cost report changes
TRANSCRIPT
Cost Report Changes to Improve Accuracy of “Cost-Based” DRG Weights
Cost Report Workgroup FindingsSeptember 2007
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 2
Presentation Overview
Background Hospital Technical Expert Workgroup Workgroup Recommendations Operational Approach Questions and Discussion
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 3
Background
August 18, 2006: CMS publishes final rule for IPPS “cost-based” DRG weights
Modifies previous DRG weighting system which used only hospital charges
CMS attempts to create DRG weights to more accurately reflect “relative resource use” by DRG
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 4
Background Three-year transition: blend of charge-
based and cost-based DRG weight methods for first two years
Two data sources used to develop hybrid system: MedPAR files (hospital specific Medicare claims) Hospital Medicare Cost Reports
Major financial impact for some acute care hospitals-positive and negative
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 5
Background
Cost report lines grouped into 13 categories and reduced to cost using national cost-to-charge ratios for each category.
Calculated for each DRG.
1. Routine 2. Intensive3. Drugs4. Supplies/equipment5. Therapy services6. Inhalation therapy7. Operating room8. Labor & delivery9. Anesthesia10. Cardiology11. Laboratory12. Radiology13. Other
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 6
Background
Final Rule Inpatient Hospital Rule for Fiscal Year 2008 expanded cost report line groupings into 15 categories.
Two additional groupings are “Emergency Room and Blood and Blood Products.”
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 7
Project Background
Final Rule Inpatient Hospital Rule for Fiscal Year 2008 changed classifications of two cost centers EEG moved from Cardiology Category to
Laboratory Category (Consistent with MedPAR Category)
Radioisotope moved from Other Category to Radiology Services.
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 8
Hospital Expert Workgroup
Project workgroup comprised of expert staff, consultants and hospital leaders representing 3 major national hospital associations American Hospital Association Association of American Medical Colleges Federation of American Hospitals
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 9
Hospital Expert Workgroup
Group charge and responsibility: Identify potential changes to the
Medicare cost report and/or other input source documents to improve the accuracy of DRG weights under the new CMS “cost-based” weight method.
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 10
Workgroup Findings Cost-based weight methodology concerns:
MedPAR data groups do not match cost report 13* categories for Medicare charges.
Hospitals group charges and costs in different departments and different lines for various reasons
CMS allows hospitals to report Medicare charges on cost reports three different ways.
The 13* CMS category groups may not yield the most appropriate cost-to-charge ratio for each cost category resulting in “charge compression.”
*Expanded to 15 in FY 2008 Final IPPS Rule
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 11
Workgroup Findings Identified methodology problems
Mismatched Medicare charges, Total Charges and Costs result in cost-to-charge ratios that may distort resulting DRG weights
Medicare cost reports were not designed to support cost estimation at the DRG level
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 12
Workgroup Recommendations All hospitals should prepare the Medicare
cost report such that Medicare charges, total charges and overall costs are aligned with each other to allow for consistency with the 15 categories utilized in developing the DRG weights.
Initial focus on medical supplies category Hospitals should evaluate their current
internal data capabilities for completing the cost report in a manner to achieve such consistency.
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 13
Workgroup Recommendations When considering changes to the
Medicare cost report, hospitals should consider other impacts this may have on reimbursement, including:
Critical access hospital costs Sole community and Medicare
dependent hospital base year costs State Medicaid plan provisions Other payers
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 14
Workgroup Recommendations Educational materials should be
developed and disseminated by national, state, regional and metropolitan hospital associations working in collaboration with HFMA
Augment existing Medicare cost report instructions
Implementing recommended cost reporting changes may be more complex and costly for some hospitals
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 15
Workgroup Recommendations National hospital associations should inform
CMS of Workgroup recommendations and seek CMS assistance to assure fiscal intermediary cooperation
Inform and seek cooperation and assistance from CMS and FIs
Allow for reasonable estimates to be accepted by FIs Seek FI cooperation in allowing for reporting
inconsistencies between cost report years in support of developing better input data for cost-based weights
Working with CMS, address hospital concerns of potential compliance issues related to changes to cost reporting methods
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 16
Operational ApproachNeed to address two problems:
1. Hospitals are not consistent in the grouping of Medicare charges, total charges and total costs into departments on the Medicare cost report. – May result in a mismatch within the cost-charge
ratio, or – May result in a mismatch between the cost-
charge ratio and Medicare charges2. A significant number of hospitals do not
categorize Medicare charges, total charges and total costs on the cost report in the same manner as CMS categorizes Medicare charges in the MedPAR file
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 17
Operational Approach
Goals: All hospitals to evaluate reporting of charge and
cost data used when filing Medicare Cost Reports to ensure that overall hospital costs, charges and Medicare charges are consistently categorized in the same departments
Uniform reporting methods will result in more accurate and consistent data used for “cost-based” DRG weights
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 18
Operational Approach CMS Form 339 (Medicare Cost Report Instructions)
provides for three alternative methods for reporting Medicare charges Only using the PS&R Using the PS&R for Department totals, then allocating
based on hospital records Only using hospital records
Currently hospitals select the method that best matches its information system, but may not accurately align Medicare charges on C/R Worksheet D-4, with overall cost and charges reported on Worksheets A and C
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 19
Operational Approach
Medical supplies cost and charges represent the most significant problem area of mismatch
Other departments, such as drugs and cardiac cath are also potential areas of concern
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 20
Operational Approach Hospitals frequently include supply charges
in different ancillary departments Operating room, Emergency, ICU, etc.
Supply charges are billed on the UB using revenue code 27X
Medical supply charges may be mapped on the Medicare C/R to line 55 or allocated to various departments where the supplies are used.
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 21
Operational Approach If the 27X Medicare charges on the PS&R
are allocated to various hospital departments on the Medicare C/R or even to line 55, and not all of the total charges and costs are re-classified to the same departments on Worksheets A and C, Medical Supplies will be misstated (often understated).
This distorts “cost-based” weights for DRGs containing medical supply charges
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 22
Operational Approach Hospitals are being asked to report all
separately billable medical supplies on line 55 of the cost report—Medicare charges, total charges and costs
If the costs cannot be determined within the hospital’s accounting system, it should be done through an A-6 reclassification
Such a reclassification may require the use of revenue department mark-up formulas that were used to establish charges for each cost item
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 23
Operational Approach
Charges with the 27X revenue code should be reported on line 55
Although most hospitals have the ability to report charges by revenue summary code, some hospitals may need to create special reports from their revenue management systems
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 24
EXAMPLE # 1
MedicareCost Charges RCC Total Cost
Worksheet COR 12,000,000 22,000,000 0.545455 OR Billable Supplies 1,500,000 2,000,000 0.750000 Total OR - Line 37 13,500,000 24,000,000 0.562500
Supplies - Line 55 2,000,000 7,500,000 0.266667
Worksheet D's274 Prosht/Ortho Dev 100,000 0.562500 56,250 275 Pace Maker 270,000 0.562500 151,875 276 Intr Ocul Lens 30,000 0.562500 16,875 278 Other Implants 200,000 0.562500 112,500 360 Oper Room -Gen 3,400,000 0.562500 1,912,500 490 ASC Gen 1,200,000 0.562500 675,000 710 Recovery Rm Gen 1,020,000 0.562500 573,750 Total OR - Line 37 6,220,000 3,498,750
270 Med surg sup - Gen'l 300,000 0.266667 80,000 271 Non Sterile Supps 700,000 0.266667 186,667 272 Med surg supplies 900,000 0.266667 240,000 Supplies - Line 55 1,900,000 506,667
SummaryTotal OR 13,500,000 24,000,000 0.562500 3,498,750 Total Supplies 2,000,000 7,500,000 0.266667 506,667
15,500,000 31,500,000 0.492063 4,005,417
UNDERSTATED SUPPLY CCR
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 25
EXAMPLE # 2UNDERSTATED SUPPLY CCR, MISMATCHED CHARGES
MedicareCost Charges RCC Total Cost
Worksheet COR 12,000,000 22,000,000 0.545455 OR Billable Supplies 1,500,000 2,000,000 0.750000 Total OR - Line 37 13,500,000 24,000,000 0.562500
Supplies - Line 55 2,000,000 7,500,000 0.266667
Worksheet D's360 Oper Room -Gen 3,400,000 0.562500 1,912,500 490 ASC Gen 1,200,000 0.562500 675,000 710 Recovery Rm Gen 1,020,000 0.562500 573,750 Total OR - Line 37 5,620,000 3,161,250
270 Med surg sup - Gen'l 300,000 0.266667 80,000 271 Non Sterile Supps 700,000 0.266667 186,667 272 Med surg supplies 900,000 0.266667 240,000 274 Prosht/Ortho Dev 100,000 0.266667 26,667 275 Pace Maker 270,000 0.266667 72,000 276 Intr Ocul Lens 30,000 0.266667 8,000 278 Other Implants 200,000 0.266667 53,333 Supplies - Line 55 2,500,000 666,667
SummaryTotal OR 13,500,000 24,000,000 0.562500 3,161,250 Total Supplies 2,000,000 7,500,000 0.266667 666,667
15,500,000 31,500,000 0.492063 3,827,917
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 26
EXAMPLE # 3ACCURATE SUPPLY CCR, MATCHED CCR AND CHARGES
MedicareCost Charges RCC Total Cost
Worksheet CTotal OR - Line 37 12,000,000 22,000,000 0.545455
Supplies 2,000,000 7,500,000 0.266667 OR Billable Supplies 1,500,000 2,000,000 0.750000 Supplies - Line 55 3,500,000 9,500,000 0.368421
Worksheet D's360 Oper Room -Gen 3,400,000 0.545455 1,854,545 490 ASC Gen 1,200,000 0.545455 654,545 710 Recovery Rm Gen 1,020,000 0.545455 556,364 Total OR - Line 37 5,620,000 3,065,454
270 Med surg sup - Gen'l 300,000 0.368421 110,526 271 Non Sterile Supps 700,000 0.368421 257,895 272 Med surg supplies 900,000 0.368421 331,579 274 Prosht/Ortho Dev 100,000 0.368421 36,842 275 Pace Maker 270,000 0.368421 99,474 276 Intr Ocul Lens 30,000 0.368421 11,053 278 Other Implants 200,000 0.368421 73,684 Supplies - Line 55 2,500,000 921,053
SummaryTotal OR 12,000,000 22,000,000 0.545455 3,065,454 Total Supplies 3,500,000 9,500,000 0.368421 921,053
15,500,000 31,500,000 0.492063 3,986,507
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 27
Conclusions Hospitals should examine Medicare C/R
filing methods and adopt the approach of classifying all separately billable medical supply charges to line 55 of the C/R
Hospitals should also map all 27X revenue from the PS&R to only line 55 of the C/R
Costs for billable medical supplies should also be reported on, or reclassified to line 55 if they have been mapped to C/R lines other than line 55
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 28
Conclusions Adoption of the proposed approach is on a
voluntary basis, and is a short-term effort to improve the accuracy and consistency of reporting for hospital Medical Supply costs and charges
The proposed operational approach will more accurately link Medicare cost reporting to the “cost-based” DRG weight method used by CMS
Continued work is still needed to address other aspects of hospital cost reporting, sources of data and how they are incorporated into the CMS “cost-based” DRG weight methodology
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 29
Conclusions
Hospitals should set up their accounting systems to allow their cost report to be completed as described
If internal recordkeeping/accounting systems cannot be modified, hospitals should design an estimation approach for FI approval
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 30
CMS FY 2008 Final Rule
CMS is supportive of voluntary effort CMS will notify FIs/MACs of educational
effort and provide guidance on how to request changes from current practices
Hospitals that modify their approach for matching costs and charges to accomplish consistent reporting need to disclose to FI/MAC in cover letter to cost report
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 31
CMS FY 2008 Final Rule
Cost reporting practices must continue to follow cost apportionment rules-42 CFR 413.53(a)(1) Allowable costs shall be apportioned
between program beneficiaries and other parties so that the costs borne by the Medicare Program are based on actual services received by program beneficiaries
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 32
CMS FY 2008 Final Rule
Cost reporting practices must continue to follow cost apportionment rules-PRM-1 Section 2203 Hospital charging practices need to
result in an equitable basis for apportioning costs
Charge structure must be applied uniformly
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 33
CMS FY 2008 Final Rule
Cost reporting practices must continue to follow cost apportionment rules-PRM-1 Section 2203 The program will determine if the
charges are allowable for use in apportioning costs
“Like” charges for “like” services must be maintained on the cost report
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 34
CMS FY 2008 Final Rule CMS plans to work with finance and cost
report experts to evaluate whether cost report improvement (forms or instructions) need to be made to improve DRG weights
CMS indicates that cost report changes to improve accuracy and consistency will benefit cost reimbursed hospitals as well as those reimbursed by IPPS.
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 35
CMS FY 2008 Final Rule CMS indicates that the impact of any
cost report form or instructions changes will have a three-year lag time before impacting DRG weights
CMS indicates that the addition of more revenue codes to the MedPAR File as one possible solution would be considered in the context of other priorities
Revised September 2007 Cost Report Workgroup 36
Questions & Discussion