There are different ways to measure how Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) accountable care organizations (ACOs) have saved money, and the way used can drastically affect the amount of savings reported, explained Clif Gaus, ScD, president and CEO of the National Association of ACOs.
There are different ways to measure how Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) accountable care organizations (ACOs) have saved money, and the way used can drastically affect the amount of savings reported, explained Clif Gaus, ScD, president and CEO of the National Association of ACOs.
Transcript
NAACOS recently released a study about how much MSSP ACOs are savings, and the findings differ greatly from what CMS has reported but are in line with research out of Harvard. What are the savings NAACOS found and what is the controversy around how to measure savings?
So, there are really are 2 ways of measuring costs and performance. The first way is the MSSP benchmark way. The benchmarks are set based on historical costs, and over a 3-year period, and then trended forward for the performance year. However, those benchmarks are capped in terms of when risk changes and goes up, the benchmark doesn’t go up. So, the patients may become sicker in the subsequent years, and cost more, but the benchmark doesn’t increase. So, ACOs are against a much harder goal or bar of performance, and therefore not always achieving as much savings as much as they truly are.
The other way of measuring is to compare precisely the ACO beneficiaries based on their risk, based on their geography, their age, and match those beneficiaries to a control group of beneficiaries who are not in the ACO, but who are living in the same geographic area, have the same illnesses, etc. And when you compare those 2 groups—the ACO beneficiaries and the like nonbeneficiaries—over time, what you see is that the ACO beneficiaries’ costs are substantially lower than the control group by almost 2-fold.
So, CMS based on benchmarks was showing gross savings of, I think it was in the range of $900 million from 2013, 2014, 2015. But when you compare them to the savings from the control group, those savings were $1.8 billion. So, the savings essentially based upon that match control group are twice what CMS was estimating.
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
Laundromats as a New Frontier in Community Health, Medicaid Outreach
May 29th 2025Lindsey Leininger, PhD, and Allister Chang, MPA, highlight the potential of laundromats as accessible, community-based settings to support Medicaid outreach, foster trust, and connect families with essential health and social services.
Listen
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
Insurance Gaps Threaten Cancer Treatment Success
July 7th 2025Access to and affordability of immune checkpoint inhibitors, which can be lifesaving if patients receive them on time and under optimal circumstances, continue to top the list of reasons behind outcomes disparities for patients who have private insurance vs those who remain uninsured.
Read More