140 likes | 283 Views
FY 2012 State and Regional Primary Care Associations (PCA) Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA) Data Clarification TA Call. April 5, 2012. Overview. Health Center Conditions Report State Performance Profile Health Center Program Requirement Goal Clinical Performance Improvement Goals
E N D
FY 2012 State and Regional Primary Care Associations (PCA) Funding Opportunity Announcement (FOA)Data Clarification TA Call April 5, 2012
Overview • Health Center Conditions Report • State Performance Profile • Health Center Program Requirement Goal • Clinical Performance Improvement Goals B2. Financial Performance Improvement Goals
Health Center Program Requirement Goal • Metric:% of Health Center Program grantees with no program conditions on their Notice of Awards (NoAs) • Definition:Currently fundedH80 Grantees that do not have any program conditions in the last 12 months • Program conditions relate to compliance with the 19 key program requirements (http://www.bphc.hrsa.gov/about/requirements/index.html)
Clinic Performance Improvement Goals • Metric: % of Health Center Program grantees in the state/region that meet or exceed performance on one or more Healthy People (HP) 2020 performance measure goal(s) • Definition:Met or exceeded the ‘Healthy People (HP) 2020’ performance measure goals on at least one of the clinical measures • Formula:
Clinical Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % Children Immunized is 80.0% or higher • Definition: Met or exceeded the HP 2020 performance measure goal(s) of 80.0% or higher for ‘% Children Immunized’ clinical measure in the 2010 UDS • Formula:
Clinical Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % Diabetic Patients with HbA1c less than or equal to 9% is 85.4% or higher • Definition: Met or exceeded the HP 2020 performance measure goal(s) of 85.4% or higher for ‘% Diabetic Patients with HbA1c less than or equal to 9%’ clinical measure in the 2010 UDS • Formula:
Clinical Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % Female Patients with PAP Test is 93.0% or higher • Definition:Met or exceeded the HP 2020 performance measure goal(s) of 93.0% or higher for ‘% Female Patients with PAP Test’ clinical measure in the 2010 UDS • Formula:
Clinical Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % Hypertensive Patients with BP less than 140/90 is 61.2% or higher • Definition:Met or exceeded the HP 2020 performance measure goal(s) of 61.2% or higher for ‘% Hypertensive Patients with BP less than 140/90’ clinical measure in the 2010 UDS • Formula:
Clinical Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % Low Birth Weight is 7.8% or lower • Definition:Met or exceeded the HP 2020 performance measure goal(s) of 7.8% or lower for ‘% Low Birth Weight’ clinical measure in the 2010 UDS • Formula:
Clinical Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % Prenatal Patients Served in the 1st Trimester is 77.9% or higher • Definition: Met or exceeded the HP 2020 performance measure goal(s) of 77.9% or higher for ‘% Prenatal Patients Served in the 1st Trimester’ clinical measure in the 2010 UDS • Formula:
Clinical Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % of Health Center Program grantees with Patient-Centered Medical Home (PCMH) recognition • Definition: Grantees as of March 12, 2012 that currently have PCMH recognition for at least one site. Only sites recognized within the past 3 years will be considered to be PCMH recognized. Data includes PCMH Recognition through NCQA, The Joint Commission, and AAAHC. • Formula:
Financial Performance Improvement Goals • Metric: % of Health Center Program grantees with cost increase less than National average • Definition: Grantees whose ‘percent increase in cost per patient’ is less than the CMS National Health Expenditure rate (NHE) • The CMS NHE is 3.94% (http://www.cms.gov/NationalHealthExpendData/03_NationalHealthAccountsProjected.asp#TopOfPage) • Formula:
Financial Performance Improvement Goals (cont’d) • Metric: % of Health Center Program grantees without going concern issues • Definition: Grantees that currently have no going concern issues identified in their audit report for the 2010 submission year and the report has been reviewed as of March 28, 2012 • Formula: