Download
office of rural health policy rural hospital flexibility grant program n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Office of Rural Health Policy Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant Program PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Office of Rural Health Policy Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant Program

Office of Rural Health Policy Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant Program

235 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Office of Rural Health Policy Rural Hospital Flexibility Grant Program

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

  1. Office of Rural Health PolicyRural Hospital Flexibility Grant Program Steven Hirsch Office of Rural Health Policy (ORHP) Health Resources & Services Administration (HRSA) U.S. Department of Health & Human Services (HHS) Sept. 1, 2009

  2. The Rural Hospital Flexibility (Flex) Program • The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (BBA) established the Flex Program and it was reauthorized in 2008. • The Flex Program consists of two separate components: • A State grant program administered by ORHP to support the development of community-based, rural, organized systems of care in the participating States. • Cost-based reimbursement for certified Critical Access Hospitals (CAH)

  3. Legislative Authority • Medicare rural hospital flexibility program.—The Secretary may award grants to States that have submitted applications in accordance with subsection (b) for— (A) engaging in activities relating to planning and implementing a rural health care plan; (B) engaging in activities relating to planning and implementing rural health networks; (C) designating facilities as critical access hospitals; and (D) providing support for critical access hospitals for quality improvement, quality reporting, performance improvements, and benchmarking.

  4. Legislative Authority • Rural emergency medical services.— (A) In general.—The Secretary may award grants to States that have submitted applications in accordance with subparagraph (B) for the establishment or expansion of a program for the provision of rural emergency medical services.

  5. FY2010 Competitive Cycle • Five Year Grant Period • Legislation increases emphasis on “quality improvement, quality reporting, performance improvements, and benchmarking” • Targeting Flex funds to make a demonstrable difference

  6. A Different Flex Meeting • Concentrating on Flex Programs, not CAHs • Aimed at Flex Personnel • More Presentations by and for Flex Programs

  7. Other CAH/Flex Meetings

  8. Survey conducted by David Blackley,Intern from East Carolina University

  9. Flex Coordinator Survey Q: Commensurate with the needs of your state, rank the 7 Flex objectives from most to least vital, with 1 representing “most vital” and 7 representing “least vital” Results: (n=28 responses) • Performance Improvement/Quality Improvement (mean=1.74) • Support Hospitals (1.89) • Integration of EMS Services (3.33) • Networking (3.85) • Evaluation (4.81) • Update of the SRHP (5.93) • Conversion of Hospitals to CAH Status (6.44)

  10. How does this compare with how the money is actually allocated for the objectives? • Support Hospitals ($4,827,304) • Performance Improvement/Quality Improvement ($4,814,735) • Integration of EMS Services ($2,484,610) • Networking ($2,426,878) • Evaluation ($815,629) • Update of the SRHP ($469,342) • Conversion of Hospitals to CAH Status ($240,787) *HIT not ranked as it was not an objective in the Program Guidance. HIT constitutes about 2% of proposed spending for 2009.

  11. Proposed Flex Spending 2009 Results from all Flex grantees (n=45)

  12. Q: What do you perceive to be the largest barrier to effective use of Flex funds? • “…lack the ability to fund multi-year projects.” • “…A multi-year grant [or] an abbreviated version…would allow us to still assess where we are and where we are going without committing as much time and resources…” • “…each year’s grant is written 6 months before…difficult to plan and initiate activities…difficult to respond to needs as they arise… • “Short turnaround time between receiving grant guidance and due date…2 weeks for internal review and 2 weeks for Director’s approval…we really have 2 weeks to put the application together…” • “Time - It is always a struggle to complete all the needed projects within the one-year grant period.”

  13. Q: What do you perceive to be the largest barrier to effective use of Flex funds? • “We could use some more guidance from ORHP in describing best practices and model activities in leading national Flex Programs.” • “Steep learning curve for new Flex coordinator” • “CEO buy-in/commitment…is often weak.” • “Limitations on EMS activities” • “Voluntary choice for participation by the client population…”

  14. Q: What do you perceive to be the largest barrier to effective use of Flex funds? • “Lack of strategic planning across HRSA funded programs…spend large amounts of time identifying where projects/activities intersect…” • “Indirect Costs” • “The State Bureaucratic system for obtaining approval to spend anything” • “Internal state procedures” • ”…lack of ability for direct program staff control…of funds…”

  15. Resources for Flex Grantees http://www.ruralcenter.org/tasc/

  16. Resources for Flex Grantees • Visits to other State Flex Programs • Flex Orientation at TASC • Project Officers • Grants Management Specialists • NOSORH

  17. Regional Liaisons

  18. Contact Information Steven Hirsch Office of Rural Health Policy 5600 Fishers Lane, 9A-55 Rockville MD 20857 (301) 443-0835, Fax (301) 443-2803 shirsch@hrsa.gov www.ruralheath.hrsa.gov