Co-op was a bold move; why didn’t it work?

By Megan Flaviano, Henderson

Thursday, Oct. 1, 2015 | 2 a.m.

I would first like to appreciate the relatively more professional tone of Jackie Valley’s piece in comparison to other reports of the Nevada Health Co-Op closing. It offered a dignified salute to a bold public health move. Nevada embraced the option of running a health insurance exchange, and although it wasn’t a mandatory component of the Affordable Care Act, this decision demonstrated a commitment to expanding health services to locals. It is disheartening to think of the people left uninsured at the year’s end.

Despite “challenging market conditions,” it would be interesting to know why the co-op failed in terms of risk-sharing. For instance, Nevada’s age distribution is largely 50-plus. Because the risk of poor health status increases with age, is our larger “gray” population, specifically those who seek coverage through state’s marketplace, associated with higher costs of upkeep?

However, I am definitely not proposing exclusion of less-than-“ideal” enrollees.

Instead, consideration of an aging population and other Nevada-specific demographic determinants of health should guide further steps to eventually provide affordable, quality coverage for all uninsured people and better balance relationships with provider networks. Or at least, one local can only hope.