Program review / Self-funded employer
Evidence for a decision.
Not a promise of savings.
A fictional employer reviews a metabolic-health program before changing its funding commitment. This brief separates measured BMI evidence, entered program spend and what remains unknown.
Fictional illustration. Unsigned. No customer outcome, personal identity, vendor evaluation or actuarial signoff is represented. The decision on page 2 is employer-recorded and illustrative—not a Metra recommendation.
The employer demo is also fictional; choose a funding scenario there. No readiness-check answers or contact details are passed into the demo.
01
Annualized BMI-associated exposure shift
Engine-derived fictional result
$1,488
Annualized association-based estimate · USD
Bootstrap 95% interval
$744–$2,418
10,000 resamples · statistical uncertainty
Not a guarantee or workforce coverage measure
Qualifying BMI improvement is credited; deterioration is not charged or offset against improvement. This is not claims savings, a premium estimate, total liability or a vendor effect. A lower value is not automatically a better outcome.
02
Population, dates & source
- Illustrative observation window
- January 15–July 15, 2026
- Source
- Fictional participant-reported BMI observations
- Enrolled / measured
- 30 enrolled / 24 with paired measurements
- Measured participant assumptions
- 24 adults, each age 40; ESI assumed
- Economically qualified / improvement credited
- 24 qualified / 8 credited
- Missing observations / coverage
- 6 without paired readings; insurance not verified
ESI means employer-sponsored insurance. Enrollment is not independent proof of coverage. The estimate describes the qualified measured population, not all 30 enrolled or a verified workforce. Annualization is not a 12-month observation or prediction period.
03
Measured movement in both directions
All 24 measured participants begin at BMI 33. These are paired BMI movements, not risk-tier transitions.
| Paired BMI | Observed direction | Economic treatment | Participants |
|---|
| 33 → 31 | Improvement | Qualifying improvement credited | 8 |
| 33 → 34 | Deterioration | Not charged; remains visible | 8 |
| 33 → 33 | Stable | No improvement credited | 8 |
Employer-recorded illustrative decision
Defer a program funding change
pending additional evidence.
Maintain the current review position while the Benefits Director and Finance partner obtain the missing evidence. This is a fictional employer decision—not Metra advice or an endorsement of the program.
04
Separate economic inputs. Do not net them.
Employer-entered spend
$12,000Illustrative program invoice · fictional vendor
Source: fictional employer invoice record
Not engine-derived. Invoice period and program population are not matched to the BMI evidence window. No ROI or net benefit is calculated.
Missing evidence
| Sourced claims experience | Unavailable |
|---|
| Stop-loss terms / reimbursements | Unavailable |
|---|
| Verified insurance coverage | Unavailable |
|---|
| Matched program-window data | Unavailable |
|---|
Unavailable means missing—not zero. No actual claims cost, avoided claims or funding-settlement balance is inferred.
05
Rationale, accountability & follow-up
Recorded rationale: BMI movement is mixed: 8 improve, 8 deteriorate and 8 are stable. The bounded estimate credits improvement only; it cannot establish overall cost change or a program effect. The $12,000 spend cannot be compared as a return against unmatched BMI evidence. Six enrolled participants have no paired readings.
- Accountable role
- Benefits Director
- Review partner
- Finance partner
- Follow-up due
- November 15, 2026 · illustrative
- Decision status
- Deferred · evidence requested
- Benefits Director: Confirm program dates, participation and coverage; request missing paired observations without treating missingness as no change.
- Finance partner: Obtain sourced claims and stop-loss disclosures; validate the invoice period and program population before any comparison.
- Joint follow-up: Revisit the funding commitment only after reviewing matched evidence and documented uncertainties.
06
Method & reproducibility record
Unsigned—not actuarial signoff. Draft methodology and a reproducibility digest are not attestation. All employer, vendor, invoice, program and decision details are fictional. No causal vendor effect, claims savings, premium or total liability is established.
