The Alexandria, Va.-based American Medical Group Association (AMGA), which represents the nation's largest-sized medical group organizations, has been at the forefront of healthcare provider associations expressing concerns over the proposed rule on accountable care organization (ACO) development released on March 31 by the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). That rule fulfills a requirement coming out of the Accountable Care Act, the federal healthcare reform legislation passed in March 2010 by the U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Obama.
While the leaders of AMGA lauded the creation of a proposed rule by CMS, they have expressed dismay at some of the specifics revealed in the proposed rule itself. In that context, Donald W. Fisher, Ph.D., AMGA's president and CEO, on June 6 submitted formal comments to Donald Berwick, M.D., CMS' administrator, expressing the association's concerns over some of the specific elements embedded in the proposed rule.
Among the areas that Fisher's letter covered were concerns over overall strategic planning, population health management and patient data-sharing requirements, the complexity of the application process, issues around potential beneficiary involvement in ACO governance, patient assignment, the size, scope, and particulars of the quality data reporting requirements, the risk models involved and risk adjustment, withholds and a self-executing mechanism for repayment of losses, marketing guidelines, the minimum savings rate, Stark law issues and antitrust requirements, and the possible participation of federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics in the program.
Chet Speed, AMGA's vice president, public policy at AMGA, spoke with HCI Editor-in-Chief Mark Hagland regarding the association's formal comments to CMS, and its overall concerns. Below are excerpts from that interview.
Healthcare Informatics: What was AMGA hoping to accomplish in sending its formal comments to Dr. Berwick?
Chet Speed: What we hoped to accomplish was to convince CMS that they need to make some fairly dramatic changes from the proposed rule to the final rule, in order for this voluntary program to be successful; because when the proposed rule was drafted, there were so many elements that, when put together, made the vast majority of our members say they wouldn't participate, if the framework wasn't changed.
One big area was the framework for risk-sharing; another has to do with problems around data-sharing, which is very important to our members, because they practice population health management right now, and it's very difficult, if not impossible, to manage a population of chronically ill patients, if you don't have full access to their data.
CHALLENGE: PATIENT DATA SHARING OPT-OUT
HCI: Can you explain the opt-out issue in a bit of detail?
Speed: What the opt-out provision in the proposed rule allows is that, if a patient goes to a primary care physician in an ACO, they're allowed to opt out from having their data shared with specialists outside the ACO, so that if a patient opts out, but goes to specialists within the ACO, the ACO will not have access to that patient's claims data. And so the ACO is left in a vulnerable position. If you as a patient say that my ACO can't see the data from my visit with my cardiologist, that's a huge, huge concern, particularly for our members, because they've been doing population health management for a long time.
HCI: Have you received any communications from CMS about resolving that issue?
Speed: After we sent a letter on May 11, Dr. Berwick and Secretary Sibelius said the next day that they would try to make changes to make the rule work. They didn't specifically mention the data-sharing/opt-out issue. What's interesting is that this new Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation [CMI] is headed by Richard Gilfillan, M.D., formerly CEO [from 2005 to 2009] of the Geisinger Health Plan [the health plan affiliate of the Danville, Pa.-based Geisinger Health System]. But CMI announced three new programs, about 10 days ago, and one of them was this pioneer ACO program, which is mainly aimed, in my opinion, at potential ACOs that are used to being capitated and used to risk-sharing; so you're looking at California- and Pacific Northwest-based organizations. But one of the interesting elements was that those ACOs would get the claims information from the beneficiaries. So within the shared-savings program, patients could opt out, but within the pioneer program, they'd give them the data.
So perhaps they'll change this element. And one of the reasons for the opt-out is the privacy issues related to your health information; and the opt-out provision was probably related to the broader concern over the privacy of personal health information.
HCI: On the risk side, you and your member organizations basically felt that the risk terms are simply too stringent in the proposed rule?