Insights

HMA Insights: Your source for healthcare news, ideas and analysis.

HMA Insights – including our new podcast – puts the vast depth of HMA’s expertise at your fingertips, helping you stay informed about the latest healthcare trends and topics. Below, you can easily search based on your topic of interest to find useful information from our podcast, blogs, webinars, case studies, reports and more.

Show All | Podcast | Blogs | Webinars | Weekly Roundup | Videos | Case Studies | Reports | News | Spotlight

Filter by topic:

Receive timely expert insights on topics you care about.

Select Topics

1174 Results found.

Solutions

Supporting real-time strategic decision-making across the leadership team

Read More

HMA Spotlight

Supporting real-time strategic decision-making across the leadership team

HMA was recently contacted by a chief strategy officer of a healthcare company with dominant market share struggling to react to the rapid changes in healthcare policy. His CEO was regularly asking him for updates, and he knew he needed a proactive construct for understanding, reacting, and ultimately shaping the environment. Could we help him build the capability to monitor those changes within the company’s strategy function?  

As organizations operate within our highly turbulent policy environment, strategy leaders are well served to consider how they source and socialize the information that sustains strategic decision-making.

While every company is different, strategy leaders should monitor the following:

Regulatory and policy realities

Existing and potential competitive offerings

Market and client needs

Organizational assets and competencies

Formal and informal relationships


These are the ingredients for developing and validating hypotheses for market growth – a critical function of the strategy office. However, just as important as monitoring this information is socializing it across the leadership team.


On one recent HMA strategy project, the executive team of an association listened soberly as we described their direct competitor. The competitor was growing rapidly and winning over long-time members of the association. They had a small, nimble team, in contrast to the association’s cumbersome and complex governance structure. As we rehearsed the sentiments of their members, the needs in the markets, their partnerships, their offerings, and the shifting policy environment, we painted an up-to-date picture of their market realities. Their reaction was almost explosive: they had to take action to stem their eroding position. 


By socializing fact-based information, a strategy leader can create the tailwinds for action within an organization. The leader can also ensure that those who need to ratify or support strategic action understand the rationale for change. We think of strategically viable actions as being grounded in the domains above. For example, does the action take advantage of policy opportunities, avoid areas of dense competition, address demonstrated need, and leverage organizational capabilities and relationships? If those blessing the decision understand these same considerations, it will be easier to get to yes.


If you sit in a chief strategy seat, consider building the capability to monitor these domains, and surface your fact-based findings to organizational decision-makers. This information should be the bedrock for strategic decision-making—and strategy leaders will find it easier to secure board and executive support if those audiences are grounded in the same set of facts.

Ready to transform your organization?

Whether you are focused on payments, healthcare delivery, government policy, behavioral health, life sciences, Medicare, Medicaid, or Managed Care, our HMA experts are ready to partner with you, from initial strategy-setting through implementation.

Related Resources

Learn more about our Strategy & Transformation services

Achieving financial resilience in a time of turbulence

Realize transaction-related cost synergies

Building Sustainable Health Systems

HMA’s Strategy & Transformation Practice collaborates with Stanford University to drive public health innovation

CMS Shakes Up the Innovation Center Model Landscape: What Comes Next?

How One Organization Unlocked Exceptional Financial Gains Through Revenue Cycle Optimization

Contact our experts:

Headshot of Rebecca Nielsen

Rebecca Nielsen

Managing Director

Rebecca Nielsen is a managing director of HMA’s strategy and transformation practice, where she designs and leads major strategy and … Read more
Headshot of Alex Rich

Alex Rich

Managing Director

Alex Rich is an experienced business transformation leader with extensive expertise designing and deploying strategic programs that produce meaningful results. … Read more
Blog

Proposed Rule on the CY 2026 Medicare PFS Emphasizes Value-Based Care and Alternative Payment Models

Read Blog

This week, our first In Focus reviews the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed rule for the calendar year (CY) 2026 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS), released on July 14, 2025. The proposal echoes many of the administration’s priorities and would substantially change how physicians are paid for their services, focusing on value-based payment strategies, efficiency adjustments, conversion factors, technology coding, and MSSP eligibility.

This In Focus is the second in our series covering recent Medicare-related announcements. [Last week, we discussed CMS Innovation Center updates.]

Emphasis on Value-Based, Hospital-Based Care

The CY 2026 Medicare PFS proposed rule reflects the administration’s prioritization of value-based care, chronic care management, new payment strategies for evolving models of care delivery, and support for technology-based services. Provisions in the proposed rule also are intended to reduce costs through reimbursement rate changes, better access to behavioral health services, and facilitated advanced primary care management (APCM).

The proposal recognizes the additional complexity of providing primary care in the home and other residential environments by proposing to allow billing of an add-on code to trigger additional payment for home-based visits. CMS also proposes to delete separate coding and payment for social determinants of health (SDOH) risk assessments (established in 2024) and will begin referring to SDOH as “upstream driver(s).”

Emphasis on Efficiency and Lower Practice Expenses

Proposed changes include an “efficiency adjustment,” which would reduce the physician work relative value unit (RVU) based on the assumption that as clinicians gain experience and technology advances, procedures become more efficient. CMS also proposes to rebalance clinician reimbursement for expenses to recognize that hospital-based physicians incur fewer costs than physicians in private or group practices and that the number of physicians practicing in hospitals has increased significantly, leaving far fewer physicians in freestanding offices. As a result, CMS estimates specialists who furnish care in hospital settings will experience double-digit cuts in reimbursement on average, whereas those practicing in freestanding (non-facility) settings will generally receive increases, though the impact on any individual clinician or practice will depend on the mix of services provided.

CMS continues to evaluate potential payment reform for global surgical packages and is studying the real-world division of work between surgeons and providers of postoperative care, as CMS findings suggest only a fraction of post-discharge visits included in valuation are furnished.

Positive PFS Conversion Factor Update

All providers/suppliers paid for services under the PFS will benefit from positive statutory updates to the conversion factor, with slightly higher increases going to clinicians who meet certain eligibility requirements for participating in an Advanced Alternative Payment Model (APM) under the Quality Payment Program (QPP). Specifically, two conversion factors would be available in CY 2026. Under the proposed rule, services furnished by providers who participate in qualifying Advanced APMs would be paid based on a conversion factor of $33.5875, representing a 3.84 percent increase (or $1.2410) from the 2025 amount of $32.3465. Services furnished by providers who do not participate in a qualifying AAPM are proposed to be paid based on a conversion factor of $33.4209, representing an increase of 3.32 percent (or $1.0744) from CY 2025.

Both conversion factors reflect the 2.50 percent overall update required by statute, a 0.55 percent budget neutrality adjustment to account for RVU changes, and an updated factor of 0.75 percent for qualified APMs or 0.25 percent for non-qualifying APMs. CY 2026 is the final year in which eligible clinicians can receive an additional APM incentive. Qualifying clinicians will get a one-time payment of 1.88 percent of their paid claims for covered professional services based on performance from two years earlier.

Evolving Coding and Payment for Technology-Based Services

CMS continues to expand coding and payment for technology-based services, including a proposal for the use of digital mental health treatment (DMHT) devices used in conjunction with an ongoing treatment plan of care for attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The agency recognizes that behavioral health conditions are common chronic diseases and that the field of digital therapeutics is evolving.

CMS requests comments on the use of devices for treating symptoms of gastrointestinal conditions, sleep disturbance for psychiatric conditions, and symptoms of fibromyalgia, as well as to aid in the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder. The agency also seeks input on a broader set of digital tools that could be used to encourage a healthy lifestyle. Through comment requests, CMS suggests that it might consider payment for digital tools that do not require Food and Drug Administration clearance in future years.

While CMS allows PFS payment of Software as a Service (SaaS) and artificial intelligence (AI) applications in certain circumstances, it also solicits comments on how to establish stable and consistent reimbursement for these technologies and asks how they can be used in the management of chronic diseases and primary care services.

Telehealth-Related Flexibilities

CMS proposes to streamline the process for adding codes to the telehealth list and making other adjustments to supervision and frequency of billing requirements for codes on the list.

Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program

CMS proposes several changes to the Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program (MDPP), which was expanded in 2018 under the CMS Innovation Center authority to increase beneficiary participation and to align with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention program standards. These proposed changes include the addition and codification of more virtual flexibilities including asynchronous delivery of services, technical changes to the collection of data, and payment changes to reflect these new requirements.

Medicare Shared Savings Program

The proposed rule comprises several provisions to modify eligibility requirements for certain tracks of the program, revisions to the quality performance standards and reporting requirements, and other changes to improve the operations of the program. The Medicare Shared Savings Program (MSSP) now has more than 477 ACO participants, furnishing care to 11.2 million Medicare beneficiaries.

Drugs and Biological Products Incident-to Physician Services

The proposed rule addresses reimbursement for drugs paid incident-to a physician’s service, including policies related to the Inflation Reduction Act provisions, continued implementation of discarded units refund requirements, changes and clarifications to Average Sales Price (ASP) reporting, and payment for procurement of tissue required to manufacture cell-based gene therapies.

Citing a nearly 40-fold increase in spending for skin substitute products from 2019 to 2024, CMS proposes major changes for reimbursement of skin substitutes that would pay for most of these products as supplies incident-to physician services, rather than as Part B drugs. CMS estimates that these modifications would result in significant savings. If finalized, these proposals will take effect at the same time as CMS launches a new model in six geographic areas to test clinical review for certain services, including skin substitutes, in fee-for-service Medicare to achieve the WISeR (Waste and Inappropriate Service Reduction) Model.

Requests for Information

CMS included multiple requests for information in the CY 2026 proposed rule. The agency seeks stakeholder feedback on how the fee schedule can be used to better account for indirect practice expenses (PEs) costs in facility settings, integration of preventive services into APCM bundles, and use of motivational interviewing and health coaching to improve chronic disease prevention and management.

On the QPP, CMS seeks input on advancing digital quality measurement, refining MIPS (Merit-Based Incentive Payment System) Value Pathways (MVPs) through core elements, procedural code alignment, and well-being and nutrition measures. The agency also requests comments on improving public health and prescription drug monitoring reporting and strengthening data quality and performance thresholds across Medicare’s quality programs.

Contact an HMA Medicare Expert Today

Health Management Associates, Inc. (HMA), policy and rate setting experts are analyzing the details and impacts in the proposed rule and will provide additional updates to key Medicare policies as they become available. Our team can help support stakeholder development of policy and data-oriented comments on this rule, due September 12, 2025, and on any other Medicare policy topic of interest. Contact our experts below to discuss your priorities and approach.

Blog

CY 2026 Medicare Hospital OPPS Proposed Rule Encourages Site of Service Shifts and Data Collection for Use in Rate Setting

Read Blog

Our second In Focus reviews the policy changes in the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for the calendar year (CY) 2026 Medicare Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System (OPPS) and Ambulatory Surgical Center (ASC) Payment System Proposed Rule (CMS-1834-P). This OPPS proposed rule, released January 15, 2025, includes several important policy revisions that will alter hospital margins and change administrative procedures beginning as soon as January 1, 2026.

Key Provisions in the CY 2026 Hospital OPPS and ASC Proposed Rule

For CY 2026, CMS proposes to make critical modifications to several hospital outpatient and ASC payment policies, which hospitals and other stakeholders will need to quickly adopt. We highlight and interpret the following seven proposed policies that may be among the most impactful for Medicare beneficiaries, hospitals and health systems, payers, and manufacturers:

  1. Proposed updates for OPPS and ASC payment rates are consistent with proposed inpatient rates.
  2. The phased elimination of the inpatient-only (IPO) list will cause services to shift to the outpatient setting.
  3. Expansion of the ASC covered procedures list will cause services to shift from the outpatient to ASC setting.
  4. Site-neutral payment to drug administration services will be expanded to all off-campus provider-based departments.
  5. Medicare Advantage data will be used to set weights for inpatient Medicare Severity Diagnosis Related Groups (MS-DRGs).
  6. 340B payment recovery will intensify to recover funds more quickly.
  7. A new survey will be conducted to gather data on the amount hospitals pay for drugs used in the hospital outpatient department.

Stakeholder comments on the OPPS and ASC Proposed Rule are due to CMS by September 13, 2025.

What the Seven Provisions Mean

1. The proposed payment update for OPPS and ASC rates is consistent with proposed inpatient rates.

Proposed Rule: Overall CMS’s CY 2026 Medicare OPPS and ASC Proposed Rule will increase 2025 payments to acute care hospitals by 2.4 percent in 2026, amounting to an estimated $4 billion increase in payments. This update is based on a hospital market basket increase of 3.2 percent and a 0.8 percent reduction for total factor productivity.

HMA Analysis: CMS’s 2.4 percent increase results from the estimated rate of increase in the cost of a standard basket of hospital goods, the hospital market basket. CMS estimates that total payments to OPPS and ASC providers (including beneficiary cost sharing and estimated changes in enrollment, utilization, and case mix) for CY 2026 will increase by roughly $8.1 billion and $480 million, respectively, from CY 2025 payment levels. The proposed outpatient and ASC rates are consistent with the proposed inpatient payment update for 2026.

2. Phased elimination of the IPO list to cause movement of cases from inpatient to outpatient setting.

Proposed Rule: CMS has long maintained a list of procedures and services that must be provided on an inpatient basis and are excluded from the OPPS. In the CY 2021 final rule, CMS finalized a proposal to eliminate the IPO list over three years, beginning with nearly 300 procedures. CMS noted various changes in technology and chose to defer to the clinical judgment of physicians which procedures can be safely performed in the hospital outpatient department based on the circumstances of individual patients. When the Biden Administration entered office in 2022, CMS halted the process of eliminating the inpatient-only list and reinstituted five criteria it had previously used to determine whether a procedure should be removed from the IPO list.

Under the Trump Administration, CMS now proposes to again eliminate the IPO list over a three- year period. For 2026, CMS proposes to eliminate 285 mostly musculoskeletal services from the IPO list. Across the next two rulemaking cycles CMS will eliminate the remaining services from the IPO list and the agency is requesting stakeholder input regarding which services should be eliminated from the IPO list in CY 2027.

HMA Analysis: If finalized, the policy to eliminate the IPO list is likely to spur a migration of many cases from the inpatient setting to the hospital outpatient setting. Many of these cases are likely to be surgical short-stay cases. Given that the proposed policy would defer largely to clinical judgment to determine which procedures are performed in the outpatient setting, we anticipate a degree of variability by hospital in how this policy plays out. We anticipate hospital revenues will decline because of this policy, as certain inpatient payment adjustments are inapplicable to the outpatient setting. We do not anticipate a cost sharing impact on patients due to policies that protect them from higher outpatient cost sharing. Because the Medicare IPO list has served as a foundation for many site of service coverage decisions, we anticipate payers will respond to this policy by encouraging more rapid migration of cases to the outpatient setting, which is likely to result in lower Medicare spending.

3. Expansion of the ASC covered procedures list will cause services to shift from the outpatient to ASC setting.

Proposed Rule: CMS proposes to add 547 services to the ASC covered procedures list.

HMA Analysis: CMS’s proposal to add 547 services to the ASC CPL enables greater fluidity of site of service for providers in deciding where to conduct procedures. Among these 547 services are 276 musculoskeletal services that are also proposed for removal from the OPPS IPO list. While state regulations concerning which procedures can be conducted in ASCs may affect which cases are eventually conducted in the ASC setting, CMS’s plan to expand the ASC CPL may enable some musculoskeletal services to move directly from the inpatient setting to the ASC setting in 2026. We anticipate that the expansion of the ASC CPL may result in lower revenues for hospitals as cases move from the inpatient or outpatient setting to the ASC. This shift may also result in lower Medicare spending.

4. Expansion of the site-neutral policy to drug administration services furnished in all outpatient provider-based departments.

Proposed Rule: Under the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015, CMS is required to implement site-neutral payments for off-campus provider-based departments (PBDs). This legislation exempted PBDs (also known as “excepted PBDs”) established as of the date of enactment. The policy has generally paid affected services at 40 percent of the OPPS rate. The agency presents the results of its own analyses, showing growth in drug administration services in the OPPS even as the number of fee-for-service beneficiaries has decreased. CMS concludes that “the differential in our payment rates has created a payment incentive that had led to unnecessary growth for the services in the drug administration” payment rates.

CMS proposes to apply the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (PFS) payment adjustment to drug administration payments for services performed at excepted off-campus PBDs, which will be the same reimbursement rates available to non-excepted PBDs. This adjustment is proposed to be made in a non-budget-neutral manner. CMS also asks for comments on whether the PFS adjuster should be applied to other services. CMS also issues a request for information (RFI) on the potential to expand site-neutral payments for clinic visits to include on campus clinic visit services and a second RFI seeking information on the possibility of adjusting OPPS payments for services “predominantly performed” in the ASC or physician’s office setting

HMA AnalysisCMS estimates this policy will yield $280 million in savings to Medicare for 2026, which will translate into commensurate revenue reductions for the hospital industry. Although CMS proposes to exempt rural sole community hospitals from this policy, other types of safety net providers may also seek an exemption.

5. The use of Medicare Advantage data to set weights for inpatient MS-DRGs.

Proposed Rule: CMS proposes to require hospitals to submit to CMS Medicare Advantage payment information through their annual hospital cost reports for later use in setting Medicare inpatient PPS payment rates. As a part of this proposal CMS will require hospitals to include in their annual cost report submissions to CMS their median negotiated payer-specific Medicare Advantage charges by individual MS-DRG. CMS proposes to begin collecting these data in the 2026 cost reporting period, and to use these data to set MS-DRG relative weights beginning in FY 2029. CMS asserts that the agency intends to make these changes to reduce its reliance on the hospital chargemaster for setting rates for inpatient services and instead create a market-based approach to rate setting.

HMA Analysis: The first Trump Administration proposed a nearly identical policy in the CY 2021 rulemaking cycle. Like the IPO list history, this proposed policy was not implemented in the CY 2022 rulemaking cycle when the Biden Administration was in place. If implemented for 2026, the reporting of negotiated charge data will add administrative complexity to hospitals’ cost reporting processes. It is unclear whether the use of these data in the IPPS rate setting process will increase or decrease payment rates. Therefore, it is unclear how this policy might affect hospital revenue or Medicare spending.

6. Increase the pace of 340B payment recovery from hospitals to recover funds more quickly.

Proposed Rule: CMS proposes to change its policy for recovering past overpayments resulting from the budget neutrality adjustments accompanying prior cuts to reimbursement for 340B drugs. The 340B recoupment process was scheduled to begin in 2026 by reducing the hospital outpatient conversion factor by 0.5 percent annually until $7.8 billion in payments were recovered. CMS forecasted this would occur annually for 16 years; however, the CY 2026 OPPS proposed rule calls for reducing the outpatient conversion factor by 2 percent over the span of six years.

HMA AnalysisIf implemented, CMS’s proposed 340B recovery policy will result in a payment reduction to hospitals of $1.1 billion in 2026. We anticipate the scale of this impact will continue during the subsequent five years that the policy is in place. We expect that hospital opposition to this proposed change will be significant.

7. New survey to gather data on the amount hospitals pay for drugs used in the hospital outpatient department.

Proposed Rule: CMS announced its intent to conduct a new survey to gather information from hospitals about the amount they pay for drugs used in the outpatient setting. The survey of drug acquisition costs will apply to specified covered outpatient drugs (SCODs) and “drugs and biologicals that CMS historically treats as SCODs.” The survey will begin at the end of 2025 and end in early 2026. CMS has stated that it intends for these survey results to “inform policy making” beginning with the 2027 rulemaking cycle.

HMA AnalysisThe data collected through this survey effort could be used to set payment rates for Part B drugs or to inform 340B payment policy, but how exactly these data would be used is unclear. CMS noted that an adequate response rate will be necessary and asks for input on how to interpret nonresponses, such as assuming that non-responding hospitals have very low drug costs and therefore payment for drugs and biologics could be packaged with other services. CMS also noted that other sources of drug data could include the Federal Supply Schedule (FSS) or other benchmarks or different markups to ASP data.

HMA’s Medicare Practice Group Can Help

The Health Management Associates, Inc. (HMA), Medicare Practice Group monitors federal regulatory and legislative developments in the hospital space and assesses the impact on hospitals, life science companies, payers, 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 current Medicare fee-for-service and Medicare Advantage (100 percent) claims data. We also support clients with DRG reassignment requests, New Technology Add-on Payment (NTAP) applications, and analyses of CMS Innovation Center alternative payment models.

For more information or questions about the policies described below, please contact our experts below.

HMA Weekly Roundup

July 23, 2025

Proposed Rule on the CY 2026 Medicare PFS Emphasizes Value-Based Care and Alternative Payment Models

Read Roundup
Podcasts

Ready or Not: Implementing Strategy Amid Massive Healthcare Disruption

Listen Now

Rebecca Nielsen and Alex Rich, co-leaders of HMA’s Strategy and Transformation practice, have been supporting healthcare strategies in an ever-changing environment defined by constant disruption from AI, shifting regulatory policies, and financial strain. With so much change in the air now, many strategic plans are outdated before they ever get implemented. In this episode of Vital Viewpoints on Healthcare, they expose the blind spots that sabotage even the most well-crafted strategies and offer a grounded look at what actually works when change is the only constant. They unpack the challenge of the 5-year strategic plan and the risk of trying to do everything at once, explaining why real-time information sharing may be your most overlooked leadership tool. If your organization is struggling to turn strategy into action, this is the clarity you’ve been waiting for.

Blog

Preparing for Ohio’s Aging Future: With Federal Uncertainty, Local Innovation Must Lead

Read Blog

Ohio faces a demographic reckoning. With 55 million Americans now over 65, including 2.2 million Ohioans, Ohio’s older adult population is expected to grow faster than the national average, while its population under 65 is projected to shrink. Nationally, by 2050, the number of individuals aged 85 and older is expected to double, creating an unprecedented demand for services as this population becomes more diverse and economically vulnerable. Innovation and collaboration will be especially critical in supporting those who won’t qualify for existing programs and in simplifying access to a complex system of providers and resources.

Fortunately, Ohio also boasts remarkable aging service innovators, from National Church Residences’ expertise in institutional transitions back to the community, to United Church Homes’ expanded service coordination beyond its affordable housing communities, to the Area Agencies on Aging serving as key partners to managed care organizations for the MyCare Ohio program. Success in Ohio’s aging future will hinge on building on these kinds of examples, mastering collaboration, and creating integrated systems that serve vulnerable populations effectively, irrespective of federal funding levels.

To that end, the following questions represent critical challenges reflecting conversations happening in boardrooms, county commissioner meetings, and strategic planning sessions across Ohio and the country.

Building Age-Ready Communities: Key Questions for Local Stakeholders

1. How can state and counties align their aging-in-place investments with those of payers, providers, and purchasers to increase the value of existing programs and resources?

As the aging population grows rapidly, states and counties can maximize aging-in-place investments by establishing unified visions that bring together public agencies, healthcare systems, and private sector partners under shared, evidence-based strategies. This requires deliberate alignment with state and local priorities while engaging private insurers, employers, and community organizations as strategic co-investors. Ohio exemplifies this approach through its remarkable growth in age-friendly communities—36 communities have now achieved age-friendly designation, including 10 new communities since early 2023, demonstrating accelerating momentum toward the development of systematic aging-in-place infrastructure.

Ensuring accountability and tracking progress are essential in demonstrating the effectiveness of public-private investments. Tools like data dashboards help maintain initiative momentum and adapt to needs. Additionally, strategically coordinating funding from various sources, such as Medicaid, Medicare, and private insurance, can enhance resource integration. The Westchester Public/Private Partnership for Aging Services exemplifies how shared resources can improve aging-in-place outcomes while serving as a replicable blueprint for creating age-friendly communities.

2. How can support for older adults in rural communities be increased? 

While urban areas grapple with capacity, rural Ohio faces a different challenge: doing more with less. Nearly one in three rural Ohioans is now 60 or older—a concentration that’s both a testament to community strength and a preview of coming pressures. These challenges include limited access to healthcare specialists, transportation systems designed for different needs, and the risk of social isolation as neighbors and family members become more dispersed. Ohioans in rural and Appalachian regions are designated as priority populations in eight of the nineteen outcomes outlined in Ohio’s 2023-2026 State Plan on Aging.

Additionally, local leaders across health plans, hospitals, aging services organizations, and government are uniquely positioned to expand telehealth networks that bring care directly into homes, invest in the broadband and housing infrastructure that makes aging in place possible, and build homegrown training programs that keep caregivers rooted in their communities. Partnerships between Area Agencies on Aging, rural hospitals, and community organizations can create integrated care models that align multiple funding streams, including Medicare and Medicaid, as well as Older Americans Act and county resources. What is needed now is coordination to replicate or scale approaches that will be key to ensuring sustainable aging support for Ohio’s rural older adults and ensure the access required for the changes underway.

3. How can stakeholders reduce social isolation and increase access to age-friendly behavioral health services?

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine report, “Addressing the Impact of COVID-19 on Social Isolation and Loneliness”  documents the impact of COVID-19 on social isolation and loneliness among older adults. The report recommends five strategies to promote social connectedness and reduce social isolation, including:

  • Community-based support: Using existing community infrastructure to leverage the resources of community service networks.
  • Community leadership: Partnering with communities to design and deliver services, forcing inclusive, action-oriented alliances to enhance social connection and solutions tailored to each unique community.
  • Digital environments: Utilizing online support groups to address loneliness and social isolation, being cognizant of cultural or generational preferences for electronic communication platforms.
  • Social infrastructure: Designing inclusive and multifaceted public infrastructure and mixed-use planning, incorporating libraries, gardens, shops, cafes to promote social connectedness.
  • Comprehensive policy initiatives: Proactive policymaking to aid in the enhancement of social connectedness through supportive programs that address older adults’ unique challenges.

In addition to trends in social isolation, depression and anxiety are frequently unreported and untreated in people age 65 and older; and people over the age of 65 are among those at the highest risk for suicide. Community and state agencies need to come together to expand access to age-friendly mental health and substance use disorder services and to engage older adults in preventive and supportive strategies. Healthy lifestyle programs like Healthy U are offered in communities statewide through the Ohio Department of Aging and local Area Agencies on Aging. These programs offer depression screenings and approaches to managing depression, anxiety, and chronic disease.

4. What are new and innovative approaches to expand affordable housing to prevent homelessness, unsafe living situations, and preventable healthcare costs?

According to the 2024 Ohio Housing Needs Assessment Executive Summary, the number of older Ohioans who live alone is increasing. One in eight Ohio households – or more than 613,000 – houses a single adult aged 65 or over. Aging householders living alone face unique challenges when it comes to maintaining the cost and upkeep of homes, especially among those who wish to age in place. Furthermore, one in eight mortgage holders aged 55 and over (13%) is severely housing cost burdened. Nineteen percent of mortgage holders aged 65 and over and 25% of those aged 75 and over are severely mortgage burdened.

Members of the Ohio General Assembly proposed a comprehensive solution to the housing crisis, including:

  • Increase access to affordable housing for all Ohioans regardless of income by increasing the number of new units being built and helping local governments and for-profits and non-profits rehabilitate existing housing stock.
  • Provide property tax relief that promotes tax fairness for all Ohioans with targeted assistance for veterans, seniors, first-time homebuyers, and low-income and middle-income renters.
  • Update zoning laws and building inspection laws to reduce regulatory obstacles and allow for new housing developments; modernize real estate agency agreements; increase property conveyance transparency; and make changes to the eviction process.

Even for older adults who have affordable housing, most will need support at some point to age in place. The Age-Friendly Health Systems resources from the Institute for Healthcare Improvement provide a great framework for supporting older adults to age in place – the 4Ms of age-friendly organizations. These include (1) understanding what matters to older adults, (2) helping with medication issues, (3) preventing, identifying, and managing mental health conditions and dementia, and (4) ensuring mobility needs are met. 

5. How can the state increase older adults, caregivers and communities access to   information that is easy to understand about resources to support aging in place?

Currently, Ohio has a 29-year life expectancy gap by zip code, partly driven by unequal access to aging resources. With 99,484 older Ohioans speaking languages other than English, simply having services is not enough; information must be accessible and culturally relevant.

Older adults struggle to navigate complex systems to find housing assistance, healthcare options, transportation, and caregiver supports. Many give up before getting help. Research shows that nationally, 21% of Area Agencies on Aging employ Community Health Workers (CHWs), with 20% more seeking to add them. These trusted community members serve as cultural bridges, providing linguistically appropriate connections to care, accompanying older adults to appointments, and offering emotional support and companionship.

Gaps exist, but there are solutions where partnerships can accelerate progress.

  • Community-Based Organizations: Expand CHW programs, host resource fairs in culturally familiar venues like faith centers and community halls, develop peer-to-peer information networks.
  • Health Plans: Fund CHW positions, create simplified resource materials, and integrate aging services information into member communications.
  • Local Government: Support broadband access in underserved areas, fund transportation to resource centers, and coordinate age-friendly community planning.
  • Private Sector: Provide workplace caregiver supports and partner on innovative outreach methods.

Better access to information requires a coordinated effort. Communities are finding that reaching older adults requires innovative partnerships that meet them where they are, whether that’s at their church, community center, doctor’s office, or through a trusted neighbor who understands their language and culture.

Blog

Planning for What’s Next: Medicaid Financing Implications of H.R.1

Read Blog

As federal budget negotiations continue, proposed policy changes under H.R.1 are prompting important questions for states and the healthcare providers that rely on Medicaid funding. While the exact timing and scope of implementation remain uncertain, the structural changes being debated—especially those tied to eligibility, enrollment, and reimbursement—could significantly reshape the Medicaid landscape in Ohio and beyond.

At HMA, we’re helping provider associations, health systems, and Medicaid plans begin modeling how these potential changes could affect state budgets and provider revenue streams over time. By leveraging Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates of projected federal Medicaid expenditures, we can develop targeted forecasts that account for major eligibility provisions—such as community engagement requirements, redetermination policies, and limits on retroactive eligibility.

This type of modeling is already underway in several states. For example, HMA is currently working with a multi-state hospital system to estimate how community engagement rules could affect their Medicaid volumes and supplemental payment streams. We’re also partnering with state-level trade associations that represent providers heavily exposed to Medicaid—such as community mental health agencies and FQHCs—to evaluate how future state budgets could impact base reimbursement or access to directed payments.

These forecasts are not one-size-fits-all. More in-depth analysis often requires access to rate letters and state-specific Medicaid financing mechanisms, including provider taxes and pass-through payment arrangements. But even without full data sets, we can begin to sketch reasonable budget and enrollment scenarios that help providers prepare for different possibilities.

For organizations operating in Medicaid-heavy markets like Ohio—whether you’re a health center, behavioral health agency, or managed care plan—this kind of planning can be a valuable input to strategy. Understanding the magnitude and timing of potential funding shifts helps organizations identify risk, advocate effectively, and prepare to adjust operations if needed.

While there are still many unknowns, one thing is clear: Medicaid policy is shifting, and proactive scenario planning is essential. HMA’s team stands ready to support organizations across Ohio and the country as they navigate what’s next.

To learn more about how we can help your organization model the impacts of H.R.1 and other federal changes, reach out to the HMA Ohio team today.

Blog

CMS Proposes New Ambulatory Specialty Model, Provides Details About Cell and Gene Therapy Model

Read Blog

Specialty model will focus on upstream management of lower back pain and congestive heart failure in traditional Medicare

This week, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the Calendar Year (CY) 2026 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule (MPFS) proposed rule, which introduces a new mandatory Ambulatory Specialty Model (ASM), and announced updates on the Cell and Gene Therapy Access Model. These developments reflect CMS’s continued focus on value-based care, chronic condition management, and new payment strategies.

Specialists will be financially accountable for the upstream management of low back pain and congestive heart failure in traditional Medicare. The model is designed to reduce costs and improve healthcare quality through performance-based payment adjustments and enhanced care coordination. The proposal is open for public comment, and CMS may revise model parameters before finalizing the rule later this year.

In this article, Health Management Associates (HMA) experts break down the ASM model’s goals and design features and explains developments in CMS’s Cell and Gene Therapy Access Model. HMA experts are reviewing the CY 2026 MPFS and the CY 2026 Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System proposed rules and will highlight key policy provisions in a forthcoming article.

ASM Focus on Chronic Care

CMS estimates that more than two-thirds of traditional Medicare beneficiaries have at least one chronic condition. CMS states that spending on heart failure comes to $10‒$13 billion annually, while annual costs associated with low back pain are $6‒$8 billion. A lack of coordinated care can impede patients’ ability to manage their health and result in low-value care like unnecessary procedures and avoidable hospitalizations that run up costs without improving healthcare outcomes. The ASM will test how incentives such as payment adjustments to providers can encourage preventive care, earlier diagnosis, and better disease management.

Program Goals

The ASM is designed to encourage collaboration and communication between patients’ primary care providers and specialists who treat low back pain and heart failure. According to CMS, improved coordination will lead to the following:

  • Better patient outcomes and reduced disease progression
  • Decreased spending on low-value care experiences, such as unnecessary hospitalizations and procedures
  • Ensure providers are evaluated based on performance measures that are linked to the care they offer their patients
  • Optimize data transparency to allow providers to compare their performance with their peers when being measured on patient-centered outcomes

Performance will be assessed based on the Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS) Value Pathways (MVPs) across four factors:

  1. Improving outcomes, such enhancing patients’ functional status or controlling their blood pressure
  2. Lowering costs, especially through reduced provision of unnecessary services
  3. Increasing patient engagement through clinical care processes
  4. Expanding interoperability and data communication through certified electronic health record technology

Though based on the MIPS MVPs, the ASM will enhance the focus of performance measures, thereby simplifying reporting and allowing for comparisons across different providers and regions.

Table 1. ASM Model Payments, Participants, and Timeline

CategoryDetails
Model TypeTwo-sided risk payment model
Payment Adjustment Range-9% to +9% based on performance relative to peers
Performance Tiers– Positive adjustment for high performance
– Neutral for average performance
– Negative adjustment for low performance
Geographic ScopeRolled out in ~25% of core-based statistical areas (CBSAs) and metropolitan divisions nationwide
Specialties Included– Low back episodes: Anesthesiologists, pain management, interventional pain management, neurosurgeons, orthopedic surgeons, physical medicine or rehabilitation specialists– Heart failure episodes: General cardiologists
First Performance YearJanuary 1, 2027
Duration5 years
Relation to Other Models– ASM is the second mandatory model proposed by CMS, following TEAM (Transforming Episode Accountability Model). While TEAM focuses on hospital-based episodes, ASM shifts accountability to specialists.– Both models align with CMS’s broader strategy to reduce low-value care, a theme also reflected in the recently announced the Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction (WISeR) model.
Policy ContextPart of CMS Innovation Center’s strategy to promote evidence-based prevention, high-value care, and reduce unnecessary utilization

Cell and Gene Therapy Model

On July 15, 2025, CMS announced the participants in the Cell and Gene Therapy (CGT) Access Model. A total of 33 states, plus the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, will participate in this model, which has the federal government negotiating outcomes-based agreements with CGT manufacturers of sickle cell disease treatments. Participating states represent approximately 84 percent of Medicaid beneficiaries with the condition. Under the model, participating states receive guaranteed discounts and rebates from participating CGT manufacturers if the therapies fail to deliver their promised therapeutic benefits. States also have the option of receiving federal support of up to $9.55 million each to assist with implementation, outreach, and data tracking. States may choose when to begin their participation between January 2025 and January 2026. CMS indicated it may modify the model in the future to cover other diseases with high-cost, high-impact therapies.

Connect with Us

The ASM introduces opportunity and financial risk for specialists, hospitals, and health systems. Providers should consider strategies and tactics that will strengthen their collaboration with primary care teams to manage the chronic conditions addressed in the ASM model, which may require workflow redesign and new communication protocols. Providers also should consider whether they will need to make investments in data infrastructure and reporting to meet their performance quality goals.

HMA’s Medicare team—including actuaries, data analysts, and policy experts—helps organizations model, understand, and navigate the impact of proposed frameworks and policy changes, quantify risk, and more, so organizations can improve both financial performance and patient outcomes.

For details about these model announcements or the new proposed rules, contact the HMA Medicare team tracking these policies.

Blog

HHS Issues Immediate Policy Shift on Federal Benefit Eligibility Under PRWORA

Read Blog

On July 10, 2025, the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Department of Labor, Department of Justice, Department of Education, and US Department of Agriculture (USDA) issued notices that significantly reinterpret the definition of “federal public benefit” used in Title IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA). These changes are effective immediately upon publication in the Federal Register, though agencies have opened 30-day public comment periods to solicit feedback.

In this article, Health Management Associates (HMA) experts explain two of these notices—those from HHS and USDA—based on what we know and outstanding issues that organizations should expect to arise in the coming months.

Programs Affected by HHS’s Revised Interpretation

The notice changes HHS’s 1998 interpretation of PRWORA and will have sweeping implications for service delivery across the country. It does this by reversing the classification of many long-standing programs to be “Federal public benefits;” until now, these programs had been specifically excluded from that definition. People with Unsatisfactory Immigration Status are not permitted to access these benefits. People classified as such include those who are undocumented, but also several categories of people lawfully in the United States, such as holders of H1B and J-1 visas, as well as some lawful permanent residents (green card holders — only for the purposes of eligibility for certain programs).

Programs newly subject to these restrictions include:

  • Head Start
  • Certified Community Behavioral Health Clinics (CCBHCs)
  • Community Mental Health Services Block Grant
  • Community Services Block Grant (CSBG)
  • Health Center Program (Community Health Centers/FQHCs)
  • Health Workforce Programs (including grants, loans, scholarships, and loan repayments)
  • Services administered by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA)
  • Title IV-E programs (Educational and Training Voucher Program, Kinship Guardianship Assistance Program and Prevention Services Program)
  • Title X Family Planning

Organizations that receive federal or pass-through federal funding may now be required to assess immigration status as a condition of service delivery—something many have never done before. This shift raises significant operational, ethical, and mission-aligned challenges for hospitals, community health centers, behavioral health providers, and human services organizations. PRWORA does include language exempting 501(c)(3) charitable organizations from being required to verify immigration status, but as the administration notes in its announcement, they are not barred from doing so. This will be an area to watch.

USDA Interpretation

The USDA’s notice similarly identifies all 16 programs the Food and Nutrition Services (FNS) administers as meeting the definition of “Federal public benefit” used in Title IV of PRWORA. These programs include:

  • Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
  • Nutrition Assistance Program for Territories
  • Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR)
  • Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)
  • National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, and Summer Food Service Program
  • Child and Adult Care Food Program

The notice, however, states that there is a difference between defining a program as a federal public benefit and applying other provisions of PRWORA to those programs. The USDA’s notice clarifies that providers of non-exempt benefits must verify that applicants have a qualified immigration status for purposes of PRWORA but does not address how verification should be implemented or how exceptions should be applied.

What We Know—and Don’t Know

Though the list of affected programs is extensive, many critical implementation details remain uncertain. Both agencies acknowledge that further guidance will be needed to clarify how these changes will be operationalized.

Organizations should expect additional updates and further clarifications from federal agencies in the coming months. Legal challenges to these changes are almost certainly forthcoming.

Looking Ahead

These policy changes are both significant and still evolving. They will affect how and where services are delivered, as well as whether people choose to access the services at all.

During this period of uncertainty, frequent and transparent communication is essential. Deploy information and updates in multiple formats —written, verbal, visual—to reach diverse audiences, including your organization’s staff and other stakeholders in your community. When policy is fluid and changing rapidly, authentic messaging about what is known and what remains unclear will position your organization as an honest broker and trusted partner.

HMA experts are tracking these and related developments. For questions and to discuss the impact of these policies on your organization, contact our featured experts below.

Brief & Report

Project FoodBox: The Case for Food Is Medicine

Download

This literature review explores the concept of Food Is Medicine (FIM)—a healthcare approach that integrates nutrition-based interventions to prevent, manage, and treat chronic diseases. The report emphasizes the role of produce prescriptions, medically tailored meals (MTMs) and groceries in improving health outcomes, especially among low-income populations.

Solutions

Realize transaction-related cost synergies

Read More

HMA Spotlight

Realize transaction-related cost synergies

In the current policy environment, we anticipate increased consolidation in various subsectors due to financial and regulatory headwinds. Organizations can take intentional steps pre- and post-integration to realize cost synergies.

HMA Strategy & Transformation consultants advise organizations in their integration activities, and find it valuable to conduct the following sequence of steps:

Map the operating model pre-close to understand organizational structure, systems, contracts, and key processes across both entities.

Identify risks and quick wins before close—including staffing gaps, system incompatibilities, or duplicative vendors.

Design a Day 1 plan to keep operations stable, align communication, and ensure continuity for staff, patients, and partners.

Stand up integration teams post-close to drive workstreams across finance, IT, HR, and clinical operations with clear timelines and ownership.

Track synergies and milestones to measure progress, course-correct where needed, and deliver the operational and financial goals of the deal.

Intregration with HMA Strategy

A thorough, objective mapping is recommended, to investigate whether to cultivate in-house capabilities or maintain vendor relationships. Considerations include in-house capacity, contracted rates, and the flexibilities and risks associated with outsourcing. We recommend identifying favorable terms in existing vendor contracts that can be leveraged in enterprise-wide contracts.

Although there are internal and external pressures to move aggressively towards transaction deadlines, ensuring that appropriate pre- and post-close activities take place is key.

Ready to transform your organization?

Whether you are focused on payments, healthcare delivery, government policy, behavioral health, life sciences, Medicare, Medicaid, or Managed Care, our HMA experts are ready to partner with you, from initial strategy-setting through implementation.

Related Resources

Learn more about our Strategy & Transformation services

Achieving financial resilience in a time of turbulence

HMA’s Strategy & Transformation Practice collaborates with Stanford University to drive public health innovation

CMS Shakes Up the Innovation Center Model Landscape: What Comes Next?

Building Sustainable Health Systems

How One Organization Unlocked Exceptional Financial Gains Through Revenue Cycle Optimization

Contact our experts:

Headshot of Rebecca Nielsen

Rebecca Nielsen

Managing Director

Rebecca Nielsen is a managing director of HMA’s strategy and transformation practice, where she designs and leads major strategy and … Read more
Headshot of Alex Rich

Alex Rich

Managing Director

Alex Rich is an experienced business transformation leader with extensive expertise designing and deploying strategic programs that produce meaningful results. … Read more
Ready to talk?