Mentor Research Institute

Healthy Contracts Legislation; Measurement & Value-Based Payment Contracting: Online Screening & Outcome Measurement Software

503 227-2027

Unfair Financial Risks in Healthcare: Challenges for Providers in Public and Private Contracts

A Discussion Paper


Unfair financial risk to providers occurs when healthcare payment models or contracts expose providers to excessive responsibility without appropriate safeguards, compensation, or control. This is particularly evident in value-based care models, capitated agreements, risk-sharing arrangements, and administrative burdens. Such risks can threaten the financial viability of providers and negatively impact patient care. Below is an expanded discussion on the factors contributing to unfair financial risks and potential ways to address them.

Unfair financial risks arise when providers are held accountable for costs or outcomes they cannot control, especially under capitation models, inadequate risk adjustment, and complex administrative requirements. If left unchecked, these risks threaten the sustainability of healthcare providers and can reduce access to care. To ensure a balanced system, fair risk-sharing mechanisms, simplified administrative requirements, and accurate risk adjustment models are essential. These steps will help align incentives between payers and providers, fostering a sustainable healthcare environment that prioritizes both financial stability and patient outcomes.

Value-Based Payment Models and Risk-Sharing Agreements

Value-based care encourages providers to improve patient outcomes while lowering costs by shifting financial risks from payers to providers. In arrangements like shared savings programs or bundled payments, providers are rewarded for meeting targets but may incur losses if outcomes or costs fall short. However, these models expose providers to risks they cannot fully control, such as patient non-compliance or social factors that affect health outcomes. For instance, a provider may be penalized even if a patient with chronic conditions refuses to adhere to prescribed treatment plans.​

Capitated Models and Fixed Payments

Capitated models involve paying providers a set amount per patient, regardless of the actual care required. While this encourages cost-saving behaviors, it can be financially damaging if payments do not reflect the needs of high-risk or complex patients. Providers who manage patients with chronic illnesses or behavioral health issues often face significant financial strain under capitation if their costs exceed the predetermined payments. This is particularly challenging for small or independent practices that lack the financial reserves to absorb losses​

Inadequate Risk Adjustment Mechanisms

Risk adjustment is meant to ensure payments reflect patient complexity, but many models fail to account for the true costs of managing high-risk populations. When payment structures do not adequately adjust for patient acuity, providers receive insufficient compensation for services, placing them at a financial disadvantage. For example, a mental health provider managing patients with severe psychiatric disorders may receive the same payment as one serving low-risk patients, despite the higher cost and intensity of care required​.

Administrative and Regulatory Burdens

Healthcare providers face additional financial risks from complex documentation requirements, audits, and compliance mandates. These burdens are particularly detrimental to small practices that must dedicate significant resources to administrative tasks. Health plans often require extensive reporting without providing adequate compensation, increasing operational costs and diverting attention from patient care. This can lead to burnout and reduced efficiency, further exacerbating financial risks​,

Retroactive Denials and Clawbacks

Providers also face financial uncertainty due to clawbacks and retroactive denials. Clawbacks occur when health plans recoup payments for services already provided, often citing documentation errors or patient ineligibility. Retroactive denials revoke coverage after treatment, leaving providers to absorb the full cost of care. These practices create unpredictable revenue streams and can jeopardize the financial stability of practices, particularly those operating on tight margins​.

Impact on Provider Behavior

Unfair financial risks not only threaten the sustainability of healthcare practices but also impact clinical decision-making. Providers under financial pressure may limit services, avoid high-risk patients, or prioritize financial considerations over patient care, leading to ethical dilemmas. Some may even choose to exit value-based contracts or refuse participation in certain health plans, limiting access to care for patients who need it most.​

Addressing Unfair Financial Risks

Mitigating unfair financial risks requires collaborative efforts among health plans, regulators, and providers. Implementing risk corridors or stop-loss insurance can help limit provider losses, while more accurate risk adjustment models would ensure fairer compensation. Payment models could also combine capitation with fee-for-service elements to balance financial risk and reward. Additionally, streamlining administrative processes and reducing documentation burdens would allow providers to focus more on patient care, improving both efficiency and outcomes​


Sources used in the discussion for further reference:

  1. Oregon Whistleblower Protections Overview:
    https://www.whistleblowerprotectionact.com/oregon-whistleblower-protections

  2. Oregon Health Authority: Reporting Fraud and Misconduct:
    https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PIAU/pages/report-fraud.aspx

  3. Vigilant Blog on Internal Complaints and Oregon Whistleblower Protections:
    https://www.vigilant.org/blog/internal-complaints-count-as-whistleblowing-under-oregon-law

  4. FindLaw: Overview of Oregon Whistleblower Laws:
    https://www.findlaw.com/state/oregon-law/oregon-whistleblower-laws.html

  5. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on State False Claims Act Reviews:
    https://oig.hhs.gov/fraud/state-false-claims-act-reviews


DISCLAIMER and PURPOSE: This discussion document is intended for training, education, and or research purposes only. The information contained herein is based on the data and perspectives available at the time of writing. It is subject to revision as new information and viewpoints emerge.

For more information see: https://www.mentorresearch.org/disclaimer-and-purpose

Key words: Supervisor education, Ethics, COVID Office Air Treatment, Mental Health, Psychotherapy, Counseling, Patient Reported Outcome Measures,