About

Stephen T Parente, Ph.D., MPH, MS, is a Professor in the Department of Finance at the Carlson School of Management at the University of Minnesota and serves as the Minnesota Insurance Industry Chair of Health Finance. He is also the Associate Dean of the Global Institute. His expertise encompasses health economics, health insurance, health information technology, and medical technology evaluation. Dr. Parente has been the principal investigator on large funded studies related to medical price transparency, consumer-directed health plans, health information technology, and health policy micro-simulation. He has held significant roles in health policy, including serving as Chief Economist for Health Policy and Senior Economist on the Council of Economic Advisers at the White House from 2019 to 2021, and as Senior Adviser to the Secretary for Health Economics in the Department of Health and Human Services. Additionally, he was the longest-serving Director of the Medical Industry Leadership Institute and is the President of the American Society of Health Economists (ASHEcon). His academic and policy work reflects a focus on health system efficiency, healthcare costs, and medical innovation, contributing extensively to the field through research, policy advising, and leadership roles.

Research topics

• Business
• Public economics
• Economics
• Finance
• Actuarial science
• Political Science
• Computer Science
• Marketing
• Microeconomics
• Law
• Medicine
• Econometrics
• Market economy
• Accounting
• Economic growth
• Management
• Demographic economics
• Labour economics

Selected publications

• A Global Review of Accountable Care Organizations: Design Features and Lessons Learned

  Medical Research Archives · 2024-01-01

  reviewOpen access

  As health systems around the world increasingly adopt accountable care models, certain design features tied to success begin to emerge. This review draws upon lessons learned from three accountable care models: Health Maintenance Organizations, Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), and Advanced Primary Care. Five elements are integral to the success of accountable care models. First, continuous strengthening of organizational alignment among health providers within ACOs to achieve shared visions and goals at operational, cultural, and cognitive levels. Second, partnerships to improve the scope of clinical operations (horizontal integration of service lines) to build efficient resource interdependence and collaboration to deliver consistent high-quality care at a scale that includes a full spectrum of clinical services (primary care through long-term care). Third, availability of adequate health information management and health information technology to improve patient management, coordination, and engagement. Fourth, employing risk adjustment models that accurately estimate the cost of the highest-risk patients to ensure sustainable health financing. Finally, using performance benchmarks to incentivize high-performing groups, achieving organizational transformation. Applying these models’ successes internationally requires leadership to understand cultural and clinical contexts, providers to commit to developing competencies, and governing bodies to address systemic impediments to providers’ ability to work together to improve patient access, experience, and outcomes, while reducing costs.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Impact of Site-Neutral Payments for Commercial and Employer-Sponsored Plans

  INQUIRY The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing · 2024-01-01 · 3 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  Site-neutral payment is a policy created by federal rule making and implemented by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) that aims to reduce healthcare costs by aligning payment rates for certain services provided in multiple care settings. Site-neutral payments are intended to eliminate the incentive for providers to acquire facilities, such as physician offices or ambulatory surgical centers (ASCs), that Medicare reimburses at the lower non-facility rate and convert those settings into hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), where Medicare reimburses at the higher facility rate. Although initiated by Congress to address payment disparities in Medicare, similar payment discrepancies can be seen in the commercial market where individual and employer-sponsored health plans often pay more for certain outpatient services depending on their location. This analysis presents a simulation of the impact of applying site-neutral payments to the commercial market with respect to overall potential savings for consumers, health plans and the federal government. To conduct the analysis, we use an all-payer claims data base generalizable to the United States. The analysis focused on a select group of outpatient services identified by the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC). We mapped the MedPAC identified 68 Ambulatory Payment Classifications (APCs), the codes Medicare uses to reimburse facilities for outpatient services, to the relevant CPT4/HCPCS codes, which the commercial market uses for billing. The potential cost savings of applying the site-neutral payment policy to the commercial insurance market to be $58 billion for year 2022. We estimate the 10-year total (2024-2033) employer market premium reduction ranges from 5.35% to 5.0% and found that those premium reductions would result in employer-sponsored insurance (ESI) tax subsidy savings of $140 billion to the federal government over a 10-year period (2024-2033).

  PublisherDOI

• Global Review of Primary Care Delivery Models as Applied to Accountable Care Strategies

  2024-09-21

  articleOpen access

  Context: This is a review of the global experience of applying a range of PHC and health status management strategies as part of an overall accountable care system strategy. It provides a critical analysis and comparison of the experiences from developed countries. The objective of this study is to identify the key elements of success in delivering accountable primary care systems to serve as guidance to design and effectively position PHC models within accountable care strategies. The target audience is policy makers tasked with the design and implementation of an effective PHC model that can drive the transformation of a health system toward accountable care. Methods: Global literature review identified commonalities of effective PHC and essential components of the more developed or high-functioning PHC and integrative strategies and models. Findings: Globally, well-designed and well-executed primary care delivery plans have commonalities in their roles under accountable care in terms of purpose, aims, functions, and beliefs. One commonality is a sufficiently sized, well-designed, and well-distributed network of primary and secondary health care services in close proximity to the populations served. There are six key characteristics of High-Functioning PHC Models within Accountable Care Systems. There are 14 Critical Success Factors in PHC Capabilities and Performance. PHC service design and delivery is highly varied, therefore it is necessary to ask 13 core questions to develop a more detailed approach to work plan development and execution. Four case-based observations offer insight from a review of US integrated health systems. Conclusions: Providers and accountable leadership should adopt an expanded and holistic definition of primary care and its role in a health system’s mission. Leadership and management of primary care strategies for integrated health systems should develop competencies and skills to effectively capture, interpret, and display the total value received for the PHC resource investments.

  PublisherDOI

• Provider turf wars and Medicare payment rules

  Journal of Public Economics · 2023 · 11 citations

  • Business
  • Labour economics
  • Accounting
  PublisherDOI

• Estimating the Impact of New Health Price Transparency Policies

  INQUIRY The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing · 2023 · 18 citations

  1st authorCorresponding
  • Computer Science
  • Actuarial science
  • Business

  This analysis investigates and scores the impact of new health price transparency rules. Using a set of novel data sources, we estimate substantial savings are possible following the implementation of the insurer price transparency rule. Specifically, we estimate annual savings to consumers, employers, and insurers by 2025, assuming a robust set of tools to allow consumers to purchase medical services. We matched claims with 70 HHS defined shoppable services by CPT and DRG codes and replaced them with an estimated median commercial allowed payment multiplied by a reduced cost of 40% based on estimates found from literature for the difference in cost between negotiated and cash payment for medical services. We consider 40% to be an upper bound estimate of the potential savings based on existing literature. Several databases are used to estimate the potential benefits of insurer price transparency. Two different all-payer claim databases were used, representing the entire insured population in the US. For this analysis, only the private insurer commercial population was examined, comprised of over 200 million covered lives as of 2021. The estimated impact of price transparency will vary significantly by region and income level. The national upper bound estimate is $80.7 billion. The national lower bound estimate is $17.6 billion. For the upper bound, the region with the most significant impact in the US will be the Midwest, with $20 billion in potential savings and an 8% reduction in medical expenditure. The region with the lowest impact will be the South, with only a 5.8% reduction. Concerning income, those at lower levels of income will have the most significant impact with a -7.4% (<100% Federal Poverty Level) to -7.5% (100%-137% Federal Poverty Level) impact. Overall, the total impact could be a 6.9% reduction for the whole privately insured population in the United States. In summary, a unique set of national data resources were used to estimate the cost savings impact medical price transparency. This analysis suggests price transparency for shoppable services may yields significant savings between $17.6 to $80.7 billion by 2025. Consumers may have strong incentives to shop with the rise in the use of high deductibles, health plans, and health savings accounts. How these potential saving are to be shared by consumers, employers and health plans has yet to be determined.

  PublisherDOI

• Reimagining Patient Data Access for Researchers

  Value in Health · 2023-07-03 · 1 citations

  articleOpen access1st author
  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Distress and Importance of Team Support among Healthcare Workersduring the Covid-19 Pandemic in Italy

  Journal of Psychiatry and Psychiatric Disorders · 2022-01-01 · 1 citations

  article
  PublisherDOI

• Assessment of the Provider Relief Fund Distribution for Treatment of Uninsured Patients With COVID-19

  JAMA Health Forum · 2022-01-28 · 3 citations

  articleOpen access1st authorCorresponding

  This cross-sectional study uses US Health Resources and Services Administration data to assess the distribution of claims reimbursement funds to health care professionals and facilities for uninsured patients with COVID-19.

  PublisherOA PDFDOI

• Provider Turf Wars and Medicare Payment Rules

  SSRN Electronic Journal · 2021-01-01

  articleOpen access
  PublisherDOI

• Do Physicians Warm Up to Higher Medicare Prices? Evidence from Alaska

  Journal of Policy Analysis and Management · 2021 · 9 citations

  • Political Science
  • Business
  • Public economics

  Abstract Medicare is a roughly $700 billion public program, with physician payments representing one of its largest expenditures. Medicare's prices are also administratively set, which leaves the structure of payment changes subject to a political process that may introduce idiosyncratic features and even perverse incentives. At the same time, physician responses to changes in Medicare reimbursements are likely to vary according to the policy's duration, scope, and size. We study a setting where broad federal laws contained specific provisions that financially benefit a narrow group: Alaskan physicians. The geographically targeted payment reforms were also unique along key dimensions. Using difference‐in‐differences strategies, we find that large, temporary price changes increase spending but elicit no detectable supply response. Conversely, generous and permanent price shocks induce greater service flows but not uniformly across specialties. Our findings suggest that Congress may engage in fiscally inefficient Medicare spending to accomplish other legislative objectives.

  PublisherDOI

Frequent coauthors

• Lynn A. Blewett

  University of Minnesota

  28 shared

• W. Pete Welch

  University of Pittsburgh

  25 shared

• Cindy Brach

  25 shared

• Robert Harmon

  Health Resources and Services Administration

  25 shared

• Barbara Rudolph

  Universität Hamburg

  25 shared

• Denise Love

  The University of Texas Rio Grande Valley

  25 shared

• Roger Feldman

  University of Minnesota

  19 shared

• Jon B. Christianson

  8 shared

Education

• PhD, Health Policy and Management

  Johns Hopkins University

  1995

• MPH

  University of Rochester Medical Center

  1989

• MS in Public Policy Analysis

  University of Rochester

  1988

• BA with Distinction

  University of Rochester

  1987

Awards & honors

• President of the American Society of Health Economists (ASHE…