Gem of the Week: Overhauling the Medicare Payment Model

Opals on Black/<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/opals-on-black/4798525308/lightbox/">Flickr</a>


In this blog post I highlight an illuminating or groundbreaking news article or report on the environment or health from the past 5 days. This week’s gem goes to… the National Academy of Science’s Institute of Medicine for revealing deep weaknesses in the way Medicare determines how much to pay doctors and hospitals for covered expenses. The report also outlined ways to fix these weaknesses.

For example, as found in the NAS report, Medicare uses geographical market areas to help determine how much a kidney transplant will cost a hospital to perform. However, Medicare divides the US into only 89 geographic markets, and some of those markets are an entire state or a large city. So even though an independent hospital in rural Nebraska incurs more costs to provide an organ transplant, it would be reimbursed the same as a better-funded, corporate-owned hospital in downtown Omaha. The authors recommend revising how these geographical areas are determined, and integrating them other parts of the Medicare payment model.

Another large flaw the report found was the wage index Medicare uses to help determine how much it should pay doctors and staff for procedures. Instead of using survey data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, the report’s authors recommend using the Bureau of Labor Statistics’s data because it’s independent and more accurate.

The report is just phase I in a two-part investigation: the final report will be released in 2012. Amid discussions of cutting Medicare entitlements and aging Baby Boomers, the report’s recommendations are vital information. Currently Medicare covers 47 million seniors and 8 million people with permanent disabilities. With so many subscribers, making payments more accurate could go a long way toward cutting waste (where it occurs), and making sure all hospitals and staff are fairly compensated Medicare services.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our newsletters

Subscribe and we'll send Mother Jones straight to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate