Minnesota All Payer Claims Database
Workgroup Meeting #2
DATA USE PARAMETERS
August 5, 2014
Kris Van Amber
Senior Management Consultant
Management Analysis & Development
Minnesota Management & Budget
Linda Green
Vice President, Programs
Freedman HealthCare
Agenda
Welcome and Introductions – Kris Van Amber
10 min
Agenda Overview – Linda Green and Kris Van Amber
5 min
Group Purpose and Ground Rules – Kris Van Amber
5 min
Meeting 1 Recap – Linda Green
10 min
Data Use Parameters in Other APCDs – Linda Green
40 min
Break
10 min
Data Use in Minnesota – Small Group Discussions
40 min
Small Groups Report Out – Kris Van Amber and Linda Green
20 min
Large Group Feedback on Small Group Reports – Kris Van
Amber and Linda Green
25 min
Opportunity for Public Comment
10 min
Next Steps – Linda Green
5 min
Adjourn
2
Meeting Goals
Review the Legislature’s question to the group
Learn how other states approach establishing data
use parameters
Frame data use parameters that are right for
Minnesota
Provide opportunity for discussion by the workgroup
and invite public comment
3
Group Purpose and Ground Rules
Direction from the Legislature to answer six questions
Product: Submit written report from the workgroup to
the Legislature by February 1, 2015
Monthly meetings through January
Workgroup members’ input
Membership reflects diverse points of view
Experience with claims data or IT not required
Looking for input on what makes sense for MN
4
Meeting 1 Recap
Purpose of Meeting 1: Context for the work ahead
Understand workgroup members’ perspectives
Legislature’s directions to the workgroup
What is an APCD?
National overview
Minnesota’s APCD history and current status
Obtain the workgroup’s top-of-mind feedback
5
What We Learned at Meeting 1
Wide ranging interest in the MN APCD
MN’s has a robust APCD with over 5 years of data for
most of the state
Workgroup members expressed interest in:
Learning more about different types of uses of the data
How the APCD will be managed, including access to the
data and alignment with other MN initiatives
How the APCD will address future data needs
Ensuring that the APCD represents the full picture of
health service delivery
6
Data Use Concepts Raised at Meeting 1
Measuring quality of care
Public reporting
Insight about variations in care, especially disparities
Inform price transparency
Understanding of care provided across settings
Aligning reporting with database maturity
Meeting analytic needs in the future
Differences in types of data users
7
Today’s Focus:
Question 1 from the Legislature
What should the parameters be for
allowable uses of the all-payer claims
data collected under Minnesota
Statutes, section 62U.04, beyond the
uses authorized in Minnesota Statutes,
section 62U.04, subdivision 11?
8
Evolving APCD Data Uses
Early Adopters 1997-2007
Monitoring total cost of care (MD)
Population health trends (UT)
Academic research (VT)
Second Wave 2008-2010
Transparency initiatives (NH,MN, MA, RI, OR, CO)
Consumer decision support (NH, MA, RI, CO)
Partnership with public health agencies (CO,NH)
Recent Activity
Policy, market analysis, research, consumer decision support (CT)
Transparency initiatives (VA)
Expanded Uses
Health Care Reform planning, implementation and operations (RI,
MD, MA, VT)
9
Data Use Parameters Also Look at Users
Specific data and level of detail should vary
State Agencies using APCD information in other
states:
Health Research and Population Management
Policy and Planning
Insurance Department
Medicaid
Health Insurance Exchange
Academic Researchers
Public Information
10
Examples of Data Uses in APCDs
PUBLIC
HEALTH
Colorado
Safe
QUALITY
COSTS
Performance
Cost Effective
Kansas
Maine
Maryland
Price & Cost
Trends
POLICY /
PLANNING
CHOICES/
COMPARE
SYSTEM
CAPACITY
Compare
Decision
making
Access
Data Use Categories
Improve
health
Performance
Massachusetts
Research
New Hampshire
Continuous
review
Performance
Oregon
Total Medical
Cost
Cost and
Utilization
Planning
Compare
Cost Effective
Continuous
review
Choice
Costs and
Effectiveness
Policy
Choices
Continuous
review
Tennessee
Performance
Expenditures
Utah
Quality
Cost effective
Costs
Vermont
Program
Effectiveness
Quality
Virginia
Prevention
Quality
Resources
Access
Policy
Compare
Resources
Compare
11
Examples of Data Users by APCD State
X= In progress O= In development
State Agency
Analysis
Colorado
Kansas
Maine
State Agency
Operations
X
Academic
Researchers
Public
Reporting
Other
X
X
X
Data Use Categories
X
O
X
X
X
X
Maryland
X
X
X
X
Massachusetts
X
X
X
X
New Hampshire
X
X
X
X
X
Oregon
Tennessee
Utah
X
X
Vermont
X
X
X
Virginia
X
X
X
12
Samples from Data Use Statements:
Users and Uses
Tennessee Health Information Committee
• Public reports should be phased in over time, building complexity as the data
mature
Massachusetts Health Care Quality and Cost Council
• “The overarching goal of measuring, monitoring and reporting information on
health care quality and costs is to help motivate continued meaningful progress
toward the twin goals of improving health care quality while reducing costs and
cost growth.”
• Durable language – BCBSMA May 2014 citation
Colorado APCD Advisory Committee
• Public reports and formal research using transparent, well understood statistical
and analytic methodologies that improve health care or public health outcomes
Oregon Quality and Efficiency Subcommittee
• Make use of best data sources and measurement methodologies that are currently
available
• Articulated criteria for development of quality and efficiency standards
• Collaborate with stakeholders
13
Public Reporting
Why have public reporting based on this data?
• Transparency in multiple dimensions
• Support for public and private health initiatives
• Measure progress and monitor trends
Structuring the reporting progress
• Phased in over time
• Start with low stakes reporting
14
Current Data Use Parameters in MN
MN 2014 Legislation topics for state agency use:
These Topics….
….May Be Categorized As:
Health Homes
Performance Evaluation
Readmissions
Quality Improvement
Variations by Geography
Population Health
State Innovation Model Testing
Health System Trends
Pain Management Prescription
Patterns
Care Improvement
Assessment of Data for Risk
Adjustment
Health Care Reform Analysis
15
Revisit Data Use Concepts Raised at
Meeting 1
Measuring quality of care
Public reporting
Insight about variations in care, especially disparities
Inform price transparency
Understanding of care provided across settings
Aligning reporting with database maturity
Meeting analytic needs in the future
Differences in types of data users
16
Components of a Data Use Parameter
Use Categories
User Types
Factors to consider:
•
•
•
•
Supporting the state’s vision for health care
Academic researchers’ ability to provide insight
Valuable analytics that may be developed in the future
Burden of required reporting (administrative simplification)
17
Our Discussion
What data use parameters make sense for Minnesota?
Which are the most compelling for the Workgroup?
Individual lists
Small Groups
Report Out
Large Group Reflection
18
Public Comment
19
Next Steps and Adjourn
How the group’s insights will be used going forward
Next meeting:
• September 2, 2014, 2 PM to 5 PM
Topics:
• Question 4: Mechanisms for data access
• Question 5: Privacy and security protections
Submit any additional comments to:
Kris Van Amber [email protected]
20
Questions?
Linda Green
Vice President, Freedman Health Care
[email protected]
617.243.9509 x 203
Kris Van Amber
Senior Management Consultant
Management Analysis & Development (Mad)
Minnesota Management & Budget
[email protected]
651.259.3808
21