Sequester could sap $200M from Indiana health care providers

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

With the federal spending "sequestration" plan kicking in Friday, health care providers in Indiana are bracing for the loss of nearly $200 million in annual revenue.

The sequestration cuts will chop Medicare payments to hospitals, doctors and nursing homes by 2 percent, beginning April 1. The federal Medicare program for seniors is the largest health insurance plan in the nation, and cuts could hit low-margin rural hospitals especially hard.

Annual Medicare spending in Indiana is roughly $10 billion, according to data compiled by California-based Kaiser Health Foundation. That spending is funded via payroll tax deductions by taxpayers across the country.

Under sequestration, Hoosiers will be sending the same amount of tax revenue to Washington, but seeing a bit less of it come back to the state for health care spending.

It’s not entirely clear how much less, because the federal government has yet to detail how exactly it will implement the 2-percent cut. But the impact will be felt, because Medicare payments make up about 40 percent of the average hospital’s total revenue.

With average operating margins at hospitals running at just north of 4 percent, the Medicare cuts represent a potential 20-percent cut to hospital profits, on average.

“That means they’re going to have to respond with expense cuts. And most of their expenses are in salaries and wages, which is why most of them are looking at it dismally,” said Doug Leonard, president of the Indiana Hospital Association. He added, “The 2 percent cut is really a meat ax.”

The five hospital systems that operate in Marion County—Community Health Network, Indiana University Health, Franciscan St. Francis Health, St. Vincent Health and Wishard Health Services—stand to see revenue decline, collectively, $63.5 million, based on the percentage of revenue they derived from Medicare in 2011, according to the most recent financial data they have made public.

IU Health, which gets 24 percent of its $4.3 billion in annual revenue from Medicare, estimates it would collect $148 million less over the next decade, or about $15 million per year.

Community Health Network, which received 26 percent of its $1.3 billion in revenue from Medicare, said it expects reimbursement to decline by $1 million per month.

“We are working to try to find cost savings without impacting patient care,” wrote Lynda de Widt, a Community spokeswoman, in an e-mail.

A September study by Pittsburgh-based Tripp Umbach estimated that cuts to Indiana’s hospitals alone would lead to direct and indirect job losses of 10,700.

“There will just be a gradual reduction in services. Along with that will be a reduction in jobs,” said Don Kelso, executive director of the Indiana Rural Health Association, which represents rural hospitals that typically run at the lowest margins. “They will look at their service lines and see which ones are routinely losing money . They evaluate that and then see what would happen to their community.”

The hits to hospitals also will flow down to the thousands of physicians they employ. Independent physicians also likely will see their payments cut.

Nursing homes will be less affected by the Medicare cuts, because the program pays only for short-term stays. But with the state-run Medicaid program planning to maintain a 5 percent reimbursement cut that was passed two years ago, nursing homes are also feeling pinched.

Medicaid spending was exempted from the sequestration cuts, but the state of Indiana has kept reimbursements low in that program recently due to budget contraints induced by the recession of 2007 through 2009.

“The Medicare cuts under the sequestration combined with the proposed continued 5 percent Medicaid rate reductions in the pending Indiana budget result in a candle burning at both ends for all health care providers, especially long-term care providers who rely heavily on those funding streams to provide high-quality care to Indiana's seniors and families,” said Scott Tittle, president of the Indiana Health Care Association.

The sequestration plan will cut a total of $85 billion from all areas of the federal government, with defense and health care taking the biggest hits. The plan was adopted by Congress in 2011 as a worst-case option in order to force legislators to come up with a better deficit-reduction plan. But Republicans and Democrats in Washington could never agree on an alternate plan.


  • Just the Start
    Health care spending is going to be reduced one way or the other. This is just a start for what is going to happen in the next coupe of years. Under the health care reform we could see a huge % of the population take advantage of the health insurance exchange. The health plans offered are could have narrow networks. These narrow networks could have deeper discounts than traditional PPO plans. Then look at the possible Medicaid expansion. You add another 400k people to that plan the state will force the hospital to reduce rates even more. Health care spending is out of control, so one way or the other spending will go down. www.indianahealthinsurance.com www.indianahealthinsuranceexchange.com
  • Sequester??
    Sequester is in fact a reduction in spending growth. The democrats want everyone to believe that a reduction in spending growth is somehow a cut in spending. Spending is not being cut, increased spending is being scaled back.
  • 2% is nothing
    I do not doubt that some rural hospitals will have issues, but I do not feel sorry for the mega systems like IU Health. They will have $15 million less...big deal. In 2011 they made $415m on $2,911m in revenues. A "healthy" 14%! Govt spending needs to be cut. and if hospitals got less they'd learn to spend less...and squueze some fluff out of their system.

Post a comment to this story

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

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.