It was a heck of a Christmas for David Fairchild and his wife, Clara Peterson. They found out they were about to lose their new health insurance.

“Clara was listening to the news on Iowa Public Radio and that’s how we found out,” Fairchild says. They went to their health plan’s website that night. “No information. We still haven’t gotten a letter about it from them.”

The two are the sole employees of a cleaning service and work nights. Fairchild has chronic leukemia but treats it with expensive medicine. Last year they saved hundreds of dollars switching from the insurer Wellmark to a plan run by CoOportunity Health. For the first time in a long time, Fairchild says, they felt like they had room to breathe.

“Basically it covered our office visits; covered exams,” he says. “It covered all but $40 of the medicine every four weeks. It was just marvelous. It probably was too good to be true.”

It was for them. CoOportunity Health has failed. The Affordable Care Act set aside funding for health care co-ops, to enable the organizations to compete in places where there aren’t many insurers. CoOportunity Health was the second largest co-op in the country in terms of membership, and one of the largest in terms of the federal funding it received.

But then CoOportunity hit a kind of perfect storm, says Peter Damiano, director of the University of Iowa’s public policy center. First, the co-op had to pay a lot more medical bills than those in charge expected.

“CoOportunity Health’s pool of people was larger than expected, was sicker than expected,” Damiano says. “So their risk became much greater than the funds that were available,”

The reason the co-op’s customers were sicker has a lot to do with what the insurance market looked like in Iowa before Obamacare. The largest insurer by far in the state was and still is Wellmark. But Wellmark decided not to offer any plans on Iowa’s health exchange, leaving just CoOportunity and one other insurer — Coventry — offering plans on the exchange throughout the state.

On top of that, when the Obama administration in late 2013 allowed people to keep the insurance plan they already had, many customers happy with Wellmark stayed put. Damiano says this meant many of the customers who flocked to CoOportunity tended to be like Fairchild — people with expensive health problems who’d had trouble paying for insurance before, in the market Wellmark dominated.

“It was always going to be a challenging market to try to reach,” says Damiano, “and on top of that, the whole idea of co-ops was relatively new and experimental. But it was to try to create competition, on that private sector approach,” says Damiano.

Not only were the patients sicker, but CoOportunity’s leaders initially thought they would enroll about 12,000 people in Iowa and Nebraska. They got about ten times that, according to Nick Gerhart, Iowa’s insurance commissioner.

Also, Gerhart says, the co-op thought it was going to get more federal money.

“On December 16 around 4 o’clock we were informed they weren’t going to get any further funding,” he says. “Nothing was pulled — it just wasn’t extended further.”

Gerhart is now essentially the CEO of the co-op because the state has taken it over. He likens the situation to a small business suddenly having its credit shut off by the bank. Even though CoOportunity is not officially dead yet, Gerhart is telling its customers to switch insurers.

He says it’s too early to make predictions about the fate for all co-ops.

“Ours was the second largest in the country, so you’ve got to look at it that way.” Gerhart says. “If the second largest can’t make it, how viable are the other ones? I don’t know. But at the end of the day they didn’t have enough capital to support 120,000 members.”

In a written statement, Dr. Martin Hickey, chairman of the board of the National Alliance of State Health Co-Ops, said, “The news about CoOportunity Health is not a statement on the health insurance co-op program or the co-op concept. It’s a reflection on the fact that all insurers — not just co-ops — are operating in unique markets with unique business plans and varying state regulations. The circumstances for CoOportunity Health in Iowa are not the same as those in the 23 other states in which co-ops are currently operating.”

But the co-op’s failure in Iowa has left David Fairchild and Clara Peterson scratching their heads.

“I mean the whole Affordable Care Act is [about] competition between insurance companies, and now we’re back down to what?” says Peterson.

For them, only one option: Coventry. They’ve already applied through healthcare.gov and now they’re now waiting for approval for a plan that will cover a lot less of Fairchild’s medicine expenses.

This story is part of a partnership between NPR and Kaiser Health News.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.

Obama administration officials have warned that ambitious experiments run by the health law’s $10 billion innovation lab wouldn’t always be successful. Now there is evidence their caution was well placed.

Only a small minority of community groups getting federal reimbursement to reduce expensive hospital readmissions produced significant results compared with those from sites that weren’t part of the $300 million program, according to partial, early results. The closely watched program is one of many tests to control costs and improve care being run by the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, which was created by the Affordable Care Act.

Dozens of community agencies on aging, from Ventura County, Calif., to southern Maine were offered money to try to ensure that seniors leaving the hospital received care that reduced their chances of being readmitted within a month.

But an early evaluation found that only four groups out of 48 that were studied in the Community-based Care Transition Program significantly cut readmissions compared with those of a control group.

At the same time, 29 groups have either withdrawn from the program or been terminated by the Department of Health and Human Services for failing to achieve targets, agency officials said. The CCTP project, which has grown since the evaluation was done, now has 72 participating sites  that administration officials hope will still produce readmission reductions and lessons in post-hospital care in return for the investment.

The evaluation, produced under contract with HHS by consulting firm Econometrica, is one of the first independent analyses of an innovation-lab test to be made public. It is dated May 30, 2014, but was posted on HHS’ website Jan. 2.

The 111-page report notwithstanding, experts said it’s too soon to pronounce substantial judgment on CCTP.

“It’s really too early to tell,” said Ellen Lukens, who leads the practice on hospital and post-hospital care at Avalere Health, a consulting firm. “Can you really evaluate this when it’s been such a short period of time?”

A five-year experiment, the program signed its first round of deals with community agencies in late 2011 and its fifth and last round in March 2013. Econometrica’s report covered partial-2012 results from groups participating in the early rounds, including some for which only a few months of data were available. Congress required the lab to closely monitor all tests, which explains the early evaluation, experts said.

One positive note was that “a lot of the sites were able to implement the program very quickly,” Lukens said, adding that later data will give a better idea of CCTP’s effectiveness.

The readmissions result — less than one site in 10 significantly reducing them — “seems kind of wimpy,” said Eric Coleman, a professor at the University of Colorado whose previous work on care for discharged patients influenced the CCTP program. He said he remains optimistic about the tests, however, also noting that the results are early and praising HHS for cutting off nonperforming groups.

“This is really the first glance of the first two waves of the program,” said HHS spokesman Raymond Thorn. “It’s too early to determine whether this model is failing or not. We will have successes.”

CCTP is one of dozens of experiments being run by HHS’ innovation lab, which has a 10-year, $10 billion budget. Preventable readmissions are calculated to cost the Medicare program for seniors $17 billion a year.

Paying community agencies to work with hospitals was thought to be one potential way of reducing them. Rather than getting grants, agencies are paid according to the discharge cases they handle.

The program faces several challenges, experts said. In awarding funding, HHS favored groups working with hospitals with high readmission rates, perhaps making success more difficult.

Plus, numerous groups and hospitals are working to cut readmissions through other means. That increases competition for aging agencies trying to make their mark and raises the difficulty of measuring their results separately from those of other programs.

Readmissions have been dropping nationally since Medicare began penalizing hospitals in late 2012 if they have too many. Some CCTP groups reduced readmissions — but so did comparison hospitals. That means the system improved overall in those areas and money was saved, but statistically the aging agencies did not show up as the critical factor.

Coleman faulted HHS for requiring agencies to file detailed reports on care models and administration rather than letting them focus on the main job.

“If it doesn’t reduce readmissions it’s game over, so why do you want all these process measures?” he said. “If we want these sites to succeed we need to get out of their way.”

Originally more than 100 agencies agreed to participate. But 29, including New York Methodist Hospital and Pennsylvania’s Delaware County Office of Services for the Aging, have withdrawn or didn’t have contracts renewed because they missed readmission-reduction or enrollment targets, HHS said.

A complete list of agencies that have left the program is here.

The health-law innovation program also includes accountable care organizations to cut costs and improve care quality; tests giving more resources to primary-care doctors to coordinate care; and innovation awards for promising models to improve Medicare efficiency.

Administration officials like to compare the lab to a venture capital fund, in which many investments are expected to fail but a few succeed spectacularly. Many Republicans think it’s a waste.

Kaiser Health News (KHN) is a national health policy news service. It is an editorially independent program of the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation.