Blue Shield of California, Blue Shield of California Promise Health Plan Receive National Recognition for Addressing Health Disparities
Nonprofit health plans serving commercial, Medicare and Medi-Cal members earn NCQA accreditation for health equity in care services, clinical performance, consumer experience
OAKLAND, Calif., April 3, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Blue Shield of California, which serves 6 million members as the only statewide nonprofit health plan, today announced national recognition for its efforts to advance health equity and improve access to culturally competent care for members. The nonprofit health plan received a perfect score in health equity accreditation measures from the National Committee for Quality Assurance (NCQA).
NCQA is a leading national accrediting body committed to advancing high-quality health care by rating quality measures among health plans, home care, and more. NCQA honors those within the healthcare system who are excelling in quality, including via Health Care Accreditation, based on HEDIS® and CAHPS® performance.
The NCQA Health Equity Accreditation requires plans to establish a strong operational foundation to address health disparities. This includes capturing data to identify and address disparities, providing culturally appropriate services in multiple languages, and determining opportunities to address inequities and improve care. Receiving NCQA Health Equity Accreditation across all lines of business demonstrates Blue Shield's commitment to health equity, meeting members where they are, and continuously assessing opportunities to address inequities. And Blue Shield was acknowledged in 21 categories.
"This recognition reflects our unwavering commitment as a mission-driven nonprofit health plan to achieving health equity for all 6 million of our members," said Ravi Kavasery, M.D., chief medical officer at Blue Shield of California. "NCQA accreditation signifies we have the right organizational culture and operations to support what's needed to advance health equity, including collecting and using the data needed to address the unique health needs of our large, diverse membership."
Blue Shield's health equity initiatives are rooted in data to identify the populations and regions with the highest disparities in access to care and health outcomes. The health plan has created programs to address birth equity, youth mental health, preventive screenings, climate change, nutrition, and more. These programs are built in collaboration with community organizations to create new solutions, or enhance current approaches, with an added health equity lens and integrate member and community perspectives to ensure approaches and initiatives meet the needs of Blue Shield members.
"Receiving this honor from NCQA is a great acknowledgment of our commitment to provide affordable, quality health care for all Californians," said Jennifer Nuovo, M.D., chief medical officer of Blue Shield of California Promise Health Plan. "The Medi-Cal population is large, diverse, and includes some of the most vulnerable populations in our state. Health equity is part of everything we do to better serve our members."
While this is Blue Shield's first perfect score for health equity, it has been recognized for its health equity efforts for the last three years by NCQA for its Commercial lines of business.
About Blue Shield of CaliforniaBlue Shield of California strives to create a healthcare system worthy of its family and friends that is sustainably affordable. The health plan is a taxpaying, nonprofit, independent member of the Blue Shield Association with nearly 6 million members, over 7,500 employees and more than $25 billion in annual revenue. Founded in 1939 in San Francisco and now headquartered in Oakland, Blue Shield of California and its affiliates provide health, dental, vision, Medicaid and Medicare healthcare service plans in California. The company has contributed more than $60 million to the Blue Shield of California Foundation in the last three years to have an impact on California communities.
For more news about Blue Shield of California, please visit news.blueshieldca.com.
Or follow us on LinkedIn or Facebook.
About Blue Shield of California Promise Health PlanBlue Shield of California Promise Health Plan is a managed care organization, wholly owned by Blue Shield of California, offering Medi-Cal. It is led by healthcare professionals with a "members-first" philosophy and committed to building a quality network of providers and partnering with community organizations for more than 575,000 members across Los Angeles and San Diego counties. For more information about Blue Shield of California Promise Health Plan, please visit www.blueshieldca.com/promise. For more news about Blue Shield of California Promise Health Plan, please visit promisenews.blueshieldca.com. Or follow us on LinkedIn.
CONTACT:
Jonna ConstantineBlue Shield of California 510-607-2359media@blueshieldca.com
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/blue-shield-of-california-blue-shield-of-california-promise-health-plan-receive-national-recognition-for-addressing-health-disparities-302419163.html
SOURCE Blue Shield of California
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Special care changes needed as costs push patients away
High specialist medical costs cause almost two million Australians to delay or skip appointments, but a report suggests stripping public funding to doctors charging excessive fees could be part of the remedy. About 1.9 million Australians are delaying or skipping critical medical care due to exorbitant fees for specialist doctors, a report by public policy think tank the Grattan Institute has found. Some private specialist doctors charge patients two to three times more than the rate Medicare sets for those services, the report found. It said patients of one specialist forked out an average of $300 per year in 2023 - up 73 per cent since 2010. Average out-of-pocket costs for extreme-fee-charging specialists in 2023 reached $671 for psychiatry services and more than $350 for endocrinology, cardiology, paediatrics, immunology and neurology services. The high costs leave critical health care out of reach for millions, causing patients in poorer pockets of Australia to wait months or years for urgent appointments, and leading to missed diagnoses, avoidable pain and added pressure on hospitals. About four in 10 Australians visited a specialist in 2023/24. About two-thirds across all specialties are private appointments, with patients receiving a Medicare rebate and paying a gap fee. Grattan's Health Program director Peter Breadon said the system was broken from start to end. "Everywhere, from how the system is planned and how training is funded through to how we target public investment and integrate the system between primary care and specialist care, it all really needs a lot of change," he told AAP. Grattan's recommendations include scrapping Medicare subsidies to specialists who charge excessive fees and publicly naming them. "Hopefully it would discourage those specialists who are charging really unreasonable fees, but this is a problem that needs many solutions," Mr Breadon said. The report also recommends governments provide one million extra specialist appointment services every year in areas that receive the least care, a system in which GPs can get written advice from other specialists, modernise public specialist clinics, and allocate $160 million to expand specialist training for undersupplied specialties and rural training. Australian Medical Association President Danielle McMullen said public hospital underinvestment and lagging Medicare rebates made it harder for patients. "The risks of delaying medical care are that the health problem gets worse," she said, adding it also puts pressure on GPs and hospitals in public and private clinics. The doctors' association supports most of Grattan's recommendations, but said removing Medicare funding from specialists who charged excessive fees was not practical. As governments negotiate the National Health Reform agreement, Dr McMullen urged leaders to sort out longer-term funding for public hospitals and develop a health workforce data tracker to show where investment was needed. Federal Health Minister Mark Butler said private health insurers and specialists needed to do more to protect patients from exorbitant bills. He said the Albanese government would upgrade the Medical Costs Finder, which helps patients find the best value for specialist medical advice, and was committed to working with stakeholders to improve cost transparency.
Forbes
a day ago
- Forbes
Time For Medicare Advantage Leaders—Including Me—To Eat Our Own Cooking
Dr. Oz just turned 65 and became a Medicare beneficiary. Everyone who operates a Medicare plan ... More should be required to be one as well. In every industry, the best leaders live the experience of the customer. Car executives drive their own vehicles. Airline leaders occasionally fly coach. Restauranteurs eat from their own kitchen. But in healthcare—and specifically in Medicare Advantage (MA), which now serves more than 30 million Americans—the leaders designing these plans rarely, if ever, use them themselves. This disconnect breeds an empathy gap between decision-makers and the seniors whose lives and well-being depend on these products. It's time to close that gap. As Dr. Mehmet Oz turns 65 and qualifies for Medicare, he is in a unique position to lead the charge in fixing this blind spot. But I'm not letting myself off the hook either. As a current CEO of company that sells Medicare Advantage plans, I am proposing a standard that would apply to me and every other leader in this space: if you run a Medicare Advantage plan—or sit on its executive team that runs these plans—you should be required to enroll in that plan. No carve-outs. No executive-only exemptions. No platinum side-door coverage. For those of us under 65, the proposal would also require a structural change: expanding Medicare eligibility to allow MA plan executives early, voluntary enrollment in their own plans. We should not be allowed to claim ignorance or detachment simply because of our age. I want to be clear: if such an early-enrollment window existed, I would enroll myself. I should have to live under the same benefit design, customer service, and network constraints as every other member. Leaders like me—and my peers across the industry—must eat our own cooking.A Modest But Necessary Reform The proposal is simple but powerful: 1. All managed care CEOs and executive teams must enroll in their own MA plan. 2. Congress and CMS should create a new category of Medicare eligibility that allows executives under 65 to voluntarily enroll in their own MA plans in a 'test user' capacity. This is the only way for leadership to truly understand the member experience. 3. No waivers, no special coverage allowances. The goal is to force leadership to live the true plan reality: the prior authorizations, the formularies, the network restrictions, the call centers, the appeals It Matters—for Me, and for the Industry I don't make this proposal lightly—because it would apply to me, too. If this became law or industry standard tomorrow, I would sign up. And I believe most honest leaders would welcome the clarity and accountability it would bring. Here's why it matters:- Operational Truth: You only truly understand the friction points—customer service delays, billing errors, prescription denials—if you live them yourself.- Accountability: Plan leaders would no longer tolerate broken systems they themselves have to endure.- Culture Change: A company where the C-suite shares the same risks and frustrations as members cannot help but become more consumer-focused.- Public Trust: Medicare Advantage is under increasing scrutiny from policymakers and the public. This move would send a clear, ethical signal: we stand behind what we sell.- Policy Innovation: The best ideas for simplifying prior authorization, improving networks, and reducing out-of-pocket costs would come not from distant consultants—but from firsthand More 'Not For Me' Products Too much of healthcare is designed by people who never have to use it. Too many decisions are made in corporate conference rooms far removed from the lived experience of real patients. If Medicare Advantage is the future of healthcare for seniors—as so many believe—its architects must also live that future. That includes Dr. Oz. That includes every MA CEO. And that includes me. It's time for all of us to eat our own cooking.
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Twin federal proposals threaten provider taxes, key source of Medicaid funding for states
Republican efforts to restrict taxes on hospitals, health plans, and other providers that states use to help fund their Medicaid programs could strip them of tens of billions of dollars. The move could shrink access to health care for some of the nation's poorest and most vulnerable people, warn analysts, patient advocates, and Democratic political leaders. No state has more to lose than California, whose Medicaid program, called Medi-Cal, covers nearly 15 million residents with low incomes and disabilities. That's twice as many as New York and three times as many as Texas. A proposed rule by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, echoed in the Republicans' House reconciliation bill, could significantly curtail the federal dollars many states draw in matching funds from what are known as provider taxes. Although it's unclear how much states could lose, the revenue up for grabs is big. For instance, California has netted an estimated $8.8 billion this fiscal year from its tax on managed care plans and took in about $5.9 billion last year from hospitals. California Democrats are already facing a $12 billion deficit, and they have drawn political fire for scaling back some key health care policies, including full Medi-Cal coverage for immigrants without permanent legal status. And a loss of provider tax revenue could add billions to the current deficit, forcing state lawmakers to make even more unpopular cuts to Medi-Cal benefits. 'If Republicans move this extreme MAGA proposal forward, millions will lose coverage, hospitals will close, and safety nets could collapse under the weight,' Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said in a statement, referring to President Donald Trump's 'Make America Great Again' movement. The proposals are also a threat to Proposition 35, a ballot initiative California voters approved last November to make permanent the tax on managed care organizations, or MCOs, and dedicate some of its proceeds to raise the pay of doctors and other providers who treat Medi-Cal patients. All states except Alaska have at least one provider tax on managed care plans, hospitals, nursing homes, emergency ground transportation, or other types of health care businesses. The federal government spends billions of dollars a year matching these taxes, which generally lead to more money for providers, helping them balance lower Medicaid reimbursement rates while allowing states to protect against economic downturns and budget constraints. New York, Massachusetts, and Michigan would also be among the states hit hard by Republicans' drive to scale back provider taxes, which allow states to boost their share of Medicaid spending to receive increased federal Medicaid funds. In a May 12 statement announcing its proposed rule, CMS described a 'loophole' as 'money laundering,' and said California had financed coverage for over 1.6 million 'illegal immigrants' with the proceeds from its MCO tax. CMS said its proposal would save more than $30 billion over five years. 'This proposed rule stops the shell game and ensures federal Medicaid dollars go where they're needed most — to pay for health care for vulnerable Americans who rely on this program, not to plug state budget holes or bankroll benefits for noncitizens,' Mehmet Oz, the CMS administrator, said in the statement. Medicaid allows coverage for noncitizens who are legally present and have been in the country for at least five years. And California uses state money to pay for almost all of the Medi-Cal coverage for immigrants who are not in the country legally. California, New York, Michigan, and Massachusetts together account for more than 95% of the 'federal taxpayer losses' from the loophole in provider taxes, CMS said. But nearly every state would feel some impact, especially under the provisions in the reconciliation bill, which are more restrictive than the CMS proposal. None of it is a done deal. The CMS proposal, published May 15, has not been adopted yet, and the reconciliation bill is likely to be altered significantly in the Senate. But the restrictions being contemplated would be far-reaching. A report by Michigan's Department of Health and Human Services, ordered by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, found that a reduction of revenue from the state's hospital tax could 'destabilize hospital finances, particularly in rural and safety-net facilities, and increase the risk of service cuts or closures.' Losing revenue from the state's MCO tax 'would likely require substantial cuts, tax increases, or reductions in coverage and access to care,' it said. CMS declined to respond to questions about its proposed rule. The Republicans' House-passed reconciliation bill, though not the CMS proposal, also prohibits any new provider taxes or increases to existing ones. The American Hospital Association, which represents nearly 5,000 hospitals and health systems nationwide, said the proposed moratorium on new or increased provider taxes could force states 'to make significant cuts to Medicaid to balance their budgets, including reducing eligibility, eliminating or limiting benefits, and reducing already low payment rates for providers.' Because provider taxes draw matching federal dollars, Washington has a say in how they are implemented. And the Republicans who run the federal government are looking to spend far fewer of those dollars. In California, the insurers that pay the MCO tax are reimbursed for the portion levied on their Medi-Cal enrollment. That helps explain why the tax rate on Medi-Cal enrollment is sharply higher than on commercial enrollment. Over 99% of the tax money the insurers pay comes from their Medi-Cal business, which means most of the state's insurers get back almost all the tax they pay. That imbalance, which CMS describes as a loophole, is one of the main things Republicans are trying to change. If either the CMS rule or the corresponding provisions in the House reconciliation bill were enacted, states would be required to levy provider taxes equally on Medicaid and commercial business to draw federal dollars. California would likely be unable to raise the commercial rates to the level of the Medi-Cal ones, because state law constrains the legislature's ability to do so. The only way to comply with the rule would be to lower the tax rate on Medi-Cal enrollment, which would sharply reduce revenue. CMS has warned California and other states for years, including under the Biden administration, that it was considering significant changes to MCO and other provider taxes. Those warnings were never realized. But the risk may be greater this time, some observers say, because the proposed changes are echoed in the House-passed reconciliation bill and intertwined with a broader Republican strategy — and set of proposals — to cut Medicaid spending by close to $800 billion. 'All of these proposals move in the same direction: fewer people enrolled, less generous Medicaid programs over time,' said Edwin Park, a research professor at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy. California's MCO tax is expected to net California $13.9 billion over the next two fiscal years, according to January estimates. The state's hospital tax is expected to bring in an estimated $9 billion this year, up sharply from last year, according to the Department of Health Care Services, which runs Medi-Cal. Losing a significant slice of that revenue on top of other Medicaid cuts in the House reconciliation bill 'all adds up to be potentially a super serious impact on Medi-Cal and the California state budget overall,' said Kayla Kitson, a senior policy fellow at the California Budget & Policy Center. And it's not only California that will feel the pain. 'All states are going to be hurt by this," Park said. Wolfson writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. Sign up for our Wide Shot newsletter to get the latest entertainment business news, analysis and insights. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
