Tuesday, October 01, 2019

CMS Quality Payment Program Part 1 of 2


Medicare and the Quality Payment Program- What is it and who can participate. (Part 1 of 2)

Many physicians and their staff ask what a Quality Payment Program is and who can or should participate. Currently the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) is looking to move to a more beneficial Quality Payment Program (QPP), but knowing the past would be helpful. Way back physicians were reimbursed in a Fee-for-Service (FFS) model where it was volume, not quality that drove the payment. As this payment model was slowly getting out of hand, Congress passed temporary fixes called “doc fixes” to avoid cuts in reimbursement. If they did not do this it would have resulted in a 21% cut in Medicare payments to clinicians.

In comes a great idea, a Quality Payment Program (QPP) that can help to reform Medicare Part B payments for more than 600,000 clinicians across the country. This is a huge step in the direction of improving care and controlling costs across an entire healthcare delivery system. There are two tracks that a clinician can choose from which are Advanced Alternative Payment Models (APMs) that require the clinician to participate in an innovative payment model. The second option is the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) which works with clinicians that choose to remain in a more traditional Medicare payment model and possibly earn a performance-based payment adjustment.

Now the question is who can participate? The Quality Payment Program is available to all Medicare Part B clinicians billing more than $30,000 a year to Medicare and providing care for more than 100 Medicare patients per year. The clinicians include Physicians, Physician Assistants, Nurse Practitioners, Clinical Nurse Specialists, and Certified Registered Nurse Anesthetists. Those clinicians who are excluded from the QPP are ones that enroll in Medicare for the first time during a performance period as they are exempt from reporting on any measures and activities for MIPS until the next performance year. Also, clinicians that are below the low-volume threshold of $30,000 per year in billing to Medicare or they see less than 100 Medicare patients per year. In addition, clinicians significantly participating in Advance Payment Models (APMs) are excluded.

Overall, this program is designed for small practices to be able to successfully participate in the Quality Payment Program by reducing the time and cost to participate, allowing the small practices to “Pick Your Pace”, increasing the opportunities to participate in an APM, including a practice-based option for participation in an Advanced APM as an alternative to total cost-based, and by conducting support and outreach to small practices through various programs such as Transforming Clinical Practice Initiative.  For the Rural and Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs) they can have less than or equal to $30,000 in Medicare Part B allowed charges or less than or equal to 100 Medicare patients served. They only need to report on one high-weighted activity or two medium-weighted activities. These are all designed to have ease of access to the program, regardless of the size of the practice or the location that they serve Medicare patients.

Monday, July 15, 2019

My Motivation to Pursue a Leadership Role in Healthcare


St. Joseph’s HA511 Course, Leadership in Health Administration, encourages students to reflect on their personal leadership journey, leadership effectiveness and the transformation of healthcare.  During week 2 students engage in a dialog on the discussion board sharing with one another leadership quotes that inspire them. The following is a post from Aaron Strout:

My Motivation to Pursue a Leadership Role in Healthcare

“You can’t lead the people if you don’t love the people.” Cornel West
Leadership is not a subject I have studied in depth.  It is not a subject I have been interested in studying until recently.  The concept of leadership may even be one that I viewed with contempt for many years, viewing leaders as shameless self-promoting bullies, hawking their snake oil to mindless masses.  But I am older now, not as interested in “sticking it to the man” or “fighting the power”, as I am in modeling a life and creating a future that my children and others can be proud of and benefit from.  This adjusted paradigm has allowed room to value the concept of leadership, and even myself as a leader. 
Working in healthcare has allowed me to see my role develop as an advocate.  This advocacy unfolds in different aspects, but it’s primary motivation stems from perceived areas of injustice and wrongs that should be made right.  Healthcare is not a perfect environment.  Healthcare related mistakes cost too many lives every year.  These can include clinical mistakes as well as system injustices that omit access to certain populations of people. 
I also feel a sense of responsibility to fellow healthcare workers.  My primary role over the past 10 years has been as a nurse, but I see other disciplines and departments as equally important in creating a functional healthcare environment.  Too often healthcare does not do a good enough job taking care of the people who take care of others.  For example, while the consensus is to debrief and process after a traumatic event happens at a hospital, long term care facility or an office, my experience is that this does not happen in practice.  Consequently, employees are left to process death, blood, suffering, pain, and chaos independently without the formal support of their peers.  These events are often discussed informally amongst co-workers, but little follow up is done from an employer perspective.  Many daily events are not as traumatic, but still deserve to be followed up on, so that employees can focus the majority of their time and energy on creating a positive environment for patients and families. 
Herein lies my motivation to pursue a leadership role in healthcare.  As an industry, we need to do a better job at caring for those we work with.  I am convinced this is the only way to improve the healthcare experience and industry.  When we start caring for each other, we will do a better job caring for our patients and families. 
Healthcare needs leaders who are developing their worldviews and growing their inner capacity to, “…love the people.”  Instructor: Danine Casper, MHA

Monday, June 03, 2019

Risk, Fear, and Failure


Risk, Fear, and Failure
Friday, April 19, 2019
8:12 AM
In his book, "Fail More", author Bill Wooditch explores the human trait of "fear" and ow this has been ingrained in our culture, education system, and other institutions of society.  He cites numerous individuals who have overcome failures and fear but went on to greater accomplishments.

When I was reading the book, I thought about how the urge to be perfect and to always win creates the an environment to quit or not even try a hobby, sport or other activity.  I recall the comment from a movie that second place was really "first loser".  During the NCAA Basketball Tourney, I saw a young boy outfitted in his teams colors emotionally distraught over the loss of his team and wonder what might be the impact on his willingness to play the sport in the future.

All of this drive for winning and perfection lead me to some thoughts about the regulatory oversight and quality improvement  systems used in the LTC/PAC sector.  Public policy has driven providers to be mandated to seek care without errors or mistakes and compliance with subjective regulations needing perfection.  Is this really feasible given the challenges in financial resources and support from governmental funders?  Has this public policy direction for perfection created a culture that avoids risk and innovation?

The basis for quality improvement is to identify goals to achieve, evaluate performance data, create plans to achieve better outcomes and assess performance and progress or the classic "Plan, Do, Check, Act" mantra.  Does that fear of failure or a less than optima outcomes destroy attempts for innovation in the quality improvement cycle? 

In earlier blogs I have suggested the need to change how the LTC/PAC sector is regulated.  The ability to create innovative, quality driven organizations is stifled by the overzealous and subjective actions by the current survey system.  LTC/PAC providers are closest to the patient, have the ability to make evidence-based judgments on their needs.  The sector should be encouraged to work on innovation and not judged merely on observations taken from a database and based on opinions of documentation provided in a healthcare record.

Steven Chies, MHA, LNHA (MN) FACHCA, HSE
Program Manager, Long-term Care Administration
Instructor
HA 214
HIM 214
LTC 448
LTC 352
LTC 462