Segmenting health maintenance organizations to study productivity and profitability

As the decade ended, health maintenance organizations (HMOs) were increasing in popularity as a means of health care delivery. These groups take many forms, so it is important for the analyst to see if the efficiency and financial results for these different forms vary. The four major forms are profit vs. not-for-profit, chain vs. non-chain, group/staff vs. individual practice association (IPA), and federally qualified vs. non-federally qualified. Using a nationwide database of all the HMOs in the United States, the article compares liquidity rates, leverage ratios, profitability ratios, marketing, and per member ratios across the four groups using paired t tests. The two classifications that showed the most differences were group/staff vs. IPA and federally qualified vs. non-federally qualified. IPAs have a better liquidity position and lower leverage ratios than group/staff but their administrative costs are higher and the time to receive payments and to pay debts is higher. Non-federally qualified have somewhat higher liquidity ratios and higher profitability ratios. These significant differences in financial outcomes indicate that studies of HMOs should segment different major forms of organizations and study them separately before trying to show the effects of different policies on HMO efficiency and effectiveness.