05/18/2021 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

claims, but noted it would be an additional service to be administered and managed. Director Boyll concluded that staff was unable to provide any assurances that overall plan costs would be reduced by the implementation of a clinic; however, there would be perceived value from the members who utilized the clinic. She indicated that if the Board determined it was in the best interest of the plan and its covered members, staff would bring back an agenda item to recommend the Board engage the services of Lockton Companies Clinic Consulting Services in the amount of $75,000. The Chairman called a recess at 11:00 a.m., and reconvened the meeting at 11:10 a.m., with all members present. Commissioner Moss referred to the percentage of plan members that lived within the 10 mile radius of the 32960 zip code and she inquired on the number of walk -in -clinics within that 10 miles radius. She questioned the origin of the employee health clinic and asked if it was something the employees had requested. Director Boyll did not have information on the number of walk -in -clinics within the 10 mile radius and confirmed that some employees had come forward and made reference to other employers with health clinics. She indicated that the employee group had not been surveyed as a whole in regard to an employee health clinic. Commissioner Moss felt it was important to survey the employees and mentioned incorporating a wellness program apart from establishing a clinic. Vice Chairman O'Bryan sought and received clarification from Director Boyll and Mr. Meredith on the StopLoss Premiums and the analysis that Lockton used to predict the number of high cost claimants. He was open to further exploration of an employee health clinic, but expressed concern with under -utilization. County Administrator Brown further discussed that everyone under the plan had access to a once -a -year wellness visit at no cost. Chairman Flescher was very interested in an employee health clinic for patient care, and he emphasized that the County needed to consider the reduction of costs through other options or plans. He felt it was critical to survey the employees for their interest in an employee health clinic. Commissioner Earman was interested in looking at options to keep the Employee Health Plan costs down and agreed that the County needed to take a further look into an employee health clinic. He added that an employee health clinic could be more than a health advocate for the employees, such as the first step in the Worker's Compensation process, and could be utilized for drug testing or physicals if required by the County. He also wanted to look at partnering with other agencies within the County.