Scott Announces “Global Budget” Healthcare Pilot Program

by Rob Roper

Governor Phil Scott announced at his press conference today an experimental healthcare plan involving roughly 30,000 Medicaid patients in Northwestern Vermont designed to end the fee-for-serIMG_3323vice model of payment. In a nutshell, the plan will set a “global budget” of $93 million to cover the costs of these people’s healthcare for one year – and that’s it! (with, it sounds like, some flexibility.)

OneCare, an Accountable Care Organization (ACO) will run the project “with participation from four area hospitals, as well as Federally Qualified Health Centers, independent practices, and Designated Agencies” under the purview of the Department of Vermont Health Access.

The good thing here is that this is, at least, not a statewide plan. We can watch and see if the canary in the coalmine drops dead. (Hopefully only figuratively.) But there are some red flags to keep an eye on.

None of the speakers from the Governor to HHS Secretary, Al Gobieille, to the doctors present could or would really define what success would look like after the pilot year is up. What signals that we should ramp up statewide or, conversely, pull the plug?

The big worry with any global healthcare budget is the incentive to ration service, like we see in Canada. If providers get to keep a portion of the budget that they don’t spend, the incentive is to not spend money caring for patients. The doctors argue that such short term thinking would lead to long term loss as withholding early preventative care ultimately results in a sicker more costly patient. Unless the patient dies, leaving all the money on the table.

Another attempt to allay any fear of neglect made was the idea that everybody participating in the program is “altruistic” and “we care.” I’m sure they do, but if that’s the case and you’re immune from financial incentives inherent in the system why aren’t you providing preventative care already?

Also worth consider is that the 30,000 Vermonters identified to take part in this study must be notified and they have the option to not participate. You have to be a willing guinea pig! Will this lead to self-selection on a meaningful scale affecting success or failure? Will the folks who expect a lot of medical bills opt to stay with fee-for-service, or vice versa? Or will everybody just say “Screw that! Count me out!” We’ll have to see.

 

{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }

Martha Stretton February 10, 2017 at 11:47 pm

And the big question is who WILL define what success looks like? My guess is it won’t be the patients. It will be someone looking at numbers in an office far, far away.

Reply

jim bulmer February 16, 2017 at 2:42 pm

At least we’re trying to find answers on a lower scale before we blow blow thousands of tax payer dollars. As for the means of measuring the merits of the proposal, I’m sure that can be worked out.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

About Us

The Ethan Allen Institute is Vermont’s free-market public policy research and education organization. Founded in 1993, we are one of fifty-plus similar but independent state-level, public policy organizations around the country which exchange ideas and information through the State Policy Network.
Read more...

Latest News

VT Left Wing Media Bias Unmasks Itself

July 24, 2020 By Rob Roper Dave Gram was a long time reporter for the Associated Press, is currently the host of what’s billed on WDEV as a...

Using Guns for Self Defense – 3 Recent Examples

July 24, 2020 By John McClaughry  The Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal last week published eleven news stories about citizens using a firearm to stop a crime. Here are...

FERC ruling on solar subsidies could help Vermont ratepayers

July 21, 2020 By John McClaughry Last Thursday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission finalized its updates to the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), in what the majority...

The Moderate Left’s Stand for Free Speech

July 17, 2020 By David Flemming Harper’s Magazine, a long-running monthly magazine of literature, politics, culture, finance, and the arts, is hardly what you would call a ‘politically...

Trump’s Regulatory Bill of Rights

July 16, 2020 by John McClaughry “President Trump [last May] issued an executive order entitled  ‘Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery.’ The executive order includes a regulatory bill...

Video