Hospitals’ ‘dire’ financial situation, in 4 charts

According to a new report from the  American Hospital Association (AHA), hospitals and health systems are facing significant financial pressures from rising expenses, including for labor, drugs, medical supplies and more. And without increased government support, the organization warns that patients’ access to care could be at risk.

Hospitals continue to see expenses grow, negative margins

In the report, AHA writes that several factors, including historic inflation and critical workforce shortages leading to a reliance on contract labor, led to “2022 being the most financially challenging year for hospitals since the pandemic began.”

According to data from  Syntellis Performance Solutions, overall hospital expenses increased by 17.5% between 2019 and 2022 — more than double the increases in Medicare reimbursements during the same time. Between 2019 and 2022, Medicare reimbursement only grew by 7.5%.

https://e.infogram.com/45b88e2f-36be-4acf-b83e-3f8441322ab5?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.advisory.com%2Fdaily-briefing%2F2023%2F04%2F26%2Fhospital-challenges%3Futm_source%3Dmember_db%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3D2023apr26%26utm_content%3Dmember_headline_final_x_infogram_x_x%26elq_cid%3D4778863%26x_id%3D&src=embed#async_embed

With expenses significantly outpacing reimbursement, hospital margins have been consistently negative over the last year. In fact, AHA noted that “over half of hospitals ended 2022 operating at a financial loss — an unsustainable situation for any organization in any sector, let alone hospitals.”

So far, this trend has continued into 2023, with hospitals reporting negative median operating margins in both January and February.

A recent analysis also found that the first quarter of 2023 had the largest number of bond defaults among hospitals in over 10 years. 

https://e.infogram.com/0e03ba0d-cad4-49b4-80da-201819ae9fab?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.advisory.com%2Fdaily-briefing%2F2023%2F04%2F26%2Fhospital-challenges%3Futm_source%3Dmember_db%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3D2023apr26%26utm_content%3Dmember_headline_final_x_infogram_x_x%26elq_cid%3D4778863%26x_id%3D&src=embed#async_embed

Where are hospital expenses increasing?

Between 2019, and 2022 hospital labor expenses increased by 20.8%, a rise that was largely driven by a growing reliance on contract labor to fill in workforce gaps during the pandemic. Even after accounting for an increase in patient acuity, labor expenses per patient increased by 24.7%.

Compared to pre-pandemic levels, hospitals saw a 56.8% increase in the rates they were charged for contract employees in 2022. Overall, hospitals’ contract labor expenses increased by a “staggering” 257.9% in 2022 compared to 2019 levels.

A sharp rise in inflation in recent months has also led to a significant increase in hospitals’ non-labor expenses, particularly for drugs and medical expenses. According to a report by  Kaufman Hall, just non-labor expenses would lead to a $49 billion one-year expense increase for hospitals and health systems.

Since 2019, non-labor expenses have grown 16.6% per patient. Hospitals’ expenses for drugs and medical supplies/equipment have seen similar increases per patient at 19.7% and 18.5%, respectively. Costs of laboratory services (27.1%), emergency services (31.9%), and purchased services, including IT and food and nutrition services, (18%) have also increased significantly per patient. 

https://e.infogram.com/8ea80e49-1f60-47cd-9429-dbd4a0869c60?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.advisory.com%2Fdaily-briefing%2F2023%2F04%2F26%2Fhospital-challenges%3Futm_source%3Dmember_db%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3D2023apr26%26utm_content%3Dmember_headline_final_x_infogram_x_x%26elq_cid%3D4778863%26x_id%3D&src=embed#async_embed

Outside of labor and non-labor expenses, AHA writes that policies from health insurers have also contributed to significant burden among hospital staff and increased administrative costs. Currently, administrative costs account for up to 31% of total healthcare spending — of which, billing and insurance makes up 82%.

https://e.infogram.com/27e64c96-bd58-4e5b-8efb-8748e4a3cc28?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.advisory.com%2Fdaily-briefing%2F2023%2F04%2F26%2Fhospital-challenges%3Futm_source%3Dmember_db%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_campaign%3D2023apr26%26utm_content%3Dmember_headline_final_x_infogram_x_x%26elq_cid%3D4778863%26x_id%3D&src=embed#async_embed

What Congress can do to support hospitals

With the COVID-19 public health emergency ending on May 11, several important hospital waivers and flexibilities will soon end, and “[t]he downstream effects of this will be wide-ranging as hospitals will be faced with a set of additional challenges,” AHA writes.

“Rising costs for drugs, supplies, and labor coupled with sicker patients, longer hospital stays, and government reimbursement rates that do not come close to covering the costs of caring for patients have created a dire situation for hospitals and health systems,” said AHA president and CEO Rick Pollack.

“This is not just a financial problem; it is an access problem.

When healthcare providers cannot afford the tools and teams they need to care for patients, they will be forced to make hard choices and the people who will be impacted the most are patients. We can’t let that happen. Congress and others must act to preserve the care our nation needs and depend on.”

To address these financial challenges and ensure that hospitals are able to continue caring for patients, AHA has suggested several actions Congress could take to support hospitals going forward, including:

  • Enacting policies to support efforts to boost the healthcare workforce and ensure of future pipeline of professionals to combat longstanding labor shortages
  • Rejecting attempts to cut Medicare or Medicaid payments to hospitals, which could further reduce patients’ access to care
  • Encouraging CMS to use its “special exceptions and adjustments” to make retrospective adjustments to account for differences between what was implemented for fiscal year 2022 and what is currently projected
  • Creating a special statutory designation and providing additional support to hospitals that serve historically marginalized communities

“As the hospital field maintains its commitment to care in the face of significant challenges, policymakers must step up and help protect the health and well-being of our nation by ensuring America has strong hospitals and health systems,” AHA writes.

The Not-for-Profit Healthcare Resource Chasm

https://www.kaufmanhall.com/insights/blog/not-profit-healthcare-resource-chasm

Current Funding Environment

Healthcare debt issuance remains incredibly light. How long can a capital-intensive industry tolerate limited capital generation? Is pressure building to some tipping point when the need for capital and liquidity will outweigh defending a credit-rating position or avoiding what seems like high-cost debt? The sector generated a lot of internal and external capital in 2020-2021, but the falloff across all channels has been dramatic and residual resource positions are deteriorating.

The Need for Enterprise Performance Improvement

Recent economic releases—jobs report to CPI to PPI to retail sales—all suggest that the Federal Reserve’s efforts to bring inflation into line are yielding slower than hoped for results. The expectation is continued Fed tightening (higher rates), with a range of voices suggesting the Fed will be forced to push rates high enough to trigger a recession. Every restaurant and shop in the small town I live near has a “we’re hiring” sign in its window and each was jam-packed with very active consumers this past Presidents’ Day weekend. If success in taming inflation requires a broad-based hiring and economic slowdown, it feels like we have a long way to go.

Markets keep doing their thing, which frequently seems disconnected from the Fed’s thing. Both 30-year Treasuries and MMD are just starting to bump up against 30-year averages, the 10-year Treasury has moved higher over the past several weeks but remains below Effective Fed Funds, and the Chicago Fed’s National Financial Conditions Index continues to suggest relatively accommodative overall financial conditions.

While I question the depth and reliability of fixed income markets, the funding environment doesn’t seem as bad as the very low debt issuance activity would suggest. Channeling Shakespeare, it seems that “the fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves,”

meaning that low debt issuance is coming out of healthcare’s very profound resource problem rather than externalities.

I concluded a long time ago that not-for-profit healthcare credit and capital management is about strategic resource allocation. Healthcare leaders continuously rebalance the allocation of resources embedded in operations, credit position, and retained fixed and financial assets; and there has never been as challenging a resource generation and allocation moment as the one we are in and are likely to remain in for an extended period.

The scary version of all this is that not-for-profit healthcare has entered a resource chasm that will fundamentally degrade the sector’s credit and capital foundation.

COVID and inflation have combined to expose the brittleness of the healthcare resource chassis. The engine—operations—is bumping up against the dual pressures of:

  1. Labor-scarcity-driven strains on converting customer demand into realized financial resources; and
  2. A business model that doesn’t allow the efficient transfer of increased costs onto customers.

The result is unprecedented resource compression that leads to dramatically lower internal and external capital formation;

existential covenant threats; and the temptation, if not the necessity, to use retained wealth (i.e., spend down balance sheet) to support current operations versus funding growth or protecting long-term resiliency.

Every organization must aggressively identify and pursue operating performance improvement initiatives. But every organization needs to extend the idea of performance improvement to balance sheet, with the goal of addressing three total enterprise considerations:

  1. What Is Our Resource Portfolio? What is the catalogue of resources available to the organization? What form are those resources in? What is the roster of demands on those resources and is there balance or imbalance between the two? What are the consequences of imbalance and the costs of moving to balance?
  2. What Are Our Resource Priorities? How dependent is your organization on balance sheet to achieve success? Is balance sheet a critical liquidity or credit buffer against elevated operating and strategic volatility—the bridge between today and a successfully implemented operations performance improvement plan? Is it a source of external capital to fund strategic initiatives or defend overall liquidity? Is it an actual funding source and is this a departure from past practice? Is it an independent and alternative source of (non-operating) cash flow? Is the balance sheet role changing and what does that mean to operations, credit, resiliency, etc.?
  3. How Should Our Resources Be Positioned? Are balance sheet resources in their best form or is there a benefit from converting them into something different (like cash)? Will performance improvement initiatives alter positioning conclusions and, if so, does that improvement occur over an acceptable time frame? Can various resources be successfully converted today or are there cost or other impediments?

The need is to move out of siloed and into integrated and enterprise-centric performance improvement, which requires one consistent resource allocation mindset applied across operations, liabilities, real estate holdings, financial asset holdings, and every other class of organizational resources.

The need is to transition from thinking that balance sheet and operations can be disconnected thoughts to seeing them as two sides of the same coin.

Covenant threats continue to escalate, all centered on how reduced resource generation impacts debt service coverage.

We reiterate that it is critical for every organization to understand how its specific covenants work and to have a rolling forecast on expected performance.

As an example, many organizations now have coverage covenants where default requires two consecutive years of below the coverage ratio. This is an unconditionally good thing, but many of these same organizations may face a consultant call-in at year one and some of them may also confront year-two limitations on additional debt, merger, sale, disposition of assets, and a host of other important management levers. So, the good thing has conditions that are essential to understand and, perhaps, get ahead of. We have a robust library of covenant-related thought leadership on our website—ranging from written content to webinars—and our team is always ready to help.

A new normal for hospital margins?

https://mailchi.mp/5e9ec8ef967c/the-weekly-gist-april-14-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

Using data from Kaufman Hall’s National Hospital Flash Report, as well as publicly available investor reports for some of the nation’s largest nonprofit health systems, the graphic above takes stock of the current state of health system margins. 

The median US hospital has now maintained a negative operating margin for a full year. Some good news may be on the horizon, as the picture is slightly less gloomy than a year ago, with year-over-year revenues increasing seven points more than total expenses. 

However, the external conditions suppressing operating margins aren’t expected to abate, and many large health systems are still struggling.

Among large national non-profits Ascension, CommonSpirit Health, Providence, and Trinity Health, operating income in FY 2022 decreased 180 percent on average, and investment returns fell by 150 percent on average, compared to the year prior.

While health systems’ drop in investment returns mirrors the overall stock market downturn, and is largely comprised of unrealized returns, systems may not be able to rely on investment income to make up for ongoing operating losses.  

Value-based Care

Context: 

Value-based care is widely accepted as key to the health system’s transformation. Changing provider incentives from volume to value and engaging provider organizations in risk-sharing models with payers (including Medicare) are means to that end. But implementation vis a vis value-based models has produced mixed results thus far and current financial pressures facing providers (esp. hospitals) have stymied momentum in pursuit of value in healthcare. Last week, CMS indicated it intends to continue its value-based insurance design (VBID) model which targets insurers, and last month announced continued commitment to its bundled payment and ACO models. But they’re considered ‘works in process’ that, to date, have attracted early adopters with mixed results.

Questions:

What’s ahead for the value agenda in healthcare? Is it here to stay or will something replace it? How is your organization adapting?

Key takeaways from Discussion:

  • ‘Not-for-profit hospitals and health systems are fighting to survive: near-term investments in value-based models are unlikely unless they’re associated with meaningful near-term savings that hospitals and physicians realize. Unlike investor-owned systems and private-equity backed providers, NFP systems face unique regulatory constraints, increasingly limited access to capital hostile treatment in media coverage and heavy-handed treatment by health insurers.’
  • Demonstrating value in healthcare remains its most important issue but implementing policies that advance a system-wide definition of value and business models that create a fair return on investment for risk-taking organizations are lacking. The value agenda must be adopted by commercial payers, employers and Medicaid and not limited to/driven by Medicare-alone.’
  • The ACO REACH model is promising but hospitals are hesitant to invest in its implementation unless compelled by direct competitive threats and/or market share leakage. It involves a high level of financial risk and relationship stress with physicians if not implemented effectively.’
  • ‘Health insurers are advantaged over provider organizations in implementing value-strategies: they have data, control of provider networks and premium dollars.’
  • ‘Any and all value models must directly benefit physicians: burnout and frustration are palpable, and concern about income erosion is widespread.’
  • ‘Value in healthcare is a long-term aspirational goal: getting there will be tough.’

My take:

Hospitals, health systems, medical groups and other traditional providers are limited in their abilities to respond to opportunities in AI and value-based models by near-term operating margin pressures and uncertainty about their finances longer-term. Risk avoidance is reality in most settings, so investments in AI-solutions and value-based models must produce near-term ROI: that’s reality. Outsiders that operate in less-regulated environments with unlimited access to capital are advantaged in accessing and deploying AI and value-based model pursuits. Thus, partnerships with these may be necessary for most traditional providers.

AI is tricky for providers:

Integration of AI capabilities in hospitals and medical practices will produce added regulator and media scrutiny about data security and added concern for operational transparency. It will also prompt added tension in the workforce as new operational protocols are implemented and budgets adapted.  And cooperation with EHR platforms—EPIC, Meditech, Cerner et al—will be essential to implementation. But many think that unlikely without ‘forced’ compliance.

Value-based models:

Participation in value-based models is a strategic imperative: in the near term, it adds competencies necessary to network design and performance monitoring, care coordination, risk and data management. Longer-term, it enables contracting directly with commercial payers and employers—Medicare alone will not drive the value-imperative in US healthcare successfully. Self-insured employers, private health insurers, and consumers will intensify pressure on providers for appropriate utilization, lower costs, transparent pricing, guaranteed outcome and satisfying user experiences. They’ll force consumerism and value into the system and reward those that respond effectively.

The immediate implications for all traditional provider organizations, especially not-for-profit health systems like the 11 who participated in Chicago last week, are 4:

  • Education: Boards, managers and affiliated clinicians need ongoing insight about generative AI and value-based models as they gain traction in the industry.
  • Strategy Development: Strategic planning models must assess the impacts of AI and value-based models in future-state scenario plans.
  • Capital: Whether through strategic partnerships with solution providers or capital reserves, investing in both of these is necessary in the near-term. A wait-and-see strategy is a recipe for long-term irrelevance.
  • Stakeholder Communication: Community leaders, regulators, trading partners, health system employees and media will require better messaging that’s supported by verifiable facts (data). Playing victim is not a sustainable communications strategy.

Generative AI and value-based models are the two most compelling changes in U.S. healthcare’s future. They’re not a matter of IF, but how and how soon.

UnitedHealth Group hits a milestone in vertical integration

https://mailchi.mp/c9e26ad7702a/the-weekly-gist-april-7-2023?e=d1e747d2d8

Constrained by the Affordable Care Act’s medical loss ratio (MLR) requirement that health insurers must spend 80-85 percent of their revenue on medical services, payers have been pivoting to providing care, managing pharmacy benefits, and supporting other healthcare services, in order to fuel earnings growth. The graphic above shows why UnitedHealth Group (UHG) is seen as the health insurance industry’s most noteworthy model of this vertical integration strategy, thanks to its flourishing Optum division. 

Optum is now as big a profit driver for UHG as its UnitedHealthcare insurance arm, with each bringing in $14B of net earnings in 2022. 

Optum’s 7.7 percent operating margin is almost two points higher than UnitedHealthcare’s, which owes much of its revenue and earnings growth to its expanding Medicare Advantage (MA) business. As both sides of UHG’s business have grown, so too have intercompany eliminations, which have increased by over 80 percent in five years, reaching $108 billion in 2022These payments from one division of UHG to another—mostly from the insurance business to the provider arm—allow the company to shift profit-capped insurance revenues into other divisions, driving increased profitability for the overall enterprise. 

It will be worth watching the trend in intercompany eliminations at other vertically integrated insurance companies, with an eye for whether integration truly results in lower cost of care for patients or just higher margins for the insurers.

Providence endures another credit downgrade

Renton, Wash.-based Providence suffered its third credit downgrade in less than three weeks when Moody’s revised a rating on bonds the 51-hospital system holds to “A2” from “A1.”

Such a rating reflects an expectation margins will remain weak in 2023. The outlook is negative.

The move follows similar actions by Fitch Ratings March 17 and S&P Global March 21 amid an anticipated multiyear process of financial recovery.

Capital expenditure for Providence is expected to be restricted after the completion of a couple of major projects this year to effect “margin recovery,” Moody’s said.

Providence reported a $1.7 billion operating loss in 2022.