Long-term care provider groups generally support a potential National Directory of Healthcare Providers and Services — with some caveats, according to comments recently provided to Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services or shared with McKnight’s Senior Living.
CMS in October issued a request for information seeking public input on such a publication, maintaining that the effort could improve access to care, reduce clinician burden and support interoperability throughout the healthcare sector.
The request for information indicated that the agency specifically was seeking comments from “entities that may not currently be included in CMS systems.” At the time, a CMS spokesperson told McKnight’s Senior Living that assisted living, memory care, independent living and continuing care retirement community operators were examples of the type of stakeholders that the agency was interested in hearing from during its 60-day comment period, which closed Dec. 6.
In Dec. 6 comments to CMS, LeadingAge said it is “highly supportive” of a national directory to “centralize data, reduce administrative burden and ensure accuracy and consistency of the available provider data across platforms.”
Nicole Fallon, LeadingAge vice president of health policy and integrated services and director of the association’s Center for Managed Care Solutions and Innovations, said that the need for a national directory is important for providers of long-term care supports and services, home- and community-based services, post-acute care services and home health.
The effort, she said, would ease efforts related to data reporting and maintenance, streamline processes and reduce the cost of resources to keep up with federal and state data requirements, as well as those from Medicare and Medicaid managed care organizations.
“By submitting data once, CMS and others who use the data could ensure data accuracy, eliminate concerns about reconciling conflicting information between systems because one has been updated and the other hands, or because the data was inconsistently entered between systems,” Fallon wrote.
A spokeswoman for the National Center for Assisted Living told McKnight’s Senior Living that many states already have directories available for assisted living providers, so federal and state government coordination could avoid unnecessary duplication.
“It’s important to streamline existing systems rather than creating new ones,” the spokeswoman said.
Concerns for assisted living
But the potential directory also poses concerns.
“We are concerned this type of directory could cause more consumer confusion, as assisted living providers are all unique and different in the services they offer, amenities provided and payer sources. A one-size-fits-all approach does not work with assisted living,” the NCAL spokeswoman said. “We encourage local, state and federal governments to work together to improve our nation’s public health systems rather than putting additional burden on providers.”
LeadingAge provided several recommendations to simplify and standardize the data-collection process, including providing submitters with the ability to select multiple service lines under a single organization, standardizing data entries, and incentivizing providers to maintain their data by tying it to payments, where applicable.
LeadingAge also recommended that the government use the directory to support access and consumer choice, including providing information on provider availability, geography served, quality measurements, provider expertise / specialties, and special attributes, including targeted populations served, languages spoken, cultural competencies, support of dietary or cultural preferences, faith-based affiliations and building accessibility.
“We believe it is worth undertaking because it will reduce administrative burden and associated costs, as well as create efficiencies in data sharing,” Fallon wrote.
