Don’t judge a Medicare Advantage plan by its stars

When you examine your Medicare plan options during this year’s open enrollment season, do not judge a Medicare Advantage plan by its stars. The government’s star-rating system is deeply flawed. Rather, you should assume that some plans with four and five-star ratings have high denial and mortality rates and low-quality provider networks.

For sure, you should avoid Medicare Advantage plans with one and two-star ratings. They are few and far between. And, if the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services is giving them such a low rating, there’s a reason.

But, the higher star-ratings are based on measures that can be extremely misleading. For one, the star ratings are determined on an insurer’s group of Medicare Advantage plans, at the Medicare Advantage “contract level.” If there’s a Medicare Advantage plan that’s performing poorly that is assessed with others that are performing better, that poor-performing Medicare Advantage plan will reap the star-rating of its fellow plans. And, people who join that poor-performing plan will have no clue.

MedPac has proposed changing the star-rating program, which it says is “flawed.” It is “inconsistent with the [MedPac] Commission’s principles for quality measurement.” In addition to giving plans ratings based at the “contract level” and not the individual plan level, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) does not focus on population-based outcome and patient experience measures. In addition, plans are rated as compared with one another, not relative to objective performance targets. And, plans are not rated by subpopulations served, so there’s no way to know if a plan with a high rating is actually meeting the needs of its members with special needs and costly conditions.

Another issue with the star-rating system is that it is not budget neutral. The more plans with four- and five-star ratings, the higher their payments. This means that Medicare Advantage plans are not operating on a level playing field with traditional Medicare.

How should you choose a Medicare plan? If you want easy access to care from your choice of doctors anywhere in the US and few if any out-of-pocket costs, traditional Medicare is your best option. But, you will need supplemental coverage—Medigap, retiree coverage or Medicaid—to protect yourself financially. To choose a Medicare Advantage plan, talk to your doctor. Pick a plan that has the doctors you want to see and hospital you want to use in its network. And, keep in mind that if you need costly health care services, your out-of-pocket costs could easily be $5,000 for in-network care alone.

Fierce Healthcare reports that, in 2022, almost seven in ten Medicare Advantage plans have a four-star or five-star rating. That’s up from not even five in ten in 2021.

Here’s more from Just Care:

Comments

2 responses to “Don’t judge a Medicare Advantage plan by its stars”

  1. S. A. Linden Avatar
    S. A. Linden

    When I signed up for Medicare over a decade ago, my broker warned me away from Med Advantage plans. His clients’ experience with them had been predominantly negative, sometimes extremely so.

  2. BC Shelby Avatar

    …I am currently on a Medicaid supplemental plan through my state which covers what parts A & B don’t as well as the monthly premium due to my meagre monthly benefit. However that will no last as it has an earning’s cap which I will be very close to reaching with the 5.8% Living Cost Adjustment for next year. So in 2023 my income will take the hit and I’ll fall backwards by whatever the premium cost will be at the time. I’ve looked at private supplemental plans, and what you get for the free ones, is higher costs all around (particularly out of pocket expenses even in-network).

    With any of these, you also still have to pay the standard Medicare premium on top of whatever they charge as well. and that’s where the feeling of being scammed comes in. Personally my feeling is since for people on Social Security, Medicare is mandatory after age 65, and for many these days, SS the only source of income is that the premium should be waived. That is forcing a a major expense on people who are barely getting by month to month with no means to “opt out” In other nations which have universal healthcare (which often covers more services than basic Medicare does), their pensioners don’t need to worry about the added expense.

    My rent alone (in federal subsidised housing) takes half my gross monthly benefit right off the top. My already meagre benefit is also taking a hit due to an over-payment (a “error” on the SSA’s part as they explained, even though it came at about the same time as the second 600$ Stimulus payment while my advocate has been working on a retroactive disability benefits case) which is siphoning off an extra 10% out of what I would receive. Their mistake but I have to pay for it, and all other programmes like the Medicaid supplemental coverage, EBT and rent are based on just the Gross, not Net, award. If this year’s LCA put me over the earnings limit for the Medicaid extension, I would be receiving 820$ to live on per month and my rent would stay the same and I would be laying about 61% of my Net income just to keep a roof over my head.

    Senator Warren’s planned 200$ increase would put me about to where I am now after the 2022 LCA, still behind, still struggling month to month. It’s like we can never get ahead in the game.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *