CMS Delivers Final ACO Rules

Via Modern Healthcare

Final rules for Medicare’s accountable care organizations, released today by the CMS, made significant changes to proposals widely rejected by hospitals and physician groups.

Accountable care under Medicare offers financial incentives to providers that achieve quality and cost-saving targets. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act calls for Medicare to offer accountable-care agreements starting in 2012. The agency released draft rules in March for three-year agreements that providers sharply criticized as too risky and burdensome. More than 1,200 comments were submitted, according to CMS.

Final rules reduced quality measures to 33 (PDF) from the 65 originally proposed. CMS officials said in regulations released today the agency sought to reduce the administrative burden and eliminate potentially redundant measures. CMS also eliminated a potential penalty for the final year under one of two proposed accountable-care payment models. Previously, one payment proposal required ACOs to accept risk during the last year of a three-year agreement. The other model requires ACOs to accept risk for all three years.


The Money Is In The Management

Conversation regarding ACOs and even healthcare reform itself is misplaced.  The well established facts are (1) more people will receive health care, and (2) the cost of healthcare will come down.  It does not matter whether the stimulus is a new law or just marketplace reaction.  The fact is that a healthcare system whose players are incentivized to do more with more expensive stuff is not economically sustainable or socially tolerable.

Take a look at our evolving marketplace.  What’s the single most distinctive feature in healthcare, aside from inactivity?  Integration.  Larger hospital systems and larger medical practices, typically single specialty.  Good adaptation?  Maybe.  It is in the short run.  Single specialty aggregation is purely defensive though.  It allows groups to maintain market share and to resist price compression better.  But how will that allow providers to do more with less?  How will that stimulate more outcome based, financial risk based care?  It doesn’t.  It is well established that cost and quality management demands broad spectrum system awareness….ummmm primary care physicians.  The adaptation of single specialty group integration is short term.  How short?  Who knows?  But it is clearly not as sustainable as one whose preparation for change includes primary care capabilities.

And how do hospital-based physician alliances help physicians survive and thrive?  They don’t unless they have a strong primary care base, and even then it is very questionable whether hospitals will be able to utilize their PCPs and specialists in a way that rewards outcomes based, financially smart behavior.  Hospitals have always been sink holes in the landscape of healthcare costs, so why jump in?  Physicians need to make sure that their affiliated hospital systems have clear plans and abilities (e.g. management and good physician billing and collection experience) to deliver outcomes at the right price.  Studies, however, that indicate over sixty percent of Florida hospital admissions are unnecessary are consoling in a fee for service environment, but devastating in a capitated (or other risk based) one.  Physicians have to make sure the ship they book passage on can sail a long way.

And they have to make sure they are part of the right team.  What expertise is there in things like IT, financial management, clinical outcomes management, and risk based contracting?  You’re gonna need that!

If one believes that healthcare costs are unsustainable (this guy does) and that our entire payment system is driving that result, then the need for new payment systems is clear.  And the challenge, just in terms of thinking about healthcare differently, is enormous!  How do you go to work and not think “I gotta do a lot, test a lot, do lots of procedures.”  How do you begin to shift?  Do you shift?

The compelling answer is “YES.”  Why not act now, before any law (even one dumber than the one that passed a year ago) gets passed, before our society calls the issue a failure and politicians and our neighbors demand a single payer-type system?  Isn’t there a huge opportunity RIGHT NOW?  You betcha.

So where is it?  It’s in management.  The money is in the management.  The data collectors, crunchers and implementers are the new gods in healthcare.  Anyone who can collect data, show what makes clinical and financial sense and then implement it will be more sought after than conflict diamonds.  Show one hospital how to live in that new system, where there are more patients, but less money available, and you retire rich.  Show physicians and other healthcare business people the same thing and lead change.  And since physicians are busy being physicians, except for a handful of physician entrepreneurs, they’re best bet is gonna be to find good partners in “business” who embrace change and see opportunity.


Elephants in the Room

ACOs and other new acronyms have swamped the minds of physicians and healthcarebusiness people alike since the terms were coined. The still new healthcare reform law continues to worry many and challenge others to figure out ways to play the game and win. While we scurry around chasing the regs and the new words and government agencies, while politics keeps moving the ball and shaping the healthcare agenda, the most central issues in healthcare cost/quality debate are not even discussed. It’s as though policy makers and business is saying “Hey, if we keep throwing new regulations at them, maybe they’ll stop asking really tough questions we can’t answer.”

Back in the 80s, the state of Oregon enacted Medicaid reform that took the breath right out of the rest of the country. Remember? The idea that a state would not list ALL medical services to ALL Medicaid patients was considered to be cruel and impolitic at the time. And the national debate about (1) whether healthcare is a right of American citizens, and if so (2) what healthcare services are “in” and which are “out” has grown virtually silent.

Instead, it seems we have entered the area of political intransigence. It appears that getting and staying in political office requires as little change as possible. So, very little seems to be accomplished or even discussed.

So what are the “elephants in the room?” They are the issues of “how much” and “patient accountability.” Though it appears that the issue of whether we Americans are entitled to receive healthcare has been skirted, we are clearly missing any discussion on the issue of how much services. Oregon hit the issue head on, but nationally there appears to be no movement or even discussion of the issue. We don’t know who should get what. We just know we want to reduce the costs (ration).

Virtually every effort to reduce costs so far has involved the use of managed care organizations. The Florida Medicaid program pilot project that began in Broward County in 2006 has produced two clear results—reduced expenditures and huge criticism that managed care has reduced costs solely by reducing access and care itself. Managed care has become the “black hat” that politics won’t pick up. It’s ok for managed care to restrict access and care because it reduces costs, but it is politically impossible to directly address the issue of “how much.” We rely on managed care to do it for us, due to our political inability to tackle the issue, then blame the payers for their (wink wink) bad behavior. If managed care is profiting, it is only because they don’t mind profiting from our unwillingness to take responsibility for the issues they deal with on a daily basis—saying “no.”

The second elephant is the issue of patient accountability. There is none! What is the consequence of patient bad behavior? What consequence is there for refusal to exercise, quit smoking, etc.? None. We pay more. There isn’t a single provision in any federal law that punishes us for making expensive healthcare decisions or that rewards us for making cost saving healthcare decisions.

I liken it to having teenagers. Expectations with no consequences yields a predictable result of no change in behavior. Simple.

These are huge issues to tackle. So many different kinds of people, agendas and ways of seeing the issues. So, we don’t even try. Instead, we “hire” managed care to bear the burden of our failure to address and answer these issues. And we throw complex ideas like metrics and healthcare reform into the market, which only serves to distract us from addressing the root causes of our healthcare challenges.


Norton and Humana Commercial ACO Moving Forward

Jim Molpus, for HealthLeaders Media, August 8, 2011

“In its most simplified form, the idea behind accountable care organizations was to get the healthcare providers and payers in a community to work together to improve care while also reducing its cost. Much of that purity has been lost in the noise of the ACO movement, but in Louisville, KY, Norton Healthcare and Humana are continuing the journey.

Norton, with five hospitals and more than 2,000 physicians, and health plan Humana, headquartered in Louisville but with 10 million members nationwide, began discussions of forming an ACO in 2009, “when we had no idea what an ACO really was,” says Steven Hester, MD, Norton’s chief medical officer.”

Read More


ACOwatch: Kathleen Sebelius: Keynote Speech From 2nd Annual ACO Summit

6/28/2011: ACOwatch.com 
Remarks as prepared for delivery by Secretary Sebelius on June 27th, 2011, Washington, DC.

“Improving care is clearly the best approach to addressing rising costs – especially compared to recent proposals that would simply cut Medicare and Medicaid, without doing anything to address underlying growth in health care spending.  But it’s also clear that we are not improving fast enough.  So our challenge is to speed it up.”

Read more here: http://acowatch.com/