"Our own network" is really two builds
They're often confused, but they're separate vehicles with separate rules. You build the first before you can safely run the second.
Six stages, each gated by the last
The foundation we already own
RCH (licensed general acute care hospital, ED, clinics) + a self-funded employee plan of ~1,405 lives administered by Cigna. That captive population is our pilot lab and our first proof of savings. Structure: existing. License: CDPH hospital license (held).
Direct-to-employer contracting
Objective: bank lives + cost/quality data with zero new regulatory burden. Structure: RCH contracts directly with the 12 self-funded employers in town — bundled/case rates, centers of excellence, near-site clinics. Lives: hundreds → low thousands. Gate to advance: demonstrated savings on our own plan + 1–2 reference employers.
Stand up the delivery network (Track A)
Objective: "our own network" in the provider sense — controlled PCP & specialty capacity. Structure: choose a CPOM-compliant vehicle — a 1206(l) medical foundation (40+ MDs, 10+ specialties, ⅔ full-time, research/education mission) or a friendly-PC + MSO — wrapped by a clinically-integrated network that aggregates the independent physicians Optum/Beaver doesn't own. Gate: physician-supply census clears DMHC adequacy math (≥1 PCP : 2,000 lives); foundation/MSO stood up with counsel.
Begin Track B — take risk
Objective: capture the savings; align the money with health. Structure: a narrow/tiered network rented to a carrier/TPA → shared-savings → partial → global capitation as a delegated risk-bearing organization (RBO) under a licensed plan. License: taking global risk triggers at least a Restricted/Limited Knox-Keene license; meet DMHC RBO solvency standards. Gate: actuarial & reserve readiness; stop-loss in place.
Own the plan (provider-sponsored health plan)
Objective: sell coverage directly to the City & employers — the full "own network." Structure: a provider-sponsored health plan. License: full Knox-Keene (DMHC) — tangible-net-equity reserves, network-adequacy & timely-access filings, annual reporting. Also triggers: AG review if via affiliation (Corp. Code §5914) and OHCA material-change notice (AB 1415). Target: the ~22,000 capturable lives. Gate: capital, reserves, regulator approval.
Replicate into the Pass
Objective: a multi-city, at-risk, whole-person system. Structure: extend the network + plan into Calimesa / Yucaipa, then Beaumont / Banning (Riverside County — new data & provider set). Gate: Redlands model proven and profitable.
Stage → structure → license → lives
| Stage | What you build | Legal structure | License / trigger | Lives |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 Today | Hospital + employee plan | Existing NFP hospital | CDPH hospital license | ~1,405 |
| 1 Direct-to-employer | Bundles, COE, near-site clinics | RCH contracts | None | 100s–1k |
| 2 Delivery network | PCP core + independents (CIN) | 1206(l) foundation or PC+MSO | None (CPOM-compliant) | attributed |
| 3 Take risk | Narrow network → capitation | RBO delegated by a plan | Restricted Knox-Keene | 1k–10k |
| 4 Own the plan | Provider-sponsored health plan | Licensed health plan | Full Knox-Keene + AG/OHCA | ~22k |
| 5 Regional | Multi-city system | Replicated | Per market | regional |
Lives figures are illustrative planning targets. See Market Opportunity for the model behind the ~22k.
The go / no-go gates between stages
Each stage adds cost, risk, and regulation. Don't climb until the prior gate is genuinely cleared.
- 1 → 2: Are we saving money on our own 1,405 lives, with ≥1 reference employer? If not, the model isn't real yet.
- 2 → 3: Does the physician-supply census actually clear network-adequacy (1:2,000 PCP, time/distance)? Is the foundation/MSO legally sound?
- 3 → 4: Can we hold global risk without blowing up — reserves, stop-loss, actuarial discipline, RBO solvency met?
- 4 → 5: Is the Redlands plan profitable and durable before we spread thin into the Pass?
California regulatory checkpoints on the path
Risks to the pathway
- Physician supply locked up by Optum/Beaver
- 1206(l)'s 40-MD / 10-specialty bar is a heavy lift
- Capital for the employed-equivalent core
- Reserves & solvency burden of bearing risk
- Catastrophic-claim exposure before scale
- Regulatory timeline (DMHC, AG, OHCA)