RAPS / EDS User Group Report

What impact will come with the migration from a RAPS-based RAF score to an encounter data-based RAF score? 


The RISE User Group aims to find out the answer to this question.  It involves complexity that is difficult to appreciate until you dig in deeper.  There are a lot of variables that cause different healthplans to come to different conclusions.  Here are some of the key moving parts:

  1. RAPS uses only 5 data elements to qualify for acceptable data submission while EDPS is aligned with the 5010 claim form of 37 data elements, which presents a lot more hurdles to pass for getting acceptance. 
  2. RAPS excludes a lot of services as ineligible for inclusion (such as labs, skilled nursing, etc.) while EDPS takes it all in. RAPS allows for supplemental data submissions to beef up its comprehensiveness and accuracy. In contrast, EDPS is primarily encounter-based (or claims- based), but EDPS allows retrospective and prospective chart reviews to augment the data from claims. 
  3. Depending on the filtering logic employed by the healthplans for both approaches, there can be a wide divergence in the percentage of diagnoses accepted

In addition to all these variables, we share further challenges getting adequate diagnoses captured.  When you take an end-to-end process review, there are several places where robust diagnosis capture gets watered down.  “Think of this as a hose”, as Behzad Mohazzebi1 famously said, “and let’s count the leaks”. Some examples:

  • The provider office billing systems, complying with the 5010, can only accept 12 ICD codes
  • The 837 submission abides by this restriction and, in order to gain a full set of diagnoses for truly complex patients, multiple 837s would be required.  However, that sets up claims processing duplicate flags at the payers’ end and would also require some special programming when submitting more than 12 ICD codes to EDPS as plans would be required to LINK claims together.
  • The handoff to billing services often result in truncating diagnoses, as do clearinghouses and other intermediate hands in the process
  • Hospital billing systems can often truncate the rich set of diagnoses that their coders extract from medical records
  • The claims systems at healthplans and insurance companies also have been found to frequently drop diagnoses because they are old systems that were not designed to accept a large number of diagnostic codes

The User Group hopes to begin tracking and reporting as testing of EDS submissions progresses.  We are expecting to gauge the level of data rejection, the types of filtering logic pursued by the plans, and root causes discovered in the process.  We are publishing a worksheet that is being used as the initial data collection tool for any RISE members to view.  Whatever we find as we work on this, we plan to publish and share in a transparent manner.  All Medicare Advantage Organizations are invited to join the group.  However, it may also be of interest to those with ACA-Marketplace products, since that will be entirely an encounter-based risk adjustment program.  

Download the Excel Spreadsheet we are using for data collection:  click here to download first page  second page  third page


1 Behzad Mohazzebi, founder of DCA, now part of Altegra Health

Categories: Risk Adjustment

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.


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.