On April 10, 2026, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the proposed rule for the Fiscal Year 2027 Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) and Long-Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System (LTCH PPS). The proposal combines a modest net increase in hospital payments with policy signals around quality reporting and mandatory episode-based payment models—most notably a proposed nationwide expansion of the Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement (CJR) model. 

These proposed updates underscore CMS’s continued emphasis on value-based purchasing, episode accountability, and alignment across quality programs. In addition, CMS resurfaces ongoing debates with hospital stakeholders about the adequacy of Medicare payment updates amid rising costs and coverage disruptions. 

This article reviews several key provisions in the FY 2027 proposed rule. 

Hospital Payment Updates: Headline Increase Masks Net Impact 

Under the proposed rule, CMS would increase base IPPS and LTCH PPS payment rates by 2.4 percent in FY 2027. However, after accounting for proposed reductions to uncompensated care payments for disproportionate share hospitals (DSH) and changes in outlier payments for extraordinarily high-cost cases, CMS estimates the effective payment increase would be closer to 1.2 percent. 

In aggregate, CMS projects the proposed update would translate to approximately $1.4 billion in additional payments to acute care hospitals next year. Hospital industry groups—including the American Hospital Association (AHA) and the Federation of American Hospitals (FAH)—have pushed back, arguing that the proposed update does not sufficiently reflect medical inflation, workforce pressures, or anticipated growth in the uninsured population. 

These concerns reflect a long-standing dynamic in annual hospital payment rules: CMS seeking to balance statutory updates and budget neutrality constraints against the hospital industry’s concern that Medicare payments are lagging behind underlying costs. 

Quality Reporting and Program Alignment 

The proposed rule would also make notable updates to the Hospital Inpatient Quality Reporting (IQR) Program. CMS proposes adding three new quality measures to be phased in during 2029 and 2030, while modifying eight existing measures to include Medicare Advantage patients. CMS also proposes shortening the performance period for certain measures from three years to two—a change designed to accelerate feedback and better align measures across programs. 

These changes continue CMS’s broader effort to harmonize quality measurement across Medicare payment and value-based programs, reduce reporting lag, and incorporate a more comprehensive view of patient populations. 

Updates to Mandatory TEAM Model 

CMS also proposes several updates to the Transforming Episode Accountability Model (TEAM), the mandatory episode-based payment model finalized last year. Key proposals include: 

• Expanding the list of MS-DRGs included in the spinal fusion episode 
• Aligning TEAM quality measurement performance periods with the IQR Program 
• Making targeted technical refinements to payment methodology 

In addition, CMS is seeking stakeholder feedback on whether ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) should participate in TEAM and whether participation should be voluntary for physician-owned hospitals, signaling potential future expansion or recalibration of the model. 

Proposed Expansion of Joint Replacement Bundles 

CMS proposes to expand the existing Comprehensive Care for Joint Replacement Expanded (CJR-X) Model nationwide beginning October 1, 2027. The agency also plans to make participation mandatory for most IPPS hospitals. 

CMS tested the original CJR model in 34 metropolitan areas between 2016 and 2024, generating improved patient outcomes and net Medicare savings, according to agency evaluations. CJR-X would become the fifth Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation model to meet the statutory criteria for nationwide expansion. 

Under CJR-X, hospitals performing lower extremity joint replacements would be accountable for the cost and quality of care for the initial procedure and most related spending during the subsequent 90 days. Although the overall structure mirrors the original CJR model, CMS proposes several important updates: 

• Expansion of episodes to include ankle replacements, in addition to hip and knee procedures 
• Adoption of a more robust risk adjustment methodology with significantly more variables, aligning closely with the TEAM model 
• Introduction of a 5 percent stop-loss policy for hospitals that serve higher proportions of dually eligible beneficiaries and certain smaller hospitals 

Participation would be mandatory for most IPPS hospitals, with exceptions for hospitals already participating in TEAM, which includes a lower extremity joint replacement episode; Maryland hospitals operating under global budgets; and hospitals not paid under both IPPS and the Outpatient Prospective Payment System, such as Critical Access Hospitals. 

Why It Matters 

The 2027 IPPS and LTCH PPS proposed rule reinforces several clear policy signals: 

• Pressure on hospital margins is likely to persist, as payment updates continue to trail hospital-reported cost growth. 
• Mandatory episode-based models remain central to CMS’s value-based strategy, with CJR-X representing a significant escalation in scope and scale. 
• Program alignment and MA inclusion are accelerating, with implications for hospital data systems, care coordination strategies, and reporting infrastructure. 

Hospitals and health systems will need to assess not only the near-term financial impact of the proposed payment updates, but also their readiness to accept expanded episode accountability and meet evolving quality measurement requirements. 

Comments on the proposed rule will shape final decisions regarding payment levels, quality program changes, and the scope of mandatory participation in CJR-X. Stakeholders will be watching closely to see whether CMS moderates its approach to mandatory models or doubles down on episode-based accountability as a cornerstone of Medicare payment reform. 

In parallel, CMS has released several other proposed payment rules this month, including those that would affect skilled nursing facilities, hospice providers, inpatient rehabilitation facilities, and inpatient psychiatric facilities. For these entities, CMS generally proposes payment updates of approximately 2.4 percent and 2.3 percent for inpatient psychiatric facilities. As part of its broader program integrity focus, CMS also has proposed new transparency measures for hospice providers; this follows recent enforcement actions related to fraudulent enrollment. 

Connect with Us 

Health Management Associates, Inc. (HMA), monitors federal regulatory and legislative developments in the inpatient setting and assesses the impact on hospitals, life science companies, and other stakeholders. Our experts interpret and model hospital payment policies and assist clients in developing CMS comment letters and long-term strategic plans. Our team replicates CMS payment methodologies and model alternative policies using the most recent Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage (100%) claims data. We also support clients with DRG reassignment requests, New Technology Add-on Payment (NTAP) applications, and analyses of Innovation Center alternative payment models. 

For more information about the proposed policies, contact one of our Medicare experts. 

The Long‑term Enhanced Accountable Care Organization (LEAD) Model represents the next major step in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) accountable care strategy and reinforces a federal commitment to value-based participation in Traditional Medicare. Announced as the successor to ACO REACH, LEAD is a voluntary, nationwide, 10‑year model that will operate from 2027 to 2036, making it the longest-running accountable care organization (ACO) model the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation has tested.

Momentum around the LEAD ACO model has accelerated since CMS’s recent release of the Request for Applications (RFA), which formally moves LEAD from policy design to implementation. The RFA requires prospective participants to evaluate program design choices, financial implications, and operational readiness on a compressed timeline. Notably, CMS has indicated that additional opportunities to express interest will follow for organizations that are not prepared to apply for participation in the initial cohort.

This article explains key design elements of the LEAD model and identifies considerations for organizations assessing whether and when to pursue participation in LEAD.

Core Design Evolutions of the LEAD Model

While LEAD builds on many of the elements from ACO REACH, its design reflects how the Innovation Center intends to address challenges with previous ACO models, such as the Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP). At its core, LEAD seeks to establish a pathway to long‑term engagement in value-based care that creates an attractive option for all types of providers, including ACOs with a history of engaging in value-based care and providers that have yet to meaningfully participate.

LEAD introduces a set of targeted design changes intended to improve predictability, alignment accuracy, and long‑term participation in accountable care—most notably through revised benchmarking, updated beneficiary alignment, and expanded flexibility for engaging specialists and high‑needs populations.

1. Revising Benchmarking Policies to Support Predictability and Success

• LEAD provides a major win for ACOs seeking long-term predictability by setting a long-term benchmark that will not rebase for the entirety of the 10-year model. In MSSP, many ACOs eventually face the “ratchet effect” in which benchmarks erode after rebasing to reflect the ACO’s more recent spending patterns. It can create a significant hurdle for ACOs that have already successfully reduced spending, as their own prior success lowers their benchmark. By not rebasing for the entirety of the model period, LEAD provides an attractive alternative to the MSSP, which rebases every five years.
• LEAD will also support historically successful ACOs by transitioning to a fully regional rate book by the end of the model period. As a result, benchmarks will be set based on overall spending in the region where an ACO operates rather than an ACO’s historical spending. While ACO REACH also used a regional rate book to inform some ACO benchmarks, LEAD goes further by seeking to transition all ACOs to a benchmark based fully on a regional rate book while also adding protections for higher-spending ACOs by transitioning regions at different timelines to ensure that newer ACOs have the opportunity to implement the kinds of care delivery changes that lead to lower spending before they are subject to penalties.
• Other notable changes to benchmarking include a variety of ACO-specific adjustments and the addition of an administrative component to benchmarking. ACOs will be eligible to receive a boost to their benchmarks with either a regional efficiency adjustment for ACOs with lower spending or a prior savings adjustment for ACOs with a demonstrated history of achieving savings. LEAD also introduces an administratively set component to benchmarking—the Accountable Care Prospective Trend—which already is used in the MSSP, though LEAD adds a new guardrail policy to promote predictability.

2. Improving Accuracy in Beneficiary Alignment

• LEAD’s new “hybrid” alignment option increases accuracy and responsiveness. Monthly additions of voluntarily aligned beneficiaries and mid-year recognition of new participant taxpayer identification numbers (TINs) adopted after the start of the performance year (PY) allow alignment to better reflect real-time care relationships, averting lag and operational friction.

3. Adding Support for High-Needs Beneficiaries

• LEAD expands support for beneficiaries with complex needs through a universal High Needs category and recalibrated risk adjustment. By moving away from ACO REACH’s population‑exclusive model, LEAD lowers barriers for organizations that serve a disproportionate share of high‑needs and dually eligible populations. In addition, CMS will test Medicare‑Medicaid alignment in two states, and help states develop arrangements supporting the provision of value-based care between ACOs and state Medicaid agencies or managed care organizations.

4. Promoting Deeper Engagement with Specialists

• LEAD increases flexibility for engaging specialists in value‑based arrangements. New Non‑Primary Care Capitation options and episode-based risk arrangements (CMS‑Administered Risk Arrangements (CARAs)), allow ACOs to share risk with specialists without Total Care Capitation, reducing operational complexity while expanding accountability beyond primary care.

5. Advancing Technology Adoption and Innovation

• LEAD introduces structured pathways to promote technology adoption. Planned Artificial Intelligence (AI)‑inferred risk adjustment will be phased in following successful testing and validation, while the Tech Enabler Initiative and Rapid Cycle Innovation Program seek to reduce administrative burden and accelerate evidence generation—particularly for smaller or resource‑constrained ACOs.

Next Steps

The Innovation Center is operating on an accelerated timeline for the initial LEAD cohort. Prospective ACOs have fewer than 50 days to digest a detailed Request for Applications and model potential performance. Applications are due May 17, 2026. ACOs that participated in ACO REACH in PY 2026 will be well-positioned, as many of the provisions in LEAD will be familiar, and the agency is permitting this group of ACOs to submit an abbreviated application for participation.

For organizations not ready to apply for the first cohort, CMS will release a standardized Letter of Interest form by April 17, 2026, to gauge interest in future application rounds. In this context, organizations considering LEAD participation should be assessing not only near‑term application readiness, but also longer‑term strategic alignment with the model’s 10‑year commitment, risk structure, and operational requirements. Key considerations include benchmarking predictability, readiness to manage regional benchmarks, capacity to engage specialists and high‑needs beneficiaries, technology capabilities, and alignment with broader value‑based care strategies across Medicare and Medicaid.

Connect with Us

Health Management Associates (HMA), supports organizations across the LEAD decision continuum, including those pursuing immediate application and those preparing for future cohorts. HMA can help organizations:

• Interpret LEAD’s policy and financial design relative to existing ACO and MSSP participation
• Model performance scenarios under alternative benchmark, alignment, and risk configurations
• Assess operational readiness across care management, contracting, analytics, and compliance
• Develop application strategies and supporting materials, including responses to the LEAD RFA
• Choose to defer application on steps that preserve future optionality

As CMS advances LEAD under an ambitious timeline, early analysis and disciplined decision‑making will be critical for organizations seeking to align participation with their long‑term value‑based care strategies.

For questions contact Amy Bassano and Rebecca Nielsen.