Category Archives: Hospital

Are Employers Ready to Engage the Health Industry Head On?

Posted on by • Posted in Affordability, Community Benefit, Direct Contracting, Employer-Based Health Insurance, Employer-Sponsored Commercial Health Insurance, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Out of Pocket Expenses, Tax Exempt Status, Uncompensated Care, Underinsured, Uninsured • Leave a comment
Are Employers Ready to Engage the Health Industry Head On?

Last week, Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF) released its Annual Employer Health Benefits Survey which included a surprise:

The average annual single premium and the average annual family premium each increased by 7% over the last year.

In 2022 as post-pandemic recovery was the focus for employers, the average single premium grew by 2% and the average family premium increased by 1%. Health costs and insurance premiums were not top of mind concerns to employers struggling to keep employees paid and door open. But 7% is an eye-opener.

The rest of the findings in the 2023 KFF Report are unremarkable: they reflect employer willingness to maintain benefits at/near pre-pandemic levels and slight inclination toward expanded benefits beyond mental health:

  • “The average annual premium for employer-sponsored health insurance in 2023 is $8,435 for single coverage and $23,968 for family coverage. Comparatively, there was an increase of 5.2% in workers’ wages and inflation of 5.8%2. The average single and family premiums increased faster this year than last year (2% vs. 7% and 1% vs. 7% respectively).
  • Over the last five years, the average premium for family coverage has increased by 22% compared to an 27% increase in workers’ wages and 21% inflation.
  • For single coverage, the average premium for covered workers is higher at small firms than at large firms ($8,722 vs. $8,321). The average premiums for family coverage are comparable for covered workers in small and large firms ($23,621 vs. $24,104) …
  • Most covered workers contribute to the cost of the premium for their coverage. On average, covered workers contribute 17% of the premium for single coverage and 29% of the premium for family coverage, similar to the percentages contributed in 2022…
  • 90% of workers with single coverage have a general annual deductible that must be met before most services are paid for by the plan, similar to the percentage last year (88%).
  • The average deductible amount in 2023 for workers with single coverage and a general annual deductible is $1,735, similar to last year…
  • In 2023, among workers with single coverage, 47% of workers at small firms and 25% of workers at large firms have a general annual deductible of $2,000 or more. Over the last five years, the percentage of covered workers with a general annual deductible of $2,000 or more for single coverage has grown from 26% to 31%.
  • While nearly all large firms (firms with 200 or more workers) offer health benefits to at least some workers, small firms (3-199 workers) are significantly less likely to do so. In 2023, 53% of all firms offered some health benefits, similar to the percentage last year (51%).”

My take:

These findings show that employers are not prone to drastic changes in health benefits for their employees despite recognition it is expensive and unaffordable to small companies and for many of their own employees.  But many large self-insured employers (except those in government, education and healthcare) are poised to make significant changes next year. They recognize themselves as the primary source of profits enjoyed by insurers, hospitals, physicians, drug companies and others.  

They’re developing multi-year at risk direct contracts, value-based purchasing arrangements, primary care gatekeeping, narrow networks, restricted formularies, alternative care models and more to that leverage their clout. They’re going on offense.

The KFF Benefits Survey is a snapshot of where employer benefits are today, but it’s likely not the same next year. It appears employers are ready to engage the health industry head on.

PS Last week, the feud between Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee Chair Bernie Sanders and Not-for-Profit Health Systems heated up. On Oct. 10, he released a Majority Staff Report that said NFP hospitals do not deserve their tax exemptions as they spend “paltry amounts” on charity care. “Hospitals have gladly accepted the tax benefits that come with nonprofit status but have failed to provide the required community benefits. Non-profit hospitals spent only an estimated $16 billion on charity care in 2020, or about 57% of the value of their tax breaks in the same year.”

The same day, the American Hospital Association (AHA) released its analysis of hospital Schedule H filings concluding that tax-exempt hospitals provided $130 billion in community benefits in 2020 and called the HELP report “just plain wrong”.

In response to the AHA report, Sanders noted that AHA had not included CEO Compensation for NFPs in its analysis though featured prominently in his Majority Staff Report: “In 2021, the most recent year for which data is available for all of the 16 hospital chains, those companies’ CEOs averaged more than $8 million in compensation and collectively made over $140 million…

The disparities between the paltry amounts these hospitals are spending on charity care and their massive revenues and excessive executive compensation demonstrates that they are failing to live up to their end of the non-profit bargain.”

This tit for tat between the Committee Chairman and AHA is notable for 2 reasons: it draws attention to the Schedule H information goldmine about how not-for-profit hospitals operate since they’re now required to attach their S-10 Medicare cost report worksheets. Quantifying charity care in Exhibit 3B (for which there’s no expectation of payment) and the myriad of claimed community benefits including bad debt in Schedule 3C will likely intensify scrutiny of NFPs even more.  Second, it draws attention to Executive Pay in hospitals: in this regard the Majority Staff Report commentary on CEO pay is misleading: by combining Column B (wages, bonuses) with Columns C (Deferred compensation) and D (non-taxable benefits), the total is significantly higher than one-year’s actual take-home pay for the CEOs. But it makes headlines!

If not-for-profit systems wish to lead transformational change in U.S. healthcare, not-for-profit system boards and their trade associations must be prepared to address the storm clouds gathering above. The skirmish between the Senate HELP Chair and AHA mirrors an increasingly skeptical public who, with Congress, believe the system is being gamed.

PeaceHealth files layoff notice ahead of Oregon hospital closure

Posted on by • Posted in Employee Layoffs, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Closure, Hospital Industry • Leave a comment
https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/peacehealth-files-layoff-notice-ahead-of-oregon-hospital-closure.html?origin=CFOE&utm_source=CFOE&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&oly_enc_id=2893H2397267F7G

Vancouver, Wash.-based PeaceHealth has notified state officials about layoffs associated with the closure of its Sacred Heart Medical Center University District hospital campus in Eugene, Ore.

“PeaceHealth will begin consolidating services at the [Sacred Heart Medical Center] RiverBend campus in Springfield, [Ore.], and will experience a reduction in our workforce through this process that will occur throughout the next few months,” Justin Thomas, senior director for human resources in the PeaceHealth Oregon network, wrote in a WARN notice filed Oct. 19 with the Oregon Higher Education Coordinating Commission’s Office of Community Colleges and Workforce Development. “We expect some aspects of that campus to be completely closed by Feb. 1, 2024.”

PeaceHealth told state officials there are currently 463 caregivers on the University District hospital campus, and the health system is looking to have opportunities for roughly 325 caregivers, displacing 129. 

“However, some of those individuals may not choose to come work at the RiverBend hospital. We do have a severance policy in place for those that will be affected by this layoff,” Mr. Thomas said.

PeaceHealth also told state officials in the notice that it notified staff in August of these changes and recently received notice from Oregon officials that it can close the first department, the emergency department, on Dec. 1. The health system noted that most of these caregivers will have positions available at the RiverBend hospital. 

“However, per the request from the [Service Employees International Union], we are considering this a lay off for those caregivers and not a reorganization, so I will be providing them notice, knowing that a large portion will still be coming to the RiverBend hospital,” said Mr. Thomas.

In August, PeaceHealth shared plans to close the “underutilized” University District campus and shift services to the RiverBend campus. The plans also include relocating an urgent care to a medical office building on the University District campus to maintain access to care for those who live in the area.

As HLTH 2023 Convenes, Three Themes speak Volumes about Where U.S, Healthcare is Headed

Posted on by • Posted in Access to Capital, Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Inflation, Price Transparency, Private Equity, Public Opinion, Public Perception, Systemness, Value-Based Healthcare • Leave a comment
As HLTH 2023 Convenes, Three Themes speak Volumes about Where U.S, Healthcare is Headed

In Las Vegas this week, 10,000 healthcare entrepreneurs, investors, purchasers and industry onlookers are gathered to celebrate the business of U.S. healthcare. It follows the inaugural Nashville Healthcare Sessions last month that drew a crowd to Music City touting “the premier healthcare conference set in the most relevant, exciting, and welcoming city in the south.“

Besides their locations and exceptional marketing, three notable themes are prominent that speak volumes about where this industry is:

1- The focus is systemness—integrated, connected, data-driven and scalable. Traditional divides that separate health and social services, hospitals and insurers, biotherapeutics and companion diagnostics are obsolete and access to private capital and swift execution vitals. And embedded in systemness is an expanded role of human resources that create workforces that are right-sized, diverse, AI-enabled and productive.
2-Technologies focused on end user value are gaining traction. Solutions that enable better, quicker, more accurate and affordable transactions with consumers are prominent. While traditional providers—hospitals, physicians, long-term care providers and public health programs– see HIT and AI investments as ways to make their work more efficient and satisfying, disruptors are focused on the untapped consumer market that’s dissatisfied with the status quo.
3-Access to smart capital is key. The venture capital and private equity markets in healthcare services are weathering corrections that have deflated returns and forced many to pullback or exit. The possibility of regulatory reforms involving greater transparency, carried interest restrictions and minimum hold periods means stronger funds with experienced operating partners and stable LP funding will be advantaged. In Vegas, they’ll be working the hallways to find tuck-ins for their platform bets and courting not-for-profit hospitals needing non-operating income to fund their growth and diversification efforts.

Those attending recognize the U.S. health industry faces unprecedented challenges:

  • Growing employer activism against lack of price transparency and inexplicably high unit costs for hospital care, prescription drugs, insurer overhead and mal-effect of consolidation in each sector.
  • Medical inflation that’s persistent but disproportionately absorbed by fewer and fewer employers and individuals who lack bargaining power.
  • Value-based purchasing activities that have failed to achieve desired cost containment goals.
  • Public dissatisfaction with the “system” and growing receptivity to alternatives.
  • Growing hostility in media coverage about hospitals, especially large not-for-profit hospitals, deemed to be profitable and wasteful.
  • Increased tension between providers (hospitals, medical groups) and insurers.
  • Increased regulation in states and court rulings that change (or have the potential to alter) how care is defined, provided, funded and legally authorized.

HLTH and Session attendees recognize the uncertainties of the political, economic and global markets in which healthcare operates. Israel will be front of mind to all as the fast-paced HLTH proceedings continue this week. 

The root causes of the system’s poor performance are understood and considered: they’re daunting. But that does not impede the willingness of private investors to make bets presuming the future of the U.S. healthcare is not a repeat of its past.

Contrary to pop culture, what happens in Vegas this week will not stay in Vegas: that’s the point. The health system is not working well. While some HLTH and Sessions attendees are no doubt focused on incremental innovations to improve the performance of their legacy organizations, others are looking beyond. And, if industries akin to healthcare like financial services and higher education are instructive, the latter are better prepared to respond than the former.

PS: Nearly 50 years to the day after the Yom Kippur War in 1973, Israel was again taken by surprise by a sudden attack. Unlike the series of clashes with Palestinian forces in Gaza over the past few years, this appears to be a full-scale conflict mounted by Hamas and its allies including Iran. 

Thousands are dead, more are injured and the health systems in both will be overwhelmed by the need. Health systems matter!

Failing to earn the consumer’s referral

Posted on by • Posted in Consumer Experience, Consumer Focus, Consumer Preferences, Consumer-Centric, Consumerism, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Patient Experience, Patient Referrals, Patient Satisfaction, Referral • Leave a comment

https://mailchi.mp/9fd97f114e7a/the-weekly-gist-october-6-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

There is a local urgent care chain that we frequented regularly when my kids were young and cycling through rounds of ear infections and strep throat. The experience was always solid, driven by online scheduling, efficient operations, and good customer service.

A few years ago, the clinics were bought by a local health system. We recently visited one for the first time post-acquisition, when my now teenage son needed to rule out a broken bone from a sports injury. This experience at the same urgent care left a very different impression.

In contrast to the “easy in, easy out” experience I expected, we sat in an exam room for hours, even though the place was not crowded. While this could be due to the staffing challenges pervasive across the industry, other elements of the acquisition left a different impression.

Gone was the advertised cash pricing (and I’m anticipating a higher bill once we get one). The new patient self-registration system was overly complex, built for a hospital, not an immediate care setting. 

The only signs of “systemness”? Multiple prompts to sign up for the health system’s MyChart patient portal (not interested, they have few facilities close by), and a printed referral to an employed orthopedic surgeon a forty-minute drive from home (with no guidance as to whether or when we should seek it, given that no bones were broken). 
 
A few days ago, a scheduler from the system called to book the appointment. With no inquiry as to whether my son’s pain had improved, the interaction felt like a business transaction, not clinical follow-up. I declined.

Just because a care site is acquired by a health system, that doesn’t mean that patients will feel any value from its being part of a system.

Right or wrong, my impression was that health system ownership has made for a worse experience: inefficient, more complicated, and possibly more expensive. 

Nothing about the visit gave me confidence that there was a benefit to following up with an affiliated provider. The health system had failed to earn our referral.

Systems buy assets like urgent care to create entry points that will generate downstream demand and hopefully build loyalty to the brand. But capturing that must start with delivering an excellent experience in every encounter, not merely changing the name on the building. 

Kaiser Permanente healthcare workers initiate record strike

Posted on by • Posted in Employee Benefits, Employee Compensation, Employee Expectations, Employee Raise, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Kaiser Permanente, Labor Spend Management, Labor Strike, Labor Union, Operating Expenses, Operating Margin • Leave a comment

https://mailchi.mp/9fd97f114e7a/the-weekly-gist-october-6-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

On Wednesday, 75K Kaiser Permanente (KP) healthcare workers in five states and Washington, DC walked off the job as part of the largest healthcare strike in US history.

The striking workers are a diverse group, based mostly in California, that includes support staff, X-ray technicians, medical assistants, and pharmacy workers. They will continue their work stoppage until Saturday morning, though union leadership is threatening an even larger strike in November if a new contract agreement is not reached by then.

Their employment contract expired on September 30th, and while negotiations have progressed on issues like shift-payment differentials and employee training investments, union leaders and KP executives remain at odds over key wage increase demands, with the unions asking for a $25 national minimum wage, and KP proposing $21.

The company has sought to minimize disruptions to patient care during the strike, bringing in temporary labor to keep critical infrastructure open, but has told its members to expect some non-urgent procedures to be rescheduled, some clinic and pharmacy operating hours to be reduced, and call center wait times to be lengthy. 

The Gist: Kaiser Permanente has enjoyed solid relations with its unions for decades, making this strike a significant break from precedent, fueled by post-pandemic burnout and staffing shortages. 

While KP is keeping all essential services open, care disruptions are inevitable with around one third of its total workforce on strike. 

The stakes of these labor negotiations extend far beyond just KP and its employees, as union success could inspire other unionized healthcare workers to adopt similar tactics and demands. (Case in point: Employees at eleven Tenet Healthcare facilities in California represented by SEIU-UHW, one of the unions representing striking KP workers, just voted to authorize their own strike.)

While happening alongside high-profile strikes in other industries, labor unrest is a troubling trend for health systems, whose margins remain well below historical levels amid persistently high labor and supply expenses.

Thousands of US health care workers go on strike in multiple states over wages and staff shortages

Posted on by • Posted in Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Kaiser Permanente, Labor Organizing, Labor Shortages, Labor Spend Management, Labor Strike, Labor Union, Labor Union Grievance, Net Income, Operating Expenses, Operating Income, Operating Margin, Operating Metrics, Operating Performance, Operating Revenue • Leave a comment

https://apnews.com/article/kaiser-health-care-workers-strike-b8b40ce8c082c0b8c4f1c0fb7ec38741

Picketing began Wednesday at Kaiser Permanente hospitals as some 75,000 health care workers went on strike in Virginia, California and three other states over wages and staffing shortages, marking the latest major labor unrest in the United States.

Kaiser Permanente is one of the country’s larger insurers and health care system operators, with 39 hospitals nationwide. The nonprofit company, based in Oakland, California, provides health coverage for nearly 13 million people, sending customers to clinics and hospitals it runs or contracts with to provide care.

The Coalition of Kaiser Permanente Unions, representing about 85,000 of the health system’s employees nationally, approved a strike for three days in California, Colorado, Oregon and Washington, and for one day in Virginia and Washington, D.C.

A cheer went up from union members outside Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center when the strike deadline arrived before dawn.

The strikers include licensed vocational nurses, home health aides and ultrasound sonographers, as well as technicians in radiology, X-ray, surgical, pharmacy and emergency departments.

Doctors are not participating, and Kaiser says its hospitals, including emergency rooms, will remain open during the picketing. The company said it was bringing in thousands of temporary workers to fill gaps during the strike. But the strike could lead to delays in getting appointments and non-urgent procedures being rescheduled.

It comes amid unprecedented worker organizing — from strike authorizations to work stoppages — within multiple industries this year, including, transportation, entertainment and hospitality.

Wednesday’s strike is the latest one for the health care industry this year as it continues to confront burnout with the heavy workloads — problems that were exacerbated greatly by the pandemic.

Unions representing Kaiser workers in August asked for a $25 hourly minimum wage, as well as increases of 7% each year in the first two years and 6.25% each year in the two years afterward.

They say understaffing is boosting the hospital system’s profits but hurting patients, and executives have been bargaining in bad faith during negotiations.

“They’re not listening to the frontline health care workers,” said Mikki Fletchall, a licensed vocational nurse based in a Kaiser medical office in Camarillo, California. “We’re striking because of our patients. We don’t want to have to do it, but we will do it.”

Kaiser has proposed minimum hourly wages of between $21 and $23 next year depending on the location.

Since 2022, the hospital system has hired 51,000 workers and has plans to add 10,000 more people by the end of the month.

Kaiser Permanente reported $2.1 billion in net income for this year’s second quarter on more than $25 billion in operating revenue. But the company said it still was dealing with cost headwinds and challenges from inflation and labor shortages.

Kaiser executive Michelle Gaskill-Hames defended the company and said its practices, compensation and retention are better than its competitors, even as the entire sector faces the same challenges.

“Our focus, for the dollars that we bring in, are to keep them invested in value-based care,” said Gaskill-Hames, president of Kaiser Foundation Health Plan and Hospitals of Southern California and Hawaii.

She added that Kaiser only faces 7% turnover compared to the industry standard of 21%, despite the effects of the pandemic.

“I think coming out of the pandemic, health care workers have been completely burned out,” she said. “The trauma that was felt caring for so many COVID patients, and patients that died, was just difficult.”

The workers’ last contract was negotiated in 2019, before the pandemic.

Hospitals generally have struggled in recent years with high labor costs, staffing shortages and rising levels of uncompensated care, according to Rick Gundling, a senior vice president with the Healthcare Financial Management Association, a nonprofit that works with health care finance executives.

Most of their revenue is fixed, coming from government-funded programs like Medicare and Medicaid, Gundling noted. He said that means revenue growth is “only possible by increasing volumes, which is difficult even under the best of circumstances.”

Workers calling for higher wages, better working conditions and job security, especially since the end of the pandemic, have been increasingly willing to walk out on the job as employers face a greater need for workers.

The California legislature has sent Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom a bill that would increase the minimum wage for the state’s 455,000 health care workers to $25 per hour over the next decade. The governor has until Oct. 14 to decide whether to sign or veto it.

Hospitals are dropping Medicare Advantage left and right

Posted on by • Posted in Accounts Receivable (AR), Administrative Burden, Cash-Flow Improvements, Health Insurance Industry, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Medicare Advantage, Medicare Advantage Contract Terms, Medicare Denials, Rev Cycle Management, Revenue Cycle • Leave a comment

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/hospitals-are-dropping-medicare-advantage-left-and-right.html

Medicare Advantage provides health coverage to more than half of the nation’s seniors, but a growing number of hospitals and health systems nationwide are pushing back and dropping the private plans altogether.

Among the most commonly cited reasons are excessive prior authorization denial rates and slow payments from insurers. Some systems have noted that most MA carriers have faced allegations of billing fraud from the federal government and are being probed by lawmakers over their high denial rates.

“It’s become a game of delay, deny and not pay,” Chris Van Gorder, president and CEO of San Diego-based Scripps Health, told Becker’s.

“Providers are going to have to get out of full-risk capitation because it just doesn’t work — we’re the bottom of the food chain, and the food chain is not being fed.” 

In late September, Scripps began notifying patients that it is terminating Medicare Advantage contracts for its integrated medical groups, a move that will affect more than 30,000 seniors in the region. The medical groups, Scripps Clinic and Scripps Coastal, employ more than 1,000 physicians, including advanced practitioners. 

Mr. Van Gorder said the health system is facing a loss of $75 million this year on the MA contracts, which will end Dec. 31 for patients covered by UnitedHealthcare, Anthem Blue Cross, Blue Shield of California, Centene’s Health Net and a few more smaller carriers. The system will remain in network for about 13,000 MA enrollees who receive care through Scripps’ individual physician associations.

“If other organizations are experiencing what we are, it’s going to be a short period of time before they start floundering or they get out of Medicare Advantage,” he said. “I think we will see this trend continue and accelerate unless something changes.”

Bend, Ore.-based St. Charles Health System has taken it a step further and is not only considering dropping all Medicare Advantage plans, but is also encouraging its older patients not to enroll in the private Medicare plans during the upcoming enrollment period in October.

The health system’s president and CEO, CFO and chief clinical officer cited high rates of denials, longer hospital stays and overall administrative burden for clinicians.

“We recognize changing insurance options may create a temporary burden for Central Oregonians who are currently on a Medicare Advantage plan, but we ultimately believe it is the right move for patients and for our health system to be sustainable into the future to encourage patients to move away from Medicare Advantage plans as they currently exist,” St. Charles Health CFO Matt Swafford said.

“I feel terrible for the patients in this situation; it’s the last thing we wanted to do, but it’s just not sustainable with these kinds of losses,” Mr. Van Gorder added. “Patients need to be aware of how this system works. Traditional Medicare is not an issue. With these other models, seniors need to be wary and savvy buyers.”

Here are six more recent examples of hospitals dropping Medicare Advantage contracts:

1. Adena Regional Medical Center is terminating its contract with Anthem BCBS’ Medicare Advantage and managed Medicaid plans in Ohio, effective Nov. 2. The flagship facility of Chillicothe, Ohio-based Adena Health System said rate negotiations between the organizations “have not been productive,” leading it to terminate its agreement with Anthem, whose parent company is Elevance Health.

2. Corvallis, Ore.-based Samaritan Health Services ended its commercial and Medicare Advantage contracts with UnitedHealthcare. The five-hospital, nonprofit health system cited slow “processing of requests and claims” that have made it difficult to provide appropriate care to UnitedHealth’s members, which will be out of network with Samaritan’s hospitals on Jan. 9. Samaritan’s physicians and provider services will be out of network on Nov. 1, 2024. 

3. Cameron (Mo.) Regional Medical Center stopped accepting Cigna’s MA plans in 2023 and plans to drop Aetna and Humana in 2024. It plans to continue Medicare Advantage contracts with UnitedHealthcare and BCBS, the St. Joseph News-Press reported in May. Cameron Regional CEO Joe Abrutz previously told the newspaper the decision stemmed from delayed reimbursements.

4. Stillwater (Okla.) Medical Center ended all in-network contracts with Medicare Advantage plans amid financial challenges at the 117-bed hospital. Humana and BCBS of Oklahoma were notified that their MA members would no longer receive in-network coverage after Jan. 1, 2023. The hospital said it made the decision after facing rising operating costs and a 22 percent prior authorization denial rate for Medicare Advantage plans, compared to a 1 percent denial rate for traditional Medicare.

5. Brookings (S.D.) Health System will no longer be in network with any Medicare Advantage plans in 2024, the Brookings Register reported. The 49-bed, municipally owned hospital said the decision was made to protect the financial sustainability of the organization. 

6. Louisville, Ky.-based Baptist Health Medical Group went out of network with Humana’s Medicare Advantage and commercial plans on Sept. 22, Fox affiliate WDRB reported.

Do insurers have a disincentive to help with transitions of care? 

Posted on by • Posted in Average Length of Stay (ALOS), Care Transition, Case Rates, Denial, Denial Rates, Health Insurance Industry, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Medicare Advantage, Medicare Denials, Post Acute Care, Post Acute Networks • Leave a comment

https://mailchi.mp/b7baaa789e52/the-weekly-gist-september-29-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

A number of health systems have recently noted increasing financial challenges for Medicare Advantage (MA) patient admissions. 

One CFO shared, “our rates from MA plans are roughly on par with fee-for-service Medicare. Denials have always been a problem, making our [revenue] capture about 90 percent. But this year it’s dropped to 80 percent…it’s a crisis for us, given fast how MA volumes are growing.”

His team investigated the change and found the cause: mean length of stay for MA patients has jumped sharply. The rise was almost entirely due to difficulties in discharging patients to rehab and skilled nursing facilities. 

Key insurers have narrowed their postacute networks, resulting in patients spending days waiting for a bed. “The payers told us they had focused the network on ‘high-performing’ providers. Our data and doctors’ experiences say otherwise. They chose a handful of facilities that are cheap, with questionable quality,” their CMO reported. Attempts to engage payers to solve the problem have gone nowhere:

“They have a disincentive to work with us on this. With case rates, they are saving money if patients are languishing in an expensive hospital bed rather than going to rehab.”

This system is exploring expedited placement and expanding their portfolio of home-based care and postacute offerings, while even considering guaranteeing payment themselves. If you’re having similar challenges or have found solutions to help with transitions of care, we’d love to hear from you and learn more. 

National Hospital Flash Report: September 2023

Posted on by • Posted in Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Operating Expense Reduction, Operating Expenses, Operating Income, Operating Margin, Operating Metrics, Operating Performance, Operating Revenue • Leave a comment
https://www.kaufmanhall.com/insights/research-report/national-hospital-flash-report-september-2023?utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=nhfr-report&utm_medium=em&utm_term=september-nhfr-nonsub-231002&mkt_tok=NjU0LUNOWS0yMjQAAAGOkDKy0Li4XKA6Pi3INpSg2IqKztXEWrgPPstuEjEXtx1BYM4bxUp8CV4c7SRSyX0mZpwjEKp50R85MNHygk17ax4yOHplyUGgONIoTFFCsY7R

While hospital operating margins remain below historical levels, overall conditions have stabilized in 2023. The median Kaufman Hall Calendar Year-To-Date Operating Margin Index reflecting actual margins was 1.1% in August.

The September issue of the National Hospital Flash Report covers these and other key performance metrics.

DOWNLOAD REPORT

Click to access KH-NHFR_2023-09.pdf

Cain Bros House Calls Kickstarting Innovation (Part 2)

Posted on by • Posted in Differentiation, Disruption, Disruptive Technology, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Innovation, Innovative Care Models, Payvider, Private Equity, Restructure, Return on Investment, Strategic Advantage, Strategic Alignment, Strategic Change, Strategic Leadership, Strategic Resource Allocation, Strategy and Transformation, Strategy Sustainable Long Term • Leave a comment
Cain Bros House Calls Kickstarting Innovation (Part 2)

This is Part 2 of a series by Cain Brothers about the first-ever collaboration conference between health systems and private equity (PE) investment firms. Part 1 of this series addressed the conference’s who, what and where. This commentary will focus on the why. We will explore the underlying forces uniting health systems with private equity during this period of unprecedented industry disruption.

Why Health Systems and PE Need Each Other

On June 13 and 14, 2023, Cain Brothers hosted the first-ever collaboration conference between health systems and private equity (PE) investment firms. Timing, market dynamics and opportunity aligned. The conference was an over-the-moon success. Along with its sponsors, Cain Brothers will seek to expand the conference and align initiatives through the coming years.

Why Now? Healthcare is Stuck and Needs Solutions

As a society, the U.S. is spending ever-higher amounts of money while its population is getting sicker. A maldistribution of facilities and practitioners creates inequitable access to healthcare services in lower-income communities with the highest levels of chronic disease.

New competitors and business models along with unfavorable macro forces, including high inflation, aging demographics and deteriorating payer mixes, are fundamentally challenging health systems’ status quo business practices.

Over the last 50 years, healthcare funding has shifted dramatically away from individuals and toward commercial and governmental payers. In 1970, individual out-of-pocket spending represented 36.5% of total healthcare spending. Today, it is just over 10%.

Governments, particularly the federal government, have become healthcare’s largest payers, funding over 40% of healthcare’s projected $4.7 trillion expenditure in 2023. Individual patients often get lost in the massive payment shuffle between payers and providers.

Meanwhile, governments’ pockets are emptying. As a percentage of GDP, U.S. government debt obligations have grown from 55% in 2001 to 124% currently. With rising interest rates and the commensurate increase in debt service costs, as well as an aging population, there is little to suggest that new funding sources will emerge to fund expansive healthcare expenditures. Scarcity reigns where resources for healthcare providers were once plentiful.

As a consequence, the healthcare industry is entering a period of more fundamental economic limitations. Delaying transformation and expecting society to fund ongoing excess expenditure is not a sustainable long-term strategy. Current economic realities are forcing a dramatic reallocation of resources within the healthcare industry.

The healthcare industry will need to do more with less. Pleading poverty will fall on deaf ears. There will be winners and losers. The nation’s acute care footprint will shrink. For these reasons, health systems are experiencing unprecedented levels of financial distress. Indeed, parts of the system appear on the verge of collapse, particularly in medically underserved rural and urban communities.

More of the same approaches will yield more of the same dismal results. Waking up to this existential challenge, enlightened health systems have become more open to new business models and collaborative partnerships.

Necessity Stimulates Innovation

Two disruptive and value-based business models are on the verge of achieving critical mass. They are risk-bearing “payvider” companies (e.g. Kaiser, Oak Street Health and others) and consumer-friendly, digital-savvy delivery platforms (e.g. OneMedical and innumerable point-solution companies).

Value-based care providers and their investors have the scars and bruises to show for challenging entrenched business practices reliant on fee-for-service (FFS) business models and administrative services only (ASO) contracting. Incumbents have protected their privileged market position well through market leverage and outsized political influence.

Despite market resistance, “payvider” and digital platform companies are emerging from the proverbial “innovators’ chasm.” More early adopters, including those health systems attending the Nashville conference, are embracing value-creating business models. The chart below illustrates the well-trodden path innovation takes to achieve market penetration.

Ironically, during this period of industry disruption, health systems understand they need to deliver greater value to customers to maintain market relevance. It will require great execution and overcoming legacy practices to develop business platforms that incorporate the following value-creating capabilities:

  • Decentralized care delivery (to make care more accessible and lower cost).
  • Root-cause treatment of chronic conditions.
  • Integrated physical and mental healthcare services.
  • Consistent, high-quality consumer experience.
  • Coordinated service delivery.
  • Standardized protocols that improve care quality and outcomes.
  • A truly patient/customer-centric operating orientation.

It’s not what to do, it’s how to get it done that creates the vexing conundrum. Solutions require collaboration. Platform business models replete with strategic partnerships are emerging. Paraphrasing an African proverb, it’s going to take a village to fix healthcare. That’s why the moment for health systems and PE firms to collaborate is now.

PE to the Rescue?

Private equity has become the dominant investment channel for business growth across industries and nations. According to a recent McKinsey report, PE has more than $11.7 trillion in assets under management globally. This is a massive number that has grown steadily. PE changes markets. It turbocharges productivity. It is a relentless force for value creation.

By investing in a wide spectrum of asset classes, private equity has become a vital source of investment returns for pensions, endowments, sovereign wealth funds and insurance companies. Healthcare, given its size and inefficiencies, is a target-rich environment for PE investment and returns. This explains the PE’s growing interest in working with health systems to develop mutually beneficial, value-creating healthcare enterprises.

Despite reports to the contrary, PE firms must invest for the long term. Unlike the stock market, where investors can buy and sell a stock within a matter of seconds, PE firms do not have that luxury. To generate a return, they must acquire and grow businesses over a period of years to create suitable exit strategies.

Money talks. By definition, all buyers of new companies value their purchase more than the capital required for the acquisition. In making purchase decisions, buyers evaluate businesses’ past performance. They also assess how the new business will perform under their stewardship. PE or PE-backed acquirers also consider which future buyers will be most likely acquire the company after a five-plus year development period.

PE’s investment approach can align well with health systems looking to create sustainable long-term businesses tied to their brands and market positioning. PE firms buy and build companies that attract customers, employees and capital over the long term, far beyond their typical five- to seven-year ownership period. Health systems that partner with PE firms to develop companies are the logical acquirers of those companies if they succeed in the marketplace. In this way, a rising valuation creates value for both health systems and their PE partners.

It is important to note that not all PE are created the same. Like health systems, PE firms differ in size, market orientation, investment theses, experience and partner expectations. Given this inherent diversity, it takes time, effort and a shared commitment to value creation for health systems and PE firms to determine whether to become strategic partners. Not all of these partnerships will succeed, but some will succeed spectacularly.

For health system-PE partnerships to work, the principals must align on strategic objectives, governance, performance targets and reporting guidelines. Trust, honest communication and clear expectations are the key ingredients that enable these partnerships to overcome short-term hurdles on the road to long-term success.

Conclusion: Time to Slay Healthcare’s Dragons

Market corrections are hard. As a nation, the U.S. has invested too heavily in hospital-centric, disease-centric, volume-centric healthcare delivery. The result is a fragmented, high-cost system that fails both consumers and caregivers. The marketplace is working to reallocate resources away from failing business practices and into value-creating enterprises that deliver better care outcomes at lower costs with much less friction.

Progressive health systems and PE firms share the goal of creating better healthcare for more Americans. Cain Brothers is committed to advancing collaboration between health systems and PE-backed companies. In addition to the Nashville conference, the firm has combined its historically separate corporate and non-profit coverage groups to foster idea exchange, expand sector understanding and deliver higher value to clients.

The ability to connect and collaborate effectively with private equity to advance business models will differentiate winning health systems. In a consolidating industry, this differentiation is a prerequisite for sustaining competitiveness. It’s adapt or die time. Health systems that proactively embrace transformation will control their future destiny. Those that fail to do so will lose market relevance.

The future of healthcare is not a zero-sum equation. Markets evolve by creating more complex win-win arrangements that create value for customers. No industry requires restructuring more than healthcare. As a nation and an industry, we have the capacity to fix America’s broken healthcare system. The real question is whether we have the collective will, creativity and resourcefulness to power the transformation. We believe the answer to that question is yes.

Paraphrasing Rev. Theodore Parker, the economic arc of the marketplace is long but it bends toward value. Together, health systems and PE firms can power value-creation and transformation more effectively than either sector can do independently. Each needs the other to succeed. Slaying healthcare’s dragons will not be easy but it is doable. It’s going to take a village to fix healthcare.