1 / 72

Modeling the Impact of Hospice Payment Reform

Modeling the Impact of Hospice Payment Reform. Pennsylvania Homecare Association Annual Meeting May 18-20, 2011 by Andrea Devoti, President/CEO Neighborhood Health Agencies, Inc. David J. Berman, CPA, CVA, Principal, Simione Consultants, LLC. The Challenges Ahead. MedPAC’s Report.

quinta
Télécharger la présentation

Modeling the Impact of Hospice Payment Reform

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Modeling the Impact of Hospice Payment Reform Pennsylvania Homecare Association Annual Meeting May 18-20, 2011 by Andrea Devoti, President/CEO Neighborhood Health Agencies, Inc. David J. Berman, CPA, CVA, Principal, Simione Consultants, LLC

  2. The Challenges Ahead

  3. MedPAC’s Report

  4. 2 Key MedPAC Recommendations for Hospice Reimbursement • U-shaped payment 2. Improvement of Data Collection

  5. Hospice Recommendations 1. U-shaped Payment Curve • Congress should direct the Secretary to change the Medicare payment system to have relatively higher payments per day at the beginning of the episode and relatively lower payments per day as the length increases with a higher payment for the costs associated with patient death at the end of the episode. • MedPAC recommends implementing the payment system changes in 2013 with a brief transitional period. • The first year of the payment system should be done is a budget neutral manner.

  6. Hospice Recommendations (cont) 2. Improvement of Data Collection • The Secretary should collect additional data on hospice care and improve the quality of all data collected to facilitate the management of the hospice benefit. • Additional data could be collected from claims as a condition of payment and from hospice cost reports.

  7. Medicare Hospice Margin • The aggregate Medicare margin was 5.9 percent in 2007. • MedPAC projects the margin will be 4.6 percent in 2010. • This estimate excludes the costs of bereavement services (about 1.5% of total costs) and marketing which are not reimbursable by Medicare.

  8. Summary of Data Collected Over the Length of Stay • Nursing Visits and Time • HHA Visits and Time • Medical Social Service Visit and Time • Physical Therapy Visits and Time • Speech Therapy Visits and Time • Occupational Therapy Visits and Time

  9. Summary of Data Collected (con’t) • Medical Social Service Phone Calls – Time on Call • All Time needs to be in 15 minute Intervals • Future Data • Chaplains/Spiritual Counselors • Volunteers

  10. Why are They Collecting the Data • Need to look at utilization of services over the lengths of stay and the intensity of the visits. • Cost out services to determine the Routine Home Care Cost in the beginning and end of length of stay. • Costs can be determined on an hourly or per visit basis. • They need to capture the cost of drugs and HME over the episode. • Looking at Site of Care

  11. How Do We Prepare for the Future • Track same data within your agency. • Visit utilization over the length of stay. • Site of Care and Diagnosis • Breakdown visits into 15 minute intervals. • Determine the length of visits at the front and back end of the length of stay and compare to visits in the middle. • Determine direct cost per visit based on time studies. • Based on Cost Analysis determine cost in beginning and end of episode divide by number of days to determine cost per day.

  12. Hypothetical Examples of U-Shaped Reimbursement

  13. Assumptions for “Hypothetical” Scenarios: • Reimbursement • Increased Routine Home Care Rate by 10% for beginning and end of Length of Stay. • Decreased Routine Home Care Rate by 10% for middle of Length of Stay. • Costs • Estimated Average Cost Per Visit (based on Hospice Cost Report) does not account for time differential. • Direct versus Indirect Cost per Visit • Cost Per Day for ancillaries based on actual. • Utilization of Services based on actual patient data by Diagnosis; Length of Stay and Site of Care.

  14. Assumptions for “Hypothetical” Scenarios: • These are Hypothetical Examples • The Data used in the following examples is REAL. • There are 8 different scenarios analyzed: • Site of Care (Nursing Home vs. Home) • Diagnosis (Cancer vs. Non Cancer) • Length of Stay (Short vs. Longer)

  15. Case 1: Facts • Length of stay – 23 days • Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 22 • Location of Patient – Home

  16. Case 1: Utilization of Services 5 Days |-----------------------13 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  17. Case 1: Cost of Service

  18. Case 1: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE $ (408.78)

  19. Case 2: Facts • Length of stay – 23 days • Non-Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 15 • Location of Patient – Home

  20. Case 2: Utilization of Services 5 Days |-----------------------13 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  21. Case 2: Cost of Service

  22. Case 2: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE $ 294.66

  23. Case 1 & 2 Analysis Home

  24. Case 3: Facts • Length of stay – 10 days • Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 17 • Location of Patient – Nursing Home

  25. Case 3: Utilization of Services 5 Days |-----------------------00 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  26. Case 3: Cost of Service

  27. Case 3: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE ($ 844.99)

  28. Case 4: Facts • Length of stay – 14 days • Non-Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 26 • Location of Patient – Nursing Home

  29. Case 4: Utilization of Services 5 Days |------------------------4 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  30. Case 4: Cost of Service

  31. Case 4: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE ($ 1,333.75)

  32. Case 3 & 4 Analysis Nursing Home

  33. Case 5: Facts • Length of stay – 87 days • Non-Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 69 • Location of Patient – Home

  34. Case 5: Utilization of Services 5 Days |-----------------------77 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  35. Case 5: Cost of Service

  36. Case 5: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE $ 2,518.20

  37. Case 6: Facts • Length of stay – 75 days • Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 78 • Location of Patient – Home

  38. Case 6: Utilization of Services 5 Days |-----------------------65 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  39. Case 6: Cost of Service

  40. Case 6: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE ($ 1,679.91)

  41. Case 5 & 6 Analysis Home

  42. Case 7: Facts • Length of stay – 91 days • Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 51 • Location of Patient – Nursing Home

  43. Case 7: Utilization of Services 5 Days |-----------------------81 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  44. Case 7: Cost of Service

  45. Case 7: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE $ 3,301.12

  46. Case 8: Facts • Length of stay – 83 days • Non-Cancer Diagnosis • Visits – 85 • Location of Patient – Nursing Home

  47. Case 8: Utilization of Services 5 Days |-----------------------73 Days-----------------------| 5 Days

  48. Case 8: Cost of Service

  49. Case 8: Cost of Service TOTAL GAIN (LOSS) ON THIS CASE ($ 1,079.01)

  50. Case 7 & 8 Analysis Nursing Home

More Related