Darcie Hurteau

Taking a bold step into the world of bundled payment models can help an organization transform itself, but it could fail.

CMS recently released the Oncology Care Model (OCM) performance period 1 (PP1) true-up 1 and the performance period 2 (PP2) initial reconciliation. The performance data show some practices may be gaining traction with their success, while others have found it difficult to make progress as CMS continues to refine the payment methodology for the model across performance periods.

CMS' announcement of a new mandatory oncology bundled payment model wasn't a surprise. It reinforces CMS' continued commitment to creating innovative ways of transforming care.

CMS has released the first round of reconciliation data from the Oncology Care Model (OCM) bundled payment program. Interestingly, some of the practices that did well were surprised to learn they they’d achieved savings, and some participants were pleased to find out that their level of performance met expectations.

Estimating episodic target prices for each patient in the Oncology Care Model (OCM) can be challenging and time consuming. Applying that time to quality-focused care management tactics, based on observed utilization and patient outcomes, may wind up being more valuable, and help to reduce unnecessary spending.

This article focuses on the financial results that may accrue to a participating hospital throughout the remainder of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement program as a result of the migration from historical baseline to regional target rates, and rebasing of the historical baseline.

An overview of factors that make the Oncology Care Model performance period data challenging to navigate and use.

Current and potential Bundled Payment for Care Initiative (BPCI) participants are looking for answers to 3 key operational questions about BPCI Advanced. Here, we discuss what to look for in terms of quality metrics, gainsharing rules, and evaluation and participation periods.