1 Utah Health Collaborative seeks funds to build consumer-facing healthcare price and outcome transparency

Utah State Legislature — Social Services Appropriations Subcommittee · February 5, 2026

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The 1 Utah Health Collaborative asked the subcommittee for $470,000 one-time to merge a new federal contract-rate database with Utah's claims data to produce consumer tools that highlight price and site-of-service differences and drive down inappropriate emergency department use.

Senator McKell introduced Scott Barlow to present the 1 Utah Health Collaborative's request for a one-time $470,000 appropriation to develop healthcare cost and outcome transparency tools. Barlow said the collaborative brings together major payers, providers and employers to analyze cost drivers and make actionable data available to consumers and purchasers.

Barlow described a new federal database that lists contract rates across providers and said the collaborative can merge that data with Utah's all-payor claims data to build analytics and consumer-facing products that show site-of-service price variation. He suggested emergency department utilization is a major target and said a modest reduction in avoidable ER visits could yield significant statewide savings (he cited a projection of 25,000 fewer ER visits and more than $30 million saved in a year if certain utilization metrics are improved).

Committee members asked for examples of past measurable changes the collaborative had enabled and how progress on patient data portability has proceeded. Barlow said the collaborative has produced annual cost-driver reports and that industry partners increasingly standardize data (FHIR/HL7) but acknowledged more work is needed to make patient data fully portable across systems.

Presenters did not request an immediate vote; staff offered to provide additional materials and representatives asked follow-up questions about demonstrated results.