a cfo s perspective on quality n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
A CFO’s Perspective on Quality PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
A CFO’s Perspective on Quality

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 33

A CFO’s Perspective on Quality - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 155 Views
  • Uploaded on

A CFO’s Perspective on Quality. CMS’ New Focus on Quality. CMS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ROADMAP EXECUTIVE SUMMARY VISION: The right care for every person every time.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'A CFO’s Perspective on Quality' - electra


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide2

CMS’ New Focus on Quality

CMS QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ROADMAP

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

VISION: The right care for every person every time.

CMS believes that this vision is realistic and substantially achievable and that recent developments create unprecedented opportunities and need for that achievement:

  • 1. A growing body of evidence shows that there are major opportunities to improve carewith major potential benefits for patients.
  • 2. The growing complexity of medical knowledge and the growing number of participants, technologies, and specialties create both enormous rewards for better careand enormous challenges in continuing our current path.
  • 3. Stakeholders from many sides are showing a new willingness to come together in partnerships to achieve improvement and are looking to CMS for leadership and broadening recognition that highest quality care is the only care anyone can afford.
slide3

Quality

Oriented

  • VBP Program Goals
  • Improve clinical quality
  • Reduce adverse events and improve patient safety
  • Encourage more patient-centered care
  • Avoid unnecessary costs in the delivery of care
  • Stimulate investments in effective structural components or systems
  • Make performance results transparent and comprehensible
  • To empower consumers to make value-based decisions about their
  • health care
  • To encourage hospitals and clinicians to improve quality of care
slide4

CMS Quality Initiatives:

Wolf in Sheep's Clothing?

Mission / Vision / Values ?

The CMS Quality Improvement Roadmap represents a major, agency-wide effort to use the new Medicare law and other new opportunities to work in partnership with the rest of the health care system to achieve major improvements in the quality of health care. This is a shared mission. It is up to all of us – government officials and health care stakeholders, and especially patients and health professionals – to work together to achieve the major quality improvements that should be possible today.

slide5

Improved

Quality

may be a

welcomed

byproduct.

Currently the only industry where you pay

for a product/service with no regard

for product/results

Also the only industry where $ =/= $

Medicare 50%

Medicaid 20%

Third Part Contract 20%

Private (nothing) 10%

medicare s history
Medicare’s History

Net of inflation, all produced

reimbursement reductions

IPPS DRG Reimbursement

Cost Adjusted, Blended, Fixed

Marketbasket Reductions

MS-DRGs

Outliers

Medicare Advantage Plans

2003 Medicare Modernization Act

Social Security Act Amendments of 1983

DSH Reductions

DRG

Congress’ Intention

Vs.

CMS Interpretation

RACs

5 Years Later

Core

Measures

APCs

IPPS 09

43 new Quality Indicators

Post Acute Transfer Policy

Introduced for 10 in 99

Increased to 29 in 2004

Increased to 182 in 2006

IPPS 09

9 new HACs

Never

Events

SNF 09

$770m Recalibration

OP 09

Quality Measures 7-11

RACs

SNF RUGs

Hospital Acquired

Conditions

OPPS

Fee Schedule-Blended

Fee schedule-Fixed

1997 Balanced Budget Act

2005 Deficit Reduction Act

24 Hour Observation

VALUE BASED PURCHASING

Medical Necessity

boomers
Boomers

1920

Many

Pay For

Few

65

2Mil

Charts by CalculatedRisk (http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com)

boomers1
Boomers

1920

1940

1960

1980

2000

2005

Charts by CalculatedRisk (http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com)

boomers2
Boomers

2005

65

2.8Mil

Charts by CalculatedRisk (http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com)

boomers3
Boomers

2005

Fewer

Pay For

More

65

Years

old in

2025

Charts by CalculatedRisk (http://calculatedrisk.blogspot.com)

medicare s future
Medicare’s Future

Program

Deficit

Grows

slide16

No Hope For Survival Under the Current Approach

Medicare Trustees estimate that it would require a gradual tripling of the payroll tax, a reduction in Part A expenditures by one-third, or some combination of the two approaches to restore the solvency of the Medicare Trust Fund over the very long run (75 years)

quality as a new approach
Quality As A New Approach
  • Core Measures – data mining
  • Hospital Acquired Conditions (HACs) and Present on Arrival (POA)
  • Never Events
  • Value Based Purchasing
slide18

Hospital Acquired Conditions (HAC) Reporting

2009 CMS Proposed Rule

    • Core Measures
      • Initially defined as a bonus program based on performance
      • in 10 core measures
      • The “bonus” was to simply allow you to keep your annual
      • 3% Market Basket (inflation) increase.
    • Quality Indicators
      • Adds 43 new IP conditions for 2010 bringing the total to 73
      • Adds 4 OP conditions bringing total to 11
    • HACs Present on Admission
      • 8 conditions in 2008
      • 9 additional proposed for 2009
        • No payment for “U”s
    • Value Based Purchasing
      • Payments to high-performing hospitals would be larger than
      • those to lower performing hospitals.
        • Financial incentives to drive improvements in clinical quality, patient-centeredness, and efficiency.
  • Note: See SCHA comments online.
the medicare hospital value based purchasing vbp plan
The Medicare Hospital Value-Based Purchasing (VBP) Plan

Section 5001(b) of the Deficit Reduction Act (DRA) of 2005 (P.L.109-171) authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop a plan to implement a value-based purchasing program for payments under the Medicare program to subsection (d) hospitals beginning with Fiscal Year 2009.

By statute, the plan must include consideration of at least the following design issues:

1. The on-going development, selection, and modification process for

measures of quality and efficiency in hospital inpatient settings.

2. The reporting, collection, and validation of quality data.

3. The structure of value-based payment adjustments, including the

determination of thresholds or improvements in quality that would

substantiate a payment adjustment, the size of such payments, and the

source of funding for the value-based payments.

4. The disclosure of information on hospital performance.

Note: IP Proposed Rule addresses no plans for the implementation of VBP .

slide20

Value Based Medicine Case Study

Vol. 297 No. 21, June 6, 2007

Conclusions  Among hospitals participating in a voluntaryquality-improvement initiative, the pay-for-performance programwas not associated with a significant incremental improvementin quality of care or outcomes for acute myocardial infarction.Conversely, we did not find evidence that pay for performancehad an adverse association with improvement in processes ofcare that were not subject to financial incentives. Additionalstudies of pay for performance are needed to determine its optimalrole in quality-improvement initiatives.

slide21

Core

Measures

Never

Events

HAC/POA

overview of a potential performance assessment model
Overview of a Potential Performance Assessment Model
  • A hospital must submit data for all VBP measures that apply to its patient population and service mix. The measures could be used for incentive payment, public reporting, or measure development.
  • A hospital receives a performance score on each measure for incentive payment for which it has a minimum number of cases.
  • Measures are grouped into “domains” a score is calculated for each domain by combining the measure scores within that domain, weighting each measure equally.
  • A hospital’s VBP Total Performance Score is determined by aggregating the scores across all domains. Domains could be weighted equally or unequally.
  • The Total Performance Score is translated into the percentage of VBP incentive payment earned using an “exchange function,”
slide23

VBP DRG Example

http://www.aishealth.com/Compliance/ResearchTools/RMC_CMS_DRG_Reimbursement.html

For the purpose of this example, the VBP incentive payment amount is set at 5 percent of the base operating DRG payment, clinical process measures

are weighted at 0.7, and HCAHPS is weighted at 0.3 in calculating the Total Performance Scores, and we assume that Hospital B and Hospital A both have

a wage index of 1. The hospital-specific incentive payment earned by each hospital is taken from the Figure 1 table in the VBP Plan. Hospital B earns 100 percent

of the incentive payment; as a result, its VBP payment for DRG 498 is the same as the base operating payment for the DRG. Hospital A earns 82 percent

of the incentive payment; as a result, its VBP payment for DRG 498 is $132.42 less than the base operating payment for the DRG.

more details on the cms vbp plan
More Details on the CMS VBP Plan

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

REPORT TO CONGRESS:

Plan to Implement a Medicare Hospital

Value-Based Purchasing Program

November 21, 2007

http://www.cms.hhs.gov/CouncilonTechInnov/downloads/qualityroadmap.pdf

slide26

Fear of the Unknown

  • “Not Billing” for Never Events
  • “Not charging” vs. “not billing”
  • Other third parties (e.g.. Aetna) not paying for never events
  • Other third parties expanding their lists
  • Carriers not paying by ICD-9
  • Related CPTs
  • Misrepresentation of the bill
  • Legal risk of “not billing”
  • Accounting and finance
  • Compliance
  • SCHA Response: “…please ensure that the new quality incentives are not utilized by carriers of lesser value and intention as a new vehicle used to deny or reduce payments.”
is quality the next rac encounter
Is Quality the Next RAC Encounter?
  • Recovery Audit Contractors
  • $30,000,000 in SC recoveries
    • Medically necessity
    • No Appeals
    • Statewide lawsuit
what s next
What’s Next?

Value Based Purchasing

“These Premier results show that Value-Based Purchasing can achieve excellent results in Medicare,” said CMS Acting Administrator Kerry Weems.  “Given these results, it is time to take the next step and implement hospital Value-Based Purchasing for the Medicare program, so that citizens across the nation can benefit from improved safety and quality get the right care, every time.”

K erry Weems

CMS Acting Director

what s next1
What’s Next?
  • HACs that are not clinically avoidable
  • Increased “never event” listing that may not be distinguishable as the hospital’s fault
  • Physician RACs? (already have data from hospital charts)
  • Outpatient RACs?
  • Clinical result RACs?
  • Quality RACs?
  • Penalties, fines, accreditation risks….
how to prepare
How to Prepare
  • IMPROVE DOCCUMENTATION
    • Facility and Physician
    • Train nursing Staff on increased importance of documentation
    • Avoid “U”s (CMS is tracking)
      • Have coders request additional documentation
    • Sample documentation (Quality Team)
  • Track current POAs (Ns and Us)
how to prepare1
How to Prepare
  • Reevaluate quality team membership
  • Educate CEO
  • Educate Physicians(Now’s the time, July payment delay and 10.5% decrease )
  • Educate Quality Team
  • Involve CFO
  • Involve HIM
  • Involve PAS
slide33

Barney Osborne

VP of Finance and Reimbursement

(803) 744-3544

bosborne@scha.org

Help SCHA maximize the potential quality improvements while minimizing the financial risks.