Posts Tagged ‘Selecting a PBM’

PBM Consulting – Medco/Express Scripts Union Looks Good

Wednesday, January 11th, 2012

Buzz has it that the much anticipated, and in some corners, shunned union of PBM giants Medco and Express Scripts is almost a done deal. Shareholders have overwhelmingly approved the acquisition and ESI is raring to go!  WBC (www.wbcbaltimore.com) has opined from the initial announcement that this marriage would receive FTC blessing, and on the latest report from confidential sources, they are ready to pull the trigger.

The ESI P.R. machine has been pushing out releases over the last several months touting the benefits to consumers and health plan payors of the new mega PBM represented by this super-sized combo. This position is sharply contrasted by several community pharmacy associations who fear the negotiating club that would be wielded by “Expredco.”

Unlike the AT&T deal for T-Mobile, which received a thumbs down from the FTC,  ESI/Medco, while potent, would still only represent 30% of the prescription drug market.  Expressed (no pun intended) another way, 7 out of 10 Rxs will still be managed by competitors.

The return for investors in a combined organization looks sweet, and ESI is making a strong case that cost savings will be significant.  The question remains whether these savings generated through operational synergies and ability to negotiate with manufacturers gets passed through to plan sponsors or is simply reserved to keep a smile on stockholders faces.  We’ll see.

PBM Consulting – Reducing Pharmacy Benefit Costs, Part 2

Tuesday, May 3rd, 2011

The PBM contract remains the key element in reducing pharmacy benefit costs. At WBC (wbcbaltimore.com) we know that creating a favorable “client-focused” contract takes some work.  When challenged over language that sounds open-ended or uncertain, many PBMs rely on what I’ve come to call “The 4 most dangerous words in the PBM lexicon.” Those four words are “It’s Standard Industry Practice” and unfortunately, in many cases, it’s true.  Just because a large portion of the industry has been able to retain fuzzy language that doesn’t provide the client with well-defined and unambiguous guidance on key operational areas such as pricing, claims and audit rights to name a few, doesn’t mean that it’s right, or that it should continue.

Plan sponsors need to ask themselves whether the business philosophy deployed in their PBM Services Agreement is serving the needs of their  organization, or of the PBM and their shareholders. The PBM contract is one of the few business agreements that clients enter where they really don’t know what the product will cost; where the  vendor can adjust the price at any time; and where they have to ask the vendor “how are we doing?”

Just about every PBM contract begins with a definitions section and sets the stage for how the plan will operate.  Some of these terms look familiar and the plan sponsor would think, pretty straight forward, but that’s not always the case.  Here are a few key contract terms and definitions to consider:

  • AWP. Means Average Wholesale Price for a standard package size of a prescription drug from the most current pricing information provided by First DataBank or such other drug database supplier “as determined by the PBM at any time.”  Of course, the standard package size they mean is 100 units, regardless of the size that is filled, unless it’s a smaller size.  This enables the PBM to create pricing spreads based on different size quantities and to use multiple pricing sources, at their discretion.
  • Claim. Means those prescription drug claims processed through the PBM’s on-line claims adjudication system, but what about errors, duplicates and reversals?  Without clarification, the plan sponsor could be billed for everything, and if there is a per click admin. fee being charged, this can really add up. These “false claims” can represent as many as 20% of total claims!
  • Brand and Generic Drug.  Sometimes it’s not even mentioned in the contract.  In which case, the PBM is free to classify any prescription as one or the other, and then, reverse themselves, when advantageous.  For example, a single-source generic may be designated as a generic when the PBM calculates their generic fill rate (“GFR”) to meet contract guarantees, yet they may adjudicate the claim as a brand in order to assign a lower discount rate (the brand discount).
  • Rebate. Means monies the PBM receives from pharmaceutical manufacturers for formulary access and/or market share increases.  Many contracts, however, also say “excluding any other payments or fees.” What about all the other revenue streams that are payable by a pharma manufacturer?  In addition to base and market share rebates, these should include sales target incentives, prompt-pay discounts, data selling fees, administrative fees and rebates on specialty drugs.

There are many more definitions and contract provisions to consider when negotiating a PBM services agreement. The plan sponsor is well-served to include contractual language requirements as part of the RFP response, where vendors understand and accept the terms and conditions being requested.  That way, they can underwrite their pricing offer to reflect client requirements and should agree to be bound to the terms defined.  The client gains the advantage of using the leverage inherent in the RFP procurement process.

PBM Consulting – Reducing Pharmacy Benefit Costs, Part 1

Wednesday, April 20th, 2011

The most important document for reducing the cost of prescription drugs in the pharmacy benefit is the PBM contract.  At WBC (www.wbcbaltimore.com)  we know that this document or agreement for PBM services ultimately determines what the plan sponsors’ drug spend will be, and is driven by the key terms, definitions and provisions in the contract.

Actually, there are two contracts in a PBM relationship that are material for understanding how a sponsors’ plan will operate.  First, is the contract with the payor or plan sponsor.  This is what the PBM will invoice the plan sponsor for covered drugs used by plan members; and second, the contract between the PBM and the pharmacy. The second contract determines how much the PBM reimburses the pharmacy for filling the prescription. In many cases, the “buy” is not the same as the “bill.”

When selecting a PBM, a plan sponsor needs to understand the relationship between the business models used by the PBM and the impact that it has on your services agreement or contract.  A plan sponsor needs to ask themselves whether the goals and objectives as expressed in the type of services contract they receive, are aligned with their business needs and  objectives.

The first thing a plan sponsor needs to do when reviewing a contract for PBM services is to fully understand the 3 basic business models that are used by PBMs and will dictate which type of contract the plan sponsor will receive.

Traditional.  The oldest and most recognized in the PBM world and is built on the idea of spread-pricing.  This means that the PBM will pay a lower reimbursement to the pharmacy (whether retail or mail) and invoice the plan sponsor a higher amount.  The difference (or spread) is kept by the PBM for its efforts.  In addition to spread pricing, the traditional PBM model generates different sources of cash flow (rebates, data fees, manufacturers incentives, etc.) from the plan sponsors’ account and may or may not share any of  it with the plan sponsor.

Transparent. Has evolved from the Traditional model and tends to share more information regarding plan cash flows with the plan sponsor.  It really is more opaque than transparent, however, since the disclosure that  occurs usually involves telling the plan sponsor what they will not receive. 

Pass-Through.  Is the latest model which, as the name implies, passes through to the plan sponsor costs and revenues without creating pricing spreads or retaining hidden cash flow.  The only profit center for the PBM is in the form of an administrative services fee, which may be presented as either a per script transaction fee or on a PEPM basis.

Why is this so important? Aren’t all contracts pretty much the same? Well, they can be if the plan sponsor doesn’t know what to identify as potential problem areas and then, what to ask for in their contract. Also, make sure that if the plan sponsor is using a broker or consultant, that the broker/consultant is also subject to the same level of disclosure and transparency that is expected of the PBM. In many cases, the broker/consultant is being paid a transaction fee by the PBM that is selected.  Not only is this a flagrant opportunity for conflict of interest, it also may prevent the sponsor from seeing other competitive proposals from PBMs that are not invited to participate because they would not agree to undisclosed transaction fees.

 As previously mentioned, the contract does control the overall drug spend, and left unchecked, the plan sponsor will receive an Agreement with tons of “wiggle room” that allows the PBM maximum discretion and the ability to pretty much interpret key provisions anyway they want,  and usually in their favor.