Procurement versus trust participation – options in insurance buying
description
Transcript of Procurement versus trust participation – options in insurance buying
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012
PROCUREMENT VERSUS TRUST PARTICIPATION – OPTIONS IN INSURANCE BUYING
Bill Munch and Andrea Billings
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 2
Options in Buying Insurance
Public Procurement Process
Contract Negotiations
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012
PUBLIC PROCUREMENT PROCESS
Bill Munch
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 4
Theoretical Intent of Public Procurements Open, transparent and non-discriminatory
procurement is generally considered to be the best.
Optimizes competition among suppliers.
To prevent waste.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 5
Public Procurements
The laws in Arizona regulates procurement closely.
There are some distinct phases in the public purchasing process: Call for bids or Request for proposals (RFPS) Request for information, prior to bid Bid delivery Evaluation of the bid (awarding procedure) Contract award
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 6
Public Procurements
For buying insurance, a consultant is typically hired prior to development of the RFP, which is separate RFP process.
The consultant works with the Purchasing staff and typically a selection committee.
It usually requires the procuring authority to issue public tenders if the value of the procurement exceeds a certain threshold.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012
CONTRACT NEGOTIATIONSAndrea Billings
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 8
Contract Negotiations
Broader, more innovative, and competitively priced services and contracts.
Contract negotiations capitalize on the knowledge, capabilities, and opportunities of each party involved, making the purchase as efficient as possible.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 9
Contract Negotiations Do not have the same “limitations” as the
public procurement process. Some limitations include; When the need for a contract is urgent. High cost of preparing a bid. Excessive standardization restricts innovation. Negotiated savings are not achieved. Scope creep. Personnel assigned to the bid committee are not
familiar with the services they are charged with evaluating.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 10
Contract Negotiations
When are negotiated contracts advantaged over the public entity purchasing process? When the scope is complex. When more information is required. For unique and innovative proposals. To learn what firms are willing to
negotiate.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012
TRUSTS AND POOLS – THE OTHER INSURANCE OPTION
Bill Munch
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 12
Trust Participation
Many public entities have elected to pool together to benefit from the “best of both worlds”, and is truly a competitive bid.
Taking advantage of collective bargaining allowances under the statutory authority afforded in ARS 11-952, 11-952.01,15-382.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 13
Arizona Public Insurance Pools
As reported by the Arizona Dept. of Insurance there are currently as many as 23 public insurance pools operating in the State of AZ:
1.Arizona Counties Insurance Pool2.Arizona Counties Worker’s Compensation Pool3.Arizona Health Insurance Pool4.Arizona Local Government Employee Benefit Trust5.Arizona Municipal Risk Retention Pool6.Arizona School Alliance for Workers’ Compensation, Inc.7.Arizona School Risk Retention Trust, Inc.8.Behavioral Health Insurance Pool, Inc.9.Cochise Combined Trust10.Mohave Schools Insurance Consortium11.Navajo County Schools Employee Benefit Trust
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 14
Arizona Public Insurance Pools
12.Northern Arizona Public Employees Benefit Trust13.RSNA Employee Benefit Trust14.Rural Arizona Group Health Trust15.School Construction Insurance Pool, Inc.16.Schools Medical Insurance Trust17.Social Service Contractors Indemnity Pool18.Valley Schools Employee Benefit Trust19.Valley Schools Insurance Trust20.Valley Schools Workers’ Compensation Pool21.Verde Valley Employee Benefit Pool22.Yavapai Combined Trust23.Yuma Area Benefit Consortium (Trust)
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012
COST ANALYSISAndrea Billings
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 16
Total Cost Breakdown
Total Costs
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 17
VSEBT Fixed Expense Fee Comparison
Compare like programs to accurately evaluate fixed expenses. Self-Insured School Districts UnitedHealthcare NOT participating in a
Trust or Pool
Fixed Expenses
• Medical Administration
• Prescription Drug Administration
• Stop Loss Coverage• Wellness
Administration• EAP/Managed Care• COBRA Services• Consulting
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 18
VSEBT Fixed Expense Fee Comparison Public Records Requests Fees for the 2011/12 Plan Year
• UnitedHealthcare Administrative Services Only (ASO)
• Stop Loss Coverage
• Employee Assistance Program
• Managed Care/Behavioral Health
• COBRA Administrative Program
• Flexible Spending Account Program
• Consulting Services
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 19
VSEBT Fixed Expense Fee Comparison The above rates include claims administration, network usage, Stop Loss
coverage, employee assistance program, COBRA administration and consulting services.
Dental, vision, and life program fees are not included in this analysis.
The consulting services PEPM is calculated based on the monthly paid invoice divided by the total employees.
Behavioral health programs vary from fully insured to self funded.
The more significant differences in programs are noted here. This analysis does not include each possible program variation, or capture every contractual difference.
PEPM Not In VSEBT: $54.32VSEBT PEPM: $46.90
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 20
VSEBT Fixed Expense Fee Comparison
PEPM Not In VSEBT: $54.32VSEBT PEPM: $46.90
District 1 The stop loss level is $225,000 per individual, plus an additional specific deductible of $200,000; does not include retirees.
Fee above does not reflect RX rebates at 80%.
The number of EAP visits is 8 per issue, per lifetime.
District 2The stop loss level is $175,000 per specific loss and does not include retirees.
The number of EAP visits is 3 per issue, per lifetime.
The managed care fees/costs were not reported.
Does not include an online employee benefit/enrollment system.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 21
Annual Member Savings/Benefit
Member Employees Dependents Total Members Annual Savings2011/2012
Non-Operating Revenue
TotalSavings + Interest Revenue
Peoria USD 3592 1689 5281 $575,007 $125,563 $700,571
Deer Valley USD 3395 1301 4696 $285,180 $779,694 $1,064,874
Chandler USD 2850 1295 4145 $239,400 $354,848 $594,248
Paradise Valley USD 2811 2136 4947 $236,124 $569,427 $805,551
Scottsdale USD 2395 834 3229 $201,180 $251,182 $452,362Glendale ESD 1133 190 1323 $79,537 $221,778 $301,315Tolleson UHSD 594 337 931 $41,699 $138,894 $180,593Sierra Vista USD 509 64 573 $35,732 $92,596 $128,328Queen Creek USD 421 218 639 $29,554 $87,731 $117,285Littleton ESD 417 147 564 $29,273 $17,998 $47,272
Apache Junction USD 395 159 554 $27,729 $59,992 $87,721
Balsz ESD 216 73 289 $15,163 $68,742 $83,905
Northwest Fire District 219 461 680 NA $6,594 $6,594
Litchfield ESD 207 99 306 NA $89,365 $89,365Fountain Hills USD 171 92 263 $12,004 $823 $12,828Tolleson ESD 161 70 231 $11,302 $46,019 $57,321
Town of Queen Creek 125 185 310 NA $25,805 $25,805
Total 28,655 $1,818,885 $2,937,053 $4,755,938
Counts taken from June 2012 Experience Reports
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 22
In Conclusion
There are basically two options for a municipality in insurance buying – Public Procurement/Consultant Route Trust and Pool Route
There are major differences in the Pools/Trusts to examine.
Copyright, Valley Schools 2012 23
Thank you!