Friday, October 31, 2008

I might just be a moron

As I go through life, I continue to find more evidence that I am simply not as smart as I think I am. Or, at least not as smart as I used to be. The latest example:

This post was going to have a more benign title of something like "benefits enrollment" since I didn't really have anything more creative to use in an analysis of our employer healthcare options. But I'll go ahead and do that post before getting my possible idiocy.

Actually, I'm not sure that's possible, since the premise of that analysis is based entirely on the aforementioned lack of intelligence.

This is the deal: We've always used Joanne's health coverage from Motorola/Freescale rather than what I could get from ASU. This was largely based on the direct cost of the plan to us--the monthly premium was cheaper on her plan for the two of us, than it was for each of us individually on our own plans. Or at least that's what I recall to be the case.

We sat down tonight to explore shifting from a no deductible/no copay coverage to a high deductible/small copay coverage, or something in the middle. This is the pricing of Freescale's options (this isn't quite comprehensive--I deleted options I knew we wouldn't consider):


Last year we had essentially the max coverage. I considered for a brief time reducing that, but in the calculation tools, child birth made it a moot point. I also pondered shifting it after Owen was born as I though the middle deductible plan was a sweet spot, but wasn't sure how a new deductible would work, so I stuck with the plan (0 deductible/90%/no copays), with the intention of doing a better analysis for 2009, which would be made easier with better knowledge/expectations of the medical needs of a child.

So I tested various expected service needs: primary visits, specialist visits, immunizations, lab work, general checkups, ER visits, out patient surgery, the Hale family plan, etc. In most scenarios, the high deductible plan was the winner. When it lost, it was because of extended stay hospital visits, but even then it wasn't that much. The main reason was because with the copay option, that covered all general office visits, so the deductible did not apply. But with a 0 deductible/no copay option, it goes straight to coinsurance, which isn't always cheaper than the copay.

We settled on the $1500 deductible/80% coinsurance/$10-$50 copay plan since it seemed to offer the highest liklihood of being the cheapest, not only for monthly deductions ($15/month!) but for overall annual medical expenses. In most of the models we tested, we never did max out the deductible, since so much ended up being covered by the copay. We also found that the lower coinsurance was likely to be better, since we'd have to have nearly $4000 in bills beyond the deductible to have it cost more. Admittedly, that is certainly possible--one extended stay in the hospital would be enough. But much like our other insurance policies, we can afford a certain amount of risk because we have the resources to self insure to an extent. The likelihood is that we are more likely to save $300 than spend an extra $500, and if the latter happens, well, we can deal with that.

After we got the medical portion done, we started looking at vision and dental and whether it was time to add Owen to both. That's when I got out my ASU benefits booklet for a point of comparison to the family costs of Freescale's vision/dental benefits. I then looked at the costs of the medical coverage. Or more specifically the coverages of the available plans.

ASU/State of Arizona offers an HMO plan, 2 EPO plans and a PPO plan. The PPO plan is a lot more than Freescale's (also a PPO) best coverage. The HMO is 30% more. The EPO plans are about the same. But the coverages! Everything is covered! There's a small copay ($10-20), but outside of that, nada!

No deductible, no coinsurance, no nothing.

I'm looking at it and thinking to myself "wait, this isn't what I remember". I recall the plan all costing significantly more than Freescale's options. In that regard, the PPO held true, but the EPO? That seems like a good deal at $150/month for a family, with a token amount out of pocket on top of that. The only thing I can think of is that I rejected the EPO option long ago because there is no out-of-network benefit. But don't you think it would have been smart to look into the extensiveness of the network? Or way the liklihood of needing to go outside of the network? I did a brief search this evening and our pediatrician, Joanne's OB/GYN and Banner Desert and Chandler Regional are all in network.

As the subject says, I might just be a moron.

The only other point in my defense is that ASU's enrollment period is 6 weeks before Freescale's, so a direct comarison isn't possible. But you'd think with 4 years of practice/having to make these elections, I would have noticed that ASU's benefits deserved much more scrutiny than I ever game them.

On a tangetial point: If we had family coverage through ASU, that would be an $1100/month benefit Im not receving. Just at the individual level, it is $461/month. It'd be nice if there was some way to get that $5000-$13,00 that ASU/State of Arizona is willing to spend on me to, you know, just give it to me.

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Catching a Falling Knife

Tuesday was the day I finally rebalanced our investment accounts.

Wednesday I felt the sting of catching the blade and not the handle. Tis but a flesh would, right?

--------

This is my first greater-that-just-a-market-correction experience--it's supposed to be good for us, right? We're still accumulating, so the lower prices are good. But there's enough negativity (which according the Efficient Market Hypothesis, is supposed to be priced into the market) to still be unnerving. During market peaks/bubbles, the thought is that "this time it's different". That exists at the bottom too. What if things don't recover? That 50% fall requires a 100% increase just to get back where you started. I guess we're not at the "Death of Equities" stage yet, but it might be a long slog back to being ahead.

---------

Our allocation plan is 45% US, 30% International, 20% Bonds/Fixed and 5% real estate. The market plummet was one reason to rebalance. The other was that I had recently vested at work. This resulted in the 5 years of employer matching being added into my 401a. Not knowing exactly when it was being deposited (October 15), or how much (considerably more than in my personally directed portion), I directed it to a money market in the account and planned on redirecting it fairly quickly.

There are multiple school of thought on rebalancing:
  • One is that it's not that big of a deal--the gains from buying low/selling high is diminished by the loss of "momentum" in classes that are highly volatile (think selling out of real estate or emerging markets in 2005, missing out on a year plus of continued high growth).
  • Another is the annual/set schedule rebalance--fixed, pre-determined times to rebalance, generally a year or more apart.
  • Another is when asset classes get outside of a pre-determined range, it is time to rebalance, say +/- 5% from a large target.
The last was our primary justification to say we're not market timing: our bond/fixed allocation was approaching 40%, twice what it's supposed to be, so we bought. Where the market timing comes in, though, is the day to actually do it. I passed on Monday since the market was up. I went and transferred assets on Tuesday because it was down. It just happened to continue doing down on Wednesday.

Unlucky.

Good think I didn't do all the rebalancing, but it was still about 75% of it.

Wednesday, October 8, 2008

Helmet time

Pretty much from birth, Owen preferred looking to the right when laying down. He developed a small flat spot behind his right ear. No matter how much we altered his position in his rocker, or propped up the shoulder when sleeping, he seemed to find that spot. Still, his head was soft enough to have some hope that it would correct.

We had him in our room for his first 3 months in a bassinet and pack-n-play. He finally moved into his room and his crib in July. I got what is generally considered one of the very best mattresses, the Colgate Classica I, a very firm mattress that is considered high quality. My mother noted how firm it was when we got it--this is what's recommended though.

Within a week it seemed, Owen developed another, larger flat spot, also on the right side of his head. We again made efforts to get him to look left when laying down, and it would work for a little bit, but eventually he would find the spot, so it never self corrected. We knew what was coming next--the helmet. At our last check up in September, we were told, yes, we should visit a specialist. We were referred to Cranial Technologies (in network provider), and in looking at their before and after photos, I thought to myself, "Yep, that's Owen's head."

After the initial consultation and fitting, Owen got his helmet today:



He seems to be OK with it. The biggest change (after having it for 7 hours) is we can't see his forehead, which is key in a lot of the faces he makes. Now when he lifts his eyebrows, his forehead scrunches up and he just looks a little pissed off. Maybe he is.

As I mentioned before, Cranial Tech is covered by our insurance, which means an out-of-pocket cost for us of $200 (10% of the $2000 contracted rate). However, at the consultation, we were told they have had some issues in Aetna (our provider) accepting the claim. If they didn't, we're on the hook for the full amount ($3600)--we don't even get the contracted rate. We were told we could file a determination, but Aetna is good about taking the full 30 days to give you an answer. Since the longer one waits for the helmet, the longer it has to be worn, we opted to skip the determination since we felt like we were going to get it anyway to fix his head.

In retrospect, I do wonder how firm a mattress needs to be. The bassinet feature on a pack and play to any crib mattress will be quite different. Where the PNP can mold to the baby a bit more (hammock style), the crib mattress stays flat. But if a baby is sleeping on its back, does the mattress really need to be super firm? The softness/plushness, I surmise, is primarily a factor if they are side or stomach sleeper. If they're on their back, though, can't they have a little cushion, to get a little more conforming? Maybe the mattress was only a small factor. Maybe Owen just has a soft head because he was early. Or maybe we didn't do something we didn't know we should be doing.

But Owen will survive. After all, there's nothing wrong with having a helmet at this time of the year. He's just ready for some football!

P.S. If anyone has any small NY Giants stickers, please send them our way.
Posted by Picasa