Tag Archive for: Vermont

You are here: Home / Vermont

Posts

Lessons from the Field: State- and Practice-Level Policies to Foster High Performance in Cervical Cancer Screening in Federally Qualified Health Centers

/in /by

States can make important strides in eradicating cervical cancer deaths. This report features promising state and federally qualified health center policies that support high performance in cervical cancer screening within the context of the medical home. Drawing from Colorado, Maine, Maryland, New York, Texas, Vermont, and Virginia, this report summarizes innovative programs, practices, and partnerships that facilitate improvement in cervical cancer screening. Experiences in these states offer examples for adoption by others to ensure high-quality preventive care for women. This publication was made possible through the support of the Health Resources and Services Administration.

Download the Publication 497.1 KB

 

Payment and Delivery System Reform: It's All About the Data, States!

/in /by

For states and their partners seeking a better integrated delivery system through multipayer reform initiatives, effective use of data is the foundation, the “building” itself, and roof above. Easier envisioned than done, data can help participants in multi-payer initiatives offer constructive feedback on performance to providers, distribute rewards in value-based payment systems, and hold system participants accountable for the costs and quality of services delivered. This webinar will explore the types of data multi-payer initiatives need to succeed, where states can get data, and how to use it. It will also highlight approaches to using various types of data from three leading states.

Speakers/Presenters: 

  • Lisa Dulsky Watkins, Associate Director, Vermont Blueprint for Health, Department of Vermont Health Access
  • Brooks Daverman, Director, Strategic Planning and Innovation, Tennessee Division of Health Care Finance and Administration
  • Karynlee Harrington, Executive Director; Dirigo Health Agency; Acting Executive Director, Maine Health Data Organization

 

Click here for the Webinar Agenda 140.8 KB
Click here for the Webinar Presentation Slides 4 MB

 

Vermont

/in /by

Vermont has been actively pursuing delivery system reform since its multi-payer Blueprint for Health medical homes program was codified in 2006 as part of health reform legislation. In 2008, Act 203 directed Vermont’s Health Care Reform Commission to “assess the feasibility of alternative designs for a pilot project to test using a system-wide budgeting initiative at the regional level within the state, including a design based on the accountable care organization (ACO) model.” The team conducting the feasibility study translated their findings into a design for a Vermont ACO pilot in a report published by The Commonwealth Fund in 2010. In 2009, Act 49 directed the reform commission to convene a dedicated workgroup to more aggressively work to launch an ACO pilot.
The passage of the Affordable Care Act gave Vermont new opportunities to re-orient its approach to launching an ACO pilot. Vermont was awarded a State Innovation Model grant by the CMS Innovation Center in February 2013. Under this grant, it will test three models of payment reform, one of which is a Medicaid shared savings ACO model. According to the state’s grant application, six of Vermont’s eight Federally Qualified Health Centers are organizing a multi-payer shared savings ACO, which will be invited by the state to participate in the program that will be launched under the SIM grant. In addition to covering Medicare Part A and B for Medicare beneficiaries and all costs for attributed commercial enrollees, Vermont’s  shared savings ACO model will cover all Medicaid costs for Medicaid beneficiaries (including children and CHIP enrollees) attributed to participating ACOs.
While the state has been exploring ACO models, private partners—including participants in the state’s multi-payer Blueprint—have formed ACOs under the Medicare Shared Savings Program: OneCare Vermont is a statewide ACO linking 13 of the state’s 14 hospitals, and the Accountable Care Coalition of the Green Mountains, LLC is an ACO linking 100 independent providers.
Last updated: November 2013.

Project Scope
Patient population: All Medicaid beneficiaries that fall into one of the following “super eligibility categories” are eligible for assignment to a Medicaid accountable care organization (ACO) under the Medicaid Shared Savings Program: aged, blind or disabled adults who are not eligible for Medicare; blind or disabled children who are not eligible for Medicare; general adult; new adult; general child; and SCHIP child.
Attribution: Claims for specified CPT codes are analyzed for Medicaid beneficiaries falling into one of the super eligibility categories identified above who were enrolled for the entire 12 month look back period (the most recent 12 months for which claims are available). Beneficiaries are assigned to the practice where he or she had the greatest number of qualifying claims. Beneficiaries without claims experience are assigned to the primary care provider they have selected or to whom they have been auto-assigned.
Covered services: Medicaid ACOs will be responsible for Medicaid-covered services. Unlike ACOs supported by other payers, Medicaid ACOs will be responsible for spending on prescription medications; dental benefits; transportation; waiver services; mental health and substance abuse services; and services administered through the state’s Department of Education.
Authority
While Vermont has authority under an existing 1115 Demonstration waiver to implement a shared savings ACO in Medicaid, the state intends to submit a Medicaid State Plan Amendment for its Shared Savings Program.
Governance
Governance standards for Vermont’s Medicaid Shared Savings Program (SSP) released in 2013 mirror the requirements of the federal Medicare Shared Savings Program. The state requires that accountable care organizations (ACOs) establish and maintain a governing body, separate and unique to the ACO (and not the governing body of any ACO participant) with adequate authority to execute the statutory functions of an ACO.
Participants in the governing body must be representative of practitioners participating in the ACO, include a Medicaid beneficiary served by the ACO, and 75 percent of the governing board must be chosen by ACO participants.
The SSP standards also require that ACOs have a leadership and management structure that includes clinical and administrative systems.
Criteria for Participation Medicaid-participating providers that form an organization meeting the governance standards may participate in the Medicaid Shared Savings Program. Following the lead of commercial accountable care organization (ACO) pilots in the state, Vermont’s Medicaid Shared Savings Program standards may require ACOs to develop a defined and coordinated strategy for care management.
Payment
Under Vermont’s Medicaid Shared Savings Program, ACOs will have a choice between two payment tracks.
Under Track 1, ACOs will not agree to downside risk and their upside shared savings will be smaller than under Track 2. Under Track 2, ACOs will have a downside risk component in which they are required to repay Medicaid for shared losses. ACO will assume the following downside risk in each pilot program year :
  • Year 1: risk limited to 5.0% of total benchmark expenditures
  • Year 2: risk limited to 7.5% of total benchmark expenditures
  • Year 3: risk limited to 10.0% of total benchmark expenditures
For both tracks, the state will identify members who would have been attributed to the ACO in 2010, 2011, and 2012. Total expenditures for all services for each attributed member within a calendar year are trended and risk-adjusted to produce a blended per member per month expenditure value for each eligibility super category. The average per member per month spending across all super categories, weighted by member volume, is then calculated to produce a single historical benchmark.
Actual spending will be calculated to determine if the ACO has achieved savings or losses—beyond a minimum savings rate and minimum loss rate, respectively—relative to the historical benchmark.
For losses in excess of the minimum loss rate, an ACO participating in Track 2 is responsible for paying back a share of the losses. For savings in excess of the minimum savings rate, ACOs in both tracks are eligible for savings if they meet a minimum threshold for performance on a defined set of common measures to be used by all pilot-participating ACOs.
The ACO is assigned points based on its level of quality performance. Greater point scores result in the ACO receiving a larger percentage of the total shared savings payment for which it is eligible.
Support for Infrastructure
Vermont’s State Innovation Model project narrative describes key elements of an integrated health data system in place in the state to support accountable care organizations:
  1. A multi-payer claims dataset (VHCURES) that contains claims from public and private payers and has been mapped to key measures of utilization, expenditures and quality tracked by the Blueprint for Health;
  2. A statewide health information exchange (VHIE) with capacity to produce care summaries and continuity of care documents (CCD), lab and other diagnostic reports, demographics related to admissions, discharges, and transfers and to query or pull clinical data from participating providers’ Electronic Health Record (EHR) systems;
  3. A “central registry” that captures a defined set of clinical data from Vermont health care practices;
  4. Trainers who work with individual provider sites to develop the data input capacity and quality controls necessary to produce reliable data sets for analysis and feedback.
Measurement and Evaluation
In 2013, an Accountable Care Organization (ACO) Measures Work Group in the state worked to select measures for the state’s ACO initiatives. The group relied on a number of criteria, including that measures be: representative of an array of services provided and beneficiaries served by ACO; focused on outcomes to the extent possible; and population-based. After creating a “crosswalk” of over 200 measures from a variety of measure sets, the group came up with two measure sets:
  • A Core Measure Set of measures for which ACOs have current or pending responsibility for collection,
  • A Monitoring and Evaluation Measure Set of measures that will be used for programmatic monitoring, evaluation, and planning (collection of these measures will not influence the distribution of shared savings).

Recommended reporting measures for Year 1 of the Medicaid Shared Savings Program include measures drawn from claims data, clinical data, and survey data.

 
 

Evolving Medical Home Payment Models to Better Support Triple Aim Goals

/in /by

Innovative payment models can support medical homes by decreasing the cost of care, incenting and rewarding quality over quantity, and enabling practices to invest in infrastructure and supports. Many leading states have learned from early initiatives and are moving forward with new payment models that to further drive system goals, including lowered costs, improved quality and increased patient satisfaction. Join us as program leaders in Colorado, Rhode Island, and Vermont describe advances in their medical  home initiatives, including where they started and where they hope to go.

Speakers: 
Mary Takach, Program Director, National Academy for State Health Policy

Kathryn Jantz, Program Performance Specialist, Colorado Dept. of Health Care Policy and Financing
 Greg Trollan, Program Performance Specialist, Colorado Dept. of Health Care Policy and Financing

Dr. Diedre Gifford, Rhode Island Medicaid Medical Director

Hunt Blair, Deputy Commissioner, Division of Health Reform, Vermont Dept. of Health Access

 

Shared Decision Making: Advancing Patient-Centered Care through State and Federal Implementation

/in /by

Shared decision making (SDM)—a process that engages patients in a dialogue with their providers to help them select health care options that conform to their values and preferences—is receiving increased attention as a tool for improving quality and patient satisfaction, and addressing unwarranted variation in care. Building on NASHP’s analyses of state health system improvement initiatives, this report reviews the definition, process, and rationale for SDM and potential roles of states in promoting SDM. The report and a companion document highlight state legislative, regulatory, and other approaches in Maine, Minnesota, Oregon, Vermont, and Washington. The report discusses the challenges of implementation, state strategies to overcome challenges, policy options states have pursued, and lessons from their experience.
 

shared.decision.making.report.pdf 457.6 KB

 

Improving the Quality of Care and Coordination of Services for Young Children—ABCD, CHIPRA and Beyond!

/in , /by

Early identification of delays and linkage to appropriate services can improve coordination among pediatric primary health care providers and providers of mental health, early intervention, child welfare, and early care and education services and influence the course of young children’s healthy development. States are using a variety of mechanisms to develop and test interventions to improve linkages between primary care and other child and family service providers. This webinar will highlight how Illinois, Oregon, South Carolina, and Vermont are using ABCD III (Assuring Better Child Health and Development) and/or CHIPRA quality grants to build on and align current efforts, such as medical home initiatives, health information technology or exchange, performance measurement, and health reform, to transform the delivery of care to children covered by Medicaid and CHIP. This event is sponsored by The Commonwealth Fund and builds upon a session held during the NASHP Annual Conference in October 2010.
 

Panelist Discussion 

  • How is your state promoting children’s healthy development by improving linkages to services?
  • How is your state using the CHIPRA grant and ABCD project to improve care coordination and linkages to services for young children? Where is the synergy between the two projects?
  • How is your state engaging the provider community to support state agency‐led efforts to improve care coordination and linkages to assure better child health and development? What do these efforts look like in real time—how does QI truly happen at the practice level?
  • How is your state using HIT/HIE to support efforts to improve care coordination and linkages to services?

 
Moderator: 
Jill Rosenthal, NASHP
Panel: 
Scott Allen, Executive Director, Illinois Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics
Juanona Brewster, Director, Early Childhood Development Projects Illinois Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics
Russell Frank, CHIP Director, Department of Vermont Health Access
Charles Gallia, Senior Policy Advisor, Division of Medical Assistance Programs, Oregon Health Care Authority
Felicity Meyers, Deputy Director, South Carolina Department of Health and Human Services

 

State Strategies to Improve Quality and Efficiency: Making the Most of Opportunities in National Health Reform

/in /by

There is an acknowledged need for extensive reform to the health care delivery system in the United States. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act offers unprecedented opportunities to transform care delivery, with numerous provisions that support systemic improvements. States have an imperative to greatly improve system efficiency if they are to effectively and sustainably implement the law’s changes, particularly mandatory coverage expansion. This report examines specific Affordable Care Act provisions that support state system improvement goals and profiles efforts in 10 states: Colorado, Kansas, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington. The report highlights the opportunities and challenges that federal health care reform will bring and offers suggestions for how state and national leaders can streamline implementation.

state.strategies.improve.quality.efficiency.pdf 580.5 KB

 

State Innovations to Transform and Link Small Practices

/in /by

Federal and state governments play a significant role in strengthening the delivery of primary care, however current efforts have disproportionally been focused on large or multi-specialty  practices. This report examines the roles states are playing to reorganize the delivery of primary and chronic care to produce more efficient and effective care, particularly in small practices. Through short case studies developed via interviews with state officials and physicians the authors highlight several state-based initiatives that seek to create high performing health systems by targeting local and regional strengths.  Additionally, authors identified five themes critical to enacting strategic delivery system reforms.

state.innovations.to_.transform.link_.small_.practices.pdf 639.8 KB

 

Finance — Vermont

/in /by

A statewide fee on insurance claims funds the state health IT fund in Vermont. VITL has a subscription model in place (fees are currently waived but by 2015 it is expected that the value added by HIE will be enough to warrant activating the fees). Refer to pages 18-19 of the state Strategic Plan.

Vermont

/in /by

Vermont’s HIE Strategic Plan preserves a central role for Vermont Health Information Technology Leaders, Inc., an organization that has already shown leadership in promoting HIE in Vermont.

Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter

Sign Up for Our Weekly Newsletter

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Portland, Maine Office:

2 Monument Square, Suite 910
Portland, Maine 04101

p: 207-874-6524

Washington, DC Office:

1233 20th St., N.W., Suite 303
Washington, DC 20036

p: (202) 903-0101
f: (202) 903-2790

Contact Us

Phone: 202-903-0101

Copyright © 2019, by The National Academy for State Health Policy. All rights reserved. May not be published or otherwise distributed without explicit permission | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use