Minnesota's provider-initiated approach yields care quality gains at participating nursing homes.

Minnesota's Performance-Based Incentive Payment Program uses a collaborative, provider-initiated approach to nursing home quality improvement: up-front funding of evidence-based projects selected and designed by participating facilities, with accountable performance targets. During the first 4 rounds of funding (2007-10), 66 projects were launched at 174 facilities. Using a composite quality measure representing multiple dimensions of clinical care, we found that facilities participating during this period exhibited significantly greater gains than did nonparticipating facilities, in both targeted areas and overall quality, and maintained their quality advantage after project completion. Participating and nonparticipating facilities were similar at baseline with respect to quality scores and improvement trends, as well as acuity-adjusted payment, operating costs, and nurse staffing. Although self-selection precludes firm conclusions regarding the program's impacts, early findings indicate that the program shows promise for incentivizing nursing home quality improvement, both in facility-identified areas of concern and overall.

[1]  R. McDaniel,et al.  Nursing Homes as Complex Adaptive Systems: Relationship Between Management Practice and Resident Outcomes , 2003, Nursing research.

[2]  R. Werner,et al.  State Adoption of Nursing Home Pay-for-Performance , 2010, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[3]  M. Rosenthal,et al.  What Is the Empirical Basis for Paying for Quality in Health Care? , 2006, Medical care research and review : MCRR.

[4]  C. Mueller,et al.  Minnesota's Nursing Facility Performance-Based Incentive Payment Program: an innovative model for promoting care quality. , 2010, The Gerontologist.

[5]  D. Polsky,et al.  The effect of pay-for-performance in nursing homes: evidence from state Medicaid programs. , 2013, Health services research.

[6]  Christian D Helfrich,et al.  A critical synthesis of literature on the promoting action on research implementation in health services (PARIHS) framework , 2010, Implementation Science : IS.

[7]  N. Castle,et al.  What is nursing home quality and how is it measured? , 2010, The Gerontologist.

[8]  M. Bleich,et al.  High-performing and low-performing nursing homes: a view from complexity science. , 2007, Health care management review.

[9]  R. Konetzka,et al.  Advancing nursing home quality through quality improvement itself. , 2010, Health affairs.

[10]  R. Konetzka,et al.  Impact of public reporting on unreported quality of care. , 2009, Health services research.

[11]  W. Spector,et al.  Nursing homes' response to the nursing home compare report card. , 2007, The journals of gerontology. Series B, Psychological sciences and social sciences.

[12]  Jo Rycroft-Malone,et al.  Evaluating the successful implementation of evidence into practice using the PARiHS framework: theoretical and practical challenges , 2008, Implementation science : IS.

[13]  Terry S. Field,et al.  Pay-for-Performance in Nursing Homes , 2009, Health care financing review.

[14]  J. Lowery,et al.  Fostering implementation of health services research findings into practice: a consolidated framework for advancing implementation science , 2009, Implementation science : IS.

[15]  G. Arling,et al.  Medicaid nursing home pay for performance: where do we stand? , 2009, The Gerontologist.

[16]  R. Kane,et al.  A quality-based payment strategy for nursing home care in Minnesota. , 2007, The Gerontologist.

[17]  P. Arling,et al.  A State-Sponsored Approach to Quality Improvement in Nursing Homes: Insights From Providers , 2013 .