The battle is on to cut budgets, survive the next few lean months and keep operations going. But what is missing is the solid strategy for organizations and individual providers to capitalize on the HITECH funds that will soon be available. Looking at some of the numbers, here is what it looks like for Providers:
|
Starting |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
Totals |
|
Year |
|||||||
|
2011 |
$18,000 |
$12,000 |
$8,000 |
$4,000 |
$2,000 |
$0 |
$44,000 |
|
2012 |
$18,000 |
$12,000 |
$8,000 |
$4,000 |
$2,000 |
$44,000 |
|
|
2013 |
$15,000 |
$12,000 |
$8,000 |
$4,000 |
$39,000 |
||
|
2014 |
$12,000 |
$8,000 |
$4,000 |
$24,000 |
|||
|
2015 |
$0 |
$0 |
$0 |
And this is the estimated funding available for hospitals:
|
Start |
2011 |
2012 |
2013 |
2014 |
2015 |
2016 |
Totals |
|
Date |
|||||||
|
2011 |
$1,256,733 |
$942,550 |
$628,367 |
$314,183 |
$0 |
$0 |
$3,143,844 |
|
2012 |
$1,256,733 |
$942,550 |
$628,367 |
$314,183 |
$0 |
$3,143,845 |
|
|
2013 |
$1,256,733 |
$942,550 |
$628,367 |
$314,183 |
$3,143,846 |
||
|
2014 |
$942,550 |
$628,367 |
$314,183 |
$1,887,114 |
|||
|
2015 |
$628,367 |
$314,183 |
$944,565 |
The hard facts are that you don’t just turn on an EHR project overnight. Besides securing resources and planning capital budget expenditures, you have to foster a sense of commitment from your clinical staff. Now is the time to layout that foundation. By the time the first payout year hits, most vendor resources and implementation specialists will be fully allocated and you’re stuck at the bottom of the “go-live” calendar (and the tail end of the funding allocations). So I am wondering what organizations are doing to get ready. Are they waiting for the next new EHR? Are they waiting to see if the government will mandate use? Are they hitting the snooze button because its just too much to deal with right now?
- Pete Rivera's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
Comments
Excellent points. I am also concerned with those that will put in a "shell" EHR without fully integrating with RX, LAB and other ancillary interfaces. This will be a sure fire way to frustrate providers and making them use both an electronic and paper system.
These are important questions you've raised. I think there's a potential for CIOs to feel pulled in two directions at once. Consultants and analysts seem to be telling them to hurry to get in vendors' queues so as not to miss out on incentive payments, but also that the implementation must be part of a larger strategic initiative that (supposedly) you have already defined. Good luck getting to meaningful use by 2010 if you haven't already set the strategy.
Pete,
Thanks for the overview. I think the timeframes set forth by the administration are very aggressive, and maybe a little unrealistic for providers who are interested in moving to an EMR for the first time (or after a long time). I'm thinking about resources. The resources to certify the vendor software, the capital resources to acquire systems, the resources to implement, the resources to integrate .... Are there enough resources to get all this done by 2010? A clinical system implementation can take two or more years in a typical hospital. Will facilities rush to 'jam in' an EMR without regard to user needs/buy-in, in order to qualify for Federal funds? Will vendors throw untrained resources into implementation to try to expedite the possible pipeline of sales?
Providers who have made investments in systems that are CCHIT certified (and likely to re-certify) will probably be in the best good position to reap the rewards of their ion and timing. Others may need more time . . .
That should read '..the best position to reap the rewards of their decision and timing'...