Resources

Resources

Hear from NextGen's expert advisors with insights and advice on the evolving COVID-19 pandemic and beyond.

Read Blog

The financial and clinical challenges you face now are evolving rapidly. Here are resources, solutions, and ideas we think will help.

Read Now

NextGen Advisors

Are Big Changes Coming for Value-based Payment Models?

By Chris Emper

Subscribe to receive a daily email as new information becomes available.   Subscribe now

Blog    Are Big Changes Coming for Value-based Payment Models?

Speaking recently at a virtual industry conference, the head of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Seema Verma said that some of the agency’s most highly publicized value-based alternative payment models have failed to deliver on their promise of lower costs and higher quality care. “I think the issue we have in value-based care is that many of our models unfortunately are not working the way we would like them to,” she said. “They are not producing the types of savings the taxpayers deserve,” delivering a “very poor return in investment,” Verma added.

Verma’s comments echo those made by other top CMS officials recently. Brad Smith, who leads CMS’s work on alternative payment models as the Director of its Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI), recently said that only five out of the 54 value-based payment models run by CMMI over the past decade have produced savings for CMS. Smith said that most models instead landed in "the break-even range" or lost money.

Even the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC), the influential independent agency that advises Congress on Medicare issues, said at its most recent meeting that CMS needs to rethink its advanced alternative payment models because they have failed to achieve cost savings. Most members of the commission supported
taking a broader look at the program and creating more long-term goals for it.

Unsurprisingly, with such widespread and prominent criticism of these payment models, changes are expected.  However, rather than turning back and abandoning the transition to value-based payments, CMS officials have signaled their desire to pivot and accelerate the pace and scope of the transition.

New Payment Models 

In September, CMS finalized a new mandatory value-based payment model for patients with kidney disease and a new mandatory value-based payment model for cancer patients receiving radiotherapy treatment.  Rather than voluntary models that offer healthcare providers the option to participate, these models require mandatory participation for a select group of providers.    

Meanwhile, in their recent critiques of CMS’s current payment models, both Verma and Smith noted that mandatory models that required downside risk were showing positive results. Verma praised the Pathways to Success model that overhauled CMS’s accountable care organization (ACO) program in 2019.  “We are already seeing significant savings and increases in quality,” Verma said.  Smith said that models which focused on a global budget fared much better than those that didn’t, giving Maryland’s Total Cost of Care model as an example. 

Both officials also admitted that a major problem has been that the current models were set up primarily to encourage participation among providers.  “They weren’t set up to garner savings to produce necessarily better outcomes for patients,” Verma said.

In response, officials are eying a shift away from “upside only” models where providers are not held financially accountable for failing to produce results. Verma noted, “I think it is important for providers to have skin in the game. Just having upside risk doesn’t really produce the type of savings and quality measures that we want to see.”

What Providers Should Expect

As a result, providers of all shapes and sizes – health systems, physician groups, community health centers, etc. –should expect CMS to pivot its strategy regarding these programs from encouraging participation to ensuring financial accountability. This will likely be accomplished by requiring downside risk, making more models mandatory, and making more changes permanent, rather than experimental or temporary.

Of course, many of these changes will have to wait until the COVID-19 pandemic subsides. CMS has offered alternative payment model participants waivers from most program requirements for the 2020 participation period and/or the extent of the public health emergency.  

The results of the upcoming election could also have some impact on the future of these programs. However, both political parties support the transition to alternative payment models and in fact, the same CMS Innovation Center that the Trump Administration is currently focused on was created in 2010 when Joe Biden was Vice President.  

Subscribe to the NextGen Advisor blog to stay updated on regulatory news and information impacting the healthcare community. 


Chris Emper

Government Affairs Advisor, NextGen Healthcare

Chris Emper, JD, MBA, is government affairs advisor at NextGen Healthcare and president of Emper Healthcare Advisors—a health IT industry advisory and consulting services firm in Washington, D.C. that specializes in helping healthcare providers and technology companies successfully navigate and comply with complex regulations and value-based reimbursement models. Prior to forming Emper Healthcare Advisors in 2016, Chris was vice president of Government Affairs at NextGen Healthcare (NASDAQ: NXGN) and Chair of the Electronic Health Record Association (EHRA) Public Policy committee…

Chris Emper, JD, MBA, is government affairs advisor at NextGen Healthcare and president of Emper Healthcare Advisors—a health IT industry advisory and consulting services firm in Washington, D.C. that specializes in helping healthcare providers and technology companies successfully navigate and comply with complex regulations and value-based reimbursement models. Prior to forming Emper Healthcare Advisors in 2016, Chris was vice president of Government Affairs at NextGen Healthcare (NASDAQ: NXGN) and Chair of the Electronic Health Record Association (EHRA) Public Policy committee.

An expert in The Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA), The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), and The 21st Century Cures Act, Chris is a frequent speaker at industry conferences and has written or appeared in articles in publications such as Politico, Health Data Management, Accountable Care News, and Medical Economics. From 2016-2019, Chris served as Chair of the HIMSS Government Relations Roundtable, a leading coalition of health IT government affairs professionals.

Prior to joining NextGen Healthcare in 2013, Chris served as a Domestic Policy Advisor for former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s 2012 Presidential Campaign, where he advised the campaign on policy issues including healthcare, technology, and innovation. He holds a law degree and an MBA from Villanova University and a BA from Boston College.

Learn More

Get in touch with Chris

The financial and clinical challenges you face now are evolving rapidly. Here are resources, solutions, and ideas we think will help.

Read Now

Follow us