29 Jul 2026
Off
View Post
Building Confidence in Claims Data: MVC’s Site Coordinator Education Program Continues to Grow

Building Confidence in Claims Data: MVC’s Site Coordinator Education Program Continues to Grow

July 29, 2026 | Comments Closed | , , , , ,

Helping hospitals turn claims data into meaningful quality improvement (QI) action is central to Michigan Value Collaborative’s (MVC) mission. While MVC has long provided members with access to robust claims-based data and reporting resources, member feedback consistently identified a common challenge: many site coordinators and quality leaders wanted additional support in understanding how to interpret claims data and apply it to their organization’s improvement initiatives.

In response, the MVC Coordinating Center launched a series of site coordinator education modules. This structured learning experience was designed to strengthen claims data literacy while building participants’ confidence in using MVC resources to support local QI efforts. The program combines foundational education with practical application, peer collaboration, and individualized support to create a flexible learning experience that can be tailored to each participants’ needs.

After program registration began in January 2026, interest quickly exceeded expectations leading to the creation of three phased cohorts of quality leaders. To date, 40 site coordinators have enrolled in the program, representing 33 hospitals and 12 health systems, reflecting the growing demand for education focused on translating data into action.

A Four-Module Learning Experience

MVC’s site coordinator education program consists of four live, virtual modules that can be completed sequentially or independently depending on each participant’s experience and learning goals.

Module 1: Understanding MVC Fundamentals

The first module introduces participants to foundational knowledge about MVC including the collaborative’s mission, vision, data resources, P4P program, and engagement opportunities. Participants are additionally encouraged to develop a plan for how to meet yearly engagement goals based on preferred activities.

Module 2: Navigating MVC Data Resources

The second module reviews common claims data terminology and definitions, strengths and limitations of claims data, and explores how claims data can be used to supplement clinical data analyses to support QI efforts. Participants also learn to navigate the MVC registry, interpret push reports and identify meaningful performance measures.

Module 3: Applying MVC Resources to Quality Improvement

The third module examines opportunities to make connections between QI efforts and other aspects of MVC’s programming including fellow CQI collaborations and the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program. This module aims to shift from understanding claims data to identifying applications of MVC resources to QI.

Module 4: Best Practice Sharing and Stakeholder Engagement

The fourth and final module focuses on translating the knowledge gained from the previous modules into the appropriate next steps for QI. Participants will have the opportunity to discuss best practices, challenges, and stakeholder communication strategies with fellow quality leaders engaged in similar areas of QI.

This curriculum is built around four complementary components that reinforce learning and encourage real-word application:

  • Foundational Learning: Live virtual sessions introduce key concepts, data resources, and other programmatic materials
  • Applied Case Studies: Independent exercises using hospital-specific reports help guide data interpretation and identify QI opportunities
  • Individual Coaching: One-on-one support from MVC Coordinating Center offers on-demand assistance with report interpretation and the development of customized reference tools
  • Peer Learning Forums: Integrated opportunities to connect with colleagues across Michigan to share experiences, discuss challenges, and exchange successful strategies

Together, these components create a learning environment that extends beyond traditional education by helping participants immediately apply knowledge to their own QI work.

As an example, following Module 2, participants are encouraged to complete a worksheet designed to apply concepts from the 1:1 session to their own organization’s data. Completed worksheets demonstrate strong engagement with the education framework, with participants identifying meaningful opportunities to improve quality of care in a variety of focus areas including readmissions, care transitions, cardiac rehabilitation utilization, and drivers of higher episode spending. Rather than jumping directly to solutions, participants thoughtfully used MVC claims data to generate hypotheses, identify additional clinical and operational information needed, and defined realistic next steps for QI.

A common theme across submissions is recognition that claims data can serve as a starting point for inquiry but must be combined with other data resources to drive QI strategies. Participants frequently identified the need to pair MVC data registry findings with health record data, chart reviews, frontline staff feedback, and internal quality dashboards to better understand underlying drivers. Participants also outlined practical next steps such as engaging multidisciplinary teams, validating findings locally, and integrating MVC data monitoring into existing QI initiatives. These outcomes demonstrate the program’s goal of helping site coordinators translate data insights into meaningful action.

Participant Feedback and Preliminary Outcomes

Evaluation is embedded throughout the education program to ensure the curriculum continues to meet participants’ needs. While the program is in its first year, initial feedback suggests it is already helping participants build confidence in using MVC resources. Following the completion of Module 1, site coordinators have reported an average confidence rating of 4.5 out of 5 in their ability to “describe MVC’s data resources and engagement opportunities.” These early results indicate that the program is successfully establishing a strong foundation for participants as they progress towards applying claims data to QI initiatives within their organizations.

Additionally, participants have highlighted the program’s impact on building both knowledge and confidence:

"Thank you so much for the time and education! I think this is exactly what I need as a new Quality Manager and Site Coordinator. Looking forward to the next module!"

"It was a great learning experience and I'm looking forward to learning more about how we can use this data for process improvement."

"This was a foundational review. I feel very confident with the foundational principles now. I look forward to becoming more comfortable with the claims data and using this data more confidently to improve our performance."

Looking Ahead

MVC’s education modules were designed to bridge the gap between data availability and practical application by combining several complimentary learning strategies. By equipping site coordinators with the knowledge and tools to not only interpret but also apply MVC data to QI efforts, the program aims to strengthen hospitals’ ability to identify improvement opportunities, support evidence-informed decision-making, and advance value-based care across Michigan.

As the program continues to expand, the MVC Coordinating Center is planning to scale up the program by training additional Coordinating Center team members to lead these sessions. Using participant feedback from post-module and post-program surveys, MVC will also continue to refine the curriculum to best meet the needs of site coordinators.

MVC looks forward to welcoming future cohorts of hospital quality leaders to the education program. If interested in joining the next cohort beginning in October 2026, please complete the registration form here.

22 Jul 2026
Off
View Post
MVC Finalizes Summary Evaluation of PY 24-25 P4P Cycle

MVC Finalizes Summary Evaluation of PY 24-25 P4P Cycle

July 22, 2026 | Comments Closed | , , ,

This year, the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) completed scoring and evaluation for Program Year (PY) 2025 of the MVC Component of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program. This concluded a two-year program cycle encompassing the program methodologies and conditions utilized in PYs 2024 and 2025. MVC recently completed an evaluation of these two program years, which focused on hospital performance on average 30-day risk-adjusted, price-standardized total episode payments for the included conditions as well as utilization rates for the included value metrics across both program years.

The PY 2024-2025 program cycle utilized episode claims from 2021 through 2024. PY 2024 scoring compared performance year data from 2023 against baseline year data from 2021. PY 2025 scoring compared performance year data from 2024 against baseline year data from 2022.

Hospitals chose one episode spending condition from six available options for the PY 2024-2025 program cycle, including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), colectomy (non-cancer), congestive heart failure (CHF), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), joint replacement (hip and knee), and pneumonia. Among these six P4P conditions, joint replacement was the most selected condition (31), and pneumonia was the least frequently selected (6). Colectomy was not selected by any hospital.

Trends in average price-standardized episode payments showed a consistent decrease over the years for joint replacement. Both COPD and CABG showed relatively consistent trend in payments and had the highest payments in 2022 as seen in Figure 1. Both PYs saw an average decrease in payments in both CABG and joint replacement. Joint replacement was the largest contributor to the cost savings in this cycle with a decrease of $3 million dollars in PY 2024 and $1.9 million dollars in PY 2025.

Figure 1. Average Price-Standardized Episode Payment Trends for P4P Conditions (2020-2024)

Line chart showing 30-day total episode payments from 2020 to 2024 for five conditions: CABG, Pneumonia, CHF, COPD, and Joint. CABG payments remain highest around $50,000 with slight fluctuations, while other conditions show gradual increases between $14,000 and $18,000.

MVC further assessed the components contributing to total episode spending, and determined all conditions except COPD showed a decrease in spending in at least one episode component (i.e., index payment, professional services, post-discharge care, readmissions) across both PYs (Figures 2-3). Joint replacement showed decreased spending across all components in PY 2025 and across all components except readmissions in PY 2024. Similarly, all conditions demonstrated a reduction in spending for at least one post-discharge component in both PYs. Home health spending decreased across all conditions while inpatient rehabilitation spending increased for most conditions in both PYs. Emergency department spending also decreased for most conditions across both PYs.

Figure 2. Change in Average Price-Standardized Episode Components, PY 2024

Bar chart comparing 30-day episode component payments across five P4P conditions: CABG, CHF, COPD, Joint Replacement, and Pneumonia. Each condition's total payment is broken down into four color-coded components—Index (dark blue), Professional (orange), Post-Discharge (bright blue), and Readmissions (gray)—highlighting negative payment for CABG and Joint Replacement and positive payments for other conditions.

Figure 3. Change in Average Price-Standardized Episode Components, PY 2025

Bar chart comparing 30-day episode component payments across five P4P conditions: CABG, CHF, COPD, Joint Replacement, and Pneumonia. Payment components include Index (dark blue), Professional (orange), Post-Discharge (bright blue), and Readmissions (gray), showing negative total payments for CABG and Joint Replacement, and highest positive payment for Pneumonia.

In addition to selecting an episode spending condition, hospitals also selected one of seven available value metrics for the PY 2024-2025 program cycle. This included 7-day follow-up after CHF, 7-day follow-up after pneumonia, 14-day follow-up after COPD, 30-day inpatient readmissions after sepsis, 90-day cardiac rehab after CABG, 90-day cardiac rehab after PCI, and preoperative testing before low-risk surgeries (i.e., inguinal hernia repair, cholecystectomy, and lumpectomy). The 7-day follow-up after CHF metric (23) was the most frequently selected value metric followed by 90-day cardiac rehab after PCI (17). In contrast, 90-day cardiac rehab after CABG and 30-day inpatient readmissions after sepsis were the least frequently selected (5) value metrics.

Among the high-value metrics, hospitals that selected 14-day follow-up after COPD and 90-day cardiac rehab after PCI increased their utilization rate by 1.4% and 3.1%, respectively, from 2021 to 2023 (Table 1). In PY 2025, the utilization of 90-day cardiac rehab after CABG increased by 3.6% in 2024 compared to 2022 (Table 2). Among the low-value metrics, sepsis readmission rates decreased by 0.5% in PY 2024 and 7.0% in PY 2025. Preoperative testing rates decreased by 5% from 2022 to 2024 in PY 2025.

Table 1. Average Utilization Changes for P4P Value Metrics in PY 2024

Table displaying P4P value metrics with average utilization percentages for 2021 and 2023, alongside utilization change rates. Metrics include follow-up rates after CHF, pneumonia, COPD, cardiac rehab after CABG and PCI, inpatient readmissions after sepsis, and preoperative testing, with notable increases in 14-day COPD follow-up (1.4%) and 90-day cardiac rehab after PCI (3.1%).

Table 2. Average Utilization Changes for P4P Value Metrics in PY 2025

Table comparing average utilization rates for various healthcare metrics in 2022 and 2024, highlighting percentage changes. Metrics include follow-up periods after conditions like CHF, pneumonia, COPD, cardiac rehab after CABG and PCI, inpatient readmissions after sepsis, and preoperative testing, with notable increases in 90-day cardiac rehab after CABG and decreases in inpatient readmissions and preoperative testing.

Overall, the average total points earned remained relatively stable between PY 2024 (6.6) and PY 2025 (6.7), as shown in Figure 4. Average episode spending points decreased from 2.4 to 2.2, while average value metric points increased from 2.4 to 2.6, and average engagement points increased from 1.7 to 1.8 from PY 24 to PY 25.

Figure 4. Average Points Earned by Scoring Components in PYs 2024-2025

Bar chart comparing scores for PY 24 and PY 25 across four categories: Episode Spending Points, Value Metrics, Engagement Points, and Final Score. PY 25 slightly outperforms PY 24 in Value Metrics, Engagement Points, and Final Score, with both years scoring similarly in Episode Spending Points.

The distribution of total points earned by participating hospitals in PY 2024 and PY 2025 are shown in Figures 5 and 6, respectively. Approximately 15% of hospitals scored the maximum score of 10 points in PY 2024 and this proportion decreased to 10% in PY 2025.

Figure 5. Distribution of Hospital Total Points Scored for PY 2024

Scatter plot showing PY24 final scores of MVC hospitals participating in PY24-25 program, with scores ranging from 0 to 10. Data points are marked in blue, with mean score 6.6 in orange and median score 6.1 in gray, highlighting most hospitals scoring at or above median and mean.

Figure 6. Distribution of Hospital Total Points Scored for PY 2025

Scatter plot showing final PY 25 scores for MVC hospitals participating in PY 24-25 program, with scores ranging from 2 to 10. Plot includes orange line for mean score (6.7), gray line for median score (6.0), and dark blue dots representing individual hospital scores, highlighting most hospitals scoring at or above median.

Additional details are contained in the full report. Please contact the Coordinating Center for more details on the report or for any questions regarding the PY 2024-2025 cycle.

15 Jul 2026
Off
View Post
Share Your Success Story at MVC’s Fall 2026 Collaborative-Wide Meeting

Share Your Success Story at MVC’s Fall 2026 Collaborative-Wide Meeting

July 15, 2026 | Comments Closed | , , , ,

The Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) is now accepting presentation proposals for its fall 2026 collaborative-wide meeting, taking place Fri., Oct. 9, at the VistaTech Center in Livonia, Michigan.

Each collaborative-wide meeting provides an opportunity for members to learn directly from one another by sharing innovative approaches, practical lessons learned, and successful quality improvement strategies. MVC is seeking presentations that highlight quality improvement initiatives informed by MVC offerings, such as push reports, custom reports, registry data, or insights gained through participation in MVC events and peer learning opportunities.

Potential presentation topics include how your organization used MVC offerings to:

  • Benchmark performance against peer hospitals
  • Establish quality improvement goals and target metrics
  • Build leadership support for improvement initiatives
  • Identify variation in care across hospitals or communities
  • Measure the progress or impact of interventions
  • Inform the development of new workflows, programs, or best practices

We also welcome proposals showcasing other ways your organization has leveraged data to support quality improvement planning, implementation, or evaluation.

Partners may submit MVC's online presentation proposal form by Tues., July 28, to share their proposed topic. After proposals are reviewed, the MVC Coordinating Center will contact selected presenters to discuss their topic and provide guidance throughout the presentation development process.

As an added benefit, hospitals participating in the MVC Component of the BCBSM Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program may earn 0.5 engagement points toward Program Year 2026 for presenting at an MVC event.

We hope you'll consider sharing your team's work and helping inspire improvement efforts across the MVC collaborative.

Presentation proposal deadline: Tues., July 28

Please reach out to the MVC Coordinating Center with any questions.

13 May 2026
Off
View Post
MVC 2026 Spring Collaborative-Wide Meeting Summary – From Innovation to Impact: Advancing Care Across Health Networks

MVC 2026 Spring Collaborative-Wide Meeting Summary – From Innovation to Impact: Advancing Care Across Health Networks

May 13, 2026 | Comments Closed | , , ,

The Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) held its spring 2026 collaborative-wide meeting on Fri., May 8, in Traverse City, Michigan. A total of 84 attendees representing 48 hospitals, 16 multi-hospital systems, and seven physician organizations from throughout the state of Michigan explored strategies for elevating quality across integrated health networks through the lens of system-wide alignment and data-driven improvement.

MVC Director Mark Bradshaw, MSc, began Friday’s meeting with updates on the MVC Coordinating Center and the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program [see slides]. He first introduced attendees to MVC’s newest team members, Senior Faculty Advisor Ryan Howard, MD, MS, and Lead Analyst Megan Heath, PhD. Bradshaw then provided an update on recent MVC reporting since the fall collaborative-wide meeting, including 12 hospital-level custom reports, a push report focused on follow-up utilization, and the P4P Program Year (PY) 2025 final scorecards. It was further announced that MVC’s registry was recently updated with new payer data, including three new months of BCBSM/BCN claims and three new quarters of Medicare FFS claims.

He also provided an update on MVC’s new site coordinator education program. With a total of 31 site coordinators enrolled thus far in 2026, he encouraged those interested in starting in Q4 of 2026 or Q1 of 2027 to join the waitlist for this individualized educational offering [registration link].

Bradshaw next summarized updates on the Michigan Cardiac Rehab network’s (MiCR) efforts to improve cardiac rehabilitation utilization. These include an upcoming MiCR virtual forum featuring a group cardiac rehab demo [registration link], a third round of NewBeat material orders, and Heart-to-Heart patient stories. Additionally, he summarized the status of MiCR’s medication management initiative. If interested in participating in an interview on this topic, please contact MVC via email [email link].

After providing MVC Coordinating Center updates, Bradshaw moved on to provide insights into final scoring of P4P PY 2025 (see Figures 1-3), which included slight increases in average total points scored from PY 2024, some improvements in engagement point scoring, and continued scoring success for value metrics tied to MVC’s value-based initiatives (e.g., cardiac rehab and preoperative testing metrics).

Figure 1. Distribution of MVC’s P4P PY 2025 Total Points

Line chart displays final scores of MVC hospitals participating in PY 24-25 program, with scores plotted as blue dots ranging from 2 to 10. Horizontal lines indicate mean score of 6.7 in orange and median score of 6.0 in gray, highlighting most hospitals scoring above median with several reaching 10 out of 10.

Figure 2. MVC’s P4P PY 2025 Scoring Breakdown by Episode Spending and Value Metric Selections

Horizontal bar chart comparing PY 25 episode spending scores and value metric scores across medical conditions and procedures. Spending scores range from 1.5 for Pneumonia to 2.9 for CABG, while value metric scores range from 2.0 for 7-day follow-up after Pneumonia to 3.7 for Preoperative Testing, with mean and median values indicated for each group.

Figure 3. MVC’s P4P PY 2025 Engagement Point Distribution

Scatter plot showing engagement scores of MVC hospitals participating in PY 24-25 program, with individual hospital scores represented by blue dots and a mean score of 1.8 marked by an orange horizontal line. Most hospitals achieve or exceed the mean score, with several reaching the maximum score of 2.0, indicating high engagement levels across participants.

After reviewing hospital performance in 2025, Bradshaw looked to the PY 2026-2027 cycle, announcing a one-time alternative point opportunity for PY 2026 to earn credit for MVC’s new health outcome variation (HOV) metric. Additional details on submission requirements and timelines will be announced to site coordinators in the coming weeks. Following this, he noted the many opportunities to earn engagement points remaining in calendar year 2026 including virtual workgroups, networking dinners, and MVC’s fall collaborative-wide meeting in Livonia. For a complete schedule of events and registration, please visit MVC’s events webpage. Bradshaw reminded members that PY 2026 mid-year scorecards are expected in Q3 2026, and hospitals will be asked to make metric selections for PYs 2028-2029 in Q4 2026.

The meeting then featured an MVC data presentation by MVC Medical Director Hari Nathan, MD, PhD, and MVC Analyst Janet Zhang, MPH, on reporting and benchmarking outcomes across Michigan health systems. Dr. Nathan began with a discussion on the gradual, structural shift over the last two decades from independent ownership towards health system affiliation, noting that Michigan has outpaced national averages for system affiliation. He then reviewed the current state of MVC’s system-level reporting and outlined other measures of system variation from the literature not currently utilized in MVC reporting (Figure 4), emphasizing the need for MVC and its membership to co-design a path for measuring system-level quality in the future.

Zhang supplemented the presentation by sharing unblinded data on variation in hospital-level risk-adjusted 30-day readmission rates within hospital systems. She outlined traditional methods of showcasing variation using caterpillar plots and demonstrated how MVC might leverage hospital-level data to calculate a single index value for systems to support tracking variation over time. Zhang and Dr. Nathan both emphasized the importance of considering quality in outcomes and variation in outcomes as they evaluate their system-level performance.

Figure 4. Sample Approaches to Measuring System Variation

Table presenting system characteristics, relevant metrics, and rationales for surgical care quality assessment. It includes metrics like Herfindahl–Hirschman Index for centralization, case volume percentages for surgery avoidance and selective referral, and ambulatory surgery distribution, highlighting standards, care optimization, and resource allocation.

Building on the data presentation, a panel discussion led by Dr. Nathan further explored what “systemness” and system quality of care mean in practice and how stronger integration can improve quality, outcomes, and access across health systems and networks. Panelists included Alex Callaway, MBA, CPHQ, CPPS, Regional Quality Director of Munson Health System; Emily Nerreter, MBA, CPC, CRC, Pay for Performance & Registries Manager of Henry Ford Health System; and Stephanie Pins-Schallip, MSA, CPHQ, Director of Value Analysis & Enhancement of MyMichigan Health. Each panelist brought unique perspectives and experience to the discussion, presenting compelling evidence to support the optimization of system-level resources, data, and cooperation.

Attendees then spent the remainder of the morning in breakout sessions [see breakout session slides] learning from peers, sharing intervention success stories, and brainstorming approaches to measuring quality in both small, stand-alone hospitals and large multi-hospital systems:

  • Catalyst Community for Improvement: Transforming Performance Together (Corewell)
  • Roadmap to Building Strong Post-Acute Care Network (Trinity Health Alliance)
  • Developing a Heart Failure Care Management Program (Trinity Health IHA)
  • Rural & Critical Access Hospital Claims Data Reporting Strategies (MVC)
  • Advancing System-Level Quality Improvement: Exploring Concepts for New MVC Metrics (MVC)

Following a networking lunch and a second session of breakouts, attendees came back together for the presentation of MVC awards by Engagement Manager Jessica Souva, MSN, RN, C-ONQS. The 2025 Engagement Award recipients included:

  • Henry Ford Health – 2025 Most Engaged System
  • Primary Care Partners, Inc. - 2025 Most Engaged Physician Organization
  • Scheurer Health – 2025 Most Engaged Critical Access Hospital
  • University of Michigan Health-West – 2025 Most Engaged General Acute Care Hospital

Souva also announced the winner of the poster contest, which was identified through member voting during the afternoon poster session. University of Michigan Health – Sparrow Carson won “best poster” for their “Rural Sepsis Initiative: Timely Care, Better Outcomes” poster submission. The poster was presented by Sara Hagerman, BSN.

The meeting closed with a reflection of the day’s themes and sessions, and reminders about upcoming meetings and events.

What are attendees saying about the meeting?

“The interactive sessions were great, and so was the location.”

“Today was a really great day, filled with a lot of discussion, networking and interactive activities.”

“This was my first meeting. I appreciate the information shared and opportunity.”

“I liked the panel discussion today. In the past, I also like the different tables of presenters to allow for smaller group discussion. Overall, lots of good discussion on how to work in a system.”

“Always love coming to MVC collaborative wide meetings as they’re so informative and a great way to network with others who have the same or very similar goals and outcomes!”

“The information presented was highly applicable across systems and independents.”

If you have questions about any of the topics discussed at MVC’s spring collaborative-wide meeting or are interested in following up for more details, please email the MVC Coordinating Center. MVC’s next collaborative-wide meeting will be held in person on Fri., Oct. 9, 2026, in Livonia, Michigan.

15 Apr 2026
Off
View Post
Spring Collaborative-Wide Meeting Agenda, Speakers Announced

Spring Collaborative-Wide Meeting Agenda, Speakers Announced

April 15, 2026 | Comments Closed | , ,

The MVC Coordinating Center is excited to announce the agenda for its spring collaborative-wide meeting on Friday, May 8, 2026, from 10 a.m. – 3 p.m., at the Grand Traverse Resort & Spa in Acme, MI. This meeting’s theme is “From Innovation to Impact: Advancing Care Across Health Networks” and will highlight the various ways in which MVC's members collaborate across health systems and networks to advance the quality of healthcare across Michigan. Those interested in attending MVC's spring 2026 collaborative-wide meeting must register here by Tues., April 21.

MVC Director Mark Bradshaw, MSc, will kick off the day with updates on MVC’s Component of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program. This will be followed by an MVC Data in Action presentation by MVC Medical Director, Hari Nathan, MD, PhD, and MVC Data Analyst, Janet Zhang, MPH.

Dr. Nathan will then invite system representatives from Munson Health System, Henry Ford Health System, and MyMichigan Health System to join him on stage for a panel discussion titled “Elevating Quality Across an Integrated Health Network”.  Nathan will lead the panelists and attendees through a discussion on addressing barriers to health care improvements and measuring success across health systems and networks.

Attendees will then transition to their first breakout session before lunch and networking. The second breakout session will occur following lunch and networking. The five breakout topics will cover:

  • Corewell Health’s system-level approach to performance improvement
  • The development of Trinity Health IHA Medical Group’s Heart Failure Care Management Program
  • Trinity Health Alliance of Michigan’s Post-Acute Care Network
  • An exploration of new concepts for MVC metrics to support Advancing System-Level Quality Improvement
  • Rural and Critical Access Hospital Claims Data Reporting Strategies

View a summary of the breakout presentations using this LINK.

MVC’s Engagement Manager, Jessica Souva, MSN, RN, C-ONQS, will close out the day presenting MVC members with MVC’s second annual engagement awards and next steps for MVC’s Component of the BCBSM P4P Program.

The deadline to register for MVC’s spring 2026 collaborative-wide meeting is Tues., April 21. We look forward to seeing you there!

12 Nov 2025
Off
View Post
MVC Announces Meeting Dates, Workgroups, and Trainings Available in 2026

MVC Announces Meeting Dates, Workgroups, and Trainings Available in 2026

November 12, 2025 | Comments Closed | , , , ,

As we head into the holiday season and final months of calendar year 2025, the MVC Coordinating Center has been planning for its 2026 engagement activities. At MVC's most recent fall collaborative-wide meeting in October, MVC first announced several key dates and updates related to next year’s engagement offerings. 

MVC’s 2026 event calendar is available now [PDF]. Of note, MVC site coordinators can see the dates for 2026 collaborative-wide meetings (Figure 1) and workgroups, as well as the months in which MVC will offer in-person or virtual networking events. MVC will head to Traverse City for its spring collaborative-wide meeting on May 8, 2026. MVC will return to Vistatech in Livonia for its fall collaborative-wide meeting on Oct. 9, 2026. 

Figure 1.

MVC 2026 collaborative-wide meeting dates & locations: May 8, Traverse City, Oct 9, Livonia

Also available is MVC’s Program Year (PY) 2026 P4P Engagement Point Menu [PDF]. Engagement activities offered in 2025 will largely continue along with some minor changes and new additions.

Earning P4P Engagement Points in 2026

In PY 2026 of the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program, members can continue to earn up to two engagement points by completing eligible MVC activities. Many of the engagement point activities from PY 2025 remain available, such as attending or presenting at eligible MVC events, participating in site visits, utilizing MVC custom analytics, and survey submissions (Figure 2). Some of these offerings will have minor adjustments to their allotted point values. For example, attending a collaborative-wide meeting will now be worth 0.4 points compared to 0.25 points in 2025, and worth 1 point in 2026 for attending both meetings versus 0.75 in 2025.

Figure 2.

2026 engagement points menu options

Another minor change is the number of virtual workgroups offered. MVC will offer 18 virtual workgroups in 2026; these workgroups will continue to focus on similar topics and themes, including cardiac rehabilitation, preoperative testing, post-discharge follow-up, rural health, health in action, and sepsis.

New Engagement Offering

MVC is excited to introduce one new offering in 2026: site coordinator education modules. These modules will support site coordinators via one-on-one tailored training that covers a variety of topics (Figure 3). Site coordinators can receive 0.2 engagement points per module and may participate in as few as one module or all four within the performance year. Each quarter of 2026, MVC will offer limited registration to participate in a module. Registration to begin participating in 2026 Q1 will start in December 2025. Training topics provide a review of:

  1. Overview of MVC’s mission, history, P4P program, and site coordinator role
  2. Training on MVC claims data, metrics, and reports
  3. Introduction to MVC’s value-based initiatives and the CQI model
  4. Meeting with other site coordinators to collaborate and discuss practices

Figure 3.

Site coordinator education modules

As part of the online training, site coordinators will complete a structured education plan with individualized guidance to deepen understanding of how to get the most value out of MVC’s offerings.

Earn Engagement Points by Being a Presenter

For those sites participating in the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program, being a presenter at an MVC event is an opportunity to earn 0.5 points toward your hospital’s PY26 engagement points. By sharing successes, lessons learned, and helpful tools with members from across the state, presenters play an important role in improving outcomes for all Michigan patients. MVC’s Engagement team is here to support you every step of the way, making the experience of presenting as easy and comfortable as possible. Presentation proposals are accepted on a rolling basis through MVC's online form.

MVC offers a variety of opportunities to engage with the Coordinating Centers and other members of the collaborative to support peer learning, best practice sharing, and networking. These activities and events foster a collaborative learning environment that enables providers to learn from one another in a cooperative, non-competitive space, and is therefore core to MVC’s efforts to support sustainable, high-value healthcare delivery across the state. We look forward to engaging with you and your teams next year. Please contact the Coordinating Center with any questions [EMAIL].

22 Oct 2025
Off
View Post
Hospitals Receive PY25 Mid-Year Scorecards for MVC Component of BCBSM P4P Program

Hospitals Receive PY25 Mid-Year Scorecards for MVC Component of BCBSM P4P Program

October 22, 2025 | Comments Closed | , , , , , ,

Last month the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) distributed mid-year scorecards for Program Year (PY) 2025 of the MVC Component of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program. This report provided hospitals with their current standing for PY 2025. It also included a preview of measure scoring for the new health outcome variation measure that will be worth one point in PYs 2026-2027.

Each hospital received a mid-year score out of a total of 10 points, including 0 to 4 points for their selected total episode payment metric, 0 to 4 points for their selected value metric, and 0 to 2 points for completed eligible engagement activities. PY 2025 scores achievement and improvement points for each hospital’s selected episode spending conditions and value metrics using index admissions from 2024 performance year data against admissions in 2022 as the baseline year. Hospitals are awarded the higher of their achievement and improvement point scores.

The performance data timeframes included in mid-year PY 2025 scoring were index events 1/1/2024 – 12/31/2024 for BCBSM PPO Commercial, BCBSM Medicare Advantage (MA), BCN HMO Commercial, BCN HMO MA, and index events from 1/1/2024 – 6/30/2024 for Medicare FFS. The engagement points accrued represent all completed activities from 1/1/2025 – 7/31/2025. All scores are subject to change in the final scorecards as the remaining 2024 performance data becomes available and additional 2025 P4P engagement activities are completed and recorded for this year.

Figure 1 illustrates the current distribution of total points out of 10 across the collaborative. The average points scored across the mid-year scorecards was 6.3 out of 10. This average is 0.3 points lower than the average points scored at the conclusion of PY 2024.

Figure 1.

dot graph

Figure 2 illustrates the breakdown of scoring on average by each program component (i.e., episode spending metric, value metric, engagement points). Hospitals could earn up to four points for their episode spending and value metric selections, and up to two points for engagement activities completed in 2025. Across the collaborative, the average points scored for both episode spending and value metrics was 2.6 points, and 1.2 points for engagement activities.

Figure 2.

vertical bar chart of average score across hospitals for episode spending metric, value metric, engagement points

Figure 3 illustrates the breakdown of the average points by episode spending conditions. Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting (CABG) was the highest scoring episode spending condition with an average of 3 points, and this was closely followed by joint replacement with 2.7 points. The lowest scoring episode spending condition was pneumonia with hospitals earning less than 2 points on average.

Figure 3.

vertical bar chart of average points by episode spending conditions

Figure 4 illustrates the breakdown of average points by value metrics. Consistent with PY 2024, the highest scoring value metric was preoperative testing with 3.9 points followed by 30-day inpatient readmissions after sepsis with 3.2 points. The lowest scoring value metric was 7-day follow up after pneumonia and follows the same trend as that of PY 2024 with 1.8 points.

Figure 4.

vertical bar chart of average points by value metrics

This is the second year of a two-year (PY 24-25) P4P cycle. The full methodology for this program cycle can be found in the PY2024-2025 technical document.

In addition to the PY 2025 mid-year scorecard summary, this report also included a preview of the new health outcome variation measure scoring, which will be worth one point in PY 2026-2027 (Figure 5). The table presents the hospital’s payer-specific risk-adjusted readmission rates in the performance year, the baseline and performance indexes for the hospital, and the target indexes required to score a point via improvement or achievement. This table’s scoring is based on PY 2025 data (i.e., 2024 performance year data and 2022 baseline data). Please note that this table was included to help orient members to the scoring methodology for this new measure and does not impact PY 2025 scores. For detailed information about this measure, please refer to this introductory video and PY 2026-2027 P4P technical document.

Figure 5.

Table presents the hospital’s payer-specific risk-adjusted of readmission rates in the performance year, the baseline and performance indexes for the hospital, and the target indexes required to score a point via improvement or achievement.

These PY 2025 P4P mid-year scores are subject to change as new data is added. The final scores will be distributed after all 2024 claims are incorporated into the calculations. Hospitals can track their score via the P4P PY 2024-2025 dashboard reports on the MVC registry, which provides all relevant scoring information for both improvement and achievement points. These registry reports can be filtered by selected conditions/metrics to make tracking of P4P points easier. You can also contact the MVC Coordinating Center [EMAIL] for a walkthrough of your hospital’s PY 2025 mid-year scorecard or P4P registry reports.

14 May 2025
Off
View Post
MVC 2025 Spring Collaborative-Wide Meeting Summary

MVC 2025 Spring Collaborative-Wide Meeting Summary

May 14, 2025 | Comments Closed | , , , ,

Collaboration in Action: Shaping the Future of Healthcare Across Michigan

The Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) held its spring 2025 collaborative-wide meeting on Friday, May 9, in Midland. A total of 106 attendees representing 62 hospitals, 6 physician organizations, 6 Collaborative Quality Initiatives (CQIs), and 11 healthcare systems from across the state of Michigan came together to build partnerships and collaborate on approaches to healthcare delivery that will have a long-lasting impact.

MVC Director Dr. Hari Nathan kicked off Friday’s meeting with updates on the MVC Coordinating Center [. He introduced MVC’s newest team members, senior analysts Steven Ellinger and Tanima Basu, and Program Assistant Dinah Pollard. Dr. Nathan also announced the promotion of Jana Stewart to Associate Program Manager and welcomed Dr. Jessica Golbus as the new Co-Director of the Michigan Cardiac Rehab network (MiCR). He provided an update on recruitment progress for Phase II of the RITE-Size pilot and encouraged sites interested in participating to reach out to the MVC Coordinating Center. Dr. Nathan concluded the welcome presentation by highlighting MVC reporting updates. These included new multi-payer preoperative testing dashboard reports added to MVC’s data registry in Q4 of 2024, and five hospital-level push reports with data reflecting P4P Program Year (PY) 2026-2027 selections, statewide health equity, process measures, P4P PY 2024 final scorecards, and ED-based episodes.

Managing Director Mark Bradshaw, MSc, presented a summary of PY 2024 scoring and PY 2026-2027 selections for the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program [SEE SLIDES]. In his summary of PY 2024 scoring, Bradshaw highlighted opportunities for members to leverage MVC resources to optimize P4P scores via MVC’s engagement point menu options and highlighted some of the value metrics that have seen success after their first year of scoring.

The overview of MVC members’ P4P selections included a comparison of the value metric selections that were made for the PY 2024-2025 vs. the PY 2026-2027 program cycles (Figure 1). Bradshaw also reviewed MVC’s new health equity measure and index of disparity before closing with a reminder about upcoming dates relevant to participating P4P hospitals (Figure 2).

Figure 1. PY 26/27 Value Metric Selections

vertical bar chart: PY 26/27 Value Metric Selections

Figure 2. Upcoming P4P Dates

Upcoming P4P Dates

The meeting then featured MVC’s first Engagement Awards, presented by MVC Engagement Manager Jessica Souva, MSN, RN, C-ONQS. MVC presented the awards to members who went above and beyond in their engagement with MVC to the benefit of the entire MVC membership. Scheurer Health received the award for the most engaged peer group 5 hospital, MyMichigan Collaborative Care organization for the most engaged physician organization (PO), Chelsea Hospital for the most engaged hospital, and Corewell Health for the most engaged health system.

Souva remained at the podium for a presentation on MVC’s 2024 Quality Improvement (QI) survey, sharing details about the survey’s purpose, completion rate, results, and applications [SEE SLIDES]. The four most widely reported QI initiatives included sepsis, health outcome variation, readmissions, and emergency department care, and also aligned with the initiatives reported as highest priority for some of the largest health systems in Michigan (Figure 3). Souva provided specific examples of MVC engagement activities that were developed to specifically support the initiatives reported in the QI survey and address common barriers members reported facing. She urged MVC’s PO members to participate in the 2025 QI survey so that MVC will be better equipped to provide support for PO QI initiatives in the future.

Figure 3. Seven System-Level High Priority Quality Improvement Initiatives

Seven System-Level High Priority Quality Improvement Initiatives

Before sending meeting attendees to participate in the poster session, Souva shared the responses from the opening virtual ice-breaker question: “What keeps you motivated to continue working in healthcare?” Members credited their teams and making a difference in the lives of patients and families as their motivation to persevere during challenging times. Posters were then presented by partner CQIs such as MEDIC, MOQC, MSHIELD, and MI Mind. Electronic copies of the posters are available on the spring meeting website [LINK]. The MVC Coordinating Center would like to thank all poster presenters for sharing their work.

After the poster session, MVC Associate Program Manager Jana Stewart, MPH, provided a presentation highlighting the ways in which MVC collaboratives with other CQIs to help drive local quality improvement efforts in hospitals across Michigan. This included two case studies and unblinded data presentations for MVC’s two value-based initiatives: cardiac rehabilitation utilization and preoperative testing de-implementation. She also presented a use case for a new area MVC is exploring within its ED-based episodes of care focused on behavioral health care and outcomes, also with aggregate and hospital-level unblinded data.

Since the launch of MVC's cardiac rehabilitation initiative in 2020, the work has been incorporated into all aspects of MVC’s portfolio, from dedicated workgroup topics to reporting and related P4P metrics, and it also led to the 2022 launch of MiCR in partnership with BMC2 and the NewBeat program in partnership with HBOM. Cardiac rehabilitation enrollment for patients discharged from a “Main 5” condition (e.g., AMI, CABG, PCI, SAVR, and TAVR), has increased across the collaborative from 24% in 2020 to 34% in 2023, amounting to an estimated 145 lives saved and 243 readmissions avoided. Stewart also shared that the mean days to a patient’s first cardiac rehabilitation visit has decreased from 59 days in 2020 to 46 days in 2024.

Highlights from MVC’s preoperative testing efforts included updates on the RITE-Size pilot—a collaboration largely between MVC, MPrOVE, and MSQC—that supported three MVC member hospitals in reducing their low-value preoperative testing rates in 2024 through a variety of strategies. Stewart called out that members interested in participating in Phase II of the pilot in 2025 or 2026 will be well positioned to both reduce their testing rates significantly and also achieve the full two engagement points for 2025. She encouraged anyone interested to reach out to the MVC Coordinating Center for additional information.

Stewart concluded by sharing aggregate and unblinded data on the prevalence of behavioral health as a co-diagnosis in MVC ED-based episodes, where behavioral health ICD-10 codes such as anxiety disorder, major depressive disorder, and dementia appear as co-diagnoses (Figure 4) in approximately 13% of index ED events. She also shared how those behavioral health rates differ by payer as well as condition and noted that 1 in 3 of ED patients who have a resulting inpatient admission have a behavioral health code noted as a comorbidity.

Figure 4. Most Common ICD-10 Diagnosis Codes Indicated

vertical bar graph: Most Common ICD-10 Diagnosis Codes Indicated - 1. anxiety 2. major depressive disorder 3. dementia 4. bipolar disorder 5. generalized anxiety disorder

After a networking lunch, attendees spent the afternoon participating in roundtable discussions and small group activities on two to three topics [SEE ROUNDTABLE MATERIALS]. During the session, attendees could either join three roundtable discussions or join one roundtable and one small group activity on system approaches to QI. At each table attendees learned about the work of the roundtable facilitator, asked questions, and discussed similar initiatives at their own organizations. In the system activity, MVC members were asked a series of questions about measuring system-level QI, and their responses will help inform MVC’s future work to support health systems across Michigan.

The meeting closed with a reflection of the day spent together, reminders about upcoming meetings, and opportunities for best practice sharing with other MVC members.

If you have questions about any of the topics discussed at MVC’s spring collaborative-wide meeting or are interested in following up for more details, contact the MVC Coordinating Center. MVC’s next collaborative-wide meeting will be in person on Fri., Oct. 10, 2025, in Livonia.

 

18 Feb 2025
Off
View Post
MVC Distributes PY 2024 Final Scorecards for MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program

MVC Distributes PY 2024 Final Scorecards for MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program

February 18, 2025 | Comments Closed | , , ,

The Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) Coordinating Center distributed final scorecards for Program Year (PY) 2024 of the MVC Component of the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan (BCBSM) Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program. This report provided hospitals with their final score for PY 2024 as well as detailed breakdowns by scoring component. This was the first year of a two-year cycle for which MVC claims data was used to score hospitals on their episode spending and value metric selections. PY 2024 used baseline year claims data from 2021 and performance year data from 2023.

The episode spending conditions for which MVC is scoring hospitals for PY 2024 include chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), colectomy (non-cancer), congestive heart failure (CHF), coronary artery bypass graft (CABG), joint replacement (hip and knee), and pneumonia. These conditions differ slightly from the list of episode spending conditions available in the PY 2026-2027 cycle (view PY 2026-2027 FAQ). Figure 1 shows the frequency of hospital selections for the PY 2024-2025 program cycle for episode spending; the plurality of hospitals selected joint replacement, whereas pneumonia was selected the least.

Figure 1. Frequency of Hospital Selections for PY 2024-2025 Episode Spending

vertical bar graph: Frequency of Hospital Selections for PY 2024-2025 Episode Spending

The value metrics for which MVC scored hospitals for PY 2024 included cardiac rehabilitation after CABG, cardiac rehabilitation after percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI), follow-up after CHF, follow-up after COPD, follow-up after pneumonia, preoperative testing, and risk-adjusted readmissions after sepsis. Figure 2 shows that the plurality of hospitals selected 7-day follow up after CHF, and both 90-day cardiac rehab after CABG & 30-day inpatient readmissions after sepsis were selected the least.

Figure 2. Frequency of Hospital Selections for PY 2024-2025 Value Metrics

vertical bar graph: Frequency of Hospital Selections for PY 2024-2025 Value Metrics

The MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program evaluated each participating hospital’s risk-adjusted, price-standardized, average 30-day episode payments for their selected condition as well as rates of utilization for their selected value metric through two methods. Hospitals earned points via "improvement" by reducing their payment or improving their utilization rate from the baseline period, or alternatively earned "achievement" points by being less expensive or having a better relative utilization rate than the peers in their designated cohort. The MVC cohorts are groups of hospitals determined to be peers using factors such as hospital bed size and case mix index.

While hospitals were scored on both improvement and achievement, members received the higher of those two scores for each of their selections. Hospitals were also eligible to receive engagement points by completing eligible MVC activities. A maximum of 10 points (4 points each for the selected episode spending condition and value metric, 2 points from engagement activities) were awarded to participating members. The distribution of total points earned by hospitals for the PY 2024 is illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Distribution of Total Points Earned by Hospitals for PY 2024

vertical bar graph: Distribution of Total Points Earned by Hospitals for PY 2024

On average, hospitals earned 6.6 points in total, a decrease of 0.8 points from the PY 2023 average of 7.4 points. Figure 4 shows that the episode spending condition with the highest average awarded points was joint replacement (3.1 points) followed by CABG (2.3 points). Similarly, Figure 5 shows that the value metric with the highest average awarded points was preoperative testing (3.3 points) followed by 90-day cardiac rehabilitation after PCI (2.7 points). The breakdown of average points by each program component is illustrated in Figure 6. On average, hospitals earned 1.7 of the 2 available engagement points.

Figure 4. PY 2024 Episode Spending Average Points Awarded for Each Condition

vertical bar graph: PY 2024 Episode Spending Average Points Awarded for Each Condition

Figure 5. PY 2024 Value Metrics Average Points Awarded for Each Selection

vertical bar graph: PY 2024 Value Metrics Average Points Awarded for Each Selection

Figure 6. Average Points Earned for Each Program Component Across Hospitals

vertical bar graph: Average Points Earned for Each Program Component Across Hospitals

If you have any questions regarding PY 2024 of the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program, please refer to the MVC P4P PY 2024-2025 Technical Document. If you would like to set up a meeting to review your hospital’s program year selections or scores, please contact the Coordination Center [EMAIL]. MVC will evaluate and release mid-year scorecards for PY 2025 in the summer of 2025.

16 Oct 2024
Off
View Post
New Qualitative Analysis Offers Insights on How Hospitals Approach MVC P4P Program

New Qualitative Analysis Offers Insights on How Hospitals Approach MVC P4P Program

October 16, 2024 | Comments Closed | ,

Quality improvement is critical for ensuring that healthcare services are safe, efficient, patient-centered, and equitable. As such, payers have increased their reliance on financial incentives to encourage high performance, foster improvement, and promote accountable spending. Despite the saturation of studies assessing hospital approaches to federal incentive programs, there remains a lack of information surrounding hospitals’ strategies for episode-based reimbursement in commercial payment models.

Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan’s (BCBSM) Hospital Pay-for-Performance (P4P) Program rewards hospitals that excel at care quality, cost-efficiency, and population health management. In 2018, BCBSM partnered with the Michigan Value Collaborative (MVC) in allocating 10% of its P4P program budget to an episode of care spending metric based on MVC data.

To fill the knowledge gaps mentioned above, a qualitative analysis published earlier this year in the American Journal of Managed Care (AJMC) [LINK] took advantage of a unique opportunity to explore hospital activity and decision-making within MVC’s episode-based incentive program. The lead author of the resulting publication was MVC Senior Faculty Advisor Dr. Scott E. Regenbogen, MD, MPH, who previously served as a Co-Director of MVC. In engaging with MVC’s hospital members, the project team aimed to understand hospital approaches to commercial incentive programs, identify best practices for success, and collect information to promote the optimal design of future metrics.

In an effort to understand the variability between participating hospitals, qualitative interviews were completed with 21 leaders from 8 intentionally selected hospitals with ranging performance metrics. Between December 2020 and November 2021, administrative leaders and quality officers were interviewed using a video teleconference-based platform. Each interview followed a standardized protocol and addressed four domains: choice of clinical condition for evaluation, strategies for episode spending reduction, best practices for success in learning incentives, and barriers to achievement.

Clinical Condition Selection Approaches

When asked about approaches to selecting clinical conditions, besides programmatic constraints, the project team found that multiple factors impacted hospitals’ decisions. Throughout the selection process, many hospital leaders aimed to identify opportunities for improvement or areas of historic underperformance.

In analyzing this trend, Dr. Regenbogen commented, “We were somewhat surprised that there was less ‘playing to the test’ than expected. For the most part, hospitals were committed to success in this program and made good faith efforts to try and achieve savings through operational improvements, not just making the numbers look good.” In addition to seeking opportunities for the greatest improvement, participants selected conditions that often aligned with ongoing value-based improvement efforts, especially those related to federal value-based financial incentive programs. A final factor contributing to the selection approach for many sites was the commitment and motivation of physician leaders to contribute to quality improvement. Most site coordinators agreed that without individual and collective dedication to hospital-based initiatives, success was unlikely.

Strategies for Episode Payment Improvement 

As members of MVC, the participants in this analysis had access to comprehensive utilization data and risk-adjusted comparisons with other hospitals across the state of Michigan. When asked about methods to improve performance, site coordinators highlighted the immense benefits of MVC’s custom analytic and annual push reports, citing the utilization of administrative and clinical data to motivate and inspire improvement at their respective hospitals. In addition to using MVC data to identify areas of growth, respondents also recognized the importance of standardizing protocols and policies to promote the implementation of consistent best practices.

Best Practices for Success in the Incentive Program 

In discussing the strategic approaches of program participants, hospitals highlighted three main areas of importance regardless of their performance rank: consistent leadership focus on metrics, readmissions reduction, and controlling costs related to post-acute care.

Obstacles to Success

However, despite these similar strategic approaches, low-performing participants also noted obstacles and barriers to their success in the program. One institution noted a failure to remain focused on cost containment for a condition across the measurement period, while another expressed a disconnect between institutional achievement goals and non-employed physician incentives. In response to participants’ obstacles to engaging with physicians, co-author and MVC Senior Advisor Mike Thompson, PhD, MPH, who served as MVC’s most recent Co-Director until June 2024, noted, “Perhaps it isn’t surprising, but the challenge of engaging front-line clinicians in pay-for-performance programs is always difficult. Bridging the gap between broader administrative goals and daily clinical operations can sometimes feel like a canyon, but it is necessary for success.”

Implications for the Future

Altogether, the data collected during the qualitative arm of this analysis gleaned key quality improvement insights that MVC can utilize to inform the continued refinement and improvement of the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program. The project team posits that, to be successful, these incentives must possess enough depth and relevance to capture the attention of hospital leadership or align closely with larger initiatives to facilitate collaboration; they must address and resolve any discrepancies between the goals of the hospital and the incentives driving credentialed physicians; and, most importantly, commercial episode-based incentives should offer the chance for success by delivering not only initial performance enhancements but also consistently maintaining excellence over time.

Moving forward, continued program evaluation will be crucial for understanding how to best design metrics in the pursuit of high-value, equitable healthcare. This area of investigation opens the door to future insights into the relationship between financial incentives and quality improvement in healthcare, holding vast potential to shape future incentive-based measures and reporting. As such, MVC is committed to understanding and improving the effectiveness of its own incentive-based measures in partnership with BCBSM.

To learn more about MVC offerings and the MVC Component of the BCBSM P4P Program, please visit our website or contact us at Michigan-Value-Collaborative@med.umich.edu.