[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 43 (Tuesday, March 29, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1934-S1935]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
By Ms. COLLINS (for herself and Ms. Cantwell):
S. 659. A bill to amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to
protect Medicare beneficiaries' access to home health services under
the Medicare program; to the Committee on Finance.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise today to join with my colleague
from Washington in introducing legislation, the Home Health Care Access
Protection Act of 2011, to prevent future unfair administrative cuts in
Medicare home health payment rates.
Home health has become an increasingly important part of our health
care system. The kinds of highly skilled and often technically complex
services that our Nation's home health agencies provide have helped to
keep families together and enabled millions of our most frail and
vulnerable older and disabled persons to avoid hospitals and nursing
homes and stay just where they want to be--in the comfort and security
of their own homes. Moreover, by helping these individuals to avoid
more costly institutional care, they are saving Medicare billions of
dollars each year.
That is why I find it so ironic--and troubling--that the Medicare
home health benefit continually comes under attack.
The health care reform bill signed into law by the President last
year includes $40 billion in cuts to home care over 10 years. Moreover,
these cuts are a ``double-whammy'' because they come on top of $25
billion in additional cuts to home health imposed by the Centers for
Medicare and Medicaid Services through regulation in the last several
years.
These cuts are particularly disproportionate for a program that costs
Medicare less than $20 billion a year. This simply is not right, and it
certainly is not in the best interest of our nation's seniors who rely
on home care to keep them out of hospitals, nursing homes, and other
institutions.
The payment rate cuts implemented and proposed by CMS are based on
the assertion that home health agencies have intentionally ``gamed the
system'' by claiming that their patients have conditions of higher
clinical severity than they actually have in order to receive higher
Medicare payments. This unfounded allegation of ``case mix creep'' is
based on what CMS contends to be an increase in the average clinical
assessment ``score'' of home health patients over the last few years.
In fact, there are very real clinical and policy explanations for why
the average clinical severity of home care patients' health conditions
may have increased over the years. For example, the incentives built
into the hospital diagnosis-related group--or DRG--reimbursement system
have led to the faster discharge of sicker patients. Advances in
technology and changes in medical practice have also enabled home
health agencies to treat more complicated medical conditions that
previously could only be treated in hospitals, nursing homes, or
inpatient rehabilitation facilities.
Moreover, this unfair payment rate cut is being assessed across the
board, even for home health agencies that showed a decrease in their
clinical assessment scores. If an individual home
[[Page S1935]]
health agency is truly gaming the system, CMS should target that one
agency, not penalize everyone.
The research method, data and findings that CMS has used to justify
the administrative cuts also raise serious concerns about the validity
of the payment rate cuts. For example, while changes in the need for
therapy services significantly affect the case mix ``score,'' the CMS
research methodology disregards those changes in evaluating whether the
patient population has changed. Moreover, the method by which CMS
evaluates changes in case mix coding is not transparent, does not allow
for true public participation, and is not performed in a manner that
ensures accountability to Medicare patients and providers in terms of
its validity and accuracy of outcomes.
The legislation we are introducing today will establish a reliable
and transparent process for determining whether payment rate cuts are
needed to account for improper changes in ``case mix scoring'' that are
not related to changes in the nature of the patients served in home
health care or the nature of the care they received. This process will
still enable the Secretary of Health and Human Services to enact rate
adjustments provided there is reliable evidence that higher case mix
scores are resulting from factors other than changes in patient
conditions. The legislation will also prevent the implementation of
future Medicare payment rate cuts in home health until the Secretary is
able to justify the payment cuts through the improved process set forth
in the bill.
Home health care has consistently proven to be a compassionate and
cost-effective alternative to institutional care. Additional deep cuts
will be completely counterproductive to our efforts to control overall
health care costs. The Home Health Care Access Protection Act of 2011
will help to ensure that our seniors and disabled Americans continue to
have access to the quality home health services they deserve, and I
encourage all of my colleagues to sign on as cosponsors.
______