Search This Blog

Saturday, April 4, 2026

CMS finalizes Medicare Advantage star ratings overhaul, sending billions of dollars more to insurers

 The Trump administration has finalized a rule overhauling the Medicare Advantage star ratings system that’s expected to significantly boost insurers’ ratings — and the reimbursement that’s attached.

On Thursday, the CMS finalized a rule cutting measures that factor into the MA quality ratings and rolling back health equity initiatives that will funnel billions of dollars more to MA insurers.

Specifically, regulators eliminated 11 star ratings metrics measuring administrative processes on which plans perform similarly. The agency is also not implementing a new health equity award put in place by the Biden administration that was set to kick in next year, called the “health equity index.”

Instead, the CMS reinstated a bonus system that raises payments to payers with consistently high ratings.

The CMS argued that the changes refocus star ratings around clinical outcomes, instead of a system that prioritizes administrative functions that are similar between plans and don’t help beneficiaries shop for coverage.

We are fundamentally shifting our approach to quality,” Medicare Director Chris Klomp said in a statement. “This isn’t just about adjusting measures; it’s about redefining success. We are moving away from a system that incentivizes administrative box-checking and are instead laser-focused on what truly matters: the clinical outcomes and health of our beneficiaries.”

However, the rule is also expected to increase star ratings for insurers, inflating the cost burden of MA at a time when regulators and legislators are increasingly alarmed about overpayments in the privatized Medicare program — including bonus payments based on stars.

The star ratings changes are expected to cost taxpayers more than $18 billion over the next decade, according to an analysis in the final rule. The CMS previously estimated the changes would cost about $13 billion when the rule was proposed in November.

The star ratings system grades MA plans on a scale from 1 to 5 based on a complex calculation of dozens of metrics measuring outcomes, patient experience and more. As part of the Trump administration’s focus on paring back what it views as overly onerous industry regulations, officials in the CMS proposed in November making the ratings simpler.

The goal was applauded by insurers eyeing the potential of higher scores, after stars fell coming out of the coronavirus pandemic, sparking a raft of lawsuits from the industry.

The metrics canceled by the CMS on Tuesday include one zeroing in on the performance of insurer’s call centers — the issue at the center of multiple suits from insurers, including MA giants UnitedHealthcare and Humana. Measures related to appeals and provider complaints were also cut.

The CMS had planned to nix a metric for eye exams for diabetic patients, but decided to keep it in after plans complained. Most of the changes take effect in the 2027 measurement period, and will inform star ratings in 2029.

MA groups applauded the final rule, saying they approved of changes to make star ratings simpler and more oriented towards clinical quality.

The Alliance of Community Health Plans, which represents nonprofit insurers, said it “strongly” supported CMS’ decision to eliminate the health equity index and restore the previous reward factor, noting it would better support rural communities.

Billions of dollars more in higher Medicare spending on star ratings bonuses is relatively nominal at the payer level, and when compared to the overall MA program — MA is expected to cost taxpayers more than $750 billion in 2028.

How much the rule benefits a plan also depends on their specific situation.

Beyond the impact on Medicare spending, “there may be effects on supplemental benefits, premiums, and plan profits. These impacts will likely vary significantly from plan to plan (or contract to contract) based on the business strategies and the competitive landscape for each plan and contract,” regulators wrote in the final rule.

But the rule is a boon nonetheless, especially for plans facing shrinking profit margins from a combination of stagnating government reimbursement and rising spending on members’ care. MA growth has slowed as major payers exit underperforming markets and trim benefits in a bid to resuscitate profits, though MA still covers 35 million seniors, more than half of all Medicare beneficiaries.

MA plans in particular are waiting anxiously for the CMS to finalize MA payment for 2027, and are crossing their fingers that final rates will be more generous than the flat update proposed earlier this year.

Regulators have until this coming Monday to publish the rate announcement.

The final rule also undoes key health equity changes to the MA program enacted by the Biden administration, as the Trump administration continues to target diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

MA plans’ quality improvement programs will no longer have to include activities designed to reduce health disparities, while their utilization management committees won’t have to include a health equity expert member, conduct annual health equity analyses or publicly post the result of those reviews, according to a fact sheet on the rule.

The CMS also finalized clarifications around MA plans’ supplemental benefits, which go above and beyond what can be provided in traditional Medicare.

Moving forward, debit cards used to administer supplemental benefits have to be linked electronically to the specific items and services covered by a plan, so that the plan can verify that a charge is eligible at the point of sale. Plans are not allowed to provide marijuana products as supplemental benefits for their chronically ill members, the CMS said.

Regulators rescinded a Biden-era requirement that MA plans notify their members of any unused supplemental benefits in the middle of the year. They also did not finalize a proposed ban on marketing the dollar value of supplemental benefits.

The CMS also declined to finalize a proposal creating a special enrollment period for enrollees affected by providers leaving their MA network to find a new plan. Regulators said they would consider the idea in future rulemaking, as contract disputes between MA plans and providers ramp up, affecting more beneficiaries.

https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/medicare-advantage-star-ratings-overhaul-cms-final-rule/816569/

Vericel new 10-year BARDA contract up to $197M for NexoBrid procurement, advanced development

 


  • Contract spans procurement, inventory management and U.S. manufacturing design activities for NexoBrid
  • BARDA funding also supports advanced development of NexoBrid, including potential new indications and formulations

Oruka Therapeutics (NASDAQ: ORKA) files $1B shelf to sell equity, warrants

Oruka Therapeutics, Inc. filed a shelf registration to offer up to $1,000,000,000 of common stock, preferred stock, depositary shares and warrants, to be sold from time to time in one or more offerings. The prospectus states securities may be sold directly, through agents or underwriters, on a continuous or delayed basis, with specific terms provided in prospectus supplements. The company’s common stock trades on the Nasdaq Global Market under the symbol ORKA, with a reported last sale price of $50.43 per share on April 1, 2026. The prospectus incorporates by reference the company’s periodic reports and risk factors, and notes that use of proceeds, pricing, and underwriting terms will be set forth in future prospectus supplements.

IDF says it struck Iran's Quds Force site in Beirut

 The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) announced on Saturday that its Israel Air Force (IAF) targeted yesterday command centers of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps' (IRGC) Quds Force operating in Lebanon's capital.

"Yesterday, the IAF completed a wave of attacks on the infrastructure of terrorist organizations throughout Lebanon, in which headquarters used by the Lebanese Quds Force were attacked," it was stated on X.

Moreover, the Israeli military also shared that it had hit two command centers belonging to the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, "which were utilized by the organization's senior officials for decision-making and coordination with Hezbollah."

https://breakingthenews.net/Article/IDF-says-it-struck-Iran's-Quds-Force-site-in-Beirut/66012490

IDF confirms striking Iran's petrochemical sites

 The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) confirmed on Saturday that its troops targeted the Mahshahr Petrochemical Special Economic Zone in Iran's southern Khuzestan province earlier today.

The military also claimed that this infrastructure was used by the Iranian regime to produce materials for ballistic missiles, whereas the Israeli attacks halted the manufacture, and are expected to cause billions of dollars in financial damage.

https://breakingthenews.net/Article/IDF-confirms-striking-Iran's-petrochemical-sites/66012625

US federal agents arrest Soleimani's relatives

 The United States Department of State announced on Saturday that US federal agents arrested yesterday the niece and grandniece of Qasem Soleimani, the late commander of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Quds Force.

According to the department, Secretary of State Marco Rubio terminated the lawful permanent resident (LPR) status of Soleimani's relatives, who are currently in the custody of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

Additionally, Soleimani was killed back in 2020 in Baghdad in a drone strike, which the US military claimed was ordered by US President Donald Trump during his first term.

https://breakingthenews.net/Article/US-federal-agents-arrest-Soleimani's-relatives/66012572

What Might Transatlantic Security Look Like If The US Leaves NATO?

 by Andrew Korybko,

If NATO as a whole remains more or less intact upon the US’ hypothetical exit, and the US then reaches bilateral security deals with Poland, the Baltic States, and Turkiye, then not much would change from Russia’s perspective.

Trump’s latest talk about the US leaving NATO is being taken seriously by many Europeans owing to his rage over their refusal to help him reopen the Strait of Hormuz, not to mention them denying the US access to its own bases on their territory and even their airspace for use in the Third Gulf War.

It’s possible that this is just a bluff, however, to usher in the radical reforms that he envisages and which were described here in connection with a prior report about his supposed “pay to play” plans.

Nevertheless, it’s also possible that he’s indeed serious and that the US will ultimately end up leaving NATO, in which case it’s useful to analyze the future of transatlantic security.

For starters, the headquarters of both EUCOM and AFRICOM are in Germany, and it would be very difficult and inconvenient to relocate them.

Therefore, the US might reach a bilateral security deal with Germany in this scenario, which could set the basis for other such deals with other NATO members.

Such arrangements would likely include terms that are advantageous to the US such as its allies committing 5% of their GDP to defense like has already been demanded of them as well as giving a preference to American companies for military-technical procurement.

The US might also demand that its troops be granted immunity for any crimes that they might commit while based in their allied nation.

Trump could seek to enshrine trade privileges for the US into any security deal too knowing him.

The only countries that would likely agree to such terms are those whose leaders either sincerely fear Russia or manipulate the public on this pretext, thus Poland and the Baltic States for sure, but Finland and Romania can’t be ruled out either.

They and the other NATO members would still enjoy Article 5 assurances amongst themselves, but it’s also possible that larger members like France, Germany, Italy, and/or the UK might follow the US’ lead in making demands of the smaller ones for ensuring this.

In that event, the European security system could fundamentally change, but concerns about Russia exploiting the optics of infighting (even if only for soft power purposes and not by initiating hostilities against post-US NATO) could deter the aforementioned larger members from doing this.

If NATO as a whole remains more or less intact upon the US’ hypothetical exit, and the US then reaches bilateral security deals with Poland and the Baltic States, then not much would change from Russia’s perspective.

The same goes for if the US reaches such a deal with Turkiye, which enjoys pragmatic ties with Russia unlike Poland and the Baltic States but is poised to take the lead in expanding Western influence along its southern periphery through the “Trump Route for International Peace and Prosperity”.

If the US remains committed to Turkiye’s defense, any potential clash with Russia could risk World War III. If no such deal is reached, however, then Russia might be more proactive in pushing back against Turkish influence there.

All in all, transatlantic security isn’t expected to change much if the US leaves NATO so long as it retains Article 5-like obligations to several of the bloc’s key members, namely Poland, the Baltic States, and Turkiye.

If it doesn’t, then Russia might consider preventive military action against post-US NATO to eliminate security threats emanating from it, but it could be deterred by nuclear-armed France and/or the UK reaffirming their Article 5 obligations to the bloc’s members.

Nothing would really change then.

https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/what-might-transatlantic-security-look-if-us-leaves-nato