Stacy Weeks, administrator for the proposed Nevada Health Authority, presented an informational briefing to the Public Employees Benefits Program board describing a proposed structure that would consolidate payer and regulatory functions and provide shared purchasing, analytic and pharmacy resources to state health programs.

Weeks said the proposal would not immediately change benefits or apply Medicaid payment rates to other markets; rather, it would give PEBP access to analytic capacity, pharmacy purchasing strategies and an all‑payer claims database that could inform population-health work and contracting strategies. “This is not to apply the Medicaid program to any other market,” Weeks said, adding the intent is to “leverage smart ideas and smart strategies” and to give PEBP more capacity for negotiating networks and bringing competition to state procurements.

Why it matters: PEBP covers state employees and retirees and has limited market leverage with some providers and vendors. The Nevada Health Authority proposal aims to centralize purchasing power and data to improve network adequacy, reduce duplicative vendor contracts and enable cross-market contracting strategies that could affect costs and access over time.

Key elements described

Weeks outlined components legislators saw in a proposed BDR: a purchasing unit with independent authority to recommend purchasing strategies; an office to oversee an all‑payer claims database; a health‑care quality and licensure unit; an inspector general for Medicaid; and a separate Department of Human Services to house direct provider services. She said the health authority would include the Silver State Health Insurance Exchange and could give PEBP technical access to pharmacy teams, actuaries and procurement staff.

Board concerns: data privacy and board role

Board members asked how PEBP participant data would be protected. Michelle Kelly, a board member, said employees frequently ask about confidentiality. Weeks replied that “there’s nothing that’s gonna change that’s currently happening today” and that any data-sharing would remain subject to HIPAA and other privacy laws; she described the all‑payer claims database as a tool that jurisdictions and plans are already expected to report to and said the authority would use aggregated analyses to inform purchasing and population-health strategies.

Members also asked how the PEBP board’s role would change. Weeks said the PEBP board would be maintained, would continue to recommend hires and be consulted on strategies; the authority, she said, would not unilaterally alter statutory duties without the board’s sign-off and necessary statutory changes.

Next steps and cautions

Weeks said a BDR and budget proposal were expected during the legislative session and that specifics could change as bills and budget language are drafted. She emphasized that any purchasing or structural changes would require board consideration and, where statutes must be changed, the regular legislative process. Several board members expressed openness to the proposal’s potential benefits (including improved competition and vendor consolidation) while noting the need for more detail on data security, consumer protections and the mechanics of shared procurement.

Ending note

Weeks offered to meet with board members individually and present follow-up modeling and options. The board asked staff to keep members informed as legislative drafts emerge and to request clarifying detail on governance, data security and timelines before any statutory changes are finalized.