A recent paper in JAMA Internal Medicine examined the accountable care organization programs in Colorado and Oregon to determine their impacts on spending, access, and utilization.
The nation’s move from fee-for-service and the implementation of the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act have placed more emphasis on the success of new delivery models such as accountable care organizations (ACOs). A recent paper in JAMA Internal Medicine examined the ACO programs in Colorado and Oregon to determine their impacts on spending, access, and utilization.
Oregon initiated its ACO program—moving most Medicaid enrollees into 16 Coordinated Care Organizations (CCOs)—in 2012, while Colorado created 7 Regional Care Collaborative Organizations (RCCOs) in 2011 as part of its Medicaid Accountable Care Collaborative (ACC). These 2 states represent early adoption of the Medicaid ACO model.
The Oregon program managed care within a global budget with CCOs accepting full financial risk for the patient population, while the Colorado program provided per member per month funding to the RCCOs to coordinate care and connect Medicaid enrollees with community services.
The researchers compared performance in Oregon’s CCO model with Colorado’s ACC model. They analyzed claims data from each state’s Medicaid agency for 18 months of preintervention data and 24 months of postintervention data.
“More than 2 years into their programs, both states can point to successes,” the authors determined.
Both states reported reductions in measures of standardized expenditures and utilization. But the researchers found that the Oregon model was not associated with a reduction in standardized expenditures for some services when compared with Colorado. In addition, while both states saw decreased primary care visits, they were significantly lower in Oregon than in Colorado in 2014.
Compared with Colorado, Oregon’s CCO model saw improvements in 3 of 4 Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set access measures, as well as reductions in both avoidable emergency department visits and preventable acute hospital admissions. However, the CCO model was not associated with significant improvements in 3 of 4 measures of low-value care compared with Colorado.
“Compared with Colorado, Oregon experienced improvements in some access and quality measures, but did not generate savings that might be anticipated with its ambitious reform model and the $1.9 billion federal investment to support the CCO transformation,” the authors wrote.
They determined that Colorado’s ACC model might represent a more promising delivery system reform option for other states to adopt.
“The incentives in most existing alternative payment models, including ACOs, are commonly considered insufficient to result in behavior change,” Carrie H. Colla, PhD, and Elliott S. Fisher, MD, MPH, wrote in an accompanying commentary. “However, the Colorado study suggests that strong incentives may not be necessary. Rather, the Colorado medical home model improved value through supporting providers with coaching, connecting members with nonmedical services, and providing feedback on costs, utilization, and outcomes.”
New Blueprint Guides Patient-Centered Research for More Equitable Health Care
July 17th 2025The new Blueprint for Patient-Centered Value Research offers a roadmap for embedding patient voices throughout every stage of the research journey to foster more equitable, transparent, and responsive health care systems.
Read More
Blister Packs May Help Solve Medication Adherence Challenges and Lower Health Care Costs
June 10th 2025Julia Lucaci, PharmD, MS, of Becton, Dickinson and Company, discusses the benefits of blister packaging for chronic medications, advocating for payer incentives to boost medication adherence and improve health outcomes.
Listen
Sequencing CAR T and Bispecifics for Multiple Myeloma: Tyler Sandahl, PharmD
July 8th 2025Tyler Sandahl, PharmD, a clinical pharmacist at Mayo Clinic, explains that sequencing novel multiple myeloma therapies with CAR T-cell therapy is generally prioritized first for eligible patients, while bispecific antibodies are reserved for later lines or for patients unable to tolerate CAR T.
Read More
Driving Value via Outcomes-Based Pricing and EHR Interoperability: Tyler Sandahl, PharmD
July 7th 2025Tyler Sandahl, PharmD, a clinical pharmacist at Mayo Clinic, discussed the complexities of alternative payment models for chimeric antigen receptor T-cell and bispecific therapies and the need for improved data sharing in cancer care.
Read More
Moving Evidence From Research to Practice: Q&A With Ken Cohen, MD
June 23rd 2025In 2025, each issue of Population Health, Equity & Outcomes will feature a profile of a health system leader transforming care in their area of expertise. This issue spotlights a conversation with Ken Cohen, MD, executive director of translational research at Optum Health.
Read More