IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v377y2025ics0277953625004617.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An absence of accountability: Evidence of employers’ failure to measure and manage employee health benefits administration

Author

Listed:
  • Singer, Sara J.
  • Pfeffer, Jeffrey
  • Nikolov, Margaret C.

Abstract

Because employers provide health benefits to >50 % of the working age U.S. population, benefits managers at companies who purchase and potentially oversee design and delivery of health benefits have an important role in affecting healthcare delivery. We sought to assess how companies measure and manage health benefits, because these dimensions of accountability affect the performance of the health ecosystem. We randomly sampled companies and obtained data from >200 people knowledgeable about health benefits administration in their organizations. Our novel survey comprehensively inquired about what data concerning health benefits operations companies collected and who, if anyone, was responsible for aspects of employee benefits experience and outcomes. We found a surprisingly small amount of accountability for employer-provided health benefits. For instance, 39 % of companies never requested any feedback from their employees about their health benefits, just 6 % assessed the time employees spent getting questions about their health benefits answered, and <5 % of companies measured how often employees postponed filling a prescription or seeing a doctor because of cost. Moreover, there was a widespread absence of accountability for the performance of health plans. On average, 64 % of 15 health benefits performance dimensions were managed by no one, and more than half of respondents reported that no one in their organizations was held accountable for either the physical (64 %) or emotional (59 %) wellbeing of the workforce. Companies mostly provide minimal oversight of the health plans they provide to their employees. This lack of accountability is inconsistent with employers’ responsibilities to effectively manage the benefits they provide and almost certainly contributes to the well-documented problems of employee dissatisfaction with third party health benefits administrators and the frustration and wasted time spent accessing care and reimbursement that occasionally results in care delayed or denied, with consequences for both behavioral and physical health.

Suggested Citation

  • Singer, Sara J. & Pfeffer, Jeffrey & Nikolov, Margaret C., 2025. "An absence of accountability: Evidence of employers’ failure to measure and manage employee health benefits administration," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 377(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:377:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625004617
    DOI: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953625004617
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.socscimed.2025.118131?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Reeleder, David & Goel, Vivek & Singer, Peter A. & Martin, Douglas K., 2006. "Leadership and priority setting: The perspective of hospital CEOs," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(1), pages 24-34, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Robinson, Suzanne & Williams, Iestyn & Dickinson, Helen & Freeman, Tim & Rumbold, Benedict, 2012. "Priority-setting and rationing in healthcare: Evidence from the English experience," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 75(12), pages 2386-2393.
    2. Lettieri, Emanuele & Masella, Cristina, 2009. "Priority setting for technology adoption at a hospital level: Relevant issues from the literature," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(1), pages 81-88, April.
    3. Maluka, Stephen & Kamuzora, Peter & Sebastiån, Miguel San & Byskov, Jens & Olsen, Øystein E. & Shayo, Elizabeth & Ndawi, Benedict & Hurtig, Anna-Karin, 2010. "Decentralized health care priority-setting in Tanzania: Evaluating against the accountability for reasonableness framework," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 71(4), pages 751-759, August.
    4. Fabrizio Sarto & Corrado Cuccurullo & Massimo Aria, 2014. "Exploring healthcare governance literature: systematic review and paths for future research," MECOSAN, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(91), pages 61-80.
    5. Lettieri, Emanuele, 2009. "Uncertainty inclusion in budgeting technology adoption at a hospital level: Evidence from a multiple case study," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 93(2-3), pages 128-136, December.
    6. Supic, Zorica Terzic & Bjegovic, Vesna & Marinkovic, Jelena & Milicevic, Milena Santric & Vasic, Vladimir, 2010. "Hospital management training and improvement in managerial skills: Serbian experience," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 80-89, June.
    7. Garpenby, Peter & Nedlund, Ann-Charlotte, 2016. "Political strategies in difficult times – The “backstage” experience of Swedish politicians on formal priority setting in healthcare," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 63-70.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:377:y:2025:i:c:s0277953625004617. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.