SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 10
Download to read offline
OCM Benchmark & Savings Report
June 17, 2015
Prepared for: Oncology Care Practice
TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
I. Savings Model Overview
II. Benchmarks
A. Service Category
1. National
2. State - Massachusetts
3. Regional - Springfield, MA Hospital Referral Region
4. Practice - Oncology Care Practice
B. Cancer Type
1. Service Category Analysis
2. Benchmarks and PGP Performance
III. Savings Estimation
A. CMS Data Sample Size Analysis
B. Savings Distribution
C. Savings Model
D. Archway Oncology Care Management Savings Estimate
IV. Savings Detail
V. Endnotes
Page 2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
● $447,227 from advanced care planning
● $526,164 from chemotherapy pathway adherence
● $223,033 from ER visit reduction
● $48,151 from avoidable hospitalizations
● $155,183 from service duplication reduction
CMS
Sample Oncology Care Practice
Cancer of lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue 12 24
Cancer of male genital organs 20 96
Cancer of urinary organs 4 48
Cancer of uterus and cervix 2 14
Colorectal cancer 2 58
Other gastrointestinal cancer 4 27
Maintenance chemotherapy; radiotherapy 11 30
Cancer of breast 2 77
Cancer of bronchus; lung 8 92
Spend per OCM Episode
Cancer of lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue 51,542$
Cancer of male genital organs 9,260$
Cancer of urinary organs 18,696$
Cancer of uterus and cervix 29,869$
Colorectal cancer 51,221$
Other gastrointestinal cancer 32,181$
Maintenance chemotherapy; radiotherapy 38,945$
Cancer of breast 29,105$
Cancer of bronchus; lung 34,175$
Oncology Care Practice can expect to generate $1,317,593 in additional revenue during the first two years of OCM, and a
total of $4,305,330 over the life of the program. This estimate is based on Archway's provisional OCM episode design using
CMS 5% files that include 65 episodes for Oncology Care Practice out of an estimated 466 reported by the practice. This
annual savings estimate assumes a comprehensive redesign of oncology care and includes savings via:
The episode sample found for Oncology Care Practice was smaller than needed for significance, and we therefore blended
expenditures with regional and state benchmarks. Oncology Care Practice's episode distribution found in our CMS sample
and that provided by the practice are shown below.
Oncology Care Practice's episode profile indicates significant opportunity for savings. As shown in the estimated per episode
spend table below there exists significant spending within each cancer type and across the key areas of expected savings.
SAVINGS MODEL OVERVIEW
The Oncology Care Model offered by CMS requires that applicants demonstrate how participants expect to
generate savings as well as providing a credible estimate of those savings. Archway Health Advisors uses CMS
claims data integrated with documented savings pathways from previous demonstrations. This document
outlines the process Archway uses to create quantified savings estimates for OCM application financial
narratives.
Archway has gained access to the CMS claims and enrollment data for a 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries
stratified by county. This data includes all inpatient, outpatient, skilled nursing, and professional claims for these
beneficiaries.
The OCM request for applications lays out the basic design of bundles within the demonstration and we have
filled in the details based on the design of the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Initiative. Archway
provisional OCM episodes begin with a professional or outpatient facility claim that include a chemotherapy CPT
code and that have a cancer diagnosis code. We have limited our list of chemotherapy codes to the drugs
specifically laid out in the OCM RFA. Cancers included in the OCM model represent our best guess at the cancers
Medicare intends to includin the model. The cancers we include are lung, breast, prostate, lymphatic, uterine,
bladder, colorectal, and other gastrointestinal. All medical claims from the initiation date through 6 months after
the initiation date are included in the episode. Part D prescription drug costs are excluded both from the
identification of chemotherapy initiation and the episode cost profile.
The costs are divided into eight service categories: ER-driven, Acute Inpatient, Post-Acute, Observation Stays,
Laboratory & Radiology, Chemotherapy, Radiation Oncology, and Outpatient & Professional.
Archway's savings model uses estimates from previous studies of oncology home models and centers on five
areas. Advance care planning, ER utilization reduction, service duplication reduction, chemotherapy pathways,
and avoidable hospitalitions represent the sources of savings in our model. The impact of these areas is
estimated for each cancer type and service category. We apply these estimates of savings to our estimate of
your practice's costs based on a combination of your performance and your regions performance. The larger the
sample of episodes in your practice's performance the more the estimate is weighted toward your specific
experience.
Page 4
State Benchmark - Massachusetts
Figure 2. Spending by Service Category - State Benchmark
In the state of Massachusetts we identified 1,199 episodes with mean costs of $33,120. State costs are 10.4%
higher than the national benchmark. This is driven primarily by chemotherapy cost.
ER Driven Cost
4%
Acute IP Cost
6%
Radiation Oncology Cost
7%
Chemotherapy Cost
45%
PAC Cost
7%
Observation Stay Cost
2%
EI Lab & Imaging Cost
0%
Other Lab & Imaging
Cost
5%
Outpatient &
Professional Cost
24%
Page 5
Regional Benchmark - Springfield, MA Hospital Referral Region
Figure 3. Spending by Service Category - Regional Benchmark
Springfield, MA Hospital Referral Region has 246 episodes with an average cost of $30,713. Regional costs are
2.4% higher than the national benchmark. This is driven primarily by outpatient & professional cost.
ER Driven Cost
4%
Acute IP Cost
8%
Radiation Oncology Cost
6%
Chemotherapy Cost
42%
PAC Cost
6%
Observation Stay Cost
1%
EI Lab & Imaging Cost
0%
Other Lab & Imaging
Cost
5%
Outpatient &
Professional Cost
28%
Page 6
Practice Performance - Oncology Care Practice
The CMS sample identified 65 episodes with a mean cost of $28,472. Oncology Care Practice has
very high spending in the chemotherapy service category. Outpatient and professional spending is
very high relative to benchmarks.
Figure 4. - Practice OCM Spending by Service Category
ER Driven Cost
2% Acute IP Cost
7%
Radiation Oncology
Cost
6%
Chemotherapy Cost
24%
PAC Cost
5%
Observation Stay Cost
4%
EI Lab & Imaging Cost
1%
Other Lab & Imaging
Cost
5%
Outpatient &
Professional Cost
46%
Page 7
Archway OCM Provisional Savings Model
Advanced Care Planning 1.5-3% All Service Categories
Pathway Adherence 8-10% Chemotherapy and Radiation Oncology
ER Visit Reduction 15-25% ER Driven Cost
Avoidable Hospitalizations 2.5-5% Acute and Post Acute Services
Service Duplication Reduction 1-5% Lab, Imaging, and Diagnostic Procedures
Low Estimate Midpoint High Estimate
End of Life Planning 402,504$ 447,227$ 504,472$
Pathway Adherence 473,548$ 526,164$ 593,513$
ER Visit Reduction 200,730$ 223,033$ 251,581$
Avoidable Hospitalizations 43,336$ 48,151$ 54,314$
Service Duplication Reduction 139,665$ 155,183$ 175,046$
Total 1,259,782$ 1,399,758$ 1,578,927$
Low Estimate Midpoint High Estimate
ER Driven Cost 140,938$ 156,598$ 176,642$
Acute IP Cost 68,583$ 76,204$ 85,958$
Radiation Oncology Cost 24,913$ 27,681$ 31,225$
Chemotherapy Cost 627,571$ 697,301$ 786,556$
PAC Cost 25,988$ 28,875$ 32,571$
Obseration Stay Cost 88,165$ 97,961$ 110,500$
EI Lab & Imaging Cost 4,233$ 4,703$ 5,305$
Other Lab & Imaging Cost 50,614$ 56,238$ 63,436$
Outpatient Cost 228,777$ 254,197$ 286,734$
Total 1,259,782$ 1,399,758$ 1,578,927$
Oncology spend savings are estimated within each service category. Table 5 presents savings estimates by service
category for Oncology Care Practice.
Table 5. - Oncology Care Practice Savings Range by Service Category
Archway's provisional OCM savings model is based on recent studies of oncology medical home and care model programs.
Research indicates that savings from oncology care model redesign result from reduced ER and acute hospital visits,
advanced care planning, reduced duplication of diagnostic services, and chemotherapy pathway development and
adherence. Working with clinicians and industry experts Archway has generated the savings ranges shown in Table 3.
Table 3 - Range of Savings by Source
For Oncology Care Practice, this results in estimated annual gross savings from $1,259,782 to $1,578,927. Table 4 displays
the range of annual savings for a fully developed program from each savings source.
Table 4. - Oncology Care Practice Savings Range by Source
Page 8
Archway Oncology Care Management Savings Estimate
Table 6. Annual Savings
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total
Annual Episode Volume 466 466 466 466 466 2,328
Estimated PBPM Care Model Revenue 447,360$ 447,360$ 447,360$ 447,360$ 447,360$ 2,236,800$
Historical Claims Benchmark 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 75,123,212$
CMS Fee (4%/2.75%) (600,986)$ (600,986)$ (413,178)$ (413,178)$ (413,178)$ (2,441,504)$
Target Price 14,423,657$ 14,423,657$ 14,611,465$ 14,611,465$ 14,611,465$ 72,681,707$
Total Spend on Chemotherapy Episodes (13,834,848)$ (13,694,872)$ (13,624,884)$ (13,610,887)$ (13,610,887)$ (68,376,377)$
Estimated OCM PBPM Payments (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (2,236,800)$
Total Practice OCM Debits (14,282,208)$ (14,142,232)$ (14,072,244)$ (14,058,247)$ (14,058,247)$ (70,613,177)$
Net Savings Estimate 141,449$ 281,425$ 539,220$ 553,218$ 553,218$ 2,068,530$
Net Savings Rate 0.9% 1.9% 3.6% 3.7% 3.7% 2.8%
1,189,794$ 1,329,770$ 1,399,758$ 1,413,756$ 1,413,756$ -$
Net Payment to Practice 588,809$ 728,785$ 986,580$ 1,000,578$ 1,000,578$ 4,305,330$
CMS Net Cost Reduction 600,986$ 600,986$ 413,178$ 413,178$ 413,178$ 2,441,504$
In the OCM RFA CMS asks for a detailed explanation of how the practice and CMS will split any cost savings generated by program
implementation. Table 6 depicts how savings are divided over the course of the demonstration. During the first two years Oncology
Care Practice generates $422,873 in net savings. Oncology Care Practice nets $1,317,593 of which $894,720 are PBPM payments;
CMS benefits from $1,201,971 in reduced cost. During the last three years the provisional OCM model estimates $1,645,657 in net
savings and $1,342,080 in PBPM payments. Note that in the first two years, any negative gross savings result in no cost to the
The model presented here assumes a 0% growth rate over the 5 year program. Volume is based on 12 practicing physicians with 50
OCM episodes per year. Distribution of episodes by cancer type is based on Medicare SEER data.
Page 9
ENDNOTES
[1.]
[2.] Barkley, Ron. "Business Case for the Oncology ACO". Downloaded from CCBD, May 27, 2015.
[3.]
[4.]
Sanghavi, Darshak, Patel, Kavita, Samuels, Kate, George, Meaghan, McStay, Frank, Thoumi, Andrea, Hart, Rio, and Mark
McClellan. "Transforming Cancer Care and the Role of Payment Reform: Lessons from the New Mexico Cancer Center " The
Merkin Series on Innovation in Care Delivery. August, 2014.
Profile of Consultants in Medical Oncology and Hematology, Drexel Hill PA. UCLA Health Global Lab for Innovation.
Downloaded June 4th, 2015.
Kuntz, G., Tozer, J., Snegosky, J., Fox, J., and Kurt Neumann. "Michigan Oncology Medical Home Demonstration Project:
First Year Results " 2014. Journal of Oncology Practice, Vol 10, 5: pp294-297.
Page 10

More Related Content

What's hot

KT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEs
KT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEsKT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEs
KT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEsKristi Toblesky
 
National annual report
National annual reportNational annual report
National annual reportCACTUS_JP
 
RF 2016 07 Health Technology Assessment
RF 2016 07 Health Technology AssessmentRF 2016 07 Health Technology Assessment
RF 2016 07 Health Technology AssessmentRichard Phillips
 
Demonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMP
Demonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMPDemonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMP
Demonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMPMauro Placchi
 
Meaningful use stage 2 - Final Rule
Meaningful use stage 2 - Final RuleMeaningful use stage 2 - Final Rule
Meaningful use stage 2 - Final RuleZH Healthcare
 
SEAAI New News Presentation
SEAAI New News PresentationSEAAI New News Presentation
SEAAI New News PresentationKSAAI
 
Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations
Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations
Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations Brian Ahier
 
Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)
Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)
Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)TopanArdiansyah1
 
Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2
Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2
Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2Brad Seybert
 
MIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement Model
MIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement ModelMIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement Model
MIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement ModelCitiusTech
 
ACO Final Rule Highlights
ACO Final Rule HighlightsACO Final Rule Highlights
ACO Final Rule HighlightsGreenway Health
 
Radiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asli
Radiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asliRadiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asli
Radiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asliTopanArdiansyah1
 
SAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systems
SAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systemsSAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systems
SAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systemsEvangelos Kontopantelis
 
freipresleyecqmsnurse16
freipresleyecqmsnurse16freipresleyecqmsnurse16
freipresleyecqmsnurse16Bill Presley
 
Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...
Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...
Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...Premier Inc.
 
trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...
trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...
trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...Apollo Hospitals Group and ATNF
 
AbbVie Announces Stemcentrx Acquisition
AbbVie Announces Stemcentrx AcquisitionAbbVie Announces Stemcentrx Acquisition
AbbVie Announces Stemcentrx AcquisitionAustin Walne
 
What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?
What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?
What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?North Texas CIN (TXCIN)
 

What's hot (20)

KT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEs
KT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEsKT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEs
KT Final Data Analysis Project Summary - ICD-9 AEs
 
National annual report
National annual reportNational annual report
National annual report
 
RF 2016 07 Health Technology Assessment
RF 2016 07 Health Technology AssessmentRF 2016 07 Health Technology Assessment
RF 2016 07 Health Technology Assessment
 
Demonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMP
Demonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMPDemonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMP
Demonstrating Significant Benefit for an OMP
 
Meaningful use stage 2 - Final Rule
Meaningful use stage 2 - Final RuleMeaningful use stage 2 - Final Rule
Meaningful use stage 2 - Final Rule
 
SEAAI New News Presentation
SEAAI New News PresentationSEAAI New News Presentation
SEAAI New News Presentation
 
Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations
Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations
Meaningful Use Workgroup Recommendations
 
Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)
Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)
Linacs radiation treatment machine, syndicate 9 (1)
 
Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2
Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2
Iggbo_Oncology_whitepaper_v2
 
MIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement Model
MIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement ModelMIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement Model
MIPS APM for ACOs: A Hybrid Reimbursement Model
 
ACO Final Rule Highlights
ACO Final Rule HighlightsACO Final Rule Highlights
ACO Final Rule Highlights
 
Rx Partnership
Rx PartnershipRx Partnership
Rx Partnership
 
Radiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asli
Radiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asliRadiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asli
Radiation treatment machine capacity planning at cancer care ontario asli
 
SAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systems
SAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systemsSAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systems
SAPC 2013 - general practice clinical systems
 
freipresleyecqmsnurse16
freipresleyecqmsnurse16freipresleyecqmsnurse16
freipresleyecqmsnurse16
 
Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...
Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...
Advisor Live: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Physician Fe...
 
trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...
trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...
trend of digital hospitals Driving patient’s safety and quality of care thr...
 
AbbVie Announces Stemcentrx Acquisition
AbbVie Announces Stemcentrx AcquisitionAbbVie Announces Stemcentrx Acquisition
AbbVie Announces Stemcentrx Acquisition
 
Systems to Support Medicines Reconciliation at TDHB
Systems to Support Medicines Reconciliation at TDHBSystems to Support Medicines Reconciliation at TDHB
Systems to Support Medicines Reconciliation at TDHB
 
What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?
What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?
What is the Advanced Alternative Payment Model (AAPM)?
 

Viewers also liked

Onbase: One Product, Unlimited Potential
Onbase: One Product, Unlimited PotentialOnbase: One Product, Unlimited Potential
Onbase: One Product, Unlimited PotentialHuck Huxley
 
Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016
Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016
Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016Kemianteollisuus ry
 
Porting E-poetry: The Case of First Screening
Porting E-poetry: The Case of First ScreeningPorting E-poetry: The Case of First Screening
Porting E-poetry: The Case of First ScreeningLeonardo Flores
 
Tagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpoint
Tagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpointTagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpoint
Tagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpointEletagliavini
 
Exposición cap. u y
Exposición cap. u  yExposición cap. u  y
Exposición cap. u yjaxigeno77
 

Viewers also liked (11)

Lucky Sindane
Lucky  SindaneLucky  Sindane
Lucky Sindane
 
Onbase: One Product, Unlimited Potential
Onbase: One Product, Unlimited PotentialOnbase: One Product, Unlimited Potential
Onbase: One Product, Unlimited Potential
 
Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016
Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016
Kemianteollisuuden talouskatsausinfo esitykset_16.3.2016
 
leanday flyer
leanday flyerleanday flyer
leanday flyer
 
Teorema de pitagora
Teorema de pitagoraTeorema de pitagora
Teorema de pitagora
 
Porting E-poetry: The Case of First Screening
Porting E-poetry: The Case of First ScreeningPorting E-poetry: The Case of First Screening
Porting E-poetry: The Case of First Screening
 
Tagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpoint
Tagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpointTagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpoint
Tagliavini eleonora presentazione powerpoint
 
Definição de aprendizagem
Definição de aprendizagemDefinição de aprendizagem
Definição de aprendizagem
 
G2 Eutanasia Bioética
G2 Eutanasia BioéticaG2 Eutanasia Bioética
G2 Eutanasia Bioética
 
Exposición cap. u y
Exposición cap. u  yExposición cap. u  y
Exposición cap. u y
 
Influenza
InfluenzaInfluenza
Influenza
 

Similar to OCM Benchmark & Savings Report

Transitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case Study
Transitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case StudyTransitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case Study
Transitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case StudyWes Chapman
 
2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)
2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)
2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)Health Catalyst
 
FLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO Landscape
FLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO LandscapeFLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO Landscape
FLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO LandscapeMARCYINC
 
The Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures Reporting
The Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures ReportingThe Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures Reporting
The Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures ReportingBill Presley
 
Web application for clinicians - SidekickCV
Web application for clinicians - SidekickCVWeb application for clinicians - SidekickCV
Web application for clinicians - SidekickCVAaron Duthie
 
Insurance reimbursement in the oncology market
Insurance reimbursement in the oncology marketInsurance reimbursement in the oncology market
Insurance reimbursement in the oncology marketsmithjgrace
 
Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...
Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...
Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...Carevive
 
Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...
Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...
Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...NHS Improving Quality
 
The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures reporting and reimbursement 2...
The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures  reporting and reimbursement 2...The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures  reporting and reimbursement 2...
The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures reporting and reimbursement 2...Bill Presley
 
The Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPS
The Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPSThe Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPS
The Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPSathenahealth
 
Standard of Care - Donna Beardsworth
Standard of Care - Donna BeardsworthStandard of Care - Donna Beardsworth
Standard of Care - Donna BeardsworthTTC, llc
 
Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...
Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...
Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...ScHARR HEDS
 
Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests
Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests
Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests ScHARR HEDS
 
Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)
Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)
Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)oncoportal.net
 
STFM PI conf 12.4.15 Gerdes
STFM PI conf 12.4.15 GerdesSTFM PI conf 12.4.15 Gerdes
STFM PI conf 12.4.15 GerdesMelissa Gerdes
 
ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011
ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011
ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011ScHARR HEDS
 
Including Patients in the Value Equation
Including Patients in the Value EquationIncluding Patients in the Value Equation
Including Patients in the Value Equationflasco_org
 

Similar to OCM Benchmark & Savings Report (20)

Transitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case Study
Transitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case StudyTransitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case Study
Transitioning to Value Based Care: Tennessee Oncology, A Case Study
 
2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)
2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)
2023 — Focus on the Margin (Vitalware by Health Catalyst)
 
FLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO Landscape
FLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO LandscapeFLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO Landscape
FLAACOs 2014 Conference - Cancer Care in an ACO Landscape
 
The Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures Reporting
The Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures ReportingThe Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures Reporting
The Alphabet Soup of Clinical Quality Measures Reporting
 
project
projectproject
project
 
Web application for clinicians - SidekickCV
Web application for clinicians - SidekickCVWeb application for clinicians - SidekickCV
Web application for clinicians - SidekickCV
 
Insurance reimbursement in the oncology market
Insurance reimbursement in the oncology marketInsurance reimbursement in the oncology market
Insurance reimbursement in the oncology market
 
Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...
Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...
Defining What is Value-Based Care for Patients with ​Relapsed/Refractory Chro...
 
ppm_information
ppm_informationppm_information
ppm_information
 
Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...
Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...
Economic Evaluation of the Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System (EP...
 
The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures reporting and reimbursement 2...
The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures  reporting and reimbursement 2...The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures  reporting and reimbursement 2...
The alphabet soup of clinical quality measures reporting and reimbursement 2...
 
The Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPS
The Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPSThe Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPS
The Latest Regulations, Simplified: MU, PQRS & MIPS
 
Webinar: CMS Innovation Center Update
Webinar: CMS Innovation Center UpdateWebinar: CMS Innovation Center Update
Webinar: CMS Innovation Center Update
 
Standard of Care - Donna Beardsworth
Standard of Care - Donna BeardsworthStandard of Care - Donna Beardsworth
Standard of Care - Donna Beardsworth
 
Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...
Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...
Cost utility analysis of interventions to return employees to work following ...
 
Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests
Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests
Evaluating the cost effectiveness of diagnostic tests
 
Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)
Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)
Journal of applied clinical medical physics Vol 14, No 5 (2013)
 
STFM PI conf 12.4.15 Gerdes
STFM PI conf 12.4.15 GerdesSTFM PI conf 12.4.15 Gerdes
STFM PI conf 12.4.15 Gerdes
 
ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011
ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011
ScHARR, ISPOR Presentation, Madrid, November, 2011
 
Including Patients in the Value Equation
Including Patients in the Value EquationIncluding Patients in the Value Equation
Including Patients in the Value Equation
 

OCM Benchmark & Savings Report

  • 1. OCM Benchmark & Savings Report June 17, 2015 Prepared for: Oncology Care Practice
  • 2. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. Savings Model Overview II. Benchmarks A. Service Category 1. National 2. State - Massachusetts 3. Regional - Springfield, MA Hospital Referral Region 4. Practice - Oncology Care Practice B. Cancer Type 1. Service Category Analysis 2. Benchmarks and PGP Performance III. Savings Estimation A. CMS Data Sample Size Analysis B. Savings Distribution C. Savings Model D. Archway Oncology Care Management Savings Estimate IV. Savings Detail V. Endnotes Page 2
  • 3. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ● $447,227 from advanced care planning ● $526,164 from chemotherapy pathway adherence ● $223,033 from ER visit reduction ● $48,151 from avoidable hospitalizations ● $155,183 from service duplication reduction CMS Sample Oncology Care Practice Cancer of lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue 12 24 Cancer of male genital organs 20 96 Cancer of urinary organs 4 48 Cancer of uterus and cervix 2 14 Colorectal cancer 2 58 Other gastrointestinal cancer 4 27 Maintenance chemotherapy; radiotherapy 11 30 Cancer of breast 2 77 Cancer of bronchus; lung 8 92 Spend per OCM Episode Cancer of lymphatic and hematopoietic tissue 51,542$ Cancer of male genital organs 9,260$ Cancer of urinary organs 18,696$ Cancer of uterus and cervix 29,869$ Colorectal cancer 51,221$ Other gastrointestinal cancer 32,181$ Maintenance chemotherapy; radiotherapy 38,945$ Cancer of breast 29,105$ Cancer of bronchus; lung 34,175$ Oncology Care Practice can expect to generate $1,317,593 in additional revenue during the first two years of OCM, and a total of $4,305,330 over the life of the program. This estimate is based on Archway's provisional OCM episode design using CMS 5% files that include 65 episodes for Oncology Care Practice out of an estimated 466 reported by the practice. This annual savings estimate assumes a comprehensive redesign of oncology care and includes savings via: The episode sample found for Oncology Care Practice was smaller than needed for significance, and we therefore blended expenditures with regional and state benchmarks. Oncology Care Practice's episode distribution found in our CMS sample and that provided by the practice are shown below. Oncology Care Practice's episode profile indicates significant opportunity for savings. As shown in the estimated per episode spend table below there exists significant spending within each cancer type and across the key areas of expected savings.
  • 4. SAVINGS MODEL OVERVIEW The Oncology Care Model offered by CMS requires that applicants demonstrate how participants expect to generate savings as well as providing a credible estimate of those savings. Archway Health Advisors uses CMS claims data integrated with documented savings pathways from previous demonstrations. This document outlines the process Archway uses to create quantified savings estimates for OCM application financial narratives. Archway has gained access to the CMS claims and enrollment data for a 5% sample of Medicare beneficiaries stratified by county. This data includes all inpatient, outpatient, skilled nursing, and professional claims for these beneficiaries. The OCM request for applications lays out the basic design of bundles within the demonstration and we have filled in the details based on the design of the Bundled Payment for Care Improvement Initiative. Archway provisional OCM episodes begin with a professional or outpatient facility claim that include a chemotherapy CPT code and that have a cancer diagnosis code. We have limited our list of chemotherapy codes to the drugs specifically laid out in the OCM RFA. Cancers included in the OCM model represent our best guess at the cancers Medicare intends to includin the model. The cancers we include are lung, breast, prostate, lymphatic, uterine, bladder, colorectal, and other gastrointestinal. All medical claims from the initiation date through 6 months after the initiation date are included in the episode. Part D prescription drug costs are excluded both from the identification of chemotherapy initiation and the episode cost profile. The costs are divided into eight service categories: ER-driven, Acute Inpatient, Post-Acute, Observation Stays, Laboratory & Radiology, Chemotherapy, Radiation Oncology, and Outpatient & Professional. Archway's savings model uses estimates from previous studies of oncology home models and centers on five areas. Advance care planning, ER utilization reduction, service duplication reduction, chemotherapy pathways, and avoidable hospitalitions represent the sources of savings in our model. The impact of these areas is estimated for each cancer type and service category. We apply these estimates of savings to our estimate of your practice's costs based on a combination of your performance and your regions performance. The larger the sample of episodes in your practice's performance the more the estimate is weighted toward your specific experience. Page 4
  • 5. State Benchmark - Massachusetts Figure 2. Spending by Service Category - State Benchmark In the state of Massachusetts we identified 1,199 episodes with mean costs of $33,120. State costs are 10.4% higher than the national benchmark. This is driven primarily by chemotherapy cost. ER Driven Cost 4% Acute IP Cost 6% Radiation Oncology Cost 7% Chemotherapy Cost 45% PAC Cost 7% Observation Stay Cost 2% EI Lab & Imaging Cost 0% Other Lab & Imaging Cost 5% Outpatient & Professional Cost 24% Page 5
  • 6. Regional Benchmark - Springfield, MA Hospital Referral Region Figure 3. Spending by Service Category - Regional Benchmark Springfield, MA Hospital Referral Region has 246 episodes with an average cost of $30,713. Regional costs are 2.4% higher than the national benchmark. This is driven primarily by outpatient & professional cost. ER Driven Cost 4% Acute IP Cost 8% Radiation Oncology Cost 6% Chemotherapy Cost 42% PAC Cost 6% Observation Stay Cost 1% EI Lab & Imaging Cost 0% Other Lab & Imaging Cost 5% Outpatient & Professional Cost 28% Page 6
  • 7. Practice Performance - Oncology Care Practice The CMS sample identified 65 episodes with a mean cost of $28,472. Oncology Care Practice has very high spending in the chemotherapy service category. Outpatient and professional spending is very high relative to benchmarks. Figure 4. - Practice OCM Spending by Service Category ER Driven Cost 2% Acute IP Cost 7% Radiation Oncology Cost 6% Chemotherapy Cost 24% PAC Cost 5% Observation Stay Cost 4% EI Lab & Imaging Cost 1% Other Lab & Imaging Cost 5% Outpatient & Professional Cost 46% Page 7
  • 8. Archway OCM Provisional Savings Model Advanced Care Planning 1.5-3% All Service Categories Pathway Adherence 8-10% Chemotherapy and Radiation Oncology ER Visit Reduction 15-25% ER Driven Cost Avoidable Hospitalizations 2.5-5% Acute and Post Acute Services Service Duplication Reduction 1-5% Lab, Imaging, and Diagnostic Procedures Low Estimate Midpoint High Estimate End of Life Planning 402,504$ 447,227$ 504,472$ Pathway Adherence 473,548$ 526,164$ 593,513$ ER Visit Reduction 200,730$ 223,033$ 251,581$ Avoidable Hospitalizations 43,336$ 48,151$ 54,314$ Service Duplication Reduction 139,665$ 155,183$ 175,046$ Total 1,259,782$ 1,399,758$ 1,578,927$ Low Estimate Midpoint High Estimate ER Driven Cost 140,938$ 156,598$ 176,642$ Acute IP Cost 68,583$ 76,204$ 85,958$ Radiation Oncology Cost 24,913$ 27,681$ 31,225$ Chemotherapy Cost 627,571$ 697,301$ 786,556$ PAC Cost 25,988$ 28,875$ 32,571$ Obseration Stay Cost 88,165$ 97,961$ 110,500$ EI Lab & Imaging Cost 4,233$ 4,703$ 5,305$ Other Lab & Imaging Cost 50,614$ 56,238$ 63,436$ Outpatient Cost 228,777$ 254,197$ 286,734$ Total 1,259,782$ 1,399,758$ 1,578,927$ Oncology spend savings are estimated within each service category. Table 5 presents savings estimates by service category for Oncology Care Practice. Table 5. - Oncology Care Practice Savings Range by Service Category Archway's provisional OCM savings model is based on recent studies of oncology medical home and care model programs. Research indicates that savings from oncology care model redesign result from reduced ER and acute hospital visits, advanced care planning, reduced duplication of diagnostic services, and chemotherapy pathway development and adherence. Working with clinicians and industry experts Archway has generated the savings ranges shown in Table 3. Table 3 - Range of Savings by Source For Oncology Care Practice, this results in estimated annual gross savings from $1,259,782 to $1,578,927. Table 4 displays the range of annual savings for a fully developed program from each savings source. Table 4. - Oncology Care Practice Savings Range by Source Page 8
  • 9. Archway Oncology Care Management Savings Estimate Table 6. Annual Savings Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Total Annual Episode Volume 466 466 466 466 466 2,328 Estimated PBPM Care Model Revenue 447,360$ 447,360$ 447,360$ 447,360$ 447,360$ 2,236,800$ Historical Claims Benchmark 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 15,024,642$ 75,123,212$ CMS Fee (4%/2.75%) (600,986)$ (600,986)$ (413,178)$ (413,178)$ (413,178)$ (2,441,504)$ Target Price 14,423,657$ 14,423,657$ 14,611,465$ 14,611,465$ 14,611,465$ 72,681,707$ Total Spend on Chemotherapy Episodes (13,834,848)$ (13,694,872)$ (13,624,884)$ (13,610,887)$ (13,610,887)$ (68,376,377)$ Estimated OCM PBPM Payments (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (447,360)$ (2,236,800)$ Total Practice OCM Debits (14,282,208)$ (14,142,232)$ (14,072,244)$ (14,058,247)$ (14,058,247)$ (70,613,177)$ Net Savings Estimate 141,449$ 281,425$ 539,220$ 553,218$ 553,218$ 2,068,530$ Net Savings Rate 0.9% 1.9% 3.6% 3.7% 3.7% 2.8% 1,189,794$ 1,329,770$ 1,399,758$ 1,413,756$ 1,413,756$ -$ Net Payment to Practice 588,809$ 728,785$ 986,580$ 1,000,578$ 1,000,578$ 4,305,330$ CMS Net Cost Reduction 600,986$ 600,986$ 413,178$ 413,178$ 413,178$ 2,441,504$ In the OCM RFA CMS asks for a detailed explanation of how the practice and CMS will split any cost savings generated by program implementation. Table 6 depicts how savings are divided over the course of the demonstration. During the first two years Oncology Care Practice generates $422,873 in net savings. Oncology Care Practice nets $1,317,593 of which $894,720 are PBPM payments; CMS benefits from $1,201,971 in reduced cost. During the last three years the provisional OCM model estimates $1,645,657 in net savings and $1,342,080 in PBPM payments. Note that in the first two years, any negative gross savings result in no cost to the The model presented here assumes a 0% growth rate over the 5 year program. Volume is based on 12 practicing physicians with 50 OCM episodes per year. Distribution of episodes by cancer type is based on Medicare SEER data. Page 9
  • 10. ENDNOTES [1.] [2.] Barkley, Ron. "Business Case for the Oncology ACO". Downloaded from CCBD, May 27, 2015. [3.] [4.] Sanghavi, Darshak, Patel, Kavita, Samuels, Kate, George, Meaghan, McStay, Frank, Thoumi, Andrea, Hart, Rio, and Mark McClellan. "Transforming Cancer Care and the Role of Payment Reform: Lessons from the New Mexico Cancer Center " The Merkin Series on Innovation in Care Delivery. August, 2014. Profile of Consultants in Medical Oncology and Hematology, Drexel Hill PA. UCLA Health Global Lab for Innovation. Downloaded June 4th, 2015. Kuntz, G., Tozer, J., Snegosky, J., Fox, J., and Kurt Neumann. "Michigan Oncology Medical Home Demonstration Project: First Year Results " 2014. Journal of Oncology Practice, Vol 10, 5: pp294-297. Page 10