CMS To Hold Series of Regional ‘Listening Sessions’

During these sessions, CMS  intends to highlight health reform efforts while also gaining continuing input from community stakeholders. CMS’s purpose in organizing the regional sessions is to clarify that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) has given it new opportunities to improve the care delivery and payment system, including Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) under the ACA’s Shared Savings Program.

Each listening session will minimally focus on:

  • The ‘Shared Savings Program’ (MSSP) for ACOs
  • The new Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI); and
  • The Federal Coordinated Health Care Office (FCHCO)

December 10, 2010: 9:00 – 11:00 AM Mountain Time

CMS Region 8 – Listening Session ‘Health Care Delivery System Reform’

Co-hosted by HHS Regional Director, Marguerite Salazar, CMS Regional Administrator Jeff Hinson And featuring Dr. Richard Gilfillan, M.D, Acting Director, CMS’ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMI).

The purpose of this listening session is to highlight the important work CMS is undertaking around health care delivery system reform. We will spotlight three areas of interest: The Accountable Care Organization Shared Savings Program, The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation and The Federal Coordinated Health Care Office.

Individuals will be provided with a registration confirmation. Attendees are instructed to bring their registration confirmation to the event as registration will be verified at the door.

Questions may be directed to the following voicemail box: 303-844-7130. We also note that a transcript of this session will be available at this website several weeks following the event. We appreciate your time and participation, and we thank you in advance.

The Children’s Hospital, Anschutz Medical Campus, 2nd Floor Conference Center, 13123 East 16th Avenue, Aurora, CO 80045

To attend, click here.

December 13, 2010: 12:00 – 2:00 PM

CMS Region 10 – Listening Session: Health Care Delivery System Reform

The Region 10 Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) invites your participation to a Listening Session co-hosted by HHS Regional Director Susan Johnson and CMS Regional Administrator John Hammarlund.

Dr. Don Berwick, CMS Administrator, will provide opening remarks and Dr. Richard Gilfillan, Acting Director of the CMS Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI), will be soliciting your ideas and feedback to help inform health care delivery reform and innovation efforts.

Hilton Seattle Airport and Conference Center, 17620 International Blvd, Seattle, WA 98188

To attend, click here.

December 16, 2010: 1:00 – 2:30 PM Eastern Time

CMS Region 4 – Listening Session ‘Health Care Delivery System Reform’

Hosted by CMS Regional Administrator, Dr. Renard Murray featuring Dr. Richard Gilfillan Acting Director, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMI) and Sharon Donovan Federal Coordinated Health Care Office Also including The Department for Health and Human Services Regional Director, Anton Gunn.

The purpose of this listening session is to highlight the important work CMS is undertaking around health care delivery system reform. We will spotlight three areas of interest: The Accountable Care Organization Shared Savings Program, The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation and The Federal Coordinated Health Care Office.

Call in information: 800-837-1935, use ID Code: 28950540

December 17, 2010: 9:30 – 11:30 AM

CMS  – Listening Session ‘Health Care Delivery System Reform’

Hosted by Dr. Renard Murray, Ph.D., CMS Regional Administrator and featuring Dr. Richard Gilfillan, M.D, Acting Director, CMS’ Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMI).

The purpose of this listening session is to highlight the important work CMS is undertaking around health care delivery system reform. The Affordable Care Act has given CMS new opportunities to improve the care delivery and payment system. We will spotlight three areas of interest: The Accountable Care Organization Shared Savings Program, The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, The Federal Coordinated Health Care Office.

In addition, we are eager to receive your input pertaining to these spotlight areas. Therefore, this session will provide a forum for interested parties to make oral statements. Because we would like to hear from as many people as possible, remarks should be kept to no more than 10 minutes.

Seating is limited and will be based on a first come, first served basis. Those interested in attending must register no later than close of business Wednesday, December 15. Individuals will be provided with a registration confirmation. Attendees are instructed to bring their registration confirmation to the event as registration will be verified at the door. Questions may be directed to the following voicemail box: 303-844-7130.

We also note that a transcript of this session will be available at this website several weeks following the event.

Richardson Civic Center, 411 W. Arapaho Road, Suite 102, Richardson, TX 75080

To attend, click here.

L. Gordon Moore, MD: Next on ACO Watch – A Mid-Week Review

On Wednesday, December 15th, at 11AM Pacific, and 2PM Eastern, my special guest commentator is l. Gordon Moore, MD, President of Ideal Medical Practices, former ‘chief evangelist’ of the HelloHealth University, and a participant on Twitter via @lgordonmooremd.

Dr. Moore is a thought leader in ‘exemplary primary care’, and a physician who is actively exploring the value proposition of new media tools, and digital health technologies to enable the more efficient organization of health care services to better meet the needs of consumers, payors and host primary and/or specialty care physicians.

On this third segment of ACO Watch: A Mid-Week Review we’ll explore the role of direct medical practices, aka primary care medical homes, in the unfolding ACO tapestry. While an unconventional dot to connect to a host (or ‘parent’) ACO, or even to extend traditional consideration to serve as a host ACO per se, a suitably configured (but yet to be defined in regulatory language) network of direct medical practices can indeed both qualify for ACO consideration, as well as earn eligibility to be included in emerging state Health Insurance Exchanges (HIE’s) as ‘qualified health plans’ under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA).

Many believe the core innovation that will determine the granular success or failure of the PPACA to achieve it’s ‘triple aim’ goals as outlined by Don Berwick recently, will be served up via niche and/or so-called ‘marginal players’ in the conversation. The direct medical practice movement (collectively including: retainer or membership based medicine, as well as certain concierge or boutique medical practices) is one of the candidate horses in the race.

To join us live or for an archived replay of the broadcast with Dr. Gordon Moore, click here.

4 Ways to Think About ACO Strategy

Stephen Jenkins, for HealthLeaders Media

We are in the midst of a full-fledged frenzy of activity around accountable care organizations (ACOs). Be wary of a frenzy—these are the times when action becomes separated from thought and we lose track of why we are doing what we are doing. There are good reasons to pursue becoming an ACO, and some bad ones too. Over the past several months I have talked to dozens of organizations to understand the logic behind their strategy—why they want to be an ACO. The following mind-sets capture the four predominant ways that Sg2 sees healthcare organizations thinking about ACO strategy.

Strategic Logic #1: “I don’t understand ACOs, but I don’t want to be late to the party.”Many organizations have not yet wrapped their heads around what it means to be an accountable care organization—either the internal competencies needed to be successful or the external strategic considerations of pursuing this path. But they recognize a rising trend when they see it and are determined not to be left behind, just in case ACOs turn out to be something important. So they join a study collaborative, or engage a consultant to perform an ACO readiness assessment.

There is nothing wrong with this line of thinking, even if there is very little thinking behind it. In fact, the CEOs of these organizations are perhaps more honest than the rest of us in admitting that the strategic logic underpinning their ACO strategy is vague because ACOs are vague. It is a hedge-your-bets approach in the face of great uncertainty. The key caution for this group is:

How much time and money will you invest in an ACO strategy before you are certain about whether it makes sense for your organization? Be decisive about how many dollars and full-time employees you will dedicate, and the time frame for reopening the question about whether continuing that investment makes sense. If, in 6 or 12 months, you cannot articulate a clearer rationale for pursuing an ACO strategy, be ready to pull the plug.

Strategic Logic #2: “I will take advantage of this short-term opportunity to consolidate my position and seize market power.”Policy wonks talk about ACOs as vehicles to drive long-term improvement in clinical quality and cost reduction. But some health care organization CEOs view their ACO strategy through a lens that is much more short-term and slanted toward commercial considerations. These masters of the local market chessboard see ACOs as a way to lock in physician relationships and build their wallet share of health care services in the communities they serve. In this line of thought, ACOs very well may drive broader performance improvement and, if so, terrific! But that would be a happy by-product. The driver of these organizations’ ACO strategies—how leadership convinced their chief financial officers and their boards—is rooted in more prosaic market power considerations. Fair enough.

Read complete story, here.

Is this the model for ‘virtual’ ACOs? Sisters of Charity Health System Creates Safe Haven For Independent Physicians

Sisters of Charity Health System, a faith-based organization, announced today the launch of its subsidiary, Independent Physician Solutions (IPS), to offer Northeast Ohio independent physicians a continuum of services, including revenue cycle management, electronic medical records (EMR), managed care contracting and a suite of a la carte consulting services for practice operations and financial management.

“What is different about IPS is that we are a physician-led organization, which will offer an equity model that physicians can invest in if they so choose and a governance structure that will have more than 50 percent of the board comprised of physicians,” said Orlando L. Alvarez, Jr., IPS CEO and Sisters of Charity Health System senior vice president for physician alignment.

Through a unique market arrangement with GE Healthcare, IPS will offer General Electric’s Centricity® Practice Solution offering as its EMR solution.  The selection of this product included a robust vetting process that involved physicians from across all Sisters of Charity Health System markets as well as a physician advisory committee comprised of independent physicians.

The technology will position independent medical practitioners to demonstrate meaningful use in order to receive federal incentives as well as provide them with efficiencies and other benefits of practicing in an electronic environment. Additionally, IPS will allow independent medical practitioners to maintain their independence while keeping pace with larger, affiliated practices and meeting the new technology requirements mandated under the Affordable Care Act of 2010. IPS will also provide billing and collections services and hopes to organize physicians into an Independent Practice Association (IPA) in order to develop clinical integration strategies and group contract opportunities with health care insurance companies and other payors.

The Sisters of Charity Health System’s investment includes securing a talented management team led by Mark Wiedt, IPS president and chief operating officer. Wiedt most recently served as CEO of the largest independent multi-specialty physician group in Northeast Ohio. With decades of experience in managing physician practices, Wiedt and his team will lead the operations of the physician-focused organization.

The long-term goal of IPS is to position its physicians for the inevitable changes in health care as a result of new reimbursement models and health care reform legislation. With its technology infrastructure, IPS will be able to tackle the challenges of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs) and other population management models.

In spite of national trends, Northeast Ohio has a large number of independent physicians who have yet to become employed by hospital systems.

“It is really about strategy,” continued Alvarez. “We believe that independent doctors who wish to remain independent need to partner with organizations whose goal is not to control their patient records or gobble them up in an employment model. Our goal is to create a ‘safe haven’ for the independent physician and garner the collaboration of physicians who share our faith-based mission.”

IPS is aggressively recruiting from a pool of more than 4,000 independent physicians in Northeast Ohio to make them aware that they have options that will enable their practices to remain truly independent.

“My partnership with IPS provides my practice the support and expertise I need, without giving up my autonomy,” said Gregory Hall, M.D., internal medicine. “It allows me to continue doing what’s best for my patients without feeling controlled.”

Dr. Hall understands all too well the pressure that independent physicians are feeling to quickly become compliant with the pending health care reform requirements, which often means sacrificing their independence.

“Many of us own practices that are small businesses, and we have been very successful for years in treating our patients and managing our books,” continued Hall. “But with new EMR requirements, some physicians are overwhelmed with the adoption process and feel they have no choice but to completely affiliate with a large health system that can help them with new technology requirements. Now Northeast Ohio physicians have an option that actually encourages their independence.”

“We have a long legacy of collaboration and partnership with our independent physicians,” said Sister Judith Ann Karam, CSA, president and CEO, Sisters of Charity Health System. “We made it part of our faith-based mission to invest in this very important initiative to help ensure the high-quality and efficiency of health care in Northeast Ohio.”

 
Original source, click here.

Kent Bottles, MD Guest Commentator on 2nd ‘ACO Watch: A Mid-Week Review’

On Tuesday at 10AM Pacific, 1PM Eastern Kent Bottles, MD, (aka @kentbottles on Twitter) noted blogger, health care social media thought leader, lecturer and physician leadership role model and mentor will address ‘physician leadership and the collaboration imperative’.

Clearly as we prepare for the ‘roll out’, ‘ramp up’ or otherwise ‘peppering of the health care landscape’ with Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs), the core driver in any success paradigm given the ‘tripple aim objectives’ of Donald Berwick, MD, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Chief, will no doubt be the level and efficacy of physician leadership, and the cultural substrate in which it incubates. This segment will address the role of physician leadership, in a culture collaboration, in what is likely to be at hotbed of ACO development, management and general stewardship.

To listen live, or via archived replay or download, click here.

ACO Comment Deadline Looming | December 3rd, 2010 by 5:30 PM (Eastern?)

Some key questions posed for input also providing context insight into current thinking at CMS relative to ACOs. Here they are direct from the ‘Medicare Program; Request for Information Regarding Accountable Care Organizations and the Medicare Shared Saving Program’ posted in Federal Register /Vol. 75, No. 221 /on Wednesday, November 17, 2010 / Proposed Rules.

Solicitation of Comments

As we develop our initial rulemaking for the Shared Savings Program and begin the development of potential models in the CMMI (CMS/Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation), we are seeking additional information, particularly from the physician community, on the following questions:

• What policies or standards should we consider adopting to ensure that groups of solo and small practice providers have the opportunity to actively participate in the Medicare Shared Savings Program and the ACO models tested by CMMI?

• Many small practices may have limited access to capital or other resources to fund efforts from which ‘‘shared savings’’ could be generated. What payment models, financingmechanisms or other systems might we consider, either for the Shared Savings Program or as models under CMMI to address this issue? In addition to payment models, what other mechanisms could be created to provideaccess to capital?

• The process of attributing beneficiaries to an ACO is important to ensure that expenditures, as well as any savings achieved by the ACO, are appropriately calculated and that quality performance is accurately measured. Having a seamless attribution process will also help ACOs focus their efforts to deliver better care and promote better health?  Some argue it is necessary to attribute beneficiaries before the start of a performance period, so the ACO can target care coordinationstrategies to those beneficiaries whose cost and quality information will be used to assess the ACO’s performance; others argue the attribution should occur at the end of the performance period to ensure the ACO is held accountable for care provided to beneficiaries who are aligned to it based upon services they receive from the ACO during the performance period. How should we balance these two points of view in developing the patient attribution models for the Medicare Shared Savings Program and ACO models tested by CMMI?

• How should we assess beneficiary and caregiver experience of care as part of our assessment of ACO performance?

• The Affordable Care Act requires us to develop patient-centeredness criteria for assessment of ACOs participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program. What aspects of patient-centeredness are particularly important for us to consider and how should we evaluate them?

To review the complete request for information or comment online, click here.

Healthcare’s Strategic Mis-adventures: A Trilogy – Act 1 The Hospital Systems

This is a somewhat arbitrary starting point, but given it’s scale, a reasonable place to begin none-the-less; but first a little context.

Luke…there is a disturbance in the force!

In the post ‘HMO Act’ era, circa the Nixon’s administration’s health care cost containment and quality promotion efforts, the antecedents where laid to transform health maintenance organizations (HMOs) from their cultural roots as ‘sleepy’, non-profit, community based entities, into aggressive for profit regional and national players, with a developing thirst to roll-up via acquisition a very fragmented yet profitable ‘cottage’ industry.

As the most promising of private sector disruptor’s and/or transformational agents of the status quo, HMOs with market scale and share clout had the ability to literally penetrate, and fundamentally amend the traditional fee for services payment paradigm upon which the giants of the hospital industry were so dependent. This was a ‘on the come’ threat, though with a 5-7% market share, not yet a real one. However, this early industry movement got the attention of the C-suites of the major for profit as well as their ‘non-profit’ (ahem, I mean tax exempt breatheren) hospital chains.

Given publically traded HMO’s improved  access to capital, and the emerging ‘gravitas’ of Wall Street backed health care ventures, their portrayals of an industry vulnerable to takeover was quite a compelling story, and many were soon to fall in line via ‘me too’ attempts at strategic positioning (this will be a subject of Act 2’s post on The HMO Industry) in the binge of acquisitions that soon followed. Further, with Sanford C. Bernstein’s prediction that non profit hospitals/health systems would not exist by 1990, the for profit hospital management companies became the coveted talk of the town, and were worshiped on Wall Street. As a result, they attracted the best and the brightest from graduate MPH, and MBA programs. Some even offered their own version of internal ‘corporate colleges’.

Shortly thereafter these HMO insights began to register, the PPO movement, an ‘HMO lite’ version that seemed more amenable to mainstream medicine and therefore their aligned hospital operators, was introduced to the national psyche first in California.  The idea of selectively contracting via a ‘preferred panel’ of participating hospitals was more palatable than a more aggressive HMO model, and therefore attracted considerable attention and support from the hospital community.

The major name plates back then included the ‘big three’: Hospital Corporation of America (HCA), National Medical Enterprises (NME) and American Medical International (AMI).

Herein lies the first mis-adventure that kicks off two decades of strategic misfires by the brain trusts of major corporate health care concerns (both for profit and tax exempt).  All correctly saw the threat posed by entities that could minimally redirect admissions, if not more aggressively manage inpatient utilization, compress lengths of stays, and shift care management from inpatient to outpatient alternatives.

All also correctly foresaw the ‘upside’ of aligning with, joint venturing, if not owning, the insurance vehicle as a market management tool. Here the path begins to get considerably more opaque and ladened with unfamiliar risk. Hospitals are in the business of providing inpatient and outpatient services, not underwriting, marketing and managing the risk associated with a range of group health or individual insurance products. So, being rather preoccupied by there own successes, i.e., growth in scale and market dominance, in the ‘buy’ vs. ‘make’ equation, they decided to make their own insurance companies, vs. partner with or find some other way to co-venture with a partner who actually knew how to do those things that insurance companies do.

In the frenzy of activity that followed: HCA formed Equicor in association with the Equitable. AMI built AMICARE; and NME launched AVMed, and lest we forget VHA, representing the non profit sector rolled out Partners National Health Plan, with Aetna somewhere in that picture. In all of these cases, though HCA and VHA approached more of a partnership than direct competition with the payors, each hospital corporation basically went head to head with the then indemnity market leaders, and early progenitors of PPOs including Aetna, United Healthcare, Prudential, the Blues, etc.

Instead of collaborating with the payor class, i.e., how can we work better together? What might an aligned interest relationship look like? How can we re-tool to make your/our/our clients lives better did not drive decisions. Instead, mostly arrogance, and market short sightedness drove poor choices as literally all of these entities were discontinued, sold off or merged with other entities as their market objectives were not realized.

Act 2 will feature the ‘HMO bonanza’ which attempted the rather aggressive roll-up of the aforementioned cottage industry – and no better trophy venture can illustrate the house of cards that ultimately had to tumble taking many with them, than Maxicare’s attempt to coral mainstream medicine into the business of HMO’s via independent practice associations (IPA’s) – anybody remember ‘the window project’?

Act 3 will conclude this treatise and focus on the rise and fall of the pyramid scheme also known on Wall Street and in health care management domains as physician practice management companies.

As always, your comments and thoughts are invited.

American College of Physician Executives (ACPE) Hosts Accountable Care Organization Panel in Tuscon with Elliott Fisher

ACPE members met in Tuscon on November 14th – 18th, 2010. Dr. Elliot Fisher, who oversees the Dartmouth-Brookings Pilot (ACO) Project, and who is often credited for ‘coining’ the term ‘Accountable Care Organization’ chairs the panel, featuring:

Mark Werner, MD, CPE, FACPE — Chief Medical Officer of the Carilion Clinic in Roanoke, Virgina, and an ACPE board member.

Palmer Evans, MD, FACOG — Chief Medical Officer of Tucson Medical Center in Tucson, Arizona.

Steven Hester, MD, FAAP — Chief Medical Officer of Norton Healthcare in Louisville, Kentucky.

The panelists addressed the challenges and opportunities experienced setting up ACOs in their respective organizations.

To view the entire session including an informative Q & A, click here.

Hat tip to Mark Browne, MD aka @consultdoc.

J. Peter Rich, McDermott, Will & Emery to Kick Off ‘ACO Watch: A Mid-week Review’

On Tuesday, November 3oth, 2010 at 10:00, Pacific, ACO Watch: A Mid-week Review of the Market will launch with J. Peter Rich as special commentator.

Not a day goes by without some reference to Accountable Care Organizations or ‘ACO’s’ in print or online media whether of the main or ‘lame stream’ variety. Throw in the ‘digital river’, or new age after market whether via Twitter or other digital interactive media including an exploding blogosphere, and the conversations are considerable and will only grow in both volume and intensity.

Since we are time bound, and given the scale of the challenge and level of stakeholder interest, a mid-week review of the market seems a prudent way to track, vet, review and analyze the contenders including key industry issues.

To join us for the inaugural live (or archived replay) broadcast, click here.

Accountable Care Organization Vision: Is it about ‘Principles’ or ‘Principals’?

We’ve witnessed several industry stakeholders step up and issue statements of principles pertinent to the ‘OG & E’ (i.e., the organization, governance & equity) domain for Accountable Care Organizations recently. The American Medical Association (AMA), California Medical Association (CMA), and an alliance of primary care physician organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAFP), the America College of Physicians (ACP), and the American Osteopathic Association (AOA) have all chimed in here, here, and here, respectively.

While no doubt central to leading, and navigating the inevitable ‘white water’ of health reform implementation, what is likely to have far greater contribution to a net strategy gain for both patients and sponsoring providers, are the ‘principals’ in that conversation. Many of the leaders in key strategy slots, whether institutional or professional, are ill equipped to sort through the many issues before them; and one more time are groping for ‘check the box’ answers with deliverables’ solutions and implementation timelines. All well intended, but perhaps a case of putting the cart before the horse?

Unfortunately, since the success of the big ‘risk push-back’ in the 1990s, i.e., hospital systems, medical practice management companies and captive or independent MSOs (i.e., utility type management companies) all returning to their ‘core businesses’, there is precious little institutional memory, insight or competence in these circles at the moment.

Lets not forget to mine the ‘wisdom of the elders’ forged in the 1980’s though mid 1990’s run up to adopt the prior iteration of Berwick’s ‘triple aim holy grail’. In this blog, we will start recounting some of the more strategic mis-adventures associated with rather large, and smart, entities virtually all of them counseled by many of the same usual suspects (or there derivatives) still in that conversation today, and positioning themselves as ‘strategy experts’.

More will be revealed….