- 2,394
Did you have to prove a record of decent production or was it based on your looks?
CMS Proposal to End Multilevel FMO Marketing
- Thread starter MedSuppPro
- Start date
Did you have to prove a record of decent production or was it based on your looks?
AgentGeneral
Guru
- 281
Well, some would say that I'm quite stunning. haha. Im also a work smarter not harder agent.
What I did was sought out one of the best agents in my state and went with who he was using. Seemed like the best way to operate. I can tell you he isn't that great looking. So I know he didn't get what he got by being good looking and neither did I.
I'm old, so the looks factor probably didn't help. My work ethic might have bc the one guy knows me and I'm sure told them I'd work every lead ten times over that came across my desk. So the real answer is more toward decent production work ethic.
All new people at the FMO I go through get the same treatment. Everyone gets help in the beginning. Time is given to prove and grow.
Wish my looks could somehow push CMS into getting those files over to where they belong for the pile of T65 that's still straggling. No looks can push that lever in the right direction, unless of course I could figure out who is at the top and say helllloooo. If only....roflmao
- 2,394
What is “Scot 65”? What makes it different or better than other direct mail pieces?
I’ve read and reread this proposal at least 5 times .I’ve read the interpretation from about 5 fmo’s .Cms is saying the carriers with big money ( uhc, Humana, Aetna etc ) are using “administrative money (volume overrides , general ga,mga, imo and fmo overrides, marketing money etc ) to steer fmo’s and agents to write their plans . As we know cms sets maximum agent compensation at $601 . For Jan 2024 that’s $610. Cms proposal is to do away with ALL compensation above the $610 (To make up for this loss of overrides there proposing an increase of $32 to $642 for 2025 ) . Currently I calculate around $400 of total overides min out there Which includes fmo overrides plus marketing money plus other money from carriers . About $150 per app is what drives massive marketing we see from commercials to direct mail to millions of telemarketers. If overrides are gone it changes the financial dynamics of the industry. It certainly means the select quotes of the world which already lose money are going to find it hard to continue .
What does this mean for carriers ? That $400 are so an app will go back in their pocket . They’ll expand regional directors per state big to deal with agents . They’ll expand the contracting and telesales operations big . On the other end . Out of that $642 max paid out will they chop $100 to the agent and give that to of heirachy fmo to continue the contracting and other things ? They’ll cut out the ga and mga’s . The bottom line if they cut the agent comp in addition to his massive new lead cost he must pay himself this kills many agents . No matter how this shakes out much if not all of the fmo override will gone. In the last 3 yrs I’ve not seen Cms change much from what they propose .In many ways with this proposal cms is blaming the massive bribing and overrides in mapd for corrupting it .
What does this mean for carriers ? That $400 are so an app will go back in their pocket . They’ll expand regional directors per state big to deal with agents . They’ll expand the contracting and telesales operations big . On the other end . Out of that $642 max paid out will they chop $100 to the agent and give that to of heirachy fmo to continue the contracting and other things ? They’ll cut out the ga and mga’s . The bottom line if they cut the agent comp in addition to his massive new lead cost he must pay himself this kills many agents . No matter how this shakes out much if not all of the fmo override will gone. In the last 3 yrs I’ve not seen Cms change much from what they propose .In many ways with this proposal cms is blaming the massive bribing and overrides in mapd for corrupting it .
For what it's worth....
I'm not saying the admin/marketing dollars should stay or go. What I don't understand is their reasoning behind it. Obviously the whole "agents are financially motivated.. blah blah aspect" but if that's the reasoning then why haven't they addressed the problem as a whole? To be clear, this suggestion is not saving the Medicare program any money. The carriers now just pay less. Who's winning here? Not the tax payer. Not the Medicare program. Not the agent. Definitely not the FMO. The carriers...
CMS is basically saying an overgrowth of marketing/admin dollars is driving FMO's to market one carrier over the other. In essence, what they are saying is they don't want compensation to incentivize an agent to focus on selling one carrier over another because of the potential earnings.
Yet CMS allows carriers to have captive agents. Why? Isn't the idea of a captive agent what CMS is basically trying to avoid? A captive agent can only market one product/carrier and is motivated by financial gains.
Will carriers still be allowed to provide sales bonuses to their employees/agent managers based on MA sales? Will they be able to still pay their telesales bonuses for apps received? I'm sure they will.
Where is the data showing CMS' speculation to be true/valid? In my area/state, the most commonly sold plan is one with the lowest override and lowest HRA payment. It is a 5-star plan. The highest HRA payment carrier is the 2nd lowest MAPD enroller in the state (a very large Medicare state).
Why wouldn't CMS focus on the funding to the actual carriers who would be required to reevaluate their admin/marketing dollars for bottom line sake?
The biggest question.... why is CMS approving the plans if they don't feel people in that region/area should be in the plans?!
If a broker holds a plan presentation, the consumer is told the features of the plan, the consumer decides to enroll into the CMS-approved plan, why does it matter if that's the highest paid plan or not? CMS approved the plan! Is this any different then an captive agent holding the same sales presentation? What's different then them calling that carrier up directly to get the information?
Don't get me wrong. It is frustrating to see the FMO's hold these parties, "carrier" breakfast/lunches for their employees, christmas bonuses, during AEP when its the agents out their busting their asses off, but without the FMO what will be my personal expenses for services they provide currently free of charge?
Lastly, I have quasi-employed agents. If this goes through as is, I'd either need to cut into their commission for me to provide the same services OR not bring on agents any more. This will occur for many GA's out there who work a similar business structure. I'm not going to train, support, etc a newbie to not earn diddly off of them. Not worth it. What will people do then...? Call the carrier who markets (spends) the most directly to only be told about ONE carrier which is the very idea CMS is trying to avoid with this proposal.
Again, not saying it shouldn't happen, but can they at least think these things through before proposing some bogus rules based on speculation. If a broker shouldn't be influenced by compensation then they should get rid of Captive shops and agents. Really everybody should be required to be a broker.
I'm not saying the admin/marketing dollars should stay or go. What I don't understand is their reasoning behind it. Obviously the whole "agents are financially motivated.. blah blah aspect" but if that's the reasoning then why haven't they addressed the problem as a whole? To be clear, this suggestion is not saving the Medicare program any money. The carriers now just pay less. Who's winning here? Not the tax payer. Not the Medicare program. Not the agent. Definitely not the FMO. The carriers...
CMS is basically saying an overgrowth of marketing/admin dollars is driving FMO's to market one carrier over the other. In essence, what they are saying is they don't want compensation to incentivize an agent to focus on selling one carrier over another because of the potential earnings.
Yet CMS allows carriers to have captive agents. Why? Isn't the idea of a captive agent what CMS is basically trying to avoid? A captive agent can only market one product/carrier and is motivated by financial gains.
Will carriers still be allowed to provide sales bonuses to their employees/agent managers based on MA sales? Will they be able to still pay their telesales bonuses for apps received? I'm sure they will.
Where is the data showing CMS' speculation to be true/valid? In my area/state, the most commonly sold plan is one with the lowest override and lowest HRA payment. It is a 5-star plan. The highest HRA payment carrier is the 2nd lowest MAPD enroller in the state (a very large Medicare state).
Why wouldn't CMS focus on the funding to the actual carriers who would be required to reevaluate their admin/marketing dollars for bottom line sake?
The biggest question.... why is CMS approving the plans if they don't feel people in that region/area should be in the plans?!
If a broker holds a plan presentation, the consumer is told the features of the plan, the consumer decides to enroll into the CMS-approved plan, why does it matter if that's the highest paid plan or not? CMS approved the plan! Is this any different then an captive agent holding the same sales presentation? What's different then them calling that carrier up directly to get the information?
Don't get me wrong. It is frustrating to see the FMO's hold these parties, "carrier" breakfast/lunches for their employees, christmas bonuses, during AEP when its the agents out their busting their asses off, but without the FMO what will be my personal expenses for services they provide currently free of charge?
Lastly, I have quasi-employed agents. If this goes through as is, I'd either need to cut into their commission for me to provide the same services OR not bring on agents any more. This will occur for many GA's out there who work a similar business structure. I'm not going to train, support, etc a newbie to not earn diddly off of them. Not worth it. What will people do then...? Call the carrier who markets (spends) the most directly to only be told about ONE carrier which is the very idea CMS is trying to avoid with this proposal.
Again, not saying it shouldn't happen, but can they at least think these things through before proposing some bogus rules based on speculation. If a broker shouldn't be influenced by compensation then they should get rid of Captive shops and agents. Really everybody should be required to be a broker.
All what you say is true . But if facts mattered why are call centers allowed to skirt the 48 hr soa rule with bogus “ they contacted us “ leads ? The call centers were always the problem yet all these rules effect the small agent much more . But your correct . Cutting override comp enriches the carriers more as they retain that money . One reason I’ve rarely taken marketing money directly from a carrier is because I don’t want to be obligated or pressured ti sell a specific carrier . With fmo dollars I cam sell anyone .We cam argue this or that but much of the cms rule will go into effect like the last 2-3 yrs .
- 29,491
https://insurance-forums.com/community/members/sshafran.13915/ Scott has a drip mail program for T-65's that several agents on here are using.
straightnochaser
Guru
- 549
Surely they just go direct with carriers, we are 5% of their size and most of our contracts are direct now.
From NABIP
CMS has proposed a rule for contract year 2025 that would revise the regulations related to Part C and D along with the Medicare cost plan, and Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly(PACE) to implement changes related to Star Ratings, marketing and communications, agent/broker compensation, health equity, dual eligible special needs plans, utilization management, network adequacy, and other programmatic areas.
o If finalized as written, CMS would redefine agent and broker compensation by eliminating “Administrative Fees” and capping the maximum compensation for enrollment at $642.
o The rule would also, in addition to altering the compensation structure, generally prohibit contract terms between Medicare Advantage organizations and field marketing organizations (FMOs), which CMS claims in volume-based bonuses for enrollment into certain plans.
o NABIP is working with our Medicare Advisory Group, FMO Council, and external stakeholders to submit comments to CMS and lawmakers, in addition to creating a fact sheet and infographic that highlights the differences between agents, TPMOs, and FMOs, highlighting the nuance required to understand how the Medicare Advantage marketplace functions.
o We are also looking for all Medicare agents to fill out this survey https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/sv/3CrwJBv
o There have been over 1,500 responses nationally and NABIP will be using these numbers to educate Congress and the administration.
CMS has proposed a rule for contract year 2025 that would revise the regulations related to Part C and D along with the Medicare cost plan, and Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly(PACE) to implement changes related to Star Ratings, marketing and communications, agent/broker compensation, health equity, dual eligible special needs plans, utilization management, network adequacy, and other programmatic areas.
o If finalized as written, CMS would redefine agent and broker compensation by eliminating “Administrative Fees” and capping the maximum compensation for enrollment at $642.
o The rule would also, in addition to altering the compensation structure, generally prohibit contract terms between Medicare Advantage organizations and field marketing organizations (FMOs), which CMS claims in volume-based bonuses for enrollment into certain plans.
o NABIP is working with our Medicare Advisory Group, FMO Council, and external stakeholders to submit comments to CMS and lawmakers, in addition to creating a fact sheet and infographic that highlights the differences between agents, TPMOs, and FMOs, highlighting the nuance required to understand how the Medicare Advantage marketplace functions.
o We are also looking for all Medicare agents to fill out this survey https://lp.constantcontactpages.com/sv/3CrwJBv
o There have been over 1,500 responses nationally and NABIP will be using these numbers to educate Congress and the administration.
Similar threads
