Tag Archive for: Increase Access to PACE

Let the Secret out by Expanding Older Adults Access to PACE

This article was originally posted on Kevin MD. Read the full article here.

PACE, the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly, has long been considered the best-kept secret in the American health care system. It’s time to unveil this hidden gem. The health and well-being of older Americans – and the future of our health care system itself – may hinge on it.

Originating nearly half a century ago with the On Lok program in San Francisco’s Chinatown, the PACE model has since expanded to encompass 155 independent, locally-based PACE organizations. These organizations serve over seventy thousand older Americans across urban and rural communities in thirty-two states and the District of Columbia.

The growth of the PACE model has been methodical and deliberate, with a focus on maintaining its quality and integrity as new PACE providers enter the market. Multiple evaluations of the PACE model consistently demonstrate superior health, mood, functionality, survival rates, and utilization outcomes compared to alternative, unmanaged approaches. PACE not only benefits its patient population but also extends its advantages to families and caregivers.

However, as impressive and deliberate as the growth of PACE has been, the model currently serves only a fraction of the growing demographic in need. It is estimated that there are over ten million older Americans clinically eligible for PACE. To provide greater access to PACE, policy and statutory changes are required. The good news is that these changes are within reach.

I’ve been fortunate to work within the PACE model for over twenty-five years, assuming roles such as a front-line primary care provider, medical director, and national leader mentoring other PACE clinicians, and guiding the growth of the PACE model. For a geriatrician, PACE is akin to nirvana. I can’t envision practicing in any other setting.

There is often a misconception that geriatric medicine should care for all older adults. However, this task demands the mobilization and support of a primary care workforce consisting of family physicians, internists, and nurse practitioners, a workforce currently under significant pressure. Geriatric medicine is designed to serve a specific but costly segment of the older population – those with medical and social complexity who require long-term care services and support. In other words, geriatric medicine, much like PACE, serves older adults who need assistance with their daily activities.

Older Americans overwhelmingly express a preference for having their long-term care needs met in their homes and communities rather than in institutional settings. Nonetheless, our health care system is designed to cater to the system’s needs rather than those of complex, disabled older patients. How else can we explain the fragmentation, the reliance on technology and high-cost utilization, and the expectation that family members shuttle their loved ones from one brief office-based appointment to another?

PACE flips this paradigm on its head by structuring care around the needs of patients, reallocating resources from excessive institutional utilization to social, functional, and nutritional determinants of health. PACE operates as a managed care model, receiving all-inclusive capitated financing from the Medicare and Medicaid programs and assuming responsibility for the delivery and costs of all care. Nothing is excluded. Nothing is carved out. PACE represents a shining example of managed care done right.

The PACE model revolves around two key operational features: the PACE center, which combines the features of a social day program and a full-service clinic, and the PACE interdisciplinary team. PACE teams comprise nurses, social workers, physical, occupational, and recreational therapists, registered dietitians, drivers, personal care and home care workers, center managers, chaplains, pharmacists, and primary care providers, with the older adult and their caregivers at the core.

As a geriatrician, I am a critical member of the PACE team, but I am not the team’s boss. The team functions as a non-hierarchical collective, conducting periodic and formal assessments, engaging in ongoing communication, collaboration, and problem-solving, and crafting and delivering finely calibrated, flexible, individualized care plans. Importantly, PACE is not a brokered model: every member of the PACE team not only participates in the care-planning process but also provides direct care.

The PACE model allows me to draw on my full range of training, skills, and experience as a geriatric generalist. I have a manageable panel of patients that I care for across the entire continuum of care, and at any moment, I can draw on the resources and expertise of my inter-professional colleagues on the PACE team. I am responsible for managing chronic medical conditions and episodic problems, and I have the time and support to address them, consulting my specialist colleagues only when I have a specific question or problem requiring their expertise.

I see my patients at the PACE Center, where our drivers transport them from home for a full day of social and physical activities. Our staff can pick up on subtle changes in function and behavior that are often the only signs of an emerging health crisis, which might otherwise lead patients to the emergency department. I also make house calls to patients who prefer the comfort of their own homes or who are nearing the end of life. I serve as the attending physician when my patients are hospitalized or admitted to a skilled nursing facility for a short stay. In summary, I operate a concierge practice for the most complex and high-needs older patients in our healthcare system.

To be eligible for PACE, one must be 55 years of age or older and meet clinical criteria for nursing home care. Nationally, over 87 percent of PACE enrollees are dually eligible, meeting criteria based on age or disability for Medicare and, due to financial constraints, for Medicaid. Of the remaining 13 percent, the majority qualify for Medicaid due to their financial status but are ineligible for Medicare for various reasons. Only a small number of current PACE enrollees solely have Medicare, with assets and income exceeding the Medicaid eligibility threshold. Nevertheless, this population is growing and urgently requires healthcare delivery solutions.

Broadly speaking, there are three strategies to expand access to PACE: scaling, spreading, and serving new populations. With the support of the National PACE Association’s 2.0 project, PACE plans are scaling up significantly, transitioning from boutique-sized programs to larger ones with approximately 1,000 members. These larger programs are better positioned to expand access and achieve sustainable economies of scale while preserving the intimacy that makes PACE successful. Concurrently, access to PACE is spreading. States like Kentucky and Ohio, which previously did not adopt PACE or restricted its growth, are now advocating for PACE as a statewide solution. In contrast, Michigan has enlisted provider organizations across the state, offering older adults in Michigan nearly universal access to PACE.

However, to serve the Medicare-only, PACE-eligible population, statutory relief is essential. PACE plans offer comprehensive prescription drug benefits as Medicare Part D providers, submitting actuarially vetted bids to Medicare for annual approval. Nonetheless, because PACE serves a uniformly medically complex population with high pharmacy needs that require extensive support for medication safety and adherence, PACE Part D premiums tend to be considerably higher than what a Medicare beneficiary can acquire on the open market. Medicare-only beneficiaries eligible for PACE are already required to pay out-of-pocket premiums equal to the PACE Medicaid capitation. The additional PACE Part D premium often constitutes a prohibitive barrier to PACE enrollment. Fortunately, recent bipartisan and bicameral legislation introduced in Congress aims to lower this barrier. The PACE Part D Choice Act will allow Medicare-only beneficiaries to purchase prescription drug coverage on the open market if they wish, an option currently disallowed.

PACE isn’t suitable for everyone. It’s a voluntary program designed exclusively for disabled, vulnerable older adults with medical and social complexity. Not all those eligible for PACE will choose it. However, every older American eligible for PACE should have access to that opportunity. With a little push, PACE can be available in every neighborhood, county, and rural community. The health of older Americans may well depend on it. Let’s reveal this secret.

Adam Burrows is a geriatrician.

Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly in Rural America: Policy Brief and Recommendations to the Secretary

This article was originally posted on National Advisory Committee on Rural Health Services. Read the full article here.

Although 1 in 5 older adults (65 and over) in the United States live in rural areas,1 there is inadequate access to long-term services and supports (LTSS)1, particularly home and community-based services (HCBS), to meet the complex needs of the population.2 Expansion of the Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) in rural areas may help ameliorate this problem. The Committee selected PACE as a topic because of the model’s unique integration of health and human services and the program’s potential for serving rural elderly.

PACE is a Medicare program and Medicaid state option.3 It is part of a group of care delivery approaches focused on preserving seniors’ ability to live at home that includes Medicare Advantage and Medicaid HCBS. However, PACE is a unique, integrated care model that provides comprehensive health care and human services to frail older adults with chronic care needs. To be eligible for PACE, an individual must be 55 or older, live in the service area of a PACE organization, need a nursing home-level of care (as certified by their state), and be able to live safely in the community with assistance from PACE.4 Individuals enrolled in PACE continue to live in their community for as long as they are able due to the program’s coordination of preventive, primary, acute care, and LTSS.5 Because PACE is the sole source of services, there is a substantial decrease in administrative burden for PACE clinicians, participants, and caregivers. Clinicians are empowered to focus on patient-centered care, and participants and caregivers on better quality of life.

Evidence indicating cost savings and improved health outcomes for PACE participants, particularly for individuals who are dual-eligible for Medicare and Medicaid, continues to grow.6 After learning about PACE from experts and site visit stakeholders during the September meeting, the Committee believes that the model has great potential for rural areas. They were impressed with how the model addresses social determinants of health by focusing on high-quality medical care, access to community services, socialization, and safe and comfortable housing.

However, awareness of PACE as a viable option remains low in rural areas. Not all states have PACE organizations or approve PACE as a Medicaid option. The significant start-up funding and application process needed to establish PACE organizations are barriers to initial implementation as well as expansion. PACE organizations that successfully serve rural populations maximize existing partnerships and resources, but the Committee realizes that may not be feasible in under-resourced rural communities.

Based on their background work and presentations from experts and stakeholders, the Committee focused on several issues that potentially affect broad expansion of PACE in rural areas. This includes low patient volume, broadband and telehealth, limited awareness of the model, the rural hospital landscape, workforce shortages, and transportation challenges. They also focused on application, administrative, and start-up funding issues that influence the viability of PACE in all areas but pose greater challenges for the model in rural communities. Despite the barriers, the Committee believes PACE is an important option in long-term care and that expansion of the model in rural America is a worthwhile endeavor.

Read the full PDF here.

Improving Access to and Enrollment in Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE)

This document was originally posted on Bipartisan Policy Center. Read the full PDF here.

For the last decade, the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Health Program has advanced federal policy reforms to improve chronic and long-term care for individuals with complex needs. This work began with four of BPC’s health leaders—former Senate Majority Leaders Tom Daschle and Bill Frist, former Health and Human Services Secretary and Gov. Tommy Thompson, and former Congressional Budget Office Director Alice Rivlin. BPC has since released reports that include a range of bipartisan, federal policy solutions to improve access to long-term services and supports (LTSS); simplify and streamline authorities for Medicaid home and community-based services (HCBS); and better integrate care for individuals dually eligible for Medicare and Medicaid.

Continue reading…