Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Page 1
Rural Accountable Care:Here to There
National Rural Health Association 2013 Annual Meeting
Martie Ross, PrincipalPershing Yoakley & Associates, PC
Page 2
• 250-approved MSSP ACOs– 4 million attributed Medicare beneficiaries
– 10 percent include rural component
– 2014 application process now under way
• Around 200 commercial ACOs – and growing– Negligible rural activity
• Slightly more physician-led ACOs
Environmental Scan
Page 3
Page 4
Elliott Fisher’s 2006 MedPAC presentation
• Higher spending regions experience lower quality and satisfaction
• Differences in spending = supply sensitive services• “No one is accountable for local capacity and political
culture.”• Create 5,000 extended hospital medical staffs accountable
for care for defined population– Payment adjustments based on performance measurements
Role of Community HospitalToday
Today
Pillar of the community
Ensure essential emergent and acute
care services, subsidize with
profitable outpatient services
Physician recruitment
and retention
Maximize availability of health care
services in the community
Role of Community Hospital Tomorrow
Today
Responsibility for entire care continuum,
regardless of where and by whom care is
delivered
Future payment tied to assuming
responsibility for covered lives
Population Health
Management
Page 7
Transitional modelTODAY: Volume-based reimbursement
→ Accountable care
TOMORROW: Value-based reimbursement
Accountable Care Economics
Page 8
• Begin shifting risk from payer to provider
• ACO is risk management vehicle
• ACO risk = total FFS payments – benchmark– Held accountable for quality of care by performance standards
• HMO risk = provider cost – capitated payment
Accountable Care Economics
Page 9
• Actual total FFS payments– Payer’s actual total payments for specified services
provided to identified patient population during defined time period
– All providers, not just ACO participants
• Benchmark– Predetermined target spend for exact same services,
population, and time period
– Typically based on historical data
9
Accountable Care Economics
Page 10
• Performance standards– Predetermined broad-ranging quality measures
– Overall patient care – not limited to ACO participants
– Payment and continued participation tied to overall ACO performance
Accountable Care Economics
Page 11
One-Sided vs. Two-Sided • One-Sided - If actual costs exceed benchmark,
ACO not liable for difference
• Two Sided - If actual costs exceed benchmark, ACO liable for difference
– Eligible for greater share of savings
• Window of opportunity on One-Sided model is closing rapidly
Page 12
Shared Savings ProgramsKey Contract Terms
• Identify parties to contract• Define population/attribution• Calculate total-cost-of-care benchmark• List quality metrics• Set out minimum performance standards• Specify savings percentage
Page 13
Shared Savings ProgramPerformance
• Providers continue to bill fee-for-service
• Track performance on quality metrics
• Calculate payer’s actual total cost of care
• Actual – benchmark = savings
• Payer pays ACO percentage of savings
• ACO distributes pool to participants
• Adjust benchmark, start over
Page 14
• 250 participating ACOs• Three-year contracts
– Each year = performance year
– One-sided available first contract term only
• Next start date is January 1, 2014– NOI due May 31
– Application due July 31
Medicare Shared Savings Program
Page 15
MSSP ACO Formation• Legal entity• Governing body
– 75 percent ACO participants– 1 independent Medicare beneficiary– Fiduciary duty (not responsible for governing
activities of individuals or entities outside the ACO)
• Management – Board-appointed manager– CMO, QA-QI professional, compliance officer– Audit and record retention requirements
Page 16
MSSP Attribution
Primary Care Services• E&M Services
– 99201-15; 99304-99318; 99324-99340; 99341-99350
• Wellness Visits
– G0402, G0438, G0439
• RHC/FQHC Services
– 0521, 0522, 0524, 0525
Primary Care Physicians• Family Practice
• General Practice
• Internal Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
Page 17
MSSP Attribution – Step 1• Identify beneficiaries who received a PC service from
ACO’s PCPs in last 12 months
• Attribute beneficiary to the ACO only if:
Total allowed charges for PC services billed by ACO’s PCPs in last 12 months
>Total allowed charges for PC services billed by PCPs in any other ACO or non-ACO TIN in last 12 months
Page 18
MSSP Attribution – Step 2• Identify non-Step 1 beneficiaries who received a PC service from
an ACO specialist physician within last 12 months
• Attribute beneficiary to ACO only if:
Total allowed charges for PC services billed by all ACO physicians and mid-levels in last 12 months
>Total allowed charges for PC services billed by PCPs in any other ACO or non-ACO TIN in last 12 months
Page 19
Beneficiary EligibilityDuring the last 12 months, beneficiary has:• At least one month of Part A and Part B enrollment
• No months of:– Part A enrollment only
– Part B enrollment only
– Medicare Advantage enrollment
– Group health plan enrollment
– Non-US residence
• Received at least one PC service billed by ACO physician
• Not been included in other shared savings initiatives
Page 20
– Shared savings in a cost-reimbursed/fixed cost financial model
– Complexity of attribution model
– Upfront investment, impossible to calculate ROI
– Technical assistance
Does the Model Work for Rural?
Page 21
• What do we really want to achieve?
• Criteria– Support rural physicians in adopting evidence-based medicine
– Provide outpatient care coordination
– Seamless transfers between levels of care
– Right size services (volume vs. fixed costs)
• Option: Rural clinically integrated network, or RCIN
What Model Would Work?
Page 22
Rural Clinically Integrated Network - RCIN
•Providers accountable to each other and to the community to deliver high-quality care in efficient mannerCollectively define and
enforce standards of careCoordinate patient care
Page 23
• Per se illegal for independent market participants to negotiate jointly on price-related terms
• Three options– Messenger model
– Economic integration
– Clinical integration
Antitrust Basics
Page 24
• Independent provider organization cannot exercise market power in anti-competitive manner– Market power = immune from competition
– Presume market power from market share
– Overcome presumption by demonstrating pro-competitive effects
Antitrust Basics
Page 25
• FTC guidance– Statements of Health Care Antitrust Enforcement
Policy - Physician Network Joint Venture
– Advisory opinions (Norman, OK)
– MSSP safe harbors
• Bottom line: Does organization maintain high degree of interdependence and cooperation to control costs and ensure quality?
Clinical Integration
Page 26
Clinical Integration• Providers accountable to each other and to
community to deliver high-quality care in efficient manner– Collectively define and enforce standards of care
– Coordinate patient care
Page 27
Clinically Integrated Network
• Lean infrastructure to support provider accountability
• Vehicle for independent providers to centralize certain functions and operations– Access to patients
– Access to payment
– Access to actionable information
Page 28
Participation Agreement• Individual providers join a CIN by signing a
participation agreement• Terms of agreement established by CIN
governing body– Parties’ respective rights and responsibilities
– Demonstrates CIN legitimacy to payers
• Breach = remedial action, termination
Page 29
CIN Functions
• Core functions– Promote evidence-based medicine
– Facilitate care coordination
– Negotiate and manage payer contracts
• Additional support services
Page 30
Promote Evidence-Based Medicine• EBM = integrating individual clinical expertise
with the best available external clinical evidence from systematic research
• Clinical protocols– Identify (prioritize)
– Implement (education, technology solutions)
– Monitor (reporting on quality measures)
– Remediation, punitive measures
Page 31
Facilitate Care Coordination
• Identify high-risk, high-cost patients– Disease registries
– Data analytics (claims data)
• Aggressive interventions– Patient navigator
– Remote monitoring
– Transitional care management
– Health information exchange
Page 32
• “Regionalization” of programs• Tertiary care
Facilitate Care Coordination
Page 33
Manage Payer Contracting
• Standard fee schedule• Narrow networks and tiered benefits plans• Pay for performance (FFS enhancements)• Shared savings programs• Bundled payments• Centers of Excellence• Global budgets
Page 34
Competitive Collaboration
Maintain access through appropriate resource allocation
Maintain local decision-making to fullest extent possible
Traditional Rural Health Network
Purpose• Administrative simplification • Economies of scale
Examples• Joint purchasing of products and
services• Shared information technology• Joint recruitment/shared
personnel• Staff education• Peer support for governance and
management• Credentialing, peer review,
utilization review• Quality/performance
improvement activities• Access to grant funding
Organizational Commitment
Governance structure All participants have a voice Clear decision-making process
Sustainability Operating account, financial
commitment, and contributions; financial reports
Practical matters Personnel; real and personal
property; limitation of liability; indemnification; dispute resolution; termination
Commitment
Operational Commitment
Quality improvement plan
Strategic plan Operational plan
Education plan
Payment and delivery system reform
Needs and assets assessment
Measures for success
Identify specific activities to be “regionalized”
Identify participants (& respective roles)
Task list to achieve each “regionalized” activity
Necessary and available resources
Timelines
Page 39
• Educate board, management team, physicians • Conduct brutally honest community health needs
assessment• Identify and evaluate potential affiliations
Immediate To-Do List
Page 40
Martie Ross [email protected]
9900 W. 109th Street, Suite 130Overland Park, KS 66210
(913) 232-5145
Learn more about PYA at www.pyapc.com
