Implementing Value-Based Payment Reform: Learning From The Field Of Practice

For the last four years, our team at the University of Washington (UW) has been evaluating seven value-based payment reform programs in six states for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF). We found that although the foundational work of value-based payment is proceeding apace for the most part, what’s missing is the sense of urgency required to move payers and providers toward patient-centered global payment based on value. Clusters of innovation are emerging across the country, and these experiments are generating valuable insights into the design and implementation of value-based payment—both what works and what doesn’t. We recently published an article in the Milbank Quarterly that presents our research assessing these pilot programs in Washington, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Maine, New Hampshire, and Massachusetts, all of which sought to move away from fee-for-service (FFS) payment to value-based payment that rewards improved processes of care, better health outcomes, and reduced cost. Some are still at it. Some failed. In this post we address some of the reasons why. Our findings complement those of Suzanne Delbanco, whose yearlong series has provided Health Affairs Blog readers with a thorough tour of the payment reform landscape. Payment Reform The seven RWJF-sponsored projects share a fundamental approach to payment reform: each is founded on a multi-stakeholder coalition, typically including employers, insurers, provider organizations, and consumer organizati...
Source: Health Affairs Blog - Category: Health Management Authors: Tags: Innovations in Care Delivery Source Type: blogs