Arizona Drug Treatment Center SRC Announces JCAHO Accreditation

May 27, 2015, 3:05 am

≫ Next: EOVI MCD Mutuelle Selects PROS Cameleon CPQ to Enhance Customer Experience

≪ Previous: Seattle Pain Relief is Now Accepting All LifeWise PPO Plans for Treatment with the Double Board Certified Provider

$

0

0

Scottsdale Recovery Center remains among Arizona’s few leading drug rehabs and addiction treatment centers with its recent Joint Commission Accreditation

Scottsdale, Arizona (PRWEB) May 27, 2015

Widely regarded as being Arizona’s premier drug and alcohol treatment center for young adults ages 18 to 40, Scottsdale Recovery Center announced this week its recent accreditation by The Joint Commission. The announcement follows SRC’s recent expansion throughout the Phoenix and Scottsdale, AZ regions, entailing a number of added clinical services, among which are a specialized opiate detox and residential treatment program in lieu of a growing national epidemic.

Considered as being the gold standard for excellence throughout the healthcare industry, The Joint Commission’s Gold Seal of Approval is currently held by fewer than 2,100 of the over 14,000 licensed residential drug rehab centers nationwide.

Says Chris Cohn, MAC, LASAC, co-founder of Scottsdale Recovery Center, “We are immensely proud to be among Arizona’s few Joint Commission Accredited treatment centers, and it ultimately goes back to our core commitment of doing more, being better and striving to effect positive, long-lasting change in the lives of the clients and families we help.” The company was able to acquire final accreditation in just under 90 days, a process of which in many cases extends upwards of 6 to 8 months.

Established in 1969, The Joint Commission’s Behavioral Health Care Accreditation process measures a broad scope of compliance related to several areas, including care, treatment, and services; environment of care; leadership; and screening procedures for the early detection of imminent harm. Given its universally accepted benchmark for excellence, the addiction treatment industry is seeing more and more health insurance providers requiring Joint Commission accreditation as a prerequisite for coverage for residential drug rehab services.

Scottsdale Recovery Center has been serving the Phoenix and Scottsdale, Arizona regions since 2006 with an array of drug and alcohol treatment services. The center’s primary scope of care consists of; residential/inpatient addiction treatment, contracted medical detox services, intensive outpatient treatment (IOP), intervention, family care & guidance as well as sober living and integrative aftercare & case management.

In terms of specialty areas, SRC provides a more “life-integrated” addiction treatment platform that is predominantly geared for young adults ages 18 to 40, most commonly throughout the 20’s and 30’s however. The program merges a broad spread of life & recovery coaching services within the overall treatment models as a means for further helping young adults navigate and persevere through life’s hurdles, all with a sober and successful outcome.

Says CFO, Alex Salcedo, “We have been very successful in not only providing a very effective overall addiction treatment approach for younger adults, but also in a capacity that in many cases allows for lower out-of-pocket costs for the family. We are very excited to be recognized among Arizona’s elite given the recent Joint Commission Accreditation.”

More information is available on the company website at http://scottsdalerecovery.com or by calling the 24/7 information & admission line at (888) 309-3385. SRC has also recently launched a new website dedicated to informing and promoting the facility's young adult addiction treatment services; it can be seen at: http://arizonaaddictioncenter.org. Reported by PRWeb 22 hours ago.

---

EOVI MCD Mutuelle Selects PROS Cameleon CPQ to Enhance Customer Experience

May 27, 2015, 5:08 am

≫ Next: Medicaid Health Plans Face Quality And Performance Ratings

≪ Previous: Arizona Drug Treatment Center SRC Announces JCAHO Accreditation

$

0

0

HOUSTON & PARIS--(BUSINESS WIRE)--PROS® (NYSE: PRO), a big data software company, today announced EOVI MCD Mutuelle has selected PROS Cameleon CPQ (Configure-Price-Quote) to streamline its sales processes for new health insurance offerings and to support its multi-channel selling strategies. PROS and EOVI MCD signed the agreement in the fourth quarter of 2014, and the project is currently underway. Headquartered in Paris, EOVI MCD is a leader in the French personal insurance sector. It covers t Reported by Business Wire 20 hours ago.

Medicaid Health Plans Face Quality And Performance Ratings

May 27, 2015, 6:13 am

≫ Next: America's Biggest Health Insurance Providers

≪ Previous: EOVI MCD Mutuelle Selects PROS Cameleon CPQ to Enhance Customer Experience

$

0

0

Just as millions of Americans enroll in the expanded Medicaid health insurance program under the Affordable Care Act, the Obama administration is rolling out new rules that will measure quality and performance of private plans that provide such benefits. Already, the federal government rates private health plans that contract with the [...] Reported by Forbes.com 19 hours ago.

America's Biggest Health Insurance Providers

May 27, 2015, 6:13 am

≫ Next: Pets Best Passes $100 Million Payout Milestone

≪ Previous: Medicaid Health Plans Face Quality And Performance Ratings

$

0

0

Reported by Forbes.com 19 hours ago.

Pets Best Passes $100 Million Payout Milestone

May 27, 2015, 7:01 am

≫ Next: GOP's Big Government Welfare Reforms

≪ Previous: America's Biggest Health Insurance Providers

$

0

0

Skin allergies and kidney failure top the list of most paid out dog and cat claims.

Boise, Idaho (PRWEB) May 27, 2015

Pets Best Insurance Services, LLC, (Pets Best) reached a landmark this week, distributing $100 million in pet insurance claim payouts to policy holders.

The number is symbolic of the strong emphasis Pets Best puts on its mission: To save pets and end economic euthanasia by helping to ensure pet owners are financially prepared when their pets need unexpected veterinary care.

In 2012, the economic euthanasia level, also called the stop treatment point, was $1,704, meaning when the veterinary bill reaches that amount or more, most pet owners will choose to have their pet euthanized rather than pay for veterinary care. The $100 million in paid claims covers the stop treatment point 58,685 times.

“The reason I started the pet insurance industry was to end economic euthanasia,” said Dr. Jack L. Stephens, founder of Pets Best and creator of the pet insurance industry in North America in 1981. “In paying out over $100 million in pet insurance claims, we have reached a major milestone in helping save pets’ lives. After 33 years, the industry has helped hundreds of thousands of pet owners and saved millions of pets. I am proud of Pets Best and the entire industry for each and every life that has been, and will continue to be, saved.”

While the rise of the pet insurance industry has been instrumental in lowering the rates of economic euthanasia, the practice is still a constant specter in veterinary care. According to an Associated Press survey, 41 percent of pet owners are extremely or somewhat worried about their ability to pay medical bills in the event of a sick cat or dog.**

New advances in the veterinary field provide exciting new ways to keep pets healthy, but at a higher cost. Americans spent an estimated $15.04 billion on veterinary care in 2014, a 5.52 percent increase from 2013, according to the American Pet Products Association.***

“This signpost is a humbling representation of the success Pets Best has achieved in keeping owners and their beloved pets together for a full and healthy life,” said Chris L. Middleton, President of Pets Best. “We will work hard to continue saving pets for the next $100 million and beyond.”

Dogs have been the recipients of the overwhelming majority of payouts, representing 88 percent of the paid claims, although they only make up 82 percent of overall policies sold. Cat claims made up the remaining 12 percent of paid claims and 18 percent of policies sold.

The top claimed conditions for canines included skin allergies, ear infections, arthritis, masses (lumps and bumps) and cruciate ligament injuries.

For the most common condition, skin allergies, the average paid claim amount was $91 with the largest paid claim amount being $4,936. The average paid claim refers to single visits, but chronic conditions can require frequent visits to the veterinarian for treatments and checkups.

For cruciate ligament injuries, the average claim amount was $585, which includes all visits, not just surgery. The largest paid claim for cruciate ligament injuries was $6,542.

The top feline conditions included kidney failure, hyperthyroidism, diabetes, allergies and inflammatory bowel disease.
For the top condition, chronic kidney failure, the average paid claim amount was $181. The largest was $5,909.

Policies offered by Pets Best include at least 70 percent reimbursement coverage for accidents, illnesses, cancer and hereditary or congenital conditions. A wellness plan can be added on to cover routine care items throughout the year such as vaccinations and teeth cleanings.

*http://veterinarynews.dvm360.com/veterinary-practices-performing-more-euthanasias-despite-increase-stop-treatment-point
** http://surveys.ap.org/
*** http://www.americanpetproducts.org/press_industrytrends.asp

About Pets Best Insurance Services, LLC
Dr. Jack L. Stephens, founder and director of Pets Best, founded pet insurance in the U.S. in 1981 with a mission to end euthanasia when pet owners couldn’t afford veterinary treatment. Dr. Stephens went on to present the first U.S. pet insurance policy to famous television dog Lassie. Pets Best provides coverage for dogs and cats. Dr. Stephens leads the Pets Best team with his passion for quality pet care and his expert veterinary knowledge. He is always available to answer questions regarding veterinary medicine, pet health and pet insurance. The Pets Best team is a group of pet lovers who strive to deliver quality customer service and value. Visit http://www.petsbest.com for more information.

Pet insurance coverage offered and administered by Pets Best Insurance Services, LLC is underwritten by Independence American Insurance Company, a Delaware insurance company. Independence American Insurance Company is a member of The IHC Group, an organization of insurance carriers and marketing and administrative affiliates that has been providing life, health, disability, medical stop-loss and specialty insurance solutions to groups and individuals for over 30 years. For information on The IHC Group, visit: http://www.ihcgroup.com. Additional insurance services administered by Pets Best Insurance Services, LLC are underwritten by Prime Insurance Company. Some existing business is underwritten by Aetna Insurance Company of Connecticut. Each insurer has sole financial responsibility for its own products.

Pets Best is a proud member of the North America Pet Health Insurance Association (NAPHIA).
### Reported by PRWeb 18 hours ago.

GOP's Big Government Welfare Reforms

May 27, 2015, 9:30 am

≫ Next: Obama Administration Implements Major Advance for Civil Rights

≪ Previous: Pets Best Passes $100 Million Payout Milestone

$

0

0

WASHINGTON -- The Republican party generally favors individual liberty, but a predilection for big government looms large if individuals happen to be spending public benefits.

The year's not even half over, and already GOP lawmakers in a dozen states have proposed drug-testing poor people who want food stamps or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families benefits -- in other words, subjecting their bodies to an intrusive search by the government. And Republicans in several other states and the U.S. Congress want to limit food stamp purchases to state-approved products. This is happening even as Republicans rage against government making people buy health insurance or bake cakes for gay weddings.

The reason for the apparent contradiction is that conservative welfare reform boosters start from the premise that assistance actually corrupts people.

"Giving people something for nothing harms the recipient," the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector told the Kansas City Star this week.

Kansas and Missouri recently shortened the amount of time poor people can receive TANF benefits. Kansas went a step further by limiting TANF recipients' cash withdrawals from ATMs to $25 per day and banning the use of TANF debit cards at a long list of business types -- including cruise ships.

The lawmakers behind the cruise ship ban didn't claim TANF had been used on a cruise, but its theoretical possibility was enough to move legislation. Since 2011, at least 13 legislatures have enacted welfare drug tests, despite little evidence of widespread drug abuse among TANF recipients and little evidence that testing saves money.

Florida started things off that year by making every TANF beneficiary and applicant pee in a cup. Just 2 percent of applicants tested positive for drugs before federal courts said the law violated the Constitution's promise that individual liberty shouldn't be violated by unreasonable government search. The state spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on the tests and subsequent legal battles.

Despite the modest results of drug testing, the idea seems more politically popular than ever. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) campaigned on drug-testing applicants for food stamps and unemployment benefits last fall, and the idea has been a reliable applause line in Iowa as he runs for president this year.

Of course, TANF and food stamps represent a small slice of the federal benefit budget, once tax code giveaways are taken into account. The largest housing program is not Section 8, but the mortgage interest deduction, which funnels some $70 billion toward homeowners, with the bulk of the tax expenditure going to wealthier Americans. Proposals to make homeowners prove they're not on drugs or spend their money responsibly haven't gained steam.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 15 hours ago.

Obama Administration Implements Major Advance for Civil Rights

May 27, 2015, 3:55 pm

≫ Next: AIS Newsletter Offers Coverage, Analysis of New CMS Strategy on Monitoring MA Provider Access

≪ Previous: GOP's Big Government Welfare Reforms

$

0

0

Now we know why the corporate lobby's favorite lawmakers filibustered the nomination of our fantastic Labor Secretary, Tom Perez, for so long. He's actually committed to sticking up for workers.

Earlier today, the Department of Labor, along with federal procurement agencies, announced guidance and regulations that will give huge and important new protections to those who work with corporations that contract with the federal government. That's 26 million people who will be positively impacted if the proposed regulations are approved.

The proposed new rules would do two really significant things:

• First, they would bar corporations from getting federal contracts if they have repeatedly subjected workers to safety risks, or if they have repeatedly engaged in wage theft.

• Second, and of incredible importance (even if less obvious to most Americans), regulations from the General Services Administration would bar federal contractors from using fine print contracts to force their workers out of court and into rigged arbitration.

The first part, limiting federal contracts to corporations with a decent record of integrity and business ethics toward their workers, may sound like an obvious thing to do. Why should corporations who regularly endanger or cheat their workers get repeat federal contracts? How could this even be this controversial?

If you asked that, you might be the kind of person who also wonders why it would be controversial to encourage more people to vote or get health insurance. As it turns out, of course, even that kind of common-sensical idea is controversial in a world where too many politicians will basically say or do anything to advance the agenda of the 0.1 percent and huge corporations.

In fact, today's new regulations are Exhibit A as to why elections matter. Just a few months ago, House Republicans held a hearing where three out of four witnesses suggested it would be incredibly unfair if repeat offenders of worker safety and wage theft laws couldn't just keep getting government contracts. Reading the testimony of these corporate lobbyist witnesses, you might get the impression that we would suddenly turn into North Korea if corporations couldn't get enormous federal contracts, despite regularly endangering and cheating their employees.

Is it any wonder corporate America is fighting so hard? According to the Department of Labor, nearly two-thirds of the 50 largest wage and hour violations, and almost 40 percent of the 50 largest worker safety violations occurred at companies that later received federal contracts.

The second part -- limiting the use of forced arbitration by federal contractors -- goes to an issue that is less visible to most people, but still incredibly important if you're a worker.

In a growing, and disturbing, trend, tens of millions of American workers have been told by their employers that if they want to get, or keep, a job, they must sign away their rights to go to court if the employer breaks the law. Instead, they have to go to forced arbitration, a system that is biased in favor of employers in a whole bunch of ways.

Forced arbitration generally bans workers from joining together in a class action, for example. That, in turn, makes it incredibly hard to enforce pay equity laws. In a class action, a group of women can come forward with evidence that a corporation pays the women in its work force much less, on average, than it pays men; in an individual case, it is dramatically harder to gather that kind of evidence.

If you meet a politician who tells you, "I really care about pay equity; women should get paid as much as men for the same work," but then side with corporate America in forcing people into arbitration (are you paying attention, Senator Feinstein?), they might as well be telling you, "I am concerned about climate change, but we just need to study it until we've burned all the fossil fuel in the ground."

Lauren Weber at the Wall Street Journal wrote a terrific piece about forced arbitration in employment a couple of months ago. Among other things, she cited evidence showing that arbitrators (who are picked by private arbitration companies that are, in turn, picked by the employers) strongly tend to rule in favor of those employers. Weber noted that, "arbitrations favor employers more often than litigation does, and result in lower awards for employees."

Forced arbitration has been picking up steam as a result of a series of U.S. Supreme Court decisions over the last 20 years. By the usual party-line vote, the Supreme Court held in 2013 that forced arbitration clauses must be enforced even where it is absolutely clear that this would mean federal statutes couldn't be enforced in a given case. In another case, also on a typical 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court held that corporations could have arbitrators (not courts) decide whether arbitration clauses are too unfair to enforce, a classic "chickens guarding the hen house" kind of ruling.

Corporate types like to say that the spread of forced arbitration is a natural outgrowth of a 1925 statute by Congress, but the scholarly evidence overwhelmingly establishes that Congress never intended for that statute to cover workers. The federal law encouraging forced arbitration in employment is entirely an activist creation of the Supreme Court's conservative majority.

In today's regulations, the Department of Labor puts an end to these unfair Supreme Court decisions, including forced arbitration for millions of employees of federal contractors. It's a huge step towards strengthening the civil rights laws. There's also a nice symmetry to this: There hasn't been such a significant improvement in civil rights laws for workers since the 1991 Civil Rights Restoration Act, which was also a step that reversed a series of harmful U.S. Supreme Court decisions.

It also promises to make our government more efficient, something politicians love to say they support. A mountain of empirical evidence shows that unsafe workplaces, and those where basic civil rights laws are violated, tend to be far less efficient than workplaces that follow the law. President Obama's critics like to attack his Executive Orders as supposedly being lawless. But today's regulations are rooted in basic procurement statutes that have been on the books for years -- the laws allow procurement agencies to take steps to improve efficiency for government contractor workplaces, and the new regulations do just that.

Today's regulations follow from an Executive Order that President Obama issued last July, called the Fair Pair and Safe Workplaces Order. It got very little attention (except for one great piece from Emily Bazelon, in Slate).

Hopefully, a lot more people will notice today's huge step forward. For the next 60 days, the public has an opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations, before they go into effect. It's imperative that as many of us as possible do so, and weigh in about why these rules matter.

It's not often these days that the legal climate gets dramatically better for American workers. President Obama and Labor Secretary Tom Perez deserve a lot of credit for this landmark achievement.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 9 hours ago.

AIS Newsletter Offers Coverage, Analysis of New CMS Strategy on Monitoring MA Provider Access

May 27, 2015, 9:41 am

≫ Next: 9 steps for solving income inequality — and why we need to be talking about them

≪ Previous: Obama Administration Implements Major Advance for Civil Rights

$

0

0

CMS’s new, more robust version of its Network Management Module highlights the agency’s attention to provider access, reports Atlantic Information Services’ Medicare Advantage News.

Washington, DC (PRWEB) May 27, 2015

With the launch of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) more robust Network Management Module (NMM) tool, monitoring provider-network adequacy will take a technological leap foward. The May 21 issue of Atlantic Information Services, Inc.’s (AIS) Medicare Advantage News (MAN) offers in-depth coverage of the new NMM tool, as well as analysis from industry experts on why CMS is moving in this direction.

The changes coming to the NMM were announced at CMS’s recently held annual spring Medicare Advantage (MA) and Part D conference and webinar. Initial use of the NMM will be in a pilot program starting late summer, with more details coming at CMS’s June 16 audit compliance conference.

MA provider access has become a major issue for CMS, following moves by several leading insurers to shrink the size of their networks in order to maximize clinical and financial outcomes, MAN reports. The new NMM will put pressure on plans to make sure their members have convenient access to providers, especially specialists. The revamped tool will allow for more frequent checks of the provider-network locations supplied by plans and compare those with where beneficiaries reside, explained Gregory Buglio, a health insurance specialist in CMS’s Medicare Drug Benefit and C & D Data Group, at the conference.

“CMS wants to be sure that when you say [to plan members] your providers are in network, they really are,” Shelley Mueller, director, government programs practice at consulting firm HTMS, tells MAN. Michael Adelberg, senior director at FaegreBD Consulting and a former top MA plan regulator at CMS, agrees, adding that “the tool will let CMS measure provider networks 365 days a year. MA plans will have to stay focused on keeping their networks as strong as they were when first approved.”

NMM gives the agency the ability to respond to complaints about networks without expending more resources than it has available for midyear checks, said a source who asked not to be identified. So when CMS gets a midyear complaint in the future about an MA plan’s network, it will be able to ask the insurer involved for provider-network evaluation through the NMM, and can impose sanctions if the access as determined by the NMM is inadequate.

Visit http://aishealth.com/archive/nman052115-01 to read the article in its entirety.

About Medicare Advantage News
Medicare Advantage News is the health care industry’s #1 source of timely news and business strategies about Medicare Advantage plans, product design, marketing, enrollment, market expansions, CMS audits, and countless federal initiatives in this hotly contested area of health insurance. Published biweekly since 1994 (when it was Medicare+Choice), the newsletter exists to help plans boost revenues, increase enrollees, cut costs and improve outcomes in Medicare Advantage and Medicaid managed care. Visit http://aishealth.com/marketplace/medicare-advantage-news for more information.

About AIS    
Atlantic Information Services, Inc. (AIS) is a publishing and information company that has been serving the health care industry for more than 25 years. It develops highly targeted news, data and strategic information for managers in hospitals, health plans, medical group practices, pharmaceutical companies and other health care organizations. AIS products include print and electronic newsletters, websites, looseleafs, books, strategic reports, databases, webinars and conferences. Learn more at http://AISHealth.com. Reported by PRWeb 15 hours ago.

---

9 steps for solving income inequality — and why we need to be talking about them

May 27, 2015, 11:39 am

≫ Next: Regulating Abortion and Boating: A Modest Proposal

≪ Previous: AIS Newsletter Offers Coverage, Analysis of New CMS Strategy on Monitoring MA Provider Access

$

0

0

Tim Smeeding, a professor of public affairs and economics at Institute for Research on Poverty at the University of Wisconsin - Madison, has a few ideas on how to solve income inequality in the US. 

Lane Kenworthy, a sociology professor at UC San Diego, posted Smeeding's ideas on her blog recently.

The idea is pretty simple: wealth redistribution is necessary in order to reduce inequality. This isn't a new idea — it's the ideology of left-wing politics. But it's still worth talking about what that actually looks like. In America, it looks like these nine bullet points: 

1. Tax appreciated assets when inherited or transferred inter-vivos.
2. Raise income tax rates on capital income — capital gains and dividends — to levels just below labor, e.g. maximum rate at true current marginal tax rate or 30%. And curtail practices of defining earnings as capital income, e.g. “carried interest” provisions.
3. Reduce political rents: close tax loopholes that benefit mainly the wealthy (e.g. cap on deductions for employer-provided health insurance); turn deductions that benefit the richest into credits, many refundable, to benefit lower- and middle-income families; allow drug purchases at “best price” rates, not market rates, for Medicare; get rid of oil and gas exploration tax subsidies; limit and phase out agricultural subsidies.
4. Use tax revenue to improve public infrastructure (including internet).
5. Improve college prep classes and college counseling for students.
6. More and better apprenticeships (get employers involved).
7. Raise the minimum wage to $10 per hour, index it, and enforce labor laws (e.g. on scheduling).
8. Universal child allowance at $2,500 per child, refundable if this is more than income taxes owed, and separate from the EITC.
9. Profit sharing among all long-term (full year or more) employees.

The problem with nearly all of these solutions is that they are politically infeasible. This is nothing but the fantasy of an academic paid to think about poverty all day. 

In an email exchange with Business Insider, Smeeding said that he thinks the $2500 tax credit for children is probably the most likely, but the whole list is fairly impractical. "The more powerful the foe the less likely it will be to have a change," he wrote.

But for this very reason, it's important to talk about these things. "Politically unfeasible" and "not a good idea" are two different things.

*SEE ALSO: It says a lot about the US economy that employers can't find workers 'not carrying some form of personal baggage'*

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Two models in Russia just posed with a 1,400-pound bear Reported by Business Insider 13 hours ago.

Regulating Abortion and Boating: A Modest Proposal

May 27, 2015, 12:12 pm

≫ Next: Large-Scale Analysis of Medication Data Provides Insights into Who Is Covered by Affordable Care Act

≪ Previous: 9 steps for solving income inequality — and why we need to be talking about them

$

0

0

The recent avalanche of state abortion regulations (for the sole purpose of improving safety) has had the desired salutary effect. Indeed, thanks to the Republican Party's preoccupation with gynecology, the risk of death from abortion has over the past decade gone from one death per 100,000 procedures to one death per 100,000 procedures. (The challenge was considerable, since getting lower than one is tough.) After the bevy of new restrictions, abortion today is safer than an injection of penicillin (as it was before the new regulations). Emboldened by their dramatic success in improving abortion safety, Republican-led state legislatures should now direct their medical expertise to non-gynecologic public health threats.

*Danger in an abortion clinic?*

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, over the past decade the average number of deaths in the U.S. from legal abortion has been about 10 per year. Induced abortion and miscarriage remain the safest possible conclusions of pregnancy. In my home state of North Carolina, no abortion-related death has occurred in decades.
Photo courtesy of National Park Service*Danger on the high (and low) seas*

In North Carolina, 16 persons have died in boating accidents in the first few months of 2015. In 2014, 26 persons died in boating accidents in the state. Most fell overboard and drowned, and most of these deaths could have been prevented had life jackets been worn.

Nationwide, 610 persons died in boating accidents in 2014, for a boating risk of death of 5.2 deaths per 100,000 registered boats. Many of these deaths were preventable. Among drownings for which information was available, 84 percent of victims were not wearing a life jacket.

*Time for new laws!*

As these federal statistics reveal, each year about 60 times more Americans die from boating than from abortion. While the risks are not directly comparable, having a boat is clearly more dangerous than having an abortion. Hence, more boating regulations are needed. Modeled after the highly successful abortion regulation blitz, the following is a tongue-in-cheek legislative agenda for the Republican Party.

*Boaters' Right to Know Act*

Because of the dangers involved, women must receive state-mandated counseling about boating safety before launching. A script written by part-time politicians in the state capital will advise boaters of the risks, benefits, and alternatives of boating. The state-scripted counseling must include the following:
· Boating causes long-lasting psychological distress related to leaving terra firma (dubbed the "post-nautical stress syndrome").
· Government-issued nautical charts are unreliable; the earth is indeed flat, and boats routinely fall off the edge.
· Wearing a life jacket increases the risk of breast cancer from friction with the chest.
*Crisis Boating Centers*

State-mandated counseling will refer potential boaters to information centers sponsored by golfing organizations opposed to boating. Proceeds from state-sponsored license plates saying "Choose golf" will subsidize these centers, which provide both on-site and Internet information about boating.

*Ultrasound requirement*

All boats must have an ultrasound transducer (sonar). The boat operator must provide a narrated description of the contours of the bottom of the river, lake, or ocean to women passengers before launching.

*Hospital proximity*

Boats can only be operated on waters within 30 miles of a hospital in the rare event that hospitalization of a passenger or crew member is needed.

*Mandatory waiting periods*

Because women boaters are flighty and irresponsible, a mandatory waiting period is required. A three-day wait sounds about right. For example, if a woman decides after work on Friday to take her children fishing, she could receive the obligatory state counseling about risk and then cast off from the dock... on Monday evening. She has the entire weekend to reflect on whether fishing was a prudent plan for her family.

*Licensure*

Only Coast Guard-licensed captains can operate boats (despite decades of evidence that such extensive training and experience are unnecessary).

*Facilities*

Since ambulatory surgical centers are (incorrectly) thought to be safer than abortion clinics, similar upgrades are needed for boating:
· Only Coast Guard-inspected vessels may be used for recreational boating.
· Boats must be at least 40 feet long and 14 feet wide, with a canvas or hard top for sun protection.
· All boats must be equipped with a chart plotter, autopilot and radar.
· Only diesel engines are allowed, since this fuel is less flammable than gasoline used in outboard engines.
*Insurance*

With state regulation of abortion coverage in health insurance as a model, states will determine which private insurance carriers can underwrite boat insurance policies. Insurance companies need legislative help.

*Politics and public health*

As Groucho Marx aptly noted,Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong remedies.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 13 hours ago.

Large-Scale Analysis of Medication Data Provides Insights into Who Is Covered by Affordable Care Act

May 27, 2015, 1:05 pm

≫ Next: 5 Questions About the Republican Presidential Debates

≪ Previous: Regulating Abortion and Boating: A Modest Proposal

$

0

0

As SCOTUS considers the legality of tax subsidies for the Affordable Care Act, Pitt analysis provides hard data on enrollee medication use.

Pittsburgh, Pa (PRWEB) May 27, 2015

As the U.S. Supreme Court considers the legality of tax subsidies to buy health insurance under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), an investigation by the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, the RAND Corporation and Express Scripts provides an unprecedented look at prescription data gleaned from over a million initial enrollees.

The analysis is published online as a Web First article by Health Affairs and will also appear in the journal’s June issue.

The study found that among people who enrolled in individual marketplaces, those who enrolled earlier were older and used more medication than later enrollees. Marketplace enrollees, as a whole, had lower average drug spending per person and were less likely to use most medication classes than patients enrolled in employer-sponsored health insurance. However, marketplace enrollees were much more likely to use medicines for hepatitis C and for HIV.

“Not since the 1960s has the United States seen an expansion of insurance coverage like that produced by the ACA, with millions of Americans enrolling in the first year,” said lead author Julie M. Donohue, Ph.D., associate professor and vice chair for research in Pitt Public Health’s Department of Health Policy and Management. “The insights gained by our analysis have implications for the marketing of ACA insurance plans, benefit design and out-of-pocket costs, as well as public health ramifications, such as expanding treatment for infectious diseases like HIV and hepatitis C.”

Dr. Donohue and her team looked at data on medication use from January through September 2014 on 1 million ACA-established marketplace insurance plan enrollees. The data came from Express Scripts – the largest pharmacy benefits manager in the nation – which kept individual information on enrollees confidential to protect their privacy.

“Our partnership with Express Scripts enabled an early look at the prescription use of around one in every seven marketplace enrollees, which is a unique vantage point to examine the ACA. Our findings on specialty medication use in marketplace plans are particularly important, given the general concerns about the rising costs of these medications for consumers,” said senior author Walid F. Gellad, M.D., M.P.H., adjunct scientist at RAND and associate professor at Pitt and the Pittsburgh VA Medical Center.

The team compared people who enrolled in marketplace plans “early” (October 2013 through February 2014) and “late” (March through May 2014). They also compared all ACA marketplace enrollees to a matched group of Express Scripts enrollees with employer-based health insurance.

Among the findings:· People who enrolled in marketplace plans early were four years older on average than those who enrolled near the enrollment deadline and filled twice as many prescriptions in the first month of enrollment.
· Marketplace enrollees lived in areas where median family income was 9 percent lower than those in employer-sponsored plans.
· ACA marketplace enrollees, as a whole, filled fewer prescriptions and spent less on average per person than those with employer-based coverage, suggesting that the marketplaces effectively pooled risk – attracting both healthy and sick enrollees – in their first year.
· Early marketplace enrollees had comparable medication use to people in employer-sponsored plans but had higher out-of-pocket costs, particularly for specialty drugs.
· Marketplace enrollees had higher use of hepatitis C medications and markedly higher use of HIV medications than those with employer-based coverage.

“From a public health perspective, our analysis indicates that the ACA is successfully helping more vulnerable populations with lower incomes gain access to medications needed to treat chronic and acute conditions,” said Dr. Donohue. “Given the unprecedented expansion of insurance coverage with the ACA, close monitoring of its impact must continue.”

The analysis also shows that the ACA marketplaces staved off early concerns about skyrocketing insurance premiums by successfully attracting younger, healthier enrollees to offset higher costs from older, less healthy people, Dr. Donohue added.

Additional authors are Eros Papademetriou, M.A., of the Eliassen Group; Sharon G. Frazee, Ph.D., M.P.H., of the Pharmacy Benefits Management Institute; Rochelle R. Henderson, Ph.D., of Express Scripts; Christine Eibner, Ph.D., and Andrew Mulcahy, Ph.D., both of RAND; Ateev Mehrotra, M.D., M.P.H., of RAND and the Harvard Medical School; Can Cui, M.A., of the University of Texas at Austin; Bradley D. Stein, M.D., Ph.D., of RAND and Pitt; and Shivum Bharill, of the University of Michigan.

This work was funded through a contract from Express Scripts to RAND.

# # #

About the University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health
The University of Pittsburgh Graduate School of Public Health, founded in 1948 and now one of the top-ranked schools of public health in the United States, conducts research on public health and medical care that improves the lives of millions of people around the world. Pitt Public Health is a leader in devising new methods to prevent and treat cardiovascular diseases, HIV/AIDS, cancer and other important public health problems. For more information about Pitt Public Health, visit the school’s Web site at http://www.publichealth.pitt.edu.

http://www.upmc.com/media

Contact: Allison Hydzik
Phone: 412-647-9975
E-mail: HydzikAM(at)upmc(dot)edu

Contact: Wendy Zellner
Phone: 412-586-9777
E-mail: ZellnerWL(at)upmc(dot)edu Reported by PRWeb 12 hours ago.

5 Questions About the Republican Presidential Debates

May 27, 2015, 4:00 pm

≫ Next: In 'Cloud Nine,' Artist Kate Durbin Asks Women 'What Have You Done For Money?'

≪ Previous: Large-Scale Analysis of Medication Data Provides Insights into Who Is Covered by Affordable Care Act

$

0

0

The idea was to prevent chaos. Instead, efforts to control this season's Republican presidential primary debates have injected greater uncertainty into an already volatile process. With the first debate just a couple of months in the offing, and with somewhere in the neighborhood of 20 candidates jockeying for position, the upcoming series of jousts is already beginning to resemble a survival-of-the-fittest reality show.

Here are five questions to consider as the Republicans gear up for what promises to be a debate season to remember:

*1. How many debates are too many?*

The driving factor behind this year's "reforms" was to reduce the number of debates -- and, by extension, to reduce the damage candidates do to each other and to the Republican brand as they clash before millions of viewers for months on end. In an effort to rein in the schedule, the Republican National Committee has called for a maximum of 12 party-sanctioned debates between August and next March. The RNC has said it will punish candidates who take part in non-sanctioned debates by barring them from the sanctioned events.

But are sanctions enforceable when it is the television networks, not the parties, that issue debate invitations? And even if sanctions could be enforced, would they deter candidates from grabbing whatever opportunities they can? Running for president means single-mindedly pursuing one's self-interest. The goals of the RNC may not square with the goals of individual contenders, particularly those in the lower tier with less to lose. Moreover, offers from potential media sponsors will abound, tempting office seekers who crave the coverage. Twelve debates would appear insufficient to accommodate the vast array of personalities in question.

*2. How many candidates are too many? *

For the first debate on Aug. 6, only 10 individuals will be allowed onstage. According to the Fox News Channel, which will sponsor the event, candidates must place among the top 10 in five national public opinion polls in order to be included. CNN, the sponsor of the second Republican debate a month later, has announced a different approach: a two-pronged debate, one part featuring the top 10 and another for those with lower poll standings.

Clearly, the Republicans face a mathematical challenge. When the pie must be split among multiple candidates, even a 90-minute debate allows for only thin slivers of exposure. Capping the numbers may somewhat control candidate sprawl, but as the months unfold and the winnowing process plays out, debate sponsors will be looking for reasons to reduce the cast of characters even further. This happens in every primary cycle -- the difference now is that the herd is being culled so early.

*3. Does the new system privilege publicity hounds over serious contenders?*

At this preliminary state of the game, making the top 10 is largely a matter of name recognition. This benefits celebrities like Donald Trump and Ben Carson at the expense of lesser-known but more plausible figures -- sitting governors and senators, for instance. If debate inclusion hinges on media visibility, there's a good chance that the also-rans will be tempted to do whatever they can to commandeer the spotlight, both as a way onto the debate stage and as a means of remaining there. In 2012 we saw how performance artists like Herman Cain and Michele Bachmann siphoned attention away from the more serious candidates. The 2016 rules would seem to incentivize an even higher level of outrageousness.

*4. What role will moderators and live audiences play?*

Republicans squealed mightily about the journalists who moderated in 2012; already they have claimed the scalp of news personality George Stephanopoulos, whose donations to the Clinton Foundation have disqualified him from moderating ABC News' 2016 Republican debate. But apart from that unexpected takedown, the RNC seems to have backed off its previously expressed demand for conservative-friendly questioners. And appropriately so, if these events are to have any credibility.

At this point it is unclear how on-site audiences will factor into the 2016 equation. The lynch mob spectators of 2012, who booed a gay soldier and cheered the prospect of patients dying for lack of health insurance, lent a creepy, extremist flavor to the Republican presidential debates. It appears that the decision to feature live audiences will be left to the sponsoring networks -- and because live audiences can add narrative conflict, these sponsors will undoubtedly insist on their inclusion.

*5. As a result of the changes, will the eventual Republican nominee emerge any less battered?*

Party leaders believe that Mitt Romney's endurance run of two dozen primary debates in 2012 left him bloodied and debilitated heading into the general election campaign -- damage sustained by friendly fire. Of course, a counterargument can also be made that Romney's primary debate experience provided excellent preparation for going toe-to-toe with President Obama. Romney's decisive victory over Obama in their first encounter underscores the value of toning one's debate muscles in advance of the main event, however unpleasant the task may be.

In the final analysis, it isn't the number of debates that determines a nominee's strength or weakness. It isn't the number of men and women on the stage, or the moderator's questions, or live audience reaction, or format details. What matters are the candidates themselves: their words, their comportment, and their ability to thrive in the inherently unstable environment of a group debate. Republican attempts to wrap the debaters in a security blanket may be understandable, but the live, unscripted nature of the beast will invariably triumph. That's why we watch.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 9 hours ago.

In 'Cloud Nine,' Artist Kate Durbin Asks Women 'What Have You Done For Money?'

May 27, 2015, 2:38 pm

≫ Next: Leadership at Starbucks: An Extra-Hot Recipe for Growth

≪ Previous: 5 Questions About the Republican Presidential Debates

$

0

0

Head over to the website for Los Angeles-based artist Kate Durbin's newest project, "Cloud Nine," and you'll be greeted by a few lustful mouths lined with dollar bills, flirtatiously positioned above a rather intrusive question: "What have you done for money?"

The question is aimed at female-identifying artists, all of whom are encouraged to submit their "confessions" anonymously to a designated email address. There, Durbin gives no hints as to what she'll do with said confessions, so The Huffington Post reached out to the artist to figure out exactly why she's soliciting women online, under the guise of a common cam girl name -- cloud9.

"The connection with the cam girl has to do with the fact that many artists I know do sex work in order to have enough time and money to be artists," Durbin explained. In an earlier interview with the pop culture blog Konbini, Durbin said that the responses she's received already have indeed ranged from sex work and sugar daddies to babysitting, PR jobs and parental and governmental assistance. She's heard about jobs from stints as assistants to pizza delivery, even reality television.

By prying into the lives of female artists, Durbin wants to highlight the difficulties creatives face -- particularly women -- in securing funds for their work, whether it's compensation for pieces made or financial support to travel and show their work. The fact that women artists earn less money than men is hardly a secret; for example, in 2012 alone, every artist in the top 100 auction sales was a man. Durbin digs deeper than that, though, confronting the fact that women outnumber men in art school (according to Gallery Tally expert Micol Hebron, women constitute between 65 and 75 percent of students in MFA programs), only to enter a world in which men make up 70 percent of gallery-represented artists.

Below, find out what Durbin had to say about art-school debt, her own financial history and exactly what she's doing with her collection of anonymous stories.

*What was the inspiration for Cloud Nine?*

I started noticing how often my artist girlfriends’ conversations revolved around money and not what was inspiring us to make art.

I noticed how often they Skyped into conferences, because they had no institution or funding source to support their attendance. I noticed how often they didn’t write because they had to work an 8-4 job just to pay rent and then work some more to pay off their student-loan debts. I noticed how often they defaulted on their loans because they didn’t have money to pay them. I noticed how many of them had sugar daddies and felt like they had to hide it. I noticed how many of them had trust funds and felt like they had to hide it. I noticed all the adjuncts who were teaching six classes at three different schools and not making enough to live, and also not making art. I noticed all the paintings being flipped and selling for bank, and then I noticed my friends who were on food stamps and who couldn’t afford dental work.

I started to notice everything in the world around me that had to do with art and money, and I paid attention to it, instead of ignoring it -- instead of believing in the fantasy that these were all “individual failings,” that none of these people were “good enough” artists to make it. This is how “Cloud Nine” came to be.

*How many stories have you gathered so far, and how did you go about reaching out to women?*

I have 50-plus stories so far, and hope to gather more. The call is viral on Facebook, and Konbini’s article helped. I’ve reached out to female-identifying artists who I know personally, and have asked them to share their stories and to spread the call. I’m specifically reaching into as many communities as I can, of varying socio-economic backgrounds. The project is DIY. I don’t have a team reaching out for me. I’m doing this while simultaneously working other jobs.

*What form will "Cloud Nine" take once you've compiled the stories?*

I will be performing the piece live online via video stream on New Hive and also on one of the world’s biggest sex camming sites simultaneously. I don’t want to give the performance away, but I will be playing with the idea of “confession,” performing as a cam girl/artist. The stories will be woven into the performance.

*You mentioned to Konbini that talk of how artists make money was never discussed in school. Ideally, what would these discussions look like to you? Would you have benefited from a class geared toward the economics of being an artist? *

The short answer is yes, but I think we have larger systemic problems that won’t be alleviated by a class on the economics of being an artist (although that should just be mandatory within our current system). It should also be noted that not all artists create the type of work that can be bought and sold for money (take poets, for example), or want to work within the gallery system.

MFA programs themselves perpetuate debt, as well as credentialism: two economic disadvantages to artists. Yes, some programs pay full tuition, and those are the ones people should be attending. The fact that it’s sort of a given for artists to get MFAs -- and, increasingly, PhDs -- is a sign of the bureaucratization of our era. And of course, many people get MFAs in order to go on to teach, yet most teaching work is now adjunct labor. Adjuncts are not paid a living wage and not given any job security. The majority of adjuncts are women. Can you see how the odds are stacking higher and higher against female-identifying artists (and, let’s not forget, artists of color, queer artists, trans artists)? Can you see how increasingly it is only artists who had money to begin with who can succeed in such a system?

People have long said that artists should “know what they are getting into” when they become artists and suffer. Now people are starting to say that to college teachers. It’s a way to shame people from speaking out against systemic abuse -- and neglect is a form of abuse. We exist currently in a system that does not support human beings with basic resources to use their gifts in this world. We exist within a system where art is not valued, which makes sense, because human beings are not valued in this system either. But is this the world we want? If not, we need to overcome our shame and fear and speak out about the realities of our lives as artists.

That is the first step. Then, to dream of something better. Yoko Ono says, “A dream you dream alone is just a dream, but a dream we dream together is reality.” I personally would love to see something like universal basic income put into place as a step toward alleviating this problem. It also serves to alleviate the increasing income equality and unemployment that is resulting as technology and robots take over human jobs over the next few decades. So this is not just about artists -- artists here are the canaries in a coal mine, in a sense. Yet of course it would be beautiful to live in a world filled with art, instead of people producing things or doing jobs they don’t care about just to eat and die.

*Obvious question: what have you done for money?*

What haven’t I done?

I plan to share my full job history during the performance, but I will give you a partial rundown now of some of the jobs I’ve had. I started working when I was 12, running my own babysitting business in two neighborhoods. I worked almost every day -- my parents homeschooled me, and as a result I could work all the time. Through high school I worked in fast food, at Krispy Kreme, and in college at a Jamba Juice knock-off shop and then at a mom-and-pop health food store. After college I worked a series of miserable administrative jobs, from data entry to [being an] administrative assistant to writing the intros for religious radio shows.

For the past seven years, since I got out of grad school, I have worked as an adjunct professor both in person and online. I often worked more than full time but did not have health insurance or a living wage. Next year will be the first year I have a full-time teaching job. I love teaching, but it is very hard to make a living teaching college.

There is more to my economic history that is difficult for me to talk about, all of which I will confess during the performance.

*Do you have anything else you want to add to people who either want to take part in the project or see it when it's completed?*

I would love to hear your stories if you want to share them with me. All of your identifying information will be removed, so it’s totally anonymous. Please send your story to cloudnineconfess@gmail.com.

Tune in to the "Cloud Nine" performance on May 28 on New Hive at 7 p.m. PST/10 p.m. EST. Images by Tien Tienngern.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 10 hours ago.

Leadership at Starbucks: An Extra-Hot Recipe for Growth

May 27, 2015, 7:01 pm

≫ Next: Mental Illness Is A Much Bigger Problem For The Poor, New Study Shows

≪ Previous: In 'Cloud Nine,' Artist Kate Durbin Asks Women 'What Have You Done For Money?'

$

0

0

"Sylvia is here!" Everyone perked up as she came through the door and deliberately hugged them all. "Michael, how is your dog's leg?""Shana, how is your Mom doing?""Oh my, Jennifer, she's precious!" she said, caressing the face of a new-born infant. It felt like a church group meeting, maybe a fraternity, sorority, or family reunion or past exchange students who had traveled the world together. Alas, it's a routine day at a Starbucks.

This routine of passion, purpose, and compassion has grown this company from approximately 4,500 stores in 2004 to 21,500 in 2014. Starbucks is 196 on the Fortune 500 list (up from 208 the previous year) and is 5 on the most admired list.

Traditional strategies of quality and innovation are certainly in the mix at Starbucks, but sitting around a coffee tasting for three hours with Sylvia Arbesu, Regional Director of Operations responsible for 86 stores with 6 employees joyously performing their duties around us, it is clear something different is afoot. Passion, compassion, and purpose are in the air and in the stories of this leader, with the company since 2012.

Sylvia had a high-paying, secure job in 2009 when Starbucks came knocking. They pursued one another for almost two years before she decided she was ready. "They flew me down once again, and for the first time ever in an interview, I authentically and emotionally opened up about my personal and professional life." They said they would call her, but having spilled her guts, she thought she surely blew the interview.
"After two years of connecting, my future partner shared they were waiting for me to show my authentic core in a business setting."
It was that unexpected element that got her the job in which today she takes so much pride.

*Transparency*

Transparency is not a rite of passage to, but rather a constant at Starbucks. "I can show up as a leader, and don't need to give my partners (see more on the partner term below) a corporate message," Sylvia said over cups of coffee and a French Press of Verana Blond Roast, paired with a lemon pound cake--a coffee tasting. We are "authentic and look each other in the eye. I want to know what you really think. You are who you are. There's a sense of peace that I can come in and truly be me at my own personal best."

Previously in her career, she was repeatedly put in compromising positions such as having holiday dinner at someone's house who she knew was to lose their job, but the transparency at Starbucks fits her authentic self hand-in-glove. "When we know we are closing a store, everyone knows it--immediately." And no one gets let go.

"We may be overstaffed in a couple of stores for a few weeks, but that quickly levels out, and everyone has a job in the end."
*Culture Fuels Performance*

Sylvia's consistent tendency towards top ratings in every job she had is reflexive and instilled by her grandmother who left everything behind in Cuba in 1962 for the sake of her kids' education. She said "What you put in your head," referring to education, "no one can take from you. If you are a president or earning minimum wage, be the best and be educated." But at Starbucks, "there is a happiness advantage," Sylvia claims.

"I'm performing at a completely different level now because I believe in the mission of this company and its partners, and I know my partners and leaders feel the same."

*Taking Care of the Partners*

"You'd have to hear Howard to understand what fuels us," Sylvia said. "You can hear his heart when he speaks. He truly lives our mission," which is "To inspire and nurture the human spirit--one person, one cup, and one neighborhood at a time." Howard Schultz, glassdoor.com's #9 CEO, has used commerce through coffee as a vehicle toward a grander vision of benevolence. Employees are called partners because they get Bean Stock, or shares, every year. "One of my baristas is building a 3,000 square foot home in the Dominican Republic and has just bought a new car at 27, all from his Bean Stock," Sylvia says proudly, among her other astonishing examples.

Starbucks also has a highly publicized tuition reimbursement policy. After 240 hours of work, the company will provide rolling reimbursement of tuition, 100% for four years of higher learning, with absolutely no strings attached. "Howard grew up in the projects of New York and is determined to provide education and health insurance for as many as he feasibly can," Sylvia said. Namely, Starbucks offers health benefits and 401(k) matching, even for part-timers.

And then there is the Cup Fund, a partner-funded account to help other partners in times of need. In fact, Sylvia was to play in Cup Fund golf tournament the afternoon of our interview. "A shift supervisor's grandmother died, and the Cup Fund paid airfare to the funeral but also threw in extra money for a nice dress."
*

"We are a people company that serves coffee, not a coffee company that serves people."
*Taking Care of the World**

A recent trip to a Costa Rican coffee plantation exemplifies how the company expands its philosophy beyond its corporate boundaries. "This was part of our Origins program. We go back to the coffee plantations and give back to the farmers and their families." She sites buying all the textbooks and backpacks for the schools of farmers' children. The company distributes trees optimized to the local climates in Starbucks labs to coffee farmers and their employees to ensure the success of their own independent family farms.

A seven-year-old boy gave Sylvia a plantation tour and conveyed volumes about the types of coffee, their growth, harvest, and yield. "I turned to the boy's father and expressed my amazement at his knowledge and ambition. Without missing a beat, the farmer said, 'He has to. His life depends on it.'"

Never before have I sat with a leader at a large corporation whose passion jumped across the table with every answer. Starbucks is a behemoth of benevolence--almost a karmic machine--with the fruits of commerce redirected back toward the passion, purpose, and compassion of the company's partners and other benefactors, who in-turn feed it right back into the company. Today's news is mired by claims that corporations have taken control of the social agenda. It would appear that in this case, Starbucks has indeed done that, but in a positive sense while bypassing Washington. And in doing so, the performance of the company is fueled to repeat and expand the same cycle year after year. Today's corporations desiring a similar growth record could stand to take note.

Laura Berger, PCC is a leadership coach, media personality and bestselling author. She has spent 20+ years counseling leaders to achieve positive, long-term, measurable results for themselves, their people and their teams. She is a corporate and conference speaker, workshop facilitator, and private coach. For more information visit Berdeo Group LLC

Enjoyed this article? Check out The Monk Chat From Thailand.

Follow me on LinkedIn and Twitter.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 6 hours ago.

Mental Illness Is A Much Bigger Problem For The Poor, New Study Shows

May 27, 2015, 9:23 pm

≫ Next: SpendWell Named a “Cool Vendor” by Gartner

≪ Previous: Leadership at Starbucks: An Extra-Hot Recipe for Growth

$

0

0

If you want to talk about inequality in America, you should be talking about mental illness -- and the ability of people to get treatment for it.

On Thursday, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released a new study that demonstrates, in vivid terms, something that public health experts have known for a while: Mental health problems are far more common among the poor than the rich.

The basis for the study is five years of responses to the National Health Insurance Survey, an in-person poll that the federal government has operated continuously since the late 1950s. Today’s version includes questions designed to measure the prevalence of “serious psychological distress,” a standard that public health experts use as a proxy for certain kinds of mental illness.

Infographic by Cameron Love

According to the new CDC paper, 8.7 percent of people with incomes below the poverty line, or $20,090 for a family of three, reported serious psychological distress from 2009 to 2013. For people with annual incomes at or above four times the poverty line -- that’s $80,360 for a family of three -- the figure was just 1.2 percent.

Researchers also discovered that about 30.4 percent of working-age adults with serious distress had no health insurance, compared with just 20.5 percent of working-age adults without serious distress.

The study, whose lead author is CDC epidemiologist Judith Weissman, does not address the issue of causality -- in other words, whether mental health problems lead to more economic hardship or whether economic hardship leads to more mental health problems. But most researchers believe the process works in both directions.

Studies have shown, for example, that infants and toddlers growing up in low-income communities are more likely to experience the kind of “toxic stress” (neglect, abuse, seeing violence in the home) that can hinder brain development and lead to mental illness in adulthood. Additional studies have suggested, though not conclusively, that adults who become unemployed are more likely to develop depression.

At the same time, somebody who had mental health problems might have a tougher time holding onto a job -- or, at least, a good job. And without employment, historically, it’s been tough to get health insurance or to have enough money to pay for timely detection and treatment of psychiatric problems.

For the people and families that deal with mental illness, the result can be a vicious, downward spiral that -- in the worst cases -- ends with some combination of medical and financial catastrophe.

A major goal of the Affordable Care Act, or Obamacare, was to address these problems -- partly by helping millions of additional people to get health insurance and partly by requiring insurance plans to provide more comprehensive coverage of mental health care. These regulations were an extension of bipartisan efforts, dating back to the 1980s and 1990s, to establish parity between mental and physical health care coverage.

The data in this latest CDC study isn't recent enough to capture most of the Affordable Care Act’s effects. But another study, focusing on a provision of the law that became effective back in 2010, found that young adults who obtained insurance were more likely to get mental health treatment. Studies of past government initiatives with similar characteristics, such as an expansion of Medicaid eligibility in Oregon, have provided yet more evidence that access to health insurance leads to better mental health.

Still, many people who obtained insurance under the Affordable Care Act struggle mightily to get mental health care -- either because they have trouble finding providers who accept insurance or because they face daunting out-of-pocket costs for every treatment session and prescription. That’s why organizations like the National Alliance for the Mental Illness have called upon officials to find ways of further improving mental health coverage -- whether by providing people with more protection from high deductibles or strengthening the regulation of networks of mental health care providers.

Not everybody would favor such an approach. The Affordable Care Act’s conservative critics frequently call for scaling back the existing requirements on mental health insurance, because, they say, such mandates tend to drive up insurance premiums. They are probably right about that, although untreated mental illness can lead to future health problems, both mental and physical, that can be expensive to treat.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 4 hours ago.

---

SpendWell Named a “Cool Vendor” by Gartner

May 28, 2015, 12:10 am

≫ Next: ZoomCare Becomes ZOOM+ and Launches Complete Performance-Based Health Insurance System

≪ Previous: Mental Illness Is A Much Bigger Problem For The Poor, New Study Shows

$

0

0

Leading analyst firm recognizes innovative companies in health care technology in the April 24, 2015, report titled "Cool Vendors in Healthcare Payers."

Portland, Ore. (PRWEB) May 28, 2015

SpendWell Health, an e-commerce marketplace for health care services, announced today that it has been named a “Cool Vendor” by Gartner in the April 24, 2015 report titled Cool Vendors in Healthcare Payers, 2015 by Jeff Cribbs, Constance Sjoquist, Robert H. Booz, Benoit J. Lheureux. The report highlights innovative vendors, products and services in health care technology—which serve as leading indicators into new trends in the health care payer market.

SpendWell’s solution delivers the next generation of health care online shopping—going beyond just showing the estimated costs of services. Instead, SpendWell’s unique e-commerce platform displays real-time buy now pricing information from health care providers and allows insured shoppers to purchase services directly from them. While payers and employers are already making price transparency tools available to consumers, adoption of these tools has been historically low. According to the Gartner report, “to drive consumer adoption, the market needs to think more expansively about the ways medical shopping can create value for consumers.”

SpendWell brings insured consumers and providers together in an online marketplace that makes health care as simple as shop, compare and buy. With clear, upfront pricing, SpendWell eliminates confusion and helps make the process of buying and selling care easy for both consumers and providers.

As more companies move toward high-deductible health plans, SpendWell’s marketplace provides an effective solution for employees struggling with rising health care costs—giving them a way to shop for routine care at competitive prices. Employees can search and select providers based on cost, quality, location and more—helping them make more informed, wallet-wise health care decisions. In addition, SpendWell provides employers with a tool for helping their employees better manage their health care spending, while still receiving quality care. A wide range of services is available for purchase in SpendWell’s marketplace, including primary care, urgent care, laboratory tests, imaging, alternative care, behavioral health and more.

For providers, SpendWell’s benefits-integrated platform helps reduce collection risk, payment lag time and overhead. SpendWell minimizes the typical administrative hassles associated with eligibility verification, claims and billing by leveraging electronic and automated services. As a result, providers typically list their services at 9-20% lower than their negotiated fee schedule. That means providers can offer a better experience at more competitive prices to thousands of shoppers in the SpendWell marketplace.

“SpendWell is honored to be recognized by Gartner as an innovator in the health care space,” said Marcee Chmait, President of SpendWell. “By combining price transparency, an easy-to-use e-commerce platform, real-time eligibility checks and claims adjudication, we’ve developed a smart solution for tackling the challenges facing employees, employers and providers in the new health care landscape. We’re delivering the right technology at the right time, with the aim of making health care better for all.”

With clear value propositions for employees, employers, health plans and providers, SpendWell delivers an innovative approach to health care—encouraging transparency, improving accessibility and increasing affordability. While SpendWell is currently only available to Cambia Health Solutions employees, it will soon offer the service to employer groups and health plans nationwide. For more information about SpendWell, visit SpendWellHealth.com.

Gartner does not endorse any vendor, product or service depicted in its research publications, and does not advise technology users to select only those vendors with the highest ratings or other designation. Gartner research publications consist of the opinions of Gartner's research organization and should not be construed as statements of fact. Gartner disclaims all warranties, expressed or implied, with respect to this research, including any warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose.

About SpendWell
SpendWell is the leading health care e-commerce solution that empowers insured consumers to shop, compare and buy routine health services at actual prices. SpendWell’s online marketplace integrates benefit plans, removes consumer anxiety about surprise bills with upfront payments, eliminates patient collections risk for providers and reduces administrative inefficiencies and costs for payers. SpendWell transforms the traditional health care model for consumers, providers, employers, health plans and administrators into an online retail experience. SpendWell’s nationwide community of providers includes medical, dental, vision, behavioral health, chiropractic, alternative care, imaging and more. SpendWell is a wholly owned subsidiary of Cambia Health Solutions, Inc. Learn more at CambiaHealth.com. For more information about SpendWell, visit SpendWellHealth.com.

About Cambia Health Solutions
Cambia Health Solutions, headquartered in Portland, Oregon, is a health solutions company dedicated to transforming health care by creating a person-focused and economically sustainable system. Cambia’s growing family of companies range from software and mobile applications, health care marketplaces, non-traditional health care delivery models, health insurance, life insurance, pharmacy benefit management, wellness and overall consumer engagement. Through bold thinking and innovative technology, we are delivering solutions that make quality health care more available, affordable and personally relevant for everyone. To learn more, visit cambiahealth.com or twitter.com/cambia. Reported by PRWeb 43 minutes ago.

ZoomCare Becomes ZOOM+ and Launches Complete Performance-Based Health Insurance System

May 28, 2015, 1:05 am

≫ Next: No Title

≪ Previous: SpendWell Named a “Cool Vendor” by Gartner

$

0

0

The ZOOM+ Performance Health Insurance System is the nation’s first health insurance system designed from the ground up to enhance human performance

HILLSBORO, Ore. (PRWEB) May 28, 2015

ZoomCare, the Portland-based innovator of on-demand health care, today becomes ZOOM+ Performance Health Insurance, the first complete system of care designed from the ground up to improve human performance.

“Nine years ago, we started with a simple idea to deliver a disruptive, delightful care experience that delivers twice the health at half the cost. Our ZoomCare clinics were very successful, but we encountered inherent friction in the system that inspired us to rethink the way all care is delivered,” says Dave Sanders, M.D., co-founder and CEO of ZOOM+. “ZOOM+ represents a new generation of health insurance, one that is not based on sickness, nor even on wellness, but on enhancing human performance. It is designed from the ground up to be used everyday to help people be happier and more creative and productive.”

This shift from a single service to a whole system represents a new dawn in healthcare. Until now, people only used insurance when they were sick. ZOOM+ is designed to be used every day for people who want to achieve their human potential.

The ZOOM+ Performance Health Insurance System is the nation’s first health insurance system designed from the ground up to enhance human performance. It provides the security of traditional health insurance with unique performance enhancing services only available at ZOOM+.

ZOOM+Members get access to ZOOM+ performance enhancing services including, but not limited to the following:

Free personal brain trainer at ZOOM+Brain
Free olympian-level circuit training at ZOOM+Performance
Free food and movement as medicine classes at ZOOM+Prime
Free parenting coaching and parent partner hotline ZOOM+Kids
Free Healthy Clean White 57 at ZOOM+Smile
Earn free green juice and brain food.

The ZOOM+ System consists of five components:

1. ZOOM+Plans
ZOOM+ is built on a rock-solid insurance core by a team of health insurance professionals with more than 300 years of experience. ZOOM+Plans provide complete health coverage including unlimited access to ZOOM+ urgent, primary and specialist care; and blue carpet service to ZOOM+Partner Providers including hospital care through OHSU, Providence and Legacy.

ZOOM+Plans are easy to buy and available in three different payment options:

ZOOM+Zero - A zero deductible plan allows people to pay a little as they go. ZOOM+ pays from the start too.
ZOOM+100 - A deductible plan where people pay 100% until their max. Then ZOOM+ pays.
ZOOM+GOV - The federally mandated bronze, silver and gold plan. People pay a bit as they go and ZOOM+ pays sooner.

All ZOOM+Plans include:
ZOOM+Mobile
ZOOM+Paths
ZOOM+Places
ZOOM+Guru

2. ZOOM+Mobile
ZOOM+Mobile allows members to access all their health from their phone. Members can schedule exams and coaching sessions, track progress, and manage health records at http://www.zoomcare.com.

3. ZOOM+Paths
Members start by creating a Personal Performance Path with a ZOOM+ health coach. ZOOM+ coaches and trainers assess brain, cellular and physical health, and prescribe food and movement as medicine to help members achieve their performance goals.

4. ZOOM+Places
ZOOM+Members have access to complete urgent, primary, specialist care including hospital partners OHSU, Providence and Legacy. Care is provided by the talented team of ZOOM+ MDs, NDs, NPs, and PAs who have been selected based on rigorous testing, openness to on-going performance reviews, and commitment to continuous learning. ZOOM+Partners have been selected based on the same criteria.

5. ZOOM+Guru
Members get access to a ZOOM+Guru or Personal Health Assistant. Guru’s help members schedule care, provide benefit and troubleshooting support and help coordinate follow up care.

ZOOM+ launches with a communications campaign reflecting the change to ZOOM+. In tandem with the launch of this new system, ZOOM+ will open its first On-Demand ZOOM+Smile Studio on June 1 at 3130 S.E. Division Street in Portland, Oregon. ZOOM+Smile features the Healthy Clean White 57 - a three-in-one complete dental exam, cleaning and whitening in 57 minutes, and the Healthy Clean Jr. for kids.

About ZOOM+

ZOOM+, the Portland-based innovator of on-demand healthcare, is creating the nation’s first health insurance system built from the ground up to enhance human performance. By seamlessly combining the security of traditional health insurance with membership-based brain, cellular and strength/stamina training and coaching, ZOOM+ Performance Health Insurance is empowering people to reach their full potential. Co-founded in 2006 in Portland, Oregon by healthcare entrepreneurs David Sanders, M.D., and Albert DiPiero, M.D., ZOOM+ (formerly called ZoomCare) was built on the promise of delivering “Twice the Health At Half the Cost With Ten Times the Delight.” ZOOM+ is a privately held company currently operating 26 neighborhood clinics in Portland, Vancouver and Seattle. ZOOM+ was selected one of the most admired healthcare companies in Oregon in 2014 and has been a finalist for the Oregon Entrepreneur Network's Growth Company of the Year.

ZOOM+ has been responsible for many retail healthcare firsts. The company built the first mobile online scheduler with same-day access to more than 500 no-wait appointments; created the innovative neighborhood retail clinic format; invented the "Magic Minute" and "Painless Procedure;" helped pass legislation allowing clinics to provide prescription medications; published transparent prices on the website; offered convenient office hours 365 days a year, in some cases until midnight.

For additional information about ZOOM+, please visit ZoomCare.com and our Facebook page. Reported by PRWeb 1 day ago.

No Title

May 28, 2015, 1:15 am

≫ Next: IPA Seeks Health Insurance Sales Representatives, Announces Leadership Opportunities throughout Texas

≪ Previous: ZoomCare Becomes ZOOM+ and Launches Complete Performance-Based Health Insurance System

$

0

0

Medicaid expansion supporters are targeting Hialeah -- the zip code that saw more health insurance sign-ups than any other in the country. Reported by WEAR ABC 3 1 day ago.

IPA Seeks Health Insurance Sales Representatives, Announces Leadership Opportunities throughout Texas

May 28, 2015, 3:03 am

≫ Next: Here's How Many People In Each State May Not Be Able To Afford Insurance If The Supreme Court Rules Against Obamacare

≪ Previous: No Title

$

0

0

IPA Family, LLC is currently looking to fill sales representative roles. Leadership opportunities and the ability to participate in wealth accumulation plan available to qualified candidates.

Tampa, FL (PRWEB) May 28, 2015

IPA Family, LLC (IPA), an American Independence Corp. company and member of The IHC Group, is pleased to announce new business opportunities in Texas. Leadership roles are now available at IPA’s San Antonio Center of Excellence Offices serving locations in San Antonio, Leon Valley, Castle Hills, Kirby and surrounding areas.

Qualified candidates will possess the following attributes: an ability to make decisions and solve problems, active listening skills, critical thinking skills, sales experience, strong time-management skills and, most importantly, a proclivity to operate with the highest ethical standards. Selected candidates will be provided with a complete and comprehensive program that promotes their personal and professional success. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:·     Compensation programs
·     Residual income and monthly bonus
·     Lifetime vesting schedules
·     Wealth accumulation plan
·     Free qualified sales leads and lead-management systems
·     Ongoing training and business education using state-of-the art technologies
·     Many other performance-based programs and incentives

To be considered for one of the select positions and participate in a professional and confidential interview process, you may submit direct inquiries with resume to IPA Family, LLC through their contact page. Due to a culture of continuous growth and market expansions, IPA is currently accepting inquiries for existing and new markets. For more information about IPA Family and the companies it represents, visit http://www.ipafamily.com or call 800-772-8667 and indicate you saw our press release.

About IPA Family, LLC (IPA)
IPA Family, LLC is a national marketing organization that distributes major medical insurance plans and other health insurance plans and consumer benefit association membership programs across the nation. IPA’s trained professional sales associates, referred to as the “IPA Family,” provides information and a product portfolio that can meet the needs of most small business owners and self-employed individuals and families. Headquartered in Tampa, Fl., IPA is accredited and has an excellent reputation with the Better Business Bureau (bbb.org) and is a member company of The IHC Group.

About American Independence Corp.
AMIC, through Independence American Insurance Company and its other subsidiaries, offers pet insurance, non-subscriber occupational accident, international coverage’s, small-group major medical and short-term medical. AMIC provides to the individual and self-employed markets health insurance and related products, which are distributed through its subsidiaries IPA Family, LLC, healthinsurance.org, LLC, IPA Direct, Inc. and IHC Specialty Benefits, Inc. AMIC markets medical stop-loss through its marketing and administrative company IHC Risk Solutions, LLC.

About The IHC Group
The IHC Group is an organization of insurance carriers and marketing and administrative affiliates that has been providing life, health, disability, medical stop-loss and specialty insurance solutions to groups and individuals for over 30 years. Members of The IHC Group include Independence Holding Company, American Independence Corp, Standard Security Life Insurance Company of New York, Madison National Life Insurance Company, Inc. and Independence American Insurance Company. Each insurance carrier in The IHC Group has a financial strength rating of A- (Excellent) from A.M. Best Company, Inc., a widely recognized rating agency that rates insurance companies on their relative financial strength and ability to meet policyholder obligations. (An A++ rating from A.M. Best is its highest rating.) Collectively, the companies in The IHC Group provide insurance coverage to more than one million individuals and groups. For more information about The IHC Group, visit http://www.ihcgroup.com. Reported by PRWeb 22 hours ago.

Here's How Many People In Each State May Not Be Able To Afford Insurance If The Supreme Court Rules Against Obamacare

May 28, 2015, 4:58 am

≫ Next: Cambia Health Solutions Leads New Round of Investment in lifeIMAGE

≪ Previous: IPA Seeks Health Insurance Sales Representatives, Announces Leadership Opportunities throughout Texas

$

0

0

The Supreme Court is expected to issue a decision in a major new lawsuit against Obamacare this June, and the health coverage for millions hangs in the balance.

This challenge to the Affordable Care Act, called King v. Burwell, came from longtime Obamacare opponents who claim that, because of a key phrase in the law, the federal government may provide tax credit subsidies only in states that operate their own health insurance exchanges. Thirty-four states declined to establish these marketplaces, and instead left that responsibility in the hands of the federal government.

If the Supreme Court rules for the plaintiffs in this case, it would eliminate health insurance subsidies for 7.5 million low- and moderate-income people in those states, causing most of them to become uninsured when their premiums become unaffordable without financial assistance.

Here's how the numbers break down in each state with a federally operated health insurance exchange.

Infographic by Alissa Scheller for The Huffington Post. Jonathan Cohn and Jesse Rifkin contributed reporting.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website. Reported by Huffington Post 20 hours ago.