
TJ Bullock | March 11th, 2026
If you’ve spent more than five minutes looking at your company’s healthcare spend, you’ve seen it: ER claims that look like a leaky faucet… connected to a firehose.
Two stats tell the whole story:
So no, this isn’t an employee “common sense” problem. It’s a system design problem.
At Bullock & Associates, we say it all the time: It’s not your plan, it’s how you’re paying for it.
High ER utilizers usually aren’t thrill-seekers who love fluorescent lighting. They’re people with predictable patterns:
This is the group where “a simple ER visit” turns into “surprise admission,” and suddenly your plan has a six-figure storyline.
Fee-For-Service (FFS) medicine pays for volume, not fixing.
That’s how you get:
When someone with anxiety + tobacco history + COPD starts wheezing at 7:00 PM, they don’t need a lecture. They need a clinician. Now. The ER wins by default.
Non‑FFS models (like Direct Primary Care) flip the incentive:
That’s the “plug.” Not a bigger deductible. Not a stern email about “appropriate settings of care.”
If you want fewer admissions, you don’t start with the ER.
You start with the payment model that’s quietly steering people there.
Ready to find where your ER overuse is actually coming from—and what model fixes it?
Making complicated simple.
#UBA #NABIP #employeebenefits #HealthInsurance #ERUtilization #CostContainment #DirectPrimaryCare
Leave a Reply