March 20, 2015 Carrie Lindgren Iowa Department of Human Services Hoover State Office Building 1305 East Walnut Street Des Moines, IA 50319 RE: Iowa High Quality Healthcare Initiative (Bid Number: MED-16-009) Dear Ms. Lindgren: On behalf of the 6,400 physician and student members of the Iowa Medical Society (IMS), thank you for this opportunity to submit additional comments on the Iowa High Quality Healthcare Initiative (Bid Number: MED-16-009), which seeks proposals to transition Iowa’s Medicaid program to a managed care system of payment and delivery. The core purpose of the Iowa Medical Society is to assure the highest quality health care in Iowa through our role as physician and patient advocate. With this purpose in mind, IMS urges the Department of Human Services (DHS) to consider the following recommendations. Procedural Transparency Transitioning nearly all of Iowa’s Medicaid populations to a system of healthcare payment and delivery that has a limited history in Iowa’s healthcare arena will necessitate clear communication with Iowa’s healthcare providers and other stakeholders in order to avoid sacrificing patient care due to confusion or misinformation. IMS supports DHS’s mechanism of issuing an updated FAQ document on a weekly basis. This FAQ document, and all other communications regarding the transition to managed care, must offer reliable information consistent with the details outlined in the program’s RFP. Because efforts to successfully transition Iowa’s Medicaid beneficiaries to the new system will be ongoing well past the program’s January 1, 2016 start date, DHS should continue to issue updated responses to stakeholder and public comments and questions even after that implementation date passes. MCO Alignment Among the core purposes of transitioning Iowa Medicaid to a managed care system is the need to minimize procedural and care fragmentation and establish greater efficiency in the program as a whole. Potentially contrary to that core purpose, the program will be administered by up to four distinct managed care organizations (MCOs), each with entirely distinct policies, payment arrangements, patient and Carrie Lindgren March 20, 2015 Page 2 provider incentive programs, and provider credentialing processes. A lack of uniformity among the MCOs could further splinter these key components of the healthcare system, counteracting the mission of managed care, creating additional administrative burdens for providers, and placing vulnerable Medicaid populations in danger of diminished access to high quality care. Consistent patient and provider performance and healthy behavior incentives; uniform cost and quality reporting; uniform prior authorization procedures; consistent electronic billing requirements; and a single uniform provider credentialing entity, process, and form will ease the administrative burden on providers and help patients navigate this new healthcare system. IMS recommends that, wherever possible, the state enforce procedural uniformity among the MCOs. Provider Credentialing Provider credentialing standards among MCOs is an area of particular need for uniformity. Requiring providers to navigate up to four distinct credentialing processes in order to contract with each of the MCOs places an unsustainable burden on providers and practices. IMS recommends that the state administratively credential providers currently credentialed under Medicaid with all MCOs contracted with the state. Any credentialing of new providers must utilize a single, standardized form and a single centralized credentialing body, ensuring uniformity across all MCOs. Telehealth Services Given Iowa’s large rural population, the use of emerging technologies, including telehealth, in healthcare delivery can play a vital role in expanding patient access and enhancing the patient experience of care. The transition to managed care offers an opportunity to drive further innovation in this area. IMS recommends that the state require MCOs to allow utilization of these technologies in a medically appropriate manner in order to expand access to services and extend the reach of provider networks, particularly into rural areas of the state. As part of facilitating these emerging technologies, the state must ensure MCOs provide coverage for services provided via telehealth at the same rates as in-person services. Capitation Rate Data Book The capitation rate data book narrative provides crucial information on the factors of each population’s history that will be taken into account when developing provider rates for the managed care system. Attachments with further information that will be used in the development of these rates have so far only been released to MCOs who submitted a Letter of Intent to Bid. In order to preserve procedural transparency and help Iowa’s provider community prepare for this significant transition, IMS recommends DHS release that information to the public and Medicaid providers as well. Carrie Lindgren March 20, 2015 Page 3 Utilization Management The RFP as written encourages MCOs to exercise a high degree of creativity in the development of utilization management procedures. The lack of clear guidelines governing the use of prior authorization or other utilization review mechanisms by all MCOs will naturally lead to added complexity for providers who contract with multiple MCOs. Further, the open-endedness of the RFP’s guidelines grants the MCOs too much freedom to develop policies that may not be in the best interest of patients or providers and are not sufficiently subject to oversight by the state. There is currently no mechanism to avoid incentivizing rationing care absent medical necessity simply for the sake of saving costs. IMS recommends the state establish clear, enforceable, and uniform criteria for prior authorization and utilization review procedures among all MCOs. Such criteria must be evidence-based and consider the medical necessity of treatment, and not be based solely upon arbitrary financial triggers. In support of those clear, uniform criteria, IMS recommends the state also establish an enforcement mechanism to address MCOs that fail to comply with their contractual obligations, including the development of a consistent, accessible provider appeals process. Program Savings In addition to improving patient outcomes, one of the stated goals of the managed care program is to decrease the cost of care through improved care coordination, which itself should contribute to improved quality outcomes. IMS supports these reciprocal goals of improved outcomes and increased coordination. As a means of extending those goals to improve the health of all Iowans, IMS recommends that a portion of any savings achieved through improved care coordination of the Medicaid program be shared with providers for the purpose of reinvesting in Iowa’s statewide healthcare workforce and infrastructure. However, again, IMS urges close state oversight to ensure MCOs are not arbitrarily denying coverage for medically necessary services strictly for financial reasons. Patient Access The Medicaid program serves many of Iowa’s most vulnerable populations. Ensuring that all patients have ready access to high quality care under the new managed care system will be of utmost importance to keeping these Iowans healthy and well. It is imperative that the state vigorously monitor and enforce the time and distance network adequacy standards detailed in the RFP to ensure that enrollees are able to access appropriate care as close to their own homes as possible. IMS recommends that DHS review MCO network adequacy compliance at least quarterly, and require that MCOs disseminate easily accessible provider panel directories to ensure that all patients are able to find and access the provider most suited to their medical needs. If DHS finds that an MCO’s provider network is no longer in compliance, there must be a mechanism for swift, defined corrective action, and the results of that correction must be clearly communicated with the plans’ enrollees and provider network. Carrie Lindgren March 20, 2015 Page 4 Provider Rates Provider rates are another critical component of ensuring adequate patient access to care. Medicaid providers have struggled for many years with unsustainably low rates that often fail to cover the actual costs of providing care. These inadequate rates lead to diminished patient access as providers must reduce the portion of their patient panel open to Medicaid patients. As the state pursues savings through the new managed care system, IMS reminds the state to be mindful that those savings not come at the expense of cutting already inadequate provider rates, which could further restrict patients’ access to care. IMS supports the vital payment floor criteria already outlined in the RFP to prevent MCOs from paying providers less than the current fee-for-service rates. However, those payment floors are inconsistently applied and time-limited. IMS recommends that the state institute a fee-for-service physician payment floor that extends for the duration of the MCO-provider contract. IMS again thanks the department for the opportunity to submit these comments on the transition to Medicaid managed care. We look forward to ongoing engagement and discussion throughout this process. Sincerely, Clare M. Kelly Executive Vice President
© Copyright 2024