Agricultural social mutual fund | The pinned MSA: multiple failures signaled by a message

The quality of service to users remains below expectations and even temporarily deteriorated in 2017 and 2018, a period when local pooling was started », concludes a report by three agricultural inspectorates (CGAER), finance (IGF) and social affairs (IGAS) on the social health insurance system in agriculture (MSA) recently published on the website of the Ministry of Agriculture. And the report notes a heterogeneity according to the regional mutuals.

With weak central fund management, local pooling was performed without defining the activities to be pooled or shared selection criteria. In fact, they did not lead to the removal of the site and passed without any social problems. Local pooling has created a complex functional geography, limiting efficiency gains and small fund performance points to the inspection report, which, on the other hand, welcomes the reduction in the MSA’s workforce and the increase in productivity.

Not paying when due

What does the report say in detail?

  • The percentage of successful conversations is one of the nine result indicators of which the target (85%) was never reached between 2016 and 2020.

  • Overall satisfaction, measured every two years, was 81% in 2019, down from 2017 (83%)† If the satisfaction of individuals (employees and retirees) generally remains stable, it is 6 points lower (compared to 2017) for operators and 5 points for employers† They call their journey ” labor intensive and regret having to contact the MSA multiple times to get an answer.

  • Concerning the family and solidarity benefits, 57% of housing support is paid when duewith checkout performance ranging from 25% to 81%

  • For the RSA, support payment at maturity reaches 62% with a variation of 38 to 77% depending on the fund.

With regard to service relationships and in particular telephone reception, the MSA has initiated an action plan that has not yet had any effect. », underline the authors of the report, who are « however wondering about the late implementation of these actions ».

Efforts for respite assistance

Founded in 2017 in response to an agricultural crisis and subsequently made permanent by the MSArespite aid benefits from a locally heterogeneous implementationtakes note of the inspection report.

In question : “ a system that forms part of the social action of the local health insurance companies, whereby the boards of directors have considerable latitude in granting them, independently of the guidelines given by the central health insurance company, which are encouraging in this regard

For example, the inspection report states a ” highly variable average number of replacement days » according to the funds of 4 for the Dordogne-Lot et Garonne and Sud Champagne offices to 10 for the Marne-Ardennes-Maas and Corse offices† The same applies to extensions of aid (eight in Provence from 58 beneficiaries, against 40 extensions from 57 new applicants in Auvergne). The authors of the inspection report believe that “ the objectives of the total respite care system are insufficiently shared † “Respite aid is not necessarily integrated into the overall management of diseases, aid to workers is little known, due to a lack of clarity of the system, which ultimately includes various tools (replacement, rest, prevention and support actions) under comparable conditions,” the report underlines.

For the next objective and management agreement (COG), the authors of the inspection report recommend a further reduction in personnel and the ” merger of the Alsace, Lorraine and Sud Champagne sites » and advocates « strengthening operational supervisory toolsFor the respite assistance system, the report recommends “reserve it for non-employees” and strengthen its management.

Leave a Comment