The Fund supports several networks of state health policymakers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The Fund identifies and shares policy ideas and analysis on topics important to state health policymakers, particularly on issues related to state leadership, primary care, aging, and health care costs.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest blogs from our thought leaders, including Fund President Christopher F. Koller.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is is a nonpartisan foundation focused on improving the health of communities and entire populations.
January 24, 2020
Sustainable Health Care Costs Health Care Consolidation
Back to The Milbank Blog
The recent settlement of the antitrust lawsuits against the Sutter Health System in California is a watershed moment in the evolution of US health care markets and public policy. The settlement’s recognition of the anti-competitive practices that health systems have used to gain market power and raise prices, as well as the size of the settlement’s financial penalties and its prohibitions on future contracting practices, have the potential to reset US health care.
Over the last decade, hospital prices in the US have risen by double digits, driving a significant portion of the overall US healthcare cost growth, but there’s been no corresponding increase in quality or outcomes. In any other industry, as products mature and suppliers grow, prices come down and value improves. But US health care is plagued with market dysfunction and monopolistic hospital consolidation that burdens employers, their employees, and state governments. Through the Sutter lawsuits, for the first time, state policy leaders, large employers, and unions joined forces to say enough—and prevailed.
In 2014, the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) & Employers Benefit Trust brought a class action lawsuit against Sutter Health and its affiliates, alleging antitrust violations and anti-competitive market actions, resulting in self-funded payors being overcharged for general acute care hospital services. Four years later, the California Attorney General joined the lawsuit. The plaintiffs accused Sutter of using anti-competitive contract terms that increased their market power, including:
Furthermore, the plaintiffs accused Sutter of using very high out-of-network prices to force health plans to include Sutter in their provider networks. The result was higher prices paid to Sutter. A recent University of California, Berkeley report found that the average in-network hospital inpatient procedure prices are 70 percent higher in Northern California (where Sutter operates) than in Southern California.
In December 2019, Sutter Health and the plaintiffs filed a proposed settlement under which Sutter agreed to pay $575 million in damages. Perhaps more significantly, Sutter is required to comply with the following terms in contracts:
Why are the new rules imposed by the settlement so important? Not only do they force Sutter to compete fairly, they also send a strong message to other health systems in California and throughout the country that it’s time to compete based on cost, quality, and patient experience.
While the settlement creates an opportunity to make health care more affordable in every state, it will require a multisector response. For example:
The first step in changing the market dynamic in other states is to make sure all stakeholders understand the terms and implications of the Sutter settlement. Then, in each market, local public, employer, and health care leaders will need to customize their approach based on the unique market characteristics and political environment.
The multistakeholder group that brought about the Sutter settlement, including the Pacific Business Group on Health, has accrued years of experience, and we want to share lessons to scale this success. But change will only occur in other states if policymakers, purchasers, and investors step up—and if providers move away from business models based on accruing and using economic power and embrace healthy competition and value-based delivery models.
Elizabeth Mitchell is the president and CEO of the Pacific Business Group on Health
Aug 5, 2021
Mar 31, 2021
Mar 29, 2021
Get the Latest from the Milbank Memorial Fund
An endowed operating foundation that engages in nonpartisan analysis, collaboration, and communication, with an emphasis on state health policy.