In connection with the Source’s research and findings on anticompetitive contract terms, Senior Health Policy Researcher Katie Gudiksen co-authored the NASHP model legislation for states to rein in the use of these contract terms, including all-or-nothing, most-favored nation, anti-steering/anti-tiering, and gag clauses. A companion report, A Tool for States to Address Health Care Consolidation: Prohibiting Anticompetitive Health Plan Contracts, further details the contract terms and how the model act can give states essential tools to create a more level playing field and help rein in rising health care costs. For …

The Nicholas C. Petris Center on Health Care Markets and Consumer Welfare, in its annual newsletter published this month, highlights many of the research collaborations with The Source in 2020 and 2021. Among the work are two studies on market consolidation and competition, one of which examines the impact of state merger review and the use of anticompetitive contract clauses on healthcare prices, quality and premiums (both research findings are published on The Source). Another ongoing project seeks to determine the size and scope of cross-market hospital and physician organization …

The Source kicked off the New Year with a trio of blog posts in the Health Affairs Blog that highlights the Database of State Laws Impacting Healthcare Cost and Quality (SLIHCQ). The SLIHCQ Database was developed in partnership with the Catalyst for Payment Reform (“CPR”) and is an interactive tool that hosts ongoing state legislative efforts to implement healthcare reform. It is intuitively designed to allow policymakers and other stakeholders to customize and filter their searches by key issue and state. In collaboration with CPR, The Source Executive Editor Jaime …

On November 13, The Source on Healthcare Price & Competition and the UC Berkeley Petris Center jointly hosted a virtual convening of some of the leading experts in law and economics in a workshop to review and evaluate current findings of our collaborative research series “The Role of States in Promoting Competition in Healthcare: A Legal and Economic Analysis.” Our research analyzes how state merger review authority and regulation of contracts between providers and insurers affect the price of healthcare services and insurance premiums. The interactive workshop, supported by Arnold …

Two papers published by The Source were cited in the latest Milbank Memorial Fund report “California’s Sutter Health Settlement: What States Can Learn About Protecting Residents from the Effects of Health Care Provider Consolidation”. The first, “Addressing Health Care Market Consolidation and High Prices”, is co-authored by The Source’s Jaime S. King and Katherine L. Gudiksen, with Robert A. Berenson et al. for the Urban Institute. The second paper is “Preventing Anticompetitive Healthcare Consolidation: Lessons From Five States”, written by Jaime S. King, Samuel M. Chang, et al. and jointly published …

As unrelenting consolidation in healthcare provider and insurer markets continues, policymakers need additional options to protect the public from escalating healthcare prices and low-quality care. High healthcare prices result from multiple factors, including third-party payers dampening consumers’ price sensitivity, patients and providers demanding expensive healthcare technologies, and healthcare markets consolidating. While these factors are visible, dominant insurers and healthcare providers can also use terms in their insurer-provider contracts in anticompetitive ways that thwart competition and lead to higher prices or lower quality but remain hidden from public view. With support …

Executive Editor Jaime King was quoted in the 7/30/2020 New Times San Luis Obispo article Big health: A look at how the Central Coast’s two hospital systems shape local health care costs: “The data is incredibly clear on this,” said Jaime King, a professor at UC Hastings College of Law who specializes in health care markets and policy. “Hospital mergers result in significant price increases almost immediately. Both entities’ prices go up as a result. Neighboring hospitals’ prices go up, too, as a shadow effect. It’s having an even bigger effect …

The Nevada Patient Protection Commission Presentation on drivers of healthcare costs and efforts to improve transparency in healthcare pricing Presentation: “Addressing High Health Care Prices: Transparency, Enforcement, and Legislation” Meeting Recording Meeting Minutes

See case page: UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health At a July 9 hearing at the Superior Court of San Francisco, Judge Anne-Christine Massullo denied Sutter Health’s motion to delay the approval hearing of the preliminary settlement agreement due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This is an encouraging ruling as there was much speculation and concern that Sutter’s request is a thinly veiled attempt to walk back the historic settlement reached last December amidst the chaos of COVID-19. In a California Healthline quote last month, The Source Executive Editor …

Case page: UFCW & Employers Benefit Trust v. Sutter Health Executive Editor Jaime King was quoted in the 6/17/2020 California Healthline article Citing COVID, Sutter Pushes To Revisit Landmark Antitrust Settlement: In its filing, Sutter does not specifically object to the $575 million settlement amount. But Jaime King, an associate dean at UC Hastings College of the Law who has followed the case, said the request for a delay could be a tactical strategy to support such a move. “The longer they can delay, the more they can show they have …