Travis County Commissioners Court
September 12, 2006
Item 14
14, we had some out of town visitors. 14-a, to approve 12-month extensions, modification number six, to contract number 02 t 000050 j, united healthcare insurance company for the, one, cobran administrative services agreement, and two, customer reporting system internet access agreement, and three, stop loss insurance agreement. And b, approve the 12-month extension, modification number seven, to contract number two t 000050 j, united healthcare insurance company, for administrative services agreement for Travis County employees, Travis County healthcare district employees, retirees and dependents.
>> judge, Commissioners, prior to open enrollment we brought before the court some information on group benefits and at that time we were requested to have representatives from united healthcare and spec terra vision before the court when the renewal came before the court. This afternoon I'm pleased to have with us our account executive from united held cake and nelson arm strong, our account executive from health vision. We're here to answer any questions you might have about the contracts and coverages.
>> a couple of questions. Just kind of general, and I don't know, maybe you can give me some guidance on it. Are these the kind of complaints that you may have to provide an example, sec terra vision care, various complaints, I have had complaints. I'm just trying to wonder how can those eventually be addressed procedurally can you maybe tell me what or how do we deal with which complaints, and I guess this goes for both parties. United healthcare and of course sec terra vision care.
>> we have had some complaints dealing with customer service from sec terra and we have been working on resolving that. Today we had nelson armstrong here to explain how we work that resolution to the benefit of Travis County and our employees.
>> good afternoon. Very simply, we have instituted a client advocate or a client administrator for Travis County that is assigned to the risk manage management team. That person's responsibility is to receive any issues from that team that's gone up to the team to get those issues resolved very quickly as possible > previously we didn't have that person assigned. In a very direct manner that has been changed. That person is now on board. We had a conference call yesterday afternoon to be sure all those procedures are in place.
>> we would ask that employees who do have issues with spectera vision call one of our benefit assistants, and we will work through our client administrator to get those issues resolved.
>> okay. And secondly, I guess, the next person going to the united healthcare provider, I'm kind of concerned about some things that did come up during the hearings when we had some employees coming up before the Commissioners court and actually telling us some of their concerns, and I heard several. I want to make sure that your ears are where they should be so you can hear what the employees have said and try to make improvements as much as possible to the seniors that you provide to employees one of those concerns, if I can recall, were the claims that were, that some of the employees were receiving and then trying to get your staff to respond to those claims. And then the employees of Travis County not getting the answers that were really responsive enough to them to be satisfied. And there were several claims that eventually, I guess, they may have been resolved but there were a lot of pending claims. I'm just wondering how and what are you going to do about claim resolutions from the Travis County employees when they are really legitimate situations as far as the dispute on claims. How is that being handled at this point?
>> if I recall correctly, the information dealt with copays, improper copays and so forth.
>> yes.
>> I think those have been resolved. I'll ask her to come up and answer your question, she worked on that.
>> cindy pairing ton, hr. Yes, Commissioner, there were several issues that came up during the employee hearings and also the e-mail e-mails that the employees sent in. A lot of them dealt with maybe being charged a specialist copay when in fact it was a primary care physician under our plan, which we have some non nonstandard figures that are considered as--physicians that are considered as primary care. It's been an ongoing exercise with uhc to make sure that these claims get paid properly and that they are set up in their system where the electronics that go through, because probably close to 90 percent of our claims go through electronically. So if it's not set up in the system correctly, then it glitches out, basically, and the wrong copay is charge. In most cases we have that completely resolved. There's one for alert guists that is ongoing and we're running reports and going back to make sure we are not missing anybody and re reprocess claims. That is an internal issue with united healthcare their computer--as far as their computer system. Everything else has basically been taken care of.
>> do you have anything to add?
>> just that we do review that report. Our claims system is ever evolving. We hope that through just the natural programming and improvement of the process, we'll eliminate a lot of those roars. And we do--errors. And we do work with the r team when--with the hr team to be sure whenever if it's a systematic problem that we address it.
>> okay secondly, would it be possible for you to look at hearing aid services or benefit that may not be available at this time but maybe enough research to look at the employees that may need hearing aid assistance here in Travis County. I'm just wondering what can we do to look toward that service if it may be provided in the futurefuture if our track employees. What--Travis County employees. What must we do to look into that and investigates the feasibility and go from there? Right now I do know it was brought up, and I really haven't had a handle on the impact of that. But I think it's enough interest there to maybe investigate to see what possibilities there are under hearing aid services that may be delivered to the Travis County employees.
>> right now the group benefits plans do not cloud hearing aids. Traditionally they are--do not include hearing . Traditionally they are not included in d9n%pg k÷plans. About months ago -- about two months ago we added hearing tests throughout Travis County for employ es. She does have access to discount hearing aids but that is not something we pursued with her directly. It's more her services during the hearing examinations. But matt may have some information that we can share with you.
>> in generally the way the hearing aids are generally excluded by all of our commercial business, definitely by united healthcares actually insured business, the groups that are self funded. I only know of one group locally that covers hearing aids. So it's not a very common benefit. That falls from, really, we take medicare as a precedent in that area. It is not covered under medicare for public policy reasons and what not. But that has been in place for many years. And I think that most polici policies, most plans out there currently follow that provision.
>> with the exception of an injury causing hearing loss where it would be covered, it generally is an exclusion now. With that said, being self funded, we, we meaning the court, can do pretty much what you please. Whether or not it's feasible to adhering aids to the benefits with some form of copay or some limitation, is something if the court wishes, we can develop some options and come back to the court with that. But traditionally, I want to emphasize that health plans don't cover hearing aids for a variety of reasons. Reasons..
>> I don't know if the court is, but I know I am interested in the possibility. My mother is on this. So if I can get something back on that, I would entertain that. Since we are self funded.
>> we can do that and bring it back before the court.
>> thank you.
>> so while united healthcare has been our third party administrative since--administrator since 2001?
>> thatand how many more options to--
>> and how many more options to renew are under the contract?
>> one more. I'm sorry.
>> they are supposed to come back.
>> actually, last year or the year before, the court voted to except this contract as a professional services contract. And I thought I had written that as an open-ended so that you have as many option options as you choose to exercise. And --when you feel that it is an appropriate time to solicit responses from other vendors, you would go out that year. But you're not legally required to go out in relation to the administrative services part part. You are required on a regular basis to go out for the excess coverage. I am not sure when the excess coverage comes in.
>> if you find out late that are the answer is different, just get it to us in writing.
>> yes, sir.
>> in the meantime, I move approval of 14 a in its entirety and 14 b.
>> second.
>> discussion?
>> judge, I'd like to abstain on the sec terra vision at least until I can have a chance to see how the prime administrator phase of this is actually functioning and working in place and see what the result is, and measure that. Today I would like to abstain on that portion of united healthcare.
>> all right. Let's see what we have here. All in favor.
>> except the one portion.
>> show than house court except for, what part are you abstaining on is this.
>> sec terra vision care until the administrator is in place and we can see the measurement.
>> looking at the agenda, which one would that be?
>> spec terra is included in united healthcare contract.
>> it's a package.
>> looking at the agenda, which one would that be?
>> is it 14 a, 14 a one, 14 a two, 14 a-two, three, an and b?
>> show Commissioner Davis abstaining.
>> which one, barbara?
>> it would be--
>> it may be all of it. Let's show him abstaining. That way we are sure to pick up.
>> okay.
>> looking forward to another year.
>> any comments from you all that have not been asked for in response to a question so far?
>> okay. I know that early on there was a concern expressed by employ ease about expanding the network of physicians for epo's. I guess we did that, and it died away, as far as I mow. I guess we dealt with that as best we could.
>> actually, the epo network is almost identical to the p ppo network at this time. They change the way they contracted so the same doctors are signed up for all of their programs for the most part.
>> but the complaints have gone away.
>> yes, sir.
>> the kind of thing of getting everybody on board.
>> okay. Looking forward to working with you another year then.
>> thank you.
>> back in 2001, cindy, when we did this, how many respondents did we have?
>> for administrator?
>> yeah.
>> we had six or 7.
>> --six or seven.
>> there were several. I know that.
>> it's important to know that.
>> thanks for coming down.
>> thank you all.
>> where do you come from?
>> we're from Austin and houston.
>> thank you.
The Closed Caption log for this Commissioners Court agenda item is provided by Travis County Internet Services. Since this file is derived from the Closed Captions created during live cablecasts, there are occasional spelling and grammatical errors. This Closed Caption log is not an official record the Commissioners Court Meeting and cannot be relied on for official purposes. For official records please contact the County Clerk at (512) 854-4722.
Last Modified:
Wednesday, September 13, 2006 10:11 AM