Press Release

No Pay Copay Program With Independence Blue Cross a Success

FutureScripts was proud to partner with Independence Blue Cross (IBC) in administering its ground-breaking No Pay Copay program. Lasting all of 2007, No Pay Copay touted the safety and cost-saving benefits of generic drugs to IBC members. With the program finished, IBC and FutureScripts encourage plan participants to continue to save money by getting into the habit of always asking for generics first.

Thanks to No Pay Copay, IBC members saved nearly $50 million in waived copays in 2007. During this time, the use of generics among IBC members increased from 52.1 percent to 60 percent.

A survey* showed plan participants not only thought highly of No Pay Copay, but of generic drugs in general.

  • Three-quarters of the plan participants surveyed believe generic drugs are as safe and effective as their brand-name equivalents.
  • An encouraging 87 percent of surveyed plan participants said they are likely to ask for generics after No Pay Copay ends, demonstrating their confidence in the safety and effectiveness of generics over brand name drugs.
  • More than 70 percent of those surveyed already had a favorable impression of generics before No Pay Copay. Now, 45 percent claim they have an even better impression of generics.
  • Nearly half of the plan participants surveyed who inquired about generic drugs in 2007 said they did so because of No Pay Copay.
  • Fifty-four percent of plan participants with chronic conditions indicated they were more likely to ask about generic drugs.

FutureScripts encourages its plan participants to consider asking for generic drugs, which can cost up to 70 percent less than their brand-name counterparts. Generic drugs are always the lowest copay amount on the FutureScripts formulary. Actual copay amounts vary, depending on the plan and administrator.

* The IBC survey was conducted by DSS Research, a national health care research firm headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. In September 2007, 805 adult IBC members in the southeastern Pennsylvania five-county area were interviewed for this survey. The margin of error on the overall sample was +/- 3.5 percent.