Feds Post PPACA Risk Program Regs
Originally posted March 05, 2014 by Allison Bell on https://www.lifehealthpro.com
Only the commercial health plans sold through the new public exchanges -- and some very similar plans -- will be able to participate in a new underwriting profit protection program.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services today ruled that only "qualified health plans" -- and plans that are "substantially the same as a QHP" -- can either make payments to or get cash from the federal "risk corridors" program.
The drafters of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act created the risk corridors program to protect QHP issuers against the possibility that all of the underwriting rules and benefits mandates PPACA is imposing could flood some insurers with claims.
Carriers with high operating profits are supposed to reimburse carriers with profit margins of less than 3 percent. If all health insurers do poorly, PPACA calls for the federal government to chip in.
CMS talks about the risk corridors program and many other PPACA provisions in the same 335-page anthology of PPACA final regulations that lets consumers keep non-PPACA-compliant individual policies for two extra years, if insurers and state regulators permit that, and that keeps the current March 31 PPACA individual QHP enrollment deadline.
Commenters on a draft of the regulations asked CMS to let all health plans that comply with PPACA rules, including non-exchange health plans, participate in the risk corridors program.
Limiting the program to QHPs and very similar plans will preserve the intent of the program, which is to stabilize QHP premiums, officials say.
Other sections of the new CMS regulations deal with everything from whether agents and brokers can use their own websites to enroll employers in small-group exchanges' QHPs to whether short-term medical plans have to pay for another PPACA risk-management program, a temporary reinsurance program.
CMS officials say they are comfortable with the idea of a state-based exchange letting brokers enroll businesses in exchange plans, but it's probably not going to make that feature available through the public exchanges it runs for HHS in 2015.
Short-term medical plan issuers might have to pay reinsurance program assessments, if the plans offer a minimum level of coverage value.
Elsewhere in the batch, CMS says.
- Connecticut is the only state taking advantage of a PPACA provision that lets states run their own reinsurance programs.
- The 2014 attachment point, or deductible, for PPACA reinsurance for health plans will be cut to $45,000, from $60,000, and the 2015 PPACA reinsurance premium will be $44 per enrollee per year.
- The HHS exchange user fee for 2015 will be 3.5 percent of premium.
CMS is preparing to publish the new PPACA regulations in the Federal Register March 11.
The IRS, meanwhile, is preparing to publish PPACA employer coverage mandate reporting final regulations for large employers and minimum essential coverage (MEC) regulations March 10.
In the IRS MEC regulations, for example, the IRS gives details about what address a reporting entity should use when it's sending workers' MEC statement.
In the final MEC regulations, the IRS says it will offer short-term relief for companies that get taxpayer identification numbers, dates of birth or other information wrong on returns filed in 2016 for the 2015 tax year.
But the relief is only available for employers or other reporting entities that make a good faith effort to comply with the regulations, officials say.
"No relief is provided in the case of reporting entities that do not make a good faith effort to comply with these regulations or that fail to timely file an information return or furnish a statement," officials warn in the preamble to the MEC regulations.
The IRS also is stating that sending a notice to a recipient's last known permanent address, or, if no permanent address is available, a temporary address, discharges the requirement to furnish a statement, even if the statement is returned.
5 Ways to Drive Healthy Behavior Change Virtually
Originally posted on https://ebn.benefitnews.com
Employees have access to thousands of apps covering health and wellness on their mobile device. Employers and wellness vendors can offer workers hi-tech ways to track their physical activity, promote healthy eating and inspire wellness at work. Here are five mobile apps and outreach ideas to get employees moving and engaged in your wellness program.
For office employees sitting at their desk all day, sedentary work can cramp muscles and staring at a computer screen too long can cause eye strain. Employers can remind employees to take stretch breaks by building reminders into the network, such as having a reminder pop-up on their computer.
On the app side, HotSeat challenges people to get out of their seats for small breaks. It includes competitions, feedback on how your small bouts of physical activity add up to meaningful amounts. UtiliFit is another app that is breaking into this space, says LuAnn Heinen, vice president and wellness leader, National Business Group on Health.
Employers can encourage better nutrition and healthy food choices with smart receipts from the company cafeteria, says the National Business Group on Health vice president and wellness leader. When employees purchase food at the company café, the smart receipt shows the calorie and nutritional content of their food choices.
Many employees can’t afford to hire a personal trainer, but technology like Anthem’s and online trainer FitOrbit’s virtual fitness and real-time, Internet-based coaching offers fitness training without breaking the banks. After selecting a trainer based on a short questionnaire, the employee electronically receives a customized fitness and nutrition plan and ongoing coaching – the latter via the modern miracle of unlimited texting, plus a weekly personal exercise plan – to support their goals.
StickK app and website asks individuals to put up their own money for a charity that they hate if they don’t accomplish their wellness or other goal. The StickK website facilitates that transaction so that a gun control advocate, for example, would have to fork over cash to the National Rifle Association for failing to meet their goal. The platform also builds in an array of behavior principles (beyond giving away your money to a cause you oppose), among them social recognition and rewards, and feedback.
People may keep old health insurance another year
Originally posted March 05, 2014 on https://www.usatoday.com
WASHINGTON — Americans can buy insurance policies that don't meet the requirements of the Affordable Care Act for another year, if their states' insurance regulators allow them to renew their policies this year, administration officials said Wednesday.
The change represented another midcourse correction for the law, which is still recovering from the flawed opening of the federal and state health care exchanges last Oct. 1 and the delay of several key provisions. Last July, the administration delayed the requirement that businesses provide health insurance for their employees, and President Obama said in November that those with pre-ACA insurance plans could keep them if they wanted.
"These policies implement the health care law in a common-sense way by continuing to smooth the transition for consumers and stakeholders and fixing problems wherever the law provides flexibility," Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius said Wednesday.
The law originally required that everyone buy a policy that complied with its requirements in 2014. That meant skimpy plans, which sometimes cost more in premiums than the coverage they provided, had to be replaced by plans that included hospital stays and prescription benefits, as well as other basic benefits. The change came following political backlash after Obama told people that they would be able to keep the same health care plans after the law was enacted.
Obama offered insurers the option to continue to offer the old plans, though some states chose to mandate ACA-compliant insurance. The new rule states that individuals and small groups may continue to renew old policies up to or beginning Oct. 1, 2016.
The number of people in those policies is dropping, Sebelius and other officials said, but they wanted to give insurers time to make sure consumers knew about the options they have through the state and federal exchanges. Officials said that applies to about only 500,000 people.
It's still hard to determine how many people have moved to compliant plans because people are buying insurance both through the exchanges and through insurance companies, Sebelius said.
The delay should be made permanent, said Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La.
"The administration's action today is a step toward keeping the promise that was made to the American people that if they liked their health plan, they could keep it," said Landrieu, a supporter of the law who faces a tough re-election fight this fall. "And I intend to hold the administration to that promise."
Officials also announced that employers that self-insure would be able to report insurer and employer provisions in one stream-lined form, as well as allowing the option of reporting which employees "may be" full-time, as opposed to "are" full-time.
"Today's announcement is part of the administration's effort to provide certainty and early guidance about major health policies so employers, small business owners and other individuals can plan for 2015," said Assistant Secretary for Tax Policy Mark J. Mazur. "Treasury's final rules significantly streamline and simplify information reporting while making it easier for employers and insurers of all sizes to provide the quality, affordable health coverage that every American deserves."
This affects 4% of employers officials said, but comes in response to concerns that the process was time-consuming for those employers.
HHS also announced more protections for insurers who based premium prices on the assumption customers would shift from old plans to newer ones that met the law's requirements. It simplified reporting requirements for employers. The changes are part of a review of regulations required to implement the law, officials said, and reflect the experiences from earlier changes.
They also announced:
• Open enrollment for 2015 will begin Nov. 14, 2014, and end Feb. 15, 2015, so that insurers have more time to prepare.
• States have until June 15, rather than Jan. 1, to have a approved blueprint in place to transition to a state-based marketplace.
• That the cost-sharing limits for individuals for 2015 will be $6,600 and $13,200 for families.
• Allows federal SHOPS to offer stand-alone dental plans or a choice of plans, and allows employers to provide different contribution rates for full-time and part-time employees after 2015.
Changes to the enrollment period will give people more time to sign up after the holidays, said Brian Haile, senior vice president for health policy at Jackson Hewitt Tax Service Inc. It will also give them a chance to see how not having insurance in 2014 will affect their taxes, assuming they file early. Beginning in 2014, people who don't have health insurance must pay a fine when they file their taxes in early 2015.
Officials said they expect no more major announcements for the rest of the year, and that March 31 will remain the last day people may sign up for health insurance in 2014.
Budget proposal phases out some PPACA funding
Originally posted March 04, 2014 by Allison Bell on https://www.lifehealthpro.com
Managers of some new Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) programs will have to wean themselves off of PPACA startup funding.
The Obama administration has included cuts in several sources of the PPACA grant money that has been flowing into state government and state public health insurance exchange offices the past few years.
The administration posted the proposal on the White House website today.
The budget would affect spending in fiscal year 2015, which starts Oct. 1.
An appendix that gives some details on the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) funding proposal shows that outlays on state regulators' commercial health insurance premium review operations would fall to $50 million, from $80 million this year.
Gross spending on the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan (PCIP) program -- a "risk pool" program for people who could not qualify to buy conventional major medical coverage before the PPACA ban on use of personal health status information took effect -- would fall to 0, from about $1 billion this year.
Total new budget obligations for PPACA public exchange construction would fall to $836 million, from $1.3 billion, and gross outlays would fall to $1.9 billion, from $2.4 billion.
New budget obligations for Consumer Operated and Oriented Plan (CO-OP) carriers -- the new member-owned, nonprofit carriers created by PPACA -- would drop to zero, from $221 million this year.
Elsewhere in the administration's budget proposal:
- Obligations for tax credit subsidies for private PPACA exchange plans -- "qualified health plans" (QHPs) -- and for QHP cost-sharing subsidies could increase to $60 billion, from $38 billion for 2014 and from nothing last year.
- Spending on a new, temporary, PPACA "risk corridor" program -- a program that's supposed to protect QHP issuers against underwriting losses -- could total $5.5 billion. The risk corridors program is supposed to be funded mainly by health insurers in the commercial individual and small group markets that earn underwriting profits, but the federal government may have to chip in if the entire individual market and the entire small-group market do poorly.
- Two of other PPACA "3 R's" risk management programs -- the temporary PPACA reinsurance program and a permanent risk adjustment program -- are supposed to get their money solely from insurer contributions. The reinsurance program would get $20 million for administration and pay out about $10 billion in reinsurance payments. The risk administration program would start with $3.4 billion in budget authority.
- Families in the top 3 percent in terms of taxable income would face a 28 percent cap on their ability to use itemized deductions and some other tax breaks to reduce tax liability. The cap would apply to employers' group health and retirement plan contributions.
Look Beyond Health Care Financing to Workforce Health
Originally posted February 26, 2014 by Thomas Parry on https://ebn.benefitnews.com
Employer focus on employee health care will expand in 2014 beyond financing health coverage to managing employee health. We expect to see employers focusing more strategically on workforce heath — in particular, how to build business impacts such as lost work time and performance into their overall assessment of best practices — and how to connect investments in health back to business goals.
However employers’ decisions have been determined by the Affordable Care Act, the reasons to continue investing in employee health and productivity remain, given their impact on employers’ bottom-line costs and top-line job performance. The evidence is clear: poor workforce health has a profound impact on companies, regardless of their industry or size.
Research by our organization, the Integrated Benefits Institute, has investigated financial productivity losses due to worker illnesses including depression, diabetes, low back pain, stress and metabolic conditions. Our findings highlight the necessity for employers to think beyond how health issues impact medical costs. Our research shows:
- Depression costs employers approximately $62,000 annually per 100 employees in lost work time and medical treatments.
- Employees with diabetes are 47% more likely to miss at least one day of work per month than workers with normal fasting blood glucose.
- Low-back pain costs employers $51,400 annually per 100 employees in lost productivity and medical treatments.
- Employees with metabolic syndromeare three times more likely to have a work-disabling event such as a heart attack or stroke.
- Stress at work contributes more to poor job performance than either stress at home or financial worries.
Over the course of the year, I’ll be sharing more of our findings related to these illnesses, and the benefits to organizations with a strong commitment to employee health and performance. Our research reveals that employees in organizations with a strong health culture report that they spend more time working, work more carefully and concentrate better than employees at organizations with poor cultures of health.
Workers with better work environments — such as favorable workloads, work-life balance, good relations with managers and fewer demands on their time — also report fewer sick days than those in less healthy workplaces.
Employers can take several steps to acting more strategically about investing in employee health:
1. Assess where you are. Use key metrics to know where your organization currently is and what you have achieved to date regarding employee health. Work with your benefits supplier partners to obtain data and determine your company’s performance relative to organizations, especially organizations within your industry.
2. Use comparisons to identify the greatest opportunities to improve employee health. Since organizations have limited resources, start by focusing on the biggest problems — and the biggest opportunities — facing your company.
3. Measure outcomes. Determine beforehand how you will track results — and track them beyond health care costs alone. Simply saying a program is successful isn’t enough to convince the CFO of the business case for health improvement — results must be measured quantitatively. Senior management is more responsive to requests for investment when HR professionals are able to demonstrate the value of programs in business-relevant terms with metrics demonstrating changes over time.
Employers will find that their investments in workforce health and performance will be most effective when integrated with a broader strategy that includes an understanding of how their organizations can positively or negatively influence workers’ health.
Study Shows Value of Benefits Begins to Erode for Employees
Originally posted February 27, 2014 on https://ifawebnews.com
While benefits remain a critical part of the overall employee experience, the perceived value of workplace benefits among employees who participate in both health and retirement plans is starting to erode, according to a new report by global insurance consultancy Mercer.
The trend was revealed in the latest edition of the Mercer Workplace Survey, a broadly cited study that measures attitudes and perceptions of benefit plan participants nationwide.
Mercer reports that despite the concern, the firm has identified ways to enhance both benefit delivery and choice, thereby improving employee perception of benefits.
With benefit coverage cost, reach and adequacy seeming to dominate U.S. news headlines, this drop in perceived value should be of major concern to employers, legislators, regulators and other concerned parties, Mercer suggests. The firm reports that a closer examination of the findings shows that the decreased value perception is being driven by concerns about rising out-of-pocket health costs. And, perhaps of most concern, workers under 50 years of age who say their benefits are “definitely worth it” in terms of what they pay out of pocket has dropped precipitously in just two years from 45% to 30%.
Even with these concerns, participants overall see benefits as critically important. In fact, 93% agree with the statement “my health benefits are as important as my salary,” while 86% disagree with the statement “my benefits don’t matter much to me.”
“Year after year, we find our survey respondents ranking benefits as one of the most important components of their employment value proposition,” said Kerry Donoghue, partner, health and benefits business leader for Mercer’s benefits administration business. “We feel strongly, however, that there are some areas of concern that plan sponsors must take into account as they evaluate and design their benefit plans, particularly as it relates to discontent about rising out-of-pocket expenses and an overall level of relative dissatisfaction among younger employees.”
“Out-of-pocket expenses for employees are likely to continue to rise,” said Beth Umland, director of research for Mercer’s Health and Benefits business. “We’re seeing more cost-shifting and rapid growth in high-deductible consumer-directed health plans as employers are asked to cover more employees under health reform. So it’s critical for sponsors to explicitly communicate the value of the overall benefits program they provide and consider offering educational resources and tools to help participants better manage their health care spending. Giving employees more choice can also help build perceived value.”
Mercer encourages plan sponsors to address the erosion in perceived benefits by designing and implementing benefit plans that are more relevant and customizable to the individual participant. A full array of plan options, such as consumer-directed health plans and private exchanges, can give plan sponsors and their participants potential savings and greater flexibility that more closely aligns with their personal situation and lifestyles.
Is PPACA a Threat to Employer-Sponsored Plans?
Originally posted February 27, 2014 by Linda Bergthold on https://www.healthinsurance.org
If you are among the 60 percent of Americans who have health insurance coverage through your workplace, you may be worried about how the Affordable Care Act (aka Obamacare) is affecting your coverage.
There are so many rumors circulating about the impact of the new law on private companies that it is not surprising you may be concerned. First, there was a threat that employers would drop their full-time employees to part-time to avoid penalties in the law. Then we heard that they might drop your coverage altogether or raise your premiums because of the law. A few weeks ago, the Obama Administration delayed the implementation of the law forsome employers even longer.
Should any of this keep you awake at night?
To address some of these concerns, I asked Larry Levitt, the Senior Vice President for Special Initiatives at the Kaiser Family Foundation, to respond to some questions about employer-sponsored coverage. Larry has been working in health policy for over 25 years and was a Senior Health Policy Advisor in the Clinton Administration.
Are employers dropping health benefits?
Linda Bergthold: Despite all the dire warnings about medium- or large-size employers dropping their health insurance benefits or making significant changes, does it look like the Affordable Care Act is having that impact? Other than pure political pressure, why did the Administration delay the mandate for employers between 51 and 100 employees to provide insurance?
Larry Levitt: I always believed that the fear of larger employers dropping health benefits now or in the near future was highly exaggerated. The vast majority (93 percent) of firms with 50 or more employees already offer health coverage to their workers. They do so voluntarily to attract a quality workforce. That’s not likely to change anytime soon.
Over time, a small number of firms may drop health benefits. This is consistent with what the Congressional Budget Office has projected, showing a modest decline in employer coverage over time. Those that do drop benefits are likely to be smaller businesses not subject to the requirement to offer coverage or pay a penalty, and lower-wage firms where the tax exemption for employer-provided health benefits is lower and the availability of premium tax credits in exchanges under the Affordable Care Act (ACA) provide greater subsidies for their workers.
Ultimately, employers will likely make economic judgments about whether to offer benefits or not, balancing a variety of factors such as:
- The value of the tax exemption for employer-provided insurance, which is greater for higher-wage employees whose desires are likely to carry the most weight.
- The penalty for not offering coverage for medium and large firms.
- Perceptions about the attractiveness of insurance in exchanges vs. employer coverage.
One consequence of the problematic rollout of the exchanges is that employers are likely to be even more cautious about making changes in their offering of health benefits until they see how the new marketplace works over time.
For a variety of reasons, regulations for the employer requirement were issued very late, and there were some complicated details to work out around employer reporting. That led to a delay in the coverage requirement for one year, and a subsequent phase-in of the requirement for another year. This provides for a gradual transition in much the same way that the law phased-in the individual mandate.
Are they changing hourly requirements?
Linda Bergthold: There has also been a lot of hype about employers reducing employees to part-time status to avoid requirements of the ACA. Are you aware of any data that shows employers changing hourly requirements? If you are an employee working 35 hours a week, what can you expect?
Larry Levitt: The aggregate data show no systematic shift to part-time work, and the recent CBO report on the labor effects of the ACA said there is no compelling evidence that such a shift is occurring.
That should not be surprising. The employer requirement was delayed, so there has been no economic incentive to reduce worker hours. And, reducing hours is not always so easy. The work still needs to get done, so it could mean more disruption and greater costs associated with hiring and training.
That said, there have been anecdotal reports of some employers reducing work hours of some part-time workers in anticipation of the requirement to offer coverage to those working an average of 30 or more hours per week. That will no doubt continue to occur, though it’s unlikely to add up to many people in aggregate terms.
It’s also important to put all this in context. Employers that offer coverage have always had hour thresholds that determine eligibility for health benefits. All the ACA did was make those thresholds uniform. Any time you require such uniformity, there will be some amount of movement and change on the margin.
Shifting from a 30-hour threshold to 40 hours would largely undermine the employer requirement to offer coverage. It would be a relatively simple matter for employers to reduce work hours for employees not offered coverage to just below that 40-hour threshold with minimal disruption to their businesses. It’s certainly a reasonable debate as to whether employers should be required to offer coverage or pay a penalty, but such a significant change would have economic consequences, significantly reducing revenue to the federal government and raising costs.
Are mandated benefits driving up costs?
Linda Bergthold: Most employer-sponsored health benefit packages are quite comprehensive and already include almost all of the essential benefits required by the ACA. The exception might be rehabilitation and MH/SA (Mental Health/Substance Abuse) benefits that are not always included in every benefit plan. Is there any evidence that requiring essential benefits has driven up employer benefit costs?
Larry Levitt: With a few minor exceptions, such has habilitationand mental health parity in some cases, the essential benefits in the ACA are very similar to what employers already provide. In fact, states had a variety of options for setting benchmarks for the essential benefits, and in the vast majority of cases chose one of the largest existing small-business plans in the state, so the package is based in large part on what most employers were already providing.
There is some confusion, though, about what benefit rules apply to employers. Medium and large employers do not have to offer the essential benefits (although many already do, per above). Small-business insurance does have to include the essential benefits, but again, the effect is likely to be modest. And, small businesses that self-insure, which may be a growing trend — are not subject to the benefit requirements.
The private exchange trend
Linda Bergthold: Large-employee benefit firms like Mercer, Aon Hewitt and Towers Watson are all offering “private exchanges” to their large-employer clients. These exchanges give employees or retirees more choice of carriers and plans and ultimately propose to lower costs. How do you view the “private” exchange trend? Do you see a two-track exchange landscape – one for individuals and low -income citizens and the other for middle and upper class people with job-based benefits? What would the impact on the public exchanges be in that case?
Larry Levitt: These new private exchange share a name with the ACA but are really quite different. For example, there are nopremium subsidies for low- and middle-income enrollees in private exchanges.
These efforts are more part of a long-running discussion about the potential for employers to move towards a defined contribution approach for health insurance, much the way they did for pensionsthrough the shift to 401(k) plans. This may – with an emphasis on “may” – finally be happening for a variety of reasons. Maybe it’s the semantic similarity to the ACA exchanges. Maybe it’s a response to the long-term trend of health insurance costs rising faster than inflation and wages (even though we are at this moment in a period of historically low increases in premiums). Or, maybe it’s in anticipation of the so-called Cadillac plan tax, which will impose a40 percent tax on high-cost plans beginning in 2018 and will provide a strong incentive to reduce the cost and growth of employer-sponsored health benefits.
Private exchanges, like ACA exchanges, provide individual employees with a choice of health plans, though they also facilitate employers turning their contributions towards coverage into what is in effect a voucher, shifting the risk of rising costs to employees.
I don’t think private exchanges represent a two-track landscape any more than the reality that most people of working age will still get their insurance through employers, while some will be covered through Medicaid or ACA exchanges. And, the ACA will significantly equalize coverage across the population, so what kind of insurance people have access to will vary much less than it did historically.
The future of employer-based benefits
Linda Bergthold: What do you see as the future of our employer-based benefit approach? Will the economics of health reform ultimately force employers to drop this benefit and send employees to the public exchanges, which may turn out to provideless costly coverage?
Larry Levitt: There’s nothing inherently advantageous to our employer-based health insurance system, which is mostly an accident of history. Proposals from the right and the left have both advocated moving away from it.
However, employer-based coverage does do a remarkable job of pooling risk and facilitating people to sign up for coverage. And, any significant dropping of coverage by employers – which I don’t think is likely – would increase government expenditures for premium subsidies.
While the ACA does not require a shift away from employer-sponsored insurance, it does provide some of the same benefits as breaking the tie between employment and health insurance coverage. People who lose their jobs will no longer lose their insurance in most cases, with expanded Medicaid coverage, guaranteed access to private insurance, and premium subsidies in exchanges.
This will largely eliminate the problem of “job lock” where people stay in a job simply because they fear losing their insurance. (Note that some people are still left out, in particular many poor adults in states that choose not to expand Medicaid.)
So, while there is some uncertainty around the future of employer-based health insurance under the ACA, there is now a safety net that didn’t exist before, if the availability of employer coverage declines.
The Morning Rituals Of 15 Highly Successful Small Business Owners
Originally posted February 13, 2014 by Richard Feloni on https://www.businessinsider.com
Each morning, small business owners awake with a fresh determination to continue growing their companies, developing their employees, and keeping their customers happy.
This unique intimacy with both staff and clients requires a high level of effective time management that starts as soon as they get out of bed.
We spoke with 15 successful entrepreneurs who have developed morning routines that clear their minds, energize their bodies, and prepare them for the day ahead.
Jeffrey Zurofsky, CEO and co-founder of 'wichcraft, Riverpark, and Riverpark Farm, is 'an animal' about his rituals.
Zurofsky is a co-founder of the gourmet sandwich chain 'wichcraft, which started in New York City in 2003 and grew to 15 locations spread over New York, San Francisco, and Las Vegas. He and his two business partners, Tom Colicchio and Sisha Ortuzar, also opened the restaurant Riverpark and its accompanying urban farm.
Zurofsky is so passionate about his morning ritual that he prepares the night before, when he writes out his to-do list and organizes emails. Before he goes to sleep sometime between midnight and 2 a.m., he eats two scoops of almond butter because he says it helps build energy for the following morning.
After he wakes up at 5:30 (he makes up for the limited sleep with a nap later in the day), he walks his dog and does some kind of exercise, whether it's running, a workout, or squash. He follows it up with some meditation, and then he's ready for an intense meal. "I have an enormous breakfast: 1,000 calories, 30 grams of protein," he says. "It changes cuisines, but it's always eggs, a cup of legumes, veggies, and typically some meats — whether it's chicken breast or leftover something." He washes it all down with a glass of green juice with ginger.
Jeffrey 'jeffstaple' Ng, founder and owner of Staple Design, starts his day with a Japanese pour-over coffee.
Ng, who goes by jeffstaple, started his cutting edge design brand in New York City with a single T-shirt back in 1997. Staple Design has worked with international clients such as Nike, HBO, Puma, and Uniqlo, and his signature pigeon logo has made Staple Clothing an instantly recognizable brand in streetwear.
Ng brings the same energy to his mornings as he does to his business. He wakes at 8 every day and scans his phone for urgent emails or messages while still in bed. And rather than settling for a cup of Folgers, he hand grinds quality coffee beans and then does a Japanese pour-over, a style of drip brewing that takes five to 10 minutes for a single cup.
In the shower, he uses AquaNotes, a waterproof notepad, to jot down ideas as his mind wanders. Three times a week, he'll work out with his personal trainer after coffee.
And of course, his outfit is a top priority, which he said he starts from the bottom up: "I get dressed by choosing my footwear first, then build my outfit based on which shoes I'm going to be wearing. Luckily, my wardrobe is mostly clothing I've designed...so it's pretty straightforward."
Jamie Walker, co-founder and CEO of Fit Approach and SweatGuru, starts her day with a 'good sweat session.'
Walker and her cousin Alyse Mason-Brill started Fit Approach in 2010 as a San Francisco-based fitness "boot camp" that has grown to a network of over 4,000 "ambassadors" throughout the country. The two then launched SweatGuru last year as a tool to set up workouts with friends and colleagues. Walker says that over 1,500 businesses are using SweatGuru's services.
Taking a dose of her own medicine, Walker gets up at 5:30 each morning to get in a "good sweat session," which can mean running, working out, or yoga. It helps her begin her day "on a refreshed and calm note," and making exercise her first priority ensures that it doesn't fall off the to-do list later, "since things tend to come up throughout the day when you own two businesses."
Dave Gilboa, co-founder and co-CEO of Warby Parker, gets going by riding his bike to work.
Gilboa founded the innovative eyewear company Warby Parker with Neil Blumenthal, Andrew Hunt, and Jeffrey Raider back in 2010. Since that time, the brand has sold over half a million frames, a healthy number for an online startup competing against the near-monopolistic Luxottica prescription eyewear corporation.
Gilboa's not really a morning person, but he thinks he's found a solution: "I'm usually a little groggy in the morning, but I find that anytime I exercise to get the blood flowing, I have more energy throughout the day. So I've been riding my bike to work, even in the winter." He usually makes it to the office by 8 a.m., with his brain "woken up" by the bike ride.
Geoff McQueen, CEO of AffinityLive, holds stand-up meetings each morning in the office.
AffinityLive is a growing small business in Silicon Valley that creates business automation software. It doubled its business last year and the team made significant software upgrades.
McQueen hates meetings that serve only as status updates, because he finds that they waste time and lower efficiency. But he also knows the importance of checking in with his team. His solution is a stand-up meeting to start each day.
"We all gather in the middle of our office and stand while bringing up any urgent updates that need to be discussed," McQueen says. "Standing enforces a sense of urgency, so these meetings are quick and efficient, and I'm still able to get a sense of exactly what's going on with my business.
Elle Kaplan, founding partner and CEO of LexION Capital Management, draws inspirations from watching the sun rise over New York.
Kaplan started LexION in 2010, making it one of the few American asset management firms owned by a woman. Within her first month, she achieved $1 million in assets, due to the network she established at firms she had previously worked for.
Kaplan wakes up some time before dawn to make coffee and give her dog Magic a bone. She then gets to reading the news and sifting through emails.
"Although I have technically begun working, the dog at my feet and the rising orange sun evoke a time before the work day begins," she says. "I look out over the park at Lincoln Center and see New York waking up, the energy invigorating me, too, and I get excited for the day. And I am ready to work."
Click here to see the full list of Small Business Owners
6 Ways to Say Goodbye to Excuses and Achieve Your Goals
Originally posted on https://ebn.benefitnews.com
“Often, people fall back on excuses and give up on trying to reach their goals,” says business strategist Dan Waldschmidt, author of “Edgy Conversations: How Ordinary People Achieve Outrageous Success.” Follow these tips to trick yourself out of making excuses and to lead you down a more successful path in business and in life.
Waldschmidt says that it’s the small-minded people who are “cranky and eager to point out others’ mistakes.” This tactic is only used by low-achievers to take the spotlight off their own failure. So don’t blame others, it’s purely lazy.
Put time in for your boss because that matters, explains Waldschmidt. What doesn’t matter is television, certain meetings that suck time out of your and anything else that gets in the way of productivity. He says to replace entertainment with any activity that meets your goal.
Waldschmidt says that we’re alive to succeed. If you let your past failures creep into your current work, you won’t get anywhere.
Ask yourself, “What can I do differently next time?” and then actually do things differently, according to Waldschmidt. “Learn from mistakes and use the lessons to dominate,” he adds.
If exercise helps you clear your head and work harder, then do it. Invest in activities that help you feel good about yourself and your goals, so that you don’t have any excuses for not achieving them.
If you get into a funk, apologize to yourself and those around you and you’ll snap out of it quickly, Waldschmidt says. When you learn to genuinely recognize how your mood is affecting yourself and others’ ability to get things done, you’ll change.
Employers’ Corporate Wellness Incentives Climb to New Heights
Originally posted February 20, 2014 by Michael Giardina on https://ebn.benefitnews.com
With a reported 15% increase in wellness incentive spending within their health care plans, corporate employers have their sights set on improving their workforce’s overall health in 2014 through wellness programs for both employees and their significant others, according to a new survey from Fidelity Investments and the National Business Group on Health.
The fifth annual study finds that corporate employers expect to spend an average of $594 per employee on wellness-based incentives, an increase from 2013’s $521 average. For smaller employers with less than 5,000 employees, the employee average reached $595, a $151 increase from levels reported in 2013.
Approximately 95% of employers plan to offer some sort of health improvement program, highlighting that benefit plan sponsors have labeled wellness programs as an integral part of their benefits program in this post-Affordable Care Act world. Also, 74% note that they offer incentives for employee participation, which is a 12% dip from last year.
“While the use and measurement of corporate wellness programs continue to evolve, it has become clear that many employers understand the value of – and are committed to – wellness-based incentives in their company health plan,” says Robert Kennedy, health and welfare practice leader with Fidelity’s benefits consulting business.
The most popular programs include lifestyle management courses that focus on physical activity, weight and stress management. Disease and care management programs – which look to manage chronic health conditions – were also favored.
Doling out for spouses/HSAs
From the 2014 survey, Fidelity and NBGH found that nearly four out of 10 employers disclosed that their plan will include options for spouses or domestic partners. Last year, results highlighted that 54% set out plans to expand wellness-based incentives to include dependents and roughly half said they were including spouses and dependents in wellness communications.
Average payouts for spouse and domestic partners are expected to reach $530 in 2014. Employers with more than 20,000 employees expect to spend an average of $611 on this group.
Other incentives such as heath savings accounts and flexible spending accounts were expected to incentivize more employees use. Roughly 34% list that they plant to contribute to these accounts in order to bolster disease or care management engagement and 30% hope these deposits will add to weight management programs participation.
“Based on the feedback from this year’s survey respondents, it’s obvious that wellness programs not only play a key role in many corporate health care plans today, but they’ll continue to be an integral part of corporate benefit programs in the future,” says Helen Darling, the retiring president and CEO of NBGH.