Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves last week announced what he called “sweeping Medicaid reimbursement reforms” that are anticipated to generate an estimated $689 million for hospitals throughout the state. However, one medical official is saying the proposal is not a victory for all hospitals.
Reeves, joined by Mississippi Division of Medicaid (MDOM) Executive Director Drew Snyder and eight hospital executives, introduced the following on Thursday:
The Mississippi Hospital Access Program will provide direct payments to hospitals serving patients in the Mississippi Medicaid managed care delivery system. With these direct payments, hospitals would be reimbursed at the same rate compensated by private insurance, which has been considered the federal ceiling for Medicaid reimbursements in managed care. The second initiative will supplement Medicaid base payments for hospitals by reimbursing inpatient and outpatient hospital services at rates in the upper payment limit. Hospitals will pay more to cover the costs of bed taxes and uninsured patients but will be reimbursed at a much higher rate than what they put in.
Matt Woodward, the chief financial officer at Winston Medical Center in Louisville, told SuperTalk Mississippi News that the initiatives will do nothing more than validate claims that the Republican governor has failed Mississippi’s healthcare industry, specifically small and rural hospitals.
“Healthcare is largely considered by most in the industry as a complete failure by the Reeves administration – most notably, rural healthcare. The announcement of Governor Reeves’ Medicaid reimbursement reform on September 21 did very little to change that,” Woodward said. “In fact, it was a slap in the face to most all of the small rural hospitals around the state.”
As part of the proposal from Reeves, 42 percent of the funds ($291 million) will be dispersed among 16 hospitals. The other 58 percent ($398 million) will be distributed among 95 hospitals, most of which are small or in rural areas. That would equal out to $18.19 million per hospital in the first category and $4.19 million per hospital in the second.
Politics is seen as the primary factor in the decision to allocate a lion’s share of the money to
Read original article by clicking here.