BENEFITS ADVISORY COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF MEETING
NOVEMBER 1, 2001
[In these minutes: Approval of October 18, 2001 minutes, Update on Processes and Issues Relating to the Committee, Subcommittee Reports, Update on Open Enrollment, Update on Health Benefits for Bargaining Units and Teamsters, Presentation by Buck Consultants on Data Warehouse Considerations and Options, Election of Benefits Advisory Committee Chair and Vice Chair for 2002-2004]
[These minutes reflect discussion and debate at a meeting of a committee of the University of Minnesota Senate or Twin Cities Assembly; none of the comments, conclusions or actions reported in these minutes represent the views of, nor are they binding on the Senate or Assembly, the Administration or the Board of Regents].
PRESENT: Fred Morrison (Chair), Don Cavalier, Peh Ng, Gailon Roen, David Johnson, Carol Carrier, George Green, Keith Dunder, Theodor Litman, Linda Aaker, Larry Thompson, Wendy Williamson, Gavin Watt, Robert Fahnhorst, Pam Wilson, Joe Jameson, Susan Brorson, Dann Chapman, Steve Burrows, Carla Lien, Barbara Van Drasek, Marjorie Cowmeadow
REGRETS: Amos Deinard, Richard McGehee
ABSENT: Frank Cerra, Rachel Estroff
GUESTS: Chris Hulla, Mary Harrison, Teri Weber
1). The October 18, 2001 minutes were approved by Committee members.
2). Update on Processes and Issues Relating to the Committee:
a). The University has agreed to utilize the services of Chris Hulla and Buck
Consultants to aid with the RFP process for the new 2003 benefit options.
b). Due to time constraints imposed by the upgrade of the PeopleSoft system,
the Committee’s meeting schedule has been accelerated.. This upgrade will require programming changes to the existing PeopleSoft system. As a result, the basic design of the new 2003 benefit plans will have to be decided by April 2002.
3). Subcommittee Reports: Each of the subcommittee chairs, with the exception of the Other Insurance Coverage Subcommittee, which will meet immediately after today’s meeting, gave the Committee a brief summary of its first meetings. To assist each Subcommittee in the RFP process, Buck Consultants agreed to provide a ‘benefit design tool’ that will help the Subcommittees target what they would like to see offered in the new benefit option plans for 2003.
4). Steve Burrows provided the Committee with an update on the Open Enrollment process. Judging by the number of calls the Benefits Department has received it can be concluded that there is a great deal of interest in the new health insurance options. Unfortunately, however, less than 1,000 completed applications have been received to date, and it is expected that in the end over 17,000 will need to be processed. To conclude, “sooner is better”. The Benefits Department is trying to persuade employees to continue their review process, and then complete and return their applications. A recommendation was made to have a Health Insurance Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) link on the Benefit Department’s web page to address some of the most commonly asked questions the department is receiving on the new health insurance options. Dann Chapman addressed the issue of “default” cases when an employee does not complete the required application for health insurance. A letter will go out to those employees explaining that they will only have a short window of opportunity to complete the process if they expect to have a choice with respect to their health insurance coverage. All employees must be enrolled in a plan. Mention was made of Les Block’s feedback concerning the UPlan 2002 in a document entitled, “A Synopsis of the University of Minnesota Health Plan – U Plan 2002”. Professor Morrison encouraged all Committee members to read this opinion statement, and said that a response from the Benefits Advisory Committee would be forthcoming.
5). Update on Health Benefits for Bargaining Units and Teamsters: Bargaining Unit Employees and Teamsters are voting to ratify their respective contracts. Results of the election will be available next week. Dann Chapman, Employee Benefits, stated with confidence that agreements with all the bargaining units concerning UPlan 2002 are in place, and their participation in the UPlan will not be conditional on the outcome of the election results.
6). The Data Warehouse is the accumulation of information concerning costs and expenditures related to UPlan 2002. Now that the University has withdrawn from SEGIP (State Employees Group Insurance Plan) it will “own” its ‘experience data’ on its employees’ claims. This raises questions on where should the data be stored, how should the University control the data and how should it be organized in order to protect privacy. Mary Harrison and Teri Weber of Buck Consultants presented data warehouse considerations and options to the Committee. To preface the discussion the primary uses of health claims database information were outlined:
What do employers use this data for?
A). To understand how much money is being spent. This information will be used to set rates for next year. In addition, it allows the plan administrator the ability to better manage the contracts with its administrators.
B). Manage plan performance by knowing where the money is spent:
C). Where is the money being spent? Helps to identify focus areas for plan change, disease management or wellness activities.
Data Warehouse options:
A). Build a data warehouse in-house using University resources.
B). Outsource to a company that specializes in data warehouse development and management.
C). Through the Action Group on Health work out a group purchase of a database product.
Other data warehouse considerations:
Pros and cons to building a data warehouse internally versus utilizing an outside vendor:
An engaging discussion followed and the representatives from Buck Consultants fielded questions from Committee members.
7). Election of Benefits Advisory Committee Chair and Vice Chair for 2002-2004: Fred Morrison and Gavin Watt were unanimously elected Chair and Vice Chair, respectively, for the 2002-2004 term.
Renee Dempsey
University Senate