Showing posts with label budget. Show all posts
Showing posts with label budget. Show all posts

27 January 2013

Ongoing problems with NC's managed care transition, and how to address them

From The Arc of North Carolina

Ongoing problems with NC's managed care transition, and how to address them

In mid-2011, the NC legislature passed a bill that would dramatically change the way the state of North Carolina provides services for people with developmental disabilities, mental illness, and substance abuse (MH/DD/SA) issues. The state would shift from a fee-for-service system to a managed care system.

The Arc originally opposed the move to a managed care system and still has significant reservations about the design. However, the political reality is that managed care is here to stay, and The Arc is committed to ensuring that NC's managed care system effectively meets the needs of people with disabilities.

A year and a half after the initial move towards managed care, we are feeling the impact of the plan’s short-sighted design and hasty implementation. Across the state, many of the entities responsible for implementing the shift to managed care (generally referred to as LME/MCOs) are struggling to make the managed care transition and are behind schedule. The effects of these transition problems can be felt throughout North Carolina.

In Mecklenburg County, the state first found that MeckLINK, the LME/MCO responsible for MH/DD/SA services in the area, had not achieved the necessary milestones to switch to a managed care model by its February 1st deadline. The state then re-assigned the responsibility to implement the new managed care system in Mecklenburg to a LME/MCO already operating under the managed care system, Cardinal Innovations Behavioral Healthcare. This decision meant that millions of dollars of public money MeckLINK spent preparing for the new managed care system would be wasted, and Mecklenburg County would adopt the new managed care system several months later than planned.

On January 23, DHHS, now under the leadership of Governor McCrory’s administration, gave MeckLINK a new target date of March 1st, providing it meets its “readiness benchmarks.” This change occurred just eight days before Cardinal Innovations was to take over.

In the southeast corner of the state, Coastal Care, the LME/MCO responsible for MH/DD/SA services for 5 counties including New Hanover, will miss its deadline to convert to the new managed care system by February 1st. While this came to light recently and details are scarce, for whatever reason the LME/MCO is not prepared to switch to the managed care system on schedule, which will result in a significant loss in savings.

Large overruns and implementation controversies are nothing new to NC’s managed care transition. Starting in January 2011, Western Highlands Network, the LME/MCO that manages MH/DD/SA services in 8 counties in the western part of the state, ran a monthly deficit of over $500,000.

Not every LME/MCO has made headlines with its transition to managed care. Many have made the transition largely out of the limelight, but questions remain about their readiness and the effectiveness of current operations.

Obviously, there have been significant problems with North Carolina’s transition to a managed care system for MH/DD/SA services. Now is the time for state leaders to learn from these controversies and make reasoned decisions about the future of our system, and the people it serves.

The Arc believes problems with the state’s transition to managed care stem from an overzealous rush to find savings, rather than a thoughtful and deliberate approach to system design. The operationally arbitrary deadlines for management entities to convert to the managed care waiver are a key example. Converting to a managed care system is not easy- it is expensive and disruptive. We must be sure that LME/MCO’s are truly ready to begin before they turn the switch.

The struggles of LME/MCOs the state deemed ready to move forward to the new system, including Western Highlands Network, prove that the prior notion of what ‘ready’ means is insufficient and needs to be re-examined. Clearly, LME/MCOs must prepare business systems capable of dealing with the large volume of claims, payments, and calls they will receive. It is also important that they are prepared to implement any new services available under the managed care system, respond to people with disabilities and their families about their concerns, and have a well-trained provider network that understands the intricacies of the new system.

Our system’s focus should be on the needs of individuals it is meant to support and the providers working within the system, rather than dreams of short term savings. Getting it right the first time with a well-measured, steady approach will lead to efficiency, cost containment, and higher satisfaction among consumers, providers, and LME/MCOs.

The Arc believes we must adhere the following basic principles if we are to make this transition to Managed Care successful. 

Stability for individuals served and those who provide the services must be the highest transition priority. No LME/MCO should be allowed to shift to managed care if they are not ready. It should be clear that readiness means the ability to successfully support people with disabilities. 


Decisions about LME/MCO mergers and “assignments” need to be about competency and not about politics. 

Where competing goals exist, the state needs to be clear about which it values more. For example, ‘local public management and ‘administrative efficiencies’ are not always mutually exclusive, but in certain areas they may be. 

All interested parties, including The Arc, must be open to new ideas and approaches surrounding managed care. There is no dishonor in adjusting a plan to meet current circumstances. The needs of people with disabilities should dictate policy, not the established position or ego of any state agency, MCO/LME, private organization, or individual. A real partnership with stakeholders must be achieved if we are going to succeed.

Finding savings within state systems for people with disabilities is certainly laudable, but if the savings mean sacrificing the ability of the system to perform its mission, then they are counter-productive. As the saying goes, buy it right or buy it twice.

Comments

MCO's

We who are involved in all the changes sit back and watch and read all that is occuring. We hear that different MCO's get different PMPM amounts and do not understand why. We hear that LME's can not get it together in the outlined time frame. We watch and read about Western Highlands being half a million dollars in the red for months while the board did not realize it. We hear and wonder how MCO's like Western Highlands have the monies to hire agencies like the private group they hired at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars to tell them what they are doing wrong after this State hired Mercer to tell them that and still the Mercer organization is at Western Highlands looking at what they are or are not doing right over a year after they began operating while the private agency is there. Now we hear of Mercer going into other LME's to see if they are ready. Why? We watch Western Highlands fire their CEO and pay an agency thousands of dollars to locate a new CEO. We hear agencies not getting reimbursed in a timely manner over never ending changing requirements. We have watched as agency, therapists and psychiatrist have left Western Highlands and I am sure this is the same for other MCO's and wonder where this State is in thinking of the Best Interest of the individuals that they are to serve while spending monies on things that should have already been in place. What is wrong with this picture? Does anyone wonder why all these monies are being spent on requirements that were supposed to be in place instead of on the individuals that they are to serve. I have not heard of any direct care staff which are the back bone of all this getting anything extra for all their efforts. We are forgetting the reason all these MCO's were started, the individuals that they are Supposed to Serve.

01 December 2012

Tillis Requests Special Session To Address PCS/Group Home Crisis



Tillis Requests Special Session To Address PCS/Group Home Crisis 
Special Session first step to solve crisis before Holiday break
 
Speaker of the NC House Thom Tillis has formally requested that Governor Perdue convene a Special Session of the General Assembly in order to address the looming Personal Care Services (PCS) crisis that threatens the housing of thousands of people with disabilities living in group homes.
The Arc of North Carolina is thrilled by this development and appreciates the Speaker's leadership on this issue and his continued dedication to North Carolinians with intellectual and developmental disabilities.
The Arc will continue to keep you updated on the PCS/Group Home Crisis as it develops. Please check www.ArcNC.org for information as it happens.
The Arc's advocacy staff is evaluating it's next steps in terms of advocacy. Look for an action alert next week.
The letter from the Speaker's office is below. See a copy of the original here.
---
Governor Perdue,
As you know, the General Assembly appropriated $39.7 million in this year's budget to provide for temporary, short-term assistance to residents who would no longer be eligible to receive Medicaid State Plan Personal Care Services under the new eligibility criteria, effective January 1, 2013. The budget provision was drafted as a short-term measure to ensure the funds went to those affected residents who would be potentially discharged from their facility, but would not immediately have a safe community placement. This budget provision was intended to prevent the Department of Health & Human Services from using funds for administrative expenses, appeals, rent deposits, or other items, as requested by the Department during budget negotiations. The Blue Ribbon Commission was summarily tasked with developing long-term solutions to ensure Medicaid beneficiaries receive the services they need.
The General Assembly has been working diligently over the last several weeks and months to determine solutions that would prevent the potential unintended closure of mental health and IDD group homes at the conclusion of this calendar year. It is now incumbent upon all of us to do what is necessary to solve this problem. In order to ensure that our state's most vulnerable citizens are protected and allowed to remain in their homes, it is my opinion that legislative action by the General Assembly is needed. Therefore, I respectfully request that you convene a Special Session of the General Assembly under the authority granted to you by Article Ill, Section 5(7) of the North Carolina Constitution.
The North Carolina House of Representatives stands ready to take immediate action to resolve this impending problem. If you should decide to convene a Special Session, you have my word that no additional matters will be taken up by the House of Representatives. We will act quickly and decisively to protect the residents of mental health and IDD group homes, and the session will end when that action is concluded.
I look forward to your prompt reply. Thank you for your time and attention concerning this very important matter.
Sincerely,
Thom Tillis
 
cc: Senator Phil Berger

09 September 2012

Thoughts to Share...

Hi, All!

Those of you who already know me are aware that I am more comfortable in small group settings where information is being actively discussed verbally…  so this form of communication is a stretch for me… blogging.  I have had to learn to stretch much in my life as has many of you, too…  and each stretch has its time of pain and relief.  Pain in the act of learning how to do it and relief that perhaps I will not only live through it but actually find something of value to take away to help my family and others and hopefully personally grow into that person I always wanted to be when I grow up…;)!  Therefore, with that said, I will be sharing in this venue as though I am visiting with you all in a small group to encourage dialogue so we can all learn together!  One of the HUGE advantages I find in this venue is that whatever your schedule, you can access and be part of the conversation... 

Now, talking about VERY serious topics that affect lives so directly is vital to finding real world solutions; however, I have also learned from my middle daughter, Cassie, just how VITAL humor is to life, too…  so I am taking a life stretch lesson from her and hoping you all will allow me this license to suggest we create our own version of a traditional arcade-style game to help us work through our frustrations while we learn together as well… and just maybe a better real world solution will emerge… (Okay, I admit it freely, I have often been accused of being a dreamer…  but we all know, too, what is needed is also possible…if we work together throughout the system!)
So…
Have you ever played Whack-a-Mole? You know, the arcade-style game where a mole suddenly appears and you have a soft mallet that you hit it to score points… the game increases in speed as you progress through the levels until the moles appear so frequently and randomly you cannot predict where they will appear or react fast enough when they pop up…and then soon after, the GAME OVER sign appears… and your tickets earned spit out of the meter for you to go redeem at the prize counter and it usually takes a LOT of tickets to get the item you actually want when you get to the counter?  Yeah, that is the one I am talking about…;)!!


Traditional Whack-a-Mole Arcade Game

I mention this game because at first glance we feel we are caught in this type of arcade-style life where the holes in the ground are the various funding streams, service definitions, operational functions, etc and the moles are the various items that seemingly pop up all of a sudden and are all “urgent” in some way or another requiring our immediate attention, input, advocacy.  It is so hard to keep up with what is happening in the URGENT file (the moles appearing quickly on the screen) much less to delve into understanding where it is coming from or what is causing them to pop-up in the first place (ongoing systemic issues that require deeper investigation along with committed effort and resources to address).   

Crystal with help of others has provided this site with extensive information that shows the moles on the screen in the “Urgent” file and additional in-depth sourcing information that gives a view into the tunnel to understand why.  I applaud this approach to allow ANYONE interested to participate at whatever level desired.

So, let’s play a round of Whack-a-Mole together… shall we?!  For today, I select the Medicaid funding channel and the current “Urgent” mole is the imminent change at the end of this month from CAP-MRDD plan to the CAP-IDD Plan.  This does not affect those who are currently being served through NC Innovations Waiver.  See the CAP-IDD Decision Flowchart below:


Please share your thoughts, and also let us know which “mole” should we take a whack at understanding better at our next blog time together?   (Be aware that just like the game, we often have a “mole” appear in the same place many times usually for different aspect of that topic that needs dealing with at that moment)…    
    
To all those who know that “Game Over” can truly be a life and death matter for those we love and does reflect the overall health of a community, too!    ~ Anna

09 August 2012

From Arc NC: Unintended Budget Cuts Must Be Fixed!


Unintended Budget Cuts Must Be Fixed!

[ view original posting ]

It’s time for the Governor and members of the General Assembly to fix the “unintended” reductions of the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) for people with disabilities. Both legislators and the Governor’s administration seem to agree that an additional cut of $4.3 million to the community system was unintended. Unintended or not, this cut, on top of the $20 million intended reduction by the General Assembly, is causing serious harm to people with disabilities and their families.

It is hard do imagine that while the state is attempting to negotiate a settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice on ADA issues, we would allow further reductions to the fragile infrastructure of the community system. Services that allow people to live at home or in community residential settings are affected by this cut the most. Letting this “accidental” cut stand will hurt people.

The Arc, in a letter to the Governor, has asked that she take the lead on eliminating this cut. We are sending a similar letter to the House and Senate leadership asking them to join with the Governor to fix this unfortunate mistake. Hopefully, all parties will work together to do so.

Members can help by letting the Governor and General Assembly know that this cut must be restored. Let them know that our fragile community system cannot stand more reductions and that people with disabilities deserve better!

Contact:

From The Arc NC: Lessons from the Western Highlands Network overruns

From The Arc of North Carolina

Lessons from the Western Highlands Network overruns

[ view original posting ]

The cost overruns at Western Highlands Network (WHN), the first LME to become an MCO under a new law, are a serious issue. The solution to these overruns that the state and WHN has come up with is clear: further service cuts. Hopefully, these overruns are just a bump in the road and not the light of an oncoming train, indicative of a system-wide underestimation of managed care cost. Most likely it will be somewhere in the middle.

We can only hope that people with disabilities will not be harmed further by these overruns than they already have been by the shift to managed care. The Arc hopes WHN survives these problems and succeeds for the sake of the individuals they are in the business of supporting.

Regardless of the reasons for the problem, the State, meaning both the Administration and the Legislature, should be paying close attention. Though we do not yet know the specifics that led to these overruns, several things should be perfectly clear:
  1. We need a real examination of the process. Regardless of why, no MCO should have such significant funding issues six months into operation. Some are understandably questioning the leadership of former CEO Arthor Carder, but it’s hard to believe anyone would question his commitment to the people WHN served, or the commitment of WHN’s staff. The fact that this MCO was allowed to go live without the tools to succeed is not only a mark on WHN, but more importantly a significant mark on the DHHS processes that deemed them ready.
  2. We should not only examine the process that led to these overruns, but the 1915(b)(c) waiver model as a whole. It is no secret that The Arc does not believe this model is appropriate for people with IDD. The issues with WHN should cause public officials to question the model as well. As WHN looks for places to cut Medicaid rates, it becomes clear that the system prevents them from even considering state operated facilities [state institutions] for reductions comparable to community services. Managed Care was sold to legislators, and the public, on the assumption of MCOs’ ability to effectively manage all public resources. Clearly, that was not true then, nor is it now. This disconnect makes the state’s difficult transition to a new model of care even more difficult. If the 1915(b)(c) managed care model works for community-based services it should also work for state-managed facilities. This issue is just one of many model design questions that must be questioned.
  3. State officials told the WHN Board that they should expect no additional state funds to make up for overruns. This begs the question: is the stated goal of “better access to services” just spin? When rate reductions, utilization reductions, and Medicaid paybacks are the primary tools used to eliminate deficits, it is difficult to take seriously that better access is a real goal. Better service access would more likely be achieved if the state were willing to adjust the capitation rate or infuse some money while WHN becomes better prepared to “manage.”

Though not enough details have been released yet to determine the specifics of the WHN overruns, we do know:
  1. The only way “savings” will be achieved through this managed care model is through cuts. That should be clear as we review the differences in what WHN was paid and what they have said they needed to provide services. We know that Medicaid cost must be controlled but an honest discussion of how managed care achieves this is critical if people will have faith in this system.
  2. The way “at risk” is used in this model is insulting to families, consumers and the people who provide the supports for them. Public MCO’s are not really “at risk” entities. They have raised no capital to fund their organizations; they receive generous administrative allocations separate from services funds, and have the ability to cut rates and services to consumers if they exceed budgets. Providers of services are the ones really at risk. With subjective decision making, constant rate reductions, no guaranteed “administrative” funds or excise payments to fund a MCO’s “risk” reserves, many providers will likely go out of business. Most importantly, people with disabilities and their families are the most at risk…at risk for another failed effort at reform jeopardizing their ability to live successful lives in the community.

06 August 2012

WRAL re NC MH Reform & Parent Info.

WRAL report re Managed Care and IDD, etc.
1 message


MaryKShort@aol.com <MaryKShort@aol.com>Sun, Aug 5, 2012 at 11:15 AM
To: MaryKShort@aol.com

FYI ... very well written and researched article by Mark Binker at WRAL.com.  I can see that there are a lot of good talking points to use when you contact your elected representatives to express your concerns or your experiences. 


In the article, a Ms. Laurie Haley is quoted:  Laurie Haley has seen ups and downs as North Carolina has slogged through mental health reform efforts over the past decade. For a three-year period from 2005 through 2008, she said, reform seemed to have worked for her daughter, Alissa. Other times, dealing with local and state mental health bureaucrats was more fraught.

That period of time covers the pre-Home Supports service definitions.  I happen to agree totally with her EXCEPT for the fact that it was at the end of 2007 and into early 2008 when the state first tried to implement the 40-hour limit!  I don't know if she was impacted by that at the time or if she even knows it is part of the Innovations waiver.  I have written the reporter to ask.

Mary K. Short
828-632-5888 or 704-451-4144 (cell)


Posted: 7:09 p.m. Friday (August 3, 2012) Updated: 12:11 a.m. yesterday

Patients, advocates wary as NC again reforms mental health system

By MARK BINKER, WRAL.com Multimedia Reporter


Raleigh, N.C. — North Carolina is in the midst of an effort to remake the state's public safety net for those with mental health, substance abuse and developmental disabilities.

Lawmakers, administrators and taxpayers want to see if the change to a "managed care" model can really save millions of dollars and avoid the over-spending debacles that marked the first system remake a decade ago.

At stake is how the North Carolina manages more than $2.4 billion in state and federal mental health dollars that flow through local mental health agencies, and how individuals with mental illness will live their lives every day.

"All I want to do is keep my daughter at home," said Laurie Haley.

For her, reforms success or failure will be measured by how it affects her daughter, Alissa. The 27-year-old woman has severe developmental disabilities and also suffers from seizures. Alissa needs help dressing, eating and taking care of other needs. Those who help her need to be able to administer medicine and prepared to act in case a seizure makes her fall in the shower or comes on her in public.

Haley says that she has, for now, ensured that the transition to managed care won't mean fewer services for her daughter. But she said other families making the switch are still encountering problems.

"What I'm hearing is that they're still trying to reduce services for people," Haley said.

That small-scale skepticism of the new system was amplified this summer when a blistering report said that one of the first local mental health authorities given permission to make the transition was not ready for the switch to managed care.

State and local mental health administrators say that one experience should not color the entire transition effort and that the system is on the road to improvement. Advocates, some who work providing services to clients and even some lawmakers say the process may be moving too fast. They worry that counties such as Wake and Durham, which have just begun the move toward managed care, could encounter the same mistakes and problems seen elsewhere.

...

[ There's much more... Read the Full Story on WRAL.com ]

And while statewide success will be measured in millions of dollars, Haley and others like her will measure it in terms of what it means for their loved ones.

"My daughter is not a disability, she's a human being with a disability," Haley said. "If I have the right to live at home and you have the right to live at home, she should too."

----------- more from Mary Short...

EXTRA:  Mercer Report link
2ND EXTRA:  Federal Report link and quote from that report

C. Health, Safety and Quality

Abuse, neglect, exploitation, the use of mechanical and chemical restraints, unexplained injuries and denial of services are far too prevalent in our current long-term system of services. CMS has made significant strides in holding states accountable for addressing health and safety issues in the 1915(c) Medicaid Home and Community Based Waiver program; but requirements governing program design, state monitoring and reporting to CMS have not been mandated for managed care programs approved under Section 1115 demonstration waivers or under the dual eligible pilot demonstrations.
3rd EXTRA:  Other news reports from Raleigh sources regarding other budget cuts and budget overruns

http://projects.newsobserver.com/under_the_dome/mental_health_office_needs_lots_of_work_consultant_says#storylink=cpy
Submitted  by lbonner on 2012-07-26 14:37
Under the Dome | mental health | N.C.  Department of Health and
Human Services | Western Highlands  Network

Last week, we wrote about a local mental health office that  covers
western North Carolina counties losing $3 million since switching  to
managed care in January.

A consultant's report issued this week  describes problems at Western
Highlands Network, one of the first local  mental heath offices to
convert to a managed care system.

Among other  things, the report says that the information Western
Highlands leaders  receive about services, use and costs is inadequate,
and that it is not  keeping good track of Medicaid claims.

The report goes on for nine pages.  In short, it says Western Highlands
needs lots of improvements, and the  consultant recommends close
monitoring by the state Department of Health and  Human Services.

Under managed care, the local mental health office gets a  set amount
of money to treat mentally ill patients who rely on Medicaid or  state
funds.

Western Highlands Network became a managed care  organization in
January. By next January, managed care organizations  for
government-paid mental health services will cover the entire  state.
And ... news article re WHN & Mercer Report is in it and easy to read!