Mr. Chairman and members of the committee: Thank you for giving
me the opportunity to testify today, about the President's Fiscal
Year 1998 Budget proposal. We in the Administration look forward
to working closely with you as we move toward our shared goals of
strengthening the Medicare trust fund and balancing the budget.
Someone once described America as "the only country deliberately
founded on a good idea."
That good idea is "We the people," and it has emboldened our
nation to face -- and overcome -- great challenges with courage
and unity.
In the 1940s, we faced a broken Europe, but we summoned the will
to fight and win -- and saved the world from tyranny.
In the 50s, we faced the terrible scourge of polio. But children
contributed their dimes, and America's best scientists dedicated
their lives to finding a vaccine. And we found one.
And, in the 1960s, we faced a Soviet Union that had taken the
lead in the race for space. But, President Kennedy issued a
challenge to land an American on the moon by the end of the
decade. We did, and no country has done it since.
What do all of these triumphs have in common? They came during
times of great social and political change. But with a deep
sense of urgency, Americans put aside partisan differences,
answered the call to unity, and achieved a critical national
goal. Today, we must do the same.
Because today, we face another great challenge: At a time when we
have fewer resources, a population that is rapidly aging, and a
deficit that while much improved, still plagues us, we must come
together again: This time to balance the budget and truly reform
Medicare, Medicaid, and welfare, while still keeping our promises
to the citizens we serve.
MEDICARE
For more than thirty years, Medicare has provided a blanket of
health security for older Americans and people with disabilities.
It has helped lift a generation of senior citizens out of poverty
and into the middle class. It has helped change what it means to
be old in America; what it means to be sick in America; what it
means to be disabled in America. And it has often served as a
fault line between a life of comfort and good health and a life
of struggle and illness.
The gift that Medicare has given to those who came before us must
be preserved for those who come after us -- for our children and
our grandchildren, for every generation. That is our moral
responsibility.
But you and I know that Medicare now faces several short-term and
a long-term financing challenges that demand action. For nearly
four years, we have been unable to come to a consensus on the
best way to preserve Medicare and improve it for the future. The
President has made it clear that he wants to work with the
Congress to make this the year of bipartisan agreement on this
vital program.
In this budget, the President has reached out to the
congressional majority by offering a plan to meet them halfway.
His Medicare proposals will extend the life of the Hospital
Insurance Trust Fund into 2007, ten years from today. I have
with me today a letter from the independent chief actuary of the
Medicare program that verifies that fact. I will be happy to
submit it for the record.
The President's plan contributes $100 billion to the five-year
balanced budget, which corresponds to $138 billion over six
years.
And we do that by maintaining a system that guarantees access to
a defined set of services rather than creating a defined
contribution per beneficiary.
These proposals are made in good faith and are based on sound
policy. They make sense for both the Medicare program and its
beneficiaries. Our savings are scoreable. I ask for your
careful consideration of our proposals, and for your partnership
in enacting them.
But Medicare reform is not and cannot be simply an exercise in
number crunching. The actions we take this year to preserve the
Medicare trust fund also must prepare Medicare for the future.
Not many of us would drive cross country in a car that's more
than 30 years old. Likewise, we can't move into the next century
with a health insurance program built in 1965. That's why to
preserve Medicare, we must modernize it. This modernization
requires us to do six things:
- First, we must make Medicare a more prudent purchaser of
health care services.
-
Second, we must add new choices to compete with today's
private market.
-
Third, we must strengthen our rural health care system.
-
Fourth, we must protect beneficiaries, by ensuring that
beneficiaries receive higher quality health care.
-
Fifth, we must continue to root out waste, fraud, and
abuse so that we spend our hard-earned tax dollars
wisely and effectively.
-
And sixth, we must add new cost effective benefits to
reflect development in today's science.
Prudent Purchasing
Mr. Chairman, it is imperative that Medicare -- which is
the largest purchaser of health care services in our nation -- be
a more prudent purchaser. Unfortunately, in too many cases,
because of limitations in the law, Medicare is now paying the
highest price in the market for certain drugs, lab services and
durable medical equipment when, given the volume of
beneficiaries, we should be paying one of the lowest. From
managed care premiums to medical devices, the reforms we propose
will make sure that Medicare isn't paying retail while everyone
else is paying wholesale.
These proposals are sound health policy and they require a shared
burden. They will result in a slower rate of growth in Medicare
spending and ensure that Medicare is paying a competitive price
for the services it buys. The savings that these proposals
generate are spread across all providers of health care and are
focused, as they should be, on those areas where growth is the
greatest.
Managed Care. Experts agree that Medicare's payment methodology
for managed care, which was created in 1982, results in serious
overpayments for services. For example, under contract to HCFA,
Mathematica Policy Research, came to such a conclusion with its
1993 review of the Medicare Risk Program. Both the Physician
Payment Review Commission and HCFA studies indicate that Medicare
should be paying managed care plans at a rate between 88 and 90
percent of fee-for-service costs. At the same time, however,
payments to many smallebe reduced by one percentage point every year from
fiscal year 1998 through 2002 to reflect increases in hospital
productivity and efficiency.
The Prospective Payment Assessment Commission (ProPAC), created
by Congress to offer advice on policies affecting Medicare
payments to hospitals and other facilities, recently announced
preliminary data showing that the majority of the nation's
hospitals have record-setting Medicare margins. ProPAC believes
that these margins are evidence that hospitals have become more
efficient. Accordingly, ProPAC recommends that hospitals receive
no update in their Medicare payments in FY 1998; this would be
equivalent to "market basket - 2.8 percent."
In light of its other hospital savings provisions, the
Administration does not propose the deeper update reduction as
recommended by ProPAC. Instead, the Administration spreads the
hospital reductions across a number of different areas of
hospital payment. When viewed as a whole, the Administration's
hospenrollment in managed care
plans.
And, third , we will reduce the Medicare payment from 95 percent
of the average adjusted per capita cost or AAPCC to 90 percent.
However, to give plans a sufficient amount of time to adjust to
these new payment levels, we would not begin this policy until
2000.
Hospital payments. We propose a series of Medicare hospital
payment changes to safeguard the program and to reflect market
changes. Under the President's budget, the hospital payment
update will be reduced by one percentage point every year from
fiscal year 1998 through 2002 to reflect increases in hospital
productivity and efficiency.
The Prospective Payment Assessment Commission (ProPAC), created
by Congress to offer advice on policies affecting Medicare
payments to hospitals and other facilities, recently announced
preliminary data showing that the majority of the nation's
hospitals have record-setting Medicare margins. ProPAC believes
that these margins are evidence that hospitals have become more
efficient. Accordingly, ProPAC recommends that hospitals receive
no update in their Medicare payments in FY 1998; this would be
equivalent to "market basket - 2.8 percent."
In light of its other hospital savings provisions, the
Administration does not propose the deeper update reduction as
recommended by ProPAC. Instead, the Administration spreads the
hospital reductions across a number of different areas of
hospital payment. When viewed as a whole, the Administration's
hospital proposals balance the need to contain Medicare costs
with ensuring access to quality care.
Home health care. Home health care is one of the fastest growing
components of Medicare, with a projected average annual growth
rate of 10.6 percent over the period FY 1997-2002. The average
number of home health visits per user increased over 40 percent
between FY 1992 and FY 1997. The average payment per visit also
has increased, rising from $57 per visit in FY 1992 to an
estimated $68 per visit by FY 1997.
We know that this growth has its roots in changes in medical
practices and technology, in the expansion of the benefit, and in
our current reimbursement system, which can contribute to
overpayment and abusive practices. And we know that we must
reduce the rate of growth in Medicare home health spending and
keep it under control. And, that's what our reforms will help us
do.
We will immediately revise our cost limits to establish a set of
interim limits that will curb excessive spending and institute a
new per-beneficiary payment limit for each home health agency.
We will implement a new prospective payment system for home
health services in 1999. This system, which has been recommended
by experts to control spending, will reduce incentives for
overutilization.
We will eliminate periodic interim payments for home health
agencies, which were originally established as an incentive for
new agencies to serve Medicare patients. With 100 new agencies
joining Medicare each month, this incentive clearly is no longer
necessary.
In addition, we will pay for home health services based on where
the service is delivered. Frankly, many agencies are taking
advantage of a loophole by locating their billing offices in
expensive urban areas to take advantage of higher prevailing
payments, regardless of where services are actually rendered. We
will close that loophole.
Along with our strategy to control home health spending, we
propose to reassign payment for home health services that are not
associated with post-hospital recovery from Part A to Part B.
This reallocation is not counted in the overall $100 billion
Medicare savings number that we submitted to the Congress. We
would limit Part A home health coverage to the first 100 visits
following a 3-day hospital stay, just as this part of the program
covers 100 days of skilled nursing care following
hospitalization. But, visits beyond 100, and those not following
a 3-day hospital stay, would be paid under Part B, along with
other outpatient services.
This return of non-post-hospital visits to Part B -- Medicare
policy prior to 1980 -- makes the home health benefit consistent
with the original intent of the Medicare statute and its division
of services between Part A and Part B. It relieves the Part A
trust fund of the responsibility for financing care that doesn't
belong there, thereby significantly extending the life of the
trust fund. And it achieves these goals without subjecting
beneficiaries to increases in premiums and cost-sharing.
Beneficiary Centered Purchasing. To become a more prudent
purchaser of other health services, our plan gives the Secretary
payment authorities to secure better deals for Medicare and the
citizens it serves. From setting payments based on competitive
bidding to selectively paying centers of excellence a single rate
for all services associated with a specific diagnosis, these --
and our other purchasing reforms -- will help us economize,
modernize, and create a Medicare program that will not only
survive, but thrive, to serve every generation.
New Choices
When it comes to health care for older Americans -- or any
Americans for that matter -- there should be no conflicts between
choice and quality. We need both. We are proud of our record of
increasing choice for Medicare beneficiaries while continuing to
protect the quality of care. Since 1993 the number of
beneficiaries in managed care has increased by 108 percent and is
rising at a rate of 80,000 per month. Today, approximately 13
percent of our Medicare beneficiaries -- about 5 million -- are
enrolled in managed care plans.
The President's budget continues this process by adding new
choices to Medicare plans. We will include preferred provider
organizations or PPOS, which offer patients a greater ability to
choose their doctors and other providers. And we will offer
beneficiaries the chance to enroll in provider sponsored
organizations or PSOS, offered by hospitals and physicians under
integrated arrangements that we hope will improve care and reduce
cost.
At the same time, to promote real and informed choice among
health plans, Medicare will establish coordinated annual open
enrollment periods as well as additional enrollment opportunities
to subscribe to managed care and Medigap plans.
To make sure that choice is real and that beneficiaries who
choose managed care have an open door to go back to
fee-for-service, if they so choose, we will prohibit Medigap
insurers from imposing pre-existing condition waiting periods
when beneficiaries initially enroll or any time they switch
plans. In addition, Medicare will establish continuous Part B
enrollment opportunities for beneficiaries.
Rural Health
The Administration continues to promote Medicare reforms that
strengthen health care in rural America.
For example, our plan would expand the Rural Primary Care
Hospital Program to all 50 states. It would update the payment
for sole community hospitals, improve the rural referral center
program, and reinstate the Medicare Dependent Hospital program to
provide resources to those rural hospitals that need it most.
The reforms will create a national floor to better assure that
managed care products can be offered in low payment areas, which
are predominantly rural communities. In addition, the proposal
includes a blended payment methodology, which combined with the
national minimum floor, will dramatically reduce geographical
variations in current payment rates.
Protect Beneficiaries
We believe we can balance the budget, preserve the Medicare Trust
Fund and modernize Medicare for the 21st century, while still
protecting our beneficiaries.
The fact is, more than three-fourths of seniors have incomes of
$25.000 or less. We believe that balance billing limits must
protect all beneficiaries, regardless of which Medicare coverage
option they choose.
Our plan proposes Medigap reforms to assure portability, protect
against preexisting condition limits, and provide equitable and
affordable premium rates.
It keeps Part B premiums at 25 percent of program costs. This
division of costs, first enacted in the Tax Equity and Fiscal
Responsibility Act of 1982, has protected beneficiaries while
ensuring that the cost of Part B is shared by those who use it.
As noted, the plan creates an opportunity for continuous Medicare
Part B enrollment.
For hospital outpatient services, it brings the patient
co-insurance rate down from about 50 percent to the 20 percent
charged for most other Part B services by 2007.
And, it ensures that managed care plans pay for emergency
services when a "prudent layperson" would have reasonably
believed they were necessary.
Quality Protection
We must also ensure that beneficiaries receive higher quality
health care. We will institute a series of reforms to further
improve the quality of care provided to all citizens who rely
upon Medicare. We will adopt a new, integrated quality
management system for Medicare and Medicaid. This will replace
quality related requirements focusing on each provider entity
individually. We will also collect and disclose more of our
survey data on safety, quality of care, and program integrity so
that citizens can have better comparative information on plans
and providers. And we will replace the so-called 50-50 rule for
managed care plans with more modem quality measures. Protecting
and improving health, and increasing satisfaction with the care
received are the goals of then program.
Fighting Fraud and Abuse
Modernizing Medicare for the 21st century also requires
eliminating the fraud and abuse that robs our health care system
and our taxpayers. Since I took office a little more than four
years ago. I have made this a top priority by setting a policy of
"zero tolerance" for health care fraud and abuse.
Just two years ago, the President and I unveiled a pilot project
called "Operation Restore Trust" to target our anti-fraud efforts
to fight fraud and abuse in 5 key states. We have significantly
increased the resources of our Inspector General and have
strengthened our payment reviews using technology to prevent
fraud, and to detect it when it occurs.
And, it's paid off. We estimate that every dollars we invest in
our anti-fraud effort yields $10 dollars in savings for the
American people. In fact, just last month, Inspector General
June Brown reported that "Labscam," her investigation of payment
fraud by independent clinical labs, could net the Medicare
program millions in recoveries and penalties.
We intend to maintain and intensify these efforts. I will be
submitting to Congress a fraud and abuse bill that will enable us
to strengthen the identification and enrollment procedure to
ensure that only legitimate providers bill Medicare. The
President's Budget includes provisions to prevent home health
agencies from using a loophole in the current reimbursement
system to bill a higher urban rate for service provided in rural
areas. We will require insurers to reject insurance coverage so
that Medicare does not pay inappropriately for beneficiaries
covered by private insurance. We would repeal the anti-kickback
exemption for managed care plans, and the requirement that we
provide advisory opinions on the anti-kickback statutes enacted
last year and scored by the Congressional Budget Office as a
considerable cost to the Medicare program. And we propose to
reinstate the requirement that providers use reasonable diligence
when submitting accurate claims to Medicare. Finally, we will
strengthen our ombudsman function in the States. building a cadre
of elderly volunteers.
New Benefits
The Medicare benefit package has remained relatively unchanged
since 1965. But our science has not. From decades of research,
we know that preventive services not only can save money, but
also can save lives. Now we're putting our money where our
science is. I am very pleased by the bipartisan support for
expansion of the Medicare benefit package. The President's plan
will cover the following:
We expand the availability of annual mammograms for Medicare
beneficiaries to eliminate economic barriers to mammography. We
also will waive the Part B deductible and coinsurance for both
screening and diagnostic mammograms.
To save lives, we want to provide annual screening to detect
signs of colon cancer.
Because better management of diabetes leads to better health, we
include monitoring of blood glucose levels and outpatient
self-management training for diabetes.
To improve access to adult vaccinations and help seniors avoid
serious and sometimes deadly illnesses, we would increase
provider payments for vaccines against pneumonia, influenza, and
hepatitis B and waive patient cost-sharing for the hepatitis B
vaccine.
And, finally, to offer some relief for the families who are
primary caregivers of a relative with Alzheimer's disease and
other dementias, we would provide a new respite care benefit of
32 hours per beneficiary per year.
MEDICAID
Mr. Chairman, I'd like, now, to turn to Medicaid. The President
s budget strengthens the Medicaid program -- so that we can
better reach the vulnerable Americans it is designed to serve.
Our plan controls the costs of Medicaid and gives new flexibility
to the states, without compromising the Federal guarantee of
coverage for low-income children, pregnant women, frail senior
citizens, and persons with disabilities.
We should all be proud that growth in Medicaid spending has
declined significantly over the past two years. CBO's baseline
projects five-year Medicaid spending to be more than $80 billion
lower than projected just a year ago for the same period. The
President's budget ensures that the success we have achieved with
our State partners will continue.
Our plan saves, on net, about $9 billion over five years. Total
savings are about $22 billion: roughly two-thirds from a
reduction in disproportionate share hospital DSH payments and
roughly one-third from the per capita cap. At the same time, the
Presidents plan invests $13 billion in improvements to Medicaid
including some of the health initiatives to expand coverage for
children, changes to last year's welfare reform law, and new
policies to help people with disabilities return to work.
Per Capita Cap
Let me take a minute to explain our per capita cap. Under the
President's proposal, the Federal government will continue to
match state Medicaid spending for each individual enrolled. In
this way, there is absolutely no incentive for states to deny
coverage to a needy individual or family.
Under the per capita cap, maximum Federal matching expenditures
will then be established for each state based on per person
spending, the number of beneficiaries, the types of
beneficiaries, and the current Federal matching rate. The
Federal government would only match expenditures up to a State's
total allowable limit. States will have flexibility to use
savings from one group to support expenditures for other groups
or to expand benefits or coverage.
Not all Medicaid spending would be subject to the per capita cap.
Spending for state fraud control units, DSH payments, Medicare
premiums and cost sharing, payments to Indian Health Service and
other Indian health providers, and the Vaccines for Children
program would be excluded. Administrative costs would be
included in the base year calculation.
Let me be clear: This per capita cap is neither a block grant nor
a cost shift to the States - it's a sensible way to make sure
that the people who need Medicaid are able to receive it. When
economic downturns occur, population growth and other factors
cause Medicaid enrollment to expand, the Federal spending limit
will increase as well. This budget keeps our promise of health
care to our most vulnerable citizens. but it does so in a smart,
responsible way.
State Flexibility
How will we help states keep spending within these per capita
limits? The President's budget includes a series of reforms that
increase state flexibility by throwing away mountains of red tape
and regulations. For example:
- We would repeal the Boren amendment for hospitals and
nursing homes and establish a public notice process for
determining those reimbursement rates.
-
We allow states to expand Medicaid coverage to new groups
and to enroll beneficiaries in Managed Care without waivers.
-
We eliminate the requirement for cost-based payments for
health clinics and create a new pool for supplemental
payments to those clinics that may be adversely affected by
this policy.
- We replace the 75/25 enrollment composition rule for
Medicaid managed care plans with new quality data standards.
- We give States the option of extending Medicaid coverage to
certain workers with disabilities, thus removing a potential
barrier to employment faced by Americans with disabilitrance for the families of
workers who are in between jobs initiative, which provides up to
six months of premium assistance, is expected to add another
700,000 children to the private-sector insurance rolls.
Second, we will make available to the states $750 million
annually to support innovative programs designed to purchase
insurance for an estimated one million uninsured children in
families that receive neither Medicaid nor employer-sponsored
insurance.
Third, we will give states the option to allow 12 months of
continuous Medicaid coverage for all children who are eligible.
By stopping the churning of children in and out of Medicaid, we
can provide stable coverage for children and better continuity of
services. We estimate this change will help one million children
annually.
Fourth, the Department will work closely with the states to
enroll 1.6 million of the estimated three million children who
are eligible for Medicaid today but who, for a variety of
reasons, are not enrolled. We are committed to working with the
nation's governors, communities, providers, and businesses to
make this a reality.
And fifth, States will enroll an additional 250,000 low-income
children in each of the next four years as part of the current
law expansion of coverage to children between the ages of 14 and
18 under current law.
Mr. Chairman, let me say that we view these proposals as a
package. My Department estimates they will dramatically reduce
the number of uninsured children in Americrance for the families of
workers who are in between jobs initiative, which provides up to
six months of premium assistance, is expected to add another
700,000 children to the private-sector insurance rolls.
Second, we will make available to the states $750 million
annually to support innovative programs designed to purchase
insurance for an estimated one million uninsured children in
families that receive neither Medicaid nor employer-sponsored
insurance.
Third, we will give states the option to allow 12 months of
continuous Medicaid coverage for all children who are eligible.
By stopping the churning of children in and out of Medicaid, we
can provide stable coverage for children and better continuity of
services. We estimate this change will help one million children
annually.
Fourth, the Department will work closely with the states to
enroll 1.6 million of the estimated three million children who
are eligible for Medicaid today but who, for a variety of
reasons, are not enrolled. We are committed to working with the
nation's governors, communities, providers, and businesses to
make this a reality.
And fifth, States will enroll an additional 250,000 low-income
children in each of the next four years as part of the current
law expansion of coverage to children between the ages of 14 and
18 under current law.
Mr. Chairman, let me say that we view these proposals as a
package. My Department estimates they will dramatically reduce
the number of uninsured children in America, thereby improving
their health and their parents' peace of mind. And, they will
create an affordable Medicaid program that fulfills the promises
we have made to our most vulnerable citizens.
Welfare
Now let me turn to welfare reform. When the President signed the
Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act
of 1996, he made it clear that this was the beginning - not the
end -- of welfare reform. He made it clear that we all have a
responsibility to come together and make this law work --
especially for our children. And, he made it clear that this was
an opportunity for us to create a welfare system that requires
work, promotes parental responsibility, and protects children.
I'm proud of the progress we've made together. Before welfare
reform became law, we gave 43 states the flexibility they need to
test innovative welfare strategies. Paternity establishments
have gone up 50 percent since 1992. In 1996, we collected a
record of over $12 billion in child support payments. And the
tough new provisions in the welfare law are projected to increase
child support collections by an additional $24 billion over 10
years.
The result? Because of the intensity of our efforts and because
of the strength of our economy, welfare rolls have gone down by
2.5 million since the beginning of President Clinton's first term
-- the largest drop in history. Moving people from welfare to
work, enabling them to support their families and maintain their
independence -- that's the goal upon which all of us have always
agreed.
We are committed to combining all of the leadership, talent and
resources possible to implement the new welfare law. The effort
to make welfare reform a success is one in which many departments
and agencies -- SSA, the Departments of Treasury, Labor,
Transportation, HUD, and others -- have joined together.
Let me briefly give you a progress report on our implementation
of the new Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)
program. Although states have until July 1997 to implement the
TANF program, we have already given the green light to 35 states
(as of 2/10/97) to begin their reforms. HHS has provided
guidance indicating that States have flexibility in designing
their TANF programs, but at the same time emphasizing the
importance of moving families from welfare to work and
ensuring that Federal costs do not increase due to the potential
loss of child support collections.
At the Federal level, we are challenging States to transform the
very culture of the system from a welfare program to a work
program. We must launch a national effort in every State and
every community to make sure there are jobs for people making the
transition from welfare to work. So they can leave the welfare
rolls, they must have opportunities not only to find jobs, but to
keep them.
As I indicated earlier, the hallmark of this welfare law is the
broad flexibility it gives states to design innovative reforms
that address their unique challenges. We are confident that
States will use this considerable new flexibility and the
Presidents new initiatives to strengthen their focus on work as
well.
We will be monitoring state performance and, Pursuant to the
statute, ranking them accordingly. We will be identifying and
studying the high performers and the low performers, tracking
child poverty, and providing an overall assessment of the
legislation's impact on children and families.
We will look closely at how states comply with some key statutory
requirements, including child support enforcement, work
participation rates, maintenance of effort, and data reporting.
We also will assume major new responsibilities for compiling and
disseminating information. As the number of options continues to
grow, states will need better information about these options,
and the Congress will need better information to assess how
effectively federal funds are used.
I know that several members of Congress have suggested a
wait-and-see approach to the new welfare system. They advise
that state implementation should be carefully reviewed before
undertaking major policy changes to the TANF program. Our
Department has proposed a number of technical and conforming
changes to the TANF program that I believe maintain the spirit
and intent of its policies.
Our Administration believes that welfare reform has always been
-- and must always remain - a bipartisan issue. But, just as we
came together to make work and responsibility the law of the
land, we believe it is time to come together again to ensure that
the centerpiece of welfare reform remains a real effort designed
to find work for everyone who is able to work.
Creating these opportunities will take a commitment from business
and labor, from religious organizations and communities, from
officials at the federal, state, and local levels. And, it will
take the bipartisan Congressional spirit that brought us this far
-and must continue to carry us down the road to success.
That is why the President's FY 98 budget contains funds to help
States and cities create new jobs, prepare individuals for them,
and provide employers with incentives to create new job
opportunities for long-term welfare recipients.
To help welfare recipients move from welfare to work, and to
supplement TANF funds, the President proposes two new
initiatives: A Welfare-to-Work Jobs Initiative to help States and
cities create job opportunities for the hardest-to-employ welfare
recipients and a greatly enhanced Work Opportunities Tax Credit
to provide powerful new private-sector financial incentives to
create jobs for long-term welfare recipients.
The Welfare-to-Work Jobs Initiative, which would be administered
by the Department of Labor, would provide $3 billion in mandatory
funding over three years for job placement and job creation to
move a million recipients off the welfare rolls by the year 2000.
We will encourage States and cities to use voucher-like
arrangements as they deploy these funds to empower individuals
with the tools and choices to help them get jobs and keep them.
Under the enriched Work Opportunities Tax Credit for hiring
long-term welfare recipients, employers could claim a tax credit
of 50 percent of the first $10,000 in wages paid to these hires.
Another major focus for the Administration is to change parts of
the welfare reform law that have nothing to do with welfare
reform. When the President signed the welfare reform bill he made
clear his disappointment with the harsh provisions in the bill
relating to benefits to immigrants. The President stated:
"My Administration supports holding sponsors who bring
immigrants into this country more responsible for their
well-being. Legal immigrants and their children however, should
not be penalized if they become disabled and require medical
assistance through no fault of their own."
The President's FY 1998 budget makes good on his promise to
correct provisions that were included to save money, and which
burden States and punish children and the disabled who cannot
work. Legal immigrants should have the same opportunities, and
bear the same responsibilities, as other members of society. The
welfare law denies most legal immigrants access to fundamental
safety net programs unless they become citizens - even though
they are in the U.S. legally, are working and paying taxes and
are responsible members of our communities.
The Administration has always supported making individuals who
encourage their relatives to emigrate to the United States more
responsible for the immigrant's well being. However, as a
nation, we should not turn our backs on anyone who has lost their
ability to earn a living due to injury, disease or illness. The
Nation should protect legal immigrants and their families --
people admitted as permanent members of the American community -
when they suffer accidents or illnesses that prevent them from
earning a living.
Consequently, the budget proposes to make legal immigrants who
become disabled after entering the United States eligible for SSI
and Medicaid. This proposal would allow 320,000 legal immigrants
who experienced an accident or illness which resulted in
disability after entering the U.S. to receive SSI and Medicaid
benefits. We are pleased that the governors, in an NGA
resolution last week, agreed - we must not balance the budget on
the backs of States or legal immigrants.
The budget would lengthen the five year exemption from the ban
for refugees to seven years in order to give them a more
appropriate amount of time to naturalize. The United States
admits refugees and asylees into this country on a humanitarian
basis. Assistance for this population while they adjust to their
new circumstances is a matter of simple decency. The budget also
would delay the Food Stamp ban on legal immigrants until the end
of FY 1997 in order to give immigrants more time to naturalize.
The budget would also provide poor children of legal immigrants
the same Medicaid health care coverage low income citizen
children receive. In addition, under our budget, disabled
children who are currently eligible for Medicaid because they are
receiving SSI benefits will be able to retain their Medicaid
coverage -- even if they lose their SSI benefits as a result of
the tightened definition of childhood disability. Under this
proposal, the families of these needy disabled children will be
assured that medical assistance will continue to be provided.
Finally, the Administration is proposing to restore some of the
overly deep benefit cuts to the Food Stamp program. The proposal
includes replacing the 3 month time limit for childless workers
with a real work requirement which would not punish those looking
for but unable to find work. Also changes would be made to help
families with high housing costs and to ensure that families'
ability to purchase an adequate diet keeps up with inflation.
Overall, our proposals strengthen our commitment to a new welfare
system focused on work and responsibility while addressing the
concerns of State and local officials and restoring benefits to
those who can't work - particularly children and the disabled.
We must give all Americans a hand-up and get on with the real
business before us; reforming our welfare system together.
Mr. Chairman, the budget I have discussed today discards tired
old solutions and meets our challenges creatively and
cooperatively. It balances the budget, without abandoning our
values and commitments.
It makes tough choices and shows tough management.
Now we must act upon it.
Because, just like the past when we faced down diseases and
tyranny, future generations will look back on today.
The question is, whether they will see a nation that put aside
politics and came together to protect the health of its citizens
in the 21st century.
The answer is up to us. Thank you.
***These are several charts Attached.
CHART 1
Modernizing Medicare
Prudent Purchasing
- Centers of Excellence
- Competitive bidding
- Global payment for selected services
- Inherent reasonableness authority
- Post-acute services payment reform
Improving Choices
- Expanded managed care options
- Annual pen enrollment for Medigap and managed care plans
- Comparative information on all choices
- Medigap community rating
- Medigap pre-existing condition reform
- Standardized additional benefit packages
- Revised managed care payment
Beneficiary Protections
- Hospital outpatient coinsurance reform
- Part B late enrollment surcharge reform
- Improved financial protections for managed care
enrollees
New Benefits
- Diabetes education
- Improved mammography benefits with no cost-sharing
- Colorectal cancer screening
- Increased payment for vaccines with no cost-sharing
- Respite benefit for Alzheimers patients
CHART 2
1998 President's Budget Medicare Savings by Category (5-Year
Totals, 1998 - 2002)
Chart of Budget Distributions (In Billions):
- Managed Care ($34);
- Hospitals ($33);
- Home Health ($14);
- Part B Premium ($10);
- Fraud & Abuse ($9);
- Doctors ($7);
- Nursing Homes ($7);
- Other ($2); and
- Beneficiary Investments (minus $15).
CHART 3
Almost 75 Percent of Medicare Beneficiaries Have Incomes
Under $25,000
Chart of Percentages of Beneficiaries in Income Ranges (In
Thousands):
- At $5 -- (7.3%);
- $ 5-10 -- (24.7%);
- $10-15 -- (19.0%);
- $15-20 -- (13.2%);
- $20-25 -- (10.0%);
- $25-30 -- (6.7%);
- $30-35 -- (4.7%);
- $35-40 -- (3.1%);
- $40-45 -- (1.9%);
- $45-50 -- (2.2%); and
- $50+ -- (5.0%).
CHART 4
-
Older Americans Spend Two and One-Half Times More of Their Income
on Out-of-Pocket Costs Than the Non-Elderly
-
People Under 65 spend 8% of their income on Out-of-Pocket Costs
in comparison to people 65 and Over who spend 21% of their
income.
CHART 5
The President's Medicaid Proposal:
Flexibility for States
Promote Managed Care
- Permits managed care without waivers
- Replaces certain Federal contracting rules and 75/25
rule with an improved quality assurance process
Increase Flexibility in
Eligibility/Benefits
- Permits home and community-based care program without
waivers
- Allows eligibility simplification
Eliminate Federal Provider
Payment Rules
- Repeals Boren Amendment
- Eliminates cost-based payment for health centers
(FQHCs/RHCs)
- Eliminates qualification requirements for certain
physicians (Ob/Peds)
Streamline Administration
- Eliminates annual State reporting requirements for
certain providers
- Simplifies computer system requirements
CHART 6
Children's Health Initiative
(Potential Number of Children Covered by 2000)
| Low-Income Adolescents: |
1 Million |
| Workers Between Jobs Initiative: |
700,000 |
| Partnership Grants with States: |
1 Million |
| Allow States to Implement 12-Month Eligibility: |
1 Million |
| Medicaid Outreach: |
1.6 Million |
| |
----------------- |
| TOTAL: |
5 Million |
MEDICARE FY 98 LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
INDEX
BENEFICIARY IMPROVEMENTS
Beneficiary Improvements
Program Improvements
- Definition of DME
- PACE Demonstrations
- Extend Social HMO for Three Years
Choice
Medicare Managed Care
- Permit Enrollment of ESRD Beneficiaries
- Limits on Charges for Out-of-Network Services
- Coverage for Out-of -Area Dialysis Services
- Clarification of Coverage for Emergency Services
- Permit States with Programs Approved by the Secretary
to Have Primary Oversight Responsibility
- Modify Termination and Sanction Authority
Improved Quality
Accreditation
- Modify the Deeming Provisions for Hospitals to Require
that the JCAHO/AOA Demonstrate that AU of the
Applicable Hospital Conditions are Met or Exceeded and
to Enhance Monitoring and Enforcement of Compliance
- Permit the Secretary to Disclose Accreditation Survey
Data from Accrediting Organizations for Purposes Other
than Enforcement
Survey and Certification
- Permit Collection of Fees from Entities Requesting
Initial Participation in Medicare
- Create Authority for an Integrated Quality Management
System Across HCFA Programs (Medicare and Medicaid)
Managed Care
- Deem Privately Accredited Plans to Meet Internal
Quality Assurance Standards
- Replace 50-50 Rule with Quality Measurement System
Nurse Aide Training
- Permit Waiver of Prohibition of Nurse Aide Training and
Competency Evaluation Programs in Certain Facilities
and Clarify that the Trigger for Disapproval of Nurse
Aide or Home Health Aide Training and Competency
Evaluation Program is Substandard Quality of Care (Medicare and
Medicaid)
MODERNIZING MEDICARE
Prudent Purchasing
Post-Acute Payment Reform
- Secretarial Authority to Create New Post Acute Care
Payment System, and Collection of Assessment Data
Beneficiary Centered Purchasing
- Centers of Excellence
- Competitive Bidding Authority
- Purchasing through Global Payments
- Flexible Purchasing Authority
- Inherent Reasonableness Authority
Contracting Reform
- Reform contracting for FI's and Carriers
Improving Efficiency and Eliminating Overpayments
Hospitals
- Hold-Harmless for DSH(technical)
Part B Issues
- Replace "Reasonable Charge" Methodology (and
"Reasonable Cost" Methodology for Ambulances) with Fee
Schedules
FRAUD AND ABUSE
- Clarify the Definition of "Homebound"
- Provide Secretarial Authority to Make Payment Denials
Based on Normative Service Standards
- Requirement to Provide Diagnostic Information
MEDICAID FY 1998 PROPOSALS INDEX
PROMOTING STATE FLEXIBILITY
Increase Flexibility in Provider Payment
- Repeal Boren Amendment
- Eliminate cost-based reimbursement for health clinics
with one year delay
Increase Flexibility in Eligibility
- Allow eligibility simplification and enrollment
expansion
- Guarantee eligibility for 12 months for children
Eliminate Unnecessary Administrative Requirements
- Eliminate OB/Peds physician qualification requirements
- Eliminate annual State reporting requirements for
certain providers
- Eliminate Federal Requirement for private health
insurance purchasing
- Simplify computer systems requirements
- Eliminate unnecessary personnel requirements
Increase Flexibility regarding Managed Care:
- Modify upper payment limit for capitation rates
- Convert managed care waivers (1915(b)) to State Plan
Amendments
- Modify Quality Assurance with new data collection
authority while eliminating 75/25 enrollment
composition rule
- Change Threshold for Federal Review of Contracts
- Allow nominal copayments for HMO enrollees
Increase Flexibility regarding Long-Term Care:
- Convert Home and Community Based Waivers (I 9 1 5(c))
to State Plan Amendments
- Increase the Medicaid Federal financial participation
rate from 75 percent to 85 for nursing home Survey and
Certification activities
- Permit waiver of prohibition of nurse aide training
programs in certain facilities
- Eliminate unnecessary repayment requirement for
alternative remedies
- Replace ineffective/duplicative Inspection of Care
requirements in mental hospitals and ICFs/MR with
survey and certification requirements
- Create Alternative sanctions in ICFs/MR
- Allow SSI beneficiaries who earn more than the 1619(b)
thresholds to buy into Medicaid - working disabled
- Grant Programs for All inclusive Care for the Elderly
(PACE) permanent provider status
IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO WELFARE REFORM
Disabled beneficiaries
- Retain Medicaid for current disabled children who lose
SSI
Immigrants
- Exempt disabled individuals from the ban on SSI cash
assistance
- Exempt the following groups from 5 year Medicaid ban
and deeming: Disabled individuals and children
- Extend the Exemption for Refugees/Asylees from 5 to 7
Years
STRENGTHENING FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
- FMAP Commission
- Strengthen MEQC system
- Increase Federal Payment Cap for Puerto Rico
- Increase Federal Payment to District of Columbia
FISCAL YEAR 1998 LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
PROPOSALS FOR BENEFICIARY IMPROVEMENTS, MODERNIZING MEDICARE,
AND FRAUD AND ABUSE
(Proposals with no Budgetary Impact)
February 11, 1997
Beneficiary Improvements
Program Improvements
- Definition of DME
Modify the definition of DME to include items needed
"for essential community activities". The Secretary would
have the authority to limit the benefit to assure the efficient
provision of items needed by the beneficiary (e.g. through the
use of prior authorization of equipment). Under current law, durable
medical equipment (DUE) is limited to those items appropriate for
use in the home. This definition was developed in 1965, when
Medicare only applied to the elderly, and beneficiaries who used
DME were not expected to function outside the home. The expanded
definition will encourage independent activity by disabled
beneficiaries.
- PACE Demonstrations
Grant full permanent provider status for Program of
All-inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) demonstration sites
that currently meet the PACE protocol. PACE has proven to be a
successful model for a unique service delivery system for
frail-elderly persons who live in the community.
- Extend Social Health Maintenance Organization (SHMO)
Demonstrations
Extend both the first and second generation of SHMO
demonstrations until December 3 1, 2000. SHMOs enroll a
cross-section of the elderly living in community and provide
standard Medicare benefits, together with limited long-term care
benefits. These congressionally-mandated demonstrations are
currently set to expire on December 3 1, 1997. A three-year
extension would provide additional time to evaluate this delivery
model.
Choice
Medicare Managed Cart
- Permit Enrollment of ESRD Beneficiaries
Permit beneficiaries with ESRD to enroll in a managed
care plan. Currently, while beneficiaries who develop ESRD can
stay enrolled in a plan, beneficiaries with ESRD are prohibited
from enrolling. ESRD beneficiaries should not have their
coverage options limited because of their health status.
- Limits on Charges for Out-of-Network Services
Expand current limits on charges to plans by
non-contracting entities for authorized services. Limits which
now apply in the case of inpatient hospital SNF, physician and
dialysis services would apply in regard to all services for which
there is a fee schedule or limit under fee-for-service Medicare.
Apply these same limits to unauthorized, out-of-network services.
Providers should not have a windfall payment as a result of providing an
authorized or unauthorized service to a Medicare beneficiary
enrolled in a managed care plan. Beneficiaries who decide to
receive unauthorized services should have the same protections as
beneficiaries who remain in fee-for-service Medicare.
- Coverage for Out-of-Area Dialysis Services
Require plans to pay for out-of-area dialysis services
when an enrollee is temporarily out of the plan's service area.
Under current law, plans are only obligated to pay for
out-of-area services in two instances: emergency care and urgent care. Since
services such as did* are foreseeable, plans have no obligation
to pay for them As a result, managed care enrollees with ESRD are
effectively barred from ever leaving their home town.
- Clarification of Coverage for Emergency Services
Clarify the obligation of managed care plans to pay for
emergency services provided to their phis enrollees (whether
through the plan or by a non-plan provider) by defining
"emergency services as services that a "prudent laypersons
would, from his or her perspective, reasonably believe were
needed immediately to prevent serious harm to his or her health.
This clarification of Medicare policy will be helpful to states
as they determine what requirements should apply in regard to
emergency services provided to commercial managed care
enrollees.
- Permit States with Programs Approved by the Secretary
to Have Primary Oversight Responsibility
Authorize States, with programs approved by the
Secretary, to certify whether a plan is eligible to contract with
Medicare and to monitor certain aspects of plan performance.
Such certification and monitoring would be subject to Federal
standards. The Secretary would retain final authority in regard
to contracting and compliance actions. User fees would be
collected from plans for both the certification and monitoring
activities. Effective 1/l/98. The proposal would eliminate
certain duplication of effort that exists between States!
traditional licencing role and HCFA oversight of managed care
contractors.
- Modify Termination and Sanction Authority
Authorize the Secretary to terminate a contract prior
to a hearing in cases where the health and safety of Medicare
beneficiaries are at-risk. Delete requirement for corrective
action plans and for hearing and appeals prior to imposing
intermediate sanctions. Conform sanctions options add by the
existing sanction authority. When the health and safety of
beneficiaries is at risk, HCFA should not be required to hold a
hearing prior to terminating a contract. in regard to
intermediate sanctions, HCFA already provides plans with the
opportunity to respond to findings that the plan has committed an
act subject to an intermediate sanction. Requiring a hearing and
an appeal in all instances, however, would unnecessarily hinder
enforcement actions.
Improved Quality
>
Accreditation
- Modify the "Deemed Status" Provisions for Hospitals to
Require that the JCAHO Demonstrate that All of the Applicable
Hospital Conditions are Met or Exceeded and to Enhance Monitoring
and Enforcement of Compliance
This would require the Joint Commission on the
Accreditation of Health care organizations (JCAHO) to demonstrate
that, under its accreditation process and standards, accredited
hospitals meet or exceed all federal health and safety standards
(called the Medicare "conditions of participation). Further, the
JCAHO would be required to enforce compliance with the standards
and monitor those entities that are found out of compliance.
Under current law, hospitals that receive JCAHO accreditation are
automatically deemed to have met Medicare conditions of
participation and the Secretary has no statutory authority to
require the JCAHO to monitor compliance. The Omnibus
Consolidated Rescissions and Appropriations Act of 1996 raised
the standards for deemed status of other (non-hospital) providers
by authorizing the Secretary to grant Medicare deemed status to
providers if the accrediting body has demonstrated to the
Secretary that a provider category meets or exceeds all of the
Medicare conditions and requirements. This proposal would bring
hospital "deemed status" requirements in line with deeming
requirements for other providers.
- Permit the Secretary to Disclose Accreditation Survey
Data from Accrediting Organizations for Purposes Other
than Enforcement
This would broaden the instances when the Secretary may disclose
accreditation survey information to include instances where the
Secretary deems disclosure to be in the interests of beneficiary
safety, quality of care, and program integrity. Under current
law, the Secretary may not publicly disclose any accreditation survey
result unless the information relates to an enforcement action
taken by the Secretary. Such limited authority restricts the
Secretary from fully safeguarding quality.
Surv>ey and Certification
- Permit Collection of Fees from Entities Requesting
Initial Participation in Medicare
This would permit the Secretary to charge entities
(including dually-participating Medicare/Medicaid providers but
excluding clinical labs under CLIA) a fee for the initial survey
required for participation in the Medicare program. Under ties
new authority, HCFA would charge fees through its agreements with
State survey agencies. As HCFA's agents, States would collect
and retain these fees and apply them to their survey costs. HCFA's
survey and certification budget has been held constant since
1993, while the number of entities seeking to enter the Medicare
program has grown dramatically each year. This under-funding has
forced HCFA to prioritize State survey workloads and has resulted
in extensive delays of initial certification surveys. This
proposal would allow a greater number of providers to enter the
Medicare program in a timely fashion, thereby enhancing
beneficiary access to, and choice of, providers. In addition,
program certification allows providers to derive a financial
benefit from participating in Medicare and Medicaid. Charging
for initial program participation surveys is consistent with the
fee-based approach for other government services.
- Create Authority for an Integrated Quality Management
System Across HCFA Programs (Medicare and Medicaid)
This proposal would provide for a uniform authority for
all Medicare and Medicaid quality management activities. A
re-engineered, integrated quality management approach would
include, but not be limited to: authorities for data collection,
quality conditions, enforcement, publication of provider-level
data, user fees, deeming flexibility, and designated
accountability. Prior to full implementation of an integrated
quality management system, HCFA would test out various models
through demonstrations. For the last five years, HCFA has been
building the foundations of a truly re-engineered approach to
survey and certification activities, which creates a new
conceptual framework and reshapes many operational features
of the current system and breaks through current limitations.
HCFA would like to test this re-engineering concept through a
demonstration.
Managed Care
- Privately Accredited Plans Deemed to Meet Internal
Quality Assurance Standards
Authorize the Secretary to deem plans with private
accreditation as meeting internal quality assurance requirement.
This proposal, without reducing Federal standards, would
eliminate certain duplication of effort that exists between
private accreditating organizations' review of plans internal
quality assurance programs and HCFA's own efforts.
- Replace 50/50 Rule with Quality Measurement System
Eliminate the current requirement that managed care
plans maintain a level of commercial enrollment at least equal
to public program enrollment, once the Secretary, in consultation
with the consumers and the industry, develops a system for
quality measurement. Authorize the Secretary to terminate plans
that do not meet standards under the quality measurement system
Until the quality measurement system is in place, expand the
Secretary's waiver authority for 50/50 (e.g., plans with good
track records). The Administration believes that the 50/50 rule
should be retained until an adequate quality measurement system
is in place. This system, once in place, should drive
contracting decisions.
Nurse Aide Training
- Permit Waiver of Prohibition of Nurse Aide Training and
Competency Evaluation Programs in Certain Facilities
and Clarify that the Trigger for Disapproval of Nurse
Aide or Home Health Aide Training and Competency
Evaluation Programs is Substandard Quality of Care
(Medicare and Medicaid)
This would allow States to waive the prohibition on nurse
aide training and competency evaluation programs offered in
(but not by) a SNF or Medicaid NF if the State: (1)
determines that there is no other such program offered
within a reasonable distance of the facility; (2) assures,
through an oversight effort, that an adequate environment
exists for operating the program in the facility; and (3)
provides notice of such determination and assurances to the
State long-term care ombudsman. The proposal would also
make clear that a survey finding substandard quality of
care, rather than the mere occurrence of an extended or
partial extended survey is what triggers the sanction of the
training program. The current prohibition on nurse aide
traiar-, and
geographic adjustments. The uniform payment system would be
built upon the prospective payment system for home health and an
expanded PPS for SNF that more appropriately reflects costs
across all post-acute inpatient settings, including the higher
intensity of service in rehabilitation and long-term care
hospitals. It would authorize the Secretary to collect any and
all data, on a national basis, that would be necessary to
implement such a system. There is considerable overlap in the
types of services provided and the types of beneficiaries that
are treated in each of the post-acute settings. Despite this
overlap, Medicare's current payment and coverage rules vary by
setting and may create perverse incentives to treat patients in
one setting rather than another in order to maximize
reimbursement. A "site-neutral" integrated post-acute care
payment would help to ensure that beneficiaries receive high
quality care in the appropriate settings. This system would
ensure that reimbursement is sufficient for all patient types
including high intensity patients who in the current environment
are cared for in rehabilitation hospitals. In addition, any
transfers among settings occur only when medically appropriate
and not in an effort to generate additional revenues. A
consistent patient classification system would allow meaningful
comparisons of the diagnoses, severity, and functional
limitations
of patients in all these settings; permit case-mix adjustment
for payment purposes,ar-, and
geographic adjustments. The uniform payment system would be
built upon the prospective payment system for home health and an
expanded PPS for SNF that more appropriately reflects costs
across all post-acute inpatient settings, including the higher
intensity of service in rehabilitation and long-term care
hospitals. It would authorize the Secretary to collect any and
all data, on a national basis, that would be necessary to
implement such a system. There is considerable overlap in the
types of services provided and the types of beneficiaries that
are treated in each of the post-acute settings. Despite this
overlap, Medicare's current payment and coverage rules vary by
setting and may create perverse incentives to treat patients in
one setting rather than another in order to maximize
reimbursement. A "site-neutral" integrated post-acute care
payment would help to ensure that beneficiaries receive high
quality care in the appropriate settings. This system would
ensure that reimbursement is sufficient for all patient types
including high intensity patients who in the current environment
are cared for in rehabilitation hospitals. In addition, any
transfers among settings occur only when medically appropriate
and not in an effort to generate additional revenues. A
consistent patient classification system would allow meaningful
comparisons of the diagnoses, severity, and functional
limitations
of patients in all these settings; permit case-mix adjustment
for payment purposes, and permit greater coordination of care.
ProPAC has cited the perverse incentives that currently operate
under separate and distinct payment methods for post-acute care
services.
-
Beneficiary-Centered Purchasing
In general provide the Secretary with authority to pay on the
basis of special arrangements as opposed to
statutorily-determined,
administered prices. This proposal has five components which are
fully described below: Centers of Excellence; Competitive
Bidding; Global Payments; Flexible Purchasing Authority; and
Inherent Reasonableness Authority. Two years after enactment,
and annually thereafter for the next three years, the Secretary would
report to Congress by March 1st on the use of these new
authorities, including the impacts on program expenditures and on
the access and quality of services received by beneficiaries.
- Centers of Excellence - Authorize the Secretary to pay
selected facilities a single rate for all services (including
potentially post-acute services) associated with a surgical
procedure or hospital admission related to a medical condition,
specified by the Secretary (The Secretary would be required by
January 1, 1999 to establish Centers of Excellence for CABG
surgery, other cardiac procedures and for hip and knee
replacements across the country). Selected facilities would have
to meet special quality standards. The single rate paid to a
Center would have to represent a savings to the program. There
would be no requirement for beneficiaries to receive services at
Centers. However, Centers would be allowed, subject to approval
by the Secretary, to provide additional services (such as
private room) or other incentives (waiver of cost-sharing) to
attract beneficiaries.
- Competitive Bidding Authority - Authorize the Secretary
to set payment rates for Part B services (excluding physician
services) specified by the Secretary based on competitive
bidding. The items included in a bidding process and the
geographic areas selected for bidding would be determined by the
Secretary based on the availability of entities able to furnish
the item or services and the potential for achieving savings.
Bids would be accepted from entities only if they met quality
standards specified by the Secretary. The Secretary would have
the authority to exclude suppliers whose bid was above the cut
off bid determined sufficient to maintain access. Automatic
reductions in rates for would be triggered for clinical
laboratory services and DMEPOS(excluding oxygen services) if by
2001 a 20 percent reduction had not been achieved.
- Purchasing Through Global Payments - Authorize the Secretary
to selectively contract with providers and suppliers to receive
global payments for a package of services directed at a specific
condition or need of an individual (e.g. diabetes, congestive
heart failure, frail elderly, cognitively or functionally
impaired, need for DME). The Secretary would select providers on
the basis of their ability to provide high quality services
efficiently, to improve coordination of care (e.g. disease
management, case management), and to offer additional benefits to
beneficiaries (e.g. prescription drugs, respite, nutritional
counseling, adaptive and assistive equipment, transportation.)
Within the global payment, providers would have flexibility in
how services are provided, and they may, subject to approval by
the Secretary, offer additional non-covered benefits financed
through the global payment. The global rate would have to
represent a savings to the program. Beneficiaries would
voluntarily elect on a month-to-month basis to participate in
such
arrangements and during that period would be "locked-m" for the
services covered under the arrangement.
- Flexible Purchasing Authority - Authorize the Secretary,
after rulemaking, to negotiate alternative administrative
arrangements with providers, suppliers and physicians who agree
to provide price discounts to Medicare. These discounts could be
based on current fee schedules or payment rates or could involve
alternative payment methods. The alternative administrative
arrangements could not include any changes to quality standards
or conditions of participation. The Secretary would have the
authority to permit sharing of these savings with beneficiaries
who use these entities -- for example, through a reduced
deductible in the case of hospital services or lower coinsurance
payments in the case of other services.
- Inherent Reasonableness Authority - Restore Medicare's
carriers-authority to make "inherent reasonableness" payment
changes for durable medical equipment, prosthetics and orthotics (DMEPOS)
as well as surgical dressings.
Medicare's statutory framework was based on a Blue
Cross/Blue Shield model from the 60's. Although payment
methodologies have improved over time, current payment authority
is too rigid for the fee-for-service program to meet the
challenges of the 21st century. Each component of this initiative represents an
approach that has been used successfully by the private sector,
other government program or under Medicare's demonstration
authority.
Contracting Reform
- Reform Contracting for FIs and Carriers
This proposal would end the requirement that an
Medicare contractors perform all Medicare administrative
activities, and would allow Medicare to contract with entities
other than insurance companies. New contractors would be
awarded contracts using the same competitive requirements that
apply throughout the government- The proposal would give HCFA
the tools to take advantage of innovations and efficiencies
in the private sector when it comes to beneficiary and
provider services, and claims processing. it builds on the
Medicare Integrity Program contracting changes established in
HIPAA.
Improving Efficiency and Eliminating Overpayments
Hospitals
- Hold-Harmless for DSH
- Freeze hospital-specific disproportionate share
hospital
(DSH) adjustments at current levels, for a period of 2 years.
Require the Secretary to submit a legislative proposal to
Congress
by 18 months after enactment for revised qualifying criteria and
Payment Methodology for hospitals that incur higher Medicare
Costs because they Serve a disproportionate sham of low-income
patients. Without action by FY 2000, the old (current) formula
would be reinstated. The current formula for identifying DSH
hospitals relies on counting the number of days the hospital
serves
Medicare/SSI beneficiaries (as a proportion of total Medicare
days) and the number of days it serves Medicaid beneficiaries (as
a proportion of total days). The resulting "DSH percentage" is
plugged into a formula that computes the increase in Medicare
payments for DSH hospitals.
However, this measure is becoming increasingly unreliable. The
recently enacted welfare reform law will have an impact both on
the number of people eligible for SSI and the number of people
eligible for Medicaid but not necessarily on the number of
low-income individuals seeking hospital care. Furthermore, as
the number of uninsured Americans increases, the reliability of this
measure to reflect the a hospital's level of uncompensated care
decreases. Concurrently, HCFA has lost a series of court cases
on the DSH formula, resulting in varying definitions of "eligible
Medicaid days" across the country. By freezing the current DSH
levels for the next two years, the level of support for DSH
hospitals will be sustained while the Secretary develops a
proposal to refine the DSH criteria and adjustment.
Part B Issues
- Replace "Reasonable Charge" Methodology (and
"Reasonable Cost" Methodology for Ambulances) with Fee
Schedules
Create fee schedules, on a budget neutral basis, for
the few Part B services still paid according to -reasonable
charge" methodology (the most significant services affected would
be ambulances, and enteral and parenteral nutrition). Specify
that ambulance services provided by hospitals or "under
arrangements" would also be covered by the new ambulance fee
schedule, with adjustments allowed for certain "core services"
that may have higher costs. This proposal will make the payment
methodology consistent for all Pan B services and improve administrative
efficiency. including hospital based ambulance services under the
fee schedule will remove incentives for independent suppliers to
evade fee schedule limits by establishing costlier arrangements
with hospitals.
FRAUD AND ABUSE
- Clarify the Definition of "Homebound"
This would redefine the "homebound" definition by
adding several calendar month benchmarks to emphasize that home
health coverage is only available to those who are truly unable to
leave the home. The current definition of "confined to the home"
is vague and over broad. It allows for considerable discretion
in interpretation and fraud and abuse. Financial reviews show
that Medicare routinely reimburses care to beneficiaries who are
not truly homebound. Without a more concrete definition, this
eligibility requirement is very difficult to enforce. The March
1996 GAO report cites the problematic homebound definition as
contributing to excessive spending and fraud and abuse.
- Provide Secretarial Authority to Make Payment Denials
Based on Normative Service Standards This proposal would allow
the BM Secretary to establish normative numbers of visits for
specific conditions or situations. For example, HCFA could
establish a normative number of aide visits for a particular
condition, and deny payment for those visits that exceed this
standard. Allowing the Secretary to establish more objective
criteria will help HCFA gain more control over excessive
utilization. A March 1996 GAO report criticizes current
statutory coverage criteria as leaving too much room for
interpretation and inviting fraud and abuse.
- Requirement to Provide Diagnostic Information
Extend to non-physician practitioners, the current
requirement that physicians provide diagnostic information on all
claims for services that they provide. Also require physicians
and non-physician practitioners to provide information to
document medical necessity for items or services ordered by the
physician or practitioner, when such documentation is required by
the Medicare contractor as a condition for payment for the item
or service. Diagnostic information is needed by Medicare's
contractors to determine the medical necessity of physician
services and for use in quality/outcome research. Given the need
for this data, there is no reason to exclude non-physician
practitioners from the current requirement to include diagnostic
codes on claims forms. Also, in regard to non-physician services
and DMEPOS items, suppliers providing the services and items
ordered by physicians or non-physician practitioners have
reported having difficulty obtaining diagnostic information required by
Medicare's contractors. This proposal will clarify that the
ordering physician or non-physician practitioners is required to
provide such information.
MEDICAID FY 1998 PROPOSALS
STATE FLEXIBILITY AND NEW INVESTMENTS
PROMOTING STATE FLEXIBILITY
Increase Flexibility in Provider Payment
- Repeal Boren Amendment
Repeal the Boren amendment for hospitals and nursing
homes, while establishing a clear and simple public notice
process for rate setting for both hospitals and nursing homes.
- Modify the process for determining payment rates for
hospitals, nursing facilities and intermediate Care Facilities
for the Mentally Retarded (ICFs/MR) to add a public notification
process that provides an opportunity for review and comment,
which should result in more mutually agreeable rates.
- Eliminate cost-based reimbursement for health clinics
Federal requirements that most Federally Qualified
Health Centers (FQHCS) and Rural Health Centers (RHCS) be paid
based on costs would be removed beginning in 1999; and a
capped, temporary funding pool would be established to help
these facilities during the transition.
Increase Flexibility in Program Eligibility
- Allow Budget Neutral eligibility simplification and
enrollment expansion
Enable States to expand or simplify eligibility to
cover individuals up to 150 percent of the Federal poverty level
through a simplified and expedited procedure. Current rules
would
be retained to the extent they are needed to ensure coverage for
those who do not meet the eligibility criteria of the new option.
Federal spending would be restrained by the per capita cap for
current eligibles and such expansions would be approved only if
they were demonstrated to be cost neutral (i.e. no credit for
persons who were not otherwise Medicaid eligible in the
determination of cap number).
This proposal enables States to expand to new groups that are not
eligible under current law without a Federal waiver.
Administration would be streamlined and simplified in that States
would be able to use the same eligibility rules for everyone
eligible under the new percent-of-poverty option in place of the
current plethora of different rules for different groups.
Integrity of Federal spending limits would be maintained by the
cost neutrality requirement.
- Guarantee eligibility for 12 months for children
This proposal would permit States to provide 12-month
continuous Medicaid eligibility for children ages 1 and older.
(Continuous coverage was enacted for infants by OBRA 90.)
- This proposal would provide stable health care coverage
for children - particularly children in families with incomes
close to the eligibility income limits, who often lose
eligibility fc@r a month due to an extra pay period within a
month. This proposal would also reduce State administrative
burden by requiring fewer eligibility determinations.
Eliminate Unnecessary Administrative Requirements
- Eliminate OB/Peds physician qualification requirements
Federal requirements related to payment for obstetrical
and pediatric services would be repealed. States would only
have to certify providers serving pregnant women and children
based on their State licensure requirements.
The minimum provider qualification requirements under
current law do not effectively address quality of care. In
addition, current law fails to recognize all bodies of specialty
certification, so certain providers are precluded from
participation in Medicaid (e.g., foreign medical graduates).
Congress amended the law in 1996 to include providers certified
by the American Osteopathic Association and emergency room
physicians.
- Eliminate annual State reporting requirements for
certain providers
States would no longer haverely to show that their
State-de-signed system meets performance standards established
under an outcome-oriented measurement process.
- Reduce unnecessary personnel requirements
We would work with States and State employees to
replace the current, excessively detailed, and ineffective
Federal rules regarding administrative issues that are properly
under the purview of States, such as personnel standards, and
training of sub-professional staff.
Increase Flexibility Regarding Managed Care
- Modify upper payment limit for capitation rates
Modify upper payment limit and actuarial soundness
standards for capitation rates to better reflect historical
managed care costs by requiring actuarial review of the rates.
The current Medicaid upper payment limit for managed
care contracts (i.e., I 000/a of fee-for-service) is not an
accurate payment measurement for Medicaid managed care plans. It
does not reflect historical managed care costs and States claim
it is inadequate to attract plans to participate. This proposal
would modify the definition of the UPL to more accurately reflect
Medicaid spending. It would also modify actuarial soundness
standards.
- Convert managed care waivers [1915(b)(1)] to State Plan
Amendments
Permit mandatory enrollment in managed care without
federal waivers. States would be able to require enrollment in
managed care without applying for a freedom of choice waiver
erely to show that their
State-de-signed system meets performance standards established
under an outcome-oriented measurement process.
- Reduce unnecessary personnel requirements
We would work with States and State employees to
replace the current, excessively detailed, and ineffective
Federal rules regarding administrative issues that are properly
under the purview of States, such as personnel standards, and
training of sub-professional staff.
Increase Flexibility Regarding Managed Care
- Modify upper payment limit for capitation rates
Modify upper payment limit and actuarial soundness
standards for capitation rates to better reflect historical
managed care costs by requiring actuarial review of the rates.
The current Medicaid upper payment limit for managed
care contracts (i.e., I 000/a of fee-for-service) is not an
accurate payment measurement for Medicaid managed care plans. It
does not reflect historical managed care costs and States claim
it is inadequate to attract plans to participate. This proposal
would modify the definition of the UPL to more accurately reflect
Medicaid spending. It would also modify actuarial soundness
standards.
- Convert managed care waivers [1915(b)(1)] to State Plan
Amendments
Permit mandatory enrollment in managed care without
federal waivers. States would be able to require enrollment in
managed care without applying for a freedom of choice waiver
[1915(b)(l)]. States would be allowed to establish mandate
enrollment managed care programs through a State plan amendment.
Qualified IRS, tribal and urban Indian organization providers
would be guaranteed the right to participate in State managed
care networks.
This proposal would provide States greater flexibility
in administering their State Medicaid programs by eliminating the
freedom-of-choice waiver application process. states would not
have to submit applications for implementation or renewal. The
Administration is pursuing strategies to assure quality in
Medicaid managed care that are more effective and less burdensome
than the assurances added through the waiver process.
Guaranteeing urban Indian organization providers the right to
participate in State Medicaid managed care networks integrates
unique into managed care delivery systems and recognizes their
unique health delivery role.
- Modify Quality Assurance with new data collection
authority while eliminating 75/25 enrollment
composition rule
Replace the current enrollment composition rule with a
new quality data monitoring system under a beneficiary purchasing
strategy with new data collection authority.
As part of the continuous effort to ensure Medicaid
managed care beneficiaries receive quality care, HCFA proposes to
implement a "beneficiary-centered purchasing"(BCP) strategy.
BCP will replace certain current federal managed care contract
requirements. The current enrollment composition rule (i.e.,
75/25 rule) requires that no more than 75 percent of the
enrollment can be Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. The
current requirement is a process-related, ineffective proxy for
quality. This requirement would be replaced with a quality
monitoring system based on standardized performance measures.
HCFA, in collaboration with States, would define and
prioritize a new standard set of program performance indicators,
including a new quality monitoring system. These measures would
be used to quantify and compare plans' quality of care, provide
purchasers and beneficiaries with the means to hold plans
accountable, and provide HCFA with comparable data to compare the
performance of State programs to effectively hold States
accountable as well.
This proposal would enhance the Secretary's ability to
ensure that beneficiaries' interests are being protected as
enrollment in managed care increases, and to detect and correct
possible abuses by managed care plans. A more outcome oriented
quality review process is vital to the Federal and State
oversight of managed care plans to ensure that Medicaid
beneficiaries are receiving the highest quality care possible.
Data would be vital to the success of such an effort.
- Change threshold for federal review of contracts
Raise the threshold for the federal review of managed
care contracts from the current $100,000 threshold to $1 million
contract amount (or base threshold for federal review on fives
covered by plan).
This proposal would provide greater State flexibility
in management and oversight of Medicaid managed care programs.
It would also reduce the number the of managed care plan
contracts requiring HCFA review and approval.
- Nominal copayments for HMO enrollees
Permit States to impose nominal copayments on HMO
enrollees.
This proposal would bring policy on Medicaid copayments
for HMO enrollees more in line with Medicaid copayments that
a State may elect to impose in fee-for service settings. It would
also allow HMOs to treat Medicaid enrollees in a manner similar
to how they treat non-Medicaid enrollees. However, impact on
beneficiaries would not be harmful since copayments. if imposed,
would still have to be nominal.
Increase Flexibility Regarding Long-Term Care
- Convert Home and Community Based Waivers (1915(c)) to
State Plan Amendments
Give States the option to create a home and
community-based services program without a Federal waiver,
through a State plan amendment. This proposal would benefit
States and beneficiaries by eliminating the constant and costly
necessity of renewing the waivers, while ensuring a high level of
care.
- Increase the Medicaid Federal financial participation
rate from 75 percent to 85 for nursing home Survey and
Certification activities
Raise the Medicaid Federal financial participation (FFP)
rate to 85 percent.
Federal funding is important to maintain both quality
standards established by OBRA 87 and resulting enforcement
activities. Increasing the Medicaid federal financial
participation percentage to 85 percent would encourage States to
increase total spending on nursing home survey and certification
activities.
- Permit waiver of prohibition of nurse aide training and
competency evaluation programs in certain facilities
Clarify that the trigger for disapproval of nurse aide
or home health aide training and competency evaluation
programs is substandard quality of care (Medicare and
Medicaid).
This would allow States to waive the prohibition on
nurse aide training and competency evaluation programs offered in
(but not by) a SNF or Medicaid NF if the State: (1) determines
that there is no other such program offered within a reasonable
distance of the facility; (2) assures, through an oversight
effort, that an adequate environment exists for operating the
program in the facility; and (3) provides notice of such
determination and assurances to the State long-term care
ombudsman. The proposal would also make clear that a survey
finding substandard quality of care, rather than the mere
occurrence of an extended or partial extended survey is what
triggers the sanction of the training program.
The current prohibition on nurse aide training and
competency evaluation programs causes a special problem for rural
nursing home where a community college or other training facility
may be inaccessible to nurse aides. This proposal would
safeguard the availability of nursing homes which might otherwise
stop participation in Medicare and Medicaid as a result of losing
a training program's approval. This proposal is also a part of
the Vice-President's Reinventing Government initiative. A
clarification of the circumstances under which a program must be
sanctioned is needed because the fact that an extended or partial
extended survey is conducted is not, in itself, an indication
that substandard quality of care exists in the SNF, NF, or HHA.
- Eliminate repayment requirement for alternative
remedies for nursing home sanctions
Eliminate the requirement for repayment of federal
funds received if a State chooses to use alternative remedies to
correct deficiencies rather than termination of program
participation.
This proposal would allow States to promote compliance
by employing alternative remedies on nursing facilities. This
provision for alternative remedies gives States the flexibility
for more creative implementation of the enforcement regulations.
- Delete Inspection of Care requirements in mental
hospitals and Intermediate Care Facilities for the Mentally
Retarded (ICFs/MR)
Eliminate the duplicative requirement for Inspection of
Care (IOC)reviews in mental hospitals and ICFs/MR. The survey
and certification reviews that currently take place in mental
hospitals and ICF/MR would remain in place.
Inspection of Care (IOC) reviews were originally
designed to ensure that Medicaid recipients were not being
forgotten in long term care facilities. The current survey
process has been improved through a new outcome-oriented process
that protects recipients in mental hospitals and ICFs/MR from
improper treatment. Consequently, IOC reviews are no longer
needed and are, in fact, in direct conflict with the revised
ICF/MR survey protocol. The current requirement for two reviews
(IOC and the ICF/MR survey) has become duplicative. If the IOC
were eliminated, the ICF/MR survey and certification process
would remain in place.
- Alternative sanctions in Intermediate Care Facilities
for the Mentally Retarded (ICFs/MR)
Provide for alternative sanctions in ICFs/MR that
already are available for nursing homes. Alternative sanctions
that currently are available in nursing homes include: directed
in-service training, directed plan of correction, denial of
payment for new admissions, civil monetary penalties and
temporary management.
Sanctions other than immediate termination were
established for nursing homes under the OBRA-87 legislation, but
not for ICFs/MR. This proposal would extend the alternative
sanction option to ICFs/MR.
SPECIAL POPULATIONS
- Allow SSI beneficiaries who earn more than the 1619(b)
thresholds to buy into Medicaid
This proposal would give States the option of creating
a new eligibility category for disabled persons to encourage them
to work beyond the 1619(b) income thresholds. SSI beneficiaries
who become eligible for this new category would contribute to the
cost of the program by paying a premium. Premium levels would be
on a sliding scale, based on the individual's income as
determined by the States.
Despite existing work incentives in SSL fewer than
« of 1 percent of beneficiaries return to substantial gainful
employment annually. The fear of losing medical benefits has
been identified as one of the most significant barriers to
disabled beneficiaries returning to work or working for the first
time. Under this proposal Medicaid would be used to extend
access to coverage for the working disabled who no longer quality
for health care benefits under current law.
- Grant Programs for All inclusive Care for the Elderly
(PACE)permanent provider status
Grant full permanent provider status for Program of
All-inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) demonstration sites
that currently meet the PACE protocol. PACE has proven to be a
successful model for a unique service delivery system for
frail-elderly persons who live in the community.
IMPROVEMENTS RELATED TO WELFARE REFORM
Disabled Beneficiaries
- Retain Medicaid for current disabled children who lose
SSI
Medicaid would be retained for children currently
receiving Medicaid who lose their Supplemental Security Income
(SSI)benefits because of changes in the definition of disability.
Most of these children would requalify for Medicaid by
meeting another eligibility category either by meeting other SSI
disability listings or other Medicaid categories for non-disabled
low-income children. Those who do not, and who would be
grandfathered under this proposal, continue to have relatively
extensive health and developmental needs which would not be met
if these children lost their Medicaid coverage.
Immigrants
-
Exempt certain disabled individuals from the ban on SSI
cash assistance
This proposal exempts immigrants who become disabled
after entering this country from the recently enacted ban on SSI
cash assistance for "qualified aliens", and ensures that they
would retain their Medicaid benefits. The exemption would apply
to immigrants who were already here on the date of enactment as
well as to new arrivals.
This proposal allows States to continue providing SSI
and Medicaid benefits to immigrants who become disabled and who
would otherwise be cut off due to welfare reform. It protects
those who can no longer be expected to work due to circumstances
beyond their control.
-
Exempt immigrant children and certain disabled
immigrants from the Medicaid bans and deeming requirements
This proposal would exempt immigrant children and
immigrants who are disabled after entering this country from the
bans on Medicaid benefits for current and future immigrants.
Immigrant children and immigrants disabled after entry would also
be exempt from the new deeming requirements that mandate that
the income and resources of an immigrant's sponsor be counted
when determining Medicaid eligibility.
These proposals assist the most vulnerable groups of
immigrants for whom lack of access to medical care may produce
long-term negative consequences and whose medical care may
result from an unexpected injury or illness that occurs after
their arrival.
- Extend the Exemption for Refugees/Asylees from 5 to 7
Years
This proposal would extend the exemption from Medicaid
bans and deeming requirements for refugees and asylees by an
additional 2 years for a total of 7 years.
Protection of refugees and asylees has been a
consistent feature of U.S. immigration policy. Refugees and
asylees often face challenges that other immigrants do not
because of persecution. Extending the exemption for an
additional two years allows for these unique circumstances and
possible difficulties these individuals may have in becoming
self-sufficient. In addition, more recent populations have
included larger numbers of elderly individuals, who may take a
longer time to adjust to new circumstances.
STRENGTHENING FINANCIAL ACCOUNTABILITY
- Establish a Federal Payment Commission
Establish a commission to review equity among the
States in Medicaid financing formula (FMAP), as well as the base
year and growth rates in the per capita spending limits.
The formula for determining the Federal and State
contribution to the Medicaid program, which is based on per
capita income in a State, has long been criticized as failing to
adequately reflect State variations in their ability to raise
revenues and in magnitude of State need. An impartial
commission could make recommendations for a more refined formula.
Similarly, once the per capita cap has an established track
record, an impartial commission would make recommendations for
further improvements to improve equity across States.
- Strengthen Medicaid Eligibility Quality Control (MEQC)
Modify and strengthen Medicaid Eligibility Quality
Control (MEQC) system. Under a per capita cap limit on spending
where Federal funding is tied to the number of beneficiaries in a
State, it would become more important than ever to ensure Federal
matching payments are provided to States only for their spending
on people who actually meet the State's eligibility criteria.
The current MEQC system is the appropriate tool for this task,
but it must be modified to accommodate and measure population
components of the per capita cap. States would have a reasonable
error tolerance 1996/03/06; NIH Testimony; Neuroscience Research at NIH