Skip Navigation


The Gerontologist Advance Access originally published online on May 20, 2009
The Gerontologist 2009 49(5):587-595; doi:10.1093/geront/gnp044
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
49/5/587    most recent
gnp044v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Arling, G.
Right arrow Articles by Cooke, V.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Arling, G.
Right arrow Articles by Cooke, V.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Gerontological Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Medicaid Nursing Home Pay for Performance: Where Do We Stand?

Greg Arling, PhD1,2, Carol Job, RN, RAC-CT3 and Valerie Cooke, BA, BS4

2 Center for Aging Research and Regenstrief Institute, School of Medicine, Indiana University, Indianapolis
3 Myers and Stauffer, LLC, Topeka, Kansas
4 Nursing Facility Rates and Policy Division, Department of Human Services, St. Paul, Minnesota

1 Address correspondence to Greg Arling, PhD, Indiana University Center for Aging Research, Health Information and Translational Sciences Building, 410 West 10th Street, Suite 2000, Indianapolis, IN 46202-3012. E-mail: garling{at}iupui.edu


  Abstract

Purpose: Nursing home pay-for-performance (P4P) programs are intended to maximize the value obtained from public and private expenditures by measuring and rewarding better nursing home performance. We surveyed the 6 states with operational P4P systems in 2007. We describe key features of six Medicaid nursing home P4P systems and make recommendations for further development of nursing home P4P. Design and Methods: We surveyed the six states with operational P4P systems in 2007. Results: The range of performance measures employed by the states is quite broad: staffing level and satisfaction, findings from the regulatory system, clinical quality indicators, resident quality of life or satisfaction with care, family satisfaction, access to care for special populations, and efficiency. The main data sources for the measures are the Minimum Data Set (MDS), nursing home inspections, special surveys of nursing home residents, consumers or employees, and facility cost reports or other administrative systems. The most common financial incentive for better performance is a percentage bonus or an add-on to a facility's per diem rate. The bonus is generally proportional to a facility performance score, which consists of simple or weighted sums of scores on individual measures. Implications: States undertaking nursing home P4P programs should involve key stakeholders at all stages of P4P system design and implementation. Performance measures should be comprehensive, valid and reliable, risk adjusted where appropriate, and communicated clearly to providers and consumers. The P4P system should encourage provider investment in better care yet recognize state fiscal restraints. Consumer report cards, quality improvement initiatives, and the regulatory process should complement and reinforce P4P. Finally, the P4P system should be transparent and continuously evaluated.

Keywords: Quality of care, Reimbursement, Long-term care, Policy, Incentives

Received June 12, 2008; Accepted October 7, 2008

Decision Editor: Jeanne A. Teresi, EdD, PhD


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 The GerontologistHome page
V. Cooke, G. Arling, T. Lewis, K. A. Abrahamson, C. Mueller, and L. Edstrom
Minnesota's Nursing Facility Performance-Based Incentive Payment Program: An Innovative Model for Promoting Care Quality
Gerontologist, October 21, 2009; (2009) gnp140v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.