IBJNews

Assessment fees benefit Indy hospitals

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

A new hospital assessment fee program created by the Indiana Medicaid system has worked out well so far for Indiana University Health and Community Health Network.

The two Indianapolis-based hospital systems enjoyed net gains of $267 million and $23 million, respectively, from the program during the fiscal year ended June 30.

Both hospital systems reported the financial gains in their third-quarter financial reports, filed in the past month. Most hospitals have yet to report on how the program affected their finances.

The assessment fee program, created by the state Legislature in 2011, is a way to increase federal matching dollars paid to Indiana’s hospitals through the federal-state Medicaid program, which pays for health care for the poor.

The federal government currently matches Indiana’s spending on Medicaid at about a 2-to-1 ratio. And federal rules allow Indiana to raise its payments to hospitals in order to draw even larger federal payments.

The hospital assessment fee is essentially a tax on hospitals to fund those higher state payments, so the hospitals can then enjoy larger federal payments.

A February projection by the Indiana Hospital Association expected new fees from the program to total $609 million per year. But the new revenue to hospitals was expected to top $828 million.

That would leave a net gain for the hospitals of nearly $220 million.

For example, IU Health paid $145 million in fees for the fiscal year ended June 30, but it received $411.8 million in additional revenue due to higher Medicaid reimbursements. So its net gain from the assessment program itself was $267 million.

However, the program also brought on a reduction in special Medicaid payments to hospitals that serve the largest numbers of Medicaid paymenys. So-called "disproportionate share" payments fell for IU Health by $122.7 million, meaning its total gain under the program totaled $144.3 million.

Community Health paid $38.6 million in additional fees but received $61.8 million in higher Medicaid payments.

Not all hospitals will be winners under the program. With IU Health and Community already raking in $168 million in net gains from the program, it’s likely that some hospitals—those that serve a small number of Medicaid patients—will actually pay more in tax than they receive in larger Medicaid payments.

That could become an issue next year when the Indiana General Assembly considers whether to renew the program for another two years.

The state government will do OK by the program, though, because it gets to keep at least 28.5 percent of the additional federal revenue generated by the assessment fees. According to the estimate by the Indiana Hospital Association, the program will generate more than $94 million in new revenue for the state.

Tight state finances forced cuts to Medicaid payments for hospitals in 2010. In nearly all cases, Medicaid payments do not cover hospitals' costs of providing care.

"Particularly with looming cuts in Medicare, better reimbursement for providing Medicaid services is a very welcome development," said Brian Tabor, the vice president of government services for the Indiana Hospital Association.

 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT