Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Health Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission approves OIC‑funded analysis to test whether boosting primary‑care spending saves money
Summary
The commission voted to use a $250,000 Office of the Insurance Commissioner proviso for an external analysis focused on testing the hypothesis that raising primary‑care spending to 12% reduces downstream costs, with flexibility to include cost‑effective administrative‑model comparisons.
The Universal Health Care Commission on June 18 directed staff to use a $250,000 proviso from the Office of the Insurance Commissioner (OIC) to fund outside actuarial and economic modeling that will test whether investing 12% of total health‑care spending in primary care would yield savings elsewhere in the system. Nicole Gomez moved the commission resolution and Ingrid Ullrich seconded it; the motion was adopted by voice consent.
Commission staff and members said the money must be spent by June 30, 2027, and emphasized the limits of the budget. Jen Scott, senior policy analyst, described three candidate analyses: (1) modeling costs of different administrative structures (fees, state‑run vs. third‑party administrators), (2) testing the 12% primary‑care spending hypothesis and estimating potential downstream savings, and (3) developing a strategic timeline to move from a primary‑care transitional model to a full universal system. The commission chose option 2 as the primary study with “a side of” option 1 where cost‑effective.
FTAC (the Financial Technical Advisory Committee) will serve as the working group to scope the contractor's questions and support procurement, staff said. Ross Valori told the commission the intent is to pursue an interagency agreement so HCA can contract while coordinating with OIC. Staff noted the tight timeline for contracting and analysis and that $250,000 is small for actuarial projects; commissioners asked staff to seek cost‑effective scopes and to prioritize a clear analytic question.
The decision follows public comments and internal work‑group discussion urging the commission to move from design to focused analysis. Jane Grafton and other public commenters urged the commission to leverage public models and university microsimulation work; staff will include relevant existing state data where appropriate but will retain external expertise for questions that require specialized actuarial modeling.
Next steps: staff and FTAAC will develop a contractor scope and procurement plan, prioritizing the 12% test and a limited assessment of administrative structures if feasible, and will report contracting progress to the commission in future meetings.
