Showing posts with label broker fraud. Show all posts
Showing posts with label broker fraud. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 31, 2024

Gateway to a dark age: 2024 in review

Note: All xpostfactoid subscriptions are now through Substack alone (still free), though I will continue to cross-post on this site. If you're not subscribed, please visit xpostfactoid on Substack and sign up.

Carnival for Muskovites; Lent for the rest of us


All bloggers (excuse the archaism…) get a free end-of-year post reviewing their year’s work, right? Here goes.

First I have to confess that it feels a bit odd to review themes in the relatively mundane world of ACA administration and performance in a year that in the 11th month shaped up as an annus horribilis, with Trump’s reelection. On the healthcare front, the parade of cranks and perverse contrarians nominated by Trump threaten disaster at the CDC, NIH and FDA, while a Republican Congress readies a fresh run at the kind of catastrophic spending cuts that Republicans have fantasized about for decades. My hope is that with the smallest possible majority in the House, Republicans will fail or (to be fair to some chunk of their members) balk at major cuts to Medicaid or major legislative changes to the ACA. I even retain a sliver of hope that the boosts to ACA subsidies enacted in the American Rescue Plan Act, currently funded only through 2025, will be extended, at least in part. But I expect deep wounds to our institutions, in healthcare as everywhere. If damage stops short of outright catastrophe, we can count ourselves lucky.

One major thread in this year’s posting is the concentration of enrollment growth in the ACA marketplace in the post-ARPA years in states that refused to enact the ACA Medicaid expansion. This is not primarily a result of enrollment fraud, as alleged by the Project 2025-adjacent Paragon Institute under the leadership of Trumpist health economist Brian Blase, who is laying the groundwork for major cuts to public health insurance programs. In July I countered Blase’s charges at some length, while acknowledging valid points — e.g. the obvious need for a crackdown on broker fraud (a crackdown begun this summer, per below) and for some regulatory tightening (eliminating the ability of low-income enrollees to make monthly enrollment changes, an option exploited by unscrupulous brokers). Marketplace enrollment growth in OEP 2024 and, it’s now emerging, in 2025, was driven in large part by the Medicaid unwinding (a fact that Blase acknowledges but casts in a nefarious light).


Subscribe for free:

As we brace for Trump 2.0, I hope my 3-part review of Trump 1.0’s administration of the ACA marketplace (along with a more recent parsing of Trump and Vance’s claims that Trump “strengthened” the ACA) may prove useful. Surprise: it wasn’t all bad — although it seems that Trump’s “heroism was quite inadvertent” (to paraphrase Woody Allen’s antagonist in Love and Death) on the main count (see: silver loading).

A rising tide of broker fraud in the ACA marketplace burst into view this year, via excellent reporting from KFFs Julie Appleby, underpinned by a lawsuit alleging fraud perpetrated by a major EDE web-broker and a pair of agencies deploying dozens of downline agencies. In several posts, I delved into the evidence and CMS’s response. Posts included a look at gray-area fraud and sloppy agency practice; a close look at the expanded allegations in an amended complaint from the plaintiffs alleging large-scale fraud; and red flags in a past CMS celebration of rapidly expanding broker participation in the marketplace.

The Biden years were a heady time for ACA watchers — though always shadowed by the threat of a Trump resurgence. Medicaid enrollment, including among those made eligible by the ACA expansion, swelled, a a three-year pandemic-induced moratorium on disenrollment played out — then shrank back in an “unwinding” of that moratorium kicked off in May 2023, leaving a net increase since the eve of the pandemic of about 11%, or 8 million, as of August 2024. The enhanced marketplace premium subsidies implemented with ARPA in March 2021 triggered a near-doubling of enrollment, from 12 million in OEP 2021 to a likely 24-odd million by the end of OEP 2025. The unemployment rate has hovered near 4% for the entirety of Biden’s term, a full employment level not sustained since the 1960s. Not surprisingly, the uninsured rate dropped to an all-time low of 7.9% nationally in 2023 (the last year tracked).

All that enrollment growth is under threat from a new Trump administration and majority-Republican Congress. Medicaid enrollment will be cut by, at the very least, work requirements being readied now in red states. The Republican Congress will try for truly catastrophic further cuts — e.g., reducing the federal match rate for the ACA expansion population; further reducing match rates for “rich” states; and imposing block grant funding or per capita caps on federal Medicaid funding. In the ACA marketplace, the odds are against renewal of the ARPA subsidy boosts. While there is allegedly little appetite among House Republicans to allow the subsidies to revert to pre-ARPA levels, it’s hard to imagine them taking positive action to extend subsidies scheduled to sunset in 2026. Perhaps Democrats will manage to slip extensions into must-past omnibus spending bills.

As Republicans at least gesture toward major cuts, progressives will dust off and update their analyses of the major cuts threatened in 2017 — as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities, Georgetown’s Center on Health Insurance Reforms and Center for Children and Families, the Center for American Progress, and Charles Gaba are already doing. It will be a weary rematch. As in 2017, fending off catastrophic defunding and major repeal will be the best outcome to be hoped for. Perhaps the more intense danger is on the public health/disease management front, as Trump appointees gear up to disarm our already-inadequate defenses before the next pandemic and roll back decades of progress in vaccination and infectious disease control. Happy New Year!

Thanks for reading xpostfactoid! Subscribe for free:


Saturday, April 20, 2024

Notes on the lawsuit alleging large-scale broker fraud in the ACA marketplace

 Note: All xpostfactoid subscriptions are now through Substack alone (still free), though I will continue to cross-post on this site. If you're not subscribed, please visit xpostfactoid on Substack and sign up.

My health plan is where?

My last post focused on alleged large-scale broker fraud in the ACA marketplace — chiefly via agents and brokers switching enrollees’ health plans without their authorization (or usually even knowledge) after obtaining minimal personal information (name, D.O.B., state) via responses to misleading ads. KHN’s Julie Appleby, who broke that story early this month, followed up this week with news of a lawsuit filed on behalf of individuals and brokers allegedly harmed by such schemes. The suit names as defendants two Florida call centers, a parent company, a marketing company deploying the ads that generate the leads, and two executives, seeking class action status on behalf of enrollee victims, as well as brokerages that allegedly had their clients poached.

The complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida on April 12, alleges a scheme in which “hundreds” of agents deployed by the call center defrauded “hundreds of thousands” of ACA marketplace enrollees. It’s quite a read and sheds light on several points (including one error) touched on in my prior post.


Role of EDE. I noted in my first post that most brokers registered with HealthCare.gov (the federal exchange, serving 32 states) execute their enrollments states via commercial web brokers deploying Direct Enrollment or Enhanced Direct Enrollment (DE or EDE). I concluded that web brokers were not a key factor in the fraud, because a) agents and brokers have the same access to existing enrollees’ accounts through HealthCare.gov itself as they do on the web brokers’ EDE platforms, and b) brokers told me that the web brokers they use flag changes to an enrollee’s designated agent or broker and thus help them detect poaching. The complaint alleges, however, that the two call centers alleged to have engaged in large-scale unauthorized plan-switching (and which allegedly deployed hundreds of downline agents in the fraud) have between them owned and deployed three proprietary EDE web brokers. Broker switches enacted via proprietary EDE would be invisible to other web brokers — e.g., to the dominant web broker, HealthSherpa, which in OEP 2024 accounted for 52% of active enrollments in HealthCare.gov states, or just shy of 7 million (passive auto re-enrollment, which accounted for 22% of 2024 enrollment in HealthCare.gov states, is not credited to web brokers). As EDE enrollment is faster than enrollments executed on HealthCare.gov, proprietary web brokers, if controlled by fraudsters, would indeed facilitate large-scale fraud. The three web brokers allegedly owned by the call centers or (a parent company), Benefitalign, Jet Health Solutions, and Inshura, are all listed among CMS’s approved EDE partners.

Role of Private Equity. According to the complaint, Bain Capital Management provided one of the two call centers central to the scheme with $150 million “to finance its call centers and the commissions of its downline agencies.” That well-funded operation also bought two web brokers, which presumably aren’t cheap. Mitt Romney, call your (former) office.

Scale. The complaint alleges that using fraudulent ads deployed by lead generators enabled the two defendant call centers to achieve enormous scale. It cites the CEO of one of them, Enhance Health, boasting in print: “Enhance Health is the largest enroller of ACA plans in the country — we help hundreds of thousands of Americans find health insurance coverage every year.” Of course, frauds similar to those alleged in this complaint may have been executed by organizations that had no connection with those named in the complaint.

Target market. The complaint adds, “Herman also noted that nearly all of Enhance Health’s clients are low-income Americans, stating ‘97% of our embers pay $0 a month in insurance premiums while obtaining the coverage they need.‘“(p. 33). As I noted in my prior post, large-scale fraud was doubtless enabled both by the subsidy increases enacted in March 2021, which rendered benchmark silver plans free at incomes up to 150% FPL ($21,870 for a single enrollee this year), and by the launch in early 2022 of year-round enrollment for those with incomes up to 150% FPL. The complaint alleges that Enhance Health, founded and funded in late 2021, switched its focus from Medicare Advantage to the marketplace specifically to capitalize on the year-round enrollment for low income applicants. For perspective, enrollment in the 100-150% FPL bracket more than doubled in HealthCare.gov states from OEP 2022 to OEP 2024, from 4.1 million to 8.7 million. Zero-premium bronze plans, moreover, are widely available at incomes well above 150% FPL. The claim that 97% of Enhance customers paid zero premium suggests that zero premium was almost a requirement for Enhance Health. HealthSherpa, which enrolled about 7 million people* during OEP 2024 — almost all of them through brokers and agents — stated that 62% of its enrollees paid zero premium. That seems in line with the income distribution of enrollees in HealthCare.gov states, where 55% had income below 150% FPL.

Serial victims. Appleby reported that some victims had their plans switched multiple times. The report details high-volume switching by named plaintiffs — one of whom allegedly had his plan switched twenty times.

Crime? The complaint alleges that the alleged malfeasance — sharing clients’ Personally Identifiable Information (PII) in violation of multiple ACA requirements, misrepresenting premium tax credits as cash benefits, enrolling or plan-switching targets without their knowledge or consent — is not only fraud, for which the perpetrators should be liable for treble damages, but also “indictable offenses under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341 and 1343 [mail fraud and wire fraud], in that they directed and carried out a scheme or artifice to defraud or obtain money by means of materially false misrepresentations or omissions” (p. 55).

Ronnell Nolan, president of CEO of Health Agents for America, told me last week that the fraud seems to have emanated from south Florida, where the defendants in this suit are based. Here’s hoping that this suit takes the measure of whatever fraud may be occurring and that there aren’t unrelated actors working at similar scale.

* While CEO George Kalogeropoulos cited more than 7 million enrollments on January 4, a HealthSherpa executive tells me that the total was pared down post-OEP to account for plan selections that were never effectuated and cancellations prior to the end of OEP.



Wednesday, April 10, 2024

On unauthorized plan-switching in the ACA marketplace

Note: All xpostfactoid subscriptions are now through Substack alone (still free), though I will continue to cross-post on this site. If you're not subscribed, please visit xpostfactoid on Substack and sign up.

How did this get in my pocket?


Julie Appleby of Kaiser Health News reported last week that health insurance brokers are switching a number of ACA marketplace enrollees in HealthCare.gov states from one plan to another “without their express permission” and often without their knowledge.

Unauthorized enrollment or plan-switching is emerging as a serious challenge for the ACA, also known as Obamacare. Brokers say the ease with which rogue agents can get into policyholder accounts in the 32 states served by the federal marketplace plays a major role in the problem, according to an investigation by KFF Health News.

Indeed, armed with only a person’s name, date of birth, and state, a licensed agent can access a policyholder’s coverage through the federal exchange or its direct enrollment platforms. It’s harder to do through state ACA markets, because they often require additional information.

The story is well-sourced and illustrated, with individuals recounting that they suddenly were unable to use the plans they thought they were enrolled in. In one case, a victim found himself on the hook for months of tax credits after disenrolling because he’d obtained employer-sponsored insurance and then being re-enrolled in another plan by a broker unknown to him. Appleby also cites brokers who claim that hundreds of their clients were poached and re-enrolled in plans other than the ones they’d chosen. Appleby links to key CMS documents, online ads, and insurer advisories.

I spoke to brokers and web brokers to delve further into how the fraud works, how the harms are redressed, and how it might be prevented. A few takeaways below.