The 6|18 Initiative: Evaluation and Impact Measurement

This webinar includes information on: (1) expectations for active Medicaid and Public Health engagement in evaluating the 6|18 Initiative’s impact; (2) a description of CDC’s Evaluation Wheel and early effectiveness evaluation approach; (3) a brief synopsis of the Medicaid Adult and Child Core Measure Sets and quality reporting activities; and (4) a description of the methodology and results of a CDC analysis of CMS quality measure sets.


Social Needs Screening Toolkit

Building on Health Leads’ 20 years of experience implementing social need programs for patients, as well as recent guidelines from the Institute of Medicine and Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, this Social Needs Screening Toolkit shares the latest research on how to screen patients for social needs.

                                               Articles and Briefs

Beyond “To Close Or Not To Close” Rural Hospitals

Financial pressures on rural hospitals are likely to continue, a foundation in Texas says in a post summarizing findings from a recently completed report. The full report suggests how rural communities could ensure that a reliable system of health care services is accessible if their hospital closes. The full report is available at: http://www.episcopalhealth.org/files/2414/9788/5907/Whats_Next_Final_6.12.pdf


Making Investments In Rural Health: What Are The New And Old Challenges?

Much of rural America helped Donald Trump win the 2016 presidential election. Now, how can health funders be useful to people in rural parts of the United States? In this commentary, the author suggests ten ways to be a better rural health funder.

"Salt in the Wound": Safety Net Clinician Perspectives on Performance Feedback Derived From EHR Data

Electronic health record (EHR) data can be extracted for calculating performance feedback, but users' perceptions of such feedback impact its effectiveness. Through qualitative analyses, we identified perspectives on barriers and facilitators to the perceived legitimacy of EHR-based performance feedback, in 11 community health centers (CHCs). Providers said such measures rarely accounted for CHC patients' complex lives or for providers' decisions as informed by this complexity, which diminished the measures' perceived validity. Suggestions for improving the perceived validity of performance feedback in CHCs are presented. Our findings add to the literature on EHR-based performance feedback by exploring provider perceptions in CHCs.

HMA Weekly Roundup: Trends in State Health Policy

This In Focus section, from Health Management Associates, reviews the request for proposals (RFP) issued on February 27, 2017, by the Illinois Department of Healthcare and Family Services (HFS) to rebid the majority of the state’s existing Medicaid managed care program contracts, consolidate multiple programs into a single streamlined program, and expand managed care statewide.

Considerations for a National Risk-Adjustment Model for Medicaid Managed Long-Term Services and Supports Programs

This brief examines considerations in developing a nationally available risk-adjustment model for MLTSS programs. It also explores research needed to develop a robust model that predicts expected LTSS costs as accurately as possible.

Rewarding High Quality: Practical Models for Value-Based Physician Payment

In Alliance of Community Health Plans’ newest brief, Rewarding High Quality: Practical Models for Value-Based Physician Payment; they examine how ACHP members across the U.S. have launched a diverse range of initiatives to reduce costs while increasing quality of care.

White Paper: Payment to Promote Sustainability of Care Management Models for High-Cost, High-Need Patients

This paper, by the Health Care Transformation Taskforce, illustrates Task Force members’ important investments in care management infrastructure and their success with improving outcomes for high-need patients under a patchwork of payment arrangements.

Key Payer and Provider Operational Steps for Successfully Implementing Bundled Payment

This brief from the Health Care Incentives Improvement Institute provides a more in-depth review of the operational steps health plans and providers are taking to be successful under bundled payment. The findings are based on interviews with seven payers, seven providers, and one organization selected as a convener.

Aligning Higher Performance Through Shared Savings Programs

Commissioned by The Center for Care Innovations, this discussion paper focuses on shared savings programs including where providers share in upside risk or where they share in both upside and downside risk as participants in Medicaid managed care programs.

Transitioning to Episode-Based Payment

This policy brief describes how to define an episode payment and how to transition to episode payment.

Oregon’s Bridge to Value-Based Payments for Community Health Centers: A Win for Medicaid, Providers, & Patients

This article summarizes a successful attempt to embrace value-based payment in Oregon health centers. The resource highlights risk-adjustment considerations for successfully implementing an alternative payment model.

Risk Adjustment for Sociodemographic Factors

This report provides a set of recommendations for successfully including socioeconomic status, race, ethnicity and other factors in risk adjustment. The National Quality Forum developed ten specific recommendations for health care organizations to follow through an expert panel of clinicians, academics, and public health professionals.

Sociodemographic Factors Affect Health Outcomes

This is a periodically updated list of evidence and resources on the need to risk adjust performance measures prepared by America’s Essential Hospital.

Impact of Risk Adjustment for Socioeconomic Status on Risk-adjusted Surgical Readmission Rates

This scholarly article explores whether differences in surgical readmission rates in safety net hospitals vs. non-safety net hospitals are the result of care quality differences. The study results indicate that variation in readmission rates are the result of differences in patient populations and not quality. The article suggests that risk adjusting readmission measures led to changes in hospital rankings.