CMS Innovation Center Health Care Innovation Awards

CMS Innovation Center Health Care Innovation Awards: Evaluation Plan

Sandra H. Berry
Thomas W. Concannon
Kristy Gonzalez Morganti
David I. Auerbach
Megan K. Beckett
Peggy Guey-Chi Chen
Donna O. Farley
Bing Han
Katherine M. Harris
Spencer S. Jones
Hangsheng Liu
Susan L. Lovejoy
Terry Marsh
Grant Martsolf
Christopher Nelson
Edward N. Okeke
Marjorie L. Pearson
Francesca Pillemer
Melony E. Sorbero
Vivian L. Towe
Robin M. Weinick
Copyright Date: 2013
Published by: RAND Corporation
Pages: 133
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt5hhtcm
  • Cite this Item
  • Book Info
    CMS Innovation Center Health Care Innovation Awards
    Book Description:

    The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation has funded 108 projects implementing new service delivery or payment models that are intended to deliver lower cost through improving quality of care. This report describes a strategy for evaluating the results. Key dimensions include implementation effectiveness, program effectiveness, workforce issues, impact on priority populations, and context.

    eISBN: 978-0-8330-8304-3
    Subjects: Health Sciences

Table of Contents

  1. Front Matter
    (pp. i-ii)
  2. Preface
    (pp. iii-iii)
  3. Table of Contents
    (pp. iv-v)
  4. Figures
    (pp. vi-vi)
  5. Tables
    (pp. vii-viii)
  6. Summary
    (pp. ix-xx)
  7. Acknowledgments
    (pp. xxi-xxi)
  8. Abbreviations
    (pp. xxii-xxiv)
  9. Chapter 1. Background, Evaluation Goals, and Overview
    (pp. 1-4)

    On November 14, 2011, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI) within the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) announced the Health Care Innovation Challenge. Through this initiative, CMS planned to award up to $900 million in Health Care Innovation Awards (HCIAs) for applicants who proposed compelling new models of service delivery or payment improvements that promise to deliver better health, better health care, and lower costs through improved quality of care for Medicare, Medicaid, and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) enrollees. CMS was also interested in learning how new models would affect subpopulations of beneficiaries (e.g., dual eligibles,...

  10. Chapter 2. Strategies for Evaluation at Three Levels
    (pp. 5-10)

    The evaluation plan envisions that data collection and analysis will be carried out on three levels: at the level of the individual awardee, at the level of the awardee group, and as a summary evaluation that includes all awardees. In this chapter, we discuss strategies for evaluation at these three levels.

    We expect that evaluations at all three levels will need to address several main questions, including the following:

    To what extent was the program implemented as designed? What modifications were made and why?

    What happened to cost of care—i.e., to what extent were awardee efforts associated with change...

  11. Chapter 3. Evaluation Dimensions, Measures, and Designs
    (pp. 11-54)

    In this chapter, we describe the overall evaluation strategy, including the key evaluation dimensions, their importance for the evaluation, and the basic approach to measurement used for each of the evaluation dimensions. We begin by outlining a conceptual framework for the evaluation.

    The conceptual framework for the evaluation is shown in Figure 3.1. The framework identifies key dimensions of the evaluation and indicates how they relate to a primary outcome of interest: the sustainability of an awardee program.

    In the leftmost box, we depict thehealth status and characteristicsof the target patient population. These characteristics motivate thedesign of...

  12. Chapter 4: Summary Evaluation and Decision Strategy
    (pp. 55-91)

    In addition to the evaluations conducted at the levels of individual awardees and awardee groups, we also see a role for summary evaluation strategies that would include large numbers of awardees or other kinds of awardee groups. For instance, one such group might be awardees that include Medicare recipients as their primary target group. The primary objective of the summary evaluation is to compare and synthesize findings from evaluations conducted at the awardee and grouping levels and from pooled analyses, in order to assist in identifying those interventions that can be implemented more broadly, those that need testing in other...

  13. Appendix A. Relationship of Evaluation Dimensions to HCIA Evaluation Questions
    (pp. 92-94)
  14. Appendix B. Sample Size Requirements for Estimating HCIA Impacts
    (pp. 95-105)
  15. References
    (pp. 106-109)