Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Employee Benefits topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Terrebonne Parish committee hears presentation on 'Prime Care' wellness plan that promises $0 primary-care visits and payroll savings

Terrebonne Parish Consolidated Government · April 27, 2026
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

At an April 27 Public Services Committee meeting, benefits consultant Joshua Alfred outlined 'Prime Care,' an accident policy with a direct primary-care component that he said provides unlimited $0 primary-care visits, telemedicine, an annual wellness visit and potential payroll tax savings; committee members pressed on enrollment and legal limits.

Terrebonne Parish’s Public Services Committee heard a detailed presentation April 27 on a workplace wellness offering called “Prime Care” meant to expand access to primary care for parish employees and potentially reduce employer payroll costs.

Joshua (Josh) Alfred of Alfred & Associates told the committee that Prime Care is “an accident policy very much like AFLAC or anything like that, but it also has a direct primary care component.” He said the plan provides unlimited, $0 primary-care office visits with participating providers, unlimited urgent-care visits, 24/7 telemedicine for employees and family members, and a no-cost annual wellness visit that includes basic blood tests.

Why it matters: supporters said the product would lower barriers to routine care, encourage preventative visits and reduce claims on the parish’s medical plan. Alfred also described tax- and FICA-related savings tied to enrollment, saying the parish could realize employer-side payroll tax savings when employees enroll and that many participating employees could see higher take-home pay.

Committee members asked practical questions about enrollment and legal limits. Councilmember Carl Harding said the product had been rolled out March 1 and that roughly 60 employees had signed up after informational meetings held across departments. "We let Alfred Associates come out and give a presentation and ... I think we got like 60 signed up," Harding said.

Members pressed on ways to increase participation. Alfred described outreach strategies including email campaigns, on-site meetings, auto-enrollment windows with opt-out options and department-level sessions; he said employers sometimes require an employee to attend an information session and sign an acknowledgement. He added that automated enrollment tools and interactive online helpers can boost uptake.

Legal constraints were a recurring concern. An administration representative told the committee that they had checked with legal counsel and "it is not allowed for us to do that. We cannot automatically enroll anybody. We can't force people to come to meetings." That response framed the limits of what the parish can require and narrowed options to voluntary or opt-out enrollment structures consistent with counsel’s guidance.

Numbers discussed at the meeting were inconsistent in the transcript. Alfred described employer savings related to FICA and taxable-income adjustments; one councilmember summarized a figure as about "$55 per employee per month." The presenter’s transcript includes a larger numeric line that appears garbled; the committee did not resolve the discrepancy during the meeting and asked staff to follow up with precise calculations.

Several members and staff said they would continue outreach and education to increase participation and ensure employees understand benefits and access. "If anybody's hearing anything as far as our employees feeling like they can't get access to health care ... we also have our HR department going out and doing some regular checks and visits with departments," an administration official said.

The committee did not take formal action on Prime Care that evening; members asked staff to provide additional enrollment, cost and participation details as a follow-up.

Next steps: staff and Alfred & Associates were asked to provide more granular cost and participation figures and to return with implementation options that respect counsel’s limitations on mandatory enrollment.