Insurers Archives - Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News /tag/insurers/ Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News produces in-depth journalism on health issues and is a core operating program of KFF. Sun, 13 Sep 2026 20:39:12 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.8.9 /wp-content/uploads/sites/8/2023/04/kffhealthnews-icon.png?w=32 Insurers Archives - Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News /tag/insurers/ 32 32 257378068 The Meltdown in Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance /podcast/arm-and-a-leg-podcast-employer-sponsored-health-insurance-costs-businesses/ Mon, 14 Sep 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2282220&post_type=podcast&preview_id=2282220 Employer-sponsored health insurance covers more than 165 million Americans. It can entice someone to work at one company over another, or be a set of golden handcuffs that keeps them locked into a job they may not enjoy.

But rising costs are straining that system like never before. As premiums balloon, employers have started to pass on more costs to their workers, and the percentage of small businesses offering employees health insurance has dropped significantly.

Stat reporter Bob Herman has been covering this in his series “.” An Arm and a Leg host Dan Weissmann and Herman break down how businesses big and small handle the skyrocketing cost of providing health insurance and what it means for workers.

Dan Weissmann Host and producer of "An Arm and a Leg." Previously, Dan was a staff reporter for Marketplace and Chicago's WBEZ. His work also appears on "All Things Considered," Marketplace, the BBC, "99% Invisible," and "Reveal," from the Center for Investigative Reporting.

Credits

Emily Pisacreta Producer
Claire Davenport Producer
Adam Raymonda Audio wizard
Ellen Weiss Editor
Click to open the Transcript Transcript: System meltdown: employer-sponsored health insurance

Note: “An Arm and a Leg” uses speech-recognition software to generate transcripts, which may contain errors. Please use the transcript as a tool but check the corresponding audio before quoting the podcast.

Dan: Hey there. Rachel Bernier-Green runs Thrive-O Financial Advisory on Chicago’s South Side. She describes herself as a fractional CFO for small businesses, offering strategic financial advice along with accounting services. And she says employee health insurance was part of her business plan from the beginning.

Before she even had employees, she built extra money into her prices, and at first, she put that extra money into a rainy day fund. But by late 2024, she thought the time had come. 

Rachel Bernier-Green: I’d been in business for a while. I had a few team members, and things were moving along. 

Dan: She wanted to keep those team members around, and she knew health insurance would help do that

Rachel Bernier-Green: And so that’s when I actually started to think, “How do we actually get this in place?”

Dan: She says she moved quickly– and by January 2025, her six-person team had health insurance.  Then things got wobbly.

Early in the year, a major client left. Income took a hit, and by spring she could see big trouble coming toward her. Insurance for 2026 was going to be way more expensive. And she could tell because some of her clients were already seeing rate hikes from their health insurance companies.

They had policies that renewed early in the year, . And these were much steeper increases than they’d been expecting, so they came to Rachel, their fractional CFO, to help them figure out how to adjust, and Rachel knew she would have to do the same.

Rachel Bernier-Green: It was almost like standing on a train tracks and you’re just kind of staring down the impending doom because you know you’re going to be in the exact same situation in a couple of months.

Dan: She says she shared the bad tidings with her team as data came in right from the start, and she said she makes a practice of sharing the company’s finances, details and all, with her colleagues. She calls it open book accounting.

Rachel Bernier-Green: We have regular team meetings where we’re discussing these things and we could all look at the numbers and the writing was on the wall. So when we kind of got to the end of the road, it wasn’t me saying, “Surprise, here’s what’s going on with the health insurance.” It was more, okay, we’ve reached the point where we have to make a decision and call it.

Dan: They made the call at a regular team meeting, which doesn’t mean the meeting was routine.

Rachel Bernier-Green: My heart was just in my stomach. Um, Because like I knew what we needed to do and I just didn’t want to, want to do it. 

Dan: But they’d gotten their renewal notice for 2026. Health insurance was gonna go up by more than 10%. Rachel says everybody agreed the business couldn’t afford it. 

Rachel Bernier-Green: The numbers were pretty clear in black and white. the entire team was on the same page that what was most important was that the business continues to survive so that we could bring back those benefits in the future. 

The thing I remember the most is that another team member who relied on the insurance reassuring me that that was the right thing to do.

Dan: Even with that kind of consensus, and even with a plan in place to bring back those benefits for 2027, Rachel describes the whole episode as devastating. She’s gone on a plan from her husband’s employer. Some other colleagues have done the same, one has left the firm, and two are uninsured. Rachel and her colleagues aren’t alone.

They’re a case study. A reporter named Bob Herman featured them recently in a story for STAT — a news outlet dedicated to health and medicine.  The headline for Bob’s story: America’s Small Businesses are Giving Up on Health Insurance. And the crisis Bob is reporting on goes beyond small employers. That story kicked off an eight-part series called Out of Pocket, Out of Reach, with a subtitle that tells you how big and how deep this crisis goes.

It’s “How America’s Employer-Based Healthcare System Continues to Crumble in Slow Motion,” which sounds scary and absolutely sucks, but it’s the kind of big picture look we really need, and Bob is exactly the person to break it down. He’s the Business of Healthcare Reporter at Stat. He has done the most comprehensive reporting on the giant UnitedHealth Group.

And for years, he’s published a list of the top paid CEOs in healthcare. These compensation packages go to the hundreds of millions of dollars a year in some cases. It’s completely wild. And he knows how to bring a huge story down to earth. He’s coming right up. This is An Arm and a Leg, a show about why healthcare costs so freaking much and what we can maybe do about it.

I’m Dan Weissmann, I’m a reporter. I like a challenge, so the job we’ve chosen here is to take one of the most enraging, terrifying, depressing parts of American life and bring you something entertaining, empowering, and useful. Bob Herman joined me from a closet. One of his kids had a friend over, it was the quietest place in his house.

He was sitting on the floor. I should’ve been recording the whole time. But we did have the recorder on when I asked him, “How did you come to the conclusion that employer health insurance doesn’t just suck, it’s crumbling?”

Bob Herman: Well, here, maybe it’ll help if I explain kind of the origins of why we even started it. Um, so I’d gotten back from parental leave last year around November. My wife and I just had our second kid, and literally the first thing I have to do, both of us, we both have to do when we get back, is we have to figure out what health insurance plans we’re gonna enroll for the next year, which, as I’m sure you and every one of your listeners knows, is a miserable experience. Um, and I… And we cover healthcare, and it’s still miserable. It’s tedious but also it’s, it, it is high stakes. And at that time, we had seen all the headlines that employer-sponsored health insurance was experiencing double-digit increases ac- everywhere. It is one of the primary ways that Americans are covered, and we’re all getting slammed in the face with historically high premium increases. It turned into, like, this needs to be a project at Stat. Let’s go after it. Let’s figure out what’s going on. And I think it just became very clear that employer-sponsored health insurance is not, you know, the robust product that I think a lot of people think it is.

Dan: And your conclusion here is, like, there’s a structural problem here, starting with how fast the cost of employer-sponsored insurance is going up. 

There’s a, there’s a really big number in your story where you kind of compare how much more health insurance costs now than it did 40 years ago comparing it to the rate of inflation. And basically, health insurance prices have risen almost four times as much as inflation in general. 

Bob: ?Right. And like, you know, we’re talking over the past several decades, almost 1,000% increase versus wages that were much, much lower than that., 

Dan:  So, one takeaway there is:  This huge increase amounts to something like a hidden pay cut for all of us. 

Bob Herman: Hopefully that’s one thing that this series can accomplish is for all workers out there, when you enroll in your health plan every year, how your employer’s paying for it, how much is getting taken out of your own paycheck. These are things that ultimately affect how someone can pay for their day-to-day things, like groceries feel expensive, rent feels expensive. Why? I think part of it is because your employer health plan, it’s become such a financial burden for everybody

Dan: Yeah. Yeah. That is, I, yes. I mean, you, you’ve said to me, I, I think about all the time, which is like, even if your employer covers your health insurance, , like every dollar that your employer is putting toward health insurance is a dollar they could be paying you. It’s a dollar that’s on the budget line for your position

Bob Herman: It’s exactly right, Dan, and this is like, you know, it’s like an iceberg. I think a lot of people see, like, what’s, what gets taken out of their paycheck every month. Like, okay, I’m paying, you know, a couple hundred dollars toward my health- health insurance premium. That is only, like, 20 to 25% of what your actual premium is.

Your employer’s paying most of it. You just don’t see it. But, like, there is so, like, this big block of compensation that you get, a big and growing chunk of it is for the h- for your health plan, and it’s so hidden, and I think that’s what kind of makes the whole p- the, the whole thing so difficult, uh, for Americans to afford.

Dan: I mean the amounts are really striking. The average employer plan for a family now costs 27 thousand dollars a year. That’s average, not the most expensive. And that’s like? It’s a new car, right? These days it’s y- and not, I mean, not a top-of-the-line car, but a Toyota Corolla is, you know, a car yeah 

Bob Herman: Yeah, it, it’s that new, it’s that new car every year, but the employer’s paying the tens of thousands that makes up most of the car. That’s the part that is hidden and that’s what, you know, I think makes the healthcare system, you know, really take advantage of everything

Dan: And, um, you know I notice you’re saying that the fact that it’s hidden helps the health care SYSTEM take advantage of everything.  Not just the health insurance companies. Because they make profits, band they’re the conduit through which everyone else also gets paid.

Bob: You’re right, like it is the health, the health insurance company often takes some for itself, yes, but majority of that money is, it goes out the door to hospitals, to drug companies, to doctors, to device makers, drug distributors, whoever else. Like, all those different companies know that the employer-sponsored system is like their golden goose. 

Dan: So that wild inflation in health insurance premiums — it’s driven by how much more everything in health care costs. How much prices keep going up.  You’ve said — I mean, everybody knows — we pay more for health care in the US than anywhere in the world. Knee replacement, MRI, any meds you can name, we pay a lot more. And I hear you saying: The fact that some of these costs are hidden — they’re bundled into employer health plans — that actually creates opportunities for price gouging, for all kinds of gaming the system. 

Bob Herman: there’s all this money that employers are dumping into these, you know, health insurance premiums for their workers, and it is, it’s like a feeding frenzy. Uh, you know, years ago I remember going to JP, the JP Morgan conference, uh, out in San Francisco. It’s just like the confab where all the big healthcare industry players, you know, gush about how much money they’re making. And commercial insurance, the employer-based insurance is their golden goose, and they know it. And, I, I went around talking to people, and it’s not like they were dismissing that idea. They know that the commercial insurance market, the, what we get, what we all pay for and through our employers, that’s where they make hay. They could charge whatever they want, they being hospitals, doctors, drugs, doesn’t matter. They know that there’s that massive pool of money there. It is, you know, just imagine, like, Scrooge McDuck, right, where there’s this massive pile of coins, and he’s kinda swimming through it. And

Dan: That image has come up before on this show. 

Bob Herman: Yeah, it, it’s just that is, that is the employer market. And, you know, it’s, it’s a lot easier to make money when, you know, the people who are paying into it don’t understand how much they’re paying into it

Dan: Yeah. So you came into this project ’cause you cover the whole business of healthcare. You were already thinking like, “This is a huge story people need to know about. It’s a hidden pay cut. It keeps making insurance and healthcare more expensive every year. Keeps getting worse.” But it, it sounds like you didn’t realize at first the kind of trouble that small businesses were in

Bob Herman: As I was just doing research and talking with people and reading up, you know, there was a KFF employer health benefits survey, I and just buried deep th- within this, very detailed report, there was this chart showing for companies with 200 or fewer employees, you know, a little bit less than 60% of these small companies were offering health insurance now. Historic low, it’s the lowest it, it had ever been . And I was like, And I was like, oh my God, like, that is a shift. It’s this idea that small companies are giving up on this grand American idea of offering health insurance. It’s actually unraveling right now. 

Dan: and so, you concluded small businesses are giving up on health insurance what does that mean they’re actually doing?

Bob Herman: Yeah. I think when we think about employer-sponsored health insurance, companies do it because it’s a retention tool. And , it could be a deciding factor for an employee to come work for you, right?

Like, “Oh, my gosh,” like, “this health plan looks pretty good. Sign me up.” but if, if it’s actually eating into your bottom line, especially as a small business where you don’t have a whole lot of margin to begin with, like that is, that is huge.

 Small companies, they already kind of live on the bleeding edge, right? They just, you know, if you’re at a Fortune 100 company, you have more money than you know what to do with. If you’re a small company, just by your nature, you don’t, you know, your business is small. And it means that the cost of health insurance eat into your expenses so much more.

 And, you know, if you’re just a company of like, for example, 25 people, and you have one really big medical claim, your insurance company can, could come back to you next year and say, “We gotta raise rates 20% because of that one medical claim.”  and, and you know what the crazy thing is? It’s like a 20% is a, a g- gigantic amount, and it’s not, like, that uncommon for a small business to get slapped with that. Like, I, I spoke with, a business in Pennsylvania, and they were staring down the barrel of, like, a 50% increase.

 It’s not uncommon for premiums to, like, double, which, what are you gonna do then? You have to look for other options.

Dan: A-and what you knew when you started was things are getting bad, like rates have been going up even faster than we’re used to, right?

Bob Herman: And the, the past two years in particular have been really bad because, you know, insurers, like they endured a lot of losses. Not a lot of losses, but like they, this … The, the losses were more than they had expected over the past couple years, and so they’re making up for it now. They made up for it in 2026, and they’re making up for it again in 2027, and that’s exactly what you and others are feeling right now

Dan: C- I mean, they’re the house. It’s a casino and they set the odds, and the house never loses. Like, it’s, it’s made that way. Like, you can’t… Like, the, the bookmaker never loses. Like, , they employ a lot of actuaries, and actuaries are just bookmakers, right?

Bob Herman: Yeah. The actuaries, they are the, the very smart people that analyze, like, how much care everyone’s getting and how much they can predict that that will go up next year. , and they’re pretty good at it. And, you know, obviously the past couple years they were less good at it, but They know if there is a bad year, they can easily adjust the premiums to make up for that bad year. There is no, there’s no multiple years of losing money in health insurance. That, that just doesn’t happen

Dan: Unlike, unlike the rest of us. Yeah. So, if you’re really big, you’re spreading the risk out across a whole bunch of people, and you have reserves, and you have long-term plans.

 And if you’re a tiny little business you don’t have all of the tools to kind of sock money away for something or pull money out of your budget someplace else. Is that, is that basically the, the deal?

Bob Herman: I thi- yeah, I think you have it spot on. If you’re a big company, you can weather these things better.The more people you have, the more money you have to pay out when someone does have to file some kind of claim.

Dan: So but so what did your reporting show you about what small businesses are doing instead and what workers are doing instead?

Bob Herman: Yeah. I mean, none of it is ideal, right? ‘Cause, like, m- a lot of small businesses, they… The ones that I spoke with, and I think this is generally true, like, they wanna offer health insurance. And when they can’t do that, some are just saying, like, “You’re just gonna have to figure it out yourself,” which is, like, it’s a great way to lose an employee, right? Like, “Oh my God, I don’t have the safety net anymore.”

Others are doing, you know, maybe giving their employees extra cash that they can say, “Hey, go buy a health plan on the ACA marketplace.” And you know, it’s not ideal because if you think, you know, when, if you have a employer plan, usually it’s, you know, there’s a, a pretty big network or there’s, like, lower out-of-pocket costs, and when you go to the exchanges, it is a world of difference.

 Like, your doctor may or may not be in-network. Out-of-pocket costs and deductibles are generally much higher, and it’s just, it’s a completely different product. 

Dan: It’s worse. That what you find on the exchanges as an individual is worse than what you’d

Bob Herman: It is. 

Dan: I, I have, I, I, I know this firsthand. Like, the first episode of our podcast, I’m shopping on the exchange. I’m like, “This is bad.”

Bob Herman: Yeah, and like, don’t get me wrong, the ACA provided some kind of baseline level of protection for people who would otherwise be uninsurable. Like b- like, it’s crazy to think about 20 years ago, if you had some kind of preexisting condition, you just couldn’t get insurance. Like, sorry. And, um, but, uh, like the ACA plans are, they’re rough.

Like, it, like it’s, it almost… Like, if you have a $9,000 deductible, is that even insurance at that point? I think that’s a fair question to ask

Dan: And, a- and just to zoom out from there, like that chart you found, the one that showed smaller employers are down to just like 60% offering health insurance, it, it also showed that for larger employers, that number hasn’t changed much, right? It’s like still like 97%.

Bob Herman: Yeah, it’s, um, I think this question’s important because, um, it, it does kind of help explain the economy in terms of haves and have-nots, right? Where the biggest companies are always gonna be able to offer health insurance if they really want to. They just, they have the money to do it. Small businesses, like, we’re living in the shift right now where small businesses are not thriving anymore in terms of offering health insurance, . Well, guess what? Like, I don’t s- foresee this reversing course anytime soon. Ask any small business, and more of them are gonna be like, “You know, my time is, like, up.”

 And, you know, is it, does this, does this spur companies to shut down? I don’t know. Like, it’s totally plausible. Um, it’s not good. It’s not good for the economy, and it, there was even a recent survey that shows that it’s not good for workers either. Like, a lot of people just stick in their jobs, jobs that they hate, because they’re just doing it for the health insurance.

 Like, what kind of economy is that where you’re doing something, you’re collecting a paycheck really to just also get health insurance? It’s not, doesn’t feel particularly productive. So, like, these are all problems that are happening right now

Dan: The, I, I saw that survey and you wrote about it. Like twenty four percent of people in that survey said, “I would leave my job except for the health insurance.” A quarter of people

Bob Herman: Yeah. And what a term, right? Job lock. Like it’s, it’s this well-known economic term, job lock. Like you’re s- you’re locked into your job not because you want to, because, but because you feel like you need to. It’s, 

Dan: And you dug into some of those numbers. You were like, “Yeah, and job lock does not hit all people equally,” right? That people are… Who’s, who’s more vulnerable to job lock?

Bob Herman: It’s, it’s oftentimes it’s people who have more chronic health conditions, right? It’s like, “Oh my God, I know I’m going to be a user of my health insurance.” So like, that makes more s- like especially women because, um, you know, especially if, if you’re planning on having a baby or if you just have any kind of chronic condition, it’s like you are… If you know you’re gonna be using your health plan, you can’t afford to leave your job even if you think it sucks

Dan: , you said at the top of our conversation that, you know, this system is collapsing and that, that health insurance isn’t, employer health insurance is not the kind of robust product we thought it was. And not just for small businesses, even though it’s more obvious for them. But you did report this spring briefly on a survey that said, like, some large number of CFOs were like, “Yeah, we didn’t hire people,” or, “We raised our prices,” uh, because of the cost of health insurance, right?

Bob Herman: Yeah, this is still affecting larger businesses, and it’s happening in all the usual ways that we’ve seen over the past, you know, two decades. It’s making deductibles higher for employees. It’s making them contribute more from their paychecks. It’s changing the health plans. And, you know, I, I just spoke with someone the other day. They said that their out-of-pocket max, it’s the term like after you reach this amount, you don’t have to pay any more for the rest of the year, like it doubled. Like that is a health benefit design change where it actually functions like a wage cut too, right? So th- big companies will always be able to do it, but they have been making changes, and most of the times it just means that the worker and their dependents are taking it on the chin somehow.

Dan: Making health insurance worse. So, I mean, there’s a big story that’s just coming out right now: Did you see the story that Disney is saying, “Actually, your spouse can’t be on your plan anymore if they have an offer from their employer”?

Bob Herman: Yeah, , Disney’s basically saying if your spouse has an offer of insurance through their own employer, they have to take that. They can’t join the Disney plan, which is just, honestly, it’s batshit crazy.

For a company that is, like, supposed to be very family-friendly, this is a very anti-family-friendly thing that they’re doing

Dan: The analysis that I saw was like, look, uh, who chooses our insurance when they have an offer from their insurance? It’s somebody who thinks our insurance is better and is, and thinks they’re likely to use it.

Bob Herman: Right. 

Dan: We think we’re gonna be paying out claims. 

Bob Herman: Right. Yeah, I mean, if you think about it, um, if, if you are sick and you know you’re gonna use insurance, you’re gonna choose the plan that, uh, that offers you more protection. Um, so I mean, like actuarily, like it makes sense. Like they’re, they, they have data showing that like when people join or when dependents join the plan, it is costing them more money, and now they’re going to actively stop it. Like if, if the entire social fabric of employer-based insurance is you, if you have a job, you can get an offer of insurance and your, you and your family can join it, even that is starting to unravel. Like what happens if every other employer did this?

Dan: Yeah, it sounds like the idea you started with — that big employers will keep offering health insurance — they’re not gonna walk away but it sounds like you’re reconsidering this?

Bob Herman: I am kind of reconsidering, and honestly, it’s the GLP-1s that have really started making me reconsider this. Like, Pepsi just this week said, “We’re not offering GLP-1 coverage for weight loss anymore for our employees.” Like, it’s not to say, like, that big… I still think big companies are always gonna offer health insurance, but e- but something like GLP-1 coverage, where it is o- so much money and so many people are using it, 

[00:29:46] Even for that, they’re saying, “No, we can’t do it anymore.” they’re still gonna offer coverage that will, that will try to attract people that they wanna attract. But stuff like this shows that, and, like, it is very clear the employer-sponsored health insurance system is unraveling more than perhaps I’ve ever seen.

Dan:  And yet: The experts Bob talked to all said, they don’t expect this system to change anytime soon.  And Bob ended up with some pretty clear ideas about just why that is. That’s coming right up.

This episode of An Arm and a Leg is a co-production of Public Road Productions and Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. That’s a nonprofit newsroom covering health issues in America. It’s a newsroom full of superstar reporters; we are honored to work with them.. 

Dan: The sense I got, you know, from your reporting is it, like, big employers aren’t happy about it. They’re, they’re mad. Um, they’re unhappy, but that this system is not likely to go away, So, if everybody’s like, “This sucks,” why doesn’t somebody do something? And you had, like, you had a kind of analysis of like, who’s getting things out of it. Who’s benefiting from, from the way things are?And who would get hurt if, if things changed?

Bob Herman: Getting rid of the employer sponsored health insurance system is just vehemently opposed by big business. They know, especially the largest businesses, if they offer an attractive health plan, they could get anybody they want.And then going back to the job lock, those people could also stay with them for a long time because they know that they have the health plan. Um, and the, the largest tax break in the entire code is employer sponsored health insurance, so it’s great for, you know, middle and upper class p- you know, people. It’s great for the businesses. They don’t… Like, nobody pays any taxes on it. 

Dan: I was really struck by the note that it’s the biggest, it’s the biggest tax break in the entire tax code, , we’re talking hundreds of billions of dollars that otherwise would go into the federal kitty that don’t. Um, so businesses, they see all of these, things that are beneficial to them, and even though it costs them so much money, it is not worth giving that up. like, “We, we still have way too many advantages from it, even though it costs us an arm and a leg.” You had a specific example, but like the Affordable Care Act was, part of its design was like super suped up, workplace health plans would incur a tax, and that this did 

Bob Herman: Yes. I, I don’t know if you remember that debate, Dan, but it wa- it was called the Cadillac tax, and it was this idea that, you know, if it’s a really, really super generous plan, we’re gonna start to tax a little bit. Everyone lost their minds about it, and it was across the board. It was businesses, it was unions, who obviously fight very hard to, you know, to, to negotiate for their health plans. It was just universally reviled. But the idea was we need to start taxing these. It went terribly. It got killed, and that w- it was honestly, it was a pretty modest change, and look at, look what happened there

Dan: A- and so I think what, what that example shows is there are people with something to lose, and then of course there’s all the people who, uh, you know, make money in healthcare, not just insurance companies, right? 

Bob Herman: Yeah. The healthcare industry is very powerful. If you look at like, like lobbying dollars, like healthcare companies and their trade groups are always at the top. And like, yeah, they want inertia. As they, you know, vacuum up another, you know, $6 trillion this year and exponentially more next yearIt is a feeding frenzy. And again, this was, this is money that otherwise would be in your paycheck.

Dan: Yeah. I mean, it’s just one of the things I think about of like, we become aware of how much things cost, a lot of us, when, like, we get a giant bill, or people we know, and we’re like, “That’s wild.” But as what you’re reporting is showing, like, no, all of this wildness is paid by all of us , a lot of us get insurance from our jobs, that’s money that could be our wages. We’re paying it there. Um, in places where the government pays for healthcare and it, we are paying that through our taxes. Um, and that is a part that I don’t think, I get to enough on this show, is that like, we’re vulnerable individually, but we’re also each of us individually paying a collective price.

Bob Herman: I remember years ago I was interviewing Don Berwick. He used to be the CMS administrator, uh, during President Obama’s term for a short while, and he made the good point that was like, workers pay for every dime of healthcare in this country, either through your wages or through what is owed to you through compensation or through taxes. Um, and I think if you, if your listeners just think of it that way, it’s actually pretty simple. Like, we’re all paying for this. It just doesn’t, it might not seem like it, but that is the reality

Dan: Um, this is a little bit risky, uh, just for our emotional health, but like, as a parent, as you report on these things, do you think about your kids as adults navigating an economy that’s another 20 and change years along this path?

Bob Herman: It’s, oh yeah. I mean, I’ve, uh, I, I don’t know. Maybe a lot of parents are worriers. I’m one of them. , I think about, like, my kids when they eventually have to go off our health insurance, right? When they have to find their own, and, you know, maybe they have their own healthcare needs at that point and they have to find something. Like, is it gonna be affordable for them? Are they gonna be one of those people who gets job locked, where they’re, they find a job but they absolutely hate every minute of it because they’re just doing it for the health insurance? Um, yeah. I, I mean, 20 years from now is a long time. Like, costs aren’t going down, and how will it affect their, you know, basic, uh, standards of living?

I have no idea. I, I mean, it’s hard not to think about it. Um, but it is far in the future, and I think that’s what also prevents people from changing things. Like, we know it’s bad, it’s gonna get worse, but, like, you know, when it’s that far in the future you can’t really address it right now. But I think that’s the perfect time to address, is before it gets so bad that our own kids can’t even, you know, afford their rent or their groceries or whatever else

Dan: I’m, I’m reminded, right, of the saying like, “The best time to plant a tree is 30 years ago, and the second best time to plant a tree is today.”

Bob Herman: Today. Exactly right 

 

Rachel Bernier-Green: I’m a little anxious about what we’ll be paying, but it, you know, it’s not keeping me up at night.

Dan: Back on the South Side of Chicago, Rachel Bernier-Green tells me she’s on track to bring insurance back for her team in 2027. She says changes they made to their business strategy last year have been paying off, so she’s got the money lined up

Rachel Bernier-Green: I mean, we hope that there are not, you know, more sky-high increases because yes, they do drastically, impact, um, our ability to operate the business But, ?I know that we’ll be well positioned to absorb the cost

Dan: as I, I’m preparing for today’s reporting, I’m like, “Oh yeah, this would be a good time for me to email our insurance broker and be like, ‘Hey Kurt, so what are we looking at for next year? Uh, I think it’s gonna be bad.’” And he’s like, “It’s gonna be bad.” He thinks for the plan that we’re on, which because of our needs for networks and stuff, is we don’t have a whole lot of choices. He’s like, “Yeah, you’re looking at like 14 to 18%, I think, for the next year.” 

Rachel Bernier-Green: Yeah. Yep Yeah. And, and the crazy thing is, like, I’m… Which sounds obscene, but I’m thinking is between 20 and 25%, um, that we need to be prepared for jumps of that magnitude. And I hope that that is not the case, but that’s what we are building into our, um, our models moving forward

Dan: And are you advising clients the same way?

Rachel Bernier-Green: Yeah. Yeah

Dan: I’m curious about, um, what it was like reading Bob’s story. What was it like, I mean, whether it was surprising or not, like what was it like seeing all of that kind of put together?

Rachel Bernier-Green: Oh, I was, um, just like silently cheering, um, because those are the, uh, exact conclusions that I, you know, I can’t inform the conclusions that he reaches, but that is exactly where, um, where I am. That the system is fundamentally broken and it is harming people in re- irreparable ways and that we need a significant overhaul,

Dan: Amen to that. Which is the thing about a story like this. On the one hand, it’s full of terrible news. On the other hand: Most of us — maybe all of us — are already experiencing the effects of all this terrible news. And I think it’s helpful, it’s good, to see it all tied together. To know:  We’re not alone. We’re not imagining things.  The whole system truly is completely broken — and as bob says, continuing to actually crumble.  

Even if we don’t have a *solution*, it’s good to know what we’re up against, to peel back the curtain.  

Next time on An Arm and a Leg, we take another look at Medicare Advantage. And, um… it’s more broken than we thought. 

News anchor: Many health insurance providers are dropping their Medicare Advantage plans.

Female voice: I heard that — I was just in tears.

Female voice 2: I don’t know any way to describe it other than total chaos. 

Dan: I’m hoping that you’re right here with me when I say:  It is so much better to know.  We do not want to get taken by surprise.

This episode of An Arm and a Leg was produced me, Dan Weissmann, with help from Emily Pisacreta — and edited by Ellen Weiss. 

Adam Raymonda is our audio wizard.

Our music is by Dave Weiner and Blue Dot Sessions. 

Claire Davenport is our engagement producer.

Amanda Boyd is our Operations Manager. Bea Bosco is our consulting director of operations. 

An Arm and a Leg is produced in partnership with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. That’s a national newsroom producing in-depth journalism about health issues in America and a core program at KFF, an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.

 Zach Dyer is senior audio producer at Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. He’s editorial liaison to this show.

An Arm and a Leg is distributed by KUOW, Seattle’s NPR news station.

And thanks to the Institute for Nonprofit News for serving as our fiscal sponsor.

They allow us to accept tax-exempt donations. You can learn more about INN at INN.org.

Finally, thank you to everybody who supports this show financially.

You can join in any time at arm and a leg show, dot com, slash: support.


An Arm and a Leg is a co-production of Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and Public Road Productions.

For more from the team at An Arm and a Leg, subscribe to its weekly newsletter, . You can also follow the show on , , , and . And if you’ve got stories to tell about the healthcare system, the producers would love to .

To hear all Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to An Arm and a Leg on , , , or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2282220
Medicaid Insurers’ Contracts on the Line in Tight Governor’s Race /health-industry/medicaid-insurer-contracts-iowa-governor-race/ Thu, 30 Jul 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2264719 One of America’s most competitive gubernatorial races could settle a heated argument over whether private insurance companies should run Medicaid.

The race is in Iowa, whose Medicaid program has been plagued with controversy since 2016, when the state hired national insurance companies to manage billions of dollars’ worth of benefits.

That shift was made by then-Gov. Terry Branstad, a Republican. With his executive order, Iowa joined most other states in privatizing the management of Medicaid, which covers healthcare for more than 67 million Americans with low incomes or disabilities.

The arguments have resurfaced this year during the competition to replace Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds, who was Branstad’s protégé and continued contracting with private companies to manage Medicaid benefits. Zach Lahn, the Republican candidate to succeed the retiring governor, supports the practice. Rob Sand, the Democratic candidate, wants to end it.

“It’s been a disaster,” said Sand, Iowa’s state auditor. “The number of complaints has been catastrophic.”

Pros and Cons

Supporters of privatization say the insurers, known as managed-care organizations, make Medicaid more effective and efficient. Critics contend the companies pad their profits by denying payment for crucial health services and by shortchanging agencies and professionals who provide care.

Iowa is among 41 states, plus the District of Columbia, that contract with outside companies to run at least part of their Medicaid programs. Overall, private insurers manage the benefits of more than three-quarters of Medicaid patients. Connecticut is the only state that has fully reversed course after privatizing its Medicaid system.

Sand has criticized privatized Medicaid for years. As state auditor, he alleging that the national insurers systematically deny or delay payment for services to which Medicaid participants are entitled.

He has vowed not to renew state contracts with the three insurers managing care for more than 600,000 Iowans on Medicaid, which is jointly financed by the state and federal governments. He would rather have state employees or nonprofit agencies review and pay bills from clinics, hospitals, and other healthcare providers.

Lahn told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News that Sand’s pledge to resume state administration of Medicaid “is the exact wrong idea.”

Lahn is a former activist for Americans for Prosperity, a national pro-business group affiliated with the Koch family. He contends that state governments and Medicaid participants benefit when insurers compete to serve them.

“There are very few things that government does more efficiently than the private sector,” he said.

Lahn, who is a businessman and farmer, emphasized that state officials should strictly enforce contract requirements, ensuring that the insurers treat Medicaid recipients fairly and make prompt payments to care providers. He also said he would bar insurers from using artificial intelligence systems to determine whether to pay for medical claims under Medicaid. “Iowans deserve to have a human looking at their case,” he said.

Sand said in a recent interview that he doesn’t want Iowa to fully return to a “fee-for-service” Medicaid system, in which hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare agencies would effectively be paid piecemeal for whatever services they provided. Instead, he said, state employees or nonprofit organizations could take over operation of a managed-care system, in which administrators review services to help ensure Medicaid participants receive what they need without wasting public money on ineffective services.

A few months ago, Republicans controlling the Iowa Legislature considered a bill to require the state to have a privately managed Medicaid system. That proposal would have blocked future governors from unilaterally shifting back to public management of the program. But the bill

Sand, a former assistant state attorney general, said he is confident he would have legal authority as governor to stop contracting with private Medicaid managers, although he cautioned that the transition would be complicated and could take time.

A man in light colored blazer and button down shirt holds a microphone. Behind him, campaign signs that say "MAKE IOWA HEALTHY AGAIN" are visible.
Republican candidate Zach Lahn says that if he were elected Iowa governor he would continue contracting with private insurance companies to manage the state’s Medicaid program because he believes they are more efficient than the government. (Erin Murphy/The Gazette via AP)
A man wearing a button down shirt and beige pants holds a microphone as he speaks to a small crowd of people.
Democratic candidate Rob Sand says that if he were elected Iowa governor he would end private management of the state’s Medicaid program, which he says has been a disaster. (KC McGinnis/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

A Toss-Up Race

National political observers say the Iowa governor’s race

This June, Lahn won an underdog primary campaign to beat a sitting congressman backed by President Donald Trump. Lahn gained Trump’s endorsement after winning the Republican primary. He is a vocal supporter of the Make America Healthy Again movement, led by Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., which aims to improve Americans’ diets and reduce environmental poisons.

Sand noted that Lahn’s past political activism included a failed 2014 attempt to defeat a proposal to cover more people under Montana’s Medicaid program.

Lahn said that at the time he worried the federal government would reduce how much money it would contribute to such Medicaid expansions, leaving states to foot much of the bill. He said he also didn’t want to see public programs such as Medicaid giving benefits to adults capable of providing for themselves. But he said those concerns have been allayed, partly by the Trump administration’s moves to require millions of Medicaid recipients to prove they are working, volunteering, or going to school.

If elected governor, he said, he would not try to reverse Iowa’s expansion of Medicaid, which happened in 2014 under Branstad.

Branstad also is the governor who decided in 2016 to hire private insurers to manage Medicaid.

Branstad, who declined to comment for this article, did not need the legislature to approve his momentous decision. He weathered controversy over the change, including allegations that the companies systematically denied payment for care that people with disabilities needed to remain in their homes.

Andy Schneider, a who studies health policy issues, said it’s understandable that many government leaders see an advantage in hiring private Medicaid management companies. Each state’s Medicaid program pays claims for hundreds of thousands or even millions of members, and administrators must scrutinize bills from thousands of hospitals, clinics, and other healthcare organizations. “That’s a heavy lift,” said Schneider, who worked in federal Medicaid administration when Barack Obama was president.

Schneider noted that Medicaid expenses are among the biggest parts of any state’s budget. The costs can vary dramatically year to year, he said, which is hard for legislators and governors to plan for. Management companies sign contracts for set amounts of money per enrollee, depending on people’s ages and health conditions. Managed-care companies say they can improve Medicaid members’ health and reduce expenses. But Schneider said have been unable to confirm or disprove those claims.

Federal law gives states flexibility in how they run their Medicaid programs, including whether they hire private insurers to manage the programs. “Unwinding those arrangements might take a little time, but there’s no question they can do it,” Schneider said.

Connecticut of private insurers to run Medicaid in 2012. to contract only with nonprofit insurers, starting in 2025, and that state’s governor doing away with private management altogether.

Gary Jessee, a former Texas Medicaid director who helped transition that state’s program into managed care, noted that most Americans’ health coverage is managed by some kind of insurance company, whether they obtain it on their own or get it through a government or employer plan.

Jessee now helps run a whose clients include Medicaid managed-care companies. He said states rarely talk about totally scrapping contracts with such companies. Instead, he said, states have options to change the contracts, including to increase oversight or limit profits.

Overall, Jessee said, managed-care companies help Medicaid enrollees obtain the services they need to stay healthy. But it’s hard to calculate how much money the companies save states, he said, because all healthcare costs have been rising, and new members of managed-care plans may at first use more services as the insurance companies encourage them to get regular checkups instead of waiting for emergencies.

Iowa’s Medicaid program is managed by three insurers: Molina Healthcare, Elevance Health subsidiary Wellpoint, and Centene subsidiary Iowa Total Care.

None responded to requests for comment for this article.

Catherine Gray of Des Moines helps run a Facebook page for families who use Iowa’s Medicaid system. Her adult son, John, is on Medicaid because of a disability. Gray said the managed-care companies have made it much harder for people to obtain services, including mental healthcare, dental care, and transportation to health appointments. Iowa’s shift to the private system was abrupt and chaotic, she said. “We know people have died,” she said.

Gray said she probably will vote for Sand for governor, even though she doesn’t agree with every nuance of his stance on Medicaid. She suspects many other Iowans who use the program will do the same. “They’ve really been put through the wringer for 10 years, and they’re exhausted.”

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2264719
Trump’s Personnel Agency Says It Will Remove Some Identifying Info as It Sweeps Up Medical Records /insurance/trump-opm-federal-workers-medical-records-data-privacy-pseudonymize/ Wed, 22 Jul 2026 09:00:00 +0000 /?p=2263660 The Trump administration is forging ahead with a controversial plan to collect the medical records of millions of federal workers and retirees, as well as their family members.

The Office of Personnel Management posted last month that it will begin routinely collecting identifiable, personal health information on more than 8 million people — despite concerns from privacy advocates and Democrats, who have demanded the agency drop the plan. The notice will go into effect July 24, allowing OPM to begin its collection at any point afterward.

In reaction to privacy concerns raised by insurers and others, OPM now says the identities of enrollees will be “pseudonymized” — meaning names, addresses, and Social Security numbers will be removed — before the agency’s analysts review the massive new health datasets it will soon begin receiving.

Birth years of enrollees will be retained, and the agency’s “technical staff” will receive member IDs that it will scramble into different, unique numbers before releasing them to other staffers, according to the notice.

But the notice also specifies that OPM retains the right to reidentify the records.

Sixty-five insurance companies will be required to routinely send OPM detailed data — including names, addresses, doctor information, diagnoses, prescriptions filled, and payment details — on health care services paid through the Federal Employees Health Benefits and Postal Service Health Benefits programs.

In a change to its original proposal, first reported by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, the agency says it also wants to peek at records kept by Medicare, the federally funded health insurance for older and disabled Americans, to examine claims from federal employees and retirees, and their families, who depend on both programs.

In its latest notice, OPM argues that the vast trove of data is necessary to ferret out fraud and overpayments in the FEHB and PSHB programs. Those programs cost roughly , with about $50 billion covered by the federal government and $30 billion funded by enrollees. The Trump administration has ramped up efforts, led by Vice President JD Vance, to curtail what it says is rampant fraud and misuse of publicly funded health benefits.

The effort still faces criticism that it doesn’t go far enough to protect the privacy of federal workers and their families.

“Clearly, this administration has not earned our trust with Americans’ sensitive data,” Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said in an emailed statement to Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. “If OPM wants to work in good faith to reduce fraud, they should come to Congress, including to folks like me who are engaged on this issue and represent many federal workers and retirees and their families, and work to build consensus and trust before implementing these sweeping changes.”

The , posted in December, sparked concerns in part because it did not specify what the Trump administration planned to do with the sensitive health information it receives — and did not instruct insurers to redact identifying information.

OPM General Counsel Kurt Dykstra said the detailed records are critical to the administration’s mission of rooting out fraud and could help identify fraud perpetrated not only by medical providers but also by enrollees.

But when pressed for instances of workers, retirees, or their relatives committing such fraud, Dykstra only noted generally that healthcare fraud does occur.

The information could demonstrate “potential anomalies in usage patterns that could be related to the individual, but really also could be related to the provider, the treater, the clinic — whoever it is that’s actually providing the care,” Dykstra told Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News in an interview.

Records deemed suspicious by OPM’s data analysts could then be referred to the agency’s Office of the Inspector General for further investigation, which could include “determining who’s involved and what the potential issues are, what the ramifications look like,” Dykstra said.

OPM’s plan to collect and analyze medical records has prompted unease among unions and federal workers, to mass firings and layoffs — in some cases, they say, driven by political retribution — since President Donald Trump took office.

Health privacy lawyers say, too, that while pseudonymizing workers’ details is a step in the right direction, it might not go far enough to protect their privacy.

OPM’s notice mostly complies with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, the federal law commonly called HIPAA that protects sensitive health data from being shared, said Matt Fisher, a health privacy lawyer. But he noted one exception: The member ID that insurers provide enrollees can be used to identify them.

“The described process arguably comes down to trusting internal controls in OPM to ensure that data is walled off as proposed,” Fisher said in an email. “The ideal would be for only truly de-identified information to be shared in the first place.”

Insurers regularly share information about claims with employers who offer health plans to employees, in efforts to control costs. But since employers themselves are not covered by HIPAA, large datasets are typically de-identified, meaning the insurers remove identifying information such as employees’ names or addresses, to comply with the law.

Employers, too, have been accused of using health information to target employees for dismissals. Most recently, a group of Meta employees filed a lawsuit of using artificial intelligence to target for layoffs those who had taken medical or family leave.

Pseudonymizing details such as names or addresses would go only so far to protect privacy, since medical conditions in particular can make it very easy to identify certain employees, said Joseph Lorenzo Hall, a technologist at the Center for Democracy & Technology, a nonprofit that advocates for data privacy.

“The richer the data, the more likely it is going to be identifying,” Hall said.

“In this case, you may be the only person in a region that has that particular kind of medical procedure, condition, or even prescription,” he said. “All of those things can be extremely identifying, even when you remove or obfuscate or pseudonymize direct identifiers.”

Most federal retirees decide to continue with FEHB plans and enroll in Medicare once they turn 65, which provides more comprehensive coverage and allows family members to remain enrolled in FEHB plans, said John Hatton, the staff vice president for policy and programs at the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association.

OPM wants to analyze medical records for those dual enrollees as well. The agency is asking for all of their cost and service use records from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

Still, Hatton said, OPM’s latest notice provides more details about how the agency says it will use the sensitive health information it receives and safeguard it.

“It’s a big improvement over the last notice, which was very lacking in detail and explanation for why they wanted all the medical claims data and how they’re going to protect the privacy of the data,” Hatton said.

“We’d be open to seeing even more security around the privacy of the data so there really is a clear wall,” he added.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2263660
She Struggled To Get a Lifesaving Drug Even After Insurers Vowed To Help /health-care-costs/prior-authorization-medicare-advantage-humana-missouri-bill-of-the-month-june-2026/ Mon, 29 Jun 2026 09:00:00 +0000 LADUE, Mo. — Over four consecutive days in January, Margaret Hvatum ran a 5K, a 10K, a half-marathon, and a full marathon. The 70-year-old covered a combined distance that’s nearly equivalent to running the length of Manhattan four times. 

By the end of the month, she was in a hospital bed.

Hvatum, a part-time computer science professor, has a weakened immune system due to a rare condition known as primary immunodeficiency, which makes it difficult for her body to fight infections. Prior to her 2005 diagnosis, she had four bouts of shingles, a painful rash caused by a virus.

For more than a decade she relied on an expensive medicine to treat her chronic condition — and relied on her insurance to pay for it.

Then the denial letters came.

The Medical Service

To give her weakened immune system a boost, she relies on Hizentra, which is made up of antibodies collected from donated blood plasma.

At her home, near St. Louis, Hvatum can administer the complex medicine herself. She uses a large syringe to draw the medicine from a vial and loads the syringe into a plastic apparatus that looks like a toy Nerf gun. She cranks a blue plastic dial that triggers a steady drip of the medicine, and it snakes through plastic tubing until it enters her leg through a needle.

The Bill

$8,141.94: The full charges for a 28-day supply of Hizentra without insurance coverage.

After her Medicare Advantage plan through Humana denied payment for the drug in January, she missed several weekly doses.

The Billing Problem: Prior Authorization

Hvatum got tangled up in the controversial process known as prior authorization, which often requires patients or their medical team to get an insurance company’s approval before obtaining medicines or treatment. 

At the start of the year, after Hvatum switched Medicare Advantage plans, she received a letter saying that Humana, her new carrier, had denied her “prior authorization prescription request” for Hizentra. The authorization from her previous insurer didn’t carry over. 

Without the medicine, Hvatum developed a urinary tract infection that sent her to the emergency room on Jan. 30. Though it is a common infection, her doctor advised her to go there because people with her condition can get sick and deteriorate quickly, she said. 

That ER visit turned into an overnight hospital stay. That turned into hospital charges of more than $18,000, and again her insurance denied payment, saying this time that she wasn’t sick enough to require hospital care.

Hvatum’s experience with prior authorization is not unique.

Medicare Advantage plans reviewed nearly 53 million prior authorization requests in 2024, . That’s equivalent to nearly two reviews for every person enrolled in the program.

It’s common for Medicare Advantage plans to deny payment for care — which helps them make a profit, said Carrie Graham, director of the Medicare Policy Initiative at Georgetown University’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms.

The government pays a monthly sum to Medicare Advantage insurers to cover care for each member. “They make a profit if the care that person receives in that year is less than the amount they receive,” Graham said.

More than half of eligible Medicare beneficiaries choose Medicare Advantage insurance coverage. In 2026, roughly 35 million selected one of these private policies offered by insurance companies.

Humana is a dominant player in the space. Nearly half of all Medicare Advantage enrollees nationwide are covered by UnitedHealth Group or Humana, according to KFF.

The killing of UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson prompted renewed scrutiny of prior authorization. Last summer, months after his death, the nation’s largest insurers, including Humana, signed a pledge that outlined a handful of commitments to ease the burden on patients.

For example, insurers vowed to reduce the number of services that would require prior authorization approval. They also promised to reduce delays by honoring existing prior authorizations for a 90-day period when patients switched plans.

That’s not what happened in Hvatum’s case.

Humana said this pledge to honor existing approvals comes with limitations. “These commitments are for medical services only and do not apply to prescription medications,” spokesperson Mark Taylor said.  

Humana declined to comment on the specifics of Hvatum’s case, even though she agreed to waive her privacy rights, giving the insurer permission to comment.

While acknowledging that the prior authorization process can be deeply frustrating for patients, Humana said it “builds important checks and balances into the healthcare system by verifying that treatments and care delivery are in the best interest of patient safety and quality of care, while safeguarding taxpayer dollars.”

In July 2025, it would remove one-third of prior authorization requirements for outpatient services.

“We are committed to making the process faster and more seamless for patients and providers,” Humana said in a statement Taylor provided to Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

The Resolution

Hvatum appealed, and Humana in late January reversed its initial payment denial for Hizentra, enabling her to afford her medicine again.

But the approval came with a catch: It expires at the end of the year, after which she would need to obtain approval all over again.

Hvatum has since switched to a different drug — and she might not stick around for any more medical-bill fights like this one. She and her husband are considering a move to Norway, a place with universal healthcare. He is a citizen there, which could give her a path to public health coverage.

At least 50 medalls attached to ribbons hang from hooks mounted above a picture window.
Running is Margaret Hvatum’s outlet, maybe an obsession. And it keeps her healthy. Scores of medals and trophies are tucked about her home. After her Humana Medicare Advantage plan denied coverage of a medicine she needs for a chronic condition, she felt that her insurer had failed her. (Samantha Liss/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

The industry’s promises to change are too little, too late for Hvatum. 

By her account, she has done her part. Running is her outlet, maybe an obsession, and it keeps her healthy. Scores of medals and trophies are tucked about her home. Some sit on a white wicker end table, next to family photos, candles, and framed St. Louis Cardinals memorabilia. Above a large bay window in the kitchen, medals hang from ribbons of all colors, made to look almost like custom window drapery.

“I have done everything I possibly can to be healthy,” Hvatum said, sitting at her dining room table in her running gear. Her printed T-shirt read, “If found on ground, please drag across the finish line.”

The Takeaway

Data shows patients should appeal prior authorizations, because those who do often get their denials reversed, Graham said. In fact, 81% of Medicare Advantage appeals were partially or fully overturned in 2024, according to KFF.

Relatively few people appeal, because “it’s an exhausting process,” Graham said. It puts the onus on patients — and doctors get frustrated, too.

It’s not just Medicare Advantage plans that subject enrollees to prior authorization approvals. It’s prevalent in other types of coverage, and it has prompted blowback from the public. Graham believes the public outcry instigated the industry’s pledge to change.

Hvatum is well versed in filing appeals. She submitted another appeal to Humana after the insurer denied payment for her January hospital stay. Humana again reversed its denial of payment in her case.

Hvatum blames Humana for her January trip to the hospital. Had Humana approved her Hizentra, she said, she could have avoided hospital care altogether.

In March, she had a stroke. Humana denied coverage of that hospital stay, too.

Humana determined that it was not reasonable for the physician who admitted Hvatum to think she would need to stay at least two nights, the threshold for approval. “You had a small stroke,” Humana’s denial letter stated.

Hvatum noted the letter was dated March 25, two days after she was hospitalized. Humana reversed its denial two weeks after Hvatum appealed.

“They love to send you the denials fast,” Hvatum said. “Approvals take longer.”

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and that dissects and explains medical bills. Since 2018, this series has helped many patients and readers get their medical bills reduced, and it has been cited in statehouses, at the U.S. Capitol, and at the White House. Do you have a confusing or outrageous medical bill you want to share? !

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2254875
Even Patients Are Shocked by the Prices Their Insurers Will Pay — And It Costs All of Us /health-care-costs/insurers-pay-high-prices-premiums-coinsurance-cost-control-inflation-patients/ Tue, 03 Mar 2026 10:00:00 +0000 /?post_type=article&p=2159599 Samantha Smith of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, went into the operating room for emergency removal of an ectopic pregnancy. “I’m grateful I didn’t die,” she said, but she was shocked to see that the outpatient surgery was billed to her insurer for about $100,000.

Jamie Estrada of Albuquerque, New Mexico, twice received injections of lidocaine in his upper spine to test if a permanent nerve ablation would treat his chronic neck pain. His pain vanished — until the numbing agent wore off about six hours later. The real zinger: His insurer was billed $28,000 for each 10-minute procedure.

Mark McCullick of Longmont, Colorado, was sent for a whole-body PET scan to find out whether his prostate cancer was back. The two-hour scan showed no evidence of cancer, but the $77,000 bill sent to the company that administered his insurance alarmed him.

Medical inflation has general inflation for years, with bills for many brief, routine procedures reaching tens of thousands of dollars.

These cases highlight the questions that haunt the American health system and the patients caught in its grip: What is a reasonable price for any health care visit or procedure, and how is it determined? How hard do insurers, the purported stewards of the patient’s hard-earned health dollars, fight to lower charges, and how closely do they scrutinize bills for accuracy?

Smith, Estrada, and McCullick’s cases are all “chargemaster” bills, calculated from the master price list that health providers place on services. Patients who have insurance don’t generally pay them. But they matter because they are often the starting point for the negotiated price the insurer agrees is reasonable to pay for the services. Patients are typically responsible for 10% to 20% of the negotiated price, their coinsurance — and when prices are this high, that can be a big number. What’s more, those negotiated rates are difficult for patients to access (until they get the bill) and seemingly arbitrary.

Also, because health insurers can offset high outlays one year by raising premiums and deductibles the next, they have little incentive to bargain hard for good deals for the patients they cover. So patients all pay unknowingly, indirectly.

In the cases of Smith and Estrada, their insurers paid the majority without questions. Penn State’s Hershey Medical Center, which treated Smith, received $61,000, or 62% of what it charged. New Mexico Surgery Center Orthopaedics, which treated Estrada, received $46,000, or 82%.

McCullick’s insurer, on the other hand, said it would pay Intermountain Health just 28% of his $77,000 bill. Then came another curveball: The hospital, which said it had gotten preauthorization, discovered after the fact that his scan was not covered. So it billed McCullick the full chargemaster rate of $77,000 — or, it offered, he could pay the cash rate of $14,259.

In an emailed statement, Chris Bond, a spokesperson for AHIP, the leading trade group for health insurers, blamed hospitals for the trouble, saying that plans are “focused on making benefits and coverage as affordable as possible for their members,” and that: “As the largest single category per premium dollar spent, increases in the cost of hospital-based care have an outsized impact on premiums.”

In a health system in which prices can vary exponentially with little transparency, how can patients afford to get sick?

‘It Makes No Sense’

Americans as a top priority for government in 2026, according to an Associated Press-NORC poll, expressing particular concern about cost, access, and insurance coverage.

The first Trump administration required insurers and hospitals to publish files containing cash, gross, and negotiated prices for various items and services. These raw, machine-readable price lists — often hundreds of pages filled with medical billing codes — to patient-customers.

Five years later, they’ve been ingested, parsed, and enriched by academics and startups, shedding light on the often-shocking disparities in prices and how they’ve come to exist.

“When we look at the data, whether it’s from a chargemaster or what insurers paid, it’s all over the map — it makes no sense,” said Marcus Dorstel, senior vice president of operations at Turquoise Health, a price transparency startup with payers and providers as clients. “The variation is huge, even in a specific area.”

When researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health looked at the data, they discovered that the price different insurers pay for the same billed charges “can be three or more times different at the same hospital,” said Ge Bai, a professor of health care accounting who was among the researchers.

The prices insurers pay are determined by numerous factors, including what’s in their contracts with health systems. Some health plans, such as Smith’s, automatically pay a percentage of the hospital’s billed charges, incentivizing hospitals to increase their rates. Hershey Medical Center increased its prices for 11 common hospital billing codes by an average of about 30% from 2023 to 2025, Dan Snow, a data scientist at Turquoise Health, calculated for this article. But those prices were not much different than those of other hospitals in Pennsylvania.

In other cases, an insurer might agree to pay a health system a case rate — a standard rate for a type of care, say a colonoscopy or an inpatient stay for pneumonia.

But there’s a lucrative catch, called a “carve-out,” which refers to a particular benefit that’s negotiated and paid separately. If the hospital used expensive drugs or devices, for instance, they can be billed in addition to the bundled case rate, with no limits on hospital markups. That was the case with McCullick’s PET scan; about 80% of the charge was not for the scan, but for a new kind of drug injected before the scan to detect cancer.

Most often the final prices depend on the relative negotiating power of the insurer and the health system: Which side has enough market sway to walk away if the other doesn’t meet its demands?

Such factors “can explain the price variations and patterns that we see,” Dorstel said. “In some markets insurers are price-makers, and in others they are price-takers.”

For Insurers, Paying More Is Profitable

Insurers aren’t incentivized to lower prices, because high prices mean they “get a slice of a bigger pie,” Bai said.

By law, insurers must spend 80% or 85% of premiums on patient care. But when prices rise, they can pass on the increase to customers in the form of higher premium costs and still meet their legal obligation. So higher premiums mean less money for the patient and more profit for the insurer.

For each spinal injection Estrada received, his insurance company’s contracted rate was $23,237.50. Estrada’s coinsurance was $5,166.20. With a high-deductible plan, he was asked to pay all of that more than $5,000 bill.

When he called to challenge the big bill, he said, the surgery center’s administrator told him the charges were the result of a “legacy contract” with the insurer that is “advantageous” and “favorable” to the center.

New Mexico Surgery Center Orthopaedics’ charges are many times those of the hospital where the center’s doctors admit patients, for example; there, Estrada’s insurance company’s contracted rate for the same spinal injection is just $2,058.67. And compared with the roughly $20,000 the insurer paid for each of Estrada’s injections, other insurers pay the center about $700 for the same procedure, Snow found.

The surgery center is part of a national group that owns more than 535 surgical facilities, United Surgical Partners International, which in turn is owned by Tenet Healthcare, a for-profit health conglomerate. That kind of market dominance can lend companies the negotiating power to charge — and get paid — what they want, Bai said.

The surgery center, United Surgical Partners International, and Tenet Healthcare did not reply to multiple requests for comment from Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

With charges prenegotiated, insurers have little incentive to scrutinize questionable bills. When Smith asked for an itemized bill for her surgery, she discovered that she had been billed for two surgeries: one for the ectopic pregnancy removal and another because the surgeon noticed signs of endometriosis and performed a biopsy. Both were billed at the contracted rate of $37,923.

She was livid at the charges, which to her seemed like double-dipping. “That was one surgery,” she said. “There was one incision.”

A Yale University-trained lawyer, Smith consulted the federal Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ , which note the two billing codes used for her surgery generally can’t be “billed together for the same patient encounter” because one more or less is bundled with the other.

Smith said she reached out to the Penn State hospital, the insurer, and even the state attorney general without resolution. So she expects she will, reluctantly, have to pay the $5,250 coinsurance that the hospital and insurer say she owes.

In response to questions from Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News, Scott Gilbert, a spokesperson for the health system, did not respond to the specifics of this case, but wrote: “Penn State Health recognizes that health care billing can be confusing and often overwhelming for patients. The process involves many factors, including the type of care provided, where it’s delivered and the details of a patient’s insurance coverage.”

A ‘Reasonable’ Price?

After a reporter sent multiple inquiries to Intermountain Health, McCullick said an agent asked him what would be “a reasonable amount to resolve the situation.”

Sara Quale, a spokesperson for Good Samaritan Hospital, the Intermountain affiliate where he got the PET scan, wrote: “We sincerely regret the frustration this situation has caused Mr. McCullick,” noting that “we have been in consistent contact with him and will continue to follow up as needed.”

McCullick said he wants to pay his fair share but is still trying to figure out what that is — certainly less than the different self-pay prices he’s been offered, which all top $10,000. “The fluid nature of these numbers is mind blowing,” he wrote in an email.

As for Estrada, he was so angry that he decided not to go ahead with the nerve ablation. While he was being prepped for the procedure, Estrada recalled, the physician said he had “heard he might sue” and chastised him for being a troublemaker. The hospital did not respond to a request for comment on the allegations, and Estrada said he had never threatened legal action.

Estrada got off the table and put his shirt back on. “I’m not going to let this person put a big needle into my back.”

Bill of the Month is a crowdsourced investigation by Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and that dissects and explains medical bills. Since 2018, this series has helped many patients and readers get their medical bills reduced, and it has been cited in statehouses, at the U.S. Capitol, and at the White House. Do you have a confusing or outrageous medical bill you want to share? Tell us about it!

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2159599
They Need a Ventilator To Stay Alive. Getting One Can Be a Nightmare. /insurance/ventilators-nursing-homes-insurers-medicaid-als-lou-gehrigs-disease-missouri/ Tue, 02 Dec 2025 10:00:00 +0000 /?post_type=article&p=2114481

On vacation in Mexico last year, Michael DiPlacido passed out twice while scuba diving and again in his hotel. Back in St. Louis, doctors diagnosed him with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, or ALS, an incurable disease that often requires mechanical ventilation.

When his son Adam DiPlacido tried to find a permanent place to care for his father, who now needed a ventilator to breathe through a tracheostomy tube, he discovered none of Missouri’s nearly 500 nursing homes could take him.

“I never thought it would be easy, but I never thought it would be this hard,” Adam said.

A Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News investigation found widespread flaws and gaps in care for some of the country’s most debilitated people: those who cannot breathe on their own.

Spinal cord injuries, strokes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and neurological diseases such as multiple sclerosis have left tens of thousands of Americans permanently dependent on ventilators. The barriers these patients face offer a stark example of how the United States’ disjointed health care system makes dealing with severe illness so much harder.

The investigation found patients are frequently stymied in efforts to get their insurers to provide appropriate home ventilators. They can end up spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for private nurses to make sure they don’t die overnight. Those who need to be in a nursing home or other health facility sometimes must move to another state, far from their families.

“There are not a lot of institutions that can manage these people,” said Jonathon Schwartz, acting chief medical officer for the Spaulding Rehabilitation Network in Boston.

Only 347 of the nation’s roughly 14,750 nursing homes have specialized units dedicated to people on ventilators, a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News analysis of federal data shows. Fifteen states, including Missouri, have no nursing homes with a specialized unit for ventilator care.

While nursing homes can care for residents on ventilators on their regular floors, in practice few do. From April through June, fewer than 10% of nursing homes had long-stay residents breathing with the assistance of invasive mechanical ventilators, which deliver air through a tube down the airway or via a tracheostomy, the analysis found. Fewer than 15% of nursing homes had short-stay patients on ventilators.

Many patients in nursing homes can be weaned off ventilators, but those who can’t because of their condition often spend years in hospitals, which are not designed for residency. Innovative alternatives to traditional nursing homes exist in some areas of the country, but they haven’t been widely replicated and now are at risk from steep reductions in Medicaid enacted by President Donald Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress.

“It could create a terrible scenario,” said Gene Gantt, a respiratory care consultant to states and insurers.

Many people permanently on ventilators prefer to live at home as long as they can. But care there can be perilous and pricey. Some state health programs pay for ventilator care for low-income patients, but getting enrolled can take months amid bureaucratic hurdles and waitlists.

Some insurers balk at providing advanced home ventilators — which sound alerts for collapsed lungs, airway leaks, or malfunctions and can cost more than $10,000 — until patients have lost much of their ability to breathe.

“Feeling you’re suffocating is a horrific feeling, and that feeling can go on for months and months” as ALS patients decline while sparring with insurers, said Tyler Rehbein, an assistant professor of neurology at the University of Rochester who treats ALS patients.

A physician wearing a white coat stands outside a hospital entrance
Tyler Rehbein, an assistant professor of neurology at the University of Rochester who treats ALS patients, says he often battles insurers to get them to cover battery-powered ventilators, which are portable, unlike basic respiratory devices. (Lauren Petracca for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

‘Out of Money’

David Goldstein’s first symptom of ALS was a limp that appeared in the fall of 2022. It took six months for doctors to diagnose him with the neuromuscular disorder, also known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease. ALS afflicts about 34,000 Americans, destroying the nerve cells in the brain and spinal cord that control muscles, including those for breathing. It eventually results in complete paralysis, while most people remain mentally alert. Patients usually end up on ventilators if they do not die first, and respiratory failure is the most common cause of death.

Now 69 and on a ventilator, David cannot move anything except his eyes and mouth, said his ex-wife, Janis Goldstein, who has power of attorney. He requires someone around all the time in his Houston apartment to feed and bathe him, give him medication, and remove mucus blocking his airway. The settings on the ventilator require frequent monitoring and adjustments.

In spring of 2023, David got on the waiting list for Texas’ Medicaid home health program for disabled adults. More than a year later, Texas authorized 12 hours of home care a day. Still, Janis said, the state’s designated administrator sometimes has trouble getting workers for those shifts, and she and her ex-husband must pay for nurses to cover the rest of the day or night.

She said they have spent around a half-million dollars, largely on nurses and aides. They raised much of it through online campaigns and a fundraiser headlined by the country singer Larry Gatlin.

“The point that we’re at now, with the 24-hour help, is we’re pretty much out of money,” Janis said.

She is planning to move David into one of the few nursing homes in the region that take patients on ventilators, she said, but is concerned it will be difficult to arrange for someone to stay with David overnight in his room. She fears that if David’s position shifts even half an inch, he won’t be able to call for help through the machine that tracks his eye movements.

“I don’t know that he’ll be able to handle the stress and the anxiety of knowing that he could suffocate, even in a facility, because he doesn’t have someone by his side,” she said.

A ventilator sits on a gurney in a hospital exam room
Home mechanical ventilators have portable power sources and backup batteries, as well as alarms that detect airway blockages, leaks, and device malfunctions. Physicians who treat ALS patients say insurers are often reluctant to provide them. (Lauren Petracca for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Ventilator Deserts

When Michael DiPlacido’s son Adam spent weeks searching for a facility in Missouri that could take care of a patient on a ventilator with a trach tube, the only one that was even a possibility told him it couldn’t accept new patients, because its lone respiratory therapist had quit.

“It’s incredible to me there is not one single place in Missouri that can take a patient like my father,” Adam said.

Looking outside the state, Michael decided to move to a nursing home north of Chicago, about five hours by car from St. Louis. After three months, he left the facility because it was so far away from his family, Adam said.

Adam helped his father move into a long-term care hospital in suburban St. Louis for six weeks. But Michael’s insurer would not pay for hospital-level acute care, so Adam said Michael had to pay more than $47,000 out-of-pocket. Next, Adam helped him move to another Illinois nursing home, about an hour away, that his son had originally rejected because of online reviews, including a Medicare warning that abuse had occurred. Finding it deficient, Michael left after a week.

Adam found a private nursing home company that would care for Michael in his home, at a cost of $960 a day. “After 323 days, my father has finally made it back home,” Adam said in an email in September.

But with his health rapidly deteriorating, Michael was admitted to a hospice facility in October. He died later that month at 75.

A man stands with his hands on a large, yellow metal tube
Iron lungs, the precursor to today’s mechanical ventilators, were developed to treat polio patients suffering from respiratory paralysis. These two iron lungs for adults, built by the J.H. Emerson Co. in the 1930s, are part of a collection owned by Gene Gantt, a Tennessee respiratory care consultant. (Donna Gantt)

Gantt, the respiratory care consultant, said that fewer than half of state Medicaid programs provide adequate reimbursement rates for ventilator patients. He said most state Medicaid payment formulas do not measure outcomes or reward nursing homes financially if they provide better care, such as weaning a patient off the ventilator or preventing infections. He said he has seen nursing homes accept patients with trach tubes even when nurses lack proper training, or when the facility doesn’t employ respiratory therapists.

“For the large part, these patients are stuck in bed,” Gantt said. “We should try to get them the best quality of life.”

David Gifford, the chief medical officer for the American Health Care Association, a nursing home trade group, said equipping a nursing home with ventilators and getting state approval is expensive, and outside of urban areas, many markets lack enough local patients who need ventilators to make it financially worthwhile.

“It’s not as simple as saying we’re going to pay more and have more respiratory therapists,” Gifford said. “This is a group that needs highly specialized care. You’re not going to have it everywhere.”

Flagging Breaths

Derek McManus’ weakening right hand and occasional twitching was the first sign something was wrong. In October 2023, doctors diagnosed Derek, a corporate executive who lives in Painted Post, New York, with ALS.

By August 2024, Derek’s lungs were operating at 78% of capacity, his medical records show. Because ALS progresses so quickly, doctors often prescribe advanced . These machines deliver high-pressure air through a mask (called non-invasive) or a tube down the airway or via a tracheostomy (called invasive). They can calibrate themselves based on a patient’s breathing and have alarms that detect leaks, airway blockages, and device malfunctions. They can run on portable power sources and backup batteries in case of a power failure. The machines can allow people to talk or eat.

A ventilator machine is in the foreground, while a man wearing a ventilator mask is in the background
Derek McManus’ insurer refused to provide an advanced medical ventilator. Each machine can cost insurers more than $10,000. An independent appeals reviewer ordered the insurer to provide one. (Lauren Petracca for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

But some insurers have what physicians call “fail first” policies that won’t pay for ventilators unless the patient has already tried a respiratory assist device without success (as defined by the company). These simpler machines, the kind sleep apnea patients use, are not as effective in removing carbon dioxide as ventilators and lack safety features. Commonly known by the acronyms or , they can cost $1,000 or more and need to be plugged into an electrical socket.

“It seems to be an expectation of insurance companies they should live the rest of their life attached to a wall outlet,” said Rehbein, the University of Rochester neurologist.

In November 2024, Derek’s insurer denied his physician’s request for a ventilator, writing that “you have not failed treatment” with the simpler device, according to the insurer’s letter, provided by his wife, Lesley McManus. By April, Derek’s breathing capacity had dropped to 60% of normal. Lesley said she worried he would suffocate overnight if his basic device stopped working, since it had no safety alert. “He couldn’t take the mask off, because he can’t move his hands,” she said.

The insurer denied a second request for a ventilator, reiterating that Derek had not shown the simpler machine hadn’t worked, according to another insurance letter. Derek, who is 56, appealed to an independent medical reviewer, who overturned the insurer’s decision and ordered it to provide a ventilator, according to a copy of the ruling. The doctor wrote that the machine’s alarm system and capacity to automatically clear away airway secretion by simulating a cough were “vital for patient safety” and would help protect Derek from developing pneumonia.

“This multi-faceted approach to respiratory care is essential for improving gas exchange, reducing the work of breathing, and ultimately enhancing the patient’s quality of life and extending survival,” the decision said.

Derek said that since he got the new machine, he’s breathing easier, literally and emotionally. “If I’m not breathing right, it will give it an alert, and it will let us know if I don’t have the mask on properly,” he said.

The McManus family requested Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News not publish their insurer’s name, out of fear of repercussions.

A man leans back on a Buffalo Bills pillow while wearing a breathing mask
Derek McManus says his new ventilator has made things easier for him physically and emotionally. (Lauren Petracca for Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Insurance Rules

John Hansen-Flaschen, a pulmonologist who founded Penn Medicine’s , said some patients give up when an insurer denies their requests and don’t file appeals. “These are some of the most vulnerable people there are, and they don’t have energy to do this,” he said.

Doctors who treat patients with neuromuscular disorders said the most resistance to providing ventilators comes from some private Medicare Advantage plans, but they said it also has been an issue with some commercial policies.

Insurers dispute that they refuse ventilators for patients who need them. The of Excellus BlueCross BlueShield, which Rehbein said was one of the companies that covers his patients, requires simpler breathing machines to have failed before patients can get the more sophisticated ventilator. After a Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News inquiry, Excellus clarified its policy with a footnote saying it does consider mechanical ventilators as first-line therapy for certain situations, such as ALS, on a case-by-case basis.

UnitedHealthcare confirmed that some of its policies require that a less complex device be tried initially and found ineffective before a ventilator can be authorized. doesn’t mandate a stepped process and says it considers mechanical ventilators based on the severity of the condition and “where interruption or failure of respiratory support would lead to death,” with other patients eligible only for the simpler devices. Humana and Cigna did not respond to requests to provide their policies.

Chris Bond, a spokesperson for AHIP, the health insurance industry’s trade organization, said, “Health plans work to connect patients with safe, clinically appropriate care and welcome opportunities to work with policymakers and stakeholders across the health care system to continually improve access and precisely address any coverage-related issues.”

Melanie Lendnal, senior vice president for policy and advocacy at the ALS Association, said, “I haven’t met one person yet living with ALS, or a family member, who has not had to fight — really fight — to get a non-invasive ventilator.”

A Model in Massachusetts

In 2019, David Marion, a 36-year-old plumber, was hanging out with friends in Lowell, Massachusetts, when he tripped on the sidewalk and fractured his neck. The injury rendered him quadriplegic and paralyzed his abdominal and diaphragm muscles, requiring him to use a ventilator. Surgeons performed a tracheotomy, and over the next year and a half, Marion lived in two long-term acute care hospitals. “I didn’t get out of bed” at the second hospital, Marion, now 43, said in an interview.

His mother, Denise Valliere, who lives in New Hampshire, said she grew desperate trying to find a permanent home for him that was close enough that she could visit. “Some of those nursing homes are pretty sad places,” she said.

At the end of 2020, Marion’s luck turned. He was accepted by the Leonard Florence Center for Living in Chelsea, Massachusetts, which has created an alternative to the institutional life most nursing homes can offer people on ventilators. The center follows the philosophy, with small residences each serving 10 people, with private bedrooms, a common living room, and outdoor space. Residents set their own schedules, including when and what to eat. The center has 10 residences in its building; six are dedicated to people dependent on ventilators, including those with ALS or MS.

The center’s respiratory therapists helped Marion get to the point where he didn’t need a feeding tube and didn’t require his ventilator for portions of the day. The center provided a portable ventilator attached to his wheelchair and a computer tablet that Marion operates with his mouth. It allows him to summon the elevator, open doors, go outside, and adjust his bed, window shades, temperature, and television settings. Other residents who can’t use their hands or mouths can operate the devices through a camera that captures eye movement.

“This gives back independence to people who never thought they’d have independence again,” said Barry Berman, the chief executive officer of Chelsea Jewish Lifecare, the nonprofit that owns the Leonard Florence Center. “There are alternatives. It doesn’t have to be the way that it is.”

A screenshot of the PEAC system with icons for controlling "elevators," "HVAC," "window shade," and more
Residents at the Leonard Florence Center for Living in Chelsea, Massachusetts, are given computer tablets they can operate with their mouths or eye movements to open doors, call elevators, and adjust the lights, shades, temperature, and TV in their rooms. This is a screen they see to select options. (Steve Saling)

Most of the residents’ stays are paid for by Medicaid, which together with Medicare provides the bulk of the center’s revenue. Its finances are bolstered by the nonprofit’s endowment, something most nursing homes lack. Berman said that since the center opened in 2010, he has hosted dozens of visitors interested in replicating its model elsewhere in the country, but no one has.

Some states have licensed facilities that aren’t nursing homes to care for people on ventilators. In California, some people on ventilators live in “congregate living health facilities,” which are residential houses that for the terminally ill, people who are catastrophically or severely disabled, or people who are mentally alert but physically disabled.

Patients often must pay privately because Medicaid managed care programs don’t include these facilities as a benefit, said Mariam Voskanyan, who is president of the state association representing congregate living facilities and owns one in Los Angeles. California’s Medi-Cal program is authorized to pay these kinds of facilities through its waiver, but the program is at capacity and there is of more than 5,000 people.

Researchers expect to reduce or eliminate programs like these to make up for nearly $900 billion in coming Medicaid reductions, since the federal government does not require states to cover or .

Valliere, Marion’s mother, said she was baffled that there were not more places like Leonard Florence. “How can we be so behind in that kind of care and those kinds of facilities if we’re the best country in the world,” she asked. “Why is this?”

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2114481
This Health Economist Wants Your Medical Bills /podcast/arm-and-a-leg-health-economist-medical-bills-hospital-prices-insurance-premiums/ Wed, 05 Nov 2025 10:00:00 +0000 Economist Vivian Ho has been researching the U.S. health care system for four decades. These days, she’s focused on what she thinks are the biggest burdens on the average American: runaway hospital prices and rising health insurance premiums.

She has developed a strategy for addressing high insurance premiums — one that’s based on giving patients reliable information about how much they, and their insurer, would have to pay for care. The system is already working in Massachusetts. Could it be a model for the rest of the country?

Ho explains to Dan Weissmann, host of “An Arm and a Leg,” why she thinks this approach could help curb high prices and how listeners can help prove it by sharing their medical bills.

Dan Weissmann Host and producer of "An Arm and a Leg." Previously, Dan was a staff reporter for Marketplace and Chicago's WBEZ. His work also appears on "All Things Considered," Marketplace, the BBC, "99 Percent Invisible," and "Reveal," from the Center for Investigative Reporting.

Credits

Emily Pisacreta Producer
Claire Davenport Producer
Adam Raymonda Audio wizard
Ellen Weiss Editor
Click to open the Transcript Transcript: This Health Economist Wants Your Medical Bills

Note: “An Arm and a Leg” uses speech-recognition software to generate transcripts, which may contain errors. Please use the transcript as a tool but check the corresponding audio before quoting the podcast.

Dan: Hey there–

Vivian Ho is a health economist at Rice University and the Baylor College of Medicine in Houston. And since early 2024, she’s been giving talks at… HR conferences. Which is not a typical gig for an economist.

Vivian Ho: Um, yes. Economists don’t usually do that. We love to go talk at our own conferences.

Dan: But she’s been eager to spread a pretty big message.

Vivian Ho: There’s a potential to save workers, um, you know, and employees a lot of money.

Dan: And a few weeks ago, she sent me an email asking for help with what she’s trying to do: 

She’s wants folks to send her hospital bills for a study she thinks could be part of saving people a lot of moneys. She wondered if I’d encourage people to pitch in.

And honestly, I wanted to say yes before I even really knew anything specific about the study.

I should say: Vivian Ho has been a donor to this show. That’s actually how I met her and learned about her work. And became kind of a fan. 

Over the last few years, she’s been digging up and publishing evidence we need, to push back against the way health care keeps getting more and more expensive.

This is stuff a lot of us suspected, to say the least — stuff reporters have documented examples of — but she’s demonstrated they’re actual trends, not one-offs. 

For instance: When nonprofit hospitals make big profits — and they often do – they call them surpluses– they don’t generally use that money to help patients, by giving more charity care to reduce people’s bills. 

In one study, she compared hospital finances in the early 2010s and near the end of the decade. As the decade was ending, she found nonprofit hospitals were a LOT more profitable than they’d been before. 

And they’d gotten a lot richer, with like seventy percent more cash in the bank than they’d had earlier.  

But they were actually giving out less charity care.  

 She told me she ran that down after she got help understanding a big set of data that helped her see what hospitals actually do with their money– and started to poke around in it.

Vivian Ho: I say, well, I’m just gonna go have a look at, you know, one of the local hospitals and see what it says and then I pull it up and I go, oh wow.

Dan: She took a peek at one hospital’s “fund balance” — that’s non-profit speak for an institution’s savings, like for a rainy day. 

Vivian Ho: The fund balance for one of the hospitals across the street from Rice University is five and a half billion dollars. And so, you know, then it’s like, well, I need to take a closer look at this.

Dan: Here’s a couple things she found: That fund balance — the “rainy day fund” — was enough to run the hospital for more than two years. And it runs a healthy profit margin. 

And her study showed when she zoomed out: This is not a one-off. Among hospitals that do well, it’s the norm.

And this kind of data — this kind of EVIDENCE of how things work, of who benefits, and how much, from the totally unfair and unaffordable prices we’re all up against — it’s ammunition. 

Vivian Ho is looking for people to share their hospital bills with her, in order to build up her arsenal of information . 

She’s got a strategy in mind for how to deploy that information to save a lot of people a ton of money. It’s interesting.

And: I have no idea if this specific strategy will pay off.

But here’s what I do think: ?If we’re going to fight against the greed and exploitation that make our health care system so unhealthy — so deadly — we’re gonna need all the fighting power we can get.

So, I’ve sent Vivian Ho a hospital bill. And at the end of this episode I’ll encourage you to do the same. 

This is An Arm and a Leg — a show about why health care costs so freaking much, and what we can maybe do about it. I’m Dan Weissmann. I’m a reporter, and I like a challenge. So the job we’ve chosen here is to take one of the most enraging, terrifying, depressing parts of American life, and bring you a show that’s entertaining, empowering and useful.

Dan: Vivian Ho has been a health economist for like 40 years. And you could say she has mixed feelings.

Vivian Ho: Health economists, they work on so many different things and they are all important and interesting. But I do think the issue of the cost of healthcare and the cost of health insurance premiums is the biggest problem putting a burden on the average American citizen. And I don’t think as a profession that we spend enough time on that basic issue. I feel kind of – well, it does make me quite sad because here I am, I’ve worked in this career for this entire time, and things aren’t getting better. They’re actually getting much worse.

Dan: And that, she says, is why she does things like go to HR conferences these days. She’s got the motivation and she’s got the freedom to do it. 

Vivian Ho: So I’m super lucky. I’ve got tenure at Rice and you know, I’m a member of National Academy of Medicine. I’ve sort of achieved everything that I wanted to achieve, and now it’s, it’s all about, well, what can we do?

Dan: She’s decided to go after what she now sees as the biggest problem. Not the ONLY problem, but the biggest driver in prices that only seem to go up more every year.

Hospital systems are consolidating — gobbling each other up. So they get more bargaining power with insurers. They get higher prices without necessarily delivering more value.

Which isn’t what economists always expect. Bigger can mean better, more efficient. That’s what Vivian Ho used to expect.

Vivian Ho: I started this whole research agenda sort of 10-15 years ago, and I thought bigger was going to be better. I thought because of economies of scale and that if you allowed hospitals to acquire physician practices, there would be less duplication of services, you’d save money. But then the problem is there’s no mechanism that forces a provider to pass any savings onto the consumer. So there may be economies of scale, it’s just you and I as consumers aren’t able to enjoy any of those benefits.

Dan: That’s something we’ve talked about on this show. Like a lot. But what Vivian Ho has been able to demonstrate is: At this point, the average profit margins for hospitals — including “non-profit” hospitals — are actually higher than average profit margins for insurance companies.

Vivian Ho: There’s plenty of rural hospitals and smaller hospitals that lose money, but net, when you average on just how much profits the consolidated systems are making and you add them up all over the country, it’s much higher than what you get for the total profits of insurers.

Dan: Which isn’t to say that insurance companies don’t have a BIG role to play in our suffering. 

Vivian Ho: Insurers are, in many ways, not doing what they should be for customers. Certainly the show demonstrates that in many ways and that they are earning high profits. I’ve just looked at the data and concluded that the hospitals are earning much higher profits than the insurers are, and that’s where we’ve gotta focus our attention. 

Dan: I mean, there’s so much to unpack there, right? One is, wow, the hospitals are earning higher profits than insurance companies, and the insurance companies, by and large, are publicly traded entities that answer to shareholders. And the majority of hospitals in the United States are, as far as the IRS is concerned not-for-profit entities.

Vivian Ho: Exactly. We’ve been doing research lately that unfortunately shows that our not-for-profit hospitals behave a lot like for-profit companies.

Dan: So, okay, how do we get at that? 

Vivian Ho: Oh, uh, how do we change the behavior of what’s going on? 

Dan: Yeah.

Vivian Ho: Yeah. So…

Dan: Here’s Vivian Ho’s game plan. It’s complicated, and I’m not in a position to say, “this’ll totally work” — but there’s a lot that’s worth knowing here.

Especially this:

When Vivian Ho talks to business executives or HR managers, she brings out another set of data. And this is data that’s only become available in the last few years. 

Insurers now have to show what they pay hospitals. Not the sticker price, the negotiated price.

So, Vivian Ho’s talk includes a slide showing some details from three Houston hospitals. Blue Cross pays one of them about 22 thousand dollars for spinal fusion surgery. Another one gets 66 thousand — three times as much.. 

And the slide shows: That math is similar for other procedures. 

Vivian Ho: Employers didn’t realize how different the prices could be at their local hospitals. They thought, you know, anyone would think, oh, the prices couldn’t be that different. And now that some of the data is starting to make it out there, it’s becoming clear you really could save a lot of money.

Dan: I mean, you MAYBE could — if you could give your workers a good reason to go to the hospital that charges less.

Vivian Ho has a model for how that could work. It’s — based in part on a story I call Once Upon a Time in Massachusetts. 

That’s next.

This episode of An Arm and a Leg is produced in partnership with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. They’re a nonprofit newsroom covering health issues in America. Their reporters do amazing work. They win all kinds of awards every year. We’re honored to work with them. 

So, here’s our story — Once Upon a Time in Massachusetts — straight from the story’s author.

Elena Prager: I am Elena Prager. I’m an assistant professor of economics at the Simon Business School at the University of Rochester.

Dan: And while doing her dissertation, she came across a very unusual set of data. 

Elena Prager: I was like, wow, goldmine.

Dan: Here’s the story: Massachusetts has an agency that basically runs employee health benefits for all state employees, and a lot of local-government workers too.

And once upon a time — starting in 2010– they tried something unusual. 

Elena Prager: Possibly because they were lucky, possibly because they were smart, they designed their health insurance plans – at least when it came to hospital care – based everything on copays. And what that means is that you are given a dollar number. Let’s say $250 or $500 and like that’s it. That’s the number. If you go to hospital A, you pay 250, you go to hospital B, you pay 500. The end.

Dan: Which is totally different from how we’re used to looking at hospitals, right? I mean, regular insurance plans typically say, “You’ll pay like 10 percent, or 20 percent or 30 percent of whatever the total bill turns out to be.” 

Elena Prager: And the patient is left scratching their head being like, well, how do I know what the total bill is gonna be? Even if the hospital tells me something. Like, what if something goes wrong with the anesthesia? They have to call in an extra specialist. There’s a complication. More stuff gets done. Like it’s very, very hard to, for a patient and even really a provider, to predict in advance what’s gonna be done to them and therefore what the price is going to be.

Dan: So there’s no way for me to take price into account if I need to go to the hospital.

But Once Upon a Time in Massachusetts, there was. It was a co-pay. Whatever insurance plan you were on, it worked the same way:

Go to hospital A — where prices are generally higher — your copay might be five hundred dollars.

Go to hospital B — that charges the insurance plan less for stuff — you’d pay two-fifty.

And Elena Prager found the data that showed what happened next.

Long story short, she found that over three years, patients started using lower-priced hospitals more often. Patients saved money, and so did the health plan. 

And actually, Massachusetts still runs its health plans this way, but– 

 Vivian Ho doesn’t think other employers can just get their insurance companies to adopt this same model. 

VIVIAN HO: It’s actually a fair amount of work.

DAN:  Work for the insurance company. Doing the math to figure out which tier is which, and what the copays would be.

Vivian Ho: and of course it gets the hospitals really upset.

Dan:  The folks in Massachusetts had a ton of leverage that most employers don’t have:  

Elena Prager says they represented a huge chunk of the insurance market like a twelfth of it. Enough business that it was worth insurance companies’ while to put in the work.

But now, Vivian Ho has her eye on a couple of new services that are promising to do something similar.

One is actually a subsidiary of everybody’s favorite insurance company: United Healthcare. They make an app called Surest.

Surest Ad: It’s easy to shop for a vacation rental or your next flight, but when it comes to something like healthcare, not so easy. That’s why Surest is a health plan, designed to be simple with clear upfront costs.

Dan: Here’s how Vivian Ho describes the mechanics of this kind of app.

Vivian Ho: Doctor tells you you need to go get an MRI, you punch an MRI, the app knows where you live, and it says, here’s a list of providers where you can go get an MRI. And then if you go to this particular place, there’s no copay and there’s actually no deductible, and then if you go to this MRI place, well, you know, there’s gonna be a $25 copay or a $50 copay. Yeah. Isn’t that kind of mind blowing?

Dan: I tell her: That sounds like I would want that if I trusted that the place that costs my employer less is, you know, gonna take good care of me.

Vivian Ho: Right. Well that’s why I’m trying to get funding to do an analysis to look at the spending and quality implications of using one of these apps.

Dan: That is: Do people using these apps end up choosing lower-cost providers? AND: Do they get good care when they do?

Vivian Ho wants to study that. But first she needs to study something else. 

Vivian Ho: All of these apps and price shopping applications, they all depend on having the correct data. Now, the insurers are required to disclose this information by federal rules. It is slowly coming out. It’s not all there yet, but no one’s actually looked to see whether it’s accurate.

Dan: Oh.

Vivian Ho: So there’s been a lot of focus on, is the price there or is it not there, but not is it the price that the patient is actually getting billed.

Dan: And this is why Vivian Ho wants our hospital bills. 

Because: Whether or not one particular strategy is gonna pan out, the data itself contains ammunition. One hospital gets paid twice as much as the ones across the street? 

I mean, that’s information I want out in the open, and getting put to use. 

But that information can  only be useful if we know the data is accurate. And right now, there’s no way to know. 

Insurers are publishing big data sets, but how  do we *know* somebody at the insurance company didn’t just go to Chat GPT and say, “Make me a giant spreadsheet with these fields on it?”

Vivian Ho says if she has enough ACTUAL bills — a thousand would be good, three thousand would be great — she can check. 

Actually, even better: She wants your itemized bill and, if she can get it, the paperwork you get from your insurance company about what they paid. The thing that says “This is not a bill.” It’s an “explanation of benefits” — or EOB for short.

And, she recognizes, this isn’t a TINY ask.

Vivian Ho: I realize it’s time consuming. It does, you know, because you gotta sit down. It’s like, what’s my password and log in, and then you’ve gotta, you know, find one of these EOBs.

Dan: Oh, and you’ve gotta cover up all your personally identifying information.

Vivian Ho: We don’t wanna see your your name and address and so, you know, it takes time to you, you can sort of print these out and use a Sharpie and cross them out.

Dan: It does sound like a huge drag, but I’m here to tell you: I did it. And it took me maybe five minutes.

I don’t know how Vivian Ho’s specific strategy will play out, and honestly, neither does she.

Vivian Ho: You know, I am going at this at sort of like many different angles.

Dan: Yeah.

Vivian Ho: So just trying to raise people’s awareness of there are huge price differences. This is, this is what it takes to address the issue. 

Dan: If you’ve gotten a hospital bill in the last year or so, and you’ve got five minutes — maybe set a note on your calendar for when you DO have five minutes? — I’d love it if you gave this a shot. 

Grab a sharpie, fire up your printer, dig up your login. Print out a bill and an EOB, scratch out your identifying information, take a picture on your phone — wow, this is sounding long, but honestly, it took me five minutes — so do those things, and send the images to pricecheck@rice.edu. 

Vivian Ho’s got researchers standing by.

Coming up on this show: We’re gonna take some time as the year ends, to look at some things that DIDN’T suck in 2025. 

Which basically means: Places where state governments stepped in to protect us from ripoff prices. Which, it turns out, happened! 

News archive 1: Oregonians burdened by medical bills may soon get a break on their credit scores.

News archive 2: New law aimed at protecting Maine consumers from the impacts of medical debt goes into effect.

News archive 3: Tonight Indiana governor Mike Braun signs 10 health care-related bills into law.

Dan: Happened enough that it’ll take more than just one episode to give you a good sample.

That’s next time on An Arm and a Leg.

Till then, take care of yourself. 

This episode of An Arm and a Leg was produced by me, Dan Weissmann, with help from Emily Pisacreta — and edited by Ellen Weiss. Adam Raymonda is our audio wizard.

Our music is by Dave Weiner and Blue Dot Sessions. Bea Bosco is our consulting director of operations. 

An Arm and a Leg is produced in partnership with Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. That’s a national newsroom producing in-depth journalism about health issues in America and a core program at KFF, an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.

 Zach Dyer is senior audio producer at Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News. He’s editorial liaison to this show.

An Arm and a Leg is distributed by KUOW, Seattle’s NPR news station.

And thanks to the Institute for Nonprofit News for serving as our fiscal sponsor.

They allow us to accept tax-exempt donations. You can learn more about INN at INN.org.

Finally, thank you to everybody who supports this show financially.

You can join in any time at arm and a leg show, dot com, slash: support.


“An Arm and a Leg” is a co-production of Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and Public Road Productions.

For more from the team at “An Arm and a Leg,” subscribe to its weekly newsletter, . You can also follow the show on  and the . And if you’ve got stories to tell about the health care system, the producers would love to .

To hear all Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News podcasts, click here.

And subscribe to “An Arm and a Leg” on , , , or wherever you listen to podcasts.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2107470
So Your Insurance Dropped Your Doctor. Now What? /health-care-costs/health-care-helpline-hospital-insurance-network-contract-disputes-what-to-do/ Wed, 29 Oct 2025 09:00:00 +0000 An illustration of a woman looking at a paper letter in her hands with a confused expression. Above her illustrates a network of medical care that's been fragmented by letters like the one she holds.
(Oona Zenda/Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News)

Last winter, Amber Wingler started getting a series of increasingly urgent messages from the local hospital in Columbia, Missouri, letting her know her family’s healthcare might soon be upended.

MU Health Care, where most of her family’s doctors work, was mired in a contract dispute with Wingler’s health insurer, Anthem. The existing contract was set to expire.

Then, on March 31, Wingler received an email alerting her that the next day Anthem was dropping the hospital from its network. It left her reeling.

“I know that they go through contract negotiations all the time … but it just seemed like bureaucracy that wasn’t going to affect us. I’d never been pushed out-of-network like that before,” she said.  

The timing was awful.

The query: When a Missouri mom’s health insurance company couldn’t come to an agreement with her hospital, most of her doctors were suddenly out-of-network. She wondered how she would get her kids’ care covered or find new doctors. “For a family of five, … where do we even start?”

— Amber Wingler, 42, in Columbia, Missouri

Wingler’s 8-year-old daughter, Cora, had been having unexplained troubles with her gut. Waitlists to see various pediatric specialists to get a diagnosis, from gastroenterology to occupational therapy, were long — ranging from weeks to more than a year.

(In a statement, MU Health Care spokesperson Eric Maze said the health system works to make sure children with the most urgent needs are seen as quickly as possible.)

Suddenly, the specialist visits for Cora were out-of-network. At a few hundred bucks a piece, the out-of-pocket cost would have added up fast. The only other in-network pediatric specialists Wingler found were in St. Louis and Kansas City, both more than 120 miles away.

So Wingler delayed her daughter’s appointments for months while she tried to figure out what to do.

Nationwide, contract disputes are common, with more than 650 hospitals having public spats with an insurer since 2021. They could as hospitals brace for about $1 trillion in cuts to federal healthcare spending prescribed by President Donald Trump’s signed into law in July.

Patients caught in a contract dispute have few good options. “There’s that old African proverb: that when two elephants fight, the grass gets trampled. And unfortunately, in these situations, oftentimes patients are grass,” said Caitlin Donovan, a senior director at the Patient Advocate Foundation, a nonprofit that helps people who are having trouble accessing healthcare.

If you’re feeling trampled by a contract dispute between a hospital and your insurer, here is what you need to know to protect yourself financially:

1. “Out-of-network” means you’ll likely pay more.

Insurance companies negotiate contracts with hospitals and other medical providers to set the rates they will pay for various services. When they reach an agreement, the hospital and most of the providers who work there become part of the insurance company’s network.

Most patients prefer to see providers who are “in-network” because their insurance picks up some, most, or even all of the bill, which could be hundreds or thousands of dollars. If you see an out-of-network provider, you could be on the hook for the whole tab.

If you decide to stick with your familiar doctors even though they’re out-of-network, consider asking about getting a cash discount and about the hospital’s financial assistance program.

2. Rifts between hospitals and insurers often get repaired.

When Brown University health policy researcher examined 3,714 nonfederal hospitals across the U.S., he said, he found that about 18% of them had a public dispute with an insurance company sometime from June 2021 to May 2025.

About half of those hospitals ultimately dropped out of the insurance company’s network, according to Buxbaum’s preliminary data. But most of those breakups ultimately get resolved within a month or two, he added. So your doctors very well could end up back in the network, even after a split.

3. You might qualify for an exception to keep costs lower.

Certain patients with might qualify for an extension of in-network coverage, called continuity of care. You can apply for that extension by contacting your insurer, but the process may prove lengthy. Some hospitals have set up resources to help patients apply for that extension.

Wingler ran that gantlet for her daughter, spending hours on the phone, filling out forms, and sending faxes. But she said she didn’t have the time or energy to do that for everyone in her family.

“My son was going through physical therapy,” she said. “But I’m sorry, dude, like, just do your exercises that you already have. I’m not fighting to get you coverage too, when I’m already fighting for your sister.”

Also worth noting, if you’re dealing with a medical emergency: For most emergency services, hospitals than their in-network rates.

4. Switching your insurance carrier may need to wait.

You might be thinking of switching to an insurer that covers your preferred doctors. But be aware: Many people who choose their insurance plans during an annual open enrollment period are locked into their plan for a year. Insurance contracts with hospitals are not necessarily on the same timeline as your “plan year.”

, such as getting married, having a baby, or losing a job, can qualify you to change insurance outside of your annual open enrollment period, but your doctors’ dropping out of an insurance network is not a qualifying life event.

5. Doctor-shopping can be time-consuming.

If the split between your insurance company and hospital looks permanent, you might consider finding a new slate of doctors and other providers who are in-network with your plan. Where to start? Your insurance plan likely has an online tool to search for in-network providers near you. 

But know that making a switch could mean waiting to establish yourself as a patient with a new doctor and, in some cases, traveling a fair distance.

6. It’s worth holding on to your receipts.

Even if your insurance and hospital don’t strike a deal before their contract expires, there’s a decent chance they will still make a new agreement.

Some patients decide to put off appointments while they wait. Others keep their appointments and pay out-of-pocket. Hold on to your receipts if you do. When insurers and hospitals make up, the deals often are backdated, so the appointments you paid for out-of-pocket could be covered after all.

End of an Ordeal

Three months after the contract between Wingler’s insurance company and the hospital lapsed, the sides announced they had reached a new agreement. Wingler joined the throng of patients scheduling appointments they’d delayed during the ordeal.

In a statement, Jim Turner, a spokesperson for Anthem’s parent company, Elevance Health, wrote, “We approach negotiations with a focus on fairness, transparency, and respect for everyone impacted.”

Maze from MU Health Care said: “We understand how important timely access to pediatric specialty care is for families, and we’re truly sorry for the frustration some parents have experienced scheduling appointments following the resolution of our Anthem contract negotiations.”

Wingler was happy her family could see their providers again, but her relief was tempered by a resolve not to be caught in the same position again.

“I think we will be a little more studious when open enrollment comes around,” Wingler said. “We’d never really bothered to look at our out-of-pocket coverage before because we didn’t need it.”

Healthcare Helpline helps you navigate the health system hurdles between you and good care. Send us your tricky question and we may tap a policy sleuth to puzzle it out. . The crowdsourced project is a joint production of NPR and Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News.

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2102809
As Insurers Struggle With GLP-1 Drug Costs, Some Seek To Wean Patients Off /health-care-costs/glp-1-weight-loss-diabetes-drugs-cost-deprescription-medicaid-north-carolina/ Thu, 04 Sep 2025 09:00:00 +0000 /?post_type=article&p=2080806 After losing 50 pounds on the injectable weight loss medication Zepbound, Kyra Wensley received a surprising letter from her pharmacy benefit manager in April.

Her request for coverage had been denied, the letter said, because she’d had a body mass index of less than 35 when she started Zepbound. The 25-year-old who lives in New York had been taking Zepbound without incident for months, so she was confused: Why was her BMI, which had been around 32 when she started, becoming an issue only now?

Wensley had no interest in quitting an effective drug. “Going right off like that, it’s easier said than done,” she said.

A photo of a woman smiling outside.
Kyra Wensley’s doctor fought to keep her on the injectable weight loss medication Zepbound, but Wensley ultimately had to switch to Wegovy, a different GLP-1 agonist, to meet her health plan’s requirements. (Lori Wensley)

Her doctor fought to keep her on the GLP-1 agonist, the category that includes weight loss and Type 2 diabetes drugs Ozempic, Wegovy, Mounjaro, and Zepbound. But Wensley ultimately had to switch from Zepbound to Wegovy to meet her plan’s requirements. She said she doesn’t like Wegovy as much as her old medication, but she now feels lucky to be on any GLP-1.

Lots of research suggests such medications must be used indefinitely to maintain weight loss and related health benefits. But with list prices of , public and private payers are struggling to keep up with for GLP-1 weight loss drugs and in some cases are eliminating or restricting their coverage as a result.

North Carolina Medicaid plans to for weight loss on Oct. 1, just over a year after starting the coverage. Pennsylvania is planning to limit Medicaid coverage to beneficiaries at the highest risk of complications from obesity. And despite of a potential federal pilot program to extend coverage of GLP-1 obesity drugs under Medicaid and Medicare, all state Medicaid programs are likely to be under pressure due to in the budget reconciliation package recently signed into law by President Donald Trump.

Already, many GLP-1 users , — often due to side effects, high costs, or insurance issues. Now a growing number of researchers, payers, and providers are exploring deliberate “deprescription,” which aims to taper some patients off their medication after they have taken it for a certain amount of time or lost a certain amount of weight.

The U.K.’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, which creates guidance for the , on the use of some weight loss medications, such as Wegovy. And the concept was raised in a recent Institute for Clinical and Economic Review to obesity drugs.

, who directs the Center for Value-Based Insurance Design at the University of Michigan, that if some people using GLP-1s to lose weight were eventually transitioned off, more people could take advantage of them.

“If you’re going to spend $1 billion or $100 billion, you could either spend it on fewer people for a long period of time, or you can spend it on a lot more people for a shorter period of time,” he said.

Fendrick’s employer, the University of Michigan, indeed does that. Its prescription drug plan caps coverage of GLP-1 drugs if they’re used solely for weight loss.

Jamie Bennett, a spokesperson for Wegovy and Ozempic maker Novo Nordisk, declined to comment on the concept of deprescription, noting that its drugs are intended for chronic conditions. Rachel Sorvig, a spokesperson for Zepbound and Mounjaro manufacturer Eli Lilly, said in a statement that users should “talk to their health care provider about dosage and duration needs.”

Studies have shown that people typically regain within a year of , and that many people who quit ultimately go back on the drugs.

“There’s no standard of care or gold standard on how to wean right now,” said , an obesity and internal medicine doctor with UK HealthCare in Kentucky.

But the math shows why time-limited coverage is appealing to payers that struggle to pay for beneficiaries’ GLP-1 prescriptions, said , chief medical officer for the pharmacy benefit manager CVS Caremark.

And states are “between a rock and a hard place,” said Kody Kinsley, who until January led North Carolina’s Health and Human Services Department. “They’re going to have to look at every single thing and trim dollars everywhere they can.”

Pennsylvania was looking for cost-saving strategies even before the new federal tax-and-spending law, according to Brandon Cwalina, press secretary for the state’s Department of Human Services. Pennsylvania projects it will spend $1.3 billion on GLP-1 drugs this year.

Plans could see real savings, Fendrick said, if they covered GLP-1s for initial weight loss then moved people to cheaper options — such as more affordable drugs or behavioral health programs — to maintain it.

Plenty of companies are eager to sell insurers, employers, and individuals on behavioral alternatives. One is , its nutrition-focused weight management program as “a proven approach for deprescribing GLP-1s when clinically appropriate.” assessed 154 people with Type 2 diabetes who stopped using GLP-1 medications but continued following Virta’s program, concluding that their weight did not significantly increase after a year.

Researchers affiliated with a European weight management company also that slowly tapering off the medications may help maintain weight loss.

For employers and insurers, the “initial question” was whether to cover GLP-1s for obesity, said Virta CEO Sami Inkinen. “Now, basically, everyone’s coming to the middle and asking, ‘How do we responsibly cover these drugs?’”

Part of responsible coverage, Inkinen said, is providing other forms of support to patients who stop using GLP-1 medications, by choice or otherwise.

For some people, however, maintaining weight loss without a GLP-1 remains a challenge, even with other options available.

Lily, who lives in Michigan, lost almost 80 pounds in roughly 18 months on Wegovy. But she had to quit the drug when she turned 26 and left her parents’ insurance plan this year. The plan her employer offers stopped covering GLP-1s for weight loss right around the time she joined.

Lily, who asked to be identified by only her first name because she is not out to her family as transgender, has tried other medications since then, and previously tried lifestyle programs to control her weight. But she said nothing works as well for her as Wegovy.

She has regained 20 pounds since going off the drug at the beginning of the year and worries that number will continue to rise, potentially contributing to future health problems.

“Just give people the drugs,” she said. “It seems cheaper and safer in the long run.”

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2080806
When Hospitals and Insurers Fight, Patients Get Caught in the Middle /insurance/hospitals-insurers-contract-dispute-patients-coverage-in-limbo/ Tue, 02 Sep 2025 09:00:00 +0000 /?post_type=article&p=2074850 Amy Frank said it took 17 hours on the phone over nearly three weeks, bouncing between her insurer and her local hospital system, to make sure her plan would cover her husband’s post-surgery care.

Many of her calls never got past the hold music. When they did, the hospital told her to call her insurer. The insurer told her to have the hospital fax a form to a special number. The hospital responded that they’d been instructed to send faxes to a different number.

“It was just a big loophole we were caught in, going around and around,” Frank said.

Frank and her husband, Allen, faced that ellipse of frustration because they were among 90,000 central Missouri patients caught in the middle of a contract dispute between University of Missouri, or MU, Health Care, a Columbia, Missouri-based health system, and Anthem, the couple’s health insurance provider. The companies let their contract expire in April after failing to strike a deal to keep the hospital system and its clinics in-network.

A growing number of Americans find themselves in a similar pinch. In New York City, negotiations between UnitedHealthcare and Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center , briefly leaving some patients in limbo until a deal was reached the next day. In North Carolina, Duke Health recently announced unless the insurance company agreed to pay more favorable rates to the health system. And the Franks were nearly caught out-of-network previously, when between Anthem and a primary care group in Jefferson City, Missouri, prompted the couple to switch some providers to MU Health Care.

Indeed, 18% of non-federal hospitals experienced at least one documented case of public brinksmanship with an insurance company from June 2021 to May 2025, according to preliminary findings by Jason Buxbaum, a health policy researcher at the Brown University School of Health. Over the same period, 8% of hospitals ultimately went out-of-network with an insurer, at least for a time.

Industry observers say long-standing trends like hospital consolidation and rising health care costs contribute to the disputes, and Trump administration policies could make them more frequent as hospitals brace for about $1 trillion in cuts to federal health care spending as part of President Donald Trump’s sweeping budget law.

“They’re going to be more hard-nosed at negotiating with the health plans because they’re going to be in a survival mode,” said , a retired insurance executive and former board member of America’s Health Insurance Plans, the national trade group representing the health insurance industry.

During the three-month stalemate between the insurer and the health system in Missouri, patients with Anthem plans lost in-network coverage with the region’s largest — and, for some specialties, only — medical provider.

Most people were unable to switch insurance midyear and faced the choice of paying higher prices upfront, delaying care, finding new providers, or running a paperwork gauntlet in hopes their medical conditions qualified for a 90-day coverage extension.

The dispute came at a particularly inconvenient time for the Franks. Allen Frank was recovering from complications from falling off the roof while cleaning the siding of the couple’s home in Rich Fountain in October. When it happened, Amy drove him 24 miles to the nearest emergency room. The facility in Jefferson City had recently been taken over by MU Health Care, and Allen was soon transferred 30 miles farther by ground ambulance to the system’s main hospital in Columbia for surgery to insert two metal plates and several screws to repair his collarbone.

Health care consolidation has been booming nationwide for 30 years, with announced since 1998, including 428 from 2018 to 2023. Mergers may lead to some efficiencies and benefits for consumers, but they also reduce market competition and strengthen the hand of hospitals in negotiations with insurers.

“Insurer markets have been consolidated for a long time,” Brown’s Buxbaum said. “What’s changed is how consolidated the hospital markets have become.”

Now if a hospital system drops out of a network, he said, “it’s not just going to be one key hospital. It’s much more likely to be all the key facilities, or many of the critical mass of providers” in an area.

It’s a scary prospect for patients, making the public threat of a rupture a potent tool in negotiations between hospitals and insurers. That typically works in a hospital’s favor, Baackes said, “because the general assumption is the insurance is being greedy and the hospital is doing God’s work.”

In a statement, Buddy Castellano, spokesperson for Anthem’s parent company, Elevance Health, wrote, “We approach negotiations with a focus on fairness, transparency, and respect for everyone impacted. Health plan rate discussions are complex and require thoughtful collaboration to ensure long-term sustainability. Our commitment remains clear: ensuring access to care while keeping coverage affordable for the families, employers, and communities we serve.”

Allen Frank needed follow-up care in the months after his initial surgery, including a second surgery in July.

A federal law dubbed the No Surprises Act, which took effect in 2022, whose provider drops out of network due to a contract dispute. People getting treatment for serious conditions can keep their in-network rates for up to 90 days with their current providers, delaying the need to find a new one or face higher rates. So Amy Frank worked the phones to get that continuity of care for her husband.

“Our deductible was already met. If we go out-of-network, we’re going to have to start completely over for the out-of-network deductible,” she said.

Eventually, Anthem agreed to let Allen Frank continue his care with MU Health Care. But when he showed up for an appointment to get an injection in his injured shoulder, he was told the health system didn’t have a record of the approval. He refused to leave without being seen, and, eventually, a nurse was able to get through to Anthem to get a confirmation number and approval for the appointment.

“It’s just very frustrating,” Amy Frank said in early July, before the sides had reached a deal. “I’ve got my own medical issues, and I don’t feel like mine are bad enough to be fighting for a continuity of care.”

In an email, MU Health Care spokesperson Eric Maze wrote: “While our goal was to reach agreement prior to our contract terminating and to avoid disruption in care, we established processes and resources well in advance to facilitate continuity of care and reduce the burden for our patients. We understand and are sorry for the stress and concern being out of network created for many, and we are deeply grateful for the patience and trust placed in us during this time.”

Rising health care costs are fueling contract disputes. Hospital expenses grew 5.1% in 2024, according to a recent , outpacing the 2.9% inflation rate. Labor costs are the biggest driver, with advertised nursing salaries rising 26.6% faster than inflation from 2020 to 2024, the brief noted.

Hospitals want to recoup those costs by pressing insurance companies to pay more for services.

Washington University in St. Louis health economist Tim McBride said that dynamic could be further enflamed by the massive tax-and-spending law. The measure makes significant cuts to federal health care spending over the next decade, including a $911 billion drop in Medicaid spending, and is expected to cause 10 million Americans to lose their insurance.

As negotiations between MU Health Care and Anthem broke down, the insurer claimed the hospital was seeking a 39% rate increase over three years, while the hospital said the insurer wouldn’t budge past 1%-2%.

On June 30, three months into the standoff, the Missouri Senate Insurance and Banking Committee called the two sides in for a hearing that broke months of deadlock and prompted new proposals from Anthem.

“Anthem doubled their rate increase offer,” Missouri Senate President Cindy O’Laughlin, a Republican whose district includes parts of central Missouri, on July 8, encouraging a deal.

“Yes I know that I’m not on the inside nor the CEO of either but from what I’ve been told this seems a reasonable offer.”

The sides one week later that was retroactive to April 1, the day the previous contract expired.

Amy Frank got several texts from friends and family about the agreement. She’d been so vocal about her frustrations, they wanted to make sure she’d seen the news. But her relief was subdued.

“So you put everybody through all of this for nothing?” she said the day after the deal was announced.

She had already sunk hours on the phone to ensure Allen’s July 31 surgery to repair the plates holding his clavicle together would be covered. She was in no rush to call her doctors to reschedule the appointments she’d skipped, figuring their phone lines would be busy. The experience had her wondering if the two sides were trying to get people upset as a bargaining tactic.

“That money that they’re fighting over — is that really worth all of the stress?” she said.

And after going through two disputes in three years, she can’t help but wonder: How long until the next one?

Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism. Learn more about .

This article first appeared on Ñî¹óåú´«Ã½Ò•îl Health News and is republished here under a .

]]>
2074850