Medicaid nursing home pay for performance: Where do we stand?

Gregory Arling, Carol Job, Valerie Cooke

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

23 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose:Nursing home pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are intended to maximize the value obtained from public and private expenditures by measuring and rewarding better nursing home performance. We surveyed the 6 states with operational P4P systems in 2007. We describe key features of six Medicaid nursing home P4P systems and make recommendations for further development of nursing home P4P.Design and Methods:We surveyed the six states with operational P4P systems in 2007.Results:The range of performance measures employed by the states is quite broad: staffing level and satisfaction, findings from the regulatory system, clinical quality indicators, resident quality of life or satisfaction with care, family satisfaction, access to care for special populations, and efficiency. The main data sources for the measures are the Minimum Data Set (MDS), nursing home inspections, special surveys of nursing home residents, consumers or employees, and facility cost reports or other administrative systems. The most common financial incentive for better performance is a percentage bonus or an add-on to a facility's per diem rate. The bonus is generally proportional to a facility performance score, which consists of simple or weighted sums of scores on individual measures. Implications:States undertaking nursing home P4P programs should involve key stakeholders at all stages of P4P system design and implementation. Performance measures should be comprehensive, valid and reliable, risk adjusted where appropriate, and communicated clearly to providers and consumers. The P4P system should encourage provider investment in better care yet recognize state fiscal restraints. Consumer report cards, quality improvement initiatives, and the regulatory process should complement and reinforce P4P. Finally, the P4P system should be transparent and continuously evaluated.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)587-595
Number of pages9
JournalGerontologist
Volume49
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 2009

Fingerprint

Incentive Reimbursement
Medicaid
Nursing Homes
Information Storage and Retrieval
Health Expenditures
Quality Improvement
Motivation
Quality of Life
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • Incentives
  • Long-term care
  • Policy
  • Quality of care
  • Reimbursement

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Geriatrics and Gerontology
  • Gerontology

Cite this

Medicaid nursing home pay for performance : Where do we stand? / Arling, Gregory; Job, Carol; Cooke, Valerie.

In: Gerontologist, Vol. 49, No. 5, 10.2009, p. 587-595.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Arling, Gregory ; Job, Carol ; Cooke, Valerie. / Medicaid nursing home pay for performance : Where do we stand?. In: Gerontologist. 2009 ; Vol. 49, No. 5. pp. 587-595.
@article{9e6255c2d8bf402ab896f6cb38de0cd1,
title = "Medicaid nursing home pay for performance: Where do we stand?",
abstract = "Purpose:Nursing home pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are intended to maximize the value obtained from public and private expenditures by measuring and rewarding better nursing home performance. We surveyed the 6 states with operational P4P systems in 2007. We describe key features of six Medicaid nursing home P4P systems and make recommendations for further development of nursing home P4P.Design and Methods:We surveyed the six states with operational P4P systems in 2007.Results:The range of performance measures employed by the states is quite broad: staffing level and satisfaction, findings from the regulatory system, clinical quality indicators, resident quality of life or satisfaction with care, family satisfaction, access to care for special populations, and efficiency. The main data sources for the measures are the Minimum Data Set (MDS), nursing home inspections, special surveys of nursing home residents, consumers or employees, and facility cost reports or other administrative systems. The most common financial incentive for better performance is a percentage bonus or an add-on to a facility's per diem rate. The bonus is generally proportional to a facility performance score, which consists of simple or weighted sums of scores on individual measures. Implications:States undertaking nursing home P4P programs should involve key stakeholders at all stages of P4P system design and implementation. Performance measures should be comprehensive, valid and reliable, risk adjusted where appropriate, and communicated clearly to providers and consumers. The P4P system should encourage provider investment in better care yet recognize state fiscal restraints. Consumer report cards, quality improvement initiatives, and the regulatory process should complement and reinforce P4P. Finally, the P4P system should be transparent and continuously evaluated.",
keywords = "Incentives, Long-term care, Policy, Quality of care, Reimbursement",
author = "Gregory Arling and Carol Job and Valerie Cooke",
year = "2009",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1093/geront/gnp044",
language = "English",
volume = "49",
pages = "587--595",
journal = "The Gerontologist",
issn = "0016-9013",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Medicaid nursing home pay for performance

T2 - Where do we stand?

AU - Arling, Gregory

AU - Job, Carol

AU - Cooke, Valerie

PY - 2009/10

Y1 - 2009/10

N2 - Purpose:Nursing home pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are intended to maximize the value obtained from public and private expenditures by measuring and rewarding better nursing home performance. We surveyed the 6 states with operational P4P systems in 2007. We describe key features of six Medicaid nursing home P4P systems and make recommendations for further development of nursing home P4P.Design and Methods:We surveyed the six states with operational P4P systems in 2007.Results:The range of performance measures employed by the states is quite broad: staffing level and satisfaction, findings from the regulatory system, clinical quality indicators, resident quality of life or satisfaction with care, family satisfaction, access to care for special populations, and efficiency. The main data sources for the measures are the Minimum Data Set (MDS), nursing home inspections, special surveys of nursing home residents, consumers or employees, and facility cost reports or other administrative systems. The most common financial incentive for better performance is a percentage bonus or an add-on to a facility's per diem rate. The bonus is generally proportional to a facility performance score, which consists of simple or weighted sums of scores on individual measures. Implications:States undertaking nursing home P4P programs should involve key stakeholders at all stages of P4P system design and implementation. Performance measures should be comprehensive, valid and reliable, risk adjusted where appropriate, and communicated clearly to providers and consumers. The P4P system should encourage provider investment in better care yet recognize state fiscal restraints. Consumer report cards, quality improvement initiatives, and the regulatory process should complement and reinforce P4P. Finally, the P4P system should be transparent and continuously evaluated.

AB - Purpose:Nursing home pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are intended to maximize the value obtained from public and private expenditures by measuring and rewarding better nursing home performance. We surveyed the 6 states with operational P4P systems in 2007. We describe key features of six Medicaid nursing home P4P systems and make recommendations for further development of nursing home P4P.Design and Methods:We surveyed the six states with operational P4P systems in 2007.Results:The range of performance measures employed by the states is quite broad: staffing level and satisfaction, findings from the regulatory system, clinical quality indicators, resident quality of life or satisfaction with care, family satisfaction, access to care for special populations, and efficiency. The main data sources for the measures are the Minimum Data Set (MDS), nursing home inspections, special surveys of nursing home residents, consumers or employees, and facility cost reports or other administrative systems. The most common financial incentive for better performance is a percentage bonus or an add-on to a facility's per diem rate. The bonus is generally proportional to a facility performance score, which consists of simple or weighted sums of scores on individual measures. Implications:States undertaking nursing home P4P programs should involve key stakeholders at all stages of P4P system design and implementation. Performance measures should be comprehensive, valid and reliable, risk adjusted where appropriate, and communicated clearly to providers and consumers. The P4P system should encourage provider investment in better care yet recognize state fiscal restraints. Consumer report cards, quality improvement initiatives, and the regulatory process should complement and reinforce P4P. Finally, the P4P system should be transparent and continuously evaluated.

KW - Incentives

KW - Long-term care

KW - Policy

KW - Quality of care

KW - Reimbursement

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70349469785&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70349469785&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/geront/gnp044

DO - 10.1093/geront/gnp044

M3 - Article

C2 - 19458344

AN - SCOPUS:70349469785

VL - 49

SP - 587

EP - 595

JO - The Gerontologist

JF - The Gerontologist

SN - 0016-9013

IS - 5

ER -