BILL ANALYSIS AB 918 Page 1 Date of Hearing: May 12, 1999 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Carole Migden, Chairwoman AB 918 (Keeley) - As Amended: April 19, 1999 Policy Committee: HealthVote:14 - 0 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:YesReimbursable: No SUMMARY This bill requires health plan capitation payments to providers be computed by a qualified actuary, and requires health plans to annually update an actuarial report. FISCAL EFFECT The bill would result in minor enforcement costs to the Department of Corporations. State costs that would result from an increase in health plan premiums due to the bill's provisions would probably be minor. COMMENTS 1)Purpose of the Bill . This bill is sponsored by the California Medical Association. The sponsor argues the bill is necessary because health plans charge and receive money up front to pay for treatment to be rendered in the future, and that the actual costs of that treatment is uncertain. Accordingly, the sponsor believes the resulting risk to contracting providers should be subject to an actuarial evaluation. The sponsor believes such an evaluation will indicate whether a health plan has adequately "spread its risk" through the use of polling, sufficient stop-loss insurance, and re-insurance, and has adequate financial reserves to cover any eventuality. 2)Current Practice . Existing regulations require plans to submit a statement describing the method used to calculate capitation rates. However, the statement is neither publicly available nor required to be updated. This bill requires the actuarial data used to compute capitation rates to be updated annually and to be filed with the Department of Corporations. AB 918 Page 2 3)Opposition . The California Association of Health Plans opposes the bill, arguing it improperly requires the disclosure of confidential, proprietary, competitive information and trade secrets and that such disclosure would put health plans at a disadvantage when negotiating with their contracting providers. The association argues there is no value in having an actuary certifying capitation rates because they are based on negotiations, market competition and individual physician income expectations. Accordingly, plans believe there is no "actuarially sound" price for physician services. 4)Prior Legislation . This bill is identical to SB 317 (Calderon) from the 1997-98 session, which was vetoed. In his veto message, the governor said "Providers can and do retain actuaries and employ negotiators now, without legislative mandate, if they feel it necessary to do so. The Department of Corporations is required to intervene if a plan is found to have set capitation rates too low to permit necessary care. But this bill at least implies a larger role for the department as a rate-setter, a role which the enabling Knox-Keene Act expressly forbids." Analysis Prepared by : William Wehrle / APPR. / (916) 319-2081