Rae Woods (00:14):
From Advisory Board, we are bringing you a Radio Advisory, your weekly download on how to untangle healthcare's most pressing challenges. My name is Rachel Woods. You can call me Rae. Look, we spend a lot of time on Radio Advisory talking about the financial fragility of health systems, and that's for good reason. You know that 2023 was the worst financial year on record, and recovery since then has been slow with margins still hovering around 1%. And at the same time, there's this perception in the industry that while providers are struggling, health plans are doing just fine. But that's not actually the case. Over the last few years, we've been tracking a steady, and frankly, in some cases, dramatic financial deterioration on the payer side of the industry. And it's hitting regional and Blues plans particularly hard.

(01:05):
Now, if you zoom out, it might be tempting to frame this as just a rough stretch that health plans need to ride out. And for some of the national payers, that might actually be true. But for regional plans, it's not just a bad year. Frankly, it's not even just a couple of bad years. The growth engines that once powered them have all but disappeared. And now, plans are finding themselves in the middle of a reset, learning how to operate a health plan that can generate sustainable margins under entirely different conditions. I want to understand that reset and where regional health plans are going next. To do that, I've invited Vice President of Advisory Board's health plan research practice, Jared Landis. And make sure you stay tuned to the very end of this episode. Abby's going to be hopping on to give you an update on the state of the Rural Health Transformation Fund because there's a key deadline that we want to make sure that you don't miss. But for now, let's focus on the health plan conversation.

(02:00):
Jared, welcome back to Radio Advisory.

Jared Landis (02:03):
Thanks, Rae. It's been a while. Good to be here.

Rae Woods (02:06):
All right. This is the part of the conversation where I do a mea culpa immediately. You haven't been on Radio Advisory since the first year that we did episodes way back in 2020. That's my fault. High time that we had you back on.

Jared Landis (02:20):
In fairness to myself and to everyone else out in the healthcare industry, I think people hear me talk enough, so this is a good little break for them. And for the purposes of today's conversation, I've spent the last five years leading our health plan research practice and spend all my time with health plans, so I have a lot to bring to the table that I've learned in those last five years.

Rae Woods (02:43):
And I want to bring what you've learned in the last five years to start thinking about the next five years for health plans. But before we get into what's next for health plans, I want to examine what happened to their finances and what it exposed for regional health plans in particular. Where should we actually begin that story?

Jared Landis (03:03):
I think the simplistic view, the commonly cited narrative, is just a demarcation coming out of the pandemic. So the view is that plans fared well during the pandemic, premiums still came in, but deferred care meant claims weren't being paid out. Medicaid funding was enhanced. Then, the pandemic ended, so to speak, and utilization from deferred care bounced back, enhanced Medicaid funding went away, the Medicaid unwinding happened, and that's sort of the commonly accepted narrative.

Rae Woods (03:35):
You started to name things that happened in 2022, 2023. Is that really when the financial picture started to change?

Jared Landis (03:45):
So everything I said is accurate. The deferred care bounced back. The Medicaid enhanced funding went away. That did create a less favorable financial environment for plans, but it leaves a lot out. On the growth side, for a number of years, really decade-plus, health plans had experienced favorable growth conditions. Medicare Advantage rise, Medicaid expansion, managed care becoming the standard mode of Medicaid operations, individual markets stabilizing.

Rae Woods (04:17):
Lots of growth in the ACA as part of those enhanced subsidies.

Jared Landis (04:22):
Yep, absolutely. So these things all happened at slightly different points in time, but they all created new growth lanes for plans over the last 5, 10, 15 years. But 2024, MA rates were constrained in a way we never seen before, and that's largely continued. For Medicaid, a state can only expand coverage once. They can only adopt the managed care model once. So once that growth happens, it can't happen again.

(04:50):
The individual market went from open-field growth to competitive, and then the creation and expiration of enhanced subsidies destabilized that market in a way similar to what you saw early in the individual market's existence causing plans to struggle with their pricing. So that's kind of the growth side. And then, there's also the cost side.

Rae Woods (05:11):
So what started happening in 2024 is that all of these market forces that were the tailwinds, the wind at health plans' back, more MA growth, Medicaid expansion, ACA growth, predictable cost trends, those were all good things for plans.

(05:26):
It sounds like 2024 is when conditions really changed and those tailwinds suddenly became headwinds. Bottom line, there's a reversal, and the reversal is happening across multiple forces seemingly all at once. How bad of a financial hit was 2024 for health plans?

Jared Landis (05:46):
Before I answer that, I do think, Rae, you teed up the cost side of the equation. As we reach 2024, we're looking at a fundamentally different environment related to cost driver and plans struggling to project medical trend, as you said, in that there are new types of utilization, new cost inputs, the rise of GLP-1s, cell and gene therapies certainly, but also post-pandemic, we've seen a boom in behavioral health, good for individuals in society, bad for payers from a new financial pressure standpoint. Simultaneously, unit costs went up at the same time. During the pandemic, providers negotiated at higher rates to reflect labor and supply costs. Out-of-network payments have been higher than anticipated through No Surprises Act.

Rae Woods (06:31):
This is a long list, Jared, and this is perhaps why we refer to it as the perfect storm impacting health plans.

Jared Landis (06:40):
Yep. So put it all together and suddenly plans don't have a clear path to growth. They're struggling to price their products. And that's when, I think, your question about what really happened to finances in 2024, that's what comes next.

Rae Woods (06:53):
So how bad were the finances?

Jared Landis (06:55):
First, I'd say there's a misperception that health insurance is this incredibly lucrative business, right?

Rae Woods (07:01):
Yeah.

Jared Landis (07:01):
Margins are fundamentally capped for insurers post-Affordable Care Act. There are MLR requirements about how much they have to pay out on care. Typically, you're looking at something like a 2% to 4% operating margin in a good year for a well-run plan. Now, depending on your source, on average 2023, Blues plans were slightly positive operating margin, 0.3, 0.4%.

Rae Woods (07:27):
Oh, wow. So very slightly positive.

Jared Landis (07:30):
Very slightly for the Blues. The nationals are performing better from a margin standpoint. But if you look at the overall health insurance market, slightly harder, but Blues, yeah, very thin operating margin, razor's edge, if you will. 2024, that reverses. Average margin, again, depending on your sources, somewhere from -1.5 to -3%. Only eight Blues plans operated with a positive margin.

Rae Woods (07:53):
Wait, wait, wait. Only eight Blues plans operated with a positive margin?

Jared Landis (07:56):
Yep.

Rae Woods (07:57):
I'm used to talking about the financial fragility of health systems. What you're describing is extraordinary fragility.

Jared Landis (08:03):
Yep. So the majority of Blues plans, and I think this applies to regional plans more broadly, very difficult financial environment as we are looking at 2024, and they're seeing all those new costs come in the system while their growth lanes dry up.

Rae Woods (08:19):
I'm glad you brought up the difference between the national plans and the Blues plans. And the average margin for Blues plans is now in the negative, but the spread, the range, I think paints an even worse picture. I want to say that the lowest margin for a Blues plan in 2024 was almost -20%.

Jared Landis (08:38):
Yeah, you've seen some very scary numbers, especially smaller Blues plans that lack the scale and some of the both geographic size or geographic coverage density of lives, if you will, as well as the backend operational capabilities. They've really seen some scary margins as a result of all these new cost inputs.

Rae Woods (09:00):
And I want to come back to the very, very long list of headwinds that we named, especially the headwinds that once were tailwinds. They're on the growth side, they are on the cost side, and there's just too many of them.

Jared Landis (09:15):
And you cut me off, Rae. You didn't even let me talk about public scrutiny on utilization management practices and other typical insurance tools that have been harder for plans to deploy.

Rae Woods (09:26):
That's right. The market forces are getting worse, and our ability to deploy the tools that actually work is getting harder because of all of this scrutiny. And that's, again, why we describe this as a perfect storm. So we're no longer in a phase where in the past, if one line of business took a hit, plans could still make up for those losses elsewhere because it sounds to me that there are just too many negative market forces hitting all at once and that they're disproportionately impacting the regional plans and the Blues plans.

Jared Landis (09:56):
Yeah, those negative forces, they hit differently in different lines of business, but they do hit every line of business. So there isn't that same spread or diversification opportunity that you think you get from operating in Medicare Advantage, employer-sponsored insurance, Medicaid managed care. And we haven't even mentioned employer-sponsored insurance yet, but just to round out that picture, at the macro level, it's a stagnant market.

(10:23):
It's not growing overall. A plan can only really grow by taking an account from another plan. Employers continue to shift from fully-funded to self-funded, which is less profitable for most plans at the same time. A lot of these utilization and cost pressures, GLP-1s, behavioral health, they're most prominent in the employer-sponsored space.

Rae Woods (10:45):
So if I reflect on the timeline that we have so far, early pandemic years, plans are doing okay. 2023, things start to shift, and 2024, the bottom just falls out for health plans. And they're realizing that their traditional avenues for growth, and even their traditional cost management tactics, they're not going to be enough to make up for these losses. If 2024 was the year that the bottom fell out, how would you characterize last year?

Jared Landis (11:11):
Since 2024, when you talk to Blues or regional plans, you almost hear this kind of universal three-year recovery plan put forth. So 2024 bottom fell out, right? So their view, 2025 was about stopping the bleed. 2026 is a bridge or transition year. And 2027 is when plans are really looking to get back on favorable financial footing. The year of stabilization is 2026. It's about crunching the numbers for 2027. I think that timing mechanism, that's worth unpacking a little bit more too.

Rae Woods (11:48):
Two things jumped out for me there. First is that you said that there's this kind of universal approach. We need a three-year plan to turn things around. And the second thing that jumped out to me is the phrase, stopping the bleed, which I don't think is a phrase that you are using, Jared. That is what health plan leaders are telling you when they talk about this three-year turnaround. Should I be thinking three years as a long time or a short time for a turnaround?

Jared Landis (12:15):
Both. I'm sure it feels long for the plans in the moment, but a lot of this has to do with the timing of the health insurance business and the exact process and mechanism here. It varies by line of business, but for the most part, plans are doing the work to set their rates for the next year and the first half of the current year.

Rae Woods (12:34):
Yeah. They have to do their math by forecasting into the future, which is always risky.

Jared Landis (12:39):
Yeah. So 2025's rates are determined in the first half of 2024. So plans are learning all the things we've been talking about across 2024, but they can't really apply those learnings to their 2025 rate-setting bid submission process. So what they learn in 2024 doesn't really help them in 2025. It can help them in 2026. So that kind of leads to this three-year timeline.

Rae Woods (13:06):
So if that's the case, what were they doing in 2025 to stop the bleed?

Jared Landis (13:11):
In 2025, the big thing plans could do was revisit their underwriting process, get their pricing better aligned with their new reality. But again, they'll only see the effects of that effort in 2026. So as far as short-term levers in 2025 impacting 2025 performance, not that much. Some Blues had gotten out over their skis on GLP-1 coverage, so they pulled that back.

(13:35):
You saw layoffs or buyouts across many of those organizations, but those are kind of Band-Aid on a broken leg kind of solutions. And accordingly, 2025 finances, they didn't look that different from 2024. Seven of Blues reporting positive operating margins. Collectively, you're looking at a negative two and a half operating margin for Blues in 2025. Very similar, probably even a little bit worse than 2024.

Rae Woods (14:01):
So stopping the bleed was really about the short-term measures, the measures that plan leaders know are only going to work in the near term: cutting costs, doing hiring freezes, doing layoffs, as you said, in some cases, stopping GLP-1 coverage altogether as a way to get out in front of some of those utilization shifts. Take me to 2026 now. This is now when the turnaround strategy can actually begin. What does that look like for the regional plans?

Jared Landis (14:30):
The first part, again, gets back to the underwriting and pricing process. And they won't really know if they got that right until 2026 plays out. So they should be in a better place in 2025, but they won't know for sure until 2026 plays out. And that's why the path to more favorable financials for them really begins in 2027.

(14:51):
The other thing that they now have had enough time to do in 2026 is to look at their operations with significant intensity and to move from admin cost takeout and just cost-cutting measures to try and redesign their operations. And at the same time that they're moving into that phase, obviously, artificial intelligence has continued to proliferate in the healthcare industry. So that's a big part of this operational efficiency story that is playing out with health plans in 2026.

Rae Woods (15:27):
I want to come back to the idea that this playbook is one that seemingly all plans are adopting and getting it right is more important for the more financially fragile plans, which are the regional plans and the Blues plans. That makes me a little bit nervous that all the plans are operating the same playbook. Should it make me nervous, or is that a viable option?

Jared Landis (15:51):
I think it's a viable option. Rae, you all here on Radio Advisory, you've talked a lot about how health systems, they're all pursuing this strategy to capture commercial volumes and it's a zero-sum game. That's not the case here with health plans. They can all improve their pricing. They can all improve their operations and get more efficient and more effective.

(16:13):
And everyone can do that. Will everyone do that? Of course not. Because it's not about competition. Their ability to do the math more correctly, their ability to take broken processes, make them more effective, more efficient, it's not dependent on another stakeholder. There's a lot that they control here related to this turnaround.

Rae Woods (16:35):
And I think the nature of regional plans allows for that, to your point about not competing with each other. What BCBS of Michigan does isn't going to impact what BCBS of North Carolina does because they're just totally different markets.

Jared Landis (16:47):
Yeah. Now, that's a little bit simplistic now that the second Blues bid is a reality and there is the opportunity for Blues to play across multiple states following the antitrust settlement a few years ago. So there is some competition there, but by and large, the market is already carved up. So that's the starting point, is the carved-up market.

Rae Woods (17:09):
So if it's reasonable, at least on paper, for the regional plans to be adopting the same three-year turnaround strategy, does that also mean that all regional plans and Blues plans can actually pull off this kind of financial and operational turnaround?

Jared Landis (17:25):
Now, they could. Will they? I don't think everyone will pull it off with the same degree of success, right? And you see that already in the spread of the margins that we've been talking about across these plans. So the success factors are going to be some of your typical things. They're going to be how effective is your leadership? How strong are your operators? A lot of plan work is about operations and the nitty-gritty. So how strong are you in those areas is going to be big.

(17:55):
And then, of course, because we're talking about how the market is carved up between Blues plans, there's some geography is destiny elements in there. Different markets are more favorable than others. And then we already mentioned the size and scale factor and how that might play in as far as backend operations being able to make the investments you need for those operational efficiencies. So no, everyone won't execute as effectively because of all those differences, but they could all get to the same place in theory.

Rae Woods (19:12):
I want to get us to present time. 2024 was this moment of realization, the bottom has fallen out. 2025, it's let's do the short-term fixes and run the numbers and do the math to set plans up for success in 2026. You already said it's too soon to tell how successful plans will be, but what is it that they actually set out to do differently this year? And what will we need to watch to determine if they are successful at the end of 2026?

Jared Landis (19:41):
Yeah, I think my team will be coming to you with more on this later in the year related to this big operational efficiency effort that I've already alluded to, but that's where a lot of the gains are going to come in 2026 and hopefully play out in 2027, put these plans in a better position for favorable finances going forward.

(20:01):
And that operational efficiency, like I said, it's really spurred by the adoption of AI across the enterprise. When you talk to health plan leaders, they talk about two things: redesigning the model and eliminating work altogether. So that, again, gets back to the idea that it's not just about cutting costs, it's about doing things differently.

Rae Woods (20:23):
I'm going to push you a little bit here. I know you said it's too soon to tell. We got to wait until the end of the year to really see if this Europe turnaround actually turned things around for health plans, but we're already more than halfway through 2026. Are there any signs that this is working or perhaps signs that it's not working?

Jared Landis (20:42):
Because the Blues, they don't have a requirement to report out on a quarterly basis, oftentimes you're looking at the for-profit, the nationals as kind of a proxy for what is happening with the health insurance business. I think we've seen, by and large, not universal, but by and large, we've seen more favorable quarterly earnings calls with the nationals this year. The tenor on those is different. Q2 earnings calls, a lot of those have just come out. They're looking better initially.

(21:11):
So we can use that as a proxy. And then you don't want to see things that we've already talked about, such as buyouts, layoffs, things of that, that are just about more of that Band-Aid on the broken leg. Just whatever costs we can save, we got to save those costs. So you could look for those things as you're trying to get a read on how it's going for the Blues and the regionals in 2026.

Rae Woods (21:36):
Jared, so far in this conversation, we've been talking about a turnaround strategy. And frankly, we've been talking about a lot of blocking and tackling. You've got to do the math, you've got to do the bids right, you've got to get your operations in order.

(21:47):
But I have to admit, I'm also feeling like we're not just talking about operations. It sounds to me that you're actually describing potentially a new era for health plans, especially if I reflect back on all of those growth engines, not only dried up, but became challenges. Do you agree that we're potentially entering a new era for health plans?

Jared Landis (22:11):
In some ways, yes. In some ways it's the same opportunities they've always had from a growth playbook standpoint. There's the improved margins on the book of business that you have. That's what we're talking about with a lot of these operational improvements. Then there is the capture more lives, grow your market share.

(22:30):
That is different because of the things we've alluded to across line of business. It's not impossible for plans, it's just different. It's harder, as we've said. And then the third part for plans thinking about that growth is they still want to diversify. They still want a portfolio and to be an organization that is more than just an insurance company. And those are growth levers as in growth lanes as well.

Rae Woods (22:55):
But it sounds like operational excellence matters as much, maybe even more than the growth strategy once did.

Jared Landis (23:03):
It's been a real pivot. And that makes sense just given the financial environment that we've talked about. When things were favorable for plans during the pandemic and they're sitting on larger sources of capital, that's when they're looking to make a lot of those corporate strategy big moves, M&A acquisition as finances are tighter. And we see this on the health system side too. As finances are tighter, you've got to make sure that your operation's in order, that you're good at running your core business. And then, in this case, that means good at running your core insurance business.

Rae Woods (23:39):
I want to take us to the future and start with 2027 because we're taking this year-by-year approach. What does winning actually look like for a health plan in 2027? Is it simply having a positive margin? Can we get back to growth? Is it something else entirely?

Jared Landis (23:55):
I think it is that positive margin. Sure, you want to continue to look for opportunities for growth. The other thing that as you look at 2027, we've started to see this play out, but this conversation is about the Blues, we've got to acknowledge you're seeing more Blues come together to put themselves in a position of strength. You've seen affiliations across different Blue Cross Blue Shield plans. Blue Cross Michigan and Blue Cross Vermont, that was the early one several years ago. But since then, Cambia and Regents, they're combining with Blue Cross North Dakota, Blue Cross Arkansas and an affiliation, Highmark and Blue Cross Kansas City. So you're seeing that. And the idea there is to put those combined entities in a better position to where they can do that operational work really well and they can grow because now they're operating across multiple markets.

Rae Woods (24:47):
Throughout this conversation, we've talked about the fragility of regional plans. In fact, there's enough fragility that those plans are coming together to try to get some shared protection, some shared scale while they're thinking about shoring up their core capabilities and diversifying their revenue streams, expanding their capabilities. I have to ask though, are there any inherent advantages that make regional plans uniquely positioned to succeed in the future?

Jared Landis (25:15):
I do think there are. And it's interesting because we actually talk about the flip side when we talk to Blues and regionals that being the local health plan isn't going to be enough for them anymore. That competitive advantage isn't enough. They're going to be competing with the nationals on cost and service and effectiveness of their business. At the same time, that advantage does still exist. Healthcare is still local. There's a lot of brand affinity and markets for individual Blues plans and for the individual regional plans that operate in there. So I think they have some of those brand advantages still, even if they are competing across nationals and even with other Blues nowadays.

(25:54):
And then the other thing that they tend to have is they tend to have tighter relationships with providers. They're in the market, their executives maybe flow between. The chief medical officer at the health plan oftentimes has come from a health system in the market. So there are just connections there in the way that geography in a market operate and people know each other and people flow between organizations and things like that. And that puts the Blues and the regional plans in a better position to move things forward with providers because they have those relationships. So again, is every Blues plan going to make that progress? I don't know that that's guaranteed, but they can continue to push on those provider relationships as a path towards competitive advantage.

Rae Woods (26:39):
So, Jared, let's say it takes me another six years to get you back on Radio Advisory. I'm going to do my best to avoid that, but for the sake of the argument, let's fast-forward further into the future. What would be the most important lessons that regional plans and Blues plans in particular learned to set themselves up for the future and not just survive this rough patch of road, but really pivot and transform into the next era of their business?

Jared Landis (27:06):
Health plans, they're constantly and they're going to continue to be asked to do more, to be more, to meet a growing set of purchaser demands. What I hope they have learned is that even while they are doing that, they're expanding their capabilities, they're bringing more services to the market, that the lesson they are taking away is you can't stop being a really good insurance company and you can't stop being operationally excellent, to use an all-encompassing phrase, you've got to be very good at what is core to your business, even as you try to do more and be more.

Rae Woods (27:43):
Well, Jared, thanks so much for finally coming back on Radio Advisory.

Jared Landis (27:48):
My pleasure, Rae. It wasn't too terribly painful, so I'll probably do it again if you ask.

Rae Woods (27:54):
Happy to have you back. I went into this conversation with Jared expecting a very specific kind of story. It felt familiar to that children's book about the terrible, no good, very bad years. But the story that Jared told is actually one that's different. It's less about a crisis to endure and more about a turnaround. And the plans that succeed with that turnaround are the ones that are going to do what any health plan technically could do.

(28:25):
It's about forecasting effectively. It's about improving operational efficiency in a way that benefits the bottom line beyond the 12-month clock. It's about strategically expanding service offerings while never taking your eye off the ball of what it means to be an excellent insurance organization. There's a lot of work to be done. And remember, as always, we're here to help.

Abby Burns (28:51):
Hey, it's Abby. We wanted to give you an update on the Rural Health Transformation Program, the activity that's happened so far, what's next, and the deadlines you need to be aware of. First, let's start with a refresher on the basics. The Rural Health Transformation Fund is a $50 billion five-year initiative authorized through the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, and it allocates $10 billion to states every year from 2026 through 2030. There are two things I want to flag right off the bat. One, money is allocated to states. It's then up to the states, whether it's a state health agency, a specific task force, et cetera, to decide how to allocate their funds to recipients.

(29:33):
Notice, I said recipients and not providers. This is perhaps the biggest misconception I still hear, so I want to be really clear. This is not a hospital fund. The second thing to be aware of is the math matters here. This $50 billion is flowing into rural health at the same time that Medicaid cuts from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act are taking money out. $50 billion in over five years, $137 billion out over the next 10 years. So this funding is exciting, but it's not a coup de grâce. With that out of the way, we're halfway through the first year of funding. Here's what's happened so far. Last year, all 50 states applied and were approved for some level of funding by December.

(30:16):
And there are guidelines about what types of initiatives can be funded. But because each state is responsible for distributing their own awards, anyone seeking funding needs to be sure and align their requests with state priorities, cater to state-specific governance and reporting requirements, and track the specific deadlines your state is operating on. That said, even with state-level differences, we do see some early patterns developing. Some early investment areas include workforce, like a $5 million program in Iowa to fund bonus and relocation costs for rural providers. Expanding access to care and strengthening EMS. For example, there's a $7 million program in Oklahoma to fund EMS vehicles and tech innovation.

(30:58):
These awards seem to be, so far, a bit more structural, but higher dollar value. For example, $25 million for Pennsylvania providers to modernize their tech backbone and enable interoperability. $61 million over three years in Wisconsin meant to improve patient access to digital health. These things are all just a small flavor. There's, of course, a lot more to come in terms of what gets funded and in pretty short order. Now, here's the timeline you need to be aware of. With the Rural Health Transformation Program, states have had to build the plane while they fly it. They spent the start of the year issuing RFPs, funding winners, running pilots, and setting up the structural foundation to support their programs because in June, they had to finalize their compliance and reporting frameworks.

(31:43):
The next deadline to know is coming up. States have to submit their financial reports for year-one spending by the end of September. Leftover funding may roll over to the next fiscal year, but states and organizations should plan to spend down the majority of their fiscal year 2026 funding by September 30th to avoid penalties or potential reallocations of future funds. From then on out, states will have to submit quarterly spending and eventually outcomes reports with the first outcomes due in March of 2027.Why do these reports matter? CMS has the power to change the allocation of discretionary funds each year. So adhering to reporting requirements both at the state and federal levels is going to be critical to maintaining funding.

(32:28):
There is still a lot to be determined in terms of how the Rural Health Transformation Program operates across its life cycle and, of course, the long-term impacts it ultimately has. But even if this fund doesn't make up for reimbursement cuts from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, even if it's not a fix to the very real challenges facing rural providers, this is real money on the table that can positively impact healthcare in rural communities. So if you don't already know how your state is rolling out funding, ask your state health agency, your Department of Rural Health, maybe even your government affairs team to keep tabs on the activity happening around you and the opportunities you may be able to tap into or even create. And remember, as always, we're here to help.

Rae Woods (33:27):
New episodes drop every Tuesday. If you like Radio Advisory, please share it with your networks. Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts and leave a rating and a review. Radio Advisory is a production of Advisory Board.

(33:39):
This episode was produced by me, Rae Woods, as well as Abby Burns, Chloe Bakst, and Atticus Raasch. The episode was edited by Katy Anderson with technical support provided by Dan Tayag, Chris Phelps, and Joe Shrum. Additional support was provided by Dominique Del Gaudio. We'll see you next week.