MACRA Basics - Montana Medical Associationmmaoffice.org/ez/files/home/Cynthia Brown MMA MACRA... ·...
Transcript of MACRA Basics - Montana Medical Associationmmaoffice.org/ez/files/home/Cynthia Brown MMA MACRA... ·...
Montana Medical Association
September 10, 2016
MACRA Basics
Rev. 8/31/16
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Some general observations
• MACRA is complex
– More than a “replacement for the SGR”
– Law reflects the diversity of the profession
– Regulations can add complications
• Many of the new requirements are simply revisions of current requirements
• One goal of MACRA was to simplify administrative processes for physicians
– Compared to recent past/ current framework, the proposed regulations include significant improvements
– More improvements are needed—looking for net reduction in burden
• The proposed rule issued in April is a draft attempt to implement a complex law.
– Lengthy and detailed recommendations have been submitted for improvements
2
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
3
MACRA establishes two Medicare paths for physicians
• MACRA was designed to offer
physicians two payment model
pathways:
• A modified fee-for-service model
(MIPS)
• New payment models that reduce
costs of care and/or support high-value
services not typically covered under
the Medicare fee schedule (APMs)
• In the beginning, most are expected to
participate in MIPS
MIPS
APMs
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
APMs and MIPS reporting at a glance
4
In an APM?
Yes No
In first year in Medicare or below the volume threshold?
Yes No
In an Advanced APM?
Yes No
Enough payments or patients to meet the threshold?
Yes No
Qualifying APM Participant. Eligible for:
• 5% lump sum bonus payment 2019-2024
• Higher fee schedule updates 2026 and beyond
• APM-specific rewards
• Exclusion from MIPS reporting
Not subject
to MIPS Subject to
MIPS
Partially qualified or MIPS
APM participant:
• Favorable CPIA scoring
• APM-specific rewards
Merit-based
Incentive Payment
System (MIPS)
5
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
MIPS components
Quality Reporting (was
PQRS)
Resource Use or Cost (was Value-based Modifier)
Advancing Care Information (was
MU)
Clinical Practice Improvement
Activities
MIPS
6
MIPS aims: • Align 3 current independent programs
• Add 4th component to promote improvement and
innovation
• Provide more flexibility and choice of measures
• Retain a fee-for-service payment option
Clinicians exempt from MIPS: • First year of Part B participation
• Medicare claims < $10K AND patients < 100
• Advanced APM participants
AMA recommendation: • Increase low-volume threshold to $30K OR 100
patients
• Would exempt 29% of physicians (vs.
10%) while covering 93% of Medicare
spending
• Mean Medicare revenue per physician is
about $109K
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Quality reporting basics
7
•50% in of total MIPS score in 2019, phases down to 30% in 2022
•Full-year reporting period MIPS weight
•6 measures required out of 200 available, reported by physicians
•Include one cross-cutting measure, one outcome measure (if outcome measure not available, substitute with choice of another “high priority” measure)
•3 population health measures from former VBM calculated by CMS administratively via claims (groups of 10 or more only)
Measures
•Each measure worth up to 10 points
•90 total points for groups >10
•80 total points for smaller groups (all-cause hospital readmission measure not applied)
•Distribution of points for each measure based on performance benchmarks (80% for claims reporting, 90% for registry reporting)
Scoring
•Up to 4 bonus points may be added for reporting on outcome and high priority measures
•1 bonus point possible for each measure captured and reported through CEHRT
•Total bonus points capped at 5% of those used to calculate the quality score Bonus points
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Quality reporting vs. PQRS
PQRS
9 measures
Pass/fail approach
Measures must fall across specific quality domains
Quality in NPRM
6 measures
Partial credit allowed
Flexibility in choice of measures
AMA recommendations
Maintain scoring thresholds at 50% (vs.
proposed 80-90%)
Further reduce the number of required quality
measures to 4
Simplify the scoring methodology
8
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Resource use basics
9
•10% of total MIPS score in 2019 (phases up to 30% in 2021)
•CMS will calculate administratively via claims over full year MIPS weight
•Continues use of VBM cost measures (Medicare spending per beneficiary and total per capita cost) developed for hospital-level measurement
•41 episode-specific measures potentially added Measures
•10 points, calculated average of all attributable cost measures (worth 10 points each)
•20 patient sample required for measure attribution
•If patient volume insufficient for all measures, score is zero and other MIPS categories will be reweighted
Scoring
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Resource use vs. VBM
10
VBM
Included both quality reporting and resource-use measures; PQRS failure counted twice
Poor risk adjustment produced penalties for
treating sickest patients
No statutory limits on penalty risk
Resource Use in NPRM
Focuses solely on cost/ resource-use; no duplicative quality
reporting
41 episode-based measures proposed
Plans to improve attribution methods in
2018 (for 2020 payments)
AMA recommendations
Cost measures flawed, episode groups need testing/ improvement
Improve attribution methods for episodes
Develop pilot rather than using flawed measures
Do not incorporate Part D or B drug costs
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Advancing care information basics
11
•25% of total MIPS score
•May be reduced if >75% of clinicians are successful
•12-month physician reporting period MIPS weight
•50 points for achieving 6 objectives (pass/fail)
•Immunization registry reporting required; reporting to more than one public health registry earns bonus point
•CPOE and clinical decision support no longer required
•Provide numerator/denominator or yes/no attestation for each
•Failure to attest to “protecting patient health information” results in zero total ACI score
Base measures and
scoring
•80 points available; total combined score exceeding 100 gets full credit
•Clinicians select from measures across 3 objective areas: patient electronic access, patient engagement, HI exchange
•ACI performance category will be reweighted to zero and other MIPS categories increased if objectives don’t apply (e.g., for hospital-based clinicians)
•Clinical quality measures from Meaningful Use no longer required
Performance measures and
scoring
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Advancing care information vs. meaningful use
12
MU
100% score required on all measures to avoid 5%
penalty
Included redundant measures and
problematic CPOE, CDS and clinical quality
measures
ACI in NPRM
Pass-fail program replaced with base and
performance scoring
Measures reduced
Performance score thresholds eliminated
Public health registry reporting reduced
AMA recommendations
50 point base score threshold still 100%; grant
credit for measures reported
Maintain existing measure exclusions
Permit proposals for more relevant measures
Establish a 90-day reporting period
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
CPIA basics
• 15% of total MIPS score
• 90-day reporting period MIPS weight
• 8 activity categories
• 90+ activities
• Do not need activities in each category CPIA categories
• 60 points = 100% CPIA score
• 7 of 8 categories have both high (20 points) and medium (10 points) weighted activities
Scoring
• Certified PCMH (60 points); other APM (30 points)
• Non-patient facing specialties & small rural practices need fewer points (one activity for partial credit, 2 activities for full credit)
Exceptions
• High weight activities should be expanded, required activities reduced
• Credit for APM participation should be increased
• Practices should be able to maintain CPIA activities over time Concerns
13
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
CPIA categories
Expanded Practice Access
Population Management
Care Coordination
Beneficiary Engagement
Patient Safety & Practice
Assessment
Achieving Health Equity
Emergency Response and Preparedness
Integrated Behavioral &
Mental Healtah
14
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
2019 (first year) penalty risks compared
15
Prior Law 2019
adjustments
PQRS -2%
MU -5%
VBM -4% or more*
Total penalty risk -11% or more*
Bonus potential (VBM
only)
Unknown (budget
neutral)*
MIPS factors 2019 scoring
Quality measurement 50% of score
Advancing Care Info. 25% of score
Resource use 10% of score
Clinical improvement
activities
15% of score
Total penalty risk Max of -4%
Bonus potential Max of 4%, plus
potential 10% for high
performers *VBM was in effect for 3 years before MACRA passed, and
penalty risk was increased in each of these years; there
were no ceilings or floors on penalties and bonuses, only a
budget neutrality requirement.
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
MIPS component weights and scoring in 2019
50%
25%
15%
10%
Component Weights
Quality
ACI
CPIA
Resource Use
Component Scoring • Quality:
– 80 points groups <10
– 90 points for larger groups
– Weight phases down to 30% in 2021
• Advancing Care Information:
– 50 points base score
– 80 points performance score
• Clinical Practice Improvement Activities:
– 60 points (3-6 activities; 2 activities for small and rural practices)
• Resource Use:
– 10 points per measure
– Score is average of attributable measures
– Weight phases up to 30% in 2021
16
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Calculating MIPS payment adjustments (2019)
17
Quality score
weighted 50%
Cost score
weighted 10%
ACI score
weighted 25%
CPIA score
weighted 15%
Composite
Performance
Score (CPS)
CPS at threshold (tied to
average performance) = 0%
CPS above threshold = 0% to 4%
CPS below threshold = 0% to -4%
Depending on CPS distribution, upward
adjustments only could increase up to 3x to
maintain budget neutrality
Physicians with CPS scores
< 25% of threshold receive
maximum reduction
Up to $500 million available
2019-2024 to provide 10%
extra bonus for exceptional
performance (> top 25% of
those above the threshold)
Maximum adjustment ranges increase to +/- 5% in 2020, +/- 7%
in 2021, +/- 9% in 2022 onward
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Some observations about MIPS
Positives:
• Overlapping quality measurement across separate programs eliminated
• Overall reduction in measures, many thresholds eliminated
• More flexibility in measure choice
• Pass/ fail approach (largely) eliminated
• Financial risk from penalties significantly reduced
Issues to address:
• Aggregate administrative burden for practices is still too high
• A more holistic approach is needed to integrate the 4 components into a single program
• MU measures largely retained in ACI; need greater flexibility and focus on goal vs. process
• Methodological issues of VBM cost and quality measures remain
• Full-year reporting for most components
18
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Estimated impacts
• Estimated MIPS actuarial impact table (table 64) predicting payment cuts for small practices should be interpreted with caution
– Data used are based on successful participation of “eligible clinicians” in PQRS and VBM in 2014
• Moving away from pass/fail approach and other accommodations proposed for small practices not reflected in the analysis
• Does not reflect reduced risk of penalties under MACRA vs. previous law
• AMA recommended changes that could ease impact (e.g., raising low volume threshold)
• Many policymakers recognize small practices as an effective means of delivering high-value care
19
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Small practice accommodations
NPRM Provisions
• Low-volume MIPS exemption
• Fewer quality measures, CPIA reporting requirements
• Reporting category exemptions if insufficient measures applicable
• Cost score not calculated if volume insufficient for measures
AMA Recommendations
• Low-volume threshold should be increased
• Peer-to-peer comparisons on performance
• Further reduce reporting requirements
• Consistent definition of small practice
• Implement virtual group provision
• Maintain EHR exemption for lack of high speed Internet, physicians who do not refer patients
20
Alternative
Payment Models
(APMs)
21
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
APMs participation options as outlined by CMS
22
Advanced APMs
Qualified Medical Homes
MIPS APMs
• “Advanced” APMs--term
established by CMS; these
have greatest risks and offer
potential for greatest
rewards
• Qualified Medical Homes
have different risk structure
but otherwise treated as
Advanced APMs
• MIPS APMs receive
favorable MIPS scoring
• Physician-focused APMs
are under development
Physician-
focused
APMs TBD
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
CMS criteria for Advanced APMs
23
Advanced APMs
EHR use
Quality Reporting
Financial
Risk
• Participants must use certified EHR technology
• At least 50% of clinicians in first year, 75%
thereafter
• Payment based on quality measures
comparable to MIPS
• Bear “more than nominal risk” for monetary
losses (current proposal is 4% of total Medicare
expenditures)
• Expanded Medical Home models exempt from
risk
• Other Medical Home models have different
standards (2.5%-5% total Medicare revenues)
• Physicians may be Qualified Participants (QPs)
or Partially Qualified Participants (PQPs) based
on revenue and patient thresholds, with
differential rewards
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
MACRA incentives for Advanced APM participation
Model design
• APMs have shared savings, flexible payment bundles and other desirable features
Bonuses
• In 2019-2024, 5% bonus payments made to physicians participating in Advanced APMs
Higher updates
• Annual baseline payment updates will be higher (0.75%) for Advanced APM participants than for MIPS participants (0.25%) starting 2026
MIPS exemption
• Advanced APM participants do not have to participate in MIPS (models include their own EHR use and quality reporting requirements)
24
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Currently proposed Advanced APMs
Comprehensive ESRD Care Model
(currently 13 ESCOs)
Comprehensive Primary Care Plus
(coming in Fall 2016)
Medicare Shared Savings Track 2
(currently 6 ACOs, 1% of total)
Medicare Shared Savings Track 3
(currently 16 ACOs, 4% of total)
Next Generation ACO Model
(currently 18)
Oncology Care Model, 2-Sided
Risk Arrangement
(coming in 2018)
25
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
MIPS APMs
Criteria
• Do not meet qualifications for Advanced APM—most likely financial risk
• Examples includes Track 1 ACOs, certified medical homes, bundled payment programs, any upside risk-only models
Advanced APM benefits do not apply
• Must participate in MIPS to receive any favorable payment adjustments
• Do not qualify for 5% APM bonus payments 2019-2024
• Not eligible for higher baseline annual updates beginning 2026
Other benefits
• Certified medical home participants get full CPIA score (60 points); others get half (30 points)
• APM-specific rewards (e.g., shared savings)
• Eligible for annual MIPS bonuses, which continue indefinitely (vs. 6 years for 5% APM bonuses)
26
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Requirements and payments for APM participants
Qualified
Participant in
Advanced APM
Partially Qualified
Participant in
Advanced APM
MIPS APM
participant
Patient and revenue
thresholds required
>25% revenues or >20%
patients in 2019, rising to
75% or 50%, respectively
by 2023
>20% revenues or >10%
patients in 2019, rising to
50% and 35%,
respectively, by 2023
None
Eligible for APM bonus,
higher updates
Yes No No
Must participate in MIPS No Optional (but no
performance adjustments
without MIPS)
Yes
MIPS scoring and
adjustments
N/A Favorable weighting and
scoring
Favorable weighting and
scoring
27
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Some observations about APM pathway
Positives
• Approach to quality measure requirements seems reasonable
• Initial EHR use proposal (50%) seems flexible (although threshold increases quickly)
• Performance judged on group basis
• Reasonable criteria for judging physician-focused payment models
Issues to address
• Too few qualified APMs will be available in 2017
• Timeline for developing new models is long; bonus payments intended to ease transition expire
• Risk requirements are unrealistic (e.g., risk for costs vs. revenues, no credit for investment)
• Risk requirements too complicated
28
Moving Forward
29
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Timeline on payment adjustments
30
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026
on
Fee
Schedule
Updates
MIPS
QPs in
Adv.
APMs
0.5% annual baseline updates No annual baseline updates
4% 5% 7% 9% Max Adjustment (additional bonuses
possible)
0.25%
or
0.75%
9% 9% 9%
5% bonus
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Regulatory timeline
31
NPRM comments deadline
• June 27, 2016
Final MACRA rule issued
• Fall 2016 (Nov. 1?)
MIPS measurement and APM participation begins
• Jan 1, 2017
Second year of measurement
• 2018
MIPS and APM pay adjustments for 2017 performance occur
• Jan 1, 2019
• Implementation timeline
concerns: • Short lead-time for
physicians to learn the
rules
• Inadequate time to
make practice
adjustments
• Too few APMs are
available
• AMA recommends
transitional reporting
year in 2017, to begin
July 1
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
AMA advocacy
• Our overarching aims in shaping regulations:
– Choice, flexibility, simplicity, feasibility, clinical relevance
• Four key issues:
– Start date and reporting period
– Accommodations for small and rural practices
– Complexity of the programs
– Expanding APMs
• Extensive Federation outreach
– MACRA Task Force, MIPS workgroup, APM workgroup, CMS listening sessions
• Extensive outreach to the Administration
• Keeping Congress informed, leveraging oversight function
• Developing tool chest of practical resources to help physicians make choices and succeed under new payment systems
32
What Physicians
Can Do to Prepare
33
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
AMA MACRA checklist
Are you exempt from MIPS?
Low volume provider?
Qualified participant in an advanced APM?
Do you meet requirements for small, rural, non-patient-facing accommodations?
Do you/ can you participate in a qualified clinical data registry?
Do your PQRS and QRUR reports reveal areas for improvement?
Which CPIAs is your practice doing now? What are you interested in doing?
Is your EHR certified? If so, is it the 2014 or 2015 edition? Does your vendor support Medicare quality reporting?
34
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
AMA MACRA web site
35
www.ama-assn.org/go/medicarepayment Links and tabs to:
• Detailed AMA comments
and recommendations
• Specific info on MIPS and
APMs
• STEPSForward modules
• Checklist to prepare
• MACRA Action Kit and
slides from A-16
• Other MACRA resources,
links, and news stories
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Take advantage of educational opportunities
36
www.stepsforward.org
Completion of select STEPSForward™ modules meets eligibility
criteria for CPIA credit
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
Learning from those who do
37
Plans underway to share information
from experienced physicians
• Interviews
• Instructional videos
• Demos
• Webinars
Also:
• Paid media
• Social media
• Federation outreach
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
New tool coming soon
38
Payment Model Evaluator Tool (PS2)
• Version 1.0 due to be released in
September
• Educational and preliminary
decision making information
• User testing
• Updated and enhanced Version 1.5
incorporating final rule requirements
and greater functionality planned for
December 2017
© 2016 American Medical Association. All rights reserved.
39