All GH Specialty COPY Flashcards
Possible reasons why DM studies show improved clinical outcomes but not cost savings
- The [M]easurement of financial outcomes is not stable enough, or measurement techniques are not sensitive enough, to detect positive financial outcomes
- Programs are either not [F]ocused on financial outcomes, or not structured to optimize financial outcomes
- Program sponsors do not understand the [E]conomics of DM programs and therefore do not optimize the programs for financial returns
- Improvements in quality of care do not always lead to [S]avings. Some improvements may actually increase costs, but still be worth the investment
FEMS
Duncan Ch. 8
Components of the Risk Management Economic Model
- [P]revalence of different chronic diseases
- the [C]ost of the chronic disease
- [P]ayer risk - the most savings for the plan will come when the plan is at financial risk for all of the patient’s costs
- [T]argeting and risk - members should be prioritized based on the probability of experiencing the targeted event. Those with the highest risk ranks will be selected for the program
- [E]stimated cost of the target event
- [C]ontact rate - the rate at which the company is able to make contact with targeted members
- [E]ngagement or enrollment rate
- Member [R]e-stratification rates - the initial risk of the member will be re-stratified after the nurse interacts with the member and assesses the member’s risk. Factors that affect whether the member should be re-stratified include the accuracy of the diagnosis, risk factors present, the ability of the DM program to intervene for the condition, the patient’s readiness to change, and the patient’s self-management skills
CREPT PEC
Duncan Ch. 8
Considerations when scenario and stress testing a capital adequacy assessment
- [T]ypes of tests would include:
> Deterministic or stochastic
> Combination of multiple events happening simultaneously or sequentially
> Reverse-engineered tests that create an adverse capital event - Level of [A]dversity tested: periods of normal volatility, plausible adverse conditions, and tail events
- Sensitivity testing to determine the applicability of the results of scenario and stress tests under changing [C]onditions
CAT
ASOP #55
Calculation of risk charge for disability income
The risk charege is the sum of:
1. A factor multiplied by earned premium. The factors vary by coverage
Coverage Type $0-50 M $50 M +
Non-Canc. Ind 35% 15%
Other Ind 25.00% 7.00%
Group LT 15% 3.00%
Group ST 5.00% 3.00%
> In applying factors, both individual products are combined and both group products are combined, but the individual and group products are not combined with one another
> For each of individual and group, the largest factor is applied first
2. 5% of claim reserves
Skwire Ch. 39
Risk identification tools
- SWOT analysis: identifies organization’s:
> Strengths (e.g., market dominance, economies of scale, and effective leadership)
> Weaknesses (e.g., high costs, lack of direction, and financial weaknesses)
> Opportunities (e.g., innovation, additional demand, and cheap funding)
> Threats (e.g., new competitors, price pressure, falling liquidity, and increased regulation) - Risk checklists: lists that are used as a reference for identifying risks in a particular organization or situation
- Risk prompt lists: similar to checklists, but rather than seeking to pre-identify every risk, they simply identify categories of risk that should be considered
- Risk taxonomy: more detailed than a prompt list, containing a description and categorization of all risks that might be faced
- Risk trigger question: lists of situations or areas in an organization that can lead to risk
- Case studies: can suggest specific risks to consider, particularly if there are similarities to the organization in the case study
- Risk-focused process analysis: involves constructing flow charts for every process used by the organization and analyzing the points at which risks can occur
Sweeting Ch. 8
Required disclosures for communications subject to ASOP #46 on risk evaluations in ERM
- The results of the [E]Conomic capital model, their intended use, and any known limitations of the model
- The results of the [S]tress and scenario tests, their intended use, and any known limitations of these tests
- The methodologies and [S]ources of information for identifying and evaluating emerging risks
- Any material [C]hanges in the system, process, methodology, or assumptions from those previously used
- Significant [A]ssumptions used in the risk evaluation and interdependencies among risks and statistical distributions
- The [R]isks included in the risk evaluation and their relative significance, as well as known material risks not included and the rationale for not including them
- Whether and how the modeled future economic conditions have been reviewed and tested for [R]easonableness
SCARERS
ASOP #46
Reasons that CO-OPs failed
- Some were unable to sign up a sifficient number of customers to enable them to cover their fixed costs
- For most CO-OPs, enrollment was relatively strong, but revenue was insufficient to offset higher-than-expected claims costs
- For CO-OPs with very high enrollment, they lacked the capacity to provide good service and they had cash flow problems. They had to rely on federal solvency loans to pay claims, but these loans were limited after Congress slashed program funding
- Payments from the ACA premium stabilization programs came much later than when costs were incurred. The payments for the 2014 plan year didn’t come until September 2015, which was too long to wait for one CO-OP that therefore went insolvent
- Lower than expected payments from the risk corridor program was the breaking point for one CO-OP
GHS-122-18
Description of the actuarially-adjusted historical control method
- Objective criteria are used to determine which members will be included in the baseline and intervention populations
> This is an open group method, since the populations are not identical. A closed group (or cohort) method uses the exact same population in both periods
> But the populations are comparable, and assumed to be equivalent, because the same selection criteria is used in each period - Savings are not directly measured. They are derived as the difference between
> An estimated statistic projected from the baseline period. The key component is the health care trend factor used for this projection.
> The actual statistic from the measurement period - Formulas for calculating savings:
> Savings = [ChrUtilpy * (1 + tr) - ChrUtilact] * ChrMbrs * Cost/Svc
> Trend rate comes form the health plan’s non-chronic population
> Savings PMPM = savings / member months
Duncan Ch. 12
Methodology used to develop the Arizona Medicaid risk adjustment model
- Model selected: Symmetry’s Episode Risk Groups (ERG) model
- Type of data used: diagnosis codes and procedural information from medical data and NDC codes from pharmacy data
- Data timing: three months of claim run-out was used
- Eligibility groups: risk adjustment was applied to prospective, non-reconciled risk groups
- Model calibration: the model was recalibrated by developing risk weights through a linear regression model based on Arizona Medicaid data, and then credibility weighting those rates with the model’s original risk weights
- Geographic issues: risk adjustment will take place at the geographical service area and risk group level
- Individual approach: risk scores calculated during the experience period will follow the individual during the rating period. This will accurately reflect movement of individuals between health plans
- Risk factors are updated once per year
- Risk factors for new members: members with at least six months of enrollment (“long” cohort) during the experience period will be given a claims-based risk factor. Other members (“short” cohort) will be given a risk factor that is the average of an age-gender factor and an adjusted plan factor
> Adjusted plan factor = (average ERG risk score of long cohort / pure age-gender factor of long cohort) * pure age-gender factor of short cohort - Phase-in: risk adjustment is being phased in such that only 80% of the 2009 rate is risk adjusted
- Risk factors for newborns: a different approach is needed because newborns have no prior year claims from which to develop condition-based risk scores. Claims of the prior cohort of newborns in the experience period are used to project newborn experience in the rating period
Duncan Ch. 13 (Risk)
Formulas for calculating final capitation rates for the Arizona Medicaid program
- Capitation rate to be risk adjusted = base capitation rate - bid risk contingency - bid admin cost - 2% premium tax
- Risk-adjusted capitation rate (before retention) = capitation rate to be risk adjusted * risk adjustment factor (relative risk score)
- Final risk-adjusted capitation rate - risk-adjusted capitation rate (before retention) + bid contingency + bid admin cost + 2% premium tax
Duncan Ch. 13 (Risk)
Broad areas in the risk-identification process
- Risk identification tools
- Risk identification techniques
- Assessment of the nature of the risks
> Quantifiable risks can be modeled
> Unquantifiable risks can often be analyzed by the groups that identify them - Recording risks in a risk register: the register details all of the risks faced by the organization. It should be constantly updated to reflect the changing nature of risks and the evolving environment
Sweeting Ch. 8
Information to include for each entry in the risk register
- A unique identifier
- The category in which the risk falls
- The date of assessment for the risk
- A clear description of the risk
- Whether the risk is quantifiable
- Information on the likelihood of the risk
- Information on the severity of the risk
- The period of exposure to the risk
- The current status of the risk
- Details of the scenarios where the risk is likely to occur
- Details of other risks to which this risk is linked
- The risk response implemented
- The cost of the responses
- Details of residual risks
- The timetable and process for review of the risk
- The risk owner
- The entry author
Sweeting Ch. 8
Criteria for a beneficiary to be assigned to a participating ACO
- The beneficiary must have a record of Medicare [E]nrollment
- The beneficiary must have at least one month of [B]oth Part A and B enrollment, and cannot have any months of Part A or Part B only enrollment
- The beneficiary cannot have any months of Medicare [G]roup health plan enrollment
- The beneficiary must be assigned to only [O]ne Medicare shared savings initiative
- The beneficiary must live in the [U]S or US territories and possessions
- The beneficiary must have a [P]rimary care service with a physician at the ACO
- The beneficiary must receive the largest [S]hare of their primary care services from the participating ACO
BEG SOUP
Duncan Ch. 22 (Risk)
Actuarial standards for the use of data
- Data that is completely [A]ccurate, appropriate, and comprehensive is frequently not available, so the actuary should use available data that allows the actuary to perform the analysis
- [C]onsiderations in selecting data
- Review of data: the actuary should review the data for reasonableness, unless such a review is not necessary or practical
- The actuary should use [A]ppropriate data
- [R]eliance on data and other information supplied by others: the accuracy of this information is the responsibility of those who supply it. The actuary may rely on this information, but should disclose this reliance
- [C]onfidentiality: the actuary should handle data containing confidential information consistent with Precept 9 of the CoPC
- [L]imitation of the actuary’s responsibility: the actuary is not required to audit the data or determine whether the data supplied by others is intentionally misleading
CAR CARL
ASOP #23
Considerations when reviewing or recommending a risk mitigation strategy
- Information relating to qualitative aspects of the organization, such as:
> The resilience of the organization under duress
> The operational capabilities of the organization
> The potential risk to the organization’s reputation - Information relating to the cost of, effectiveness of, and constraints upon risk mitigation activities. This includes various items such as:
> The availability of risk mitigation instruments
> The counterparty credit risk inherent in the risk mitigation instruments
> The degree of confidence that the risk mitigation process can be maintained or repeated over time
> The variability of outcomes after risk mitigation
> Regulatory constraints on risk mitigation options
ASOP #47
Calculation of risk factors
Risk factors are part of the formula for Claim Experience Fluctuation Risk charge
1. The factor is based on the type of coverage and the amount of annual underwriting revenue
2. For each coverage type, a weighted average of the following factors is calculated based on the amount of revenue in each tier
Coverage Type $0-3 M $3-25 M $25 M +
Comprehensive 15% 15% 9%
Med Supp 10.50% 6.70% 6.70%
Dental and Vision 12% 7.60% 7.60%
Medicare PD 25.10% 25.10% 15.10%
Other 13% 13% 13%
Skwire Ch. 39
Common chronic diseases addressed by disease management programs
- Ischemic heart disease
- Heart failure
- Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
- Asthma
- Diabetes
I CHAD
Duncan Ch. 8
Conditions that would exclude a member from a disease management program
- End-stage renal disease (ESRD): this condition is excluded because management of the condition may delay cost, but it cannot ultimately reduce or postpone those costs
- Transplants: claims are high up to a period shortly after the transplant, at which point the claims are reduced and stabilized
- HIV, AIDS, mental health: privacy issues make it difficult or impossible for a vendor to receive complete data feeds, or manage the member
- Members who are institutionalized: these members may not be reachable, or may not benefit from disease management interventions
- Members with catastrophic claims: these members are not manageable by the DM program, and are often subject to management by another program
- Members who are eligible for other management programs
Duncan Ch. 12
How ERM differs from traditional risk management
- Traditional health care risk management examines risks individually
> This approach maintains that risks are best managed within functional silos and that shareholder value is maximized through risk transfer
> But this approach fails to appreciate relationships among risks. And it lacks the optimization of collective risk management through an enterprise approach - ERM uses common metrics across risk domains to determine the effectiveness of risk management approaches. With an integrated enterprise-wide view of risk, the risk manager focuses on opportunities as well as risks
GHS-123-18
Risk adjustment approaches for updating benchmarks to the performance years for Medicare ACO
- For newly-assigned beneficiaries: the ACO’s CMS-HCC prospective risk scores are recalculated to adjust for changes in severity and case mix
- For continuously assigned beneficiaries: for each performance year, the risk ratio is calculated as the ratio of the HCC score for that year relative to benchmark year 3. An overall risk ratio is calculated as a weighted average of the ratios for the different Medicare enrollment types
> When the risk ratio is greater than one, demo risk scores are used. This is done to negate some of the effect of diagnosis-driven increases in risk scores.
> When the risk ratio is less than one, HCC ratios are applied
Duncan Ch. 22 (Risk)
Responsibilities of the CRO
- [I]dentifying and quantifying risks
- [M]anaging the ERM process
- [A]nalyzing risk strategically
- Facilitating the [A]ctivities of the risk management team
- Being a [L]iaison for the CEO, CFO, senior management, and middle management
- Developing organizational [P]&Ps
- Working on [C]oncept development and implementation
- [T]racking key risks
- Facilitating continuous risk [A]ssessment
CAT IMPALA
GHS-123-18
Considerations when developing, reviewing, or maintaining risk evaluation models
Whether models are fit for the purpose:
- The degree to which the models need to be reproducible and [A]daptable to new risks
- The [S]ophistication of the models in proportion to the materiality of the risks they cover
- The practical considerations for the models, including [U]sability, reliability, and cost efficiency
- The statistical and theoretical [L]imitations of the models
- The quality of the [D]ata underlying the models
- The appropriateness of the methodologies used for the model validation and [C]alibration
- The appropriateness of the methodologies used for modeling [D]ependencies among risks
- The appropriateness of the [C]ash flow and discounting methods used in the models
Whether the assumptions are appropriate:
- Whether the assumptions are [S]upportable and appropriately documented
- Whether the assumptions are regularly [R]evisited to determine their appropriateness
- Whether the assumptions regarding anticipated [M]anagement actions are supportable and appropriately documented
CUD SCALD
MRS
ASOP #46
Financial measures for disease management programs
- Return on investment - this is the most common metric. DM programs typically use Gross ROI
> Net ROI = (gross savings - cost)/cost
> Gross ROI = gross savings/cost
> Program costs generally include direct costs, indirect costs, management costs, overhead costs, and set-up costs
> Gross savings come from decreased utilization as a result of the DM program or intervention - Total savings - this metric may be more useful, since it represents the dollar savings for the plan
> Average savings = Total Savings net of Program Cost / Total Population
> Marginal savings per chronic member equals the increase in savings (net of costs) due to intervention on the marginal population, divided by the number of members in the marginal population
Duncan Ch. 8
Required documentation related to data quality
- The [S]ource of the data
- Any [L]imitations on the use of the actuarial work product due to uncertainty about data quality
- Whether the actuary [R]eviewed the data, and any limitations due to data that was not reviewed
- A summary of [U]nresolved concerns the actuary may have about questionable data values
- A summary of any significant steps the actuary has taken to [I]mprove the data
- A summary of significant judgmental [A]djustments or assumptions the actuary applied to the data or to the results
- The existence of results that are highly uncertain or potentially [B]iased due to the quality of the data
- The [E]xtent of the actuary’s reliance on data and other information supplied by others
- [D]isclosures in accordance with ASOP #41 if:
> Any material assumption or method was prescribed by law
> The actuary relies on other sources and thereby disclaims responsibility for any material assumption or method
> The actuary has otherwise deviated materially from the guidance of this ASOP
ABSURD LIE
ASOP #23
Domains of risk recognized by ERM
- [O]perational: risk related to the organization’s core business, including its systems and practices. Examples include clinical services and outpatient care
- [F]inancial: risks related to the organization’s ability to earn, raise, or access capital, as well as costs associated with its transfer of risk. Examples include bonds and insurance premiums
- [H]uman: risks related to recruiting, retaining, and managing the organization’s workforce. Examples include employee turnover and absenteeism
- [S]trategic: risks related to the ability of the organization to grow and expand. Examples include joint ventures and customer satisfaction
- Legal or [R]egulatory: risks related to health care statutory and regulatory compliance, licensure, and accreditation. Examples include HIPAA compliance and OSHA regulations
- [T]echnological: risk associated with biomedical and information technologies, equipment, devices, and telemedicine. Examples include clinical information systems and off-site monitoring of critical care units
FROTHS
GHS-123-18
Purposes of an internal economic capital model
- To determine how much [C]apital a firm should hold to protect it against adverse events
- To [P]rice new products and decide how to allocate capital across business lines
- To assess the amount of [E]conomic capital that should be held over time
- To assess the impact of changes in [I]nvestment strategy and capital structure
- To look at how an organization copes in the face of [E]xtreme events
- To help measure [P]erformance
- To carry out [D]ue diligence for corporate transactions
- To provide information on the financial state of the organization to a [R]egulator
DICE PREP
Sweeting Ch. 18
Key learnings from DM programs that ACOs should apply to be successful
- Any DM program needs to employ high-quality data [A]nalytics, as close to real time as possible
- Medical [R]ecords need to have the analytical sophistication and workflow capabilities to support the program. ACOs emphasize electronic medical or health records, but many of these are simply a repository of data and are not universally used by providers
- [S]ystems need to be aggregated before they can usefully support the ACO
- The importance of [E]conomics:
> Changing patient behavior in a way that produces a measurable financial outcome is a long and difficult undertaking
> Programs need to be focused on the patients who represent the greatest opportunity for cost reduction - The importance of [P]lanning and understanding the opportunity: economically successful programs must be focused, e.g. they must identify what patients and what conditions will be managed
PARSE
Duncan Ch. 22 (Risk)
Calculation of risk charge for LTC
The risk charge is the sum of:
- For earned premium, 10% of the first $50M, 3% of the excess, and an additional 10% for non-cancelable premiums
- For incurred claims, one factor (usually 25%) for the first $35M, and another factor (usually 8%) for the excess
- 5% of claim reserves
Skwire Ch. 39