Administrator Perspectives on the Impact of COVID-19 on the Administration of the Patient Driven Payment Model in U.S. Skilled Nursing Facilities.

The Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM) was implemented in U.S. skilled nursing facilities (SNFs) in October 2019, shortly before COVID-19. This new payment model aimed to reimburse SNFs for patients' nursing needs rather than the previous model which reimbursed based on the volume of therapy received. Through 156 semi-structured interviews with 40 SNF administrators from July 2020 to December 2021, this qualitative study clarifies the impact of COVID-19 on the administration of PDPM at SNFs. Interview data were analyzed using modified grounded theory and thematic analysis. Our findings show that SNF administrators shifted focus from management of the PDPM to COVID-19-related delivery of care adaptations, staff shortfalls, and decreased admissions. As the pandemic abated, administrators re-focused their attention to PDPM. Policy makers should consider the continued impacts of the pandemic at SNFs, particularly on delivery of care, admissions, and staffing, on the ability of SNF administrators to administer a new payment model.

Implementing the Patient Driven Payment Model-Perspectives from Skilled Nursing Facility Administrators.

Objective: To explore skilled nursing facility (SNF) administrator retrospective perspectives on their preparation for and initial implementation of the Patient Driven Payment Model (PDPM), the new Medicare payment system for SNFs enacted on October 1, 2019. Methods: 156 interviews at 40 SNFs in eight U.S. markets were conducted and qualitatively analyzed. Results: Administrators retrospectively expressed feeling well-prepared for the PDPM implementation. Advance preparation focused on training staff regarding patient assessment and documentation. Administrators also recognized increased incentives for admitting patients with more complex needs and prepared accordingly. Therapy staffing reductions were concentrated in contract employees, while SNF-employed therapists were less affected. Conclusion: Policy makers and industry experts should consider the long-term impact of changing financial incentives through payment reform, and ensure that reimbursement best reflects the cost of providing services while prioritizing high-quality care. PDPM's effect on care quality and access to care should continue to be monitored.

How Medicare Advantage plans use data for supplemental benefits decision-making.

OBJECTIVES: Health care payers are increasingly experimenting with interventions to address social risk factors. With enactment of the 2018 Bipartisan Budget Act, Medicare Advantage (MA) plans have new opportunities to offer supplemental benefits that are not "primarily health-related." This article presents findings from interviews conducted with executives from MA plans regarding plan decision-making processes related to new social risk factor benefits. STUDY DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interviews with MA plan leadership. METHODS: A total of 63 plan representatives from 29 unique MA plans were interviewed about the rationale for social risk-related interventions and how data are used to inform benefits expansion decisions. This paper combines qualitative interview data from 2 separate studies with similar target groups and interview guides. Interview transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to examine underlying themes. RESULTS: Three main themes emerged: (1) Plans use multiple data sources to determine how to target benefits; (2) evidence gaps hinder decision-making to expand or offer new supplemental benefits; and (3) in the absence of sufficient evidence, some plans have their own research and quality improvement processes to maximize effectiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Findings provide insights about opportunities and challenges that MA plans face in making decisions related to supplemental benefits designed to address members' social risk factors. Barriers include collecting, generating, and analyzing data critical to informing investments. Results highlight the need to ensure interoperability of new and existing data sources, foster shared learning opportunities, and narrow evidence gaps about specific social care interventions to inform the design and implementation of effective supplemental benefits.

Health Care and Community-Based Organization Partnerships to Address Social Needs: Medicare Advantage Plan Representatives' Perspectives.

Payers and providers are increasingly being held accountable for the overall health of their populations and may choose to partner with community-based organizations (CBOs) to address members' social needs. This study examines the opportunities and challenges that health care entities, using Medicare Advantage (MA) plans as an example, encounter when forming these relationships. We conducted interviews with 38 representatives of 17 MA organizations, representing 65% of MA members nationally. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to understand overarching themes. Participants described qualities they look for in community partners, including an alignment of organizational missions and evidence of improved outcomes. Participants also described challenges in working with CBOs, including needing an evidence base for CBOs' services and an absence of organizational infrastructure. Results demonstrate areas where CBOs may target their efforts to appeal to payers and providers and reveal a need for health care entities to assist CBOs in acquiring skills necessary for partnerships.

Medicare Advantage plan representatives' perspectives on Pay for Success.

OBJECTIVES: To understand how Medicare Advantage (MA) plan representatives perceive the alternative financing model Pay for Success (PFS) and its potential to address members' social risk factors. STUDY DESIGN: Semistructured qualitative interviews designed to understand plan representatives' priorities regarding addressing nonmedical needs of their members, awareness of and experiences with PFS, and thoughts about implementing PFS as a method to address members' nonmedical needs. METHODS: Interviews with 38 upper-management representatives from 17 MA plans, which represent 65% of MA beneficiaries nationally, were conducted from July to November 2018. Plans varied in geographic coverage, star rating, and enrollment. Transcripts were qualitatively analyzed to understand overarching themes and patterns of responses. RESULTS: MA plan representatives were largely unfamiliar with PFS and were interested in learning more about how it could address members' social needs. When probed about specific requirements of PFS, responses varied: Some reported willingness to share data with project partners and be reviewed by independent evaluators; others expressed their preference to keep data and performance analysis internal to the organization. Although most representatives prioritized innovation, some were more risk averse and preferred to use traditional methods to deliver new services. CONCLUSIONS: MA plan representatives were unfamiliar with PFS, but most expressed interest in it as an alternative model for funding initiatives to address members' social needs. Education of MA representatives about PFS as an alternative payment model for innovative programming is warranted. However, further guidance from CMS is needed to assuage the concerns raised by these representatives.

Perspectives of Medicare Advantage Plan Representatives on Addressing Social Determinants of Health in Response to the CHRONIC Care Act.

Importance: The passage of the Creating High-Quality Results and Outcomes Necessary to Improve Chronic (CHRONIC) Care Act in 2018 allows Medicare Advantage (MA) plans, which enroll more than one-third of Medicare beneficiaries, greater flexibility to address members' social determinants of health (SDOH) through supplemental benefits. Objective: To understand MA plan representatives' perspectives on the importance of addressing members' SDOH and their responses to the passage of the CHRONIC Care Act. Design, Setting, and Participants: This semistructured qualitative interview study conducted via telephone from July 6, 2018, to November 7, 2018, included participants from 17 MA plans that collectively enrolled more than 13 million MA members (>65% of the total MA market). Data analysis was conducted from September 18, 2018, to December 13, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Audio-recorded interviews were transcribed and then analyzed using a modified content analysis approach to identify major themes and subthemes. Results: Thirty-eight participants representing 17 MA plans varying in region, star rating, and size were interviewed. Analysis of interviews revealed 3 key themes. The first theme was that participants increasingly recognize the value of addressing members' SDOH. The second theme was that participants had different perspectives on whether MA plans should directly address SDOH and how to do so. While some reported that they were taking advantage of the increased flexibility provided by the CHRONIC Care Act to design new benefits or partner with community-based organizations, others indicated that it was outside of their purview to directly address members' SDOH. The third theme was that participants described complex decision-making around how to provide supplemental benefits, including a need for evidence, return on investment, strong community partnerships, and guidance from the US Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that the changes in MA plans' benefit packages in response to the CHRONIC Care Act and their efforts to address SDOH will vary. Therefore, it is likely that MA enrollees will be differentially affected by the implementation of the CHRONIC Care Act.