The IMPACT Act is well named. And the kickback (pun intended) changes the rules on many levels. So does home health value-based purchasing (HHVBP),
These articles from the NAHC (National Association for Home Health and Hospice) Report explain why no home health agency can afford to ignore these newish changes.
CMS: Transcript and Audio Now Available from July 7 Quality Measures and IMPACT Act Call
During this call, CMS experts discussed key quality measures related to the Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 (IMPACT Act) and how they will affect you. The call also provided information regarding upcoming stakeholder engagement activities, as well as a question and answer discussion session.
The IMPACT Act requires the reporting of standardized patient assessment data on quality measures, resource use, and other measures by Post-Acute Care (PAC) providers, including skilled nursing facilities, home health agencies, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and long-term care hospitals. The target audience for the call was PAC providers, healthcare industry professionals, clinicians, researchers, health IT vendors, and other interested stakeholders.
2016 FMC Highlights: Value-Based Purchasing Payment Models Are Here, Now What? (Part 1 of 2)
Medicare launched the home health value-based purchasing pilot program (HHVBP) on January 1, 2016. The HHVBP will last for five years and can be expanded at any time. The pilot operates in nine states: Arizona, Florida, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maryland, Nebraska, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington State. During March and April, NAHC held training conferences in each of these states to familiarize home health agencies with the program and to encourage best practices that lead to success.
The FMC panelists addressed many of the questions raised during the pre-conference on the HHVBP, and provided an overview of that in-depth discussion to begin the session.
Mike Dordick explained that the nine states in which the value-based purchasing payment model is operating were selected because of their similarities in size, utilization, and organization, and because health care use in those states is an accurate sampling of the range of health issues facing Americans. With the possibility of nationwide adoption of value-based purchasing, it behooves states not included in the pilot program to observe the progress of the program, familiarize themselves with the terminology and concepts of value-based purchasing, and prepare for implementation in their own states at a later stage. The panelists encouraged non-HHVBP states to use the current time as an opportunity to get a leg up, learn from the pilot states, and develop their own strategies by keeping a close eye on which tactics are effective and ineffective.
By looking at how the Total Performance Score (TPS) is calculated, agencies can start determining areas of strength and areas in need of improvement. The panelists stressed the importance of making sure staff members understand the measures that are included in the calculation of the TPS and of ensuring all measures are weighed equally.
The panelists emphasized the importance of knowing your data. “The data coming out this month is only your own data, CMS won’t show you other [pilot states’ data],” Chris Attaya said, adding that as a result it might be difficult to tell where you stand. “That’s why you have to learn how to go into your system and read your own numbers – know what they mean and where you can get what you need to keep your eye on the process measures and outcome measures.”
The slides from this session are available here.
Stay tuned to NAHC Report for Part 2 of our coverage on this session, including additional action items with regards to HHVBP. If you have any questions about the conference or the education sessions, please contact Katharine Howard at NAHC: email@example.com.