Star Ratings Plan Preview #2
It's hard to believe, but it's that time of year again. Yes, it's football season—and it's also the beginning of Star Ratings season.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) annual Star Ratings plan preview periods have become as much an annual ritual for Medicare Advantage (MA) plans as the Advance Notice and Call Letter, and plans throughout the nation are feverishly working to understand their 2016 Star Ratings so they can quickly determine what still needs to be done during the fourth quarter to close out 2015 strong.
Although there were few surprises in the 2016 Star Ratings measure specifications, there was much to be gleaned from the long-awaited removal of the remaining pre-determined 4-Star thresholds. As expected, almost as many 4-Star thresholds were decreased as were increased. The plan preview measure specifications show 4-Star cut points were tightened on 20 measures and relaxed for 13 measures. Measures where the 4-Star cut points were relaxed included those with significant patient lifestyle and perception impacts, such as medication adherence, diabetic blood sugar control, and several Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) measures. In contrast, measures with tightened cut points include many of the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS®) process measures, where plans and providers have a long history of focus and attention to gap closure. In contrast, 4-Star cut points were only relaxed for one administrative, or plan-controlled, measure, which demonstrates plans are "controlling the controllables" within the program. Again, no big surprises in these changes. But the absence of surprise does not mean it will be easy for plans to adapt to these changes.
So what can we take away from the plan preview?
- CMS continues to use the Star Ratings program to compel health plans to increase their strong focus on quality improvement in their service to beneficiaries.
- Plans must continue investing efforts in longer-term strategic relationships with members and providers to continue improving health outcomes, meeting beneficiary expectations, and performing well in the Star Ratings program.
- With the increasing competition in MA and full adoption of the bell curve within the Star Ratings program, the definition of success is likely to continue to rise. There is simply no such thing as "good enough" in Star Ratings.
With approximately five percent of MA plan revenues tied to Star Ratings performance through Quality Bonus Payments, an objective review of a plan's Star Ratings infrastructure, strategy, and performance can be a wise investment.
Resources
Whether your plan missed the overall 4 Star Rating necessary to earn Quality Bonus Payments, or whether the new 4-Star cut points have introduced new risks of maintaining your overall 4 Star rating, we can help. Our team of experts understands the Star Ratings program and knows how to influence performance. Contact us to learn more >>
Join us on Friday, October 9, from 1-2 pm ET, as John Gorman, Founder & Executive Chairman at Gorman Health Group (GHG), examines the state of government healthcare programs and outlines proven tactics market leaders are implementing to cut costs, increase member satisfaction, and drive sustainable growth. Register Now >>
Medicare Advantage Value-Based Insurance Design: Key Considerations
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently announced a proposed demonstration that will test varying benefit designs based on health status. The Medicare Advantage Value-Based Insurance Design (MA-VBID) Model will allow organizations to offer targeted supplemental benefits and/or reduced cost sharing to enrollees with specific chronic conditions to further the goal of improving beneficiary health, reducing the utilization of avoidable high-cost care, and reducing costs for plans, beneficiaries, and the Medicare program. The overall goal of this demonstration is to improve clinical outcomes while reducing plan expenditures.
Do you qualify?
This demonstration is proposed for seven states: Arizona, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Tennessee. According to the announcement, only current MA organizations in good standing in those states will be allowed to participate. The demonstration is aimed at Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), Health Maintenance Organization Point of Service (HMO-POS) plans, and local Preferred Provider Organizations (PPOs) in order to determine how it affects beneficiaries and costs in the most common plans. Special Needs Plans (SNPs), Regional PPOs, Medicare-Medicaid Plans (MMPs), Private Fee-for-Service (PFFS) plans, Employer Group Waiver Plans (EGWPs), Health Savings Accounts, and cost plans are not eligible.
The demonstration will waive certain regulations so benefit plans can vary for enrolled members based on their diagnosis, condition, or need for a medical service. Currently, health status distinctions in providing benefits to enrolled beneficiaries are prohibited by regulations.
How we can help:
Applications
The CMS process begins with the submission of a Request for Application (RFA), which is currently due on November 15, 2015. Organizations failing to submit an RFA cannot participate in 2017 but may be allowed at a later date during the five-year demonstration period. Organizations must submit an RFA that has sufficient detail to allow CMS to determine if the benefit plan addresses targeted beneficiaries, will provide measureable results, and is appropriately structured for the demonstration. We can work with your organization through every step of the application process, from gathering the right data and completing the application, to submitting the application and responding to follow-up questions.
Financial Analysis
The key to designing a successful MA-VBID model is to establish programs to simultaneously manage revenue through best-in-class Star Ratings operations and targeted risk adjustment for these prevalent diseases and avoid adverse risk selection as well as an ongoing review of cost and utilization drivers from medical and pharmacy claims. An initial assessment of claims and financials can help highlight existing strengths and weaknesses in medical management (including pharmacy) as well as provider networks. With annual bids as the source of financial truth, targets need to be realistic and timely.
Benefit Design Analysis
Organizations can propose any myriad of combinations of benefits or services provided they are based on the proposed chronic conditions listed in the announcement. Most importantly, CMS notes participating organizations can initiate the demonstration with a limited benefit and can expand their benefit plans during the five-year term of the demonstration. While the benefits will be mandatory supplemental benefits, CMS proposes to prohibit marketing these benefits to non-member beneficiaries.
Resources
We can work with your organization to design and implement a comprehensive data analysis to guarantee you have the right products, programs, and capabilities in place to compete and ensure you are go-to-market ready.
Is this the right opportunity for your organization? Attend our webinar to find out. Join John Gorman, Founder and Executive Chairman at Gorman Health Group, and I on Tuesday, September 29, from 1-2 pm ET, as they outline the MA-VBID plan requirements as well as what you should be doing now to prepare for January 2017. Register now >>
How to Partner with Key Health Systems in your Service Area to Optimize Benefit Plan Offerings
As we anticipate additional information this week on the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) network adequacy (pilot) audit, we can't help but consider how CMS' rigorous access and availability standards hamper Medicare Advantage (MA) plans' ability to be on the cutting edge of innovative network design. The Affordable Care Act, in comparison, has allowed for Marketplace plans to offer narrow networks as long as the networks have sufficient numbers and types of providers to deliver services without "unreasonable delay," leaving states to define the meaning of "unreasonable." This difference in network adequacy standards has widened the gap in plan offerings.
MA plans, after meeting network adequacy standards, are able to offer tiered benefit plans to members ensuring members are still afforded access to the larger network if not all standards are met within the smaller subset. The tiered benefit designs leave MA plans with the question of which providers would be the best partners.
In evaluating provider partners for tiered benefit designs or co-branding opportunities, health plans need to determine the attractiveness of each prospective provider by asking questions such as: Does the potential provider system have a similar philosophy? Is the provider system large enough to meet network adequacy standards in a given market area on their own, or would fill-in providers be required? How would their participation or non-participation in our network affect our market strategy? Does the provider system do anything particularly well, do they have unique services, service area, or exclusive providers, and how can those services be packaged? Would these bundled services contribute to increased revenue and/or market share?
In turn, provider systems that may be contemplating offering their own provider-sponsored health plan could be asking themselves similar questions and determining if a payor partnership would be a good option. Providers should develop a plan/partner evaluation process concurrent with developing a marketing strategy in order to find the best available partnership.
As we see the Marketplace and Medicaid proposing similar network access and availability standards as MA plans, we easily foresee a change in how these two government-sponsored programs will need to re-evaluate their network design. By beginning to monitor their networks now, Medicaid and Marketplace plans will be able to identify some of the provider network challenges MA plans have faced. As CMS moves forward with decisions on network adequacy for all government-sponsored health plans, enhanced relationships between payors and providers will be key in developing the networks needed to support competitive benefit plans.
Resources
Gorman Health Group evaluates the design and delivery of high quality collaborative care while achieving compliance and improving revenue cycle management. Our multidisciplinary team of experts will assess the alignment of your products, your current network and your market to translate your business strategies into practical, efficient and rigorous work processes with the highest degree of compliance and accountability. Visit our website to learn more >>
From ACO-type incentives to bundled payments and contract capitation, to full professional and global capitation — where the potential is promising, we can help design and implement these arrangements. Let's get started. Contact us today
Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>
Changes for 2015 Part D Reporting Announced by CMS
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) recently released an updated version of the Contract Year 2015 Part D Reporting Requirements Technical Specifications.
Sponsors are required to undergo data validation to have some of their Part D data audited annually. Each Part D Sponsor is required to provide necessary data to CMS to support payment, program integrity, program management, and quality improvement activities. Additional reporting requirements are identified in separate guidance documents throughout the year.
REPORT DELETIONS
Long-Term Care (LTC) Utilization -
One notable change for 2015 reporting is the LTC Utilization section will be suspended effective immediately because similar information can be obtained using Prescription Drug Event (PDE) data. Similarly, CMS removed the LTC Utilization reporting section which reports information about the total number of beneficiaries in LTC facilities for whom Part D drugs have been provided because it is provided elsewhere in the Plan's CMS contract.
Prompt Payment -
CMS removed Prompt Payment to Part D Sponsors and Fraud, Waste, and Abuse (FWA) reporting sections and decreased hour estimates associated with these sections because CMS determined these data are no longer necessary for monitoring through these reporting requirements.
CMS has determined the reporting of these data is no longer necessary for monitoring through FWA reporting requirements. Other methods using data validation processes have replaced the need for this reporting element. Annual Data Validation Audits, informatic analysis of PDE data, and other elements reported elsewhere meet the FWA monitoring goals of CMS.
REPORTING CHANGES
Medication Therapy Management (MTM) -
The addition of a note, reporting of Line Q, "Date(s) of Comprehensive Medicare Reviews (CMRs) with written summary in CMS standardized format," has been reduced to two CMR dates, even if more have been completed. One CMR is required if the member meets eligibility requirements. After analyzing the data, CMS concluded only two dates are needed for monitoring purposes.
CMS provided clarification to Line S, "Qualified Provider who performed the initial CMR," (Physician; Registered Nurse; Licensed Practical Nurse; Nurse Practitioner; Physician's Assistant; Local Pharmacist; LTC Consultant Pharmacist; Plan Sponsor) to provide more descriptive choices.
The Technical Specifications for Part D Reporting document can be viewed in its entirety as posted on the Health Plan Management System (HPMS) Plan Reporting site and on the external CMS website by clicking this link.
Resources
We can help your MAPD or PDP develop and implement efficient and compliant internal operations and prepare effectively for CMS audits with professional services and unmatched compliance tools. Visit our website to learn more >>
Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>
The Impact of CMS Changes on MA & FFM 2016 Agent Readiness
Preparing for the 2016 selling season means implementing a strategy that mitigates compliance risks for your organization and empowers your sales force to meet your enrollment targets. In our recent webinar regarding the impact of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) changes on Medicare Advantage (MA) and Federally-Facilitated Marketplace (FFM) 2016 Agent Readiness, I outlined key takeaways your organization needs to enforce in order to protect your health plan from compliance risks while also positioning it for sales success in 2016 and beyond.
1. MA/Part D Compliance and FWA Training for FDRs:
Beginning on January 1, 2016, every organization will need to ensure Compliance and Fraud, Waste, and Abuse (FWA) training requirements for first-tier, downstream, and related entities (FDRs) are fulfilled ONLY through CMS courses found on the Medicare Learning Network (MLN). This includes contracted Field Marketing Organizations (FMOs) and agents/brokers. This means the organization may now require these individuals to take custom training and must have mechanisms in place to accept completion of the CMS training. CMS also explicitly states plans will need to provide accurate reporting of this information.
Ways to fulfill requirement:
Note this requirement does not exempt organizations from ensuring all employees and FDRs are informed on how to report instances of fraud, waste, or abuse and other relevant information as described in Compliance Program requirements.
2. New Features for Health Insurance Marketplace Training
CMS is implementing changes to its process where vendors will be offering training. CMS has approved three vendors as "conditionally approved" (not approved until go-live in late summer 2015). GHG is a conditionally-approved vendor for Health Insurance Marketplace training. The number one takeaway from this is agents still begin and end on the CMS website. They cannot come to any vendor website to take their training; they must go directly to CMS and choose the party they would like to utilize.
Important to note:
- Vendors may use CMS' training or vendor-developed training approved by CMS.
- New! Vendor pricing varies: GHG's pricing is $29 for Individual and/or Small Business Health Options Program (SHOP), while AHIP is $125 for Individual or SHOP and $150 for both.
- Vendors offer Continuing Education (CE) units in 5 or more states (pricing varies by vendor).
For information on the requirements and process for completing Health Insurance Marketplace agent and broker registration and training for plan year 2016, please visit here.
Learn more about GHG Health Insurance Marketplace training at exchangebrokertraining.com.
3. Plan Benefit Training Is Important (but doesn't have to be long!)
The point of plan benefit training is not to communicate every detail of your benefits but to provide key information, such as:
- basic company information,
- plan types,
- service areas,
- premiums and deductibles,
- any changes from benefits last year,
- network restrictions and/or changes,
- highlights of drug benefits,
- description of value-added benefits,
- anything that makes you stand out from competitors, and
- most importantly, how and where to get more detailed information
Remember, every interaction your sales agents have with prospective enrollees should be viewed as a golden opportunity to educate the public about your organization. Ensure your staff is effectively trained to make every member touch count.
4. Licensure
CMS does not specify how or how often the organization checks licensure − just that they ensure the agent is licensed. GHG recommends the organization use primary-source verification through the state Department of Insurance (DOI) or National Insurance Producer Registry (NIPR). At a minimum, the organization should check annually and upon any expiration date. Quarterly checks are slightly more robust, and monthly checks the most rigorous.
5. OIG/GSA (Exclusion) Checks
Like compliance and FWA training, this is a compliance requirement that applies to all delegates (and employees) — not just agents. Every agent representing your plan needs to be checked against the federal exclusion lists every month. Plans need to work with their Compliance Department to ensure this requirement is met.
Whether you operate strictly in the MA market or are participating in the Health Insurance Marketplace, thorough and streamlined agent/broker training positions your plan to make the most of every opportunity and minimize compliance risks. Focus on better agents, not just more agents, to best serve your plan and your beneficiaries.
Need help? GHG's fully-automated Sales Sentinel™ can take your agents from zero to ready-to-sell in as little as one week, ensuring agents are not only trained but contracted, licensed, and appointed per CMS requirements. Sales Sentinel™ can also assist your organization with administrative onboarding functions such as form collection and writing code assignment.
If you have questions, please contact me directly at afleming@ghgadvisors.com.
Resources
Gorman Health Group is one of three conditionally approved for exchange marketplace training, is accepted by all carriers in federal exchange states and provides CE credits available in most states. To learn more visit exchangebrokertraining.com >>
Stay connected. Subscribe to Gorman Health Group news and updates via our weekly newsletter.
The Affordability Review — “Reading the Tea Leaves"
The fall season is a good reality check — back to school, cooler weather, end of summer, and …. Budgeting/financial forecasting. Forecasting is like predicting the future — you have to know how to read the tea leaves and see the efficiencies and interdependencies of your current performance to have a better idea of future performance and challenges.
Regardless of lines of business and marketplaces, companies need to manage to an acceptable loss ratio. Government regulations use this metric across different products and populations. Medicare Advantage demands at least 85% medical loss ratio (MLR), and many Medicaid plans and special needs populations require at least 90% MLR. Administrative costs are constantly squeezed, and risk adjustment is an ongoing process that is sometimes hard to quantify relative to the amount and timing of the additional revenue.
So the process of going through an affordability review is like a readiness audit. It is better to be proactive and look for opportunities before it is too late. An affordability review consists of several steps. An initial onsite visit, including interviews with management across the key departments of medical management, networks, pharmacy, claims, finance, risk adjustment, and marketing, can set the foundation for an in-depth review of internal financial and operating reports. An objective review of claims trends, based on cost and utilization drivers across members, providers, and services, can result in improved financial and operational performance. With collaboration among subject matter experts, initiatives with financial targets and action plans can be developed and monitored.
Even with new products and demonstrations, reports and a monitoring process should be in place on day one. Many Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) demonstrations only last for three years, so waiting for claims data and trends minimizes your window for mitigation.
Resources
Gorman Health Group has subject matter experts in operations and analytics to provide assistance with this process and help cultivate a corporate awareness and discipline toward financial outcomes that deserve a spot with quality and compliance. It is everyone's responsibility. Contact us to learn more >>
Stay connected. Subscribe to Gorman Health Group news and updates via our weekly newsletter.
Medicare at 50: Past, Present & Future
Since its inception on July 30,1965, millions of elderly and disabled Americans have been able to obtain medical care through Medicare. Before Medicare, almost half of all Americans 65 and older had no health insurance. Today that number has dropped to a staggering 2 percent.
The accomplishments for Medicare have been noteworthy.
These include increased access to health insurance coverage and healthcare, decreased disparities in access by race leading to desegregation of hospital staff and facilities, as well as payment and delivery system reforms such as prospective payment, capitation, and shared savings — all of which have been adopted by private payers. Karen Davis from Johns Hopkins and former President of the Commonwealth Fund noted the success of Medicare's insurance Marketplace which offers beneficiaries a choice of traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage plans with a 4-5 Star program that is driving plans and enrollment to higher quality. Medicare spending per capita has grown more slowly than overall health spending per capita and is currently at historically low rates.
The challenges are many.
Disjointed coverage (Parts A, B, D) is confusing to beneficiaries and results in high administrative costs and overpayments. Out-of-pocket costs for premiums, cost-sharing, and uncovered services remain high, and Medicare has no out-of-pocket maximum. Medicare does not cover long-term care services or home- and community-based services. Provider payment still remains largely fee-for-service, resulting in incentives for volume and provider not patient-centered care.
The Future
The future involves many different directions. The first is moving from an acute care model to a program that can effectively care for beneficiaries with complex chronic conditions. Provider payment reform needs to move to value-based payment that rewards efficiency and quality. The focus needs to shift to patient-centered care rather than provider-centric care. Care coordination and team care needs to be a focus. Program fragmentation and high out-of-pocket costs, particularly for high service users, needs to be addressed.
As Charles Darwin pointed out, evolution isn't about being the biggest or the smartest, but the most adaptable. Government programs have become the biggest opportunity for payers. Rates will be positive especially in Medicare Advantage, but the compliance environment will be brutal throughout the rest of the Obama administration. Star Ratings and the member experience are now driving the market — 30 plus states are now using some form of Star Ratings for performance-based payment, many states have adopted quality ratings for Medicaid managed care plans, but there is no national standard….yet, and the Health Insurance Marketplace will begin publishing quality ratings in 2016.
What have we learned?
John Gorman, Founder and Executive Chairman at Gorman Health Group, recently provided lessons learned in the 19 years we have partnered with health plans operating in Medicare, Medicaid and now the Health Insurance Marketplaces. He discusses the current industry environment and what's important moving forward. Read more >>
About 81M will be enrolled in Medicare by 2030. Is your organization prepared?
Resources
Gorman Health Group evaluates the design and delivery of high quality collaborative care while achieving compliance and improving revenue cycle management. Our multidisciplinary team of experts will assess the alignment of your products, your current network and your market to translate your business strategies into practical, efficient and rigorous work processes with the highest degree of compliance and accountability. Visit our website to learn more >>
GHG can evaluate your Star Ratings approach, and identify tactics you can begin implementing immediately, to integrate initiatives, eliminate redundancies, and build an enterprise-wide Star management structure. We can help you identify clinical, operational, and networking opportunities to increase your score for 2016 and beyond. Contact us to learn more >>
Stay connected. Subscribe to Gorman Health Group news and updates via our weekly newsletter.
MLTSS: Key to Caring for Duals
We all want to do it: Provide the best healthcare services for our members. For our vulnerable population, this can be complicated, if not near impossible to achieve, given the current healthcare issues at hand.
About 9.6 million people in the United States are covered by both Medicare and Medicaid, including low-income seniors and younger people with disabilities, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation (kff.org). Kindred Healthcare's "Making Sense of Healthcare Reform: Dual Eligible" points out, as baby-boomers reach their 65th birthdays, an estimated 10,000 individuals become eligible for Medicare-covered services each day. Couple this fact with the expansion of Medicaid eligibility in many states, the result is a much larger dual-eligible population in the near future. These dual-eligible beneficiaries are almost, by definition, a high-needs population often demonstrating to be the poorest and sickest beneficiaries of both programs. Consequently, they account for a disproportionate share of spending in both programs and, according to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), dual-eligible beneficiaries cost Medicare about 60 percent more than non-dual eligibles.
Medicare and Medicaid were never operationally designed to work as a single health plan (and it shows). Kindred Healthcare explains further in their article there are coverage and payment policies offered by 50 separate and unique Medicaid policies. Simplified, Medicaid pays for almost all long-term care (LTC) services, while Medicare covers more acute care such as emergency department visits. Dual eligibles are constantly bouncing back and forth between the two government-funded programs; Medicare pays for an operation and Medicaid for long-term recovery.
It's complex, inflexible, and silo-infested.
Health plans need to identify ways to better manage escalating costs and make payment reform a fundamental requirement in both improving quality and containing costs. The answer is multi-faceted.
Move from Volume to Value: According to an article in governing.gov, the volume-driven Fee-for-Service (FFS) payment system for the Managed Long Term Services and Supports (MLTSS) of the aging and disabled LTC populations is focused on volume. The volume-driven FFS payment system can be replaced with pay-for-performance and care management initiatives including performance-based contracting, shared risk, and capitated payments to providers and managed care organizations (MCOs). Success of these initiatives is dependent on the plan's ability to track and analyze the outcomes. Focusing on outcomes can transition staff perspective, actions, and care plan goals to be more person-centered.
Improve Access to Home- and Community- Based Care: Tennessee implemented a pilot based on a decade-long study published in Health Affairs in 2009 which found states with established home- and community-based programs were able to reduce their overall Medicaid LTC spending by nearly 8 percent. Acting on the results of this study, Tennessee lawmakers introduced a new program called CHOICES in 2010, which was a way to help seniors on Medicaid receive home- and community-based care instead of living in nursing homes. Programs like CHOICES are estimated by the Bowles-Simpson presidential commission of fiscal reform to possibly produce savings up to $12 billion by 2020. Nursing homes, as a default option for aging and disabled beneficiaries, will quickly prove unaffordable in the long run not to mention negatively impact satisfaction ratings. After all, AARP conducted a study of individuals over the age of 50 and found more than 80 percent prefer aging in their own home than in an institution.
Provide Feedback to CMS: September 14, 2015, is the deadline to provide the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) comments regarding their newly released rule, Reform of Requirements for Long-Term Care (LTC) Facilities. This proposed rule would revise the requirements LTC facilities must meet to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. An emphasis has been made on theory and practice of service delivery and safety in order to achieve broad-based improvements both in the quality of healthcare furnished through federal programs, and in patient safety, while at the same time reducing procedural responsibilities on providers. New sections address facility responsibilities for protecting resident rights and enhancing quality of life; requirements for comprehensive person-centered care planning; changes relating to behavioral health service and laboratory, radiology, and other diagnostic services; requirements for Quality Assurance and Performance Improvement (QAPI) and Compliance and Ethics Programs; and staff training requirements. CMS estimates costs to comply per facility over a span of two years will be about $40,685.
Care Coordinate Effectively: In John Gorman's blog, "You're Doing it Wrong in Care Management" issued May 18, 2015, he explained how modernizing your approach in care management into data-driven care coordination "pods" can help you better manage your high utilizers and those about to become them. By "doing it right in case management," you can both contain costs and improve quality.
Resources
GHG can help your transform a total change in the delivery, payment, and care coordination efforts necessary to provide positive outcomes for a very challenging patient population. We can help you learn what works best in coordinating quality-driven care for dual-eligible beneficiaries — and what approaches would be unsustainable. Contact us to get started today>>
Stay connected. Subscribe to Gorman Health Group news and updates via our weekly newsletter.
EHR Incentive Programs: Improving Access to Care
The 2014 Medicare and Medicaid Electronic Health Record (EHR) Incentive Programs were developed to provide financial incentives to eligible professionals, eligible hospitals, and Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) to achieve meaningful use of certified EHR technology with the goal of improving patient care. The programs worked to prompt healthcare providers to adopt, implement, upgrade, or demonstrate meaningful use of certified EHR technology. In her May 18, 2015, article in RevCycleIntelligence, Jacqueline DiChiara reported by the end of 2014, EHR incentive payments reached over $28 billion with eligible hospitals receiving more than $17 billion, Medicare and Medicaid-eligible professionals collectively receiving nearly $10 billion. However, there are some changes with the EHR Technology Incentive Program that may affect your revenue—and not in a good way.
In the amended American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), Congress included provisions in the Medicare and Medicaid EHR Technology Incentive Program for CAHs, as well as eligible professionals and hospitals, who did not successfully demonstrate meaningful use of Certified EHR Technology to experience a negative payment adjustment to their reimbursement. Effective January 1, 2016, payment adjustments will be applied for those Medicare-eligible professionals not meeting the criteria for meaningful use in the Medicare EHR Incentive Program. For eligible hospitals, payment adjustments were applied as of October 1, 2014. Interestingly, DiChiara notes over 28,000 eligible professionals reported a 2% decrease in their 2015 Medicare payments for not meeting the standards related to Electronic Prescribing (eRx) and the Medicare EHR Incentive Program. CAHs unable to demonstrate meaningful use for the applicable reporting period of fiscal year (FY) 2015 will have a decrease in their reimbursement, from 101% of its reasonable costs to 100.66%, according to CMS.gov. For 2016, the percent of reasonable costs reimbursement decreases to 100.33% and then down again to 100% for 2017 and for each year thereafter, well into years 2020 and beyond.
CAHs were created to preserve access to primary and emergency care services in isolated rural areas by improving the financial conditions of CAHs and, subsequently, preventing some closures. Choices Magazine article, "Performance of the Critical Access Hospital Program: Lessons Learned for Future Rural Hospital Effectiveness in a Changing Health Policy Landscape," highlighted the CAH program grew rapidly from 41 hospitals in 1999 to 1,055 hospitals in 2005 and to 1,327 CAHs in 2011 because of the 1983 Medicare switch from cost-based reimbursement to the Prospective Payment System (PPS). CAHs now face possible Medicare cuts. Hopefully, the following information from CMS.gov can help CAHs effectively avoid EHR Incentive Program payment adjustments and ensure their financial longevity as Medicare and Medicaid providers.
- Hardship: A CAH may, on a case-by-case basis, be exempted from this adjustment if the CAH can demonstrate, on an annual basis, becoming a meaningful user of EHR technology would result in a significant hardship. However, in no case will a CAH be granted an exemption for more than five years.
- July 1, 2015: 2016 Eligible Professional (EP) Medicare EHR Incentive Program Hardship Exception Application Deadline
- CAHs can apply for hardship exceptions in the following categories:
- Infrastructure — CAHs must demonstrate they are in an area without sufficient internet access or face insurmountable barriers to obtaining infrastructure (e.g., lack of broadband).
- New CAHs — CAHs with new Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Certification Numbers (CCNs) not having had time to become meaningful users can apply for a limited exception to payment adjustments. The hardship exception is limited to one full year after the CAH accepts its first patient.
- Unforeseen Circumstances — Examples may include a natural disaster or other unforeseeable barrier.
- Meaningful Use: In order to avoid the payment adjustments, CAHs must demonstrate meaningful use within the full federal fiscal year that is the same as the payment adjustment year. The adjustment would then apply based upon the cost reporting period beginning in the payment adjustment year (that is, FY 2015 and thereafter). Thus, if a CAH is not a meaningful user for FY 2015 and thereafter, the adjustment would then be applied to the CAH's reasonable costs incurred in a cost reporting period beginning in that affected fiscal year.
- An eligible hospital or CAH demonstrates meaningful use by successfully attesting through either the CMS Medicare EHR Incentive Programs Attestation System (https://ehrincentives.cms.gov/) or through its state's attestation system.
- CAHs are required to submit their attestations for meaningful use by November 30th of the following fiscal year. For example, if a CAH is attesting it was a meaningful EHR user for FY 2015, the attestation must be submitted no later than November 30, 2015, in order to avoid payment adjustments.
- Eligible hospitals and CAHs participating in meaningful use for the first time this year may attest to a 90-day reporting period for FY 2015. CMS is allowing eligible hospitals and CAHs participating in meaningful use for the first time the ability to attest. The hospitals must first register in the CMS Registration and Attestation System at: https://ehrincentives.cms.gov/hitech/login.action. Once the registration is active, the hospital should contact Elizabeth Holland at elizabeth.holland@cms.hhs.gov and provide the hospital name, CCN, and contact person information.
- Call CMS Information Center: Ask questions, get more information. Dial 888-734-6433 then dial 1 for the EHR Information Center.
At the Intersection of Exhausted and Impossible
Today, most employees and employers in all organizations struggle to do more with less…not just health plans.
Information flow and the necessity to respond quickly to change have totally transformed existing jobs in the last ten years. There is little opportunity to spend days considering the implications of data and information received. The necessity of implementing new programs to meet the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) requirements strains the resources of health plan organizations and departments even further and may contribute to lapses in compliance and, therefore, regulatory risk. A daily to-do list for the Part D team routinely includes:
- Rejected claims review
- Formulary maintenance
- Adjudication issues resolution
- Intra-departmental calls to assist with resolution of grievances and Complaints Tracking Module cases (CTMs)
- Transition fill and notice monitoring
- B versus D medication resolutions
- Intra-departmental and other organization meetings
- Compliance communications and directives
- Personnel issue resolution
- Clinical pharmacy activities
- Part D Star Ratings monitoring and report reviews
- Case management activities
- CMS-required reporting
- Enrollment and eligibility issue resolution
- Prescription drug event (PDE) reconciliation
- AND the never diminishing email inbox
The list goes on and on. A thorough review of all department functions either utilizing internal human resource assistance or external experts can provide recommendations for the right size staffing, resource delineation, and recommendations for new products or tools for the Pharmacy/Part D Department. The review should include the following questions: What is the right mix of pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, and business analysts? How many hours or full-time employee (FTE) segments should be dedicated to the various tasks? Will additional training and refining of work processes help to alleviate some of the burden? Is there a software solution that will streamline some of the manual processes currently in place?
With the insufficient amount of true subject matter experts in the industry, we know recruiting is difficult and time consuming. If interim staffing is what you need, Gorman Health Group (GHG) can enhance your team with our own, providing knowledgeable, effective assistance and an eye for detail from processors and analysts with decades of experience. Our pharmacy consultants come fully trained and prepared to provide short-term or long-term support and create a business case for additional resources, training, and tools. We offer strategic and operational leadership experts when, and where you need it.
Interested in more information? Contact us today.
Resources
Our Part D services are designed with your staff in mind, ensuring that with a mix of counsel and DIY tools your staff will have access to actionable information — faster. Don't chase data points. Spend your time on the things that will impact your audit results when a CMS audit comes — and it always does. Visit our website to learn more >>
Stay connected. Subscribe to Gorman Health Group news and updates via our weekly newsletter.