Description: Risk adjustment in government regulated health plans has been around for over two decades. Yet the strategies for promoting risk score accuracy haven't varied much during that time. Most health plans, physician groups, and vendors promote chart reviews and/or in-home assessments as the primary vehicle for collecting data not perceived to be present in the routine claims submission and adjudication stream. We know that most organizations trying to coalesce encounter data from multiple sources often fail to ensure that all relevant data is ultimately submitted to CMS or a state Medicaid agency. Crucial data, often with significant financial value, frequently gets lost in the data pipeline, somewhere between the provider's billing system and the health plan and/or its vendors. Because 837-formatted data is difficult to read, it complicates payers and vendor’s abilities to track encounter data so that every service delivered to patients is credited to the applicable risk adjustment formula. It is incumbent upon successful risk-adjusted entities to be able to track encounter data, identify processes and/or vendors which may be mangling or losing data, in order to ensure that risk scores are sufficiently accurate to be compliant with plan sponsor requirements and to ensure appropriate revenue to the health plan or provider group.

Description: Producing a crystal-clear balance roll-forward on time, obtaining a fresh model output the first time or providing model results for your business partners with a tight turnaround all depend on one thing: how fast the model engine runs. Authors explored various reasons behind significant computational power consumption, and discussed different ways to speed the computational process such as in-force population compression, model use case consolidation, code simplification and streamlining, and infrastructure automation, etc.