It’s been a difficult year for the hospital workforce, both here and around the world, as the effects of the pandemic, the economy, and the legacy of lean staffing models have combined to drive up vacancy rates and threaten the sustainability of hospital operations.
Everywhere we’ve gone in the past six months, workforce issues have overshadowed every other topic: how can hospitals attract and retain staff given the environment, how can they stabilize finances in the face of 15-20 percent increases in labor costs, how can they safeguard patient care with intense turbulence in the clinical workforce?
This week we heard yet another wrinkle to this problem, one that had not occurred to us but in retrospect is obvious. A system CFO was lamenting the fact that even with big salary increases, the hospital workforce remains unstable. “It’s like we’re not even getting credit for raising base salary 15 percent across the board and giving big retention bonuses.”
As to why—it’s a timing issue. Her system, like many, delivered pay raises back in the late winter and early spring, when staff were still recovering from the Omicron surge and the urgency of reducing reliance on expensive agency labor became clear. But economy-wide inflation had only then begun to spike, and has since continued to be stuck at high levels.
Staff don’t view the earlier salary increases as a response to inflation, but as predating it—and they’re asking for still more, to offset rising prices for food, transportation and housing. “I wish we’d waited to give the pay bump,” the CFO told us. “Even though our wage increases have outpaced inflation this year, the timing of events didn’t help us at all.”
With the hospitals operating near capacity, and a severe flu season impacting both patient volumes and staff availability, her sense is that the system is back to square one on staffing—and more difficult financial decisions lie ahead.
The latest piece in the New York Times ’“Profits over Patients” series focuses on the staffing policies of Ascension, one of the nation’s largest nonprofit health systems, drawing a straight line from its cost-cutting practices over the last decade to its current staffing woes. Like previous articles in the series, the piece hones in on Ascension’s profit-seeking motives, pairing pre-pandemic accounts of Ascension executives boasting about savings from slashed labor costs with story after story of its frontline clinicians struggling to provide adequate patient care once COVID hit.
In responses included in the article, an Ascension spokesperson rejected the idea that the system’s workforce policies were responsible for its current staffing crisis, claiming that Ascension has maintained better staff-to-patient ratios than many of its peers.
The Gist: Yet again, the New York Times is shining a harsh light on a health system that has been engaged in management practices common across the industry.
While the piece omits some relevant information, such as the recent spike in labor costs, it’s useful to point out that many hospitals were so thinly staffed prior to COVID that they had virtually no slack in their labor pools, hindering their response to the crisis.
In our experience, the reasons for this have less to do with lining executives’ pockets, and more to do with the realities of dealing with a worsening payer mix and rising input costs. While future hospital workforce strategy is going to have to focus on reducing dependency on nurses—especially in the inpatient setting—any effort to that end must augment nurses with team-based care models and technology solutions, rather than pushing further on already-tight nurse-to-patient ratios.
Ann Arbor, MI-based University of Michigan Health (UM Health), part of Michigan Medicine, announced last Thursday that it will acquire Lansing, MI-based Sparrow Health System, forming a $7B health system with over 200 care sites across southeast and mid-Michigan. The acquisition will connect Sparrow’s six hospitals to UM Health’s flagship academic medical center (AMC) and sole hospital, while extending the reach of Sparrow’s 70K-member health plan, in which UM Health had previously invested. Pending regulatory approvals, the deal is expected to be completed in the first half of 2023.
The Gist: Given Sparrow’s recent financial struggles—the system announced hundreds of layoffs in September after posting a $90M loss in the first half of 2022—this was a sensible pickup for UM Health, extending its reachinto lower-cost community healthcare adjacent to its current market. Other AMCs have made similar moves in recent years, as the differentiated services of an AMC and the local patient reach of community hospitals make for a strong pairing—and this deal will go far toward advancing UM as a truly regional system.
But even if UM Health got a good deal on the acquisition, the current status of Sparrow’s infrastructure and workforce will require considerable investment (UM Health has already committed $800M in the deal’s announcement).
Here are 10 health systems with strong operational metrics and solid financial positions, according to reports from credit rating agencies Fitch Ratings and Moody’s Investors Service.
1. Allina Health System has an “AA-” rating and a stable outlook with Fitch. The Minneapolis-based system is the inpatient market share leader in a highly competitive market and has a strong relation with payers in the market, Fitch said.
2. Bryan Health has an “AA-” rating and stable outlook with Fitch. The Lincoln, Neb.-based health system has a leading and growing market position, very strong cash flow and a strong financial position, Fitch said. The credit rating agency said Bryan Health has been resilient through the COVID-19 pandemic and is well-positioned to accommodate additional strategic investments.
3. CaroMont Health has an “AA-” rating and stable outlook with Fitch. The Gastonia, N.C.-based system has a leading market position in a growing services area and a track record of good cash flow, Fitch said.
4. Christiana Care Health System has an “Aa2” rating and stable outlook with Moody’s. The Newark, Del.-based system has a unique position as the state’s largest teaching hospital and extensive clinical depth that affords strong regional and statewide market capture, and is expected to return to near pre-pandemic level margins over the medium-term, Moody’s said.
5. Intermountain Healthcare has an “Aa1” rating and stable outlook with Moody’s. The Salt Lake City-based health system has exceptional credit quality, which will continue to benefit from its leading market position in Utah, Moody’s said. The credit rating agency said the health system’s merger with Broomfield, Colo.-based SCL Health will also give Intermountain greater geographic reach.
6. OhioHealth has a “AA+” rating and stable outlook with Fitch. The Columbus, Ohio-based system has an exceptionally strong credit profile, broad regional operating platform and leading market position in both its competitive two-county primary service area and broader 47-county total service area, Fitch said.
7. Parkview Health has an “Aa3” rating and stable outlook with Moody’s. The Fort Wayne, Ind.-based system has a leading market position with expansive tertiary and quaternary clinical services in northeastern Indiana and northwestern Ohio, Moody’s said.
8. Rady Children’s Hospital has an “AA” rating and stable outlook with Fitch. The San Diego based hospital has a very strong balance sheet position and operating performance, and is also a leading provider of pediatric services in the growing city and tri-county service area, Fitch said.
9. ThedaCare has an “AA-” rating and stable outlook with Fitch. The Neenah, Wis.-based system has a focused strategy, strong financial profile and robust market share, Fitch said.
10. Trinity Health has an “AA-” rating and stable outlook with Fitch. The Livonia, Mich.-based system’s large size and market presence in multiple states disperses and the long-term ratings incorporate the expectation that Trinity will return to sustained stronger operating EBITDA margins.
Livonia, Mich.-based Trinity Health is experimenting with paying its employees by the day in a bid to recruit and retain staff, according to a Dec. 13Grand Rapids Business Journal report.
Trinity, which will initially roll out the initiative at Trinity Health Grand Rapids, Trinity Health Medical Group and several locations outside Michigan, is partnering with financial services company DailyPay to provide earned wage access (EWA) to its employees, the report said.
Through EWA, employees can access their pay on a daily basis, allowing them to pay bills, for example, without having to wait for the more traditional payday and therefore avoiding the possibility of overdue fees. Employees would pay $2.99 to gain such early access.
The pay model, which will be available for all pay scales across Trinity except for the highest earners, was piloted across select Trinity locations about four months ago. It will eventually be rolled out to all Trinity locations over the next few years, with all West Michigan employees signed up by 2025, the report said.
Recent reports have raised concerns about the financial stability of hospitals amidst disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and the looming prospect of an economic recession.
Large amounts of government relief helped prop up hospital margins in 2020 and 2021. However, industry reports suggest that the outlook for hospitals and health systems has deteriorated in 2022 due to the ongoing effects of the pandemic (such as labor shortages), decreases in government relief, and broader economic trends that have led to rising prices and investment losses. According to at least one account, 2022 may be the worst financial year for hospitals in decades. These challenges could force hospitals to take steps to increase efficiency but may also result in price increases or cost-cutting measures that impair patient access or care quality. Against this backdrop,industrystakeholders have asked Congress to provide additional fiscal relief to hospitals and to stop scheduled Medicare payment reductions.
To provide context for these policy discussions, we evaluated the financial performance of the three largest for-profit health systems in the country—HCA Healthcare (“HCA”), Tenet Healthcare Corporation (“Tenet”), and Community Health Systems (CHS)—which collectively accounted for about 8 percent of community hospital beds in the US in 2020.1 These three systems are publicly traded, meaning that we were able to acquire timely financial data about these systems through their reports to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), as well as data on their stock prices (see Methods for additional details).
Operating margins among all three large health systems were positive and exceeded pre-pandemic levels for the majority of the pandemic, including most recently in the third quarter of 2022.
Operating margins reflect the profit margins earned on patient care and other operations of a given health system—such as from gift shops, parking, and cafeterias—and incorporate government COVID-19 relief funds.2 Our definition of operating margins excludes income taxes and nonrecurring revenues and expenses, such as from the sale of facilities. HCA and Tenet had positive operating margins throughout the pandemic, and CHS had positive operating margins in all but two quarters of the pandemic (with one of those quarters being at the very beginning of the pandemic). HCA has had operating margins of at least 10 percent during the majority of the pandemic (9 out of 11 quarters). In other words, HCA’s revenue from patient care and other operations exceeded operating expenses by at least 10 percent for most of the pandemic. Tenet has had operating margins of at least 5 percent for the majority of the pandemic (9 out of 11 quarters), while CHS’s operating margins have been lower (less than 5% for 9 out of 11 quarters). CHS had lower margins than the other systems before the pandemic as well.
For all three systems, operating margins have exceeded pre-pandemic (2019) levels for most of the pandemic (9 out of 11 quarters), including the last quarter of our analysis (the third quarter of 2022), despite recent decreases in operating margins. HCA and Tenet dipped below their 2019 operating margins during two quarters of 2020, and CHS fell below their 2019 operating margins during the first quarter of 2020 and the second quarter of 2022 before increasing again. As of the third quarter of 2022, operating margins were 11.4 percent for HCA, 8.4 percent for Tenet, and 1.2 percent for CHS.
Stock prices increased and then decreased during the pandemic; HCA and Tenet stock prices have increased overall since January 2020 while CHS stock prices have decreased.
Stock prices generally reflect investors’ evaluation of the future earnings potential of a given company. Stock prices increased dramatically during the first 1.5 to 2 years of the pandemic. At their heights, HCA stock prices had increased by 87.9 percent, Tenet stock prices had increased by 153.8 percent, and CHS stock prices had increased by 383.1 percent relative to January 2020.
Stock prices have also decreased substantially in 2022—in line with broader economic trends—and especially so among Tenet and CHS. As of November 8, 2022, HCA and Tenet stock prices have increased overall relative to January 2020 (by 44.6% and 12.6%, respectively).3 CHS stock prices have decreased by 11.5% since January 2020, though CHS has also experienced longstanding financial challenges thatpredate the pandemic. For purposes of comparison, HCA stock prices increased by a much greater amount than the S&P 500 during this period (44.6% versus 16.8%), while the S&P 500 slightly outperformed Tenet stock (16.8% versus 12.6%) and significantly outperformed CHS stock (16.8% versus -11.5%).
As of December 2, 2022, the majority of market analysts followed by MarketWatch were bullish on HCA and Tenet stock (with 18 buy, 3 overweight, and 5 hold recommendations for HCA stock and 14 buy, 2 overweight, and 4 hold recommendations for Tenet stock) and neutral about CHS stock (with 8 hold and 4 buy recommendations); none of the analysts rated these stocks as “sell” or “underweight.”
Discussion
Industry reports have suggested that hospitals had high margins in 2020 and 2021 but have faced significant financial challenges in 2022. Our analysis adds nuance to this discussion. So far this year, operating margins among the three largest for-profit health systems in the country have met or exceeded pre-pandemic levels. HCA and Tenet in particular have had high operating margins. CHS had negative operating margins in the second quarter of 2022, and its stock prices decreased overall from January 2020 to November 2022, but its financial challenges precede the pandemic. While some hospitals are struggling in the current environment—with high inflation and the ongoing burdens posed by COVID-19, flu, and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)—our results indicate that the largest for-profit systems have had operating margins that exceed pre-pandemic levels.
Charlotte, NC-based Atrium Health and Downers Grove, IL- and Milwaukee, WI-based Advocate Aurora Health have formally combined to become the nation’s fifth-largest nonprofit health system. Taking the name Advocate Health, the $27B system will control 67 hospitals across six states in the Midwest and Southeast. The merger, announced in May of this year, unites the systems on even footing, with equal representation on a new board of directors, and a co-CEO arrangement for the first 18 months. The Atrium, Advocate, and Aurora brands will continue to be used in their respective local markets.
The Gist: Structuring Advocate Health as a joint operating agreement, and creating a new superstructure atop the two legacy systems, should allow the combined entity more flexibility in local decision-making, while still potentially generating cost savings from back-office efficiencies.
While we expect these kinds of mega-mergers between large regional systems to continue, it remains to be seen whether the newly combined systems can successfully create value by building larger “platforms” of care to win consumer loyalty, deploying digital capabilities, attracting talent, and becoming more desirable partners for nontraditional players.
On Tuesday, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced a proposed rule that aims to streamline the prior authorization process by requiring certain payers to establish a method for electronic transmission, shorten response time for physician requests, and provide a reason for denials. This rule replaces one proposed in December 2020 that was never finalized.
In addition to applying to Medicaid and Affordable Care Act exchange plans, the new rule would also apply to Medicare Advantage plans, which the previous rule did not. If finalized, it will take effect in 2026.
The Gist: Managing prior authorization requests is one of providers’ greatest sources of frustration, with over 80 percent of physicians rating it as “very or extremely burdensome” in a recent Medical Group Management Association survey.
Not only would patients would benefit from faster turnarounds, but even major payers agree that the status quo is suboptimal, and payer advocacy organization AHIP has signaled support for transmitting prior authorization requests electronically.
The challenge for regulators will be to strike a balance that satisfies the competing interests of payers and providers—turnaround time is likely to be a sticking point—but the one good thing about a system that no one likes is that there’s plenty of room for improvement.
Durham, N.C.-based Duke University Health System was downgraded to an “AA-” credit rating amid concern over its planned integration of the Private Diagnostic Clinic, a for-profit medical group with over 1,800 physicians, Fitch Ratings said Dec. 8.
The rating, declining from “AA,” applies both to specific bonds the group holds and to its overall Issuer Default Rating. In addition to the integration of the PDC, Fitch also cited concern over macro issues such as labor and inflationary pressures, which have helped to drag down operating results for the health group.
“While the transition of the PDC into the Duke Health Integrated Practice will only be effective in July 2023, the uncertainty of the proposed change had already caused some disruption to PDC’s ability to recruit physicians and may have had a negative impact on volumes,” Fitch said.
But while such integration will likely lead to an “extended period of lower operating results,” Duke Health is expected to gradually return to much stronger performance given its robust fundamentals, the ratings group added. Historically, the hospital system had pre-pandemic operating EBITDA margins of over 10 percent, compared with a fiscal year 2022 figure of just 2.1 percent.
The health system, which reported $4.5 billion of total operating revenues in 2022, said its CEO, A. Eugene Washington, MD, will step down in June 2023.
Sustained high labor expenses and inflationary pressures will continue to affect the healthcare industry in 2023, keeping the outlook for nonprofit hospital systems negative, Moody’s said in a Dec. 7 report.
In addition to such pressures, persistent COVID-19 surges, supply chain disruptions and the need for continued cybersecurity investments will also increase expenses, the report said. And while operating revenue is expected to modestly improve next year, the ending of federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act funding, net Medicare cuts and the end of the public health emergency will negatively affect hospital revenues, Moody’s said.
“This level of operating cash flow production will likely prove insufficient over the long term to enable adequate reinvestment in facilities, maintain investment in programs, or support organizational growth — key considerations that drive our negative outlook,” said Brad Spielman, vice president, senior credit officer for Moody’s.
Some of the less well-funded healthcare systems could even face breaches of covenant amid such a challenging backdrop, Moody’s warned. Such covenants typically refer to issues like days of cash on hand or minimum coverage of debt.
Management in such challenged systems have taken measures to mitigate the danger of such breaches, the report said. These include liquidating investments and drawing on lines of credit as well as refinancing debt, an unfavorable option in the current economic situation.
“The present interest-rate environment, however, currently makes such a move relatively costly,” the report noted.
The Moody’s report follows quickly on the heels of a similar one from Fitch Ratings Dec. 1 that highlighted the “formidable challenge” of high labor expenses and inflationary pressures facing the industry.
HENRY KOTULA 