Benefit Design

Do Pharma/PBM Contracts Play Role in Drugmakers’ Revenue Leakage?

Pharma manufacturers depend on contracts with PBMs — and, increasingly, their group purchasing organizations (GPOs) — to ensure favorable formulary positioning with PBMs’ health plan and employer clients. But as those contracts have grown more complex and less transparent, drugmakers may be at risk of losing significant amounts of money, according to some industry experts.

Revenue leakage — unintended revenue loss because of process inefficiencies — can be a huge financial drain on pharma manufacturers. It also may potentially result in compliance risks with the Anti-Kickback Statute and its discount safe harbor protections, “so it always has to be clearly defined as to what the rebate or any monies between pharma and the PBM being exchanged; there has to be a reason,” explains Stephanie Seadler, vice president of Trade Relations at EmsanaRx.

AHIP: States Should ‘Carefully Consider’ Basic Health Program

With millions of people at risk of losing Medicaid coverage once the COVID-19 public health emergency ends, two states are setting up insurance programs designed to scoop up people who make too much for Medicaid and find Affordable Care Act exchange coverage unaffordable.

If Oregon and Kentucky follow through on their plans to set up Basic Health Programs (BHPs), they’ll join just two other states — New York and Minnesota — that have taken advantage of an often-overlooked provision of the ACA, Section 1331. However, there is some evidence that health insurers are wary of BHPs gaining traction.

0 Comments

CMS Rule on Pharma Patient-Assistance Programs Could Cut Back on Aid

CMS’s stance has long been that manufacturer-provided assistance given to patients is excluded from best price and average manufacturer price (AMP) calculation for prescription drugs. However, the rise of copayment accumulators and maximizers — and health insurers’ subsequent taking of this assistance rather than allowing it to count toward patients’ deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums — have caused the agency to rethink its position. A rule slated to take effect at the beginning of 2023 would reverse that longtime approach, potentially resulting in increased patient out-of-pocket costs for drugs and pharma companies being on the hook for ensuring they know exactly where their assistance is going, industry experts tell AIS Health, a division of MMIT.

The Medicaid rebate rule allows state Medicaid programs to get the same discounts on drug prices that manufacturers offer commercial plans purchasing prescription drugs. Manufacturers pay rebates to Medicaid programs that are calculated based on drugmakers’ best price, which is the lowest price the manufacturer gives to most providers of health care services or items, including hospitals, HMOs and MCOs — but not patients. It includes any price adjustments, such as discounts and rebates, but not manufacturer-provided assistance to patients.

Court Will Rule Soon on ACA’s Preventive Coverage Mandate

Although the Affordable Care Act has now survived multiple legal challenges heard by the Supreme Court, the 12-year-old law does not appear to be home free yet. A case currently pending before a Texas district court — which could make it up to the highest court in the land — threatens to dismantle the ACA’s mandate that group and individual health plans must fully cover preventive services such as birth control and vaccines.

If the lawsuit is successful in striking down or weakening one of the ACA’s more popular provisions, it would also raise the question of whether private health plans would stop covering certain preventive services with zero cost sharing. According to industry experts, the answer isn’t so simple.

0 Comments

Despite Growth, Barriers Remain to Driving MA Benefit Innovation

Innovative, mostly non-medical supplemental benefits have seen tremendous growth in the few years the Medicare Advantage program has allowed them. But that growth is still from a base of zero, and industry experts suggest that numerous barriers are keeping adoption of these new supplemental benefits at a relatively slow pace.

Starting with plan year 2019, MA organizations began offering a wider range of benefits such as Adult Day Care and In-Home Support Services thanks to CMS’s reinterpretation of the definition of “primarily health-related supplemental benefits.” And with the passage of the CHRONIC Care Act of 2018, MA plans in 2020 began offering Special Supplemental Benefits for the Chronically Ill (SSBCI), a category of “non-primarily health related” items and services that can be made available to certain beneficiaries.

0 Comments

How Do Pharma/PBM Contracts Play Role in Rebate Leakage? Part 2

Pharma manufacturers depend on contracts with PBMs — and, increasingly, their group purchasing organizations (GPOs) — to ensure favorable formulary positioning with PBMs’ health plan and employer clients. But as those contracts have grown more complex and less transparent, drugmakers may be at risk of losing significant amounts of money, according to industry experts. In a two-part series, AIS Health, a division of MMIT, explores the details within the contracts and how those complexities may result in losses of billions of dollars across the pharma industry.

Revenue leakage — unintended revenue loss because of process inefficiencies — can be a huge financial drain on pharma manufacturers. It also may potentially result in compliance risks with the Anti-Kickback Statute and its discount safe harbor protections, “so it always has to be clearly defined as to what the rebate or any monies between pharma and the PBM being exchanged; there has to be a reason,” explains Stephanie Seadler, vice president of Trade Relations at EmsanaRx.

Despite Growth, Barriers Remain to Driving Benefit Innovation

Innovative, mostly non-medical supplemental benefits have seen tremendous growth in the few years the Medicare Advantage program has allowed them. But that growth is still from a base of zero, and industry experts suggest that numerous barriers are keeping adoption of these new supplemental benefits at a relatively slow pace.

Starting with plan year 2019, MA organizations began offering a wider range of benefits such as Adult Day Care and In-Home Support Services thanks to CMS’s reinterpretation of the definition of “primarily health-related supplemental benefits.” And with the passage of the CHRONIC Care Act of 2018, MA plans in 2020 began offering Special Supplemental Benefits for the Chronically Ill (SSBCI), a category of “non-primarily health related” items and services that can be made available to certain beneficiaries.

Nearly One-Third of Medicare Advantage Members Receive Extra Supplemental Benefits as of 2022

More than 30% of Medicare Advantage members are currently enrolled in a plan that offers at least one type of newer supplemental benefit, according to an April report from ATI Advisory and the Long-Term Quality Alliance. Researchers studied the growth of both Special Supplemental Benefits for the Chronically Ill (SSBCI), established by the CHRONIC Care Act of 2018 and first made available to eligible beneficiaries in 2020, and Expanded Primarily Health-Related Benefits (EPHRB), which emerged in 2019 following CMS’s reinterpretation of the definition of “primarily health-related.” Both benefit types have grown significantly over the past two years, with nutritional benefits, transportation and in-home support services among the most popular offerings. Just one benefit type, adult day health services, saw a decline in uptake, which report authors attributed to lack of availability caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. See an overview of the findings in the table below.

News Briefs: Lawmakers Urge CMS to Rethink 8.5% Medicare Advantage Plan Rate Increase

Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and other progressive lawmakers wrote CMS Administrator Chiquita Brooks-LaSure asking the agency to reconsider recently finalized policies that would lead to an average revenue increase of 8.5% for Medicare Advantage plans next year. Citing the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission’s March 2022 Report to the Congress, lawmakers wrote that MA plans last year were paid 4% more per enrollee than fee-for-service Medicare, even though the program was designed to generate savings by paying insurers rates set at 95% of those used by FFS Medicare. “To preserve Medicare and its Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund, we urge CMS to mitigate the announced payment increases for Medicare Advantage plans so they are on par with payments to fee-for-service Traditional Medicare and take additional steps to address overpayments and increase transparency in the Medicare Advantage program,” they wrote on April 20.

CMS Targets Patient-Assistance Programs; Rule Could Curtail Aid

CMS’s stance has long been that manufacturer-provided assistance given to patients is excluded from Best Price and average manufacturer price (AMP) calculation for prescription drugs. However, the rise of copayment accumulators and maximizers and health insurers’ subsequent taking of this assistance rather than allowing it to count toward patients’ deductibles and out-of-pocket maximums have caused the agency to rethink its position. A rule slated to take effect at the beginning of 2023 would reverse that longtime approach, potentially resulting in increased patient out-of-pocket costs for drugs and pharma companies being on the hook for ensuring they know exactly where their assistance is going, industry experts tell AIS Health, a division of MMIT.

The Medicaid rebate rule allows state Medicaid programs to get the same discounts on drug prices that manufacturers offer commercial plans purchasing prescription drugs. Manufacturers pay rebates to Medicaid programs that are calculated based on drugmakers’ Best Price, which is the lowest price the manufacturer gives to most providers of health care services or items, including hospitals, HMOs and MCOs — but not patients. It includes any price adjustments, such as discounts and rebates, but not manufacturer-provided assistance to patients.