Long Term Care Hospitals

The New York Times had an interesting article about the growing industry of long term care hospitals.  The greedy owners manipulate the Medicare and Medicaid regulations on reimbursement to make even more money and profit.

Fewer than 10 hospitals dedicated to long-term care existed in the early 1980s, according to Medicare officials.  More than 400 long term care hospitals have opened nationally in the last 25 years.   These hospitals have sprouted driven by Medicare rules that offer high payments for hospitals that treat patients for an average of 25 days or more.  Long-term care hospitals now treat about 200,000 patients a year, including 130,000 Medicare patients — at a projected cost of $4.8 billion to the government this year, up from $400 million in 1993. 

Among the more peculiar aspects of long-term care hospitals is that nearly half of them, and almost all of Select’s, are actually “hospitals within hospitals.” They do not have their own buildings and instead occupy a floor or two of an existing hospital. They contract most services from the host hospital, so they can be opened quickly and cheaply.

Yet under Medicare rules, because they have different owners, the two hospitals are considered separate for payment purposes. This means there can be a second reimbursement when a patient is simply transferred between floors.  Under Medicare payment rules, traditional hospitals often lose money on patients who stay for long periods. So they have a financial incentive to discharge patients to long-term hospitals, which then receive new Medicare payments for admitting the patients. Both hospitals benefit financially.  The industry’s growth is an example of how health care companies can exploit the $450 billion Medicare program.

 

Few long term care hospitals have doctors on staff. Select, which has 23,000 employees and provided care to 42,000 patients in 2009, has no physicians on its board or in management. In 2007, it hired a physician for a new position, national medical director. The physician, Dr. David Jarvis, does not work at Select’s headquarters in Mechanicsburg, Pa., and has no management responsibilities. He estimated he spent only 10 hours a week working for Select Medical. Select Medical Corporation is a publicly traded Pennsylvania company that runs 89 long-term hospitals, more than any other company.

Lawsuits, state inspection reports and statistics deep in federal reports paint a troubling picture of the care offered at some Select hospitals, and at long-term care hospitals in general. For-profit long-term hospitals generally spend less on patients and have higher margins than comparable nonprofits, according to data from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, a Congressional research agency. In 2007, for-profit long-term care hospitals had margins of 6 percent on Medicare patients, while regular hospitals lost an average of 6 percent on Medicare patients, according to the commission. In a presentation to investors last month, Select Medical reported that it improved its margins by lowering staffing levels and supply costs. Medicare inspection reports, however, describe preventable patient injuries and deaths, and they portray Select’s hospitals as understaffed and with high turnover.

In 2007 and 2008, Select’s hospitals were cited at a rate almost four times that of regular hospitals for serious violations of Medicare rules. Other long-term care hospitals were cited at a rate about twice that of regular hospitals. Long-term care hospitals also had a higher incidence of bedsores and infections than regular hospitals in 2006, the most recent year for which federal data is available.

Unlike other specialized hospitals, like psychiatric or children’s hospitals, long-term care hospitals do not treat specific types of patients or offer services unavailable in regular hospitals. They are defined solely by the fact that they keep patients longer than other hospitals. They are also smaller than a typical hospital, averaging about 60 beds.

Despite the rapid expansion of long-term care hospitals, Medicare has never closely examined their care. Unlike traditional hospitals, Medicare does not penalize them financially if they fail to submit quality data.

Select also manipulates how long patients stay, to maximize its profits. A hospital is certified as a long-term care hospital and receives high Medicare reimbursements if most patients stay at least 25 days. But Medicare pays the hospital a set amount for each patient, meaning that patients who stay longer than that become less profitable. Therefore, long-term care hospitals are most profitable if most patients are discharged at or just after their 25th day, with a few discharged earlier. Select adheres closely to this formula, with an average length of stay at its hospitals of about 24 days, according to public filings. At some Select hospitals, the 25th day is called the “magic day,” ex-employees say.

Partly owned by a private equity firm, Select Medical sold shares to the public in September. Its top two executives, a father and son named Rocco and Robert Ortenzio, have made about $200 million from salary, benefits and share sales since founding Select in November 1996. The Ortenzios, who are veterans of the for-profit hospital industry, still own about 10 percent of the company, worth about $200 million.
 

Staffing and Fall Prevention

Another great Star-Tribune article about the inadequate staffing levels in nursing homes.   John Doll and Sharon Erickson Ropes wrote the article.  They are state senators and policymakers in Minnesota.  They focused on two important themes that ran through the entire prior series: inadequate staffing and staff training at Minnesota nursing homes.  Both relate to funding of Medicaid reimbursements and the greed of the for profit national chains.

State funding for nursing homes has been a highly charged issue at the State Capitol under the Pawlenty administration. The governor has repeatedly thwarted efforts to raise funding for nursing homes despite protests from senior advocacy organizations and the ardent efforts of legislators on both sides of the aisle. Just this past year the governor unalloted an increase in reimbursements that would have helped nursing homes keep up with the cost of providing quality care to their residents.  However, safety and quality care should never be compromised. Failing to properly fund these services for our elders leads to tragic outcomes.  Budget cuts are forcing caregivers to be responsible for more and more vulnerable adults without adequate supervision, resources or proper training.

Nursing homes depend on state and federal dollars to keep their doors open. As funding has been stripped away, these facilities have been forced to reduce staff, freeze wages, delay needed upgrades and repairs, and sometimes cut corners when it comes to providing quality care, as was shown by the Star Tribune series. Inadequate staffing leads to poor working conditions for caregivers, which in turn significantly increases the risk of serious mistakes.

Our goal is to supply nursing homes with the tools and resources they need to provide quality care to their residents, and to ensure that when accidents occur, every step is taken to prevent future mishaps and to provide seniors and their families with the answers they deserve.

 

 

Overpayments to Nursing Homes

Center for Medicare Advocacy issued a bulletin about overpayments to nursing homes.  The bulletin explains the long history of nursing homes collecting more money than they deserve or are entitled to for services especially for nonexistent rehabilitation.  Changes have recently been made to rein in wasteful spending and overpayments.

In March 2009, as in previous years, Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) recommended that Congress not increase Medicare nursing home rates.   MedPAC reported that "the aggregate Medicare margin for freestanding" nursing homes was 14.5% in 2007; that for the seventh consecutive year, the aggregate Medicare margins exceeded 10%; and a one quarter of SNFs show profit margins of at least 24.8%.   That is a big profit margin paid for by taxpayers.

 

How overpayments occur:

SNFs are paid for services they do not provide. PPS pays SNFs a daily rate based on the assessed needs of the resident.  Although getting paid based on the assessment, most residents were not provided the therapy they required in order to be placed into those assessment categories.  SNFs did not provide the amount of rehabilitation services they were paid to provide and rehabilitation services actually provided to residents under PPS decreased.  Now it will pay only for services that are actually provided in the SNF. Billions of dollars in overpayments have been wasted.  CMS is not recouping the billions of dollars of overpayments from the previous four years.
 

The falsity of "concurrent" therapy.  SNFs shifted from one-on-one therapy to "concurrent" therapy, a method by which one professional therapist works with multiple residents on different therapy tasks at the same time, but SNFs still bill Medicare as if each resident received 100% of the therapist's attention. For example, SNF Medicare reimbursement rules have allowed a therapist treating four patients concurrently during the course of one hour to bill Medicare for four full hours of therapy. CMS reports that more than a quarter (28.26%) of therapy provided in SNFs is now concurrent. CMS will close this loophole when it implements revisions to Medicare by requiring allocation of concurrent therapy time and by limiting concurrent therapy to two residents.  CMS is not recouping overpayments for the many past years of "concurrent therapy."

Greed.  When several large multi-state nursing home chains filed for bankruptcy protection in the late 1990s, Congress responded by increasing Medicare reimbursement rates for SNFs in multiple ways. Although Congress increased the nursing component of all SNF rates by 16.66%, SNFs did not spend the billion-dollar rate increase on nurse staffing, as Congress intended. The GAO found, "in the aggregate, SNFs' nurse staffing ratios changed little after the increase in the nursing component of the Medicare payment rate took effect. Overall, SNFs' average nursing time increased by 1.9 minutes per patient day."  The national for profit chains took the increase and put it in profits to increase their stock instead of using the money to increase staffing to provide proper and adequate care.

CMS has taken strong steps to eliminate some of the waste and overpayments to SNFs that have been well-documented by MedPAC and the GAO for many years. In the final regulations published in August, CMS eliminated the look-back period; recalibrated the rates to maintain budget neutrality; revised the rules for concurrent therapy; and is considering development of a SNF-specific wage index. These changes and the changes included in H.R. 3200 should not result in reduced staffing and quality of care, as suggested by the nursing home industry. Instead, they will improve the integrity of the Medicare program by ensuring that SNFS are reimbursed accurately and fairly for the services they actually provide.

 

 

Texas Medicaid funding places residents at risk

The Dallas Morning News had an article about the amount of money Texas provides to nursing home residents who are on Medicaid.  The article emphasizes that the amount of money is directly related to the quality of care and shows how Texas treats its most vulnerable citizens.

Texas' Medicaid program only reimburses nursing homes an average of $112.79 per patient per day – less than 48 other states.  Texas remains 30 percent below the national average of $163.27 per day.  Patient advocates and industry experts say Texas' 49th-place ranking means that nursing homes can't pay employees competitive wages. That in turn leads to high staff turnover, which hurts residents' care.  It is no surprise that 28 percent of Texas' 1,100 nursing homes received the worst rating and only 10 percent scored the best when Medicare announced its new nursing home ratings late last year.

The reimbursements now don't even cover nursing homes' actual costs and would need to increase to at least $125 a day for facilities to break even.  Skilled nursing care costs tens of thousands of dollars a year, so many nursing home residents eventually exhaust their personal assets and qualify for Medicaid, the federal-state health care program for the poor.

Nursing homes have tried to hold the line on their labor costs, but that leads to high staff turnover. It's difficult to compete with hospitals, which pay better, so nursing homes routinely lose registered nurses, licensed vocational nurses and nurses' aides.  "The average annual turnover rate is 87 percent for certified nurses' aides," said Pearl Merritt, who leads a center task force on long-term care. "It's a challenge to maintain high-quality care in a revolving-door environment."

Nurses' aides can work at a McDonald's for more than what Texas nursing homes are willing to pay them.

 

 

Obama's budget and nursing homes.

McKnight's had an article about President Obama's budget and how it will affect nursing homes.  It may be too early to tell but it looks like nursing home reimbursements will increase under the new budget.  Many nursing home operators are praising President Obama's proposed 2010 budget for provisions that would help educate and train nurses.   The budget also proposes “bundling” of some Medicare funding for post-acute care.  The goal of bundled payments is to lower hospital readmission rates and decrease the overall cost of health care.

Larry Minnix, the CEO of the American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging, highlighted another part of the budget: a proposal to allocate $1 billion “to capitalize and launch the Affordable Housing Trust Fund to develop, rehabilitate and preserve affordable housing and increased funding for the project-based rental assistance program to preserve 1.3 million affordable rental units will help moderate income elders find and keep a place to call home.

 

S.C. to post Medicaid payments online

S.C. to post Medicaid payments to doctors, nursing homes online 

South Carolina is now posting how much the local nursing home or doctor gets in Mediciad reimbursements.

"We are pleased to be able to offer the public a way to track how their money is spent in the Medicaid program," Emma Forkner, director of the state Department of Health and Human Services, said in a statement. "This kind of spending transparency is key to ensuring accountability from government agencies and those who get paid by them."

The move by DHHS, which administers the $5.4 billion Medicaid program, will help DHHS locate "unusual billing patterns"  and hopefully detect fraud.  

The site also provides information about dentists, hospitals and any of the other nearly 30,000 health care providers in South Carolina who participate in the Medicaid program. It includes their reimbursements as well as the number of patients they saw. More than 800,000 South Carolinians receive Medicaid, the health insurance program for the poor and disabled.

To access the data, go to http://www.dhhs.state.sc.us/dhhsnew/Transparency.asp and click on Medicaid Transparency Database.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Corporations take assets from bankrupt nursing homes

Interesting article from the Courant.com about a deal to sell the bankrupt Haven Healthcare nursing-home chain.  Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said that Formation Capital, which owns Genesis HealthCare, notified the state that it was pulling out of an $85 million deal to take over 14 of Haven's homes in Connecticut and 10 in other New England states, without giving a reason.

Formation announced June 12 that it had signed a purchase agreement for the homes, but the company had two weeks to reconsider before the deal was to be finalized in bankruptcy court Thursday.

Many nursing homes across the country are owned by real-estate investment firms and managed by other entities — a form of ownership called a REIT, or a real-estate investment trust. By law, a REIT cannot operate a nursing home, but must hire a licensed provider to do so.

"The former management of Haven is history. We are all committed to a new day for these nursing homes, their residents and their dedicated employees," Blumenthal said.

Blumenthal and officials of the state Department of Social Services said they and the health department will be closely monitoring operations of the Haven homes while the future of the chain remains in limbo.   Occupancy in some Haven homes has fallen off dramatically since the chain declared bankruptcy seven months ago.

Haven — one of the largest chains in the state, with more than 1,800 beds — declared bankruptcy last November in the wake of a series in The Courant detailing its financial troubles and repeated citations for patient-care deficiencies. The company defaulted on millions of dollars in bills for supplies and utilities while its CEO used corporate assets to launch a Nashville recording company and make other personal purchases.

The Department of Social Services had offered Genesis sizable Medicaid rate increases and other incentives to take over the chain, but also had required that Genesis agree to provide detailed financial reports and meet certain staffing standards once it took over operations. 

Blumenthal said Thursday that a wide-ranging investigation of Haven's financial dealings will continue, regardless of the outcome of the sale of the chain.



Increased payments to nursing homes went to profit margin instead of care

Below is an excerpt of an article I recently saw from The Choate News about how California nursing homes used an increase in reimbursements from the State for profit instead of providing adequate care.

Nursing Home Pocket Money Meant For Care
By Jordan Rau

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- California’s nursing homes pocketed much of the $590 million that state lawmakers provided them to better tend to low-income people, while patient care declined by several key measures, according to a study to be released Tuesday.

A law boosting reimbursements from MediCal, the state’s health-care program for poor people, passed in 2004. By 2006, the first full year the higher rates were in place, average nursing-home revenues from MediCal had increased from $124 a day to $152 per day, according to the study by a team of researchers at the University of California, San Francisco -- but few of the promised improvements for patients or staff had come to pass.

Nursing attention for patients grew, on average, by 3 percent. But the study also found that 144 homes, or 16 percent, did not meet the state’s minimum staffing standard.

Average wages for nursing assistants increased from $10.61 an hour to $11.32, not quite enough to keep pace with inflation, the study said.   Turnover among nurses grew slightly worse, with nearly 7 in 10 leaving their jobs that year.

The amount nursing homes spent on direct patient care actually decreased by 3.6 percent, according to the study. Substantiated complaints of patient mistreatment increased by 38 percent. State and federal regulators cited homes for 6 percent more violations.

“They got so much money, they should have been able to do something,” said the study’s lead author, Charlene Harrington, a UCSF professor and nationally recognized authority on nursing homes.   “The fact that they let the nursing-assistant wages actually decline with inflation, I think there’s no excuse for that,” Harrington said. “They’re the bulk of the workers and they’re the lowest paid.”

The higher reimbursement rates were pushed through the Legislature in the final two weeks of its 2004 session by a powerful alliance between the nursing-home industry and Service Employees International Union, which represents many health-care workers.

At the time, several nursing-home advocates objected that the measure lacked sufficient safeguards to ensure that the money went to patient care.

Along with more money, the new law changed the way facilities were reimbursed from a flat fee for each patient to one based on how much the homes spent on workers, patients and the physical plant. Supporters pledged that the change would reward homes that hired more nurses and paid them better.

The average nursing home netted $248,047 in 2006, a 233 percent increase from 2004, the study said.   The study found some areas where nursing-home spending did increase substantially.

For example, administrators’ wages rose by 13 percent, and the pay for licensed nurses -- who have more training than assistants -- grew by 9 percent.

Nonprofit nursing homes raised their wages more than for-profit homes. Still, said Michael Connors of California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform, a patient watchdog group, “to a great degree, no one knows where the money went and how it was used. What’s clear is it hasn’t been used for beneficial effects on residents, which is appalling.”

How tort reform hurts nursing home residents


There is a great editorial by Tamara Hill in the Tennessean.  Here it is in its entirety.


Lawsuits are the only way some nursing homes will provide the services they're supposed to offer

By TAMARA L. HILL   Tennessee Voices

In response to a letter to the editor by Debra Fish ("Nursing homes are pot of gold to lawyers," March 5):

Taxpayer money does not line the pockets of attorneys who sue nursing homes for providing negligent care. If the facility is found to be negligent because a civil justice attorney brings its behavior to the attention of the courts and jury system and the facility pays a judgment or settlement, Medicaid and/or Medicare, whichever paid for the negligent care, is reimbursed ... meaning the taxpayers are reimbursed when a facility is found negligent, not that the taxpayers' burden is increased.

It has also been suggested that lawyers "pile on huge sums of money that bankrupt nursing homes and keep money from being spent on improving care for the residents" on top of judgments allowed by judges and juries. This simply is not true. A lawyer cannot force the nursing home to pay more than the judgment or settlement amount.

As a former nursing-home nurse working in administration, there were multiple instances in which I had to beg corporate for things needed to provide basic patient care ... soap, shampoo, gloves, bandages, dressings, towels, sheets, equipment and, of course, the staff to actually provide the care. I was often told that it wasn't in the budget.

Sometimes the ONLY way I could get what I needed for the residents was to say "OK, but if I can't get what I need for my staff to take care of them, then you are just buying a lawsuit." Then, suddenly, someone "found" money in the budget to get the things the patient needed. If there were caps, then it would become a cost-benefit risk analysis, weighing a known cost (about 75 percent of the cap) and the savings (benefit) by not providing the staff, supplies and care vs. the risk that someone would take the lawsuit with caps in place.

National HealthCare Corp. is using some of its money in two ways: One is to give bonuses to its corporate employees. Another is to pay lobbyists to convince your state legislators that it needs "liability reform" so that it can't be held responsible for its negligence.

The proposed bill seeks to put a cap on so-called non-economic damages suffered by nursing-home residents, such as pain and suffering, emotional distress, disfigurement and death. It also seeks to make the cases much more expensive to pursue and defend by placing nursing homes under the Medical Malpractice Act.

Finally, the bill seeks to give nursing homes the ultimate immunity by forcing residents to sign away their right to access to the courts as a condition of admission. How does this protect patients? I submit to you that it does not. It protects nursing-home profits.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nursing homes are getting a much needed raise

 U.S. Medicare Monday proposed a $690 million increase in payments to nursing homes. The 3.3-percent increase would go to nursing facilities that provide skilled nursing and rehabilitation care to Medicare beneficiaries, according to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.


Under the new payment schedule, called the skilled nursing facility prospective payment system, the daily rate for room, board, medical care and other expenses would be increased. Current payments are based on a 1997 market basket, but the proposal would update rates using a 2004 market basket.

Hopefully, this increase will lead to more staff who are better trained.

Poliakoff & Associates, P.A., is one of South Carolina’s most respected and distinguished law firms. The Poliakoff firm began nearlyMore...