Phia Group Russo & Minchoff

US Department of Labor announces supplemental funding to help North Carolina residents looking for work cover health insurance payments

cmonfils | January 22, 2012

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Department of Labor today announced a $2 million National Emergency Grant supplemental award, in the form of a National Emergency Grant, to provide an estimated 1,175 additional jobless workers in North Carolina with partial premium payments for health insurance coverage. The state qualified for funds available under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. 

Pender fitness program saves county money

cmonfils | January 3, 2012

A report on Pender County’s wellness program reveals cost savings for the county in employee health care as employee health improved over three years.

County Human Resource Director Amber Parker said EbenConcepts, the county’s benefits broker, conducted a return-on-investment analysis of actual claims data of 83 county employees who participated in the county’s voluntary health screening all three years and determined that the net savings for the county, minus the cost of the screenings, is $74,576.

States Move To Implement Health Reform Provisions

cmonfils | September 19, 2011

www.hr.cch.com

CCH® BENEFITS — 09/01/11
from Spencer’s Benefits Reports: According to the Kaiser Family Foundation’s State Health Facts, 23 states have established American Health Benefit Exchanges under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), have enacted legislation with the intent to establish an Exchange, or have Exchange legislation pending.
Massachusetts and Vermont have established Exchanges, while California, Colorado, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Nevada, Oregon, Vermont, Washington, and West Virginia have enacted legislation to establish an Exchange. Hawaii’s Exchange will be a nonprofit, Vermont Exchange will be operated by the state. The rest of the Exchanges will be quasi-governmental.
The Exchange will be a clearinghouse and contract with all qualified health plans in Colorado and Hawaii. In California, Connecticut, Oregon, and Vermont, the Exchange will be an active purchaser contracting with selected health plans and/or negotiating premium prices with health plans. The other states have not yet decided the type of Exchange they will operate.

In Illinois, Indiana (by executive order of the governor), North Dakota, and Virginia, legislation has established the intent to set up an Exchange, while Alabama (by executive order of the governor), Georgia (by executive order of the governor), Mississippi, and Wyoming will study the feasilibility of an Exchange.
The District of Columbia, New Jersey, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania have Exchange legislation pending.
For more information, visit http://statehealthfacts.kff.org/comparemaptable.jsp?ind=962&cat=17.
Rate Review Programs
The federal government will either conduct or assist health insurance rate reviews in nine states, according to the most recent fact sheet from the Center for Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight (CCIIO), which discusses the rate review requirements included in the ACA.
According to the CCIIO, as of Aug. 15, 2011, state rate review procedures were as follows:
  43 states, the District of Columbia, and one U.S. territory have effective rate review in at least one insurance market;
  41 states, the District of Columbia, and the U.S. Virgin Islands have effective review for all insurance markets and issuers.
  In two states (Virginia, Pennsylvania), the federal government will partner with the state to conduct reviews; and
  The federal government will conduct reviews in seven states (Wyoming, Montana, Missouri, Louisiana, Idaho, Arizona, and Alabama) and four U.S. territories (American Samoa, Guam, Northern Marianas Islands, and Puerto Rico) until those areas are able to strengthen their review processes and authorities.
Starting Sept. 1, 2011, insurers seeking rate increases of 10% or more for non-grandfathered plans in the individual and small group markets are required to publicly disclose the proposed increases and the justification for them.
For more information, visit http://cciio.cms.gov/resources/factsheets/rate_review_fact_sheet.html.

Amicus Committee Update Bills in North Carolina

cmonfils | April 26, 2011

www.subrogation.org 

NORTH CAROLINA TORT REFORM

Several bills have been introduced in North Carolina with the hope of reforming the tort system.  We will only highlight briefly some of the finer points relating to subrogation: (more…)

Feds Investigate CHS Health Plan

cmonfils | March 25, 2011

www.charlotteobserver.com

Carolinas HealthCare System’s tie to health benefits firm has led to conflict questions.

By Ames Alexander   aalexander@charlotteobserver.com     Posted: Thursday, Mar. 17, 2011

The U.S. Labor Department is investigating Carolinas HealthCare System following questions about whether its relationship with a health benefits company it co-owns poses a conflict of interest.

The company, MedCost, provides health benefits to the Charlotte-based hospital chain’s roughly 30,000 employees. (more…)

T.A. Loving v. Denton

Adam V. Russo | September 7, 2010

Summary

Federal district court in N.C. favors recovery after lien is dissolved by attorney – Denton is injured and gets a $100,000 settlement, her attorney takes $33,800 of that and disburses the remainder to Denton with a warning that her share could be recovered by the plan. The plan paid $48,250. The plan sued Denton and her attorney to recover. The court awarded the $48,250, but the attorney was not liable just because he disbursed the proceeds; and the proceeds were not traceable in a way similar to what’s now required under Sereboff. The court contrasted this from the 6th Circuit holding in Longaberger Co. v. Kolt (2009), which allowed recovery from a contingency fee paid to an attorney. The court noted the settlement allowed for paying the attorney and the plan with some left over for the participant.

Click here to see the entire case

North Carolina: PPACA

Adam V. Russo | June 28, 2010

North Carolina. Gov. Bev Purdue’s budget recommends restoring $40 million for community mental health programs that was eliminated in last year’s budget. The proposal also includes $12 million for the state to buy more local private hospital beds for mental health patients who require short term care. Eliminating the $40 million last year drew widespread criticism from behavioral health officials and advocates. For more information, visit http://www.dhhs.state.nc.us/MHDDSAS/.

State Health Care Reform Update

Adam V. Russo | January 25, 2010

For the last few years, states have been leading the way toward more comprehensive health care coverage to ensure that more people have or can obtain health insurance. Because of the potential impact of this ongoing activity on employer-provided health insurance benefits, Spencer’s Benefits Reports provides regular updates about state health care reform.

North Carolina. The federal government is giving the state a $1.5 million grant to provide monthly subsidies to people to aid participation in the state’s high-risk insurance pool. The state’s high-risk pool provides health care coverage for those who cannot find affordable insurance in the private market. For more information, visit http://nchirp.org/.

North Carolina

Adam V. Russo | November 13, 2009

North Carolina introduced bills seeking to move from a contributory negligence state to a comparative negligence state. The bill would bar the plaintiff’s recovery when the plaintiff’s negligence is “equal to or greater than fifty percent” (50%) and would bar recovery when the plaintiff’s negligence is “greater than fifty percent” (50%).

North Carolina Considers Move from Contributory Negligence to Comparative Fault

Adam V. Russo | June 12, 2009

NASP, www.subrogation.org

North Carolina has introduced bills in both the House and Senate seeking to move from a contributory negligence state to a comparative negligence state. See North Carolina House bill 813 and Senate bill 679. The bills seek to introduce a modified comparative fault system which benefits subrogation claims where an insured may be partially at fault. House bill 813 would bar the plaintiff’s recovery when the plaintiff’s negligence is “equal to or greater than fifty percent (50%).” Senate bill 679 would bar recovery when the plaintiff’s negligence is “greater than fifty percent (50%).” The bills also eliminate joint and several liability with limited exceptions. North Carolina’s shift away from contributory negligence opens the door for many more subrogation opportunities.