News spotlight: Immediate jeopardy at Parkland puts VBP incentive pay in peril
Nurse Leader Weekly, September 12, 2011
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Nurse Leader Weekly!
The possibility that Parkland Memorial Hospital could lose $417 million in federal pay stemming from last month's "immediate jeopardy" declaration for shameful quality problems uncovered by state and federal surveyors sounds draconian.
But frankly, such harsh punishment is unlikely, given the fact that Parkland is a 140-year-old safety net facility with national historic significance. Such a decision would surely shut the hospital down, and Dallas couldn't withstand that. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will work very hard with Parkland to get these problems fixed, I'm sure.
Additionally, CMS officials tell me their 344-page federal report documenting Parkland's problems is, in part, the result of a concerted effort to be more assertive as they investigate complaints. I'll explain more about that shortly.
But there's another consequence lurking with a much more realistic impact on Parkland's revenue, one that as yet has not been the topic of much open discussion.
The hospital to which the assassinated President John F. Kennedy was rushed in 1963 could well be the first major acute care facility in the nation prohibited from receiving millions in incentive payments under a key provision of the Affordable Care Act.
Under that rule, called the Hospital Inpatient Value-Based Purchasing program, roughly 3,000 hospitals in the nation will see their Medicare payments reduced by 1% in fiscal 2013, and more in later years.
To read the rest of this free article, click here.
Source: HealthLeaders Media
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Nurse Leader Weekly!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- State medical board will hear unprofessional charges against OB-GYN
- The debate continues: Nurses who reported physician to the Texas Medical Board file federal appeal
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- Don't let these sentinel events trigger falsely
- Arkansas woman convicted for HIPAA violation
- Q/A: Coding infusions to correct low potassium levels
- Q&A: Coding for protein malnutrition
- Q&A tackles coding questions about injections and infusions
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Searched
