Transcription
Performance Evaluation ReportCenCal HealthJuly 1, 2012–June 30, 2013Medi-Cal Managed Care DivisionCalifornia Department ofHealth Care ServicesApril 2014
Performance Evaluation Report – CenCal HealthJuly 1, 2012 – June 30, 2013TABLE OF CONTENTS1. INTRODUCTION . 1Purpose of Report.1Managed Care Plan Overview.22. MANAGED CARE PLAN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS. 3Conducting the EQRO Review .3Assessing the State’s Compliance Review Activities.3Readiness Reviews .3Medical Performance Audits and Member Rights Reviews .4Strengths.5Opportunities for Improvement.53. PERFORMANCE MEASURES . 6Conducting the EQRO Review .6Validating Performance Measures and Assessing Results.6Performance Measure Validation .7Performance Measure Validation Findings.7Performance Measure Results.8Seniors and Persons with Disabilities Performance Measure Results.12Performance Measure Result Findings .16Improvement Plans .17Strengths.18Opportunities for Improvement.194. QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS . 20Conducting the EQRO Review .20Validating Quality Improvement Projects and Assessing Results .20Quality Improvement Project Objectives .21Quality Improvement Project Validation Findings .22Quality Improvement Project Outcomes and Interventions .24Strengths.26Opportunities for Improvement.265. MEMBER SATISFACTION SURVEY . 27Conducting the EQRO Review .27Findings .27National Comparisons .29Strengths.30Opportunities for Improvement.316. ENCOUNTER DATA VALIDATION . 32Conducting the EQRO Review .32Methodology.32Encounter Data Validation Findings .33Review of Encounter Systems and Processes .33Record Completeness.33CenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013California Department of Health Care ServicesApril 2014Health Services Advisory Group, Inc.Page i
TABLE OF CONTENTSData Element Completeness.34Data Element Accuracy .34Recommendations .347. OVERALL FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS . 36Overall Findings Regarding Health Care Quality, Access, and Timeliness .36Quality .36Access .38Timeliness .40Follow-Up on Prior Year Recommendations.41Recommendations .41APPENDIX A. SCORING PROCESS FOR THE DOMAINS OF CARE . A-1APPENDIX B. MCP’S SELF-REPORTED FOLLOW-UP ON EXTERNAL QUALITY REVIEWRECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE JULY 1, 2011–JUNE 30, 2012 .PERFORMANCE EVALUATION REPORT . B-1CenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013California Department of Health Care ServicesApril 2014Health Services Advisory Group, Inc.Page ii
Performance Evaluation Report – CenCal HealthJuly 1, 2012 – June 30, 20131. INTRODUCTIONPurpose of ReportThe Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) administers California’s Medicaid program(Medi-Cal), which provides managed health care services to more than 5.6 million beneficiaries (asof June 2013)1 in the State of California through a combination of contracted full-scope andspecialty managed care plans (MCPs). DHCS is responsible for assessing the quality of caredelivered to beneficiaries through its contracted MCPs, making improvements to care andservices, and ensuring that contracted MCPs comply with federal and State standards.The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 42 CFR §438.3642 requires that states use an externalquality review organization (EQRO) to prepare an annual, independent technical report thatanalyzes and evaluates aggregated information on the health care services provided by the states’Medicaid MCPs. The EQRO’s performance evaluation centers on federal and State-specifiedcriteria that fall into the domains of quality, access, and timeliness and includes designation of oneor more domains of care for each area reviewed as part of the compliance review process, eachperformance measure, and each quality improvement project (QIP). The report must contain anassessment of the strengths and weaknesses with respect to the quality and timeliness of, andaccess to health care services furnished to Medicaid recipients; provide recommendations forimprovement; and assess the degree to which the MCPs addressed any previousrecommendations.DHCS contracted with Health Services Advisory Group, Inc. (HSAG), an EQRO, to prepare theexternal quality review technical report on the Medi-Cal Managed Care program (MCMC). Due tothe large number of contracted MCPs and evaluative text, HSAG produced an aggregate technicalreport and MCP-specific reports separately. The reports are issued in tandem as follows: The Medi-Cal Managed Care Program Technical Report, July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013. This reportprovides an overview of the objectives and methodology for conducting the EQRO review. Itincludes an aggregate assessment of MCPs’ performance through organizational structure andMedi-Cal Managed Care Enrollment Report—June 2013. Available es/MMCDMonthlyEnrollment.aspx.2 Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Federal Register/Vol. 68, No.16/Friday, January 23, 2003/Rules and Regulations, p. 3597. 42 CFR Parts 433 and 438 Medicaid Program; ExternalQuality Review of Medicaid Managed Care Organizations, Final Rule.1CenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013California Department of Health Care ServicesApril 2014Health Services Advisory Group, Inc.Page 1
INTRODUCTIONoperations, performance measures, QIPs, and optional activities, including member satisfactionsurvey and encounter data validation results, as they relate to the quality, access, and timelinessdomains of care. MCP-specific evaluation reports (July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013). Each report includes findings foran MCP regarding its organizational structure and operations, performance measures, QIPs, andoptional activities, including member satisfaction survey and encounter data validation results, asthey relate to the quality, access, and timeliness domains of care.This report is specific to DHCS’s contracted MCP, CenCal Health (“CenCal” or “the MCP”), forthe review period July 1, 2012, through June 30, 2013. Actions taken by the MCP subsequent toJune 30, 2013, regarding findings identified in this report will be included in the next annualMCP-specific evaluation report.Managed Care Plan OverviewCenCal is a full-scope MCP delivering services to its MCMC members as a County OrganizedHealth System (COHS). A COHS is a nonprofit, independent public agency that contracts withDHCS to administer Medi-Cal benefits through a wide network of managed care providers. EachCOHS MCP is sanctioned by the County Board of Supervisors and governed by an independentcommission.CenCal became operational to provide MCMC services in Santa Barbara County in September1983 and in San Luis Obispo in March 2008. As of June 30, 2013, CenCal had 75,915 MCMCmembers in Santa Barbara County and 30,515 members in San Luis Obispo County—for a totalof 106,430 MCMC members.33Medi-Cal Managed Care Enrollment Report—June 2013. Available es/MMCDMonthlyEnrollment.aspxCenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013California Department of Health Care ServicesApril 2014Health Services Advisory Group, Inc.Page 2
2. MANAGED CARE PLAN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONSfor CenCal HealthConducting the EQRO ReviewThe Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at 42 CFR §438.358 specifies that the state or its EQROmust conduct a comprehensive review within a three-year period to determine a Medicaid MCP’scompliance with standards established by the state related to enrollee rights and protections,access to services, structure and operations, measurement and improvement, and grievance systemstandards. DHCS conducts this review activity through an extensive monitoring process thatassesses MCPs’ compliance with State and federal requirements at the point of initial contractingand through subsequent, ongoing monitoring activities.This report section covers DHCS’s medical performance and member rights review activities.These reviews occur independently of one another, and while some areas of review are similar, theresults are separate and distinct.The Medi-Cal Managed Care Technical Report, July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013, provides an overview of theobjectives and methodology for conducting the EQRO review.Assessing the State’s Compliance Review ActivitiesHSAG organized, aggregated, and analyzed results from DHCS’s compliance monitoring reviewsto draw conclusions about CenCal’s performance in providing quality, accessible, and timelyhealth care and services to its MCMC members. Compliance monitoring standards fall under thetimeliness and access domains of care; however, standards related to measurement andimprovement fall under the quality domain of care.For this report, HSAG reviewed the most current member rights reviews, medical performanceaudits, and monitoring reports available as of June 30, 2013. In addition, HSAG reviewed eachMCP’s quality improvement program description, quality improvement program evaluation, andquality improvement work plan, as available and applicable, to review key activities betweenformal comprehensive reviews. For newly established MCPs, HSAG reviewed DHCS’s readinessreview materials.Readiness ReviewsDHCS aids MCP readiness through review and approval of MCPs’ written policies andprocedures. DHCS MCP contracts reflect federal and State requirements. DHCS reviews andapproves MCP processes in these areas prior to the commencement of MCP operations, duringCenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013California Department of Health Care ServicesApril 2014Health Services Advisory Group, Inc.Page 3
MANAGED CARE PLAN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONSMCP expansion into new counties, upon contract renewal, and upon the MCP’s changes inpolicies and procedures.Medical Performance Audits and Member Rights ReviewsHistorically, DHCS and the Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) collaborated toconduct joint medical performance audits of Medi-Cal MCPs. In some instances, however, theseaudits were conducted solely by DHCS or DMHC. These medical performance audits assessMCPs’ compliance with contract requirements and State and federal regulations. These audits wereconducted for each Medi-Cal MCP approximately once every three years.During this review period, DHCS began a transition of medical performance monitoringprocesses to enhance oversight of MCPs. Two primary changes occurred. First, DHCS’s Audits &Investigation Division (A&I) began transitioning its medical performance audit frequency fromonce every three years to once each year. The second change, which occurred late in this report’sreview period (March 2013), was the phasing out of DHCS’s biennial member rights/programintegrity on-site reviews.4 The biennial member rights/program integrity on-site reviews werereplaced with an expanded continuous review process.Under DHCS’s new monitoring protocols, findings identified in annual A&I Medical Audits,DMHC Seniors and Persons with Disabilities (SPD) Enrollment Surveys, and othermonitoring-related MCP examinations are actively and continuously monitored until fullresolution is achieved. Monitoring activities under these new protocols include follow-upcommunications and meetings with MCPs, augmented by DHCS technical assistance for MCPs todevelop meaningful corrective action plans (CAPs) that address findings.Since DHCS was transitioning to new monitoring protocols during this reporting period, HSAGreviewed the most recent monitoring reports available as of June 30, 2013. In some cases, themost recent monitoring report available was the earlier DHCS or DMHC medical audit report(once every three-years) and/or the biennial member rights/program integrity review report. Forsome of the MCP-specific evaluation reports, HSAG assessed the MCP using materials producedunder the new monitoring protocols.DHCS did not conduct any audits or reviews with CenCal during the review period for this report.In the MCP’s 2011–12 MCP-specific evaluation report, HSAG noted that the MCP had twofindings from the October 2011 Member Rights/Program Integrity Unit (MR/PIU) review relatedto the area of Cultural and Linguistic Services. In the report, HSAG noted that CenCal appeared tohave taken actions to address the findings. HSAG also recommended that the MCP provide a4These reviews were conducted by DHCS’s Medi-Cal Managed Care Member Rights & Program Integrity Unit tomonitor MCP compliance with requirements under the DHCS contract, Title 42 Code of Federal Regulations, titles 22and 28 of the California Code of Regulations, and applicable MMCD All Plan and Policy Letters pertaining to thefollow areas: member grievances and appeals, prior-authorization request notifications, marketing (for non-COHSMCPs), cultural and linguistic services, and program integrity (fraud and abuse prevention and detection).CenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013California Department of Health Care ServicesApril 2014Health Services Advisory Group, Inc.Page 4
MANAGED CARE PLAN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONSmechanism to formally assess and document whether provider education and monitoring haveresulted in improved documentation of members’ preferred language in the medical record and thatmember and provider education has resulted in all provider offices discouraging the use of family,friends, or minors as interpreters. As part of the process for producing CenCal’s 2012–13 MCPspecific evaluation report, CenCal was asked to document actions the MCP had taken in responseto each recommendation from the 2011–12 MCP-specific evaluation report. CenCal’s self-reportindicated that the MCP has a mechanism for monitoring medical record documentation and noteda 20-percentage-point increase in the medical record documentation of members’ language needsfrom June 2011–12 to June 2012–13.StrengthsCenCal provided documentation to HSAG that described the MCP’s monitoring process fordocumentation of language preferences and use of family, friends, or minors as interpreters.Additionally, the MCP indicated that from June 2011–12 to June 2012–13, medical recorddocumentation of language needs increased 20 percentage points.Opportunities for ImprovementSince it appears that CenCal has fully addressed HSAG’s recommendation from the MCP’s 2011–12 MCP-specific evaluation report, HSAG does not have any recommendations for opportunitiesfor improvement in the area of compliance.CenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013California Department of Health Care ServicesApril 2014Health Services Advisory Group, Inc.Page 5
3. PERFORMANCE MEASURESfor CenCal HealthConducting the EQRO ReviewDHCS annually selects a set of performance measures for the Medi-Cal full-scope MCPs toevaluate the quality
CenCal Health Performance Evaluation Report: July 1, 2012–June 30, 2013 April 2014 California Department of Health Care Services Health Services Advisory Group, Inc. Page 3 2. MANAGED CARE PLAN STRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS for CenCal Health Conducting the EQRO Review The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR
