Claims News Service, Feb. 13, 2008 —
The Workers Compensation Research Institute (WCRI), an independent,
not-for-profit research organization that provides information about
public policy issues involving workers' compensation systems, has
released the eighth edition of its CompScope report. In this
edition, two main questions are examined: How does the performance
of a state system compare with that of other states and how is
workers’ compensation system performance changing over time?
The states included in this edition are Arkansas, California,
Florida, Illinois, Indiana, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts,
Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Texas,
and Wisconsin, which WCRI says represent more than
50 percent of the nation’s workers’
compensation benefit payments. T
he
report can help policymakers and others benchmark a state
’s
system performance or a company’s workers’ compensation program.
They said the benchmarks they provide also offer a
n excellent baseline for
tracking the effectiveness of policy changes and identifying
important trends.
Below are a few of the findings and conclusions reached, which used
claims filed between 2000 and 2005.
Overall costs per claim in Massachusetts were typical among the 14
study states. When examining changes over time, however, the study
found that costs per claim grew rapidly in four out of five study
years, including a nearly 10 percent increase in the most recent
year (2005 claims evaluated in mid 2006). This recent growth was
driven by rapid increases in medical costs per claim (nearly 11
percent); indemnity benefits per claim with more than seven days of
lost time (10 percent increase); and the cost of delivering medical
and indemnity benefits to injured workers (nine
percent increase).
Injured workers received their first indemnity payments faster in
Wisconsin than in most other study states. Fifty-three percent of
injured workers in Wisconsin were issued their first checks within
21 days of injury, compared to the 14-state median of 41 percent.
Faster payments may have been influenced by the state agency’s
efforts to monitor timely payments and to provide payors
with feedback about
their performance.
Two offsetting factors were at work in Maryland, which largely
explained why the overall costs per claim in Maryland were typical
of the states in the study. Medical costs per claim with more than
seven days of lost time in Maryland were among the lowest of the
study states—33 percent lower than the 14-state median. However, the
state had a higher proportion of claims that received income
benefits (claims with more than seven days of lost time)—8
percentage points higher than the 14-state median of 21 percent.
The average cost per claim of delivering medical and income benefits
to injured workers in Pennsylvania was 22 percent higher than the
typical study state for 2003 claims with more than seven days of
lost time (evaluated in mid 2006), driven mainly by higher
litigation expenses. Although Pennsylvania was not among the most
litigious states in the study, defense attorney payments were 34
percent higher than the 14-state median. These higher payments may
indicate that more hours of billable time were required to resolve
cases in Pennsylvania, suggesting that the state has a somewhat more
expensive and complex dispute resolution process.
CompScope™
Benchmarks: Multistate
Comparisons, 8th Edition.
Carol A. Telles , Rui
Yang, Evelina
Radeva
, Ramona P. Tanabe. January 2008.
WC-08-12.