Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Risk management committee recommends PayorAlly to handle St. Charles Parish schools' pharmacy analytics
Loading...
Summary
A district risk management committee recommended hiring PayorAlly as the St. Charles Parish Public Schools' pharmacy analytics firm, citing proactive data review, contract validation and potential cost savings; the one-year contract would begin May 1 if the board approves.
The Risk Management & Benefits committee recommended PayorAlly as the pharmacy analytics firm for St. Charles Parish Public Schools, saying the independent consultant would audit pharmacy benefits, benchmark PBM performance, and pursue contract savings on the district's behalf.
Miss Darrencisha, who led the committee presentation, said the district moved to self‑insurance in 2022 and has been relying on broker USI. She told the committee it's time for the district to take ownership of claims data and “use that data to affect the bottom line,” and described the analytics firm's role as RFP evaluation, contract compliance validation, rebate negotiation and implementation support.
Will McHugh, president and founder of PayorAlly, said the firm assigns a PharmD to each account and would perform quarterly data reviews and interventions when a PBM fails to meet contract commitments. “Ultimately, the buck stops with me,” McHugh said, offering his availability throughout the engagement.
Staff told the committee the district's current analytics contract runs through April 30, 2026; if the committee recommendation is approved by the full board, a PayorAlly contract would begin May 1 on a one‑year term. Staff said the incumbent arrangement was budgeted at about $70,000; PayorAlly's modeled cost was roughly $56,000, but the consultant noted the fee varies with claims volume.
Board members pressed for clarity on oversight and data sharing. A committee member asked whether the analytics reports would be provided to the full board; staff and PayorAlly said committee reports would be shared and the district would set timelines for quarterly meetings. Another board member insisted USI be part of the review loop so broker analysis and PayorAlly recommendations are coordinated; USI representatives said their pharmacy team would work with PayorAlly and provide an additional oversight layer.
Miss Darrencisha said the selection committee (herself and Miss Burris) vetted four firms forwarded by USI and used an evaluation rubric posted in BoardDocs. The firms evaluated included Truveris, PayorAlly, Leaf (transcript variants), and PCM. Committee members asked that findings discussed with the committee be presented to the full board at the board's next meeting.
The committee closed the presentation without a recorded committee roll‑call vote; the recommendation is scheduled to move to the Board on Wednesday.
