1 1
December 7, 2016
Measuring Physical and Behavioral Health Integration in the Context of Value-Based Purchasing
Gregory Allen, MSW Director Division of Program Development and Management Office of Health Insurance Programs, NYSDOH
Measuring Physical and Behavioral Health Integration in the Context - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
1 1 Measuring Physical and Behavioral Health Integration in the Context of Value-Based Purchasing Gregory Allen, MSW Director Division of Program Development and Management Office of Health Insurance Programs, NYSDOH December 7, 2016 2
1 1
December 7, 2016
Gregory Allen, MSW Director Division of Program Development and Management Office of Health Insurance Programs, NYSDOH
2 December 2016
1. Recap: Medicaid Redesign Team (MRT), Delivery System Reform Incentive Payments (DSRIP), and Value-Based Payment (VBP) Initiatives 2. BH & VBP 3. Behavioral Health (BH) in New York State (NYS) 4. Moving Towards Integrated Services 5. Q&A
October 2015
Allen
3 December 2016
Allen
4
Governor Cuomo created the Medicaid Redesign Team (MRT) to develop reforms to improve health outcomes and further savings. $6.42 billion dollars of savings were reinvested and designated to Delivery System Reform Incentive Payments (DSRIP). The MRT developed a multi-year action plan. We are still implementing that plan today.
$17.1 billion Federal savings generated by MRT reforms $8 billion Savings reinvested in NYS $6.42 billion Designated to DSRIP
MRT
1115 Waiver
Better care Lower cost Better health
CMS Triple Aim
December 2016
5 December 2016
Goal: Reduce avoidable hospital use – Emergency Department (ED) and Inpatient – by 25% over 5+ years
Remove Silos Develop Integrated Delivery Systems Enhance PC and Community- based Services Integrate BH and PC
and Medicaid Services’ (CMS) and the State’s goals towards achieving the Triple Aim: Better care Better health Lower costs
primary, specialty and BH care in the community setting with hospitals used primarily for emergent and tertiary level of services
healthcare transformation is set to have a positive effect on healthcare in NYS
Source: The New York State DSRIP Program. NYSDOH Website. & New York’s Pathway to Achieving the Triple Aim. NYSDOH DSRIP Website. Published December 18, 2013.
6 December 2016
7 December 2016
VOLUME VALUE VOLUME VALUE
Increasing the value of care delivered more
provider’s margins
When VBP is done well, providers’ margins go up when the value of care delivered increases
8 December 2016
In addition to choosing which integrated services to focus on, Managed Care Organizations and contractors can choose different levels of VBP:
Level 0 VBP Level 1 VBP* Level 2 VBP Level 3 VBP (feasible after experience with Level 2; requires mature contractors) FFS with bonus and/or withhold based on quality scores FFS with upside-only shared savings available when
(For PCMH/IPC, FFS may be complemented with PMPM subsidy) FFS with risk sharing (upside available when outcome scores are sufficient) Prospective capitation PMPM
based component) FFS Payments FFS Payments FFS Payments Prospective total budget payments No Risk Sharing Upside Risk Only Upside & Downside Risk Upside & Downside Risk
Acronyms: FFS – Fee-for-Service PCMH – Patient Centered Medical Home VBP = Value Based Payments PMPM – Per Member Per Month IPC – Integrated Primary Care
9 December 2016
MCO PPS* MCO Role:
Maintain Care Coordination
PPS/ VBP Contractor Role:
Overall Health Care Cost at local level
VBP Contractors Advanced & Integrated BH/PC DSRIP VBP HH HARP** NYS Healthcare Initiatives:
delivery system reform
and specialized projects
performance incentives
Program Role:
targeted populations
through integrated care management
*PPS= Performing Provider Systems **HARP= Health and Recovery Plans
HARP Role:
BH needs
health, mental health and substance abuse services for individuals requiring specialized approaches
packages designed to provide the individual with specialized services not currently covered under the State Plan
HH Role:
populations
10 10 December 2016
11 11 December 2016
Clinical Advisory Group (CAG) selects measures OQPS reviews measures VBP Workgroup sets measures Start of measurement End of year: evaluation results reported back to CAG
During the process:
measures that really matter (specific to VBP arrangement)
measures
and relevance of measures
Start
12 12 December 2016
Health Plans Clinical Experts Universities Providers Medical Societies State Agencies Medical Centers
Each CAG is comprised of leading experts and key stakeholders throughout NYS healthcare delivery system, spanning Upstate and Downstate regions. Their scope includes development of quality measures for all VBP arrangements.
13 13 December 2016
Understand the State’s visions for the Roadmap to VBP Discuss and validate definitions of VBP arrangements Review and recommend quality measures for the VBP arrangements Make additional recommendations to the State on:
14 14 December 2016
Use Disorder (SUD) diagnoses having serious behavioral health issues are eligible to enroll in HARP Plans
include employment, education and peer supports services. Tier 2 includes the full array of BH HCBS
HARP plans (including the enhanced benefit package BH HCBS)
Population Included Defined Services
The CAG recommends the following definition for the HARP VBP arrangement.
15 15 December 2016
The CAG recommends the following quality measures for use in the HARP arrangement.
# Measures Reporting Source State Recommended Category* P4R** 1 Diabetes screening for people with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder using antipsychotic medications State 1 No 2 Follow-up after hospitalization for mental illness (within 7 and 30 days) State 1 No 3 Percentage of members enrolled in a Health Home State 1 No 4 Initiation of pharmacotherapy for opioid dependence within 30 days1
State
1 No 5 Percentage of mental health discharges followed by two or more mental health
State 1 Yes 6 Tobacco use screening and follow-up for people with serious mental illness or alcohol or other drug dependence VBP Contractor 1 Yes 7 Initiation of pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder within 30 days2 State 1 Yes
1 – OASAS proposing to work through measure specifications and application of measure as a pay-for-performance measure 2 – A claims-based measure for which OMH/OASAS are seeking additional input from VBP contractors to refine * – P4R entry of ‘Yes’ then State Recommended Category of ‘1’ = Required & ‘2’ = Optional. ** – P4R entry of “No” indicates can be used for performance payment.
16 16 December 2016
The CAG recommends the following quality measures for use in the HARP arrangement.
# Measures Reporting Source State Recommended Category* P4R** 8 Utilization of pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorder2 State 1 Yes 9 Utilization of pharmacotherapy for opioid dependence2 State 1 Yes 10 Follow-up after emergency department visit for alcohol and other drug dependence2 State 1 Yes
1 – OASAS proposing to work through measure specifications and application of measure as a pay-for-performance measure 2 – A claims-based measure for which OMH/OASAS are seeking additional input from VBP contractors to refine * – P4R entry of ‘Yes’ then State Recommended Category of ‘1’ = Required & ‘2’ = Optional. ** – P4R entry of “No” indicates can be used for performance payment.
17 17 December 2016
The CAG recommends the following quality measures for use in the HARP arrangement.
# Measures Reporting Source State Recommended Category* P4R** 11 Rate of readmission to inpatient mental health treatment within 30 days (readmission in any geographic region) State 1 No 12 Continuing engagement of alcohol and other drug dependence treatment (CET)1
State
1 No 13 Continuity of care within 14 days of discharge from any level of SUD inpatient care1
State
1 No 14 Percentage of members who receive PROS or HCBS for at least 3 months in reporting year VBP Contractor 1 Yes 15 Percentage of members who maintained/obtained employment or maintained/improved higher education status (from HCBS Waiver Eligibility Screening) VBP Contractor 1 Yes 16 Percentage of members with maintenance of stable or improved housing status(from HCBS Waiver Eligibility Screening) VBP Contractor 1 Yes 17 Percentage of members with reduced criminal justice involvement(from HCBS Waiver Eligibility Screening) VBP Contractor 1 Yes
1 – OASAS proposing to work through measure specifications and application of measure as a pay-for-performance measure * – P4R entry of ‘Yes’ then State Recommended Category of ‘1’ = Required & ‘2’ = Optional. ** – P4R entry of “No” indicates can be used for performance payment.
18 18 December 2016
19 19 December 2016
BH population
Overview:
with BH account for 20.9% of the overall Medicaid population in NYS
(LOS) per admission for BH Medicaid users is 30% longer than the overall Medicaid population's LOS
(PMPM) costs for Medicaid Members with BH diagnosis is 2.6 times higher than the
* This data includes Medicaid Members with 1+ Claims with primary or secondary diagnosis of behavioral health issues
$28,824,105,821 $ 19,224,273,571 Medicaid members diagnosed with BH account for 60% of the total cost of care in NYS 1,415,454 1,724,531 Medicaid members diagnosed with BH account for 45.1% of all ED Visits 584,503 508,538 Medicaid members diagnosed with BH account for 53.5% of admissions 5,509,029 11,729,701 Medicaid members diagnosed with BH account for 32% of Medicaid Primary Care Physicians (PCP) visits Total PCP Visits from Medicaid Members: 17,238,730 Total ED visits from Medicaid Members: 3,139,985 Total Medicaid Cost of Care in NYS: $48,048,379,392 Total Medicaid Admissions: 1,093,041
Source: SIM Database. 2014 Claims Data – analysis based on data from January – December 2014. New York State.*
Total Medicaid Pop. Excluding Medicaid BH Pop. Medicaid members diagnosed w/ BH
20 20 December 2016
MH/SA readmission $270M
Patients with MH/SA $665M 82% Patients without MH/SA $149M MH/SA medical readmission $395M (59%) MH/SA readmission $270M Patients with MH/SA $665M (82%)
All Readmissions* ($814M) Readmissions for Patients with MH/SA Conditions ($665M)
*Readmissions within 30 day from original admission date
medical reasons
21 21 December 2016
22 22
measures associated with their chosen projects across all five demonstration years (DY1-5)
Includes organizational milestones (governance, workforce, cultural competency / health literacy, financial sustainability) and project implementation milestone reporting Projects are divided between three domains to meet overall goals of system transformation, clinical improvement and population health. Examples are:
Each project is associated with its own corresponding metrics or measures DOMAIN 3: Clinical Improvement DOMAIN 4: Population Health DOMAIN 2: System Transformation DOMAIN 1: Overall Project Progress
December 2016
23 23
3.a.i - Integration of PC and BH services 3.a.ii – BH community crisis stabilization services 3.a.iii - Implementation of evidence-based medication adherence program (MAP) in community-based sites for BH medication compliance 3.a.iv - Development of withdrawal management capabilities and appropriate enhanced abstinence services within community-based addiction treatment programs 3.a.v - Behavioral Interventions Paradigm (BIP) in Nursing Homes
3.A Projects: BH
project from the Domain 3 – Clinical Improvement Projects category. December 2016
24 24
MY1 results are helpful to understand how PPSs are trending from the baseline, but they are not necessarily indicative of future performance. * Table shows the Domain 3 performance measures where all 25 PPSs had comparable data.** DY = Demonstration Year HP: High Performance measure ^ The denominator for this measure is less than 30 for some Performing Provider System's, therefore the rates may not be stable due to small numbers. Data Source: Medicaid Analytics Performance Portal (MAPP) – official MY0 and MY1 Attribution for Performance results.
Domain Measure name* # PPS that achieved measure target # PPS achieved measure target (%) Turns P4P in:** 3 Follow-up care for Children Prescribed ADHD Medications - Continuation Phase^ 20 / 25 80% DY4 3
HP Antidepressant Medication Management - Effective Continuation Phase Treatment
18 / 25 72% DY2 3
HP Antidepressant Medication Management - Effective Acute Phase Treatment
16 / 25 64% DY2 3 Follow-up care for Children Prescribed ADHD Medications - Initiation Phase 13 / 25 52% DY4 3
HP Cardiovascular Monitoring for People with Cardiovascular Disease and Schizophrenia^
9 / 25 36% DY2 3 Initiation of Alcohol and Other Drug Dependence Treatment (1 visit within 14 days) 9 / 25 36% DY2 3
HP Diabetes Monitoring for People with Diabetes and Schizophrenia^
7 / 25 28% DY2 3 Engagement of Alcohol and Other Drug Dependence Treatment (Initiation and 2 visits within 44 days) 6 / 25 24% DY2 3 Diabetes Screening for People with Schizophrenia or Bipolar Disease who are Using Antipsychotic Medication 5 / 25 20% DY3 3
HP Follow-up after hospitalization for Mental Illness - within 30 days
5 / 25 20% DY3 3
HP Follow-up after hospitalization for Mental Illness - within 7 days
5 / 25 20% DY3 3 Adherence to Antipsychotic Medications for People with Schizophrenia 2 / 25 8% DY3 3
HP Potentially Preventable Emergency Department Visits (for persons with Behavioral Health diagnosis)
2 / 25 8% DY3
December 2016
25 25
Rate of preventable ER visits per 100,000 members with a Behavioral Health diagnosis in MY0 and MY1
+ A lower rate is desirable
Moving in wrong direction Moving in right direction
MY1 results are helpful to understand how PPSs are trending from the baseline, but they are not necessarily indicative of future performance. Data Source: Medicaid Analytics Performance Portal (MAPP) – official MY0 and MY1 Attribution for Performance results.
Statewide Total
MY0 MY0 MY1 MY1
PPS Result
December 2016
26 26
December 2016
Measure Name # PPS that met HP Target % PPS that met HP Target Turns P4P in:*
BH Antidepressant Medication Management - Effective Continuation Phase Treatment
11 / 25 44% DY2
BH Antidepressant Medication Management - Effective Acute Phase Treatment
10 / 25 40% DY2
BH Cardiovascular Monitoring for People with Cardiovascular Disease and Schizophrenia^
8 / 25 32% DY2
BH Diabetes Monitoring for People with Diabetes and Schizophrenia^
3 / 25 12% DY2
BH Follow-up After Hospitalization for Mental Illness - within 7 days
3 / 25 12% DY2 Potentially Preventable Readmissions 2 / 25 8% DY3
BH Follow-up After Hospitalization for Mental Illness - within 30 days
1 / 25 4% DY2
BH Potentially Preventable Emergency Department Visits (for persons with BH diagnosis)
1 / 25 4% DY2 Potentially Preventable Emergency Room Visits 1 / 25 4% DY3 Antipsychotic Use in Persons with Dementia 0 / 1 0% DY2 Top three measures Bottom three measures
BH Domain 3 Behavioral Health measures
* DY = Demonstration Year ^ The denominator for this measure is less than 30 for some Performing Provider System's, therefore the rates may not be stable due to small numbers. Sources: OQPS, P4P OQPS Mega chart_PS and Measure Summaries v2.xlsm, accessed on 8/29/2016 and DOH website.
27
28
http://www.health.ny.gov/health_care/medicaid/ redesign/behavioral_health/index.htm
https://www.omh.ny.gov/omhweb/bho/
dsrip@health.ny.gov