Elevance Health Inc. | Civil rights audit at Elevance Health Inc.

Status
AGM passed
AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
ELV
Resolution ask
Conduct due diligence, audit or risk/impact assessment
ESG theme
  • Social
ESG sub-theme
  • Diversity, equity & inclusion (DEI)
Type of vote
Shareholder proposal
Filer type
Shareholder
Company sector
Health Care
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
Resolved: Shareholders urge the board of directors to oversee a third-party audit (within a reasonable time and at a reasonable cost, and consistent with the law) which assesses and produces recommendations for improving the civil rights impact of its policies, practices, products, and services. Input from stakeholders, including civil rights organizations, employees, and customers, should be considered in determining the specific matters to be assessed. A report on the audit, prepared at reasonable cost and omitting confidential/proprietary information, should be published on the company’s website.
Whereas: Black and Native Americans have higher death rates than white people across a variety of illnesses.1 Black and Latina women, even in higher income brackets, also face higher preconception and maternal health risks than other groups.2 One study found “a potential economic gain of $135 billion per year if racial disparities in health are eliminated, including $93 billion in excess medical care costs and $42 billion in untapped productivity.”3 Elevance committed $50 million to “combat racial injustice, strengthen communities, and address health inequities” among other initiatives, but it has not conducted an outside assessment of its current and potential civil rights impacts.4
Although algorithms increase efficiencies, they should be vetted to prevent algorithmic bias. Optum, a UnitedHealth Group subsidiary, used an algorithm that reportedly referred equally sick Black people to care less frequently than white people.5 We believe an analysis of Elevance’s algorithms and proxy factors is necessary as similar biases may exist. Opaque data collection practices by health insurance companies raise the possibility of discrimination and pose reputational and legal risk.6 New York’s Financial Services and Health departments launched an investigation of Optum after the results of the study were published.7
Elevance’s executive committee also appears to lack racial diversity and its reporting demonstrates a decrease since 2019. Moreover, managerial racial diversity has stayed flat since 2019. The 2021 EEO-1 report shows just 3.2 percent Hispanic and 4.6 percent Black executives compared to 79.7 percent white executives. Elevance’s strategy to address the lacking diversity remains unclear to shareholders without public targets.
Beyond race, Elevance should examine its approach to transgender-inclusive care to avoid future legal risk. In September 2022, Elevance’s Anthem Blue Cross in California was reportedly found out of compliance by the California Department of Managed Health Care after a transgender patient submitted a complaint.8 Insurers such as Elevance are requiring manual overrides for transgender patients seeking care, causing additional stress and burden on a marginalized population.
Lastly, Elevance has supported political candidates such as Young Kim of California who voted against HR 8296 Women's Health Protection Act of 2022 and HR 8373 Right to Contraception Act.9 Bills such as these address health disparities for women.
We urge the company to conduct a civil rights audit to examine its total impact and help dismantle systemic injustices.
1 https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=3&lvlid=61, https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-health-policy/issue- brief/disparities-in-health-and-health-care-5-key-question-and-answers/
2 https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/nyregion/childbirth-Covid-Black-mothers.html .
3 https://altarum.org/RacialEquity2018
4 https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/anthem-commits-50-million-for-racial-justice-health-equity
5 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03228-6
6 https://www.propublica.org/article/health-insurers-are-vacuuming-up-details-about-you-and-it-could-raise-your-rates , https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMms2004740
7 https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/payer/new-york-to-probe-algorithm-used-by-optum-for-racial-bias
8 https://khn.org/news/article/medical-coding-creates-barriers-to-care-for-transgender-patients/
9 https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/151787/young-kim/?p=2, https://www.antheminc.com/cs/groups/wellpoint/@wp_about_government/documents/wlp_assets/d19n/mzk3/~edisp/2021%20Anthem%20Political%20Giving%20and%20Related%20Activity%20Report%20FINAL.pdf
Whereas clause
Black and Native Americans have higher death rates than white people across a variety of illnesses.[1] Black and Latina women, even in higher income brackets, also face higher preconception and maternal health risks than other groups.[2] One study found “a potential economic gain of $135 billion per year if racial disparities in health are eliminated, including $93 billion in excess medical care costs and $42 billion in untapped productivity.”[3] Elevance committed $50 million to “combat racial injustice, strengthen communities, and address health inequities” among other initiatives, but it has not conducted an outside assessment of its current and potential civil rights impacts.[4]
Although algorithms increase efficiencies, they should be vetted to prevent algorithmic bias. Optum, a UnitedHealth Group subsidiary, used an algorithm that reportedly referred equally sick Black people to care less frequently than white people.[5] We believe an analysis of Elevance’s algorithms and proxy factors is necessary as similar biases may exist. Opaque data collection practices by health insurance companies raise the possibility of discrimination and pose reputational and legal risk.[6] New York’s Financial Services and Health departments launched an investigation of Optum after the results of the study were published.[7]

Elevance’s executive committee also appears to lack racial diversity and its reporting demonstrates a decrease since 2019. Moreover, managerial racial diversity has stayed flat since 2019. The 2021 EEO-1 report shows just 3.2 percent Hispanic and 4.6 percent Black executives compared to 79.7 percent white executives. Elevance’s strategy to address the lacking diversity remains unclear to shareholders without public targets.
Beyond race, Elevance should examine its approach to transgender-inclusive care to avoid future legal risk. In September 2022, Elevance’s Anthem Blue Cross in California was reportedly found out of compliance by the California Department of Managed Health Care after a transgender patient submitted a complaint.[8] Insurers such as Elevance are requiring manual overrides for transgender patients seeking care, causing additional stress and burden on a marginalized population.
Lastly, Elevance has supported political candidates such as Young Kim of California who voted against HR 8296 Women’s Health Protection Act of 2022 and HR 8373 Right to Contraception Act.[9] Bills such as these address health disparities for women.
We urge the company to conduct a civil rights audit to examine its total impact and help dismantle systemic injustices.

[1] https://minorityhealth.hhs.gov/omh/browse.aspx?lvl=3&lvlid=61, https://www.kff.org/racial-equity-and-health-policy/issue-brief/disparities-in-health-and-health-care-5-key-question-and-answers/
[2] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/06/nyregion/childbirth-Covid-Black-mothers.html .
[3] https://altarum.org/RacialEquity2018
[4] https://philanthropynewsdigest.org/news/anthem-commits-50-million-for-racial-justice-health-equity
[5] https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03228-6
[6] https://www.propublica.org/article/health-insurers-are-vacuuming-up-details-about-you-and-it-could-raise-your-rates , https://www.nejm.org/doi/10.1056/NEJMms2004740
[7] https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/payer/new-york-to-probe-algorithm-used-by-optum-for-racial-bias
[8] https://khn.org/news/article/medical-coding-creates-barriers-to-care-for-transgender-patients/
[9] https://justfacts.votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/151787/young-kim/?p=2, https://www.anthemin.com/cs/groups/wellpoint/@wp_about_government/documents/wlp_assets/d19n/mzk3/~edisp/2021%20Anthem%20Political%20Giving%20and%20Related%20Activity%20Report%20FINAL.pdf

How other organisations have declared their voting intentions

Organisation name Declared voting intentions Rationale
Anima Sgr Not voting https://s201.q4cdn.com/332696633/files/doc_downloads/2023/03/28/Notice-of-Annual-Meeting-of-Shareholders.pdf

There seems not to be any item related to that subject.

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.