Radar on Medicare Advantage

In newly released guidance, CMS told Medicare Part D plans that they’re allowed to cover weight-loss drugs if they’ve been approved for another medical use — a description fitting Novo Nordisk’s Wegovy (semaglutide) after it recently received an FDA nod for preventing major heart problems.

So far, CVS Health Corp., Elevance Health, Inc. and Kaiser Permanente have said their Part D plans will cover Wegovy for its newest approved use: reducing the risk of heart attacks and strokes in people who have cardiovascular disease and who meet body-weight criteria, the Wall Street Journal reported on March 28.

For other insurers that sell Part D plans, the decision about whether to cover Wegovy represents an additional challenge to grapple with, as they’re also facing significant regulatory changes.

Thanks to a final rule published just one year ago, Medicare Advantage plans as of Jan. 1 were expected to meet new constraints when it comes to applying their utilization management (UM) policies, including prior authorization. CMS has said it aims to assess UM-related performance of plans serving 88% of beneficiaries this year, and it intends to accomplish this through both routine program audits and “focused audits.” According to compliance experts, the volume of audit activity since CMS began sending engagement letters in late February suggests the agency is eager to meet its goal, but it may not like what it finds.

Medicare Part D formularies are becoming more restrictive over time, asserts new research published in the March issue of Health Affairs. Studying Medicare administrative data that included Part D claims and plan formulary characteristics, researchers from the University of Southern California and Blaylock Health Economics found that utilization management tactics such as prior authorization, step therapy and formulary exclusions became far more commonplace between 2011 and 2020. In 2011, an average of 31.9% of drugs were restricted in some form, vs. 44.4% in 2020.

Restrictions varied based on drug costs and the availability of generic alternatives to brand-name drugs. Nearly 70% of brand-name compounds with no generic alternatives were restricted in 2020, compared to 30% of drugs with generic availability. Additionally, the lower the cost of the drug, the less likely it was to be restricted. In 2020, only 16.7% of drugs with generic availability that cost less than $100 per prescription faced restrictions, vs. 83.7% of brand-name only drugs that cost more than $1,000.

As Medicare Advantage organizations continue to face intense scrutiny — from the government’s latest probe into UnitedHealthcare to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission calling attention to the cost of higher coding in MA — a new report underscores the power of whistleblower lawsuits in enforcing program requirements. Recent False Claims Act (FCA) settlements with the Dept. of Justice reflect a continued focus on MA insurers submitting inaccurate diagnosis information for the purposes of inflating reimbursement, and while the DOJ isn't involved in proposed class action lawsuits accusing major insurers of using artificial intelligence to wrongfully deny claims, such litigation “bears continued watching as it progresses.”

Most seniors are happy with their health benefits, whether they get coverage via Medicare Advantage or traditional Medicare, but some pain points persist across programs. And when it comes to supplemental benefits that have attracted members to MA, a sizable portion of beneficiaries aren’t even using them. That’s according to new research from the Commonwealth Fund, which released results from its 2024 Value of Medicare Survey last month.

The nationally representative survey of 3,280 Medicare beneficiaries found that a whopping 96% of MA members said their coverage fully or somewhat met their expectations, vs. 93% of traditional Medicare enrollees. Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibles, meanwhile, were much more satisfied with MA than their counterparts in traditional Medicare. The most common reasons beneficiaries reported any dissatisfaction with their coverage were a lack of covered services, uncertainty about benefits and affordability issues. MA beneficiaries were slightly more likely to report frustrations with costs and coverage limitations.

After circulating a discussion draft in the first half of 2023, Sen. Bill Cassidy, M.D. (R-La.) on March 14 released his long-awaited bipartisan bill aimed at improving coverage for Medicare-Medicaid dual eligibles. The Delivering Unified Access to Lifesaving Services Act of 2024 calls for comprehensive changes to the way states and plans currently deliver care to dual eligibles, who often have multiple chronic conditions and account for a disproportionate share of spending.

The bill was introduced by Cassidy and his cosponsors, Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Mark Warner (D-Va.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.) and Bob Menendez (D-N.J). It would, among other things, require all states to establish an “integrated health plan” for duals — either building off their own or existing options — and require managed care organizations to develop and update comprehensive care plans that include a designated care coordinator for each beneficiary. The legislation also includes “passive enrollment” of qualifying dual eligibles into such plans and continuity of care requirements. The legislation also seeks to expand access to Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) to individuals aged 55 and older.

President Joe Biden’s fiscal year 2025 budget proposal included a familiar item from the previous year: a proposal to establish new medical loss ratio (MLR) requirements for supplemental benefits in Medicare Advantage. Without an estimated economic impact or additional detail, that proposal was included as a line item in the 188-page document released by the White House Office of Management and Budget. According to a March 11 fact sheet on the budget, the administration also aims to build on recent efforts to improve prescription drug affordability by accelerating the pace of Medicare drug price negotiations, expanding the Inflation Reduction Act’s inflation rebates and $2,000 out-of-pocket cap beyond Medicare and into the commercial market, and extending the IRA-established $35 cost-sharing limit for Medicare-covered insulin to the commercial sector. Further, the budget seeks to strengthen Medicare by “modestly increasing” the Medicare tax rate on incomes above $400,000, and it “directs an amount equivalent to the savings from the proposed Medicare drug reforms” into the Medicare Hospital Insurance trust fund.

Nearly a year into the massive nationwide effort to reverify Medicaid eligibility after a pause in redeterminations during the COVID-19 pandemic, about 40% of renewals have yet to occur. With millions of people estimated to have lost coverage because of administrative or procedural reasons, states have an opportunity to work with managed care organizations and other health care providers to innovate and improve existing processes that aren’t working, according to panelists at a recent session of AHIP’s 2024 Medicare, Medicaid, Duals & Commercial Markets Forum, held March 12 to 14 in Baltimore.

“This is still very much in progress,” and “these next few months are going to be very important,” declared panelist Kate Honsberger, a director with NORC at the University of Chicago. States as of April 1, 2023, were allowed to begin disenrolling people from Medicaid who no longer qualify, but they have 12 months to complete eligibility redeterminations, which may have kicked off at different times depending on the state.

In its latest report to Congress, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) asserted that the federal government now pays approximately 22% more for Medicare Advantage enrollees than it would if they were enrolled in traditional fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare, for projected higher spending of $83 billion in 2024. That figure came in slightly below projections provided at a January meeting but higher than MedPAC’s previously estimated differences in spending, largely because it accounted for favorable selection. And while the commission said it “strongly supports the inclusion of private plans in the Medicare program,” it maintains that the current payment system is ripe for reform.

According to MedPAC’s latest Report to the Congress: Medicare Payment Policy, released March 15, the federal government in 2023 paid MA plans roughly $455 billion for serving approximately 31.6 million enrollees — 52% of Medicare beneficiaries with both Parts A and B coverage.

Starting with the 2027 Star Ratings, CMS will begin rewarding Medicare Advantage plans for their efforts to assess social risk factors and address disparities in certain quality measures with the new Health Equity Index (HEI). Not all plans will qualify and only a third of top-performing plans will be rewarded, but the time is now for plans to look at how they are doing on the claims-based measures that will be impacted and how they are performing for members with one of the qualifying factors (i.e., eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, disability and/or the Part D low-income subsidy).

During a recent panel moderated by AIS Health, a division of MMIT, speakers at the 7th Annual Medicare Advantage Leadership Innovations forum discussed best practices for assessing members’ social needs and how plans can use data to address them and move the needle forward on health equity.