Financial Performance of Accountable Care Organizations: A 5-Year National Empirical Analysis.

GOALS: Of 513 accountable care organizations (ACOs) participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) in 2020, 67% generated a positive shared savings of approximately $2.3 billion. This research aimed to examine their financial performance trends and drivers over time. METHODS: The unit of analysis was the ACO in each year of the study period from 2016 to 2020. The dependent variable was the ACOs' total shared savings earned annually per beneficiary. The independent variables included ACO age, risk model, clinician staffing type, and provider type (hybrid, hospital-led, or physician-led). Covariates were the average risk score among beneficiaries, payer type, and calendar year. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) public use files (PUFs) and a commercial healthcare data aggregator were the data sources. RESULTS: ACOs' earned shared savings grew annually by 35%, while the proportions of ACOs with positive shared savings grew by 21%. For 1-year increase in ACO age, an additional $0.57 of shared savings per beneficiary was observed. ACOs with two-sided risk contracting were associated with an average marginal increase of $109 in shared savings per beneficiary compared to ACOs with one-sided risk contracting. Primary care physicians were associated with the greatest increase in earned shared savings per beneficiary. In contrast, nurse practitioners/physician assistants/clinical nurse specialists were associated with a reduction in earned shared savings. Under a one-sided risk model, hospital-led ACOs were associated with $18 higher average shared savings earning per beneficiary compared to hybrid ACOs, while physician-led ACOs were associated with lower average saved shared earnings per beneficiary at -$2 compared to hybrid ACOs. Provider-type results were not statistically significant at the 5% nominal level. No statistically significant differences were observed between provider types under a two-sided risk model. PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS: For all ACO provider types, building broader primary care provider networks was correlated with positive financial results. Future research should examine whether ACOs are conducting specific preventive screenings for cancer or monitoring conditions such as diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, obesity, mental disorders, and joint disorders. Such studies may answer health policy and strategy questions about the effects of incentives for improved ACO performance in serving a healthier population.

Association of ACO Shared Savings Success and Serious Illness Spending.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Accountable care organizations (ACOs) need confidence in their return on investment to implement changes in care delivery that prioritize seriously ill and high-cost Medicare beneficiaries. The objective of this study was to characterize spending on seriously ill beneficiaries in ACOs with Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) contracts and the association of spending with ACO shared savings. The population included Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries identified with serious illness (N = 2,109,573) using the Medicare Master Beneficiary Summary File for 100% of ACO-attributed beneficiaries linked to MSSP beneficiary files (2014-2016). Lower spending for seriously ill Medicare beneficiaries and risk-bearing contracts in ACOs were associated with achieving ACO shared savings in the MSSP. For most ACOs, the seriously ill contribute approximately half of the spending and constitute 8%-13% of the attributed population. Patient and geographic (county) factors explained $2,329 of the observed difference in per beneficiary per year spending on seriously ill beneficiaries between high- and low-spending ACOs. The remaining $12,536 may indicate variation as a result of potentially modifiable factors. Consequently, if 10% of attributed beneficiaries were seriously ill, an ACO that moved from the worst to the best quartile of per capita serious illness spending could realize a reduction of $1,200 per beneficiary per year for the ACO population overall. Though the prevalence and case mix of seriously ill populations vary across ACOs, this association suggests that care provided for seriously ill patients is an important consideration for ACOs to achieve MSSP shared savings.

Prospective or retrospective ACO attribution matters for seriously ill patients.

OBJECTIVES: Since 2019, the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) has allowed accountable care organizations (ACOs) to choose either retrospectively or prospectively attributed ACO populations. To understand how ACOs' choice of attribution method affects incentives for care among seriously ill Medicare beneficiaries, this study compares beneficiary characteristics and Medicare per capita expenditures between prospective and retrospective ACO populations. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective, cross-sectional analysis describes survival, patient characteristics, and Medicare spending for Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries identified with serious illness (n = 1,600,629) using 100% Medicare Master Beneficiary Summary and MSSP beneficiary files (2014-2016). METHODS: We used generalized linear models with ACO and year fixed effects to estimate the average within-ACO difference between potential retrospective and prospective ACO populations. RESULTS: Dying in the first 90 days of the performance year was associated with reduced odds of retrospective ACO attribution (odds ratio [OR], 0.24; 95% CI, 0.24-0.25) relative to beneficiaries surviving 270 days or longer. Similarly, hospice use was associated with reduced odds of retrospective assignment (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.79-0.80). Among ACOs that did not achieve shared savings, average per capita Medicare expenditures (after truncation) were $2459 (95% CI, $2192-$2725) higher for prospective vs retrospective ACO populations. The difference was $834 (95% CI, $402-$1266) greater per capita among ACOs that achieved shared savings. CONCLUSIONS: The difference in survival and spending for ACO populations captured by prospective vs retrospective attribution methods means that ACOs may need to employ different care management strategies to improve performance depending on their attribution method.

ACO Serious Illness Care: Survey And Case Studies Depict Current Challenges And Future Opportunities.

Care for people living with serious illness is suboptimal for many reasons, including underpayment for key services (such as care coordination and social supports) in fee-for-service reimbursement. Accountable care organizations (ACOs) have potential to improve serious illness care because of their widespread dissemination, strong financial incentives for care coordination in downside-risk models, and flexibility in shared savings spending. Through a national survey we found that 94 percent of ACOs at least partially identify their seriously ill beneficiaries, yet only 8-21 percent have widely implemented serious illness initiatives such as advance care planning or home-based palliative care. We selected six diverse ACOs with successful programs for case studies and interviewed fifty-three leaders and front-line personnel. Cross-cutting themes include the need for up-front investment beyond shared savings to build serious illness infrastructure and workforce; supporting the business case for organizational buy-in; how ACO contract specifications affect savings for serious illness populations; and using data and health information technology to manage populations. We discuss the implications of the recent Medicare ACO regulatory overhaul and other policies related to serious illness quality measures, risk adjustment, attribution methods, supporting rural ACOs, and enhancing timely data access.