top of page

USA64: Why a Health Insurance Exchange Mistook Enrollment UX for Enterprise Architecture Maturity

Overview:

This case is part of a 100-diagnostic series revealing how US healthcare marketplaces have mislabeled front-end improvements as “Enterprise Architecture progress.”


In state and federal health exchanges, a recurring pattern is treating a polished enrollment experience as proof of architectural maturity.


Citizens could browse plans, check subsidies, and enroll through a sleek interface — yet the enterprise structure linking eligibility rules, provider networks, payment reconciliation, compliance reporting, and appeals was never modeled.




P1–P6 Insight Preview:

P1 (Strategy): The UX redesign was justified as part of an “access and equity” initiative, but there was no architecture-driven plan to improve cost efficiency, policy agility, or long-term sustainability.


P2 (Process): Enrollment workflows were streamlined, but downstream processes like billing, coverage changes, and appeals handling remained disjointed.


P3 (System): Front-end enrollment was not behaviorally integrated with eligibility engines, provider directories, or payment systems.


P4 (Component): UI modules, rules engines, and provider data sources were managed as separate silos.


P5 (Implementation): Development sprints optimized for visible interface features, while structural integration backlog items were repeatedly deferred.


P6 (Operations): Business ops could enroll citizens quickly, but tech ops were constantly patching mismatches between front-end data and backend systems, leading to delays in coverage activation.




Stakeholder Impact Mapping:

  1. CEO/Exchange Director: Feels P1 — political and media wins on launch, but no improvement in long-term operational metrics.

  2. CIO: Feels P3 & P4 — core systems are still disconnected, creating manual reconciliation overhead.

  3. Sales Head (Outreach & Partnerships): Feels P2 & P5 — enrollment looks smooth, but churn rises when coverage changes or claims fail.

  4. Chief EA: Feels P1–P6 — the architecture is front-loaded for optics, not designed for sustainable operations.

  5. Head of Enrollment Operations: Feels P2, P3, & P6 — spends more time fixing mismatches than supporting new applicants.

Want to read more?

Subscribe to architecturerating.com to keep reading this exclusive post.

Related Posts

See All

Enterprise Intelligence

Transforming Strategy into Execution with Precision and Real Intelligence

bottom of page