Towards a single “no balance billing” payment system

1. Towards a single “no balance billing” payment system Rajesh Patel Jhb June 2007

2. BHF board mandate • Affordability • Quality of care • …

3. Benefit History • 2001 • Regulated minimum benefit entitlement • At cost • No co-pay….

4. Remunerations • Unbundling of RAMS • Competition Commissioner actions • HPCSA ethical fees • Surgicom; Spesnet and its actions • Cost escalations • Funders as price takers

5. Regulated SOB Negotiated SOB Reference price ???? SAMA; SADA rate HPCSA ethical fees Tariff history

6. Regulated Negotiated RAP Reference

8. Considerations • Statutory provision for a no balance billing fee • Schemes can negotiate a lower fee

9. Remuneration determination Models • SA model • Belgium model • Australian model • Hybrid model

10. Advantages of statutory maximum fee • Affordability • Expansion of minimum mandatory benefit • Rationalisation of plans • Can include assessment of healthcare needs

11. Belgium model • Bargaining council model • If no agreement, Minister decides • 7 year – no Minister’s intervention • Advantage • Agreed fee by all parties • Disadvantage • Inefficiency may be entrenched

12. Australian model Coding centre Federal Government MBS fees Fees centre Disadvantage: coding development for National Health benefits

13. Hybrid model Sufficiently representative provider group No Certification criteria met? Yes Centralised bargaining process Consideration for Certification by MOH Ministerial determination Publication in Gazette of no balance-billing tariffs Yes Sufficiently representative funder group Appeal process (limited to subsequent process) Agreement? ICU No

14. Certification criteria and statutory powers • Statutory “TOR” • Include budget impact, Inflation… • Representivity • Powers of the Minister • …

15. Timelines • Code structure settlement • Price settlement • Ministerial determination • Consider • Technology assessment • REF time lines

16. Questions?