Does the Public Believe the Headlines?

Here is what the article says: Feds Knew About Medicare Advantage Overcharges Years Ago

This article is very disturbing. It is so easy to hate insurance companies and assume that this is all true without understanding the more complex story. I think we risk getting the "baby thrown out with the bath water" if we cannot spell out the value of risk adjustment and accountable care, compared with the failings of FFS healthcare. 

I find that people get stopped at the headllines without understanding what it all really means because, unless you are involved in risk adjustment, it is difficult to understand. Let's use an example and see if this makes sense to you.

A pair of identical twins have the exact same health conditions and see the same doctor for care. The doctor is a great clinician, treats the twins exactly the same way and documents well in his charts, but he is lazy putting the diagnostic codes on the claims. 

 
One of the twins has a Medicare Supplement policy while the other is enrolled in a Medicare Advantage plan. 
 
Using the CMS risk adjustment model, the skimpy diagnostic codes are used to predict how much the expected health care costs would be for both twins in the coming year. Let us say that, using this methodology the Medicare Advantage plan receives $12,000 over the year based on the overly simplified ICD-9 codes supplied by the doctor. But, if the health plan had sent in a coder to read the doctor's charts to determine what the true health conditions were instead of relying solely on the claims data, the adjustments to the premiums from CMS would have been $24,000 annually. But the health plan did not do that and just received the $12,000. 
 
Now fast forward a year and the higher costs come true because the twins were actually twice as sick as the ICD-9 codes from the claims suggested. Who pays for that doubled cost of care for each of the twins? 
 
In the case of the twin with the Medicare Supplement, Medicare pays for it because they must. But for the twin with the Medicare Advantage plan, the health plan pays for it from the premiums received based on the risk adjusted payment model. However, the premiums were only half what they should have been and the health plan has to still pay for the actual health care provided. 
 
The U.S. taxpayer, through Medicare, pays for the actual health care due to the true health conditions of the beneficiaries under Original Medicare, even if the diagnostic coding is poor. However, the Medicare Advantage plan receives underpayment for the same beneficiary because the diagnostic coding is poor. 
 
If the Medicare Advantage health plan had sent in a coder and got the risk adjusted payment levels at the accurate levels, they would have received adequate payment for the health care costs based on the true burden of illness. That payment level would more closely approximate what Original Medicare ended up paying for the identical twin on the Medicare Supplement plan, since CMS is getting closer to paying MA plans at 100% of FFS levels now. The taxpayer is indifferent. Yet the diagnostic codes supplied for the one twin is twice the number of codes supplied for the other twin.
 

The punchline to this story then is that people that are alarmed by the much higher number of diagnostic codes associated with Medicare Advantage members compared with FFS Medicare beneficiaries are making the incorrect assumption that the health plans are over-coding to earn additional premiums to which they are not entitled.  But the differences in coding levels is actually due to lazy diagnostic coding on the part of providers under a FFS system.  

 

FFS Medicare is drastically under-coded for diagnoses, and if Medicare Advantage plans were simply passively accepting the same level of coding, the taxpayers would realize enormous short term savings in comparison to FFS Medicare costs.  Of course, as time goes on, the healthplans would go broke subsidizing the undercoded beneficiaries.  

http://www.publicintegrity.org/2015/03/13/16882/feds-were-advised-medicare-advantage-overcharges-years-ago

 


Log on to Your Rise Account

Forgot your password?
Create an Account

Association Sponsors

Latest Posts

Keep M.E.A.T. on Your List for a Healthy Audit

By Jeanmarie Loria, Advize Health, LLC If you’re reading this article, chances are you already know what HCC Coding is – but we’ll give you a refresher anyway. Hierarchical Condition Category (HCC) and Risk Adjustment Coding is a CMS-mandated payment model. This model works to identify those with chronic and other serious illnesses and prescribes a risk factor score to each patient, taking into consideration their ailments and other demographics. With every payment model comes a specific set of audit and review requirements that must be met to maintain the integrity of the system, and this is where MEAT (Monitor, Evaluate, Assess/Address, Treat) comes in handy. In a face to face visit M.E.A.T. maybe found in the chief complaint, history of present illness, review of systems, physical exam, assessment and/or plan....
Read More

Getting It Right: True North in Healthcare Reform

The movement to repeal and replace "ObamaCare" created so much political noise that clear thinking has been hard to come by. The 2010 legislation that created the marketplace for individuals and small business (the Affordable Care Act or ACA), has almost evolved into a political Rorschach test. The more that politicized options and alternatives to repealing, replacing, or repairing it were discussed, the harder it was to put into focus the original problems the legislation was designed to address. Nevertheless, the rancorous divisions over what needs to happen to fix problems in the individual insurance market remain a distraction from the real issue at hand: the cost of healthcare weighing down the economy and what we need to do to fix it. With all the intense debates swirling around this topic, an impression emerges that “solving the ObamaCare issues” is something that must be accomplished as an isolated matter, discrete and independent of other problems. The heated debates concentrate on the mechanics and tactics required to solve the "uninsured problem", the "under-insured problem", and for some, the federal budget problems created by the subsidies for low-income enrollees in these plans. This single-issue mono-vision obscures a reality that must be addressed. This perspective completely misses the fact that something is going on that is far more corrosive to the wellbeing of all of us as consumers of health care, as taxpayers, and as a nation: something that overshadows the tug ‘o war over ObamaCare. The critical and overlooked issue is that health care expenditures in the U.S are at least twice as expensive as other nations, which consume so much of the national economy...
Read More

Upcoming Conference

 

Qualipalooza: The 2nd Annual RISE Quality Leadership Summit 

This unique event incorporates three conferences presented side-by-side: the Star Ratings Strategic Planning Forum, the HEDIS Forum, and the CAHPS, HOS & Member Survey Forum. Register for one conference for an in-depth examination of a single area, or design your own event by opting for the all-access pass and choosing the sessions from each conference which correspond exactly to your interests.

More

Upcoming Webinar

Successful and Meaningful Techniques for Integrating Risk and Quality Interventions

Quality measurement and risk adjustment regulations are increasing and the financial impact upon health plans is progressively driving accountability and influencing profitability through payments, penalties, and bonuses. To improve performance and optimize risk and quality payments, Health Plans need to streamline processes, employ best practices for data capture, and focus on strategic interventions that use a member-centric approach.  

Connect With Us

Copyright © 2014 Resource Initiative & Society for Education. All rights reserved.