Quality Disclosure and Medicare Advantage Star Ratings
Ian McCarthy | Emory University
Outline for Today
Quality Disclosure in Economics
Background on MA Star Ratings
Quality
Disclosure
and Plan Choice
Quality Disclosure
Hidden quality
Many goods have unobserved quality (e.g., used cars, hospitals, schools, mutual funds)
Asymmetric information implies potential
adverse selection
and market shrinkage
Quality disclosure tools: ratings, report cards, warranties, online reviews, certifications
Lemons logic
Sellers know quality; buyers only know the distribution of quality
Buyers pay price based on expected quality of sellers who accept a given price
With lower prices, high-quality sellers exit, expected quality falls, prices decline further
High-quality firms cannot sufficiently relay information on quality, so only low-quality “lemons” may remain
Voluntary disclosure and “unraveling”
Assume each seller can
credibly
disclose their own quality at low cost
If a good-quality seller stays silent, buyers suspect they’re like the
worst
silent type
Slightly better types want to separate by disclosing
Result: almost all types disclose;
silence = bad news
Why full unraveling may fail
Disclosure is costly (data collection, audits, risk adjustment)
Information is noisy or complex; buyers may not understand it
Quality is multi-dimensional; firms highlight strong metrics, hide weak ones
Outcome:
partial disclosure
and strategic framing instead of full unraveling
Evidence from report cards
Cardiac surgery and hospital report cards:
Higher-rated providers often gain volume but may avoid sicker patients or focus on scored outcomes
Restaurant hygiene grades:
Public scores push restaurants to improve measured cleanliness and reduce violations
Overall: disclosure changes both
demand
(patient choice) and
supply
(quality effort and selection)
Policy lessons
Well-designed disclosure can:
Reduce adverse selection and reward high quality
Strengthen competition on performance, not just price or brand
Poorly designed disclosure can:
Encourage cream-skimming and metric gaming
Key design choices: which outcomes, how risk-adjusted, and how information is presented to users
Medicare Advantage Quality Ratings
Overview
Initial MA Star Ratings (2007)
Overall rating introduced in 2009
Complicated formula…
key point:
ratings from several domains are averaged and then rounded
More details available
here
Role of Quality Ratings
Potentially affect plan choice
Quality bonus program in 2012
Demonstration program at first (2012 through 2015)
ACA quality bonus payments begin 2015
Details of QBP
Eligible plans may receive two bonuses:
Benchmark bonus: Increased benchmark payment of up to 5%
Rebate bonus: Share of bid-benchmark differential going back to insurer (from 50% up to 70%)
Applied to plans with 3-stars and above from 2012-2015 (demonstration period)
Applied to plans with 4-stars and above beginning 2015
Some good primers
KFF Bonus Payment Illustration
2024 Star Ratings and Bonus Payments
Quality Ratings and Plan Choice
Quality Ratings as Information Disclosure
Health insurance is a complicated product with many dimensions
Strong empirical evidence of “bad” choices in health insurance
Quality disclosure might help consumers make better choices
Disclosure versus Quality
We are interested in the effects of
disclosure
, not just quality ratings themselves
Correlation between ratings and enrollments will combine the disclosure effect as well as the “higher quality” effect
Our RD design will exploit differential reporting but for otherwise very similiar underlying quality