Medicare Program; Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities Prospective Payment System-Update for Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2013 (FY 2014), 46733-46777 [2013-18445]
Download as PDF
Vol. 78
Thursday,
No. 148
August 1, 2013
Part III
Department of Health and Human Services
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
Medicare Program; Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities Prospective Payment
System—Update for Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2013 (FY 2014);
Notice
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00001
Fmt 4717
Sfmt 4717
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46734
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND
HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid
Services
[CMS–1447–N]
RIN 0938–AR63
Medicare Program; Inpatient
Psychiatric Facilities Prospective
Payment System—Update for Fiscal
Year Beginning October 1, 2013 (FY
2014)
Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
AGENCY:
This notice updates the
prospective payment rates for Medicare
inpatient hospital services provided by
inpatient psychiatric facilities (IPFs).
These changes are applicable to IPF
discharges occurring during the fiscal
year (FY) beginning October 1, 2013
through September 30, 2014.
DATES: Effective Date: The updated IPF
prospective payment rates are effective
for discharges occurring on or after
October 1, 2013 through September 30,
2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Dorothy Myrick or Jana Lindquist, (410)
786–4533, for general information.
Hudson Osgood, (410) 786–7897 or
Bridget Dickensheets, (410) 786–8670,
for information regarding the market
basket and labor-related share. Theresa
Bean, (410) 786–2287, for information
regarding the regulatory impact
analysis.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
SUMMARY:
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
Table of Contents
To assist readers in referencing
sections contained in this document, we
are providing the following table of
contents.
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
C. Summary of Costs and Benefits
II. Background
A. Annual Requirements for Updating the
IPF PPS
B. Overview of the Legislative
Requirements of the IPF PPS
C. General Overview of the IPF PPS
III. Transition Period for Implementation of
the IPF PPS
IV. Changing the IPF PPS Payment Rate
Update Period from a Rate Year to a
Fiscal Year
V. Market Basket for the IPF PPS
A. Background
B. FY 2014 Market Basket Update
C. Labor-Related Share
VI. Updates to the IPF PPS for FY Beginning
October 1, 2013
A. Determining the Standardized BudgetNeutral Federal Per Diem Base Rate
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
1. Standardization of the Federal Per Diem
Base Rate and Electroconvulsive Therapy
(ECT) Rate
2. Calculation of the Budget Neutrality
Adjustment
a. Outlier Adjustment
b. Stop-Loss Provision Adjustment
c. Behavioral Offset
B. Update of the Federal Per Diem Base
Rate and Electroconvulsive Therapy Rate
VII. Update of the IPF PPS Adjustment
Factors
A. Overview of the IPF PPS Adjustment
Factors
B. Patient-Level Adjustments
1. Adjustment for MS–DRG Assignment
2. Payment for Comorbid Conditions
3. Patient Age Adjustments
4. Variable Per Diem Adjustments
C. Facility-Level Adjustments
1. Wage Index Adjustment
a. Background
b. Wage Index for FY 2014
c. OMB Bulletins
2. Adjustment for Rural Location
3. Teaching Adjustment
a. FTE Intern and Resident Cap Adjustment
b. Temporary Adjustment to the FTE Cap
to Reflect Residents Added Due to
Hospital Closure
c. Temporary Adjustment to FTE Cap to
Reflect Residents Affected By Residency
Program Closure
i. Receiving IPF
ii. IPF That Closed Its Program
4. Cost of Living Adjustment for IPFs
Located in Alaska and Hawaii
5. Adjustment for IPFs with a Qualifying
Emergency Department (ED)
D. Other Payment Adjustments and
Policies
1. Outlier Payments
a. Update to the Outlier Fixed Dollar Loss
Threshold Amount
b. Update to IPF Cost-to-Charge Ratio
Ceilings
2. Expiration of the Stop-Loss Provision
3. Future Refinements
VIII. Secretary’s Recommendations
IX. Waiver of Notice and Comment
X. Collection of Information Requirements
XI. Regulatory Impact Analysis
Addenda
Acronyms
Because of the many terms to which
we refer by acronym in this notice, we
are listing the acronyms used and their
corresponding meanings in alphabetical
order below:
BBRA Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP
[State Children’s Health Insurance Program]
Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999,
(Pub. L. 106–113)
CBSA Core-Based Statistical Area
CCR Cost-to-charge ratio
CAH Critical access hospital
DSM–IV–TR Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders Fourth
Edition—Text Revision
DRGs Diagnosis-related groups
FY Federal fiscal year (October 1 through
September 30)
ICD–9–CM International Classification of
Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical
Modification
PO 00000
Frm 00002
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
IPFs Inpatient psychiatric facilities
IRFs Inpatient rehabilitation facilities
LTCHs Long-term care hospitals
MedPAR Medicare provider analysis and
review file
RPL Rehabilitation, Psychiatric, and LongTerm Care
RY Rate Year (July 1 through June 30)
TEFRA Tax Equity and Fiscal
Responsibility Act of 1982, (Pub. L. 97–
248)
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
This notice updates the prospective
payment rates for Medicare inpatient
hospital services provided by inpatient
psychiatric facilitates for discharges
occurring during the fiscal year (FY)
beginning October 1, 2013 through
September 30, 2014.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
In this notice, we update the IPF PPS,
as specified in 42 CFR 412.428. The
updates include the following:
• The FY 2008-based Rehabilitation,
Psychiatric, and Long Term Care (RPL)
market basket update of 2.6 percent
adjusted by a 0.1 percentage point
reduction as required by section
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Social Security
Act (the Act) and a 0.5 percentage point
reduction for economy-wide
productivity as required by
1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act.
• The fixed dollar loss threshold
amount in order to maintain the
appropriate outlier percentage.
• The electroconvulsive therapy
payment by a factor specified by CMS.
• The national urban and rural costto-charge ratio medians and ceilings.
• The cost of living adjustment
factors for IPFs located in Alaska and
Hawaii, if appropriate.
• Description of the ICD–9–CM and
MS–DRG classification changes
discussed in the annual update to the
hospital inpatient PPS regulations.
• Use of the best available hospital
wage index and information regarding
whether an adjustment to the Federal
per diem base rate is needed to maintain
budget neutrality.
• The MS–DRG listing and
comorbidity categories to reflect the
ICD–9–CM revisions effective October 1,
2013.
• Retaining the 17 percent adjustment
for IPFs located in rural areas, the 1.31
adjustment factor for IPFs with a
qualifying emergency department, the
coefficient value of 0.5150 for the
teaching adjustment to the Federal per
diem rate, the MS–DRG adjustment
factors and comorbidity adjustment
factors currently being paid to IPFs for
FY 2013.
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
C. Summary of Transfers
Provision
description
Total transfers
FY 2014 IPF
PPS payment rate
update.
The overall economic impact
of this notice is an estimated $115 million in increased payments to IPFs
during FY 2014.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
II. Background
A. Annual Requirements for Updating
the IPF PPS
In November 2004, we implemented
the inpatient psychiatric facilities (IPF)
prospective payment system (PPS) in a
final rule that appeared in the
November 15, 2004 Federal Register (69
FR 66922). In developing the IPF PPS,
in order to ensure that the IPF PPS is
able to account adequately for each
IPF’s case-mix, we performed an
extensive regression analysis of the
relationship between the per diem costs
and certain patient and facility
characteristics to determine those
characteristics associated with
statistically significant cost differences
on a per diem basis. For characteristics
with statistically significant cost
differences, we used the regression
coefficients of those variables to
determine the size of the corresponding
payment adjustments.
In that final rule, we explained that
we believe it is important to delay
updating the adjustment factors derived
from the regression analysis until we
have IPF PPS data that include as much
information as possible regarding the
patient-level characteristics of the
population that each IPF serves.
Therefore, we indicated that we did not
intend to update the regression analysis
and recalculate the Federal per diem
base rate and the patient-and facilitylevel adjustments until we complete
that analysis. Until that analysis is
complete, we stated our intention to
publish a notice in the Federal Register
each spring to update the IPF PPS (71
FR 27041). In the May 6, 2011 IPF PPS
final rule (76 FR 26432), we changed the
payment rate update period to a rate
year (RY) that coincides with a fiscal
year (FY) update. Therefore, update
notices are now published in the
Federal Register in the summer to be
effective on October 1. For further
discussion on changing the IPF PPS
payment rate update period to a RY that
coincides with a FY, see the IPF PPS
final rule published in the Federal
Register on May 6, 2011 (76 FR 26434
through 26435).
Updates to the IPF PPS, as specified
in 42 CFR § 412.428, include the
following:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
• A description of the methodology
and data used to calculate the updated
Federal per diem base payment amount.
• The rate of increase factor as
described in § 412.424(a)(2)(iii), which
is based on the Excluded Hospital with
Capital market basket under the update
methodology of section 1886(b)(3)(B)(ii)
of the Act for each year (effective from
the implementation period until June
30, 2006).
• For discharges occurring on or after
July 1, 2006, the rate of increase factor
for the Federal portion of the IPF’s
payment, which is based on the
Rehabilitation, Psychiatric, and LongTerm Care (RPL) market basket.
• The best available hospital wage
index and information regarding
whether an adjustment to the Federal
per diem base rate is needed to maintain
budget neutrality.
• Updates to the fixed dollar loss
threshold amount in order to maintain
the appropriate outlier percentage.
• Description of the International
Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision,
Clinical Modification (ICD–9–CM)
coding and diagnosis-related groups
(DRGs) classification changes discussed
in the annual update to the hospital
inpatient prospective payment system
(IPPS) regulations.
• Update to the electroconvulsive
therapy (ECT) payment by a factor
specified by CMS.
• Update to the national urban and
rural cost-to-charge ratio medians and
ceilings.
• Update to the cost of living
adjustment factors for IPFs located in
Alaska and Hawaii, if appropriate.
Our most recent IPF PPS annual
update occurred in the August 7, 2012
Federal Register notice (77 FR 47224)
(hereinafter referred to as the August
2012 IPF PPS notice) that set forth
updates to the IPF PPS payment rates
for FY 2013. That notice updated the
IPF PPS per diem payment rates that
were published in the May 2011 IPF
PPS final rule in accordance with our
established policies.
Since implementation of the IPF PPS,
we have explained that we believe it is
important to delay updating the
adjustment factors derived from the
regression analysis until we have IPF
PPS data that include as much
information as possible regarding the
patient-level characteristics of the
population that each IPF serves.
Because we are now approximately 8
years into the system, we believe that
we have enough data to begin that
process. Therefore, we have begun the
necessary analysis to make future
refinements. While we do not propose
to make refinements in this notice, as
PO 00000
Frm 00003
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
46735
explained in section V.D.3 below, we
expect that in future rulemaking, for FY
2015, we will be ready to propose
potential refinements.
B. Overview of the Legislative
Requirements of the IPF PPS
Section 124 of the Medicare,
Medicaid, and SCHIP (State Children’s
Health Insurance Program) Balanced
Budget Refinement Act of 1999 (BBRA)
(Pub. L. 106–113) required the
establishment and implementation of an
IPF PPS. Specifically, section 124 of the
BBRA mandated that the Secretary
develop a per diem PPS for inpatient
hospital services furnished in
psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric
units including an adequate patient
classification system that reflects the
differences in patient resource use and
costs among psychiatric hospitals and
psychiatric units.
Section 405(g)(2) of the Medicare
Prescription Drug, Improvement, and
Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub.
L. 108–173) extended the IPF PPS to
distinct part psychiatric units of critical
access hospitals (CAHs).
Section 3401(f) of the Patient
Protection and Affordable Care Act
(Pub. L. 111–148) as amended by
section 10319(e) of that Act and by
section 1105(d) of the Health Care and
Education Reconciliation Act of 2010
(Pub. L. 111–152) (hereafter referred to
as ‘‘the Affordable Care Act’’) added
subsection (s) to section 1886 of the Act.
Section 1886(s)(1) is titled ‘‘Reference
to Establishment and Implementation of
System’’ and it refers to section 124 of
the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP
Balanced Budget Refinement Act of
1999, which relates to the establishment
of the IPF PPS.
Section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act
requires the application of the
productivity adjustment described in
section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act to
the IPF PPS for the RY beginning in
2012 (that is, a RY that coincides with
a FY) and each subsequent RY. For the
RY beginning in 2013 (that is, FY 2014),
the productivity adjustment is equal to
0.5 percentage point, which we are
implementing in this notice. Section
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act requires the
application of an ‘‘other adjustment’’
that reduces any update to an IPF PPS
base rate by percentages specified in
section 1886(s)(3) of the Act for the RY
beginning in 2010 through the RY
beginning in 2019. For the RY beginning
in 2013 (that is, FY 2014), section
1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act requires the
reduction to be 0.1 percentage point. We
are implementing that provision in this
FY 2014 IPF PPS notice.
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46736
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
Section 1886(s)(4) of the Act requires
the establishment of a quality data
reporting program for the IPF PPS
beginning in RY 2014. We proposed and
finalized new requirements for quality
reporting for IPFs in the ‘‘Hospital
Inpatient Prospective Payment System
for Acute Care Hospitals and the Long
Term Care Hospital Prospective
Payment System and Fiscal Year 2013
Rates’’ proposed rule (May 11, 2012) (77
FR 27870, 28105 through 28116) and
final rule (August 31, 2012) (77 FR
53258, 53644 through 53360).
To implement and periodically
update these provisions, we have
published various proposed and final
rules in the Federal Register. For more
information regarding these rules, see
the CMS Web site at https://
www.cms.hhs.gov/
InpatientPsychFacilPPS/.
C. General Overview of the IPF PPS
The November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule (69 FR 66922) established the IPF
PPS, as authorized under section 124 of
the BBRA and codified at subpart N of
part 412 of the Medicare regulations.
The November 2004 IPF PPS final rule
set forth the per diem Federal rates for
the implementation year (the 18-month
period from January 1, 2005 through
June 30, 2006), and it provided payment
for the inpatient operating and capital
costs to IPFs for covered psychiatric
services they furnish (that is, routine,
ancillary, and capital costs, but not costs
of approved educational activities, bad
debts, and other services or items that
are outside the scope of the IPF PPS).
Covered psychiatric services include
services for which benefits are provided
under the fee-for-service Part A
(Hospital Insurance Program) Medicare
program.
The IPF PPS established the Federal
per diem base rate for each patient day
in an IPF derived from the national
average daily routine operating,
ancillary, and capital costs in IPFs in FY
2002. The average per diem cost was
updated to the midpoint of the first year
under the IPF PPS, standardized to
account for the overall positive effects of
the IPF PPS payment adjustments, and
adjusted for budget neutrality.
The Federal per diem payment under
the IPF PPS is comprised of the Federal
per diem base rate described above and
certain patient- and facility-level
payment adjustments that were found in
the regression analysis to be associated
with statistically significant per diem
cost differences.
The patient-level adjustments include
age, DRG assignment, comorbidities,
and variable per diem adjustments to
reflect higher per diem costs in the early
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
days of an IPF stay. Facility-level
adjustments include adjustments for the
IPF’s wage index, rural location,
teaching status, a cost of living
adjustment for IPFs located in Alaska
and Hawaii, and presence of a
qualifying emergency department (ED).
The IPF PPS provides additional
payment policies for: Outlier cases;
stop-loss protection (which was
applicable only during the IPF PPS
transition period); interrupted stays; and
a per treatment adjustment for patients
who undergo ECT.
A complete discussion of the
regression analysis appears in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69
FR 66933 through 66936).
Section 124 of BBRA did not specify
an annual update rate strategy for the
IPF PPS and was broadly written to give
the Secretary discretion in establishing
an update methodology. Therefore, in
the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule,
we implemented the IPF PPS using the
following update strategy:
• Calculate the final Federal per diem
base rate to be budget neutral for the 18month period of January 1, 2005
through June 30, 2006.
• Use a July 1 through June 30 annual
update cycle.
• Allow the IPF PPS first update to be
effective for discharges on or after July
1, 2006 through June 30, 2007.
III. Transition Period for
Implementation of the IPF PPS
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule, we provided for a 3-year transition
period. During this 3-year transition
period, an IPF’s total payment under the
PPS was based on an increasing
percentage of the Federal rate with a
corresponding decreasing percentage of
the IPF PPS payment that was based on
reasonable cost concepts. However,
effective for cost reporting periods
beginning on or after January 1, 2008,
IPF PPS payments were based on 100
percent of the Federal rate.
IV. Changing the IPF PPS Payment Rate
Update Period From a Rate Year to a
Fiscal Year
Prior to RY 2012, the IPF PPS was
updated on a July 1st through June 30th
annual update cycle. Effective with RY
2012, we switched the IPF PPS payment
rate update from a rate year that begins
on July 1st ending on June 30th to a
period that coincides with a fiscal year.
In order to transition from a RY to a FY,
the IPF PPS RY 2012 covered a 15
month period from July 1st through
September 30th. As proposed and
finalized, after RY 2012, the rate update
period for the IPF PPS payment rates
and other policy changes begin on
PO 00000
Frm 00004
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
October 1 through September 30.
Therefore, the update cycle for FY 2014
will be October 1, 2013 through
September 30, 2014.
For further discussion of the 15month market basket update for RY
2012 and changing the payment rate
update period from a RY to a FY, we
refer readers to the RY 2012 IPF PPS
proposed rule (76 FR 4998) and the RY
2012 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR 26432).
V. Market Basket for the IPF PPS
A. Background
The input price index (that is, the
market basket) that was used to develop
the IPF PPS was the Excluded Hospital
with Capital market basket. This market
basket was based on 1997 Medicare cost
report data and included data for
Medicare participating IPFs, inpatient
rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), long-term
care hospitals (LTCHs), cancer
hospitals, and children’s hospitals.
Although ‘‘market basket’’ technically
describes the mix of goods and services
used in providing hospital care, this
term is also commonly used to denote
the input price index (that is, cost
category weights and price proxies
combined) derived from that market
basket. Accordingly, the term ‘‘market
basket’’ as used in this document refers
to a hospital input price index.
Beginning with the May 2006 IPF PPS
final rule (71 FR 27046 through 27054),
IPF PPS payments were updated using
a FY 2002-based market basket
reflecting the operating and capital cost
structures for IRFs, IPFs, and LTCHs
(hereafter referred to as the
Rehabilitation, Psychiatric, and LongTerm Care (RPL) market basket).
We excluded cancer and children’s
hospitals from the RPL market basket
because these hospitals are not
reimbursed through a PPS; rather, their
payments are based entirely on
reasonable costs subject to rate-ofincrease limits established under the
authority of section 1886(b) of the Act,
which are implemented in regulations at
§ 413.40. Moreover, the FY 2002 cost
structures for cancer and children’s
hospitals are noticeably different than
the cost structures of the IRFs, IPFs, and
LTCHs. A complete discussion of the FY
2002-based RPL market basket appears
in the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71
FR 27046 through 27054).
In the May 1, 2009 IPF PPS notice (74
FR 20362), we expressed our interest in
exploring the possibility of creating a
stand-alone IPF market basket that
reflects the cost structures of only IPF
providers. We noted that, of the
available options, one would be to join
the Medicare cost report data from
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
freestanding IPF providers (presently
incorporated into the RPL market
basket) with data from hospital-based
IPF providers (not currently
incorporated in any market basket cost
weights). We indicated that an
examination of the Medicare cost report
data comparing freestanding and
hospital-based IPFs revealed
considerable differences between the
two with respect to cost levels and cost
structures. At that time, we were unable
to fully understand the differences
between these two types of IPF
providers. As a result, we felt that
further research was required; therefore
we solicited public comment for
additional information that might help
us to better understand the reasons for
the variations in costs and cost
structures, as indicated by the cost
report data, between freestanding and
hospital-based IPFs (74 FR 20376).
We summarized the public comments
received and our responses in the April
2010 IPF PPS notice (75 FR 23111
through 23113). Despite receiving
comments from the public on this issue,
we were unable to explain the observed
differences in costs and cost structures
between hospital-based and
freestanding IPFs. Therefore, we did not
believe it was appropriate, at the time,
to incorporate data from hospital-based
IPFs with those of freestanding IPFs to
create a stand-alone IPF market basket.
In the RY 2012 IPF PPS proposed rule
(76 FR 4998) and final rule (76 FR
26432), we proposed and finalized the
use of a rebased and revised FY 2008based RPL market basket to update IPF
payments. In the RY 2012 IPF PPS
proposed rule (76 FR 5001), we also
welcomed public comment on the
possibility of using a rehabilitation and
psychiatric (RP) market basket to update
IPF payments in the future. Comments
received and our responses are
summarized in the RY 2012 final rule
(76 FR 26436).
We continue to explore the viability
of creating separate market baskets from
the current RPL market basket. In the FY
2013 IPPS/LTCH final rule (77 FR 53468
through 53476), we adopted the newly
created FY 2009-based LTCH-specific
market basket for use under the LTCH
PPS beginning in FY 2013. We continue
to investigate the use of an alternative
market basket to update IPF PPS
payments; however, for the FY 2014 IPF
PPS update, we continue to use (as was
done for the FY 2013 update) the
percentage increase in the FY 2008-
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
based RPL market basket to determine
the IPF PPS market basket update. We
still have concerns about cost
differences between freestanding and
hospital-based providers, which remain
unexplained even when looking at more
recent data. However, we remain
interested in researching this topic
further to determine if these data quality
and representativeness concerns can be
overcome, and have plans to conduct
more analysis into the claims and cost
data for IPFs. Any possible changes to
the market basket used to update IPF
payments would appear in a future
rulemaking and be subject to public
comment.
B. FY 2014 Market Basket Update
The FY 2014 update for the IPF PPS
using the FY 2008-based RPL market
basket and IHS Global Insight’s second
quarter 2013 forecast of the market
basket components is 2.6 percent (prior
to the application of any statutory
adjustments). This includes increases in
both the operating and the capital
components for FY 2014 (that is,
October 1, 2013 through September 30,
2014). IHS Global Insight, Inc. is a
nationally recognized economic and
financial forecasting firm that contracts
with CMS to forecast the components of
the market baskets.
As previously described in section
I.B, section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act
requires the application of the
productivity adjustment described in
section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act to
the IPF PPS for the RY beginning in
2012 and each subsequent RY. The
statute defines the productivity
adjustment to be equal to the 10-year
moving average of changes in annual
economy-wide private nonfarm business
multifactor productivity (MFP) (as
projected by the Secretary for the 10year period ending with the applicable
FY, year, cost reporting period, or other
annual period) (the ‘‘MFP adjustment’’).
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
is the agency that publishes the official
measure of private non-farm business
MFP. We refer readers to the BLS Web
site at https://www.bls.gov/mfp to obtain
the BLS historical published MFP data.
The MFP adjustment for FY 2014
applicable to the IPF PPS is derived
using a projection of MFP that is
currently produced by IHS Global
Insight, Inc. For a detailed description
of the model currently used by IHS
Global Insight, Inc. to project MFP, as
well as a description of how the MFP
PO 00000
Frm 00005
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
46737
adjustment is calculated, we refer
readers to the FY 2012 IPPS/LTCH final
rule (76 FR 51690 through 51692).
Based on IHS Global Insight, Inc.’s 2013
second quarter forecast, the productivity
adjustment for FY 2014 is 0.5
percentage point. Section
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act also requires
the application of an ‘‘other adjustment’’
that reduces any update to an IPF PPS
base rate by percentages specified in
section 1886(s)(3) of the Act for rate
years beginning in 2010 through the RY
beginning in 2019. For the RY beginning
in 2013 (that is, FY 2014), the reduction
is 0.1 percentage point. We are
implementing the productivity
adjustment and ‘‘other adjustment’’ in
this FY 2014 IPF PPS notice.
C. Labor-Related Share
Due to variations in geographic wage
levels and other labor-related costs, we
believe that payment rates under the IPF
PPS should continue to be adjusted by
a geographic wage index, which would
apply to the labor-related portion of the
Federal per diem base rate (hereafter
referred to as the labor-related share).
The labor-related share is determined
by identifying the national average
proportion of total costs that are related
to, influenced by, or vary with the local
labor market. We classify a cost category
as labor-related if the costs are laborintensive and vary with the local labor
market. Based on our definition of the
labor-related share, we include in the
labor-related share the sum of the
relative importance of Wages and
Salaries, Employee Benefits,
Professional Fees: Labor-related,
Administrative and Business Support
Services, All Other: Labor-related
Services, and a portion of the CapitalRelated cost weight.
Therefore, to determine the laborrelated share for the IPF PPS for FY
2014, we used the FY 2008-based RPL
market basket cost weights relative
importance to determine the laborrelated share for the IPF PPS. This
estimate of the FY 2014 labor-related
share is based on IHS Global Insight
Inc.’s second quarter 2013 forecast,
which is the same forecast used to
derive the FY 2014 market basket
update.
Table 1 below shows the FY 2014
relative importance labor-related share
using the FY 2008-based RPL market
basket along with the FY 2013 relative
importance labor-related share.
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46738
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE LABOR-RELATED SHARE AND THE FY 2013 RELATIVE IMPORTANCE LABORRELATED SHARE BASED ON THE FY 2008-BASED RPL MARKET BASKET
FY 2013
relative importance laborrelated share 1
FY 2014
relative importance laborrelated share 2
Wages and Salaries ........................................................................................................................................
Employee Benefits ...........................................................................................................................................
Professional Fees: Labor-Related ...................................................................................................................
Administrative and Business Support Services ...............................................................................................
All Other: Labor-Related Services ...................................................................................................................
Subtotal ............................................................................................................................................................
Labor-Related Portion of Capital Costs (46%) ................................................................................................
48.796
13.021
2.070
0.417
2.077
66.381
3.600
48.394
12.963
2.065
0.415
2.080
65.917
3.577
Total Labor-Related Share .......................................................................................................................
69.981
69.494
1. Published in the FY 2013 IPF PPS notice (77 FR 47228) and based on IHS Global Insight, Inc.’s second quarter 2012 forecast of the FY
2008-based RPL market basket.
2. Based on IHS Global Insight, Inc.’s second quarter 2013 forecast of the FY 2008-based RPL market basket.
The labor-related share for FY 2014 is
the sum of the FY 2014 relative
importance of each labor-related cost
category, and would reflect the different
rates of price change for these cost
categories between the base year (FY
2008) and FY 2014. The sum of the
relative importance for FY 2014 for
operating costs (Wages and Salaries,
Employee Benefits, Professional Fees:
Labor-Related, Administrative and
Business Support Services, and All
Other: Labor-related Services) is 65.917
percent, as shown in Table 1 above. The
portion of Capital-related cost that is
influenced by the local labor market is
estimated to be 46 percent. Since the
relative importance for Capital-Related
Costs is 7.776 percent of the FY 2008based RPL market basket in FY 2014, we
take 46 percent of 7.776 percent to
determine the labor-related share of
Capital-related cost for FY 2014. The
result is 3.577 percent, which we add to
65.917 percent for the operating cost
amount to determine the total laborrelated share for FY 2014. Therefore, the
labor-related share for the IPF PPS in FY
2014 is 69.494 percent. This laborrelated share is determined using the
same general methodology as employed
in calculating all previous IPF laborrelated shares (see, for example, 69 FR
66952 through 66953). The wage index
and the labor-related share are reflected
in budget neutrality adjustments.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
VI. Updates to the IPF PPS for FY
Beginning October 1, 2013
The IPF PPS is based on a
standardized Federal per diem base rate
calculated from the IPF average per
diem costs and adjusted for budgetneutrality in the implementation year.
The Federal per diem base rate is used
as the standard payment per day under
the IPF PPS and is adjusted by the
patient- and facility-level adjustments
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
that are applicable to the IPF stay. A
detailed explanation of how we
calculated the average per diem cost
appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS
final rule (69 FR 66926).
A. Determining the Standardized
Budget-Neutral Federal Per Diem Base
Rate
Section 124(a)(1) of the BBRA
required that we implement the IPF PPS
in a budget neutral manner. In other
words, the amount of total payments
under the IPF PPS, including any
payment adjustments, must be projected
to be equal to the amount of total
payments that would have been made if
the IPF PPS were not implemented.
Therefore, we calculated the budgetneutrality factor by setting the total
estimated IPF PPS payments to be equal
to the total estimated payments that
would have been made under the Tax
Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of
1982 (TEFRA) (Pub. L. 97–248)
methodology had the IPF PPS not been
implemented.
Under the IPF PPS methodology, we
calculated the final Federal per diem
base rate to be budget neutral during the
IPF PPS implementation period (that is,
the 18-month period from January 1,
2005 through June 30, 2006) using a July
1 update cycle. We updated the average
cost per day to the midpoint of the IPF
PPS implementation period (that is,
October 1, 2005), and this amount was
used in the payment model to establish
the budget-neutrality adjustment.
A step-by-step description of the
methodology used to estimate payments
under the TEFRA payment system
appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS
final rule (69 FR 66926).
PO 00000
Frm 00006
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
1. Standardization of the Federal Per
Diem Base Rate and Electroconvulsive
Therapy (ECT) Rate
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule, we describe how we standardized
the IPF PPS Federal per diem base rate
to account for the overall positive effects
of the IPF PPS payment adjustment
factors. To standardize the IPF PPS
payments, we compared the IPF PPS
payment amounts calculated from the
FY 2002 Medicare Provider Analysis
and Review (MedPAR) file to the
projected TEFRA payments from the FY
2002 cost report file updated to the
midpoint of the IPF PPS
implementation period (that is, October
2005). The standardization factor was
calculated by dividing total estimated
payments under the TEFRA payment
system by estimated payments under
the IPF PPS. The standardization factor
was calculated to be 0.8367.
As described in detail in the May
2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27045),
in reviewing the methodology used to
simulate the IPF PPS payments used for
the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule,
we discovered that due to a computer
code error, total IPF PPS payments were
underestimated by about 1.36 percent.
Since the IPF PPS payment total should
have been larger than the estimated
figure, the standardization factor should
have been smaller (0.8254 vs. 0.8367). In
turn, the Federal per diem base rate and
the ECT rate should have been reduced
by 0.8254 instead of 0.8367.
To resolve this issue, in RY 2007, we
amended the Federal per diem base rate
and the ECT payment rate
prospectively. Using the standardization
factor of 0.8254, the average cost per day
was effectively reduced by 17.46
percent (100 percent minus 82.54
percent = 17.46 percent).
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
2. Calculation of the Budget Neutrality
Adjustment
To compute the budget neutrality
adjustment for the IPF PPS, we
separately identified each component of
the adjustment, that is, the outlier
adjustment, stop-loss adjustment, and
behavioral offset.
A complete discussion of how we
calculate each component of the budget
neutrality adjustment appears in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69
FR 66932 through 66933) and in the
May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR
27044 through 27046).
a. Outlier Adjustment
Since the IPF PPS payment amount
for each IPF includes applicable outlier
amounts, we reduced the standardized
Federal per diem base rate to account
for aggregate IPF PPS payments
estimated to be made as outlier
payments. The outlier adjustment was
calculated to be 2 percent. As a result,
the standardized Federal per diem base
rate was reduced by 2 percent to
account for projected outlier payments.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
b. Stop-Loss Provision Adjustment
As explained in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule, we provided a stoploss payment during the transition from
cost-based reimbursement to the per
diem payment system to ensure that an
IPF’s total PPS payments were no less
than a minimum percentage of their
TEFRA payment, had the IPF PPS not
been implemented. We reduced the
standardized Federal per diem base rate
by the percentage of aggregate IPF PPS
payments estimated to be made for stoploss payments. As a result, the
standardized Federal per diem base rate
was reduced by 0.39 percent to account
for stop-loss payments. Since the
transition was completed in RY 2009,
the stop-loss provision is no longer
applicable, and for cost reporting
periods beginning on or after January 1,
2008, IPFs were paid 100 percent PPS
rates.
c. Behavioral Offset
As explained in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule, implementation of
the IPF PPS may result in certain
changes in IPF practices, especially with
respect to coding for comorbid medical
conditions. As a result, Medicare may
make higher payments than assumed in
our calculations. Accounting for these
effects through an adjustment is
commonly known as a behavioral offset.
Based on accepted actuarial practices
and consistent with the assumptions
made in other PPSs, we assumed in
determining the behavioral offset that
IPFs would regain 15 percent of
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
potential ‘‘losses’’ and augment
payment increases by 5 percent. We
applied this actuarial assumption,
which is based on our historical
experience with new payment systems,
to the estimated ‘‘losses’’ and ‘‘gains’’
among the IPFs. The behavioral offset
for the IPF PPS was calculated to be
2.66 percent. As a result, we reduced
the standardized Federal per diem base
rate by 2.66 percent to account for
behavioral changes. As indicated in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we
do not plan to change adjustment factors
or projections until we analyze IPF PPS
data.
If we find that an adjustment is
warranted, the percent difference may
be applied prospectively to the
established PPS rates to ensure the rates
accurately reflect the payment level. In
conducting this analysis, we will be
interested in the extent to which
improved coding of patients’ principal
and other diagnoses, which may not
reflect real increases in underlying
resource demands, has occurred under
the PPS.
B. Update of the Federal Per Diem Base
Rate and Electroconvulsive Therapy
Rate
As described in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66931), the
average per diem cost was updated to
the midpoint of the implementation
year. This updated average per diem
cost of $724.43 was reduced by—(1)
17.46 percent to account for
standardization to projected TEFRA
payments for the implementation
period; (2) 2 percent to account for
outlier payments; (3) 0.39 percent to
account for stop-loss payments; and (4)
2.66 percent to account for the
behavioral offset. The Federal per diem
base rate in the implementation year
was $575.95. The increase in the per
diem base rate for RY 2009 included the
0.39 percent increase due to the removal
of the stop-loss provision. We indicated
in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule
(69 FR 66932) that we would remove
this 0.39 percent reduction to the
Federal per diem base rate after the
transition. As discussed in section
IV.D.2. of the May 2008 IPF PPS notice,
we increased the Federal per diem base
rate and the ECT base rate by 0.39
percent in RY 2009. Therefore for RY
2009 and beyond, the stop-loss
provision has ended and is no longer a
part of budget neutrality.
In accordance with section
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, which
requires the application of an ‘‘other
adjustment,’’ described in section
1886(s)(3) of the Act (specifically,
section 1886(s)(3)(B)) for RYs 2013 and
PO 00000
Frm 00007
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
46739
2014 that reduces the update to the IPF
PPS base rate for the FY beginning in
Calendar Year (CY) 2013, we are
adjusting the IPF PPS update by a 0.1
percentage point reduction for FY 2014.
In addition, in accordance with section
1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, which
requires the application of the
productivity adjustment that reduces
the update to the IPF PPS base rate for
the FY beginning in CY 2013, we are
adjusting the IPF PPS update by a 0.5
percentage point reduction for FY 2014.
For this notice, we are applying an
annual update of 2.0 percent (that is the
FY 2008-based RPL market basket
increase for FY 2014 of 2.6 percent less
the productivity adjustment of 0.5
percentage point less the 0.1 percentage
point required under
section1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act), and the
wage index budget neutrality factor of
1.0010 to the FY 2013 Federal per diem
base rate of $698.51, yielding a Federal
per diem base rate of $713.19 for FY
2014. Similarly, we are applying the 2.0
percent payment update, and the 1.0010
wage index budget neutrality factor to
the FY 2013 ECT base rate, yielding an
ECT base rate of $307.04 for FY 2014.
As noted above, section 1886(s)(4) of
the Act requires the establishment of a
quality data reporting program for the
IPF PPS beginning in RY 2014. We
finalized new requirements for quality
reporting for IPFs in the ‘‘Hospital
Inpatient Prospective Payment System
for Acute Care Hospitals and the Long
Term Care Hospital Prospective
Payment System and Fiscal Year 2013
Rates’’ final rule (August 31, 2012) (77
FR 53258, 53644 through 53360).
Section 1886(s)(4)(A)(i) of the Act
requires that, for RY 2014 and each
subsequent rate year, the Secretary shall
reduce any annual update to a standard
Federal rate for discharges occurring
during the rate year by 2.0 percentage
points for any IPF that does not comply
with the quality data submission
requirements with respect to an
applicable year. Therefore, we are
applying a 2.0 percentage point
reduction to the federal per diem base
rate and the ECT base rate as follows.
For IPFs that fail to submit quality
reporting data under the IPFQR
program, we are applying a 0 percent
annual update (that is 2 percent reduced
by 2 percentage points in accordance
with section 1886(s)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act)
and the wage index budget neutrality
factor of 1.0010 to the FY 2013 Federal
per diem base rate of $698.51, yielding
a Federal per diem base rate of $699.21
for FY 2014.
Similarly, we are applying the 0
percent annual update and the 1.0010
wage index budget neutrality factor to
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46740
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
the FY 2013 ECT base rate of $300.72,
yielding an ECT base rate of $301.02 for
FY 2014.
In the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH PPS final
rule (78 FR 27485), we are adopting two
new measures for the FY 2016 payment
determination and subsequent years for
the IPFQR Program. We are also
finalizing a request for voluntary
information whereby IPFs will be asked
to provide information on the patient
experience of care survey they use.
VII. Update of the IPF PPS Adjustment
Factors
A. Overview of the IPF PPS Adjustment
Factors
The IPF PPS payment adjustments
were derived from a regression analysis
of 100 percent of the FY 2002 MedPAR
data file, which contained 483,038
cases. For this notice, we used the same
results of the regression analysis used to
implement the November 2004 IPF PPS
final rule. For a more detailed
description of the data file used for the
regression analysis, see the November
2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66935
through 66936). While we have since
used more recent claims data to set the
fixed dollar loss threshold amount, we
used the same results of this regression
analysis to update the IPF PPS for FY
2013 and for FY 2014. Now that we are
approximately 8 years into the IPF PPS,
we believe that we have enough data to
begin looking at the process of refining
the IPF PPS as appropriate. We expect
that in future rulemaking, we may
propose potential refinements to the
system.
As we stated previously, we do not
plan to update the regression analysis
until we are able to analyze IPF PPS
claims and cost report data. However,
we continue to monitor claims and
payment data independently from cost
report data to assess issues, to determine
whether changes in case-mix or
payment shifts have occurred among
freestanding governmental, non-profit
and private psychiatric hospitals, and
psychiatric units of general hospitals,
and CAHs and other issues of
importance to IPFs.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
B. Patient-Level Adjustments
In the August 2012 IPF PPS notice (77
FR 47230 through 47233) we announced
payment adjustments for the following
patient-level characteristics: Medicare
Severity diagnosis related groups (MS–
DRGs) assignment of the patient’s
principal diagnosis, selected
comorbidities, patient age, and the
variable per diem adjustments.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
1. Adjustment for MS–DRG Assignment
The IPF PPS includes payment
adjustments for designated psychiatric
DRGs assigned to the claim based on
each patient’s principal diagnosis. As
we did in FY 2013 (77 FR 47231), for
FY 2014, we will make a payment
adjustment for psychiatric diagnoses
that group to one of the 17 MS–IPF–
DRGs listed in Table 2. The DRG
adjustment factors were expressed
relative to the most frequently reported
psychiatric DRG in FY 2002, that is,
DRG 430 (psychoses). The coefficient
values and adjustment factors were
derived from the regression analysis.
In accordance with § 412.27(a),
payment under the IPF PPS is
conditioned on IPFs admitting ‘‘only
patients whose admission to the unit is
required for active treatment, of an
intensity that can be provided
appropriately only in an inpatient
hospital setting, of a psychiatric
principal diagnosis that is listed in
Chapter Five (‘Mental Disorders’) of the
International Classification of Diseases,
Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification
(ICD–9–CM)’’ or in the Fourth Edition,
Text Revision of the American
Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual, (DSM–IV–TR). IPF
claims with a principal diagnosis
included in Chapter Five of the ICD–9–
CM or the DSM–IV–TR are paid the
Federal per diem base rate under the IPF
PPS and all other applicable
adjustments, including any applicable
DRG adjustment. Psychiatric principal
diagnoses that do not group to one of
the 17 designated DRGs will still receive
the Federal per diem base rate and all
other applicable adjustments, but the
payment will not include a DRG
adjustment.
The Standards for Electronic
Transaction final rule published in the
Federal Register on August 17, 2000 (65
FR 50312), adopted ICD–9–CM as the
designated code set for reporting
diseases, injuries, impairments, other
health related problems, their
manifestations, and causes of injury,
disease, impairment, or other health
related problems. Therefore, we use
ICD–9–CM as the designated code set
for the IPF PPS.
We believe that it is important to
maintain the same diagnostic coding
and DRG classification for IPFs that are
used under the IPPS for providing
psychiatric care. Therefore, when the
IPF PPS was implemented for cost
reporting periods beginning on or after
January 1, 2005, we adopted the same
diagnostic code set and DRG patient
classification system (that is, the CMS
DRGs) that were utilized at the time
PO 00000
Frm 00008
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
under the hospital inpatient IPPS. Since
the inception of the IPF PPS, the DRGs
used as the patient classification system
under the IPF PPS have corresponded
exactly with the CMS DRGs applicable
under the IPPS for acute care hospitals.
Every year, changes to the ICD–9–CM
coding system are addressed in the IPPS
proposed and final rules. The changes to
the codes are effective October 1 of each
year and must be used by acute care
hospitals as well as other providers to
report diagnostic and procedure
information. The IPF PPS has always
incorporated ICD–9–CM coding changes
made in the annual IPPS update. We
publish coding changes in a
Transmittal/Change Request, similar to
how coding changes are announced by
the IPPS and LTCH PPS. Those ICD–9–
CM coding changes are also published
in the following IPF PPS FY update, in
either the IPF PPS proposed and final
rules, or in an IPF PPS update notice.
In the May 2008 IPF PPS notice (73
FR 25709), we discussed CMS’ effort to
better recognize resource use and the
severity of illness among patients. CMS
adopted the new MS–DRGs for the IPPS
in the FY 2008 IPPS final rule with
comment period (72 FR 47130). A
crosswalk, to reflect changes that were
made to the DRGs under the IPF PPS to
the new MS–DRGs, was provided (73 FR
25716). We believe by better accounting
for patients’ severity of illness in
Medicare payment rates, the MS–DRGs
encourage hospitals to improve their
coding and documentation of patient
diagnoses. The MS–DRGs, which are
based on the IPPS MS–DRGs, represent
a significant increase in the number of
DRGs (from 538 to 745, an increase of
207). For a full description of the
development and implementation of the
MS–DRGs, see the FY 2008 IPPS final
rule with comment period (72 FR 47141
through 47175).
All of the ICD–9–CM coding changes
are reflected in the FY 2013 GROUPER,
Version 31.0, effective for IPPS
discharges occurring on or after October
1, 2013 through September 30, 2014.
The GROUPER Version 31.0 software
package assigns each case to an MS–
DRG on the basis of the diagnosis and
procedure codes and demographic
information (that is, age, sex, and
discharge status). The Medicare Code
Editor (MCE) 31.0 uses the new ICD–9–
CM codes to validate coding for IPPS
discharges on or after October 1, 2013.
The complete documentation of the
GROUPER logic is available from 3M/
Health Information System (HIS),
which, under contract with CMS, is
responsible for updating and
maintaining the GROUPER program.
The current MS–DRG Definitions
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46741
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
Manual, version 30.0, is available on a
CD for $225.00. Version 31.0 of this
manual, which will include the final FY
2014 MS–DRG changes, will be
available on CD for $225.00. These
manuals may be obtained by writing to
3M/HIS at the following address: 100
Barnes Road, Wallingford, CT 06492; or
by calling (203) 949–0303, or by
obtaining an order form at the Web site:
https://www.3MHIS.com. The IPF PPS
has always used the same GROUPER
and Code Editor as the IPPS. Therefore,
the ICD–9–CM changes, which were
reflected in the GROUPER Version 31.0
and MCE 31.0 on October 1, 2013, also
became effective for the IPF PPS for
discharges occurring on or after October
1, 2013.
The impact of the new MS–DRGs on
the IPF PPS was negligible. Mapping to
the MS–DRGs resulted in the current 17
MS–DRGs, instead of the original 15, for
which the IPF PPS provides an
adjustment. Although the code set is
updated, the same associated
adjustment factors apply now that have
been in place since implementation of
the IPF PPS, with one exception that is
unrelated to the update to the codes.
When DRGs 521 and 522 were
consolidated into MS–DRG 895, we
carried over the adjustment factor of
1.02 from DRG 521 to the newly
consolidated MS–DRG. This was done
to reflect the higher claims volume
under DRG 521, with more than eight
times the number of claims than billed
under DRG 522. For a detailed
description of the mapping changes
from the original DRG adjustment
categories to the current MS–DRG
adjustment categories, we refer readers
to the May 2008 IPF PPS notice (73 FR
25714).
The official version of the ICD–9–CM
is available on CD–ROM from the U.S.
Government Printing Office. The FY
2012 version can be ordered by
contacting the Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Department 50, Washington, DC
20402–9329, telephone number (202)
512–1800. Questions concerning the
ICD–9–CM should be directed to
Patricia E. Brooks, Co-Chairperson, ICD–
9–CM Coordination and Maintenance
Committee, CMS, Center for Medicare
Management, Hospital and Ambulatory
Policy Group, Division of Acute Care,
Mailstop C4–08–06, 7500 Security
Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244–
1850. The Web site for the CD–ROM
which contains the complete official
version of the International
Classification of Diseases, Ninth
Revision, Clinical Modification is
located at: https://www.cms.gov/
Medicare/Coding/
ICD9ProviderDiagnosticCodes/
CDROM.html.
Further information concerning the
official version of the ICD–9–CM can be
found on the IPPS Web site at: https://
cms.hhs.gov/medicare/coding/
icd9providerdiagnosticcodes/
addendum.html.
Transition to ICD–10–CM
We note that, in accordance with the
requirements of the final rule published
in the Federal Register on September 5,
2012 (77 FR 54664), we will be
discontinuing our current use of the
International Classification of Diseases,
9th revision, Clinical Modification
(ICD–9–CM), effective with the
compliance date for using the
international Classification of Diseases,
10th revision, Clinical Modifications
(ICD–10–CM) of October 1, 2014. The
ICD–10–CM coding guidelines are
available through the CMS Web site at:
www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/ICD10/
downloads/pcs_2012_guidelines.pdf
and https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/
Coding/ICD10/?redirect=/
ICD10 or on the CDC’s Web site at
www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd10/
10cmguidelines2012.pdf.
The MS–IPF–DRG adjustment factors
(as shown in Table 2) will continue to
be paid for discharges occurring in FY
2014. In FY 2015, the MS–IPF–DRG
adjustment factors will be updated
effective with the compliance date for
using the ICD–10–CM of October 1,
2014.
TABLE 2—FY 2014 CURRENT MS–IPF–DRGS APPLICABLE FOR THE PRINCIPAL DIAGNOSIS ADJUSTMENT
MS–DRG
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
056
057
080
081
876
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
894
895
896
897
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
Degenerative nervous system disorders w MCC ...................................................................................................
Degenerative nervous system disorders w/o MCC ................................................................................................
Nontraumatic stupor & coma w MCC .....................................................................................................................
Nontraumatic stupor & coma w/o MCC ..................................................................................................................
O.R. procedure w principal diagnoses of mental illness ........................................................................................
Acute adjustment reaction & psychosocial dysfunction ..........................................................................................
Depressive neuroses ...............................................................................................................................................
Neuroses except depressive ...................................................................................................................................
Disorders of personality & impulse control .............................................................................................................
Organic disturbances & mental retardation ............................................................................................................
Psychoses ...............................................................................................................................................................
Behavioral & developmental disorders ...................................................................................................................
Other mental disorder diagnoses ............................................................................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence, left AMA ........................................................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w rehabilitation therapy ..................................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation therapy w MCC .................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation therapy w/o MCC ..............................................................
2. Payment for Comorbid Conditions
The intent of the comorbidity
adjustments is to recognize the
increased costs associated with
comorbid conditions by providing
additional payments for certain
concurrent medical or psychiatric
conditions that are expensive to treat. In
VerDate Mar<15>2010
Adjustment
factor
MS–DRG descriptions
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
the May 2011 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR
26451 through 26452), we explained
that the IPF PPS includes 17
comorbidity categories and identified
the new, revised, and deleted ICD–9–
CM diagnosis codes that generate a
comorbid condition payment
PO 00000
Frm 00009
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
1.05
1.05
1.07
1.07
1.22
1.05
0.99
1.02
1.02
1.03
1.00
0.99
0.92
0.97
1.02
0.88
0.88
adjustment under the IPF PPS for RY
2012 (76 FR 26451).
Comorbidities are specific patient
conditions that are secondary to the
patient’s principal diagnosis and that
require treatment during the stay.
Diagnoses that relate to an earlier
episode of care and have no bearing on
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46742
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
the current hospital stay are excluded
and must not be reported on IPF claims.
Comorbid conditions must exist at the
time of admission or develop
subsequently, and affect the treatment
received, length of stay (LOS), or both
treatment and LOS.
For each claim, an IPF may receive
only one comorbidity adjustment within
a comorbidity category, but it may
receive an adjustment for more than one
comorbidity category. Billing
instructions require that IPFs must enter
the full ICD–9–CM codes for up to 24
additional diagnoses if they co-exist at
the time of admission or develop
subsequently and impact the treatment
provided.
The comorbidity adjustments were
determined based on the regression
analysis using the diagnoses reported by
IPFs in FY 2002. The principal
diagnoses were used to establish the
DRG adjustments and were not
accounted for in establishing the
comorbidity category adjustments,
except where ICD–9–CM ‘‘code first’’
instructions apply. As we explained in
the May 2011 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR
265451), the code first rule applies
when a condition has both an
underlying etiology and a manifestation
due to the underlying etiology. For these
conditions, ICD–9–CM has a coding
convention that requires the underlying
conditions to be sequenced first
followed by the manifestation.
Whenever a combination exists, there is
a ‘‘use additional code’’ note at the
etiology code and a code first note at the
manifestation code.
As discussed in the MS–DRG section,
it is our policy to maintain the same
diagnostic coding set for IPFs that is
used under the IPPS for providing the
same psychiatric care.
For FY 2014, we are applying the 17
comorbidity categories for which we are
providing an adjustment, their
respective codes, and their respective
adjustment factors in Table 3 below. In
FY 2015, the diagnosis codes and
adjustment factors for the comorbidity
categories will be updated effective with
the compliance date for using the ICD–
10–CM of October 1, 2014.
TABLE 3—FY 2014 DIAGNOSIS CODES AND ADJUSTMENT FACTORS FOR COMORBIDITY CATEGORIES
Adjustment
factor
Description of comorbidity
Diagnoses codes
Developmental Disabilities .........................
Coagulation Factor Deficits ........................
Tracheostomy .............................................
Renal Failure, Acute ...................................
317, 3180, 3181, 3182, and 319 ....................................................................................
2860 through 2864 .........................................................................................................
51900 through 51909 and V440 ....................................................................................
5845 through 5849, 63630, 63631, 63632, 63730, 63731, 63732, 6383, 6393, 66932,
66934, 9585.
40301, 40311, 40391, 40402, 40412, 40413, 40492, 40493, 5853, 5854, 5855, 5856,
5859, 586, V4511, V4512, V560, V561, and V562.
1400 through 2399 with a radiation therapy code 92.21–92.29 or chemotherapy code
99.25.
25002, 25003, 25012, 25013, 25022, 25023, 25032, 25033, 25042, 25043, 25052,
25053, 25062, 25063, 25072, 25073, 25082, 25083, 25092, and 25093.
260 through 262 .............................................................................................................
3071, 30750, 31203, 31233, and 31234 ........................................................................
01000 through 04110, 042, 04500 through 05319, 05440 through 05449, 0550
through 0770, 0782 through 07889, and 07950 through 07959.
2910, 2920, 29212, 2922, 30300, and 30400 ...............................................................
1.04
1.13
1.06
1.11
3910, 3911, 3912, 40201, 40403, 4160, 4210, 4211, and 4219 ...................................
44024 and 7854 .............................................................................................................
49121, 4941, 5100, 51883, 51884, V4611, V4612, V4613 and V4614 ........................
56960 through 56969, 9975, and V441 through V446 ..................................................
6960, 7100, 73000 through 73009, 73010 through 73019, and 73020 through 73029
1.11
1.10
1.12
1.08
1.09
96500 through 96509, 9654, 9670 through 9699, 9770, 9800 through 9809, 9830
through 9839, 986, 9890 through 9897.
1.11
Renal Failure, Chronic ................................
Oncology Treatment ...................................
Uncontrolled Diabetes-Mellitus with or
without complications.
Severe Protein Calorie Malnutrition ...........
Eating and Conduct Disorders ...................
Infectious Disease ......................................
Drug and/or Alcohol Induced Mental Disorders.
Cardiac Conditions .....................................
Gangrene ....................................................
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease ...
Artificial Openings—Digestive and Urinary
Severe Musculoskeletal and Connective
Tissue Diseases.
Poisoning ....................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
3. Patient Age Adjustments
As explained in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66922), we
analyzed the impact of age on per diem
cost by examining the age variable (that
is, the range of ages) for payment
adjustments.
In general, we found that the cost per
day increases with age. The older age
groups are more costly than the under
45 age group, the differences in per
diem cost increase for each successive
age group, and the differences are
statistically significant.
We do not plan to update the
regression analysis until we are able to
analyze IPF PPS data. Therefore, for FY
2014, we are continuing to use the
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
patient age adjustments currently in
effect as shown in Table 4 below.
TABLE 4—AGE GROUPINGS AND
ADJUSTMENT FACTORS
Adjustment
factor
Age
Under 45 ...................................
45 and under 50 .......................
50 and under 55 .......................
55 and under 60 .......................
60 and under 65 .......................
65 and under 70 .......................
70 and under 75 .......................
75 and under 80 .......................
80 and over ..............................
PO 00000
Frm 00010
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
1.00
1.01
1.02
1.04
1.07
1.10
1.13
1.15
1.17
1.11
1.07
1.05
1.13
1.12
1.07
1.03
4. Variable Per Diem Adjustments
We explained in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66946) that the
regression analysis indicated that per
diem cost declines as the LOS increases.
The variable per diem adjustments to
the Federal per diem base rate account
for ancillary and administrative costs
that occur disproportionately in the first
days after admission to an IPF.
We used a regression analysis to
estimate the average differences in per
diem cost among stays of different
lengths. As a result of this analysis, we
established variable per diem
adjustments that begin on day 1 and
decline gradually until day 21 of a
patient’s stay. For day 22 and thereafter,
the variable per diem adjustment
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
remains the same each day for the
remainder of the stay. However, the
adjustment applied to day 1 depends
upon whether the IPF has a qualifying
ED. If an IPF has a qualifying ED, it
receives a 1.31 adjustment factor for day
1 of each stay. If an IPF does not have
a qualifying ED, it receives a 1.19
adjustment factor for day 1 of the stay.
The ED adjustment is explained in more
detail in section VII.C.5 of this notice.
For FY 2014, we are continuing to use
the variable per diem adjustment factors
currently in effect as shown in Table 5
below. A complete discussion of the
variable per diem adjustments appears
in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule
(69 FR 66946).
TABLE 5—VARIABLE PER DIEM
ADJUSTMENTS
Day-of-stay
Adjustment
factor
Day 1—IPF Without a Qualifying ED ................................
Day 1—IPF With a Qualifying
ED .........................................
Day 2 ........................................
Day 3 ........................................
Day 4 ........................................
Day 5 ........................................
Day 6 ........................................
Day 7 ........................................
Day 8 ........................................
Day 9 ........................................
Day 10 ......................................
Day 11 ......................................
Day 12 ......................................
Day 13 ......................................
Day 14 ......................................
Day 15 ......................................
Day 16 ......................................
Day 17 ......................................
Day 18 ......................................
Day 19 ......................................
Day 20 ......................................
Day 21 ......................................
After Day 21 .............................
1.19
1.31
1.12
1.08
1.05
1.04
1.02
1.01
1.01
1.00
1.00
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.97
0.96
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.92
C. Facility-Level Adjustments
The IPF PPS includes facility-level
adjustments for the wage index, IPFs
located in rural areas, teaching IPFs,
cost of living adjustments for IPFs
located in Alaska and Hawaii, and IPFs
with a qualifying ED.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
1. Wage Index Adjustment
a. Background
As discussed in the May 2006 IPF PPS
final rule (71 FR 27061) and in the May
2008 (73 FR 25719) and May 2009 IPF
PPS notices (74 FR 20373), in order to
provide an adjustment for geographic
wage levels, the labor-related portion of
an IPF’s payment is adjusted using an
appropriate wage index. Currently, an
IPF’s geographic wage index value is
determined based on the actual location
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
of the IPF in an urban or rural area as
defined in § 412.64(b)(1)(ii)(A) and (C).
b. Wage Index for FY 2014
Since the inception of the IPF PPS, we
have used the pre-reclassified, pre-floor
hospital wage index in developing a
wage index to be applied to IPFs
because there is not an IPF-specific
wage index available and we believe
that IPFs generally compete in the same
labor market as acute care hospitals so
the pre-reclassified, pre-floor inpatient
acute care hospital wage index should
be reflective of labor costs of IPFs. As
discussed in the May 2006 IPF PPS final
rule for FY 2007 (71 FR 27061 through
27067), under the IPF PPS, the wage
index is calculated using the IPPS wage
index for the labor market area in which
the IPF is located, without taking into
account geographic reclassifications,
floors, and other adjustments made to
the wage index under the IPPS. For a
complete description of these IPPS wage
index adjustments, please see the CY
2013 IPPS/IRF PPS final rule (77 FR
53365 through 53374). We are
continuing that practice for FY 2014.
We apply the wage index adjustment
to the labor-related portion of the
Federal rate, which is 69.494 percent.
This percentage reflects the laborrelated relative importance of the FY
2008-based RPL market basket for FY
2014 (see section V.C. of this notice).
Changes to the wage index are made
in a budget neutral manner so that
updates do not increase expenditures.
For FY 2014, we are applying the most
recent hospital wage index (that is, the
FY 2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified
hospital wage index because this is the
most appropriate index as it best reflects
the variation in local labor costs of IPFs
in the various geographic areas) using
the most recent hospital wage data (that
is, data from hospital cost reports for the
cost reporting period beginning during
FY 2009), and applying an adjustment
in accordance with our budget
neutrality policy. This policy requires
us to estimate the total amount of IPF
PPS payments for FY 2013 using the
labor-related share and the wage indices
from FY 2013 divided by the total
estimated IPF PPS payments for FY
2014 using the labor-related share and
wage indices from FY 2014. The
estimated payments are based on FY
2012 IPF claims, inflated to the
appropriate FY. This quotient is the
wage index budget neutrality factor, and
it is applied in the update of the Federal
per diem base rate for FY 2014 in
addition to the market basket described
in section VI.B. of this notice. The wage
index budget neutrality factor for FY
2014 is 1.0010. The wage index
PO 00000
Frm 00011
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
46743
applicable for FY 2014 appears in Table
1 and Table 2 in Addendum B of this
notice.
In the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule for
RY 2007 (71 FR 27061–27067), we
adopted the changes discussed in the
Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Bulletin No. 03–04 (June 6,
2003), which announced revised
definitions for Metropolitan Statistical
Areas (MSAs), and the creation of
Micropolitan Statistical Areas and
Combined Statistical Areas. In adopting
the OMB Core-Based Statistical Area
(CBSA) geographic designations, we did
not provide a separate transition for the
CBSA-based wage index since the IPF
PPS was already in a transition period
from TEFRA payments to PPS
payments.
As was the case in FY 2013, for FY
2014, we will continue to use the CBSA
geographic designations. The updated
FY 2014 CBSA-based wage index values
are presented in Tables 1 and 2 in
Addendum B of this notice. A complete
discussion of the CBSA labor market
definitions appears in the May 2006 IPF
PPS final rule (71 FR 27061 through
27067).
In keeping with established IPF PPS
wage index policy, we will use the FY
2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital
wage index (which is based on data
collected from hospital cost reports
submitted by hospitals for cost reporting
periods beginning during FY 2009) to
adjust IPF PPS payments beginning
October 1, 2013.
c. OMB Bulletins
OMB publishes bulletins regarding
CBSA changes, including changes to
CBSA numbers and titles. In the May
2008 IPF PPS notice, we incorporated
the CBSA nomenclature changes
published in the most recent OMB
bulletin that applies to the hospital
wage index used to determine the
current IPF PPS wage index and stated
that we expect to continue to do the
same for all the OMB CBSA
nomenclature changes in future IPF PPS
rules and notices, as necessary (73 FR
25721). The OMB bulletins may be
accessed online at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/bullentins/
index.html.
In accordance with our established
methodology, we have historically
adopted any CBSA changes that are
published in the OMB bulletin that
corresponds with the hospital wage
index used to determine the IPF PPS
wage index. For FY 2014, we use the FY
2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital
wage index to adjust the IPF PPS
payments. On February 28, 2013, OMB
issued OMB Bulletin No. 13–01, which
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46744
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
establishes revised delineations of
statistical areas based on OMB
standards published in the Federal
Register on June 28, 2010 and 2010
Census Bureau data. Because the FY
2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital
wage index was finalized prior to the
issuance of this Bulletin, the FY 2013
pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital wage
index does not reflect OMB’s new area
delineations based on the 2010 Census
and, thus, the FY 2014 IPF PPS wage
index will not reflect the OMB changes.
CMS intends to propose changes to the
hospital wage index based on this OMB
Bulletin in the FY 2015 IPPS/LTCH PPS
proposed rule, as stated in the FY 2014
IPPS/LTCH PPS proposed rule (78 FR
27552 through 27553). Therefore, we
anticipate that the OMB Bulletin
changes will be reflected in the FY 2015
hospital wage index. Because we base
the IPF PPS wage index on the hospital
wage index from the prior year, we
anticipate that the OMB Bulletin
changes would be reflected in the FY
2016 IPPS PPS wage index.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
2. Adjustment for Rural Location
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule, we provided a 17 percent payment
adjustment for IPFs located in a rural
area. This adjustment was based on the
regression analysis, which indicated
that the per diem cost of rural facilities
was 17 percent higher than that of urban
facilities after accounting for the
influence of the other variables included
in the regression. For FY 2014, we are
applying a 17 percent payment
adjustment for IPFs located in a rural
area as defined at § 412.64(b)(1)(ii)(C).
As stated in the November 2004 IPF PPS
final rule, we do not intend to update
the adjustment factors derived from the
regression analysis until we are able to
analyze IPF PPS data. A complete
discussion of the adjustment for rural
locations appears in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66954).
3. Teaching Adjustment
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule, we implemented regulations at
§ 412.424(d)(1)(iii) to establish a facilitylevel adjustment for IPFs that are, or are
part of, teaching hospitals. The teaching
adjustment accounts for the higher
indirect operating costs experienced by
hospitals that participate in graduate
medical education (GME) programs. The
payment adjustments are made based on
the number of full-time equivalent (FTE)
interns and residents training in the IPF
and the IPF’s average daily census.
Medicare makes direct GME payments
(for direct costs such as resident and
teaching physician salaries, and other
direct teaching costs) to all teaching
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
hospitals including those paid under a
PPS, and those paid under the TEFRA
rate-of-increase limits. These direct
GME payments are made separately
from payments for hospital operating
costs and are not part of the IPF PPS.
The direct GME payments do not
address the estimated higher indirect
operating costs teaching hospitals may
face.
For teaching hospitals paid under the
TEFRA rate-of-increase limits, Medicare
does not make separate payments for
indirect medical education costs
because payments to these hospitals are
based on the hospitals’ reasonable costs
which already include these higher
indirect costs that may be associated
with teaching programs.
The results of the regression analysis
of FY 2002 IPF data established the
basis for the payment adjustments
included in the November 2004 IPF PPS
final rule. The results showed that the
indirect teaching cost variable is
significant in explaining the higher
costs of IPFs that have teaching
programs. We calculated the teaching
adjustment based on the IPF’s ‘‘teaching
variable,’’ which is one plus the ratio of
the number of FTE residents training in
the IPF (subject to limitations described
below) to the IPF’s average daily census
(ADC).
We established the teaching
adjustment in a manner that limited the
incentives for IPFs to add FTE residents
for the purpose of increasing their
teaching adjustment. We imposed a cap
on the number of FTE residents that
may be counted for purposes of
calculating the teaching adjustment. The
cap limits the number of FTE residents
that teaching IPFs may count for the
purpose of calculating the IPF PPS
teaching adjustment, not the number of
residents teaching institutions can hire
or train. We calculated the number of
FTE residents that trained in the IPF
during a ‘‘base year’’ and used that FTE
resident number as the cap. An IPF’s
FTE resident cap is ultimately
determined based on the final
settlement of the IPF’s most recent cost
report filed before November 15, 2004
(that is, the publication date of the IPF
PPS final rule).
In the regression analysis, the
logarithm of the teaching variable had a
coefficient value of 0.5150. We
converted this cost effect to a teaching
payment adjustment by treating the
regression coefficient as an exponent
and raising the teaching variable to a
power equal to the coefficient value. We
note that the coefficient value of 0.5150
was based on the regression analysis
holding all other components of the
payment system constant.
PO 00000
Frm 00012
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
As with other adjustment factors
derived through the regression analysis,
we do not plan to rerun the regression
analysis until we analyze IPF PPS data.
Therefore, in this notice, for FY 2014,
we are retaining the coefficient value of
0.5150 for the teaching adjustment to
the Federal per diem base rate.
A complete discussion of how the
teaching adjustment was calculated
appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS
final rule (69 FR 66954 through 66957)
and the May 2008 IPF PPS notice (73 FR
25721).
a. FTE Intern and Resident Cap
Adjustment
CMS had been asked to reconsider the
original IPF teaching policy and permit
a temporary increase in the FTE resident
cap when an IPF increases the number
of FTE residents it trains due to the
acceptance of displaced residents
(residents that are training in an IPF or
a program before the IPF or program
closed) when another IPF closes or
closes its medical residency training
program.
To help us assess how many IPFs had
been, or were expected to be adversely
affected by their inability to adjust their
caps under § 412.424(d)(1) and under
these situations, we specifically
requested public comment from IPFs in
the May 1, 2009 IPF PPS notice (74 FR
20376 through 20377). A summary of
the comments and our responses can be
reviewed in the April 30, 2010 IPF PPS
notice (75 FR 23106 through 23117). All
of the commenters recommended that
CMS modify the IPF PPS teaching
adjustment policy, supporting a policy
change that would permit the IPF PPS
residency cap to be temporarily adjusted
when that IPF trains displaced residents
due to closure of an IPF or closure of an
IPF’s medical residency training
program(s). The commenters
recommended a temporary resident cap
adjustment policy similar to the policies
applied in similar contexts for acute
care hospitals.
We agreed with the commenters that,
when a hospital temporarily takes on
residents because another hospital
closes or discontinues its program, a
temporary adjustment to the cap would
be appropriate for a rotation that occurs
in an IPF setting (freestanding or units).
In these situations, residents may have
partially completed a medical residency
training program at the hospital that has
closed its training program and may be
unable to complete their training at
another hospital that is already training
residents up to or in excess of its cap.
We believe that it is appropriate to
allow temporary adjustments to the FTE
caps for an IPF that provides residency
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
training to medical residents who have
partially completed a residency training
program at an IPF that closes or at an
IPF that discontinues training residents
in a residency training program(s) (also
referred to as a ‘‘closed’’ program
throughout this preamble). For this
reason, we adopted the following
temporary resident cap adjustment
policies, similar to the temporary
adjustments to the FTE cap used for
acute care hospitals. We proposed and
finalized that the cap adjustment would
be temporary because it is resident
specific and would only apply to the
displaced resident(s) until the
resident(s) completes training in that
specialty. As under the IPPS policy for
displaced residents, the IPF PPS
temporary cap adjustment would apply
only to residents that were still training
at the IPF at the time the IPF closed or
at the time the IPF ceased training
residents in the residency training
program(s). Residents who leave the
IPF, for whatever reason, before the
closure of the IPF hospital or medical
residency training program would not
be considered displaced residents for
purposes of the IPF temporary cap
adjustment policy. Similarly, as under
the IPPS policy, medical students who
match to a program at an IPF but the IPF
or medical residency training program
closes before the individual begins
training at that IPF are also not
considered displaced residents for
purposes of the IPF temporary cap
adjustments. For detailed information
on these acute care hospital GME/IME
payment policies, we refer the reader to
the August 1, 2001 final rule (66 FR
39899), July 30, 1999 final rule (64 FR
41522), and May 7, 1999 proposed rule
(64 FR 24736). We note that although
we adopted a policy under the IPF PPS
that is consistent with the policy
applicable under the IPPS, the actual
caps under the two payment systems
may not be commingled.
b. Temporary Adjustment to the FTE
Cap To Reflect Residents Added Due to
Hospital Closure
In the May 6, 2011 IPF PPS final rule
(76 FR 26455), we indicated that we
would allow an IPF to receive a
temporary adjustment to the FTE cap to
reflect residents added because of
another IPF’s closure. This adjustment
is intended to account for medical
residents who would have partially
completed a medical residency training
program at the hospital that has closed
and may be unable to complete their
training at another hospital because that
hospital is already training residents up
to or in excess of its cap. We made this
change because IPFs have indicated a
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
reluctance to accept additional residents
from a closed IPF without a temporary
adjustment to their caps. For purposes
of this policy on IPF closure, we
adopted the IPPS definition of ‘‘closure
of a hospital’’ in 42 CFR 413.79(h) to
mean the IPF terminates its Medicare
provider agreement as specified in 42
CFR 489.52. Therefore, we added a new
§ 412.424(d)(1)(iii)(F)(1) to allow a
temporary adjustment to an IPF’s FTE
cap to reflect residents added because of
an IPF’s closure on or after July 1, 2011,
to be effective for cost reporting periods
beginning on or after July 1, 2011.
Under this policy, we allow an
adjustment to an IPF’s FTE cap if the
IPF meets the following criteria: (1) The
IPF is training displaced residents from
an IPF that closed on or after July 1,
2011; and (2) the IPF that is training the
displaced residents from the closed IPF
submits a request for a temporary
adjustment to its FTE cap to its
Medicare contractor no later than 60
days after the hospital first begins
training the displaced residents, and
documents that the IPF is eligible for
this temporary adjustment to its FTE
cap by identifying the residents who
have come from the closed IPF and have
caused the IPF to exceed its cap, (or the
IPF may already be over its cap), and
specifies the length of time that the
adjustment is needed. After the
displaced residents leave the IPF’s
training program or complete their
residency program, the IPF’s cap would
revert to its original level. This means
that the temporary adjustment to the
FTE cap would be available to the IPF
only for the period of time necessary for
the displaced residents to complete
their training. Further, as under the
IPPS policy, we also indicated that the
total amount of temporary cap
adjustment that can be distributed to all
receiving hospitals cannot exceed the
cap amount of the IPF that closed.
c. Temporary Adjustment to FTE Cap To
Reflect Residents Affected by Residency
Program Closure
In the May 6, 2011 final rule (76 FR
26455), we indicated that if an IPF that
ceases training residents in a residency
training program(s) agrees to
temporarily reduce its FTE cap, we
would allow another IPF to receive a
temporary adjustment to its FTE cap to
reflect residents added because of the
closure of another IPF’s residency
training program. For purposes of this
policy on closed residency programs,
we adopted the IPPS definition of
‘‘closure of a hospital residency training
program’’ to mean that the hospital
ceases to offer training for residents in
a particular approved medical residency
PO 00000
Frm 00013
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
46745
training program as specified in
§ 413.79(h). The methodology for
adjusting the caps for the ‘‘receiving
IPF’’ and the ‘‘IPF that closed its
program’’ is described below.
i. Receiving IPF
We proposed and finalized that an
IPF(s) may receive a temporary
adjustment to its FTE cap to reflect
residents added because of the closure
of another IPF’s residency training
program for cost reporting periods
beginning on or after July 1, 2011 if—
• The IPF is training additional
residents from the residency training
program of an IPF that closed its
program on or after July 1, 2011.
• No later than 60 days after the IPF
begins to train the residents, the IPF
submits to its Medicare Contractor a
request for a temporary adjustment to its
FTE cap, documents that the IPF is
eligible for this temporary adjustment
by identifying the residents who have
come from another IPF’s closed program
and have caused the IPF to exceed its
cap, (or the IPF may already be in excess
of its cap), specifies the length of time
the adjustment is needed, and, submits
to its Medicare contractor a copy of the
FTE cap reduction statement by the IPF
closing the residency training program.
In general, the temporary adjustment
criteria established for closed medical
residency training programs at IPFs is
similar to the criteria established for
closed IPFs. More than one IPF may be
eligible to apply for the temporary
adjustment because residents from one
closed program may complete their
training at one IPF, or at several IPFs.
Also, an IPF would be eligible for the
temporary adjustment only to the extent
that the displaced residents would
cause the IPF to exceed its FTE cap.
Finally, we proposed and finalized
that IPFs meeting the proposed criteria
would be eligible to receive temporary
adjustments to their FTE caps for cost
reporting periods beginning on or after
July 1, 2011.
ii. IPF That Closed Its Program
We indicated that an IPF that agrees
to train residents who have been
displaced by the closure of another IPF’s
resident teaching program, may receive
a temporary FTE cap adjustment only if
the IPF that closed a program:
• Temporarily reduces its FTE cap by
the number of FTE residents, in each
program year, training in the program at
the time of the program’s closure. The
yearly reduction would be determined
by deducting the number of those
residents who would have been training
in the program during the year of the
closure, had the program not closed.
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46746
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
• No later than 60 days after the
residents who were in the closed
program begin training at another IPF,
submits to its Medicare contractor a
statement signed and dated by its
representative that specifies that it
agrees to the temporary reduction in its
FTE cap to allow the IPF training the
displaced residents to obtain a
temporary adjustment to its cap;
identifies the residents who were
training at the time of the program’s
closure; identifies the IPFs to which the
residents are transferring once the
program closes; and specifies the
reduction for the applicable program
years.
We proposed and finalized that the
cap reduction for the IPF with the
closed program would be based on the
number of FTE residents in each
program year who were in the program
at the IPF at the time of the program’s
closure, and who begin training at
another IPF.
A complete discussion on the
temporary adjustment to the FTE cap to
reflect residents added due to hospital
closure and by residency program
appears in the January 27, 2011 IPF PPS
proposed rule (76 FR 5018 through
5020) and the May 6, 2011 IPF PPS final
rule (76 FR 26453 through 26456).
4. Cost of Living Adjustment for IPFs
Located in Alaska and Hawaii
The IPF PPS includes a payment
adjustment for IPFs located in Alaska
and Hawaii based upon the county in
which the IPF is located. As we
explained in the November 2004 IPF
PPS final rule, the FY 2002 data
demonstrated that IPFs in Alaska and
Hawaii had per diem costs that were
disproportionately higher than other
IPFs. Other Medicare PPSs (for example,
the IPPS and LTCH PPS) have adopted
a cost of living adjustment (COLA) to
account for the cost differential of care
furnished in Alaska and Hawaii.
We analyzed the effect of applying a
COLA to payments for IPFs located in
Alaska and Hawaii. The results of our
analysis demonstrated that a COLA for
IPFs located in Alaska and Hawaii
would improve payment equity for
these facilities. As a result of this
analysis, we provided a COLA in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule.
A COLA adjustment for IPFs located
in Alaska and Hawaii is made by
multiplying the nonlabor-related
portion of the Federal per diem base rate
by the applicable COLA factor based on
the COLA area in which the IPF is
located.
The COLA factors are published on
the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) Web site (https://www.opm.gov/
oca/cola/rates.asp).
We note that the COLA areas for
Alaska are not defined by county as are
the COLA areas for Hawaii. In 5 CFR
591.207, the OPM established the
following COLA areas:
• City of Anchorage, and 80-kilometer
(50-mile) radius by road, as measured
from the Federal courthouse;
• City of Fairbanks, and 80-kilometer
(50-mile) radius by road, as measured
from the Federal courthouse;
• City of Juneau, and 80-kilometer
(50-mile) radius by road, as measured
from the Federal courthouse;
• Rest of the State of Alaska.
As previously stated in the November
2004 IPF PPS final rule, we update the
COLA factors according to updates
established by the OPM. Sections 1911
through 1919 of the Nonforeign Area
Retirement Equity Assurance Act, as
contained in subtitle B of title XIX of the
National Defense Authorization Act
(NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L.
111–84, October 28, 2009), transitions
the Alaska and Hawaii COLAs to
locality pay. Under section 1914 of
Public Law 111–84, locality pay is being
phased in over a 3-year period
beginning in January 2010, with COLA
rates frozen as of the date of enactment,
October 28, 2009, and then
proportionately reduced to reflect the
phase-in of locality pay.
When we published the proposed
COLA adjustment factors in the January
2011 IPF proposed rule (76 FR 4998),
we inadvertently selected the FY 2010
COLA rates. The FY 2010 COLA rates
were reduced rates to account for the
phase-in of locality pay. We did not
intend to propose reduced COLA rates,
and we do not believe it is appropriate
to finalize the reduced COLAs that we
showed in our January 2011 proposed
rule. The 2009 COLA rates do not reflect
the phase-in of locality pay. Therefore,
we finalized the FY 2009 COLA rates,
which are the same rates that were in
effect for RY 2010 through RY 2012. We
plan to address the COLA in the future
refinement process in FY 2015. For FY
2014, IPFs located in Alaska and Hawaii
will continue to receive the updated
COLA factors based on the COLA area
in which the IPF is located as shown in
Table 6 below.
TABLE 6—COLA FACTORS FOR ALASKA AND HAWAII IPFS
Cost of living
adjustment
factor
Area
Alaska:
City of Anchorage and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road .................................................................................................
City of Fairbanks and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road ..................................................................................................
City of Juneau and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road ......................................................................................................
Rest of Alaska ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Hawaii:
City and County of Honolulu ....................................................................................................................................................
County of Hawaii ......................................................................................................................................................................
County of Kauai ........................................................................................................................................................................
County of Maui and County of Kalawao ..................................................................................................................................
1.23
1.23
1.23
1.25
1.25
1.18
1.25
1.25
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
(The above factors are based on data obtained from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management Web site at: https://www.opm.gov/oca/cola/
rates.asp.)
5. Adjustment for IPFs With a
Qualifying Emergency Department (ED)
The IPF PPS includes a facility-level
adjustment for IPFs with qualifying EDs.
We provide an adjustment to the
Federal per diem base rate to account
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
for the costs associated with
maintaining a full-service ED. The
adjustment is intended to account for
ED costs incurred by a freestanding
psychiatric hospital with a qualifying
ED or a distinct part psychiatric unit of
PO 00000
Frm 00014
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
an acute hospital or a CAH for
preadmission services otherwise
payable under the Medicare Outpatient
Prospective Payment System (OPPS)
furnished to a beneficiary on the date of
the beneficiary’s admission to the
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
hospital and during the day
immediately preceding the date of
admission to the IPF (see § 413.40(c)(2))
and the overhead cost of maintaining
the ED. This payment is a facility-level
adjustment that applies to all IPF
admissions (with one exception
described below), regardless of whether
a particular patient receives
preadmission services in the hospital’s
ED.
The ED adjustment is incorporated
into the variable per diem adjustment
for the first day of each stay for IPFs
with a qualifying ED. That is, IPFs with
a qualifying ED receive an adjustment
factor of 1.31 as the variable per diem
adjustment for day 1 of each stay. If an
IPF does not have a qualifying ED, it
receives an adjustment factor of 1.19 as
the variable per diem adjustment for day
1 of each patient stay.
The ED adjustment is made on every
qualifying claim except as described
below. As specified in
§ 412.424(d)(1)(v)(B), the ED adjustment
is not made where a patient is
discharged from an acute care hospital
or CAH and admitted to the same
hospital’s or CAH’s psychiatric unit. An
ED adjustment is not made in this case
because the costs associated with ED
services are reflected in the DRG
payment to the acute care hospital or
through the reasonable cost payment
made to the CAH. If we provided the ED
adjustment in these cases, the hospital
would be paid twice for the overhead
costs of the ED, as stated in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69
FR 66960).
Therefore, when patients are
discharged from an acute care hospital
or CAH and admitted to the same
hospital’s or CAH’s psychiatric unit, the
IPF receives the 1.19 adjustment factor
as the variable per diem adjustment for
the first day of the patient’s stay in the
IPF.
For FY 2014, we are retaining the 1.31
adjustment factor for IPFs with
qualifying EDs. A complete discussion
of the steps involved in the calculation
of the ED adjustment factor appears in
the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule
(69 FR 66959 through 66960) and the
May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR
27070 through 27072).
D. Other Payment Adjustments and
Policies
For FY 2014, the IPF PPS includes an
outlier adjustment to promote access to
IPF care for those patients who require
expensive care and to limit the financial
risk of IPFs treating unusually costly
patients. In this section, we also explain
the reason for ending the stop-loss
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
provision that was applicable during the
transition period.
1. Outlier Payments
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule, we implemented regulations at
§ 412.424(d)(3)(i) to provide a per-case
payment for IPF stays that are
extraordinarily costly. Providing
additional payments to IPFs for
extremely costly cases strongly
improves the accuracy of the IPF PPS in
determining resource costs at the patient
and facility level. These additional
payments reduce the financial losses
that would otherwise be incurred in
treating patients who require more
costly care and, therefore, reduce the
incentives for IPFs to under-serve these
patients.
We make outlier payments for
discharges in which an IPF’s estimated
total cost for a case exceeds a fixed
dollar loss threshold amount
(multiplied by the IPF’s facility-level
adjustments) plus the Federal per diem
payment amount for the case.
In instances when the case qualifies
for an outlier payment, we pay 80
percent of the difference between the
estimated cost for the case and the
adjusted threshold amount for days 1
through 9 of the stay (consistent with
the median LOS for IPFs in FY 2002),
and 60 percent of the difference for day
10 and thereafter. We established the 80
percent and 60 percent loss sharing
ratios because we were concerned that
a single ratio established at 80 percent
(like other Medicare PPSs) might
provide an incentive under the IPF per
diem payment system to increase LOS
in order to receive additional payments.
After establishing the loss sharing ratios,
we determined the current fixed dollar
loss threshold amount of $11,600
through payment simulations designed
to compute a dollar loss beyond which
payments are estimated to meet the 2
percent outlier spending target.
a. Update to the Outlier Fixed Dollar
Loss Threshold Amount
In accordance with the update
methodology described in § 412.428(d),
we are updating the fixed dollar loss
threshold amount used under the IPF
PPS outlier policy. Based on the
regression analysis and payment
simulations used to develop the IPF
PPS, we established a 2 percent outlier
policy which strikes an appropriate
balance between protecting IPFs from
extraordinarily costly cases while
ensuring the adequacy of the Federal
per diem base rate for all other cases
that are not outlier cases.
We believe it is necessary to update
the fixed dollar loss threshold amount
PO 00000
Frm 00015
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
46747
because an analysis of the latest
available data (that is, FY 2012 IPF
claims) and rate increases indicate that
adjusting the fixed dollar loss amount is
necessary in order to maintain an outlier
percentage that equals 2 percent of total
estimated IPF PPS payments.
In the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71
FR 27072), we describe the process by
which we calculate the outlier fixed
dollar loss threshold amount. We will
continue to use this process for FY
2014. We begin by simulating aggregate
payments with and without an outlier
policy, and applying an iterative process
to determine an outlier fixed dollar loss
threshold amount that will result in
estimated outlier payments being equal
to 2 percent of total estimated payments
under the simulation. Based on this
process, using the FY 2012 claims data,
we estimate that IPF outlier payments as
a percentage of total estimated payments
are approximately 1.7 percent in FY
2013. Thus, for this notice, we are
updating the FY 2014 IPF outlier
threshold amount to ensure that
estimated FY 2014 outlier payments are
approximately 2 percent of total
estimated IPF payments. The outlier
fixed dollar loss threshold amount of
$11,600 for FY 2013 will be changed to
$10,245 for FY 2014 to increase
estimated outlier payments and thereby
maintain estimated outlier payments at
2 percent of total estimated aggregate
IPF payments for FY 2014.
b. Update to IPF Cost-to-Charge Ratio
Ceilings
As previously stated, under the IPF
PPS, an outlier payment is made if an
IPF’s cost for a stay exceeds a fixed
dollar loss threshold amount. In order to
establish an IPF’s cost for a particular
case, we multiply the IPF’s reported
charges on the discharge bill by its
overall cost-to-charge ratio (CCR). This
approach to determining an IPF’s cost is
consistent with the approach used
under the IPPS and other PPSs. In the
June 2003 IPPS final rule (68 FR 34494),
we implemented changes to the IPPS
policy used to determine CCRs for acute
care hospitals because we became aware
that payment vulnerabilities resulted in
inappropriate outlier payments. Under
the IPPS, we established a statistical
measure of accuracy for CCRs in order
to ensure that aberrant CCR data did not
result in inappropriate outlier
payments.
As we indicated in the November
2004 IPF PPS final rule, because we
believe that the IPF outlier policy is
susceptible to the same payment
vulnerabilities as the IPPS, we adopted
a method to ensure the statistical
accuracy of CCRs under the IPF PPS (69
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
46748
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
FR 66961). Specifically, we adopted the
following procedure in the November
2004 IPF PPS final rule: We calculated
two national ceilings, one for IPFs
located in rural areas and one for IPFs
located in urban areas. We computed
the ceilings by first calculating the
national average and the standard
deviation of the CCR for both urban and
rural IPFs using the most recent CCRs
entered in the CY 2013 Provider
Specific File.
To determine the rural and urban
ceilings, we multiplied each of the
standard deviations by 3 and added the
result to the appropriate national CCR
average (either rural or urban). The
upper threshold CCR for IPFs in FY
2014 is 1.8644 for rural IPFs, and 1.7066
for urban IPFs, based on CBSA-based
geographic designations. If an IPF’s CCR
is above the applicable ceiling, the ratio
is considered statistically inaccurate
and we assign the appropriate national
(either rural or urban) median CCR to
the IPF.
We apply the national CCRs to the
following situations:
++ New IPFs that have not yet
submitted their first Medicare cost
report.
++ IPFs whose overall CCR is in
excess of 3 standard deviations above
the corresponding national geometric
mean (that is, above the ceiling).
++ Other IPFs for which the Medicare
contractor obtains inaccurate or
incomplete data with which to calculate
a CCR.
For new IPFs, we are using these
national CCRs until the facility’s actual
CCR can be computed using the first
tentatively or final settled cost report.
We are not making any changes to the
procedures for updating the CCR
ceilings in FY 2014. However, we are
updating the FY 2014 national median
and ceiling CCRs for urban and rural
IPFs based on the CCRs entered in the
latest available IPF PPS Provider
Specific File. Specifically, for FY 2014,
and to be used in each of the three
situations listed above, using the most
recent CCRs entered in the CY 2013
Provider Specific File we estimate the
national median CCR of 0.6220 for rural
IPFs and the national median CCR of
0.4770 for urban IPFs. These
calculations are based on the IPF’s
location (either urban or rural) using the
CBSA-based geographic designations.
A complete discussion regarding the
national median CCRs appears in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69
FR 66961 through 66964).
2. Expiration of the Stop-Loss Provision
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule, we implemented a stop-loss policy
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
that reduced financial risk to IPFs
projected to experience substantial
reductions in Medicare payments
during the period of transition to the IPF
PPS. This stop-loss policy guaranteed
that each facility received total IPF PPS
payments that were no less than 70
percent of its TEFRA payments had the
IPF PPS not been implemented. This
policy was applied to the IPF PPS
portion of Medicare payments during
the 3-year transition.
In the implementation year, the 70
percent of TEFRA payment stop-loss
policy required a reduction in the
standardized Federal per diem and ECT
base rates of 0.39 percent in order to
make the stop-loss payments budget
neutral. As described in the May 2008
IPF PPS notice for RY 2009, we
increased the Federal per diem base rate
and ECT rate by 0.39 percent because
these rates were reduced by 0.39 percent
in the implementation year to ensure
stop-loss payments were budget neutral.
The stop-loss provision ended during
RY 2009 (that is for discharges occurring
on or after July 1, 2008 through June 30,
2009). The stop-loss policy is no longer
applicable under the IPF PPS.
3. Future Refinements
As we have indicated throughout this
notice, we have delayed making
refinements to the IPF PPS until we
have adequate IPF PPS data on which to
base those refinements. Specifically, we
explained that we will delay updating
the adjustment factors derived from the
regression analysis until we have IPF
PPS data that include as much
information as possible regarding the
patient-level characteristics of the
population that each IPF serves. Now
that we are approximately 8 years into
the system, we believe that we have
enough data to begin that process. We
have begun the necessary analysis to
better understand IPF industry practices
so that we may refine the IPF PPS as
appropriate. Using more recent data, we
plan to re-run the regression analyses
and recalculate the Federal per diem
base rate and the patient-and facilitylevel adjustments. While we are not
making these refinements in this notice,
we expect that in the rulemaking for FY
2015 we will be ready to present the
results of our analysis.
For RY 2012, we published several
areas of concern for future refinement
and we invited comments on these
issues in our RY 2012 proposed and
final rules. For further discussion of
these issues and to review public
comments, we refer readers to the RY
2012 IPF PPS proposed rule (76 FR
4998) and final rule (76 FR 26432).
PO 00000
Frm 00016
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
VIII. Secretary’s Recommendations
Section 1886(e)(4)(A) of the Act
requires the Secretary, taking into
consideration the recommendations of
MedPAC, to recommend update factors
for inpatient hospital services
(including IPFs) for each FY that take
into account the amounts necessary for
the efficient and effective delivery of
medically appropriate and necessary
care of high quality. Section 1886(e)(5)
of the Act requires the Secretary to
publish the recommended and final
update factors in the Federal Register.
In the past, the Secretary’s
recommendations and a discussion
about the MedPAC recommendations
for the IPF PPS were included in the
IPPS proposed and final rules. The
market basket update for the IPF PPS
was also included in the IPPS proposed
and final rules, as well as in the IPF PPS
annual update.
Beginning FY 2013, however, we only
publish the market basket update for the
IPF PPS in the annual IPF PPS FY
update and not in the IPPS proposed
and final rules. Furthermore, for any
years in which MedPAC makes
recommendations for the IPF PPS, those
recommendations will be noted and
considered in the IPF PPS update.
MedPAC did not make any
recommendations for the IPF PPS for FY
2014. For the update to the IPF PPS
standard Federal rate for FY 2014, see
section IV B. of this notice.
IX. Waiver of Notice and Comment
We ordinarily publish a notice of
proposed rulemaking in the Federal
Register to provide a period for public
comment before the provisions of a rule
take effect. We can waive this
procedure, however, if we find good
cause that notice and comment
procedures are impracticable,
unnecessary, or contrary to the public
interest and we incorporate a statement
of finding and its reasons in the notice.
We find it is unnecessary to undertake
notice and comment rulemaking for this
action because the updates in this notice
do not reflect any substantive changes
in policy, but merely reflect the
application of previously established
methodologies. Therefore, under 5
U.S.C 553(b)(3)(B), for good cause, we
waive notice and comment procedures.
X. Collection of Information
Requirements
This notice does not impose any new
or revised information collection,
recordkeeping, or third-party disclosure
requirements. Consequently, it does not
need additional Office of Management
and Budget review under the authority
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
XI. Regulatory Impact Analysis
A. Statement of Need
This notice will update the
prospective payment rates for Medicare
inpatient hospital services provided by
IPF for discharges occurring during the
FY beginning October 1, 2013 through
September 30, 2014. We are applying
the FY 2008-based RPL market basket
increase of 2.6 percent, less the 0.1
percentage point required by sections
1886(s)(2)(A) (ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the
Act and less the productivity
adjustment of 0.5 percentage point as
required by 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
B. Overall Impact
We have examined the impact of this
notice as required by Executive Order
12866 on Regulatory Planning and
Review (September 30, 1993), Executive
Order 13563 on Improving Regulation
and Regulatory Review (January 18,
2011), the Regulatory Flexibility Act
(RFA) (September 19, 1980, Pub. L. 96–
354), section 1102(b) of the Social
Security Act, section 202 of the
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(March 22, 1995; Pub. L. 104–4),
Executive Order 13132 on Federalism
(August 4, 1999) and the Congressional
Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563
direct agencies to assess all costs and
benefits of available regulatory
alternatives and, if regulation is
necessary, to select regulatory
approaches that maximize net benefits
(including potential economic,
environmental, public health and safety
effects, distributive impacts, and
equity). A regulatory impact analysis
(RIA) must be prepared for a major
notice with economically significant
effects ($100 million or more in any 1
year). This notice is designated as
economically ‘‘significant’’ under
section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866.
We estimate that the total impact of
these changes for FY 2014 payments
compared to FY 2013 payments will be
a net increase of approximately $115
million. This reflects a $100 million
increase from the update to the payment
rates, as well as, a $15 million increase
as a result of the update to the outlier
threshold amount. Outlier payments are
estimated to increase from 1.7 percent
in FY 2013 to 2.0 percent in FY 2014.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze
options for regulatory relief of small
entities, if a rule has a significant impact
on a substantial number of small
entities. For purposes of the RFA, small
entities include small businesses,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
nonprofit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. Most IPFs
and most other providers and suppliers
are small entities, either by nonprofit
status or having revenues of $7 million
to $34.5 million or less in any 1 year
depending on industry classification
(for details, refer to the SBA Small
Business Size Standards found at
https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/
files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf), or
being nonprofit organizations that are
not dominant in their markets.’’
Because we lack data on individual
hospital receipts, we cannot determine
the number of small proprietary IPFs or
the proportion of IPFs’ revenue that is
derived from Medicare payments.
Therefore, we assume that all IPFs are
considered small entities. The
Department of Health and Human
Services generally uses a revenue
impact of 3 to 5 percent as a significance
threshold under the RFA.
As shown in Table 7, we estimate that
the overall revenue impact of this notice
on all IPFs is to increase Medicare
payments by approximately 2.3 percent.
As a result, since the estimated impact
of this notice is a net increase in
revenue across all categories of IPFs, the
Secretary has determined that this
notice will have a positive revenue
impact on a substantial number of small
entities. Medicare fiscal intermediaries,
Medicare Administrative Contractors,
and Carriers are not considered to be
small entities. Individuals and States are
not included in the definition of a small
entity.
In addition, section 1102(b) of the
Social Security Act requires us to
prepare a regulatory impact analysis if
a rule may have a significant impact on
the operations of a substantial number
of small rural hospitals. This analysis
must conform to the provisions of
section 604 of the RFA. For purposes of
section 1102(b) of the Act, we define a
small rural hospital as a hospital that is
located outside of a metropolitan
statistical area and has fewer than 100
beds. As discussed in detail below, the
rates and policies set forth in this notice
will not have an adverse impact on the
rural hospitals based on the data of the
309 rural units and 73 rural hospitals in
our database of 1,624 IPFs for which
data were available. Therefore, the
Secretary has determined that this
notice will not have a significant impact
on the operations of a substantial
number of small rural hospitals.
Section 202 of the Unfunded
Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA)
also requires that agencies assess
anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule whose mandates
require spending in any 1 year of $100
PO 00000
Frm 00017
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
46749
million in 1995 dollars, updated
annually for inflation. In 2014, that
threshold is approximately $141
million. This notice will not impose
spending costs on state, local, or tribal
governments in the aggregate, or by the
private sector, of $141 million.
Executive Order 13132 establishes
certain requirements that an agency
must meet when it promulgates a
proposed rule (and subsequent final
rule) that imposes substantial direct
requirement costs on state and local
governments, preempts state law, or
otherwise has Federalism implications.
As stated above, this notice would not
have a substantial effect on state and
local governments.
C. Anticipated Effects
We discuss the historical background
of the IPF PPS and the impact of this
notice on the Federal Medicare budget
and on IPFs.
1. Budgetary Impact
As discussed in the November 2004
and May 2006 IPF PPS final rules, we
applied a budget neutrality factor to the
Federal per diem and ECT base rates to
ensure that total estimated payments
under the IPF PPS in the
implementation period would equal the
amount that would have been paid if the
IPF PPS had not been implemented. The
budget neutrality factor includes the
following components: outlier
adjustment, stop-loss adjustment, and
the behavioral offset. As discussed in
the May 2008 IPF PPS notice (73 FR
25711), the stop-loss adjustment is no
longer applicable under the IPF PPS.
In accordance with § 412.424(c)(3)(ii),
we indicated that we will evaluate the
accuracy of the budget neutrality
adjustment within the first 5 years after
implementation of the payment system.
We may make a one-time prospective
adjustment to the Federal per diem and
ECT base rates to account for differences
between the historical data on costbased TEFRA payments (the basis of the
budget neutrality adjustment) and
estimates of TEFRA payments based on
actual data from the first year of the IPF
PPS. As part of that process, we will
reassess the accuracy of all of the factors
impacting budget neutrality. In
addition, as discussed in section VII.C.1
of this notice, we are using the wage
index and labor-related share in a
budget neutral manner by applying a
wage index budget neutrality factor to
the Federal per diem and ECT base
rates. Therefore, the budgetary impact to
the Medicare program of this notice will
be due to the market basket update for
FY 2014 of 2.6 percent (see section V.B.
of this notice) less the ‘‘other
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46750
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
adjustment’’ of 0.1 percentage point
according to sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii)
and 1886 (s)(3)(B) of the Act, less the
productivity adjustment of 0.5
percentage point required by section
1886 (s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, and the
update to the outlier fixed dollar loss
threshold amount.
We estimate that the FY 2014 impact
will be a net increase of $115 million in
payments to IPF providers. This reflects
an estimated $100 million increase from
the update to the payment rates and a
$15 million increase due to the update
to the outlier threshold amount to
increase outlier payments from
approximately 1.7 percent in FY 2013 to
2.0 percent in FY 2014.
2. Impact on Providers
To understand the impact of the
changes to the IPF PPS on providers,
discussed in this notice, it is necessary
to compare estimated payments under
the IPF PPS rates and factors for FY
2014 versus those under FY 2013. The
estimated payments for FY 2013 and FY
2014 will be 100 percent of the IPF PPS
payment, since the transition period has
ended and stop-loss payments are no
longer paid. We determined the percent
change of estimated FY 2014 IPF PPS
payments to FY 2013 IPF PPS payments
for each category of IPFs. In addition,
for each category of IPFs, we have
included the estimated percent change
in payments resulting from the update
to the outlier fixed dollar loss threshold
amount, the labor-related share and
wage index changes for the FY 2014 IPF
PPS, and the market basket update for
FY 2014, as adjusted by the ‘‘other
adjustment’’ according to sections
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the
Act and the productivity adjustment
according to section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i).
To illustrate the impacts of the FY
2014 changes in this notice, our analysis
begins with a FY 2013 baseline
simulation model based on FY 2012 IPF
payments inflated to the midpoint of FY
2013 using IHS Global Insight Inc.’s
most recent forecast of the market basket
update (see section V.B. of this notice);
the estimated outlier payments in FY
2013; the CBSA designations for IPFs
based on OMB’s MSA definitions after
June 2003; the FY 2012 pre-floor, prereclassified hospital wage index; the FY
2013 labor-related share; and the FY
2013 percentage amount of the rural
adjustment. During the simulation, the
total estimated outlier payments are
maintained at 2 percent of total IPF PPS
payments.
Each of the following changes is
added incrementally to this baseline
model in order for us to isolate the
effects of each change:
• The update to the outlier fixed
dollar loss threshold amount.
• The FY 2013 pre-floor, prereclassified hospital wage index and FY
2014 labor-related share.
• The market basket update for FY
2014 of 2.6 percent less the ‘‘other
adjustment’’ of 0.1 percentage point in
accordance with sections
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the
Act and less the productivity
adjustment of 0.5 percentage point
reduction in accordance with section
1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act.
Our final comparison illustrates the
percent change in payments from FY
2013 (that is, October 1, 2012 to
September 30, 2013) to FY 2014 (that is,
October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2014)
including all the changes in this notice.
TABLE 7—IPF IMPACT TABLE FOR FY 2014
Projected Impacts (% Change In Columns 3–6)
Number of
facilities
Outlier
CBSA wage
index &
labor share
Adjusted
market basket
update 1
Total percent
change 2
(1)
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
Facility by type
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
All Facilities ..........................................................................
Total Urban ..........................................................................
Total Rural ...........................................................................
Urban unit ............................................................................
Urban hospital ......................................................................
Rural unit ..............................................................................
Rural hospital .......................................................................
By Type of Ownership:
Freestanding IPFs:
Urban Psychiatric Hospitals:
Government ...........................................................
Non-Profit ...............................................................
For-Profit ................................................................
Rural Psychiatric Hospitals:
Government ...........................................................
Non-Profit ...............................................................
For-Profit ................................................................
IPF Units:
Urban:
Government ...........................................................
Non-Profit ...............................................................
For-Profit ................................................................
Rural:
Government ...........................................................
Non-Profit ...............................................................
For-Profit ................................................................
Unknown Ownership Type ...................................................
By Teaching Status:
Non-teaching .................................................................
Less than 10% interns and residents to beds ..............
10% to 30% interns and residents to beds ..................
More than 30% interns and residents to beds .............
By Region:
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00018
1,624
1,242
382
834
408
309
73
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.4
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.0
0.0
¥0.1
0.0
0.0
¥0.1
¥0.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.3
2.3
2.1
2.5
2.1
2.2
2.0
130
99
177
0.3
0.1
0.1
¥0.1
0.2
0.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.2
2.2
2.0
36
13
23
0.5
0.1
0.1
¥0.4
0.0
¥0.1
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.0
131
548
155
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.1
0.1
¥0.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.9
2.5
2.0
80
163
66
3
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.0
¥0.1
0.0
¥0.1
0.2
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.2
2.2
1,419
109
70
26
0.2
0.5
0.5
0.9
0.0
0.0
0.1
0.5
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.2
2.5
2.6
3.5
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46751
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 7—IPF IMPACT TABLE FOR FY 2014—Continued
Projected Impacts (% Change In Columns 3–6)
Facility by type
Number of
facilities
Outlier
CBSA wage
index &
labor share
Adjusted
market basket
update 1
Total percent
change 2
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
New England ................................................................
Mid-Atlantic ...................................................................
South Atlantic ................................................................
East North Central ........................................................
East South Central .......................................................
West North Central .......................................................
West South Central ......................................................
Mountain .......................................................................
Pacific ...........................................................................
By Bed Size:
Psychiatric Hospitals:
Beds: 0–24 ............................................................
Beds: 25–49 ..........................................................
Beds: 50–75 ..........................................................
Beds: 76 + .............................................................
Psychiatric Units:
Beds: 0–24 ............................................................
Beds: 25–49 ..........................................................
Beds: 50–75 ..........................................................
Beds: 76 + .............................................................
111
256
233
258
171
139
234
99
123
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.5
¥0.1
¥0.3
0.1
¥0.7
0.2
¥0.2
¥0.6
0.9
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
3.0
2.3
1.9
2.4
1.6
2.5
1.9
1.7
3.5
82
75
79
245
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.1
¥0.3
¥0.1
0.0
0.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
1.9
1.9
2.2
2.1
684
306
94
59
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.2
¥0.1
0.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.0
2.4
2.5
2.2
2.6
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
1 This column reflects the payment update impact of the RPL market basket update for FY 2014 of 2.6 percent, a 0.1 percentage point reduction in accordance with sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act, and a 0.5 percentage point reduction for the productivity adjustment as required by section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act.
2 Percent changes in estimated payments from FY 2013 to FY 2014 include all of the changes presented in this notice. Note, the products of
these impacts may be different from the percentage changes shown here due to rounding effects.
3. Results
Table 7 above displays the results of
our analysis. The table groups IPFs into
the categories listed below based on
characteristics provided in the Provider
of Services (POS) file, the IPF provider
specific file, and cost report data from
HCRIS:
• Facility Type
• Location
• Teaching Status Adjustment
• Census Region
• Size
The top row of the table shows the
overall impact on the 1,624 IPFs
included in this analysis.
In column 3, we present the effects of
the update to the outlier fixed dollar
loss threshold amount. We estimate that
IPF outlier payments as a percentage of
total IPF payments are 1.7 percent in FY
2013. Thus, we are adjusting the outlier
threshold amount in this notice to set
total estimated outlier payments equal
to 2 percent of total payments in FY
2014. The estimated change in total IPF
payments for FY 2014, therefore,
includes an approximate 0.3 percent
increase in payments because the outlier
portion of total payments is expected to
increase from approximately 1.7 percent
to 2 percent.
The overall impact of this outlier
adjustment update (as shown in column
3 of table 7), across all hospital groups,
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
is to increase total estimated payments
to IPFs by 0.3 percent. We do not
estimate that any group of IPFs will
experience a decrease in payments from
this update. The largest increase in
payments is estimated to reflect a 0.9
percent increase in payments for IPFs
located in teaching hospitals with an
intern and resident ADC ratio greater
than 30 percent.
In column 4, we present the effects of
the budget-neutral update to the laborrelated share and the wage index
adjustment under the CBSA geographic
area definitions announced by OMB in
June 2003. This is a comparison of the
simulated FY 2014 payments under the
FY 2013 hospital wage index under
CBSA classification and associated
labor-related share to the simulated FY
2013 payments under the FY 2012
hospital wage index under CBSA
classifications and associated laborrelated share. We note that there is no
projected change in aggregate payments
to IPFs, as indicated in the first row of
column 4. However, there will be small
distributional effects among different
categories of IPFs. For example, we
estimate the largest increase in
payments to be a 0.9 percent increase
for IPFs in the Pacific region and the
largest decrease in payments to be a 0.7
percent decrease for IPFs in the East
South Central region.
PO 00000
Frm 00019
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
Column 5 shows the estimated effect
of the update to the IPF PPS payment
rates, which includes a 2.6 percent
market basket update less the 0.1
percentage point in accordance with
section 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and
1886(s)(3)(B) and less the productivity
adjustment of 0.5 percentage point in
accordance with section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i).
Column 6 compares our estimates of
the total changes reflected in this notice
for FY 2014, to our payments for FY
2013 (without these changes). This
column reflects all FY 2014 changes
relative to FY 2013. The average
estimated increase for all IPFs is
approximately 2.3 percent. This
estimated net increase includes the
effects of the 2.6 percent market basket
update adjusted by the ‘‘other
adjustment’’ of minus 0.1 percentage
point, as required by sections
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the
Act and the productivity adjustment of
minus 0.5 percentage point, as required
by section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act. It
also includes the overall estimated 0.3
percent increase in estimated IPF outlier
payments from the update to the outlier
fixed dollar loss threshold amount.
Since we are making the updates to the
IPF labor-related share and wage index
in a budget-neutral manner, they will
not affect total estimated IPF payments
in the aggregate. However, they will
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46752
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
affect the estimated distribution of
payments among providers.
Overall, no IPFs are estimated to
experience a net decrease in payments
as a result of the updates in this notice.
IPFs in urban areas will experience a 2.3
percent increase and IPFs in rural areas
will experience a 2.1 percent increase.
The largest payment increase is
estimated at 3.5 percent for IPFs located
in teaching hospitals with an intern and
resident ADC ratio greater than 30
percent and IPFs in the Pacific region.
This is due to the larger than average
positive effect of the CBSA wage index
and labor-related share updates and the
higher volume of outlier payments for
IPFs in these categories.
4. Effect on the Medicare Program
Based on actuarial projections
resulting from our experience with other
PPSs, we estimate that Medicare
spending (total Medicare program
payments) for IPF services over the next
5 years would be as shown in Table 8
below.
TABLE 8—ESTIMATED PAYMENTS
SHOWN IN CURRENT YEAR DOLLARS
Fiscal year
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Dollars in
millions
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
..........................................
5,420
5,910
6,500
7,090
7,570
These estimates are based on the
current forecast of the increases in the
RPL market basket, including an
adjustment for productivity, for the FY
beginning in 2014 and each subsequent
RY, as required by section
1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, as follows:
• 2.1 percent for FY 2014.
• 2.3 percent for FY 2015.
• 2.6 percent for FY 2016.
• 2.6 percent for FY 2017.
• 2.5 percent for FY 2018.
The estimates in Table 8 also include
the application of the ‘‘other
adjustment,’’ as required by sections
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the
Act, as follows:
• ¥0.3 percentage point for rate years
beginning in 2014.
• ¥0.2 percentage point for rate years
beginning in 2015.
• ¥0.2 percentage point for rate years
beginning in 2016.
• ¥0.75 percentage point for rate
years beginning in 2017.
• ¥0.75 percentage point for rate
years beginning in 2018.
We estimate that there would be a
change in fee-for-service Medicare
beneficiary enrollment as follows:
• 2.2 percent in FY 2014.
• 4.1 percent in FY 2015.
• 5.0 percent in FY 2016.
• 5.5 percent in FY 2017.
• 4.4 percent in FY 2018.
5. Effect on Beneficiaries
Under the IPF PPS, IPFs will receive
payment based on the average resources
consumed by patients for each day. We
do not expect changes in the quality of
care or access to services for Medicare
beneficiaries under the FY 2014 IPF PPS
but we continue to expect that paying
prospectively for IPF services would
enhance the efficiency of the Medicare
program.
D. Alternatives Considered
The statute does not specify an update
strategy for the IPF PPS and is broadly
written to give the Secretary discretion
in establishing an update methodology.
Therefore, we are updating the IPF PPS
using the methodology published in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule.
Lastly, no alternative policy options
were considered in this notice, since
this notice does not initiate policy
changes with regard to the IPF PPS. This
notice simply provides an update to the
rates for FY 2014.
E. Accounting Statement
As required by OMB Circular A–4
(available at https://
www.whitehouse.gov/omb/
circulars_a004_a-4), in Table 9 below,
we have prepared an accounting
statement showing the classification of
the expenditures associated with the
provisions of this notice. This table
provides our best estimate of the
increase in Medicare payments under
the IPF PPS as a result of the changes
presented in this notice and based on
the data for 1,624 IPFs in our database.
All expenditures are classified as
Federal transfers to IPF Medicare
providers.
TABLE 9—ACCOUNTING STATEMENT: CLASSIFICATION OF ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES, FROM THE 2013 IPF PPS FY TO
THE 2014 IPF PPS FY
[In millions]
Category
Transfers
Annualized Monetized Transfers ............................................................................................
From Whom To Whom? .........................................................................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
In accordance with the provisions of
Executive Order 12866, this notice was
reviewed by the Office of Management
and Budget.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance
Program No. 93.773, Medicare—Hospital
Insurance; and Program No. 93.774,
Medicare—Supplementary Medical
Insurance Program)
$115.
Federal Government to IPF Medicare Providers.
Dated: May 29, 2013.
Marilyn Tavenner,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services.
Approved: June 28, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.
Addendum A—Rate and Adjustment
Factors
Per Diem Rate:
Federal Per Diem Base Rate—$713.19
Labor Share—(0.69494)—$495.62
Non-Labor Share (0.30506)—$217.57
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00020
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
Per Diem Rate Applying the 2
Percentage Point Reduction:
Federal Per Diem Base Rate—$699.21
Labor Share (0.69494)—$485.91
Non-Labor Share (0.30506)—$213.30
Fixed Dollar Loss Threshold Amount:
$10,245
Wage Index Budget Neutrality Factor:
1.0010
Facility Adjustments:
Rural Adjustment Factor—1.17
Teaching Adjustment Factor—0.5150
Wage Index—Pre-reclass Hospital
Wage Index (FY2013)
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
46753
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
COST OF LIVING ADJUSTMENTS (COLAS)
Cost of living
adjustment factor
Area
Alaska:
City of Anchorage and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road .............................................................................................
City of Fairbanks and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road ..............................................................................................
City of Juneau and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road ..................................................................................................
Rest of Alaska ......................................................................................................................................................................
Hawaii:
City and County of Honolulu ................................................................................................................................................
County of Hawaii ..................................................................................................................................................................
County of Kauai ....................................................................................................................................................................
County of Maui and County of Kalawao ..............................................................................................................................
Patient Adjustments:
ECT—Per Treatment—$307.04
ECT—Per Treatment Applying the 2
Percentage Point Reduction—
1.23
1.23
1.23
1.25
1.25
1.18
1.25
1.25
$301.02
VARIABLE PER DIEM ADJUSTMENTS
Adjustment
factor
Day 1—Facility Without a Qualifying Emergency Department ...............................................................................................................
Day 1—Facility With a Qualifying Emergency Department ....................................................................................................................
Day 2 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 3 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 4 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 5 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 6 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 7 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 8 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 9 .......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 10 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 11 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 12 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 13 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 14 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 15 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 16 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 17 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 18 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 19 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 20 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
Day 21 .....................................................................................................................................................................................................
After Day 21 .............................................................................................................................................................................................
1.19
1.31
1.12
1.08
1.05
1.04
1.02
1.01
1.01
1.00
1.00
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.99
0.98
0.97
0.97
0.96
0.95
0.95
0.95
0.92
AGE ADJUSTMENTS
Age
(in years)
Adjustment
factor
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
Under 45 ..................................................................................................................................................................................................
45 and under 50 ......................................................................................................................................................................................
50 and under 55 ......................................................................................................................................................................................
55 and under 60 ......................................................................................................................................................................................
60 and under 65 ......................................................................................................................................................................................
65 and under 70 ......................................................................................................................................................................................
70 and under 75 ......................................................................................................................................................................................
75 and under 80 ......................................................................................................................................................................................
80 and over ..............................................................................................................................................................................................
1.00
1.01
1.02
1.04
1.07
1.10
1.13
1.15
1.17
DRG ADJUSTMENTS
Adjustment
factor
MS–DRG
MS–DRG descriptions
056 .................
057 .................
080 .................
Degenerative nervous system disorders w MCC .......................................................................................................
Degenerative nervous system disorders w/o MCC ....................................................................................................
Nontraumatic stupor & coma w MCC .........................................................................................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
18:54 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00021
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
1.05
1.07
46754
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
DRG ADJUSTMENTS—Continued
MS–DRG
081
876
880
881
882
883
884
885
886
887
894
895
896
897
Adjustment
factor
MS–DRG descriptions
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
.................
Nontraumatic stupor & coma w/o MCC ......................................................................................................................
O.R. procedure w principal diagnoses of mental illness ............................................................................................
Acute adjustment reaction & psychosocial dysfunction ..............................................................................................
Depressive neuroses ...................................................................................................................................................
Neuroses except depressive .......................................................................................................................................
Disorders of personality & impulse control .................................................................................................................
Organic disturbances & mental retardation ................................................................................................................
Psychoses ...................................................................................................................................................................
Behavioral & developmental disorders .......................................................................................................................
Other mental disorder diagnoses ................................................................................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence, left AMA ............................................................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w rehabilitation therapy ......................................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation therapy w MCC .....................................................................
Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation therapy w/o MCC ..................................................................
1.22
1.05
0.99
1.02
1.02
1.03
1.00
0.99
0.92
0.97
1.02
0.88
COMORBIDITY ADJUSTMENTS
Adjustment
factor
Comorbidity
Developmental Disabilities .......................................................................................................................................................................
Coagulation Factor Deficit .......................................................................................................................................................................
Tracheostomy ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
Eating and Conduct Disorders ................................................................................................................................................................
Infectious Diseases ..................................................................................................................................................................................
Renal Failure, Acute ................................................................................................................................................................................
Renal Failure, Chronic .............................................................................................................................................................................
Oncology Treatment ................................................................................................................................................................................
Uncontrolled Diabetes Mellitus ................................................................................................................................................................
Severe Protein Malnutrition .....................................................................................................................................................................
Drug/Alcohol Induced Mental Disorders ..................................................................................................................................................
Cardiac Conditions ..................................................................................................................................................................................
Gangrene .................................................................................................................................................................................................
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease .................................................................................................................................................
Artificial Openings—Digestive & Urinary .................................................................................................................................................
Severe Musculoskeletal & Connective Tissue Diseases ........................................................................................................................
Poisoning .................................................................................................................................................................................................
Addendum B—FY 2014 CBSA Wage
Index Tables
In this addendum, we provide the
wage index tables referred to in the
preamble to this notice. The tables
presented below are as follows:
Table1—FY 2014 Wage Index For
Urban Areas Based on CBSA Labor
Market Areas.
1.04
1.13
1.06
1.12
1.07
1.11
1.11
1.07
1.05
1.13
1.03
1.11
1.10
1.12
1.08
1.09
1.11
Table 2—FY 2014 Wage Index Based
On CBSA Labor Market Areas For Rural
Areas.
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
10180 .......................................................
Abilene, TX ....................................................................................................................
Callahan County, TX.
Jones County, TX.
Taylor County, TX.
´
Aguadilla-Isabela-San Sebastian, PR ...........................................................................
Aguada Municipio, PR.
Aguadilla Municipio, PR.
˜
Anasco Municipio, PR.
Isabela Municipio, PR.
Lares Municipio, PR.
Moca Municipio, PR.
´
Rincon Municipio, PR.
´
San Sebastian Municipio, PR.
Akron, OH ......................................................................................................................
Portage County, OH.
Summit County, OH.
Albany, GA ....................................................................................................................
Baker County, GA.
Dougherty County, GA.
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
10380 .......................................................
10420 .......................................................
10500 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00022
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
0.8324
0.3532
0.8729
0.8435
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46755
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
10580 .......................................................
10740 .......................................................
10780 .......................................................
10900 .......................................................
11020 .......................................................
11100 .......................................................
11180 .......................................................
11260 .......................................................
11300 .......................................................
11340 .......................................................
11460 .......................................................
11500 .......................................................
11540 .......................................................
11700 .......................................................
12020 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
12060 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Lee County, GA.
Terrell County, GA.
Worth County, GA.
Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY ......................................................................................
Albany County, NY.
Rensselaer County, NY.
Saratoga County, NY.
Schenectady County, NY.
Schoharie County, NY.
Albuquerque, NM ..........................................................................................................
Bernalillo County, NM.
Sandoval County, NM.
Torrance County, NM.
Valencia County, NM.
Alexandria, LA ...............................................................................................................
Grant Parish, LA.
Rapides Parish, LA.
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ ............................................................................
Warren County, NJ.
Carbon County, PA.
Lehigh County, PA.
Northampton County, PA.
Altoona, PA ...................................................................................................................
Blair County, PA.
Amarillo, TX ...................................................................................................................
Armstrong County, TX.
Carson County, TX.
Potter County, TX.
Randall County, TX.
Ames, IA ........................................................................................................................
Story County, IA.
Anchorage, AK ..............................................................................................................
Anchorage Municipality, AK.
Matanuska-Susitna Borough, AK.
Anderson, IN .................................................................................................................
Madison County, IN.
Anderson, SC ................................................................................................................
Anderson County, SC.
Ann Arbor, MI ................................................................................................................
Washtenaw County, MI.
Anniston-Oxford, AL ......................................................................................................
Calhoun County, AL.
Appleton, WI ..................................................................................................................
Calumet County, WI.
Outagamie County, WI.
Asheville, NC .................................................................................................................
Buncombe County, NC.
Haywood County, NC.
Henderson County, NC.
Madison County, NC.
Athens-Clarke County, GA ............................................................................................
Clarke County, GA.
Madison County, GA.
Oconee County, GA.
Oglethorpe County, GA.
Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA .............................................................................
Barrow County, GA.
Bartow County, GA.
Butts County, GA.
Carroll County, GA.
Cherokee County, GA.
Clayton County, GA.
Cobb County, GA.
Coweta County, GA.
Dawson County, GA.
DeKalb County, GA.
Douglas County, GA.
Fayette County, GA.
Forsyth County, GA.
Fulton County, GA.
Gwinnett County, GA.
PO 00000
Frm 00023
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.8647
0.9542
0.7857
0.9084
0.8898
0.8506
0.9595
1.2147
0.9547
0.8929
1.0115
0.7539
0.9268
0.8555
0.9488
0.9517
46756
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
12100 .......................................................
12220 .......................................................
12260 .......................................................
12420 .......................................................
12540 .......................................................
12580 .......................................................
12620 .......................................................
12700 .......................................................
12940 .......................................................
12980 .......................................................
13020 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
13140 .......................................................
13380 .......................................................
13460 .......................................................
13644 .......................................................
13740 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Haralson County, GA.
Heard County, GA.
Henry County, GA.
Jasper County, GA.
Lamar County, GA.
Meriwether County, GA.
Newton County, GA.
Paulding County, GA.
Pickens County, GA.
Pike County, GA.
Rockdale County, GA.
Spalding County, GA.
Walton County, GA.
Atlantic City-Hammonton, NJ ........................................................................................
Atlantic County, NJ.
Auburn-Opelika, AL .......................................................................................................
Lee County, AL.
Augusta-Richmond County, GA-SC ..............................................................................
Burke County, GA.
Columbia County, GA.
McDuffie County, GA.
Richmond County, GA.
Aiken County, SC.
Edgefield County, SC.
Austin-Round Rock, TX .................................................................................................
Bastrop County, TX.
Caldwell County, TX.
Hays County, TX.
Travis County, TX.
Williamson County, TX.
Bakersfield, CA ..............................................................................................................
Kern County, CA.
Baltimore-Towson, MD ..................................................................................................
Anne Arundel County, MD.
Baltimore County, MD.
Carroll County, MD.
Harford County, MD.
Howard County, MD.
Queen Anne’s County, MD.
Baltimore City, MD.
Bangor, ME ...................................................................................................................
Penobscot County, ME.
Barnstable Town, MA ....................................................................................................
Barnstable County, MA.
Baton Rouge, LA ...........................................................................................................
Ascension Parish, LA.
East Baton Rouge Parish, LA.
East Feliciana Parish, LA.
Iberville Parish, LA.
Livingston Parish, LA.
Pointe Coupee Parish, LA.
St. Helena Parish, LA.
West Baton Rouge Parish, LA.
West Feliciana Parish, LA.
Battle Creek, MI ............................................................................................................
Calhoun County, MI.
Bay City, MI ...................................................................................................................
Bay County, MI.
Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX .............................................................................................
Hardin County, TX.
Jefferson County, TX.
Orange County, TX.
Bellingham, WA .............................................................................................................
Whatcom County, WA.
Bend, OR .......................................................................................................................
Deschutes County, OR.
Bethesda-Frederick-Gaithersburg, MD .........................................................................
Frederick County, MD.
Montgomery County, MD.
Billings, MT ....................................................................................................................
Carbon County, MT.
PO 00000
Frm 00024
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
1.1977
0.7437
0.9373
0.9746
1.1611
1.0147
1.0184
1.2843
0.8147
0.9912
0.9181
0.8533
1.1415
1.1119
1.0374
0.8737
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46757
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
13780 .......................................................
13820 .......................................................
13900 .......................................................
13980 .......................................................
14020 .......................................................
14060 .......................................................
14260 .......................................................
14484 .......................................................
14500 .......................................................
14540 .......................................................
14740 .......................................................
14860 .......................................................
15180 .......................................................
15260 .......................................................
15380 .......................................................
15500 .......................................................
15540 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
15764 .......................................................
15804 .......................................................
15940 .......................................................
15980 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Yellowstone County, MT.
Binghamton, NY ............................................................................................................
Broome County, NY.
Tioga County, NY.
Birmingham-Hoover, AL ................................................................................................
Bibb County, AL.
Blount County, AL.
Chilton County, AL.
Jefferson County, AL.
St. Clair County, AL.
Shelby County, AL.
Walker County, AL.
Bismarck, ND ................................................................................................................
Burleigh County, ND.
Morton County, ND.
Blacksburg-Christiansburg-Radford, VA .......................................................................
Giles County, VA.
Montgomery County, VA.
Pulaski County, VA.
Radford City, VA.
Bloomington, IN .............................................................................................................
Greene County, IN.
Monroe County, IN.
Owen County, IN.
Bloomington-Normal, IL .................................................................................................
McLean County, IL.
Boise City-Nampa, ID ....................................................................................................
Ada County, ID.
Boise County, ID.
Canyon County, ID.
Gem County, ID.
Owyhee County, ID.
Boston-Quincy, MA .......................................................................................................
Norfolk County, MA.
Plymouth County, MA.
Suffolk County, MA.
Boulder, CO ...................................................................................................................
Boulder County, CO.
Bowling Green, KY ........................................................................................................
Edmonson County, KY.
Warren County, KY.
Bremerton-Silverdale, WA .............................................................................................
Kitsap County, WA.
Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT .................................................................................
Fairfield County, CT.
Brownsville-Harlingen, TX .............................................................................................
Cameron County, TX.
Brunswick, GA ...............................................................................................................
Brantley County, GA.
Glynn County, GA.
McIntosh County, GA.
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY ..............................................................................................
Erie County, NY.
Niagara County, NY.
Burlington, NC ...............................................................................................................
Alamance County, NC.
Burlington-South Burlington, VT ....................................................................................
Chittenden County, VT.
Franklin County, VT.
Grand Isle County, VT.
Cambridge-Newton-Framingham, MA ...........................................................................
Middlesex County, MA.
Camden, NJ ..................................................................................................................
Burlington County, NJ.
Camden County, NJ.
Gloucester County, NJ.
Canton-Massillon, OH ...................................................................................................
Carroll County, OH.
Stark County, OH.
Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL ...........................................................................................
Lee County, FL.
PO 00000
Frm 00025
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.8707
0.8516
0.7261
0.8348
0.8752
0.9502
0.8897
1.2378
1.0574
0.8665
1.0829
1.3170
0.8612
0.8792
0.9999
0.8485
0.9997
1.1262
1.0474
0.8834
0.9153
46758
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
16020 .......................................................
Cape Girardeau-Jackson, MO-IL ..................................................................................
Alexander County, IL.
Bollinger County, MO.
Cape Girardeau County, MO.
Carson City, NV ............................................................................................................
Carson City, NV.
Casper, WY ...................................................................................................................
Natrona County, WY.
Cedar Rapids, IA ...........................................................................................................
Benton County, IA.
Jones County, IA.
Linn County, IA.
Champaign-Urbana, IL ..................................................................................................
Champaign County, IL.
Ford County, IL.
Piatt County, IL.
Charleston, WV .............................................................................................................
Boone County, WV.
Clay County, WV.
Kanawha County, WV.
Lincoln County, WV.
Putnam County, WV.
Charleston-North Charleston-Summerville, SC ............................................................
Berkeley County, SC.
Charleston County, SC.
Dorchester County, SC.
Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC ............................................................................
Anson County, NC.
Cabarrus County, NC.
Gaston County, NC.
Mecklenburg County, NC.
Union County, NC.
York County, SC.
Charlottesville, VA .........................................................................................................
Albemarle County, VA.
Fluvanna County, VA.
Greene County, VA.
Nelson County, VA.
Charlottesville City, VA.
Chattanooga, TN-GA .....................................................................................................
Catoosa County, GA.
Dade County, GA.
Walker County, GA.
Hamilton County, TN.
Marion County, TN.
Sequatchie County, TN.
Cheyenne, WY ..............................................................................................................
Laramie County, WY.
Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IL .........................................................................................
Cook County, IL.
DeKalb County, IL.
DuPage County, IL.
Grundy County, IL.
Kane County, IL.
Kendall County, IL.
McHenry County, IL.
Will County, IL.
Chico, CA ......................................................................................................................
Butte County, CA.
Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN .................................................................................
Dearborn County, IN.
Franklin County, IN.
Ohio County, IN.
Boone County, KY.
Bracken County, KY.
Campbell County, KY.
Gallatin County, KY.
Grant County, KY.
Kenton County, KY.
Pendleton County, KY.
Brown County, OH.
16180 .......................................................
16220 .......................................................
16300 .......................................................
16580 .......................................................
16620 .......................................................
16700 .......................................................
16740 .......................................................
16820 .......................................................
16860 .......................................................
16940 .......................................................
16974 .......................................................
17020 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
17140 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00026
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
0.8860
1.0559
1.0143
0.8944
0.9907
0.8050
0.8820
0.9215
0.9195
0.8678
0.9730
1.0600
1.1197
0.9508
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46759
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
17300 .......................................................
17420 .......................................................
17460 .......................................................
17660 .......................................................
17780 .......................................................
17820 .......................................................
17860 .......................................................
17900 .......................................................
17980 .......................................................
18020 .......................................................
18140 .......................................................
18580 .......................................................
18700 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
18880 .......................................................
19060 .......................................................
19124 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Butler County, OH.
Clermont County, OH.
Hamilton County, OH.
Warren County, OH.
Clarksville, TN-KY .........................................................................................................
Christian County, KY.
Trigg County, KY.
Montgomery County, TN.
Stewart County, TN.
Cleveland, TN ................................................................................................................
Bradley County, TN.
Polk County, TN.
Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH ........................................................................................
Cuyahoga County, OH.
Geauga County, OH.
Lake County, OH.
Lorain County, OH.
Medina County, OH.
Coeur d’Alene, ID ..........................................................................................................
Kootenai County, ID.
College Station-Bryan, TX .............................................................................................
Brazos County, TX.
Burleson County, TX.
Robertson County, TX.
Colorado Springs, CO ...................................................................................................
El Paso County, CO.
Teller County, CO.
Columbia, MO ...............................................................................................................
Boone County, MO.
Howard County, MO.
Columbia, SC ................................................................................................................
Calhoun County, SC.
Fairfield County, SC.
Kershaw County, SC.
Lexington County, SC.
Richland County, SC.
Saluda County, SC.
Columbus, GA-AL .........................................................................................................
Russell County, AL.
Chattahoochee County, GA.
Harris County, GA.
Marion County, GA.
Muscogee County, GA.
Columbus, IN .................................................................................................................
Bartholomew County, IN.
Columbus, OH ...............................................................................................................
Delaware County, OH.
Fairfield County, OH.
Franklin County, OH.
Licking County, OH.
Madison County, OH.
Morrow County, OH.
Pickaway County, OH.
Union County, OH.
Corpus Christi, TX .........................................................................................................
Aransas County, TX.
Nueces County, TX.
San Patricio County, TX.
Corvallis, OR .................................................................................................................
Benton County, OR.
Crestview-Fort Walton Beach-Destin, FL ......................................................................
Okaloosa County, FL.
Cumberland, MD-WV ....................................................................................................
Allegany County, MD.
Mineral County, WV.
Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX .................................................................................................
Collin County, TX.
Dallas County, TX.
Delta County, TX.
Denton County, TX.
Ellis County, TX.
PO 00000
Frm 00027
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.8082
0.7592
0.9082
0.9218
0.9584
0.9364
0.8339
0.8560
0.8857
0.9564
0.9763
0.8591
1.0715
0.8916
0.8836
0.9835
46760
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
19140 .......................................................
19180 .......................................................
19260 .......................................................
19340 .......................................................
19380 .......................................................
19460 .......................................................
19500 .......................................................
19660 .......................................................
19740 .......................................................
19780 .......................................................
19804 .......................................................
20020 .......................................................
20100 .......................................................
20220 .......................................................
20260 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
20500 .......................................................
20740 .......................................................
20764 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Hunt County, TX.
Kaufman County, TX.
Rockwall County, TX.
Dalton, GA .....................................................................................................................
Murray County, GA.
Whitfield County, GA.
Danville, IL .....................................................................................................................
Vermilion County, IL.
Danville, VA ...................................................................................................................
Pittsylvania County, VA.
Danville City, VA.
Davenport-Moline-Rock Island, IA-IL ............................................................................
Henry County, IL.
Mercer County, IL.
Rock Island County, IL.
Scott County, IA.
Dayton, OH ....................................................................................................................
Greene County, OH.
Miami County, OH.
Montgomery County, OH.
Preble County, OH.
Decatur, AL ...................................................................................................................
Lawrence County, AL.
Morgan County, AL.
Decatur, IL .....................................................................................................................
Macon County, IL.
Deltona-Daytona Beach-Ormond Beach, FL ................................................................
Volusia County, FL.
Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO .....................................................................................
Adams County, CO.
Arapahoe County, CO.
Broomfield County, CO.
Clear Creek County, CO.
Denver County, CO.
Douglas County, CO.
Elbert County, CO.
Gilpin County, CO.
Jefferson County, CO.
Park County, CO.
Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA ................................................................................
Dallas County, IA.
Guthrie County, IA.
Madison County, IA.
Polk County, IA.
Warren County, IA.
Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, MI .........................................................................................
Wayne County, MI.
Dothan, AL ....................................................................................................................
Geneva County, AL.
Henry County, AL.
Houston County, AL.
Dover, DE ......................................................................................................................
Kent County, DE.
Dubuque, IA ..................................................................................................................
Dubuque County, IA.
Duluth, MN-WI ...............................................................................................................
Carlton County, MN.
St. Louis County, MN.
Douglas County, WI.
Durham-Chapel Hill, NC ................................................................................................
Chatham County, NC.
Durham County, NC.
Orange County, NC.
Person County, NC.
Eau Claire, WI ...............................................................................................................
Chippewa County, WI.
Eau Claire County, WI.
Edison-New Brunswick, NJ ...........................................................................................
Middlesex County, NJ.
Monmouth County, NJ.
Ocean County, NJ.
PO 00000
Frm 00028
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.8828
0.9977
0.8218
0.9145
0.9136
0.7261
0.7993
0.8716
1.0469
0.9616
0.9361
0.7398
0.9893
0.8662
1.0741
0.9525
0.9705
1.0806
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46761
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
20940 .......................................................
21060 .......................................................
21140 .......................................................
21300 .......................................................
21340 .......................................................
21500 .......................................................
21660 .......................................................
21780 .......................................................
21820 .......................................................
21940 .......................................................
22020 .......................................................
22140 .......................................................
22180 .......................................................
22220 .......................................................
22380 .......................................................
22420 .......................................................
22500 .......................................................
22520 .......................................................
22540 .......................................................
22660 .......................................................
22744 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
22900 .......................................................
23060 .......................................................
23104 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Somerset County, NJ.
El Centro, CA ................................................................................................................
Imperial County, CA.
Elizabethtown, KY .........................................................................................................
Hardin County, KY.
Larue County, KY.
Elkhart-Goshen, IN ........................................................................................................
Elkhart County, IN.
Elmira, NY .....................................................................................................................
Chemung County, NY.
El Paso, TX ...................................................................................................................
El Paso County, TX.
Erie, PA .........................................................................................................................
Erie County, PA.
Eugene-Springfield, OR ................................................................................................
Lane County, OR.
Evansville, IN-KY ...........................................................................................................
Gibson County, IN.
Posey County, IN.
Vanderburgh County, IN.
Warrick County, IN.
Henderson County, KY.
Webster County, KY.
Fairbanks, AK ................................................................................................................
Fairbanks North Star Borough, AK.
Fajardo, PR ...................................................................................................................
Ceiba Municipio, PR.
Fajardo Municipio, PR.
Luquillo Municipio, PR.
Fargo, ND-MN ...............................................................................................................
Cass County, ND.
Clay County, MN.
Farmington, NM .............................................................................................................
San Juan County, NM.
Fayetteville, NC .............................................................................................................
Cumberland County, NC.
Hoke County, NC.
Fayetteville-Springdale-Rogers, AR-MO .......................................................................
Benton County, AR.
Madison County, AR.
Washington County, AR.
McDonald County, MO.
Flagstaff, AZ ..................................................................................................................
Coconino County, AZ.
Flint, MI ..........................................................................................................................
Genesee County, MI.
Florence, SC .................................................................................................................
Darlington County, SC.
Florence County, SC.
Florence-Muscle Shoals, AL .........................................................................................
Colbert County, AL.
Lauderdale County, AL.
Fond du Lac, WI ............................................................................................................
Fond du Lac County, WI.
Fort Collins-Loveland, CO .............................................................................................
Larimer County, CO.
Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach-Deerfield Beach, FL ................................................
Broward County, FL.
Fort Smith, AR-OK ........................................................................................................
Crawford County, AR.
Franklin County, AR.
Sebastian County, AR.
Le Flore County, OK.
Sequoyah County, OK.
Fort Wayne, IN ..............................................................................................................
Allen County, IN.
Wells County, IN.
Whitley County, IN.
Fort Worth-Arlington, TX ...............................................................................................
Johnson County, TX.
Parker County, TX.
PO 00000
Frm 00029
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.8602
0.8294
0.9097
0.8205
0.8426
0.7823
1.1454
0.8401
1.0816
0.3663
0.8108
0.9323
0.8971
0.9288
1.2369
1.1257
0.8087
0.7679
0.9158
0.9833
1.0363
0.7848
0.9633
0.9516
46762
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
23420 .......................................................
23460 .......................................................
23540 .......................................................
23580 .......................................................
23844 .......................................................
24020 .......................................................
24140 .......................................................
24220 .......................................................
24300 .......................................................
24340 .......................................................
24500 .......................................................
24540 .......................................................
24580 .......................................................
24660 .......................................................
24780 .......................................................
24860 .......................................................
25020 .......................................................
25060 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
25180 .......................................................
25260 .......................................................
25420 .......................................................
25500 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Tarrant County, TX.
Wise County, TX.
Fresno, CA ....................................................................................................................
Fresno County, CA.
Gadsden, AL .................................................................................................................
Etowah County, AL.
Gainesville, FL ...............................................................................................................
Alachua County, FL.
Gilchrist County, FL.
Gainesville, GA ..............................................................................................................
Hall County, GA.
Gary, IN .........................................................................................................................
Jasper County, IN.
Lake County, IN.
Newton County, IN.
Porter County, IN.
Glens Falls, NY .............................................................................................................
Warren County, NY.
Washington County, NY.
Goldsboro, NC ...............................................................................................................
Wayne County, NC.
Grand Forks, ND-MN ....................................................................................................
Polk County, MN.
Grand Forks County, ND.
Grand Junction, CO ......................................................................................................
Mesa County, CO.
Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI ..........................................................................................
Barry County, MI.
Ionia County, MI.
Kent County, MI.
Newaygo County, MI.
Great Falls, MT .............................................................................................................
Cascade County, MT.
Greeley, CO ..................................................................................................................
Weld County, CO.
Green Bay, WI ...............................................................................................................
Brown County, WI.
Kewaunee County, WI.
Oconto County, WI.
Greensboro-High Point, NC ..........................................................................................
Guilford County, NC.
Randolph County, NC.
Rockingham County, NC.
Greenville, NC ...............................................................................................................
Greene County, NC.
Pitt County, NC.
Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC .....................................................................................
Greenville County, SC.
Laurens County, SC.
Pickens County, SC.
Guayama, PR ................................................................................................................
Arroyo Municipio, PR.
Guayama Municipio, PR.
Patillas Municipio, PR.
Gulfport-Biloxi, MS ........................................................................................................
Hancock County, MS.
Harrison County, MS.
Stone County, MS.
Hagerstown-Martinsburg, MD-WV ................................................................................
Washington County, MD.
Berkeley County, WV.
Morgan County, WV.
Hanford-Corcoran, CA ...................................................................................................
Kings County, CA.
Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA ..................................................................................................
Cumberland County, PA.
Dauphin County, PA.
Perry County, PA.
Harrisonburg, VA ...........................................................................................................
Rockingham County, VA.
Harrisonburg City, VA.
PO 00000
Frm 00030
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
1.1593
0.7697
0.9631
0.9327
0.9259
0.8340
0.8560
0.7250
0.9415
0.9125
0.7927
0.9593
0.9793
0.8638
0.9694
0.9737
0.3696
0.8544
0.9422
1.0992
0.9525
0.9087
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46763
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
25540 .......................................................
Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT ....................................................................
Hartford County, CT.
Middlesex County, CT.
Tolland County, CT.
Hattiesburg, MS .............................................................................................................
Forrest County, MS.
Lamar County, MS.
Perry County, MS.
Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, NC ......................................................................................
Alexander County, NC.
Burke County, NC.
Caldwell County, NC.
Catawba County, NC.
Hinesville-Fort Stewart, GA 1 .........................................................................................
Liberty County, GA.
Long County, GA.
Holland-Grand Haven, MI .............................................................................................
Ottawa County, MI.
Honolulu, HI ...................................................................................................................
Honolulu County, HI.
Hot Springs, AR ............................................................................................................
Garland County, AR.
Houma-Bayou Cane-Thibodaux, LA .............................................................................
Lafourche Parish, LA.
Terrebonne Parish, LA.
Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX ...............................................................................
Austin County, TX.
Brazoria County, TX.
Chambers County, TX.
Fort Bend County, TX.
Galveston County, TX.
Harris County, TX.
Liberty County, TX.
Montgomery County, TX.
San Jacinto County, TX.
Waller County, TX.
Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY-OH ..................................................................................
Boyd County, KY.
Greenup County, KY.
Lawrence County, OH.
Cabell County, WV.
Wayne County, WV.
Huntsville, AL ................................................................................................................
Limestone County, AL.
Madison County, AL.
Idaho Falls, ID ...............................................................................................................
Bonneville County, ID.
Jefferson County, ID.
Indianapolis-Carmel, IN .................................................................................................
Boone County, IN.
Brown County, IN.
Hamilton County, IN.
Hancock County, IN.
Hendricks County, IN.
Johnson County, IN.
Marion County, IN.
Morgan County, IN.
Putnam County, IN.
Shelby County, IN.
Iowa City, IA ..................................................................................................................
Johnson County, IA.
Washington County, IA.
Ithaca, NY ......................................................................................................................
Tompkins County, NY.
Jackson, MI ...................................................................................................................
Jackson County, MI.
Jackson, MS ..................................................................................................................
Copiah County, MS.
Hinds County, MS.
Madison County, MS.
Rankin County, MS.
25620 .......................................................
25860 .......................................................
25980 .......................................................
26100 .......................................................
26180 .......................................................
26300 .......................................................
26380 .......................................................
26420 .......................................................
26580 .......................................................
26620 .......................................................
26820 .......................................................
26900 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
26980 .......................................................
27060 .......................................................
27100 .......................................................
27140 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00031
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
1.0869
0.8035
0.8677
0.8843
0.8024
1.2156
0.8944
0.7928
0.9933
0.8635
0.8667
0.9114
0.9870
1.0120
0.9249
0.8511
0.8177
46764
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
27180 .......................................................
27260 .......................................................
27340 .......................................................
27500 .......................................................
27620 .......................................................
27740 .......................................................
27780 .......................................................
27860 .......................................................
27900 .......................................................
28020 .......................................................
28100 .......................................................
28140 .......................................................
28420 .......................................................
28660 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
28700 .......................................................
28740 .......................................................
28940 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Simpson County, MS.
Jackson, TN ..................................................................................................................
Chester County, TN.
Madison County, TN.
Jacksonville, FL .............................................................................................................
Baker County, FL.
Clay County, FL.
Duval County, FL.
Nassau County, FL.
St. Johns County, FL.
Jacksonville, NC ............................................................................................................
Onslow County, NC.
Janesville, WI ................................................................................................................
Rock County, WI.
Jefferson City, MO ........................................................................................................
Callaway County, MO.
Cole County, MO.
Moniteau County, MO.
Osage County, MO.
Johnson City, TN ...........................................................................................................
Carter County, TN.
Unicoi County, TN.
Washington County, TN.
Johnstown, PA ..............................................................................................................
Cambria County, PA.
Jonesboro, AR ...............................................................................................................
Craighead County, AR.
Poinsett County, AR.
Joplin, MO .....................................................................................................................
Jasper County, MO.
Newton County, MO.
Kalamazoo-Portage, MI .................................................................................................
Kalamazoo County, MI.
Van Buren County, MI.
Kankakee-Bradley, IL ....................................................................................................
Kankakee County, IL.
Kansas City, MO-KS .....................................................................................................
Franklin County, KS.
Johnson County, KS.
Leavenworth County, KS.
Linn County, KS.
Miami County, KS.
Wyandotte County, KS.
Bates County, MO.
Caldwell County, MO.
Cass County, MO.
Clay County, MO.
Clinton County, MO.
Jackson County, MO.
Lafayette County, MO.
Platte County, MO.
Ray County, MO.
Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, WA ...................................................................................
Benton County, WA.
Franklin County, WA.
Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, TX ......................................................................................
Bell County, TX.
Coryell County, TX.
Lampasas County, TX.
Kingsport-Bristol-Bristol, TN-VA ....................................................................................
Hawkins County, TN.
Sullivan County, TN.
Bristol City, VA.
Scott County, VA.
Washington County, VA.
Kingston, NY .................................................................................................................
Ulster County, NY.
Knoxville, TN .................................................................................................................
Anderson County, TN.
Blount County, TN.
Knox County, TN.
PO 00000
Frm 00032
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.7672
0.8883
0.7957
0.9458
0.8263
0.7359
0.8116
0.8084
0.7828
0.9834
1.0127
0.9614
0.9708
0.9102
0.7325
0.8953
0.7575
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46765
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
29020 .......................................................
29100 .......................................................
29140 .......................................................
29180 .......................................................
29340 .......................................................
29404 .......................................................
29420 .......................................................
29460 .......................................................
29540 .......................................................
29620 .......................................................
29700 .......................................................
29740 .......................................................
29820 .......................................................
29940 .......................................................
30020 .......................................................
30140 .......................................................
30300 .......................................................
30340 .......................................................
30460 .......................................................
30620 .......................................................
30700 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
30780 .......................................................
30860 .......................................................
30980 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Loudon County, TN.
Union County, TN.
Kokomo, IN ....................................................................................................................
Howard County, IN.
Tipton County, IN.
La Crosse, WI-MN .........................................................................................................
Houston County, MN.
La Crosse County, WI.
Lafayette, IN ..................................................................................................................
Benton County, IN.
Carroll County, IN.
Tippecanoe County, IN.
Lafayette, LA .................................................................................................................
Lafayette Parish, LA.
St. Martin Parish, LA.
Lake Charles, LA ...........................................................................................................
Calcasieu Parish, LA.
Cameron Parish, LA.
Lake County-Kenosha County, IL-WI ...........................................................................
Lake County, IL.
Kenosha County, WI.
Lake Havasu City-Kingman, AZ ....................................................................................
Mohave County, AZ.
Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL ..........................................................................................
Polk County, FL.
Lancaster, PA ................................................................................................................
Lancaster County, PA.
Lansing-East Lansing, MI ..............................................................................................
Clinton County, MI.
Eaton County, MI.
Ingham County, MI.
Laredo, TX .....................................................................................................................
Webb County, TX.
Las Cruces, NM ............................................................................................................
Dona Ana County, NM.
Las Vegas-Paradise, NV ...............................................................................................
Clark County, NV.
Lawrence, KS ................................................................................................................
Douglas County, KS.
Lawton, OK ....................................................................................................................
Comanche County, OK.
Lebanon, PA ..................................................................................................................
Lebanon County, PA.
Lewiston, ID-WA ............................................................................................................
Nez Perce County, ID.
Asotin County, WA.
Lewiston-Auburn, ME ....................................................................................................
Androscoggin County, ME.
Lexington-Fayette, KY ...................................................................................................
Bourbon County, KY.
Clark County, KY.
Fayette County, KY.
Jessamine County, KY.
Scott County, KY.
Woodford County, KY.
Lima, OH .......................................................................................................................
Allen County, OH.
Lincoln, NE ....................................................................................................................
Lancaster County, NE.
Seward County, NE.
Little Rock-North Little Rock-Conway, AR ....................................................................
Faulkner County, AR.
Grant County, AR.
Lonoke County, AR.
Perry County, AR.
Pulaski County, AR.
Saline County, AR.
Logan, UT-ID .................................................................................................................
Franklin County, ID.
Cache County, UT.
Longview, TX .................................................................................................................
PO 00000
Frm 00033
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.8756
1.0070
0.9316
0.8565
0.7813
1.0558
0.9760
0.8262
0.9452
1.0065
0.7486
0.9044
1.2076
0.8676
0.8351
0.7994
0.9326
0.9178
0.9023
0.9226
0.9726
0.8595
0.8456
0.8550
46766
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
31020 .......................................................
31084 .......................................................
31140 .......................................................
31180 .......................................................
31340 .......................................................
31420 .......................................................
31460 .......................................................
31540 .......................................................
31700 .......................................................
31740 .......................................................
31860 .......................................................
31900 .......................................................
32420 .......................................................
32580 .......................................................
32780 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
32820 .......................................................
32900 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Gregg County, TX.
Rusk County, TX.
Upshur County, TX.
Longview, WA ...............................................................................................................
Cowlitz County, WA.
Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA .......................................................................
Los Angeles County, CA.
Louisville-Jefferson County, KY-IN ...............................................................................
Clark County, IN.
Floyd County, IN.
Harrison County, IN.
Washington County, IN.
Bullitt County, KY.
Henry County, KY.
Meade County, KY.
Nelson County, KY.
Oldham County, KY.
Shelby County, KY.
Spencer County, KY.
Trimble County, KY.
Lubbock, TX ..................................................................................................................
Crosby County, TX.
Lubbock County, TX.
Lynchburg, VA ...............................................................................................................
Amherst County, VA.
Appomattox County, VA.
Bedford County, VA.
Campbell County, VA.
Bedford City, VA.
Lynchburg City, VA.
Macon, GA ....................................................................................................................
Bibb County, GA.
Crawford County, GA.
Jones County, GA.
Monroe County, GA.
Twiggs County, GA.
Madera-Chowchilla, CA .................................................................................................
Madera County, CA.
Madison, WI ..................................................................................................................
Columbia County, WI.
Dane County, WI.
Iowa County, WI.
Manchester-Nashua, NH ...............................................................................................
Hillsborough County, NH.
Manhattan, KS ...............................................................................................................
Geary County, KS.
Pottawatomie County, KS.
Riley County, KS.
Mankato-North Mankato, MN ........................................................................................
Blue Earth County, MN.
Nicollet County, MN.
Mansfield, OH ................................................................................................................
Richland County, OH.
¨
Mayaguez, PR ...............................................................................................................
Hormigueros Municipio, PR.
¨
Mayaguez Municipio, PR.
McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX ......................................................................................
Hidalgo County, TX.
Medford, OR ..................................................................................................................
Jackson County, OR.
Memphis, TN-MS-AR ....................................................................................................
Crittenden County, AR.
DeSoto County, MS.
Marshall County, MS.
Tate County, MS.
Tunica County, MS.
Fayette County, TN.
Shelby County, TN.
Tipton County, TN.
Merced, CA ...................................................................................................................
Merced County, CA.
PO 00000
Frm 00034
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
1.0081
1.2293
0.8862
0.8870
0.8615
0.8584
0.8050
1.1264
1.0042
0.7839
0.9413
0.8993
0.3586
0.8603
1.0400
0.9049
1.2996
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46767
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
33124 .......................................................
Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL ...................................................................................
Miami-Dade County, FL.
Michigan City-La Porte, IN ............................................................................................
LaPorte County, IN.
Midland, TX ...................................................................................................................
Midland County, TX.
Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI ............................................................................
Milwaukee County, WI.
Ozaukee County, WI.
Washington County, WI.
Waukesha County, WI.
Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI ...................................................................
Anoka County, MN.
Carver County, MN.
Chisago County, MN.
Dakota County, MN.
Hennepin County, MN.
Isanti County, MN.
Ramsey County, MN.
Scott County, MN.
Sherburne County, MN.
Washington County, MN.
Wright County, MN.
Pierce County, WI.
St. Croix County, WI.
Missoula, MT .................................................................................................................
Missoula County, MT.
Mobile, AL .....................................................................................................................
Mobile County, AL.
Modesto, CA ..................................................................................................................
Stanislaus County, CA.
Monroe, LA ....................................................................................................................
Ouachita Parish, LA.
Union Parish, LA.
Monroe, MI ....................................................................................................................
Monroe County, MI.
Montgomery, AL ............................................................................................................
Autauga County, AL.
Elmore County, AL.
Lowndes County, AL.
Montgomery County, AL.
Morgantown, WV ...........................................................................................................
Monongalia County, WV.
Preston County, WV.
Morristown, TN ..............................................................................................................
Grainger County, TN.
Hamblen County, TN.
Jefferson County, TN.
Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA ......................................................................................
Skagit County, WA.
Muncie, IN .....................................................................................................................
Delaware County, IN.
Muskegon-Norton Shores, MI .......................................................................................
Muskegon County, MI.
Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle Beach-Conway, SC ............................................................
Horry County, SC.
Napa, CA .......................................................................................................................
Napa County, CA.
Naples-Marco Island, FL ...............................................................................................
Collier County, FL.
Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN ............................................................
Cannon County, TN.
Cheatham County, TN.
Davidson County, TN.
Dickson County, TN.
Hickman County, TN.
Macon County, TN.
Robertson County, TN.
Rutherford County, TN.
Smith County, TN.
Sumner County, TN.
33140 .......................................................
33260 .......................................................
33340 .......................................................
33460 .......................................................
33540 .......................................................
33660 .......................................................
33700 .......................................................
33740 .......................................................
33780 .......................................................
33860 .......................................................
34060 .......................................................
34100 .......................................................
34580 .......................................................
34620 .......................................................
34740 .......................................................
34820 .......................................................
34900 .......................................................
34940 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
34980 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00035
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
1.0130
0.9694
1.0640
0.9931
1.1336
0.9001
0.7467
1.2841
0.7717
0.8472
0.7858
0.8284
0.6768
1.0340
0.8734
1.1007
0.8717
1.6045
0.9265
0.9061
46768
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
35004 .......................................................
35084 .......................................................
35300 .......................................................
35380 .......................................................
35644 .......................................................
35660 .......................................................
35840 .......................................................
35980 .......................................................
36084 .......................................................
36100 .......................................................
36140 .......................................................
36220 .......................................................
36260 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
36420 .......................................................
36500 .......................................................
36540 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Trousdale County, TN.
Williamson County, TN.
Wilson County, TN.
Nassau-Suffolk, NY .......................................................................................................
Nassau County, NY.
Suffolk County, NY.
Newark-Union, NJ-PA ...................................................................................................
Essex County, NJ.
Hunterdon County, NJ.
Morris County, NJ.
Sussex County, NJ.
Union County, NJ.
Pike County, PA.
New Haven-Milford, CT .................................................................................................
New Haven County, CT.
New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA ................................................................................
Jefferson Parish, LA.
Orleans Parish, LA.
Plaquemines Parish, LA.
St. Bernard Parish, LA.
St. Charles Parish, LA.
St. John the Baptist Parish, LA.
St. Tammany Parish, LA.
New York-White Plains-Wayne, NY-NJ ........................................................................
Bergen County, NJ.
Hudson County, NJ.
Passaic County, NJ.
Bronx County, NY.
Kings County, NY.
New York County, NY.
Putnam County, NY.
Queens County, NY.
Richmond County, NY.
Rockland County, NY.
Westchester County, NY.
Niles-Benton Harbor, MI ................................................................................................
Berrien County, MI.
North Port-Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL ..................................................................
Manatee County, FL.
Sarasota County, FL.
Norwich-New London, CT .............................................................................................
New London County, CT.
Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA ....................................................................................
Alameda County, CA.
Contra Costa County, CA.
Ocala, FL .......................................................................................................................
Marion County, FL.
Ocean City, NJ ..............................................................................................................
Cape May County, NJ.
Odessa, TX ...................................................................................................................
Ector County, TX.
Ogden-Clearfield, UT ....................................................................................................
Davis County, UT.
Morgan County, UT.
Weber County, UT.
Oklahoma City, OK .......................................................................................................
Canadian County, OK.
Cleveland County, OK.
Grady County, OK.
Lincoln County, OK.
Logan County, OK.
McClain County, OK.
Oklahoma County, OK.
Olympia, WA .................................................................................................................
Thurston County, WA.
Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA ........................................................................................
Harrison County, IA.
Mills County, IA.
Pottawattamie County, IA.
Cass County, NE.
Douglas County, NE.
PO 00000
Frm 00036
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
1.2698
1.1223
1.2061
0.8932
1.2914
0.8237
0.9375
1.1376
1.6654
0.8455
1.0307
0.9741
0.9031
0.8810
1.1397
1.0037
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46769
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
36740 .......................................................
36780 .......................................................
36980 .......................................................
37100 .......................................................
37340 .......................................................
37380 .......................................................
37460 .......................................................
37620 .......................................................
37700 .......................................................
37764 .......................................................
37860 .......................................................
37900 .......................................................
37964 .......................................................
38060 .......................................................
38220 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
38300 .......................................................
38340 .......................................................
38540 .......................................................
38660 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Sarpy County, NE.
Saunders County, NE.
Washington County, NE.
Orlando-Kissimmee, FL .................................................................................................
Lake County, FL.
Orange County, FL.
Osceola County, FL.
Seminole County, FL.
Oshkosh-Neenah, WI ....................................................................................................
Winnebago County, WI.
Owensboro, KY .............................................................................................................
Daviess County, KY.
Hancock County, KY.
McLean County, KY.
Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA ...........................................................................
Ventura County, CA.
Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL ...............................................................................
Brevard County, FL.
Palm Coast, FL .............................................................................................................
Flagler County, FL.
Panama City-Lynn Haven-Panama City Beach, FL .....................................................
Bay County, FL.
Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna, WV-OH ..........................................................................
Washington County, OH.
Pleasants County, WV.
Wirt County, WV.
Wood County, WV.
Pascagoula, MS ............................................................................................................
George County, MS.
Jackson County, MS.
Peabody, MA .................................................................................................................
Essex County, MA.
Pensacola-Ferry Pass-Brent, FL ...................................................................................
Escambia County, FL.
Santa Rosa County, FL.
Peoria, IL .......................................................................................................................
Marshall County, IL.
Peoria County, IL.
Stark County, IL.
Tazewell County, IL.
Woodford County, IL.
Philadelphia, PA ............................................................................................................
Bucks County, PA.
Chester County, PA.
Delaware County, PA.
Montgomery County, PA.
Philadelphia County, PA.
Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ .......................................................................................
Maricopa County, AZ.
Pinal County, AZ.
Pine Bluff, AR ................................................................................................................
Cleveland County, AR.
Jefferson County, AR.
Lincoln County, AR.
Pittsburgh, PA ...............................................................................................................
Allegheny County, PA.
Armstrong County, PA.
Beaver County, PA.
Butler County, PA.
Fayette County, PA.
Washington County, PA.
Westmoreland County, PA.
Pittsfield, MA .................................................................................................................
Berkshire County, MA.
Pocatello, ID ..................................................................................................................
Bannock County, ID.
Power County, ID.
Ponce, PR .....................................................................................................................
´
Juana Dıaz Municipio, PR.
Ponce Municipio, PR.
Villalba Municipio, PR.
PO 00000
Frm 00037
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
0.9082
0.9433
0.8117
1.3079
0.8838
0.9880
0.7976
0.7487
0.7662
1.0551
0.7819
0.8882
1.0806
1.0477
0.7847
0.8585
1.0721
0.9555
0.4314
46770
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
38860 .......................................................
Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME ........................................................................
Cumberland County, ME.
Sagadahoc County, ME.
York County, ME.
Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA .......................................................................
Clackamas County, OR.
Columbia County, OR.
Multnomah County, OR.
Washington County, OR.
Yamhill County, OR.
Clark County, WA.
Skamania County, WA.
Port St. Lucie, FL ..........................................................................................................
Martin County, FL.
St. Lucie County, FL.
Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY ....................................................................
Dutchess County, NY.
Orange County, NY.
Prescott, AZ ...................................................................................................................
Yavapai County, AZ.
Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA .................................................................
Bristol County, MA.
Bristol County, RI.
Kent County, RI.
Newport County, RI.
Providence County, RI.
Washington County, RI.
Provo-Orem, UT ............................................................................................................
Juab County, UT.
Utah County, UT.
Pueblo, CO ....................................................................................................................
Pueblo County, CO.
Punta Gorda, FL ............................................................................................................
Charlotte County, FL.
Racine, WI .....................................................................................................................
Racine County, WI.
Raleigh-Cary, NC ..........................................................................................................
Franklin County, NC.
Johnston County, NC.
Wake County, NC.
Rapid City, SD ...............................................................................................................
Meade County, SD.
Pennington County, SD.
Reading, PA ..................................................................................................................
Berks County, PA.
Redding, CA ..................................................................................................................
Shasta County, CA.
Reno-Sparks, NV ..........................................................................................................
Storey County, NV.
Washoe County, NV.
Richmond, VA ...............................................................................................................
Amelia County, VA.
Caroline County, VA.
Charles City County, VA.
Chesterfield County, VA.
Cumberland County, VA.
Dinwiddie County, VA.
Goochland County, VA.
Hanover County, VA.
Henrico County, VA.
King and Queen County, VA.
King William County, VA.
Louisa County, VA.
New Kent County, VA.
Powhatan County, VA.
Prince George County, VA.
Sussex County, VA.
Colonial Heights City, VA.
Hopewell City, VA.
Petersburg City, VA.
Richmond City, VA.
38900 .......................................................
38940 .......................................................
39100 .......................................................
39140 .......................................................
39300 .......................................................
39340 .......................................................
39380 .......................................................
39460 .......................................................
39540 .......................................................
39580 .......................................................
39660 .......................................................
39740 .......................................................
39820 .......................................................
39900 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
40060 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00038
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
0.9975
1.1673
0.9577
1.1325
1.2009
1.0699
0.9133
0.8518
0.8590
0.9158
0.9488
0.9823
0.9072
1.4555
1.0328
0.9695
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46771
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
40140 .......................................................
Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA .........................................................................
Riverside County, CA.
San Bernardino County, CA.
Roanoke, VA .................................................................................................................
Botetourt County, VA.
Craig County, VA.
Franklin County, VA.
Roanoke County, VA.
Roanoke City, VA.
Salem City, VA.
Rochester, MN ..............................................................................................................
Dodge County, MN.
Olmsted County, MN.
Wabasha County, MN.
Rochester, NY ...............................................................................................................
Livingston County, NY.
Monroe County, NY.
Ontario County, NY.
Orleans County, NY.
Wayne County, NY.
Rockford, IL ...................................................................................................................
Boone County, IL.
Winnebago County, IL.
Rockingham County-Strafford County, NH ...................................................................
Rockingham County, NH.
Strafford County, NH.
Rocky Mount, NC ..........................................................................................................
Edgecombe County, NC.
Nash County, NC.
Rome, GA ......................................................................................................................
Floyd County, GA.
Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Roseville, CA .....................................................................
El Dorado County, CA.
Placer County, CA.
Sacramento County, CA.
Yolo County, CA.
Saginaw-Saginaw Township North, MI .........................................................................
Saginaw County, MI.
St. Cloud, MN ................................................................................................................
Benton County, MN.
Stearns County, MN.
St. George, UT ..............................................................................................................
Washington County, UT.
St. Joseph, MO-KS .......................................................................................................
Doniphan County, KS.
Andrew County, MO.
Buchanan County, MO.
DeKalb County, MO.
St. Louis, MO-IL ............................................................................................................
Bond County, IL.
Calhoun County, IL.
Clinton County, IL.
Jersey County, IL.
Macoupin County, IL.
Madison County, IL.
Monroe County, IL.
St. Clair County, IL.
Crawford County, MO.
Franklin County, MO.
Jefferson County, MO.
Lincoln County, MO.
St. Charles County, MO.
St. Louis County, MO.
Warren County, MO.
Washington County, MO.
St. Louis City, MO.
Salem, OR .....................................................................................................................
Marion County, OR.
Polk County, OR.
Salinas, CA ....................................................................................................................
Monterey County, CA.
40220 .......................................................
40340 .......................................................
40380 .......................................................
40420 .......................................................
40484 .......................................................
40580 .......................................................
40660 .......................................................
40900 .......................................................
40980 .......................................................
41060 .......................................................
41100 .......................................................
41140 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
41180 .......................................................
41420 .......................................................
41500 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00039
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
1.1396
0.9088
1.0708
0.8704
0.9935
1.0234
0.8898
0.8844
1.4752
0.8820
1.1010
0.8870
0.9856
0.9420
1.1069
1.6074
46772
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
41540 .......................................................
Salisbury, MD ................................................................................................................
Somerset County, MD.
Wicomico County, MD.
Salt Lake City, UT .........................................................................................................
Salt Lake County, UT.
Summit County, UT.
Tooele County, UT.
San Angelo, TX .............................................................................................................
Irion County, TX.
Tom Green County, TX.
San Antonio, TX ............................................................................................................
Atascosa County, TX.
Bandera County, TX.
Bexar County, TX.
Comal County, TX.
Guadalupe County, TX.
Kendall County, TX.
Medina County, TX.
Wilson County, TX.
San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA ..........................................................................
San Diego County, CA.
Sandusky, OH ...............................................................................................................
Erie County, OH.
San Francisco-San Mateo-Redwood City, CA ..............................................................
Marin County, CA.
San Francisco County, CA.
San Mateo County, CA.
´
San German-Cabo Rojo, PR ........................................................................................
Cabo Rojo Municipio, PR.
Lajas Municipio, PR.
Sabana Grande Municipio, PR.
´
San German Municipio, PR.
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA ..........................................................................
San Benito County, CA.
Santa Clara County, CA.
San Juan-Caguas-Guaynabo, PR .................................................................................
Aguas Buenas Municipio, PR.
Aibonito Municipio, PR.
Arecibo Municipio, PR.
Barceloneta Municipio, PR.
Barranquitas Municipio, PR.
´
Bayamon Municipio, PR.
Caguas Municipio, PR.
Camuy Municipio, PR.
´
Canovanas Municipio, PR.
Carolina Municipio, PR.
˜
Catano Municipio, PR.
Cayey Municipio, PR.
Ciales Municipio, PR.
Cidra Municipio, PR.
´
Comerıo Municipio, PR.
Corozal Municipio, PR.
Dorado Municipio, PR.
Florida Municipio, PR.
Guaynabo Municipio, PR.
Gurabo Municipio, PR.
Hatillo Municipio, PR.
Humacao Municipio, PR.
Juncos Municipio, PR.
Las Piedras Municipio, PR.
´
Loıza Municipio, PR.
´
Manatı Municipio, PR.
Maunabo Municipio, PR.
Morovis Municipio, PR.
Naguabo Municipio, PR.
Naranjito Municipio, PR.
Orocovis Municipio, PR.
Quebradillas Municipio, PR.
´
Rıo Grande Municipio, PR.
San Juan Municipio, PR.
San Lorenzo Municipio, PR.
41620 .......................................................
41660 .......................................................
41700 .......................................................
41740 .......................................................
41780 .......................................................
41884 .......................................................
41900 .......................................................
41940 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
41980 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00040
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
0.9260
0.9063
0.8221
0.8936
1.1922
0.8347
1.6327
0.4804
1.7396
0.4318
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46773
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
42020 .......................................................
42044 .......................................................
42060 .......................................................
42100 .......................................................
42140 .......................................................
42220 .......................................................
42340 .......................................................
42540 .......................................................
42644 .......................................................
42680 .......................................................
43100 .......................................................
43300 .......................................................
43340 .......................................................
43580 .......................................................
43620 .......................................................
43780 .......................................................
43900 .......................................................
44060 .......................................................
44100 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
44140 .......................................................
44180 .......................................................
44220 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
Wage index
Toa Alta Municipio, PR.
Toa Baja Municipio, PR.
Trujillo Alto Municipio, PR.
Vega Alta Municipio, PR.
Vega Baja Municipio, PR.
Yabucoa Municipio, PR.
San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles, CA ...............................................................................
San Luis Obispo County, CA.
Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, CA .....................................................................................
Orange County, CA.
Santa Barbara-Santa Maria-Goleta, CA .......................................................................
Santa Barbara County, CA.
Santa Cruz-Watsonville, CA ..........................................................................................
Santa Cruz County, CA.
Santa Fe, NM ................................................................................................................
Santa Fe County, NM.
Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA ............................................................................................
Sonoma County, CA.
Savannah, GA ...............................................................................................................
Bryan County, GA.
Chatham County, GA.
Effingham County, GA.
Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA ...........................................................................................
Lackawanna County, PA.
Luzerne County, PA.
Wyoming County, PA.
Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA ........................................................................................
King County, WA.
Snohomish County, WA.
Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL ............................................................................................
Indian River County, FL.
Sheboygan, WI ..............................................................................................................
Sheboygan County, WI.
Sherman-Denison, TX ...................................................................................................
Grayson County, TX.
Shreveport-Bossier City, LA ..........................................................................................
Bossier Parish, LA.
Caddo Parish, LA.
De Soto Parish, LA.
Sioux City, IA-NE-SD ....................................................................................................
Woodbury County, IA.
Dakota County, NE.
Dixon County, NE.
Union County, SD.
Sioux Falls, SD ..............................................................................................................
Lincoln County, SD.
McCook County, SD.
Minnehaha County, SD.
Turner County, SD.
South Bend-Mishawaka, IN-MI .....................................................................................
St. Joseph County, IN.
Cass County, MI.
Spartanburg, SC ............................................................................................................
Spartanburg County, SC.
Spokane, WA ................................................................................................................
Spokane County, WA.
Springfield, IL ................................................................................................................
Menard County, IL.
Sangamon County, IL.
Springfield, MA ..............................................................................................................
Franklin County, MA.
Hampden County, MA.
Hampshire County, MA.
Springfield, MO ..............................................................................................................
Christian County, MO.
Dallas County, MO.
Greene County, MO.
Polk County, MO.
Webster County, MO.
Springfield, OH ..............................................................................................................
Clark County, OH.
PO 00000
Frm 00041
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
1.3081
1.2038
1.2670
1.8062
1.0400
1.6440
0.8968
0.8260
1.1771
0.8850
0.9515
0.8544
0.8412
0.9010
0.8338
0.9531
0.9186
1.0824
0.9179
1.0377
0.8581
0.9236
46774
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
44300 .......................................................
State College, PA ..........................................................................................................
Centre County, PA.
Steubenville-Weirton, OH-WV .......................................................................................
Jefferson County, OH.
Brooke County, WV.
Hancock County, WV.
Stockton, CA .................................................................................................................
San Joaquin County, CA.
Sumter, SC ....................................................................................................................
Sumter County, SC.
Syracuse, NY ................................................................................................................
Madison County, NY.
Onondaga County, NY.
Oswego County, NY.
Tacoma, WA ..................................................................................................................
Pierce County, WA.
Tallahassee, FL .............................................................................................................
Gadsden County, FL.
Jefferson County, FL.
Leon County, FL.
Wakulla County, FL.
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL ..........................................................................
Hernando County, FL.
Hillsborough County, FL.
Pasco County, FL.
Pinellas County, FL.
Terre Haute, IN .............................................................................................................
Clay County, IN.
Sullivan County, IN.
Vermillion County, IN.
Vigo County, IN.
Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, AR .....................................................................................
Miller County, AR.
Bowie County, TX.
Toledo, OH ....................................................................................................................
Fulton County, OH.
Lucas County, OH.
Ottawa County, OH.
Wood County, OH.
Topeka, KS ....................................................................................................................
Jackson County, KS.
Jefferson County, KS.
Osage County, KS.
Shawnee County, KS.
Wabaunsee County, KS.
Trenton-Ewing, NJ .........................................................................................................
Mercer County, NJ.
Tucson, AZ ....................................................................................................................
Pima County, AZ.
Tulsa, OK ......................................................................................................................
Creek County, OK.
Okmulgee County, OK.
Osage County, OK.
Pawnee County, OK.
Rogers County, OK.
Tulsa County, OK.
Wagoner County, OK.
Tuscaloosa, AL ..............................................................................................................
Greene County, AL.
Hale County, AL.
Tuscaloosa County, AL.
Tyler, TX ........................................................................................................................
Smith County, TX.
Utica-Rome, NY ............................................................................................................
Herkimer County, NY.
Oneida County, NY.
Valdosta, GA .................................................................................................................
Brooks County, GA.
Echols County, GA.
Lanier County, GA.
Lowndes County, GA.
44600 .......................................................
44700 .......................................................
44940 .......................................................
45060 .......................................................
45104 .......................................................
45220 .......................................................
45300 .......................................................
45460 .......................................................
45500 .......................................................
45780 .......................................................
45820 .......................................................
45940 .......................................................
46060 .......................................................
46140 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
46220 .......................................................
46340 .......................................................
46540 .......................................................
46660 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00042
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
0.9510
0.7640
1.3356
0.7454
0.9829
1.1741
0.8521
0.9032
0.9113
0.7967
0.9034
0.8969
1.0360
0.9065
0.8139
0.8533
0.8361
0.8653
0.7918
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46775
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
CBSA code
Urban area
(constituent counties)
46700 .......................................................
Vallejo-Fairfield, CA .......................................................................................................
Solano County, CA.
Victoria, TX ....................................................................................................................
Calhoun County, TX.
Goliad County, TX.
Victoria County, TX.
Vineland-Millville-Bridgeton, NJ .....................................................................................
Cumberland County, NJ.
Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC ............................................................
Currituck County, NC.
Gloucester County, VA.
Isle of Wight County, VA.
James City County, VA.
Mathews County, VA.
Surry County, VA.
York County, VA.
Chesapeake City, VA.
Hampton City, VA.
Newport News City, VA.
Norfolk City, VA.
Poquoson City, VA.
Portsmouth City, VA.
Suffolk City, VA.
Virginia Beach City, VA.
Williamsburg City, VA.
Visalia-Porterville, CA ....................................................................................................
Tulare County, CA.
Waco, TX .......................................................................................................................
McLennan County, TX.
Warner Robins, GA .......................................................................................................
Houston County, GA.
Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, MI .................................................................................
Lapeer County, MI.
Livingston County, MI.
Macomb County, MI.
Oakland County, MI.
St. Clair County, MI.
Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV .......................................................
District of Columbia, DC.
Calvert County, MD.
Charles County, MD.
Prince George’s County, MD.
Arlington County, VA.
Clarke County, VA.
Fairfax County, VA.
Fauquier County, VA.
Loudoun County, VA.
Prince William County, VA.
Spotsylvania County, VA.
Stafford County, VA.
Warren County, VA.
Alexandria City, VA.
Fairfax City, VA.
Falls Church City, VA.
Fredericksburg City, VA.
Manassas City, VA.
Manassas Park City, VA.
Jefferson County, WV.
Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA ...............................................................................................
Black Hawk County, IA.
Bremer County, IA.
Grundy County, IA.
Wausau, WI ...................................................................................................................
Marathon County, WI.
Wenatchee-East Wenatchee, WA .................................................................................
Chelan County, WA.
Douglas County, WA.
West Palm Beach-Boca Raton-Boynton Beach, FL .....................................................
Palm Beach County, FL.
Wheeling, WV-OH .........................................................................................................
Belmont County, OH.
47020 .......................................................
47220 .......................................................
47260 .......................................................
47300 .......................................................
47380 .......................................................
47580 .......................................................
47644 .......................................................
47894 .......................................................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
47940 .......................................................
48140 .......................................................
48300 .......................................................
48424 .......................................................
48540 .......................................................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
Jkt 229001
PO 00000
Frm 00043
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Wage index
01AUN3
1.5844
0.8992
1.0596
0.9208
1.0349
0.8458
0.8197
0.9543
1.0659
0.8422
0.8921
1.0037
0.9661
0.6863
46776
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
TABLE 1—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX FOR URBAN AREAS BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET AREAS—Continued
Urban area
(constituent counties)
CBSA code
48620 .......................................................
48660 .......................................................
48700 .......................................................
48864 .......................................................
48900 .......................................................
49020 .......................................................
49180 .......................................................
49340 .......................................................
49420 .......................................................
49500 .......................................................
49620 .......................................................
49660 .......................................................
49700 .......................................................
49740 .......................................................
1 At
Marshall County, WV.
Ohio County, WV.
Wichita, KS ....................................................................................................................
Butler County, KS.
Harvey County, KS.
Sedgwick County, KS.
Sumner County, KS.
Wichita Falls, TX ...........................................................................................................
Archer County, TX.
Clay County, TX.
Wichita County, TX.
Williamsport, PA ............................................................................................................
Lycoming County, PA.
Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ .................................................................................................
New Castle County, DE.
Cecil County, MD.
Salem County, NJ.
Wilmington, NC .............................................................................................................
Brunswick County, NC.
New Hanover County, NC.
Pender County, NC.
Winchester, VA-WV .......................................................................................................
Frederick County, VA.
Winchester City, VA.
Hampshire County, WV.
Winston-Salem, NC .......................................................................................................
Davie County, NC.
Forsyth County, NC.
Stokes County, NC.
Yadkin County, NC.
Worcester, MA ...............................................................................................................
Worcester County, MA.
Yakima, WA ...................................................................................................................
Yakima County, WA.
Yauco, PR .....................................................................................................................
´
Guanica Municipio, PR.
Guayanilla Municipio, PR.
˜
Penuelas Municipio, PR.
Yauco Municipio, PR.
York-Hanover, PA .........................................................................................................
York County, PA.
Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA ......................................................................
Mahoning County, OH.
Trumbull County, OH.
Mercer County, PA.
Yuba City, CA 1 .............................................................................................................
Sutter County, CA.
Yuba County, CA.
Yuma, AZ ......................................................................................................................
Yuma County, AZ.
0.8681
0.9048
0.8230
1.0687
0.9155
0.9249
0.8660
1.1205
1.0097
0.4059
0.9557
0.8283
1.2004
0.9517
this time, there are no hospitals located in this urban area on which to base a wage index.
TABLE 2—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX
BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET
AREAS FOR RURAL AREAS
State
code
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
Wage index
Nonurban area
1 ...........
2 ...........
3 ...........
4 ...........
5 ...........
6 ...........
7 ...........
8 ...........
10 .........
11 .........
Alabama .....................
Alaska ........................
Arizona .......................
Arkansas ....................
California ....................
Colorado ....................
Connecticut ................
Delaware ....................
Florida ........................
Georgia ......................
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
TABLE 2—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX
BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET
AREAS FOR RURAL AREAS—Continued
State
code
Wage
index
0.7121
1.2807
0.9182
0.7350
1.2567
1.0208
1.1128
1.0171
0.8062
0.7421
Jkt 229001
TABLE 2—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX
BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET
AREAS FOR RURAL AREAS—Continued
State
code
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
PO 00000
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
Wage
index
Nonurban area
Hawaii ........................
Idaho ..........................
Illinois .........................
Indiana .......................
Iowa ...........................
Kansas .......................
Kentucky ....................
Louisiana ....................
Maine .........................
Frm 00044
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 4703
1.0728
0.7583
0.8438
0.8472
0.8351
0.7997
0.7877
0.7718
0.8300
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
Nonurban area
Maryland ....................
Massachusetts ...........
Michigan .....................
Minnesota ..................
Mississippi ..................
Missouri ......................
Montana .....................
Nebraska ....................
Nevada .......................
01AUN3
Wage
index
0.8797
1.3540
0.8387
0.9053
0.7537
0.7622
0.8600
0.8733
0.9739
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 / Notices
46777
TABLE 2—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX
BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET
AREAS FOR RURAL AREAS—Continued
TABLE 2—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX
BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET
AREAS FOR RURAL AREAS—Continued
TABLE 2—FY 2014 WAGE INDEX
BASED ON CBSA LABOR MARKET
AREAS FOR RURAL AREAS—Continued
State
code
State
code
State
code
Nonurban area
65 .........
Guam .........................
mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with NOTICES3
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
Wage
index
Nonurban area
New Hampshire .........
New Jersey 1 ..............
New Mexico ...............
New York ...................
North Carolina ............
North Dakota ..............
Ohio ...........................
Oklahoma ...................
Oregon .......................
Pennsylvania ..............
Puerto Rico 1 ..............
Rhode Island 1 ...........
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:44 Jul 31, 2013
1.0372
0.8879
0.8199
0.8271
0.6891
0.8470
0.7783
0.9500
0.8380
0.4047
Jkt 229001
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
PO 00000
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
.........
Wage
index
Nonurban area
South Carolina ...........
South Dakota .............
Tennessee .................
Texas .........................
Utah ...........................
Vermont .....................
Virgin Islands .............
Virginia .......................
Washington ................
West Virginia ..............
Wisconsin ...................
Wyoming ....................
Frm 00045
Fmt 4701
Sfmt 9990
0.8338
0.8124
0.7559
0.7978
0.8516
0.9725
0.7185
0.7728
1.0092
0.7333
0.9142
0.9238
Wage
index
0.9611
1 All
counties within the State are classified
as urban, with the exception of Puerto Rico.
Puerto Rico has areas designated as rural;
however, no short-term, acute care hospitals
are located in the area(s) for FY 2013. The
Puerto Rico wage index is the same as FY
2012.
[FR Doc. 2013–18445 Filed 7–29–13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P
E:\FR\FM\01AUN3.SGM
01AUN3
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 78, Number 148 (Thursday, August 1, 2013)]
[Notices]
[Pages 46733-46777]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2013-18445]
[[Page 46733]]
Vol. 78
Thursday,
No. 148
August 1, 2013
Part III
Department of Health and Human Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Medicare Program; Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities Prospective Payment
System--Update for Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2013 (FY 2014);
Notice
Federal Register / Vol. 78, No. 148 / Thursday, August 1, 2013 /
Notices
[[Page 46734]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services
[CMS-1447-N]
RIN 0938-AR63
Medicare Program; Inpatient Psychiatric Facilities Prospective
Payment System--Update for Fiscal Year Beginning October 1, 2013 (FY
2014)
AGENCY: Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: This notice updates the prospective payment rates for Medicare
inpatient hospital services provided by inpatient psychiatric
facilities (IPFs). These changes are applicable to IPF discharges
occurring during the fiscal year (FY) beginning October 1, 2013 through
September 30, 2014.
DATES: Effective Date: The updated IPF prospective payment rates are
effective for discharges occurring on or after October 1, 2013 through
September 30, 2014.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dorothy Myrick or Jana Lindquist,
(410) 786-4533, for general information. Hudson Osgood, (410) 786-7897
or Bridget Dickensheets, (410) 786-8670, for information regarding the
market basket and labor-related share. Theresa Bean, (410) 786-2287,
for information regarding the regulatory impact analysis.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
To assist readers in referencing sections contained in this
document, we are providing the following table of contents.
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
C. Summary of Costs and Benefits
II. Background
A. Annual Requirements for Updating the IPF PPS
B. Overview of the Legislative Requirements of the IPF PPS
C. General Overview of the IPF PPS
III. Transition Period for Implementation of the IPF PPS
IV. Changing the IPF PPS Payment Rate Update Period from a Rate Year
to a Fiscal Year
V. Market Basket for the IPF PPS
A. Background
B. FY 2014 Market Basket Update
C. Labor-Related Share
VI. Updates to the IPF PPS for FY Beginning October 1, 2013
A. Determining the Standardized Budget-Neutral Federal Per Diem
Base Rate
1. Standardization of the Federal Per Diem Base Rate and
Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) Rate
2. Calculation of the Budget Neutrality Adjustment
a. Outlier Adjustment
b. Stop-Loss Provision Adjustment
c. Behavioral Offset
B. Update of the Federal Per Diem Base Rate and
Electroconvulsive Therapy Rate
VII. Update of the IPF PPS Adjustment Factors
A. Overview of the IPF PPS Adjustment Factors
B. Patient-Level Adjustments
1. Adjustment for MS-DRG Assignment
2. Payment for Comorbid Conditions
3. Patient Age Adjustments
4. Variable Per Diem Adjustments
C. Facility-Level Adjustments
1. Wage Index Adjustment
a. Background
b. Wage Index for FY 2014
c. OMB Bulletins
2. Adjustment for Rural Location
3. Teaching Adjustment
a. FTE Intern and Resident Cap Adjustment
b. Temporary Adjustment to the FTE Cap to Reflect Residents
Added Due to Hospital Closure
c. Temporary Adjustment to FTE Cap to Reflect Residents Affected
By Residency Program Closure
i. Receiving IPF
ii. IPF That Closed Its Program
4. Cost of Living Adjustment for IPFs Located in Alaska and
Hawaii
5. Adjustment for IPFs with a Qualifying Emergency Department
(ED)
D. Other Payment Adjustments and Policies
1. Outlier Payments
a. Update to the Outlier Fixed Dollar Loss Threshold Amount
b. Update to IPF Cost-to-Charge Ratio Ceilings
2. Expiration of the Stop-Loss Provision
3. Future Refinements
VIII. Secretary's Recommendations
IX. Waiver of Notice and Comment
X. Collection of Information Requirements
XI. Regulatory Impact Analysis
Addenda
Acronyms
Because of the many terms to which we refer by acronym in this
notice, we are listing the acronyms used and their corresponding
meanings in alphabetical order below:
BBRA Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP [State Children's Health
Insurance Program] Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999, (Pub. L.
106-113)
CBSA Core-Based Statistical Area
CCR Cost-to-charge ratio
CAH Critical access hospital
DSM-IV-TR Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders
Fourth Edition--Text Revision
DRGs Diagnosis-related groups
FY Federal fiscal year (October 1 through September 30)
ICD-9-CM International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision,
Clinical Modification
IPFs Inpatient psychiatric facilities
IRFs Inpatient rehabilitation facilities
LTCHs Long-term care hospitals
MedPAR Medicare provider analysis and review file
RPL Rehabilitation, Psychiatric, and Long-Term Care
RY Rate Year (July 1 through June 30)
TEFRA Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982, (Pub. L. 97-
248)
I. Executive Summary
A. Purpose
This notice updates the prospective payment rates for Medicare
inpatient hospital services provided by inpatient psychiatric
facilitates for discharges occurring during the fiscal year (FY)
beginning October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014.
B. Summary of the Major Provisions
In this notice, we update the IPF PPS, as specified in 42 CFR
412.428. The updates include the following:
The FY 2008-based Rehabilitation, Psychiatric, and Long
Term Care (RPL) market basket update of 2.6 percent adjusted by a 0.1
percentage point reduction as required by section 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of
the Social Security Act (the Act) and a 0.5 percentage point reduction
for economy-wide productivity as required by 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the
Act.
The fixed dollar loss threshold amount in order to
maintain the appropriate outlier percentage.
The electroconvulsive therapy payment by a factor
specified by CMS.
The national urban and rural cost-to-charge ratio medians
and ceilings.
The cost of living adjustment factors for IPFs located in
Alaska and Hawaii, if appropriate.
Description of the ICD-9-CM and MS-DRG classification
changes discussed in the annual update to the hospital inpatient PPS
regulations.
Use of the best available hospital wage index and
information regarding whether an adjustment to the Federal per diem
base rate is needed to maintain budget neutrality.
The MS-DRG listing and comorbidity categories to reflect
the ICD-9-CM revisions effective October 1, 2013.
Retaining the 17 percent adjustment for IPFs located in
rural areas, the 1.31 adjustment factor for IPFs with a qualifying
emergency department, the coefficient value of 0.5150 for the teaching
adjustment to the Federal per diem rate, the MS-DRG adjustment factors
and comorbidity adjustment factors currently being paid to IPFs for FY
2013.
[[Page 46735]]
C. Summary of Transfers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Provision description Total transfers
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2014 IPF PPS payment rate update.... The overall economic impact of
this notice is an estimated
$115 million in increased
payments to IPFs during FY
2014.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. Background
A. Annual Requirements for Updating the IPF PPS
In November 2004, we implemented the inpatient psychiatric
facilities (IPF) prospective payment system (PPS) in a final rule that
appeared in the November 15, 2004 Federal Register (69 FR 66922). In
developing the IPF PPS, in order to ensure that the IPF PPS is able to
account adequately for each IPF's case-mix, we performed an extensive
regression analysis of the relationship between the per diem costs and
certain patient and facility characteristics to determine those
characteristics associated with statistically significant cost
differences on a per diem basis. For characteristics with statistically
significant cost differences, we used the regression coefficients of
those variables to determine the size of the corresponding payment
adjustments.
In that final rule, we explained that we believe it is important to
delay updating the adjustment factors derived from the regression
analysis until we have IPF PPS data that include as much information as
possible regarding the patient-level characteristics of the population
that each IPF serves. Therefore, we indicated that we did not intend to
update the regression analysis and recalculate the Federal per diem
base rate and the patient-and facility-level adjustments until we
complete that analysis. Until that analysis is complete, we stated our
intention to publish a notice in the Federal Register each spring to
update the IPF PPS (71 FR 27041). In the May 6, 2011 IPF PPS final rule
(76 FR 26432), we changed the payment rate update period to a rate year
(RY) that coincides with a fiscal year (FY) update. Therefore, update
notices are now published in the Federal Register in the summer to be
effective on October 1. For further discussion on changing the IPF PPS
payment rate update period to a RY that coincides with a FY, see the
IPF PPS final rule published in the Federal Register on May 6, 2011 (76
FR 26434 through 26435).
Updates to the IPF PPS, as specified in 42 CFR Sec. 412.428,
include the following:
A description of the methodology and data used to
calculate the updated Federal per diem base payment amount.
The rate of increase factor as described in Sec.
412.424(a)(2)(iii), which is based on the Excluded Hospital with
Capital market basket under the update methodology of section
1886(b)(3)(B)(ii) of the Act for each year (effective from the
implementation period until June 30, 2006).
For discharges occurring on or after July 1, 2006, the
rate of increase factor for the Federal portion of the IPF's payment,
which is based on the Rehabilitation, Psychiatric, and Long-Term Care
(RPL) market basket.
The best available hospital wage index and information
regarding whether an adjustment to the Federal per diem base rate is
needed to maintain budget neutrality.
Updates to the fixed dollar loss threshold amount in order
to maintain the appropriate outlier percentage.
Description of the International Classification of
Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) coding and
diagnosis-related groups (DRGs) classification changes discussed in the
annual update to the hospital inpatient prospective payment system
(IPPS) regulations.
Update to the electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) payment by a
factor specified by CMS.
Update to the national urban and rural cost-to-charge
ratio medians and ceilings.
Update to the cost of living adjustment factors for IPFs
located in Alaska and Hawaii, if appropriate.
Our most recent IPF PPS annual update occurred in the August 7,
2012 Federal Register notice (77 FR 47224) (hereinafter referred to as
the August 2012 IPF PPS notice) that set forth updates to the IPF PPS
payment rates for FY 2013. That notice updated the IPF PPS per diem
payment rates that were published in the May 2011 IPF PPS final rule in
accordance with our established policies.
Since implementation of the IPF PPS, we have explained that we
believe it is important to delay updating the adjustment factors
derived from the regression analysis until we have IPF PPS data that
include as much information as possible regarding the patient-level
characteristics of the population that each IPF serves. Because we are
now approximately 8 years into the system, we believe that we have
enough data to begin that process. Therefore, we have begun the
necessary analysis to make future refinements. While we do not propose
to make refinements in this notice, as explained in section V.D.3
below, we expect that in future rulemaking, for FY 2015, we will be
ready to propose potential refinements.
B. Overview of the Legislative Requirements of the IPF PPS
Section 124 of the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP (State Children's
Health Insurance Program) Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999 (BBRA)
(Pub. L. 106-113) required the establishment and implementation of an
IPF PPS. Specifically, section 124 of the BBRA mandated that the
Secretary develop a per diem PPS for inpatient hospital services
furnished in psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric units including an
adequate patient classification system that reflects the differences in
patient resource use and costs among psychiatric hospitals and
psychiatric units.
Section 405(g)(2) of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement,
and Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA) (Pub. L. 108-173) extended the IPF
PPS to distinct part psychiatric units of critical access hospitals
(CAHs).
Section 3401(f) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
(Pub. L. 111-148) as amended by section 10319(e) of that Act and by
section 1105(d) of the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of
2010 (Pub. L. 111-152) (hereafter referred to as ``the Affordable Care
Act'') added subsection (s) to section 1886 of the Act.
Section 1886(s)(1) is titled ``Reference to Establishment and
Implementation of System'' and it refers to section 124 of the
Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act of 1999,
which relates to the establishment of the IPF PPS.
Section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act requires the application of the
productivity adjustment described in section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of
the Act to the IPF PPS for the RY beginning in 2012 (that is, a RY that
coincides with a FY) and each subsequent RY. For the RY beginning in
2013 (that is, FY 2014), the productivity adjustment is equal to 0.5
percentage point, which we are implementing in this notice. Section
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act requires the application of an ``other
adjustment'' that reduces any update to an IPF PPS base rate by
percentages specified in section 1886(s)(3) of the Act for the RY
beginning in 2010 through the RY beginning in 2019. For the RY
beginning in 2013 (that is, FY 2014), section 1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act
requires the reduction to be 0.1 percentage point. We are implementing
that provision in this FY 2014 IPF PPS notice.
[[Page 46736]]
Section 1886(s)(4) of the Act requires the establishment of a
quality data reporting program for the IPF PPS beginning in RY 2014. We
proposed and finalized new requirements for quality reporting for IPFs
in the ``Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System for Acute Care
Hospitals and the Long Term Care Hospital Prospective Payment System
and Fiscal Year 2013 Rates'' proposed rule (May 11, 2012) (77 FR 27870,
28105 through 28116) and final rule (August 31, 2012) (77 FR 53258,
53644 through 53360).
To implement and periodically update these provisions, we have
published various proposed and final rules in the Federal Register. For
more information regarding these rules, see the CMS Web site at https://www.cms.hhs.gov/InpatientPsychFacilPPS/.
C. General Overview of the IPF PPS
The November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66922) established the
IPF PPS, as authorized under section 124 of the BBRA and codified at
subpart N of part 412 of the Medicare regulations. The November 2004
IPF PPS final rule set forth the per diem Federal rates for the
implementation year (the 18-month period from January 1, 2005 through
June 30, 2006), and it provided payment for the inpatient operating and
capital costs to IPFs for covered psychiatric services they furnish
(that is, routine, ancillary, and capital costs, but not costs of
approved educational activities, bad debts, and other services or items
that are outside the scope of the IPF PPS). Covered psychiatric
services include services for which benefits are provided under the
fee-for-service Part A (Hospital Insurance Program) Medicare program.
The IPF PPS established the Federal per diem base rate for each
patient day in an IPF derived from the national average daily routine
operating, ancillary, and capital costs in IPFs in FY 2002. The average
per diem cost was updated to the midpoint of the first year under the
IPF PPS, standardized to account for the overall positive effects of
the IPF PPS payment adjustments, and adjusted for budget neutrality.
The Federal per diem payment under the IPF PPS is comprised of the
Federal per diem base rate described above and certain patient- and
facility-level payment adjustments that were found in the regression
analysis to be associated with statistically significant per diem cost
differences.
The patient-level adjustments include age, DRG assignment,
comorbidities, and variable per diem adjustments to reflect higher per
diem costs in the early days of an IPF stay. Facility-level adjustments
include adjustments for the IPF's wage index, rural location, teaching
status, a cost of living adjustment for IPFs located in Alaska and
Hawaii, and presence of a qualifying emergency department (ED).
The IPF PPS provides additional payment policies for: Outlier
cases; stop-loss protection (which was applicable only during the IPF
PPS transition period); interrupted stays; and a per treatment
adjustment for patients who undergo ECT.
A complete discussion of the regression analysis appears in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66933 through 66936).
Section 124 of BBRA did not specify an annual update rate strategy
for the IPF PPS and was broadly written to give the Secretary
discretion in establishing an update methodology. Therefore, in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we implemented the IPF PPS using the
following update strategy:
Calculate the final Federal per diem base rate to be
budget neutral for the 18-month period of January 1, 2005 through June
30, 2006.
Use a July 1 through June 30 annual update cycle.
Allow the IPF PPS first update to be effective for
discharges on or after July 1, 2006 through June 30, 2007.
III. Transition Period for Implementation of the IPF PPS
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we provided for a 3-year
transition period. During this 3-year transition period, an IPF's total
payment under the PPS was based on an increasing percentage of the
Federal rate with a corresponding decreasing percentage of the IPF PPS
payment that was based on reasonable cost concepts. However, effective
for cost reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2008, IPF
PPS payments were based on 100 percent of the Federal rate.
IV. Changing the IPF PPS Payment Rate Update Period From a Rate Year to
a Fiscal Year
Prior to RY 2012, the IPF PPS was updated on a July 1st through
June 30th annual update cycle. Effective with RY 2012, we switched the
IPF PPS payment rate update from a rate year that begins on July 1st
ending on June 30th to a period that coincides with a fiscal year. In
order to transition from a RY to a FY, the IPF PPS RY 2012 covered a 15
month period from July 1st through September 30th. As proposed and
finalized, after RY 2012, the rate update period for the IPF PPS
payment rates and other policy changes begin on October 1 through
September 30. Therefore, the update cycle for FY 2014 will be October
1, 2013 through September 30, 2014.
For further discussion of the 15-month market basket update for RY
2012 and changing the payment rate update period from a RY to a FY, we
refer readers to the RY 2012 IPF PPS proposed rule (76 FR 4998) and the
RY 2012 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR 26432).
V. Market Basket for the IPF PPS
A. Background
The input price index (that is, the market basket) that was used to
develop the IPF PPS was the Excluded Hospital with Capital market
basket. This market basket was based on 1997 Medicare cost report data
and included data for Medicare participating IPFs, inpatient
rehabilitation facilities (IRFs), long-term care hospitals (LTCHs),
cancer hospitals, and children's hospitals. Although ``market basket''
technically describes the mix of goods and services used in providing
hospital care, this term is also commonly used to denote the input
price index (that is, cost category weights and price proxies combined)
derived from that market basket. Accordingly, the term ``market
basket'' as used in this document refers to a hospital input price
index.
Beginning with the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27046 through
27054), IPF PPS payments were updated using a FY 2002-based market
basket reflecting the operating and capital cost structures for IRFs,
IPFs, and LTCHs (hereafter referred to as the Rehabilitation,
Psychiatric, and Long-Term Care (RPL) market basket).
We excluded cancer and children's hospitals from the RPL market
basket because these hospitals are not reimbursed through a PPS;
rather, their payments are based entirely on reasonable costs subject
to rate-of-increase limits established under the authority of section
1886(b) of the Act, which are implemented in regulations at Sec.
413.40. Moreover, the FY 2002 cost structures for cancer and children's
hospitals are noticeably different than the cost structures of the
IRFs, IPFs, and LTCHs. A complete discussion of the FY 2002-based RPL
market basket appears in the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27046
through 27054).
In the May 1, 2009 IPF PPS notice (74 FR 20362), we expressed our
interest in exploring the possibility of creating a stand-alone IPF
market basket that reflects the cost structures of only IPF providers.
We noted that, of the available options, one would be to join the
Medicare cost report data from
[[Page 46737]]
freestanding IPF providers (presently incorporated into the RPL market
basket) with data from hospital-based IPF providers (not currently
incorporated in any market basket cost weights). We indicated that an
examination of the Medicare cost report data comparing freestanding and
hospital-based IPFs revealed considerable differences between the two
with respect to cost levels and cost structures. At that time, we were
unable to fully understand the differences between these two types of
IPF providers. As a result, we felt that further research was required;
therefore we solicited public comment for additional information that
might help us to better understand the reasons for the variations in
costs and cost structures, as indicated by the cost report data,
between freestanding and hospital-based IPFs (74 FR 20376).
We summarized the public comments received and our responses in the
April 2010 IPF PPS notice (75 FR 23111 through 23113). Despite
receiving comments from the public on this issue, we were unable to
explain the observed differences in costs and cost structures between
hospital-based and freestanding IPFs. Therefore, we did not believe it
was appropriate, at the time, to incorporate data from hospital-based
IPFs with those of freestanding IPFs to create a stand-alone IPF market
basket.
In the RY 2012 IPF PPS proposed rule (76 FR 4998) and final rule
(76 FR 26432), we proposed and finalized the use of a rebased and
revised FY 2008-based RPL market basket to update IPF payments. In the
RY 2012 IPF PPS proposed rule (76 FR 5001), we also welcomed public
comment on the possibility of using a rehabilitation and psychiatric
(RP) market basket to update IPF payments in the future. Comments
received and our responses are summarized in the RY 2012 final rule (76
FR 26436).
We continue to explore the viability of creating separate market
baskets from the current RPL market basket. In the FY 2013 IPPS/LTCH
final rule (77 FR 53468 through 53476), we adopted the newly created FY
2009-based LTCH-specific market basket for use under the LTCH PPS
beginning in FY 2013. We continue to investigate the use of an
alternative market basket to update IPF PPS payments; however, for the
FY 2014 IPF PPS update, we continue to use (as was done for the FY 2013
update) the percentage increase in the FY 2008-based RPL market basket
to determine the IPF PPS market basket update. We still have concerns
about cost differences between freestanding and hospital-based
providers, which remain unexplained even when looking at more recent
data. However, we remain interested in researching this topic further
to determine if these data quality and representativeness concerns can
be overcome, and have plans to conduct more analysis into the claims
and cost data for IPFs. Any possible changes to the market basket used
to update IPF payments would appear in a future rulemaking and be
subject to public comment.
B. FY 2014 Market Basket Update
The FY 2014 update for the IPF PPS using the FY 2008-based RPL
market basket and IHS Global Insight's second quarter 2013 forecast of
the market basket components is 2.6 percent (prior to the application
of any statutory adjustments). This includes increases in both the
operating and the capital components for FY 2014 (that is, October 1,
2013 through September 30, 2014). IHS Global Insight, Inc. is a
nationally recognized economic and financial forecasting firm that
contracts with CMS to forecast the components of the market baskets.
As previously described in section I.B, section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of
the Act requires the application of the productivity adjustment
described in section 1886(b)(3)(B)(xi)(II) of the Act to the IPF PPS
for the RY beginning in 2012 and each subsequent RY. The statute
defines the productivity adjustment to be equal to the 10-year moving
average of changes in annual economy-wide private nonfarm business
multifactor productivity (MFP) (as projected by the Secretary for the
10-year period ending with the applicable FY, year, cost reporting
period, or other annual period) (the ``MFP adjustment'').
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is the agency that publishes
the official measure of private non-farm business MFP. We refer readers
to the BLS Web site at https://www.bls.gov/mfp to obtain the BLS
historical published MFP data. The MFP adjustment for FY 2014
applicable to the IPF PPS is derived using a projection of MFP that is
currently produced by IHS Global Insight, Inc. For a detailed
description of the model currently used by IHS Global Insight, Inc. to
project MFP, as well as a description of how the MFP adjustment is
calculated, we refer readers to the FY 2012 IPPS/LTCH final rule (76 FR
51690 through 51692). Based on IHS Global Insight, Inc.'s 2013 second
quarter forecast, the productivity adjustment for FY 2014 is 0.5
percentage point. Section 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act also requires
the application of an ``other adjustment'' that reduces any update to
an IPF PPS base rate by percentages specified in section 1886(s)(3) of
the Act for rate years beginning in 2010 through the RY beginning in
2019. For the RY beginning in 2013 (that is, FY 2014), the reduction is
0.1 percentage point. We are implementing the productivity adjustment
and ``other adjustment'' in this FY 2014 IPF PPS notice.
C. Labor-Related Share
Due to variations in geographic wage levels and other labor-related
costs, we believe that payment rates under the IPF PPS should continue
to be adjusted by a geographic wage index, which would apply to the
labor-related portion of the Federal per diem base rate (hereafter
referred to as the labor-related share).
The labor-related share is determined by identifying the national
average proportion of total costs that are related to, influenced by,
or vary with the local labor market. We classify a cost category as
labor-related if the costs are labor-intensive and vary with the local
labor market. Based on our definition of the labor-related share, we
include in the labor-related share the sum of the relative importance
of Wages and Salaries, Employee Benefits, Professional Fees: Labor-
related, Administrative and Business Support Services, All Other:
Labor-related Services, and a portion of the Capital-Related cost
weight.
Therefore, to determine the labor-related share for the IPF PPS for
FY 2014, we used the FY 2008-based RPL market basket cost weights
relative importance to determine the labor-related share for the IPF
PPS. This estimate of the FY 2014 labor-related share is based on IHS
Global Insight Inc.'s second quarter 2013 forecast, which is the same
forecast used to derive the FY 2014 market basket update.
Table 1 below shows the FY 2014 relative importance labor-related
share using the FY 2008-based RPL market basket along with the FY 2013
relative importance labor-related share.
[[Page 46738]]
Table 1--FY 2014 Relative Importance Labor-Related Share and the FY 2013
Relative Importance Labor-Related Share Based on the FY 2008-Based RPL
Market Basket
------------------------------------------------------------------------
FY 2013 FY 2014
relative relative
importance labor- importance labor-
related share related share
\1\ \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wages and Salaries.................. 48.796 48.394
Employee Benefits................... 13.021 12.963
Professional Fees: Labor-Related.... 2.070 2.065
Administrative and Business Support 0.417 0.415
Services...........................
All Other: Labor-Related Services... 2.077 2.080
Subtotal............................ 66.381 65.917
Labor-Related Portion of Capital 3.600 3.577
Costs (46%)........................
-----------------------------------
Total Labor-Related Share....... 69.981 69.494
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. Published in the FY 2013 IPF PPS notice (77 FR 47228) and based on
IHS Global Insight, Inc.'s second quarter 2012 forecast of the FY 2008-
based RPL market basket.
2. Based on IHS Global Insight, Inc.'s second quarter 2013 forecast of
the FY 2008-based RPL market basket.
The labor-related share for FY 2014 is the sum of the FY 2014
relative importance of each labor-related cost category, and would
reflect the different rates of price change for these cost categories
between the base year (FY 2008) and FY 2014. The sum of the relative
importance for FY 2014 for operating costs (Wages and Salaries,
Employee Benefits, Professional Fees: Labor-Related, Administrative and
Business Support Services, and All Other: Labor-related Services) is
65.917 percent, as shown in Table 1 above. The portion of Capital-
related cost that is influenced by the local labor market is estimated
to be 46 percent. Since the relative importance for Capital-Related
Costs is 7.776 percent of the FY 2008-based RPL market basket in FY
2014, we take 46 percent of 7.776 percent to determine the labor-
related share of Capital-related cost for FY 2014. The result is 3.577
percent, which we add to 65.917 percent for the operating cost amount
to determine the total labor-related share for FY 2014. Therefore, the
labor-related share for the IPF PPS in FY 2014 is 69.494 percent. This
labor-related share is determined using the same general methodology as
employed in calculating all previous IPF labor-related shares (see, for
example, 69 FR 66952 through 66953). The wage index and the labor-
related share are reflected in budget neutrality adjustments.
VI. Updates to the IPF PPS for FY Beginning October 1, 2013
The IPF PPS is based on a standardized Federal per diem base rate
calculated from the IPF average per diem costs and adjusted for budget-
neutrality in the implementation year. The Federal per diem base rate
is used as the standard payment per day under the IPF PPS and is
adjusted by the patient- and facility-level adjustments that are
applicable to the IPF stay. A detailed explanation of how we calculated
the average per diem cost appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule (69 FR 66926).
A. Determining the Standardized Budget-Neutral Federal Per Diem Base
Rate
Section 124(a)(1) of the BBRA required that we implement the IPF
PPS in a budget neutral manner. In other words, the amount of total
payments under the IPF PPS, including any payment adjustments, must be
projected to be equal to the amount of total payments that would have
been made if the IPF PPS were not implemented. Therefore, we calculated
the budget-neutrality factor by setting the total estimated IPF PPS
payments to be equal to the total estimated payments that would have
been made under the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982
(TEFRA) (Pub. L. 97-248) methodology had the IPF PPS not been
implemented.
Under the IPF PPS methodology, we calculated the final Federal per
diem base rate to be budget neutral during the IPF PPS implementation
period (that is, the 18-month period from January 1, 2005 through June
30, 2006) using a July 1 update cycle. We updated the average cost per
day to the midpoint of the IPF PPS implementation period (that is,
October 1, 2005), and this amount was used in the payment model to
establish the budget-neutrality adjustment.
A step-by-step description of the methodology used to estimate
payments under the TEFRA payment system appears in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66926).
1. Standardization of the Federal Per Diem Base Rate and
Electroconvulsive Therapy (ECT) Rate
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we describe how we
standardized the IPF PPS Federal per diem base rate to account for the
overall positive effects of the IPF PPS payment adjustment factors. To
standardize the IPF PPS payments, we compared the IPF PPS payment
amounts calculated from the FY 2002 Medicare Provider Analysis and
Review (MedPAR) file to the projected TEFRA payments from the FY 2002
cost report file updated to the midpoint of the IPF PPS implementation
period (that is, October 2005). The standardization factor was
calculated by dividing total estimated payments under the TEFRA payment
system by estimated payments under the IPF PPS. The standardization
factor was calculated to be 0.8367.
As described in detail in the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR
27045), in reviewing the methodology used to simulate the IPF PPS
payments used for the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we discovered
that due to a computer code error, total IPF PPS payments were
underestimated by about 1.36 percent. Since the IPF PPS payment total
should have been larger than the estimated figure, the standardization
factor should have been smaller (0.8254 vs. 0.8367). In turn, the
Federal per diem base rate and the ECT rate should have been reduced by
0.8254 instead of 0.8367.
To resolve this issue, in RY 2007, we amended the Federal per diem
base rate and the ECT payment rate prospectively. Using the
standardization factor of 0.8254, the average cost per day was
effectively reduced by 17.46 percent (100 percent minus 82.54 percent =
17.46 percent).
[[Page 46739]]
2. Calculation of the Budget Neutrality Adjustment
To compute the budget neutrality adjustment for the IPF PPS, we
separately identified each component of the adjustment, that is, the
outlier adjustment, stop-loss adjustment, and behavioral offset.
A complete discussion of how we calculate each component of the
budget neutrality adjustment appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS final
rule (69 FR 66932 through 66933) and in the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule
(71 FR 27044 through 27046).
a. Outlier Adjustment
Since the IPF PPS payment amount for each IPF includes applicable
outlier amounts, we reduced the standardized Federal per diem base rate
to account for aggregate IPF PPS payments estimated to be made as
outlier payments. The outlier adjustment was calculated to be 2
percent. As a result, the standardized Federal per diem base rate was
reduced by 2 percent to account for projected outlier payments.
b. Stop-Loss Provision Adjustment
As explained in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we provided a
stop-loss payment during the transition from cost-based reimbursement
to the per diem payment system to ensure that an IPF's total PPS
payments were no less than a minimum percentage of their TEFRA payment,
had the IPF PPS not been implemented. We reduced the standardized
Federal per diem base rate by the percentage of aggregate IPF PPS
payments estimated to be made for stop-loss payments. As a result, the
standardized Federal per diem base rate was reduced by 0.39 percent to
account for stop-loss payments. Since the transition was completed in
RY 2009, the stop-loss provision is no longer applicable, and for cost
reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2008, IPFs were paid
100 percent PPS rates.
c. Behavioral Offset
As explained in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule,
implementation of the IPF PPS may result in certain changes in IPF
practices, especially with respect to coding for comorbid medical
conditions. As a result, Medicare may make higher payments than assumed
in our calculations. Accounting for these effects through an adjustment
is commonly known as a behavioral offset.
Based on accepted actuarial practices and consistent with the
assumptions made in other PPSs, we assumed in determining the
behavioral offset that IPFs would regain 15 percent of potential
``losses'' and augment payment increases by 5 percent. We applied this
actuarial assumption, which is based on our historical experience with
new payment systems, to the estimated ``losses'' and ``gains'' among
the IPFs. The behavioral offset for the IPF PPS was calculated to be
2.66 percent. As a result, we reduced the standardized Federal per diem
base rate by 2.66 percent to account for behavioral changes. As
indicated in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we do not plan to
change adjustment factors or projections until we analyze IPF PPS data.
If we find that an adjustment is warranted, the percent difference
may be applied prospectively to the established PPS rates to ensure the
rates accurately reflect the payment level. In conducting this
analysis, we will be interested in the extent to which improved coding
of patients' principal and other diagnoses, which may not reflect real
increases in underlying resource demands, has occurred under the PPS.
B. Update of the Federal Per Diem Base Rate and Electroconvulsive
Therapy Rate
As described in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66931),
the average per diem cost was updated to the midpoint of the
implementation year. This updated average per diem cost of $724.43 was
reduced by--(1) 17.46 percent to account for standardization to
projected TEFRA payments for the implementation period; (2) 2 percent
to account for outlier payments; (3) 0.39 percent to account for stop-
loss payments; and (4) 2.66 percent to account for the behavioral
offset. The Federal per diem base rate in the implementation year was
$575.95. The increase in the per diem base rate for RY 2009 included
the 0.39 percent increase due to the removal of the stop-loss
provision. We indicated in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR
66932) that we would remove this 0.39 percent reduction to the Federal
per diem base rate after the transition. As discussed in section
IV.D.2. of the May 2008 IPF PPS notice, we increased the Federal per
diem base rate and the ECT base rate by 0.39 percent in RY 2009.
Therefore for RY 2009 and beyond, the stop-loss provision has ended and
is no longer a part of budget neutrality.
In accordance with section 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) of the Act, which
requires the application of an ``other adjustment,'' described in
section 1886(s)(3) of the Act (specifically, section 1886(s)(3)(B)) for
RYs 2013 and 2014 that reduces the update to the IPF PPS base rate for
the FY beginning in Calendar Year (CY) 2013, we are adjusting the IPF
PPS update by a 0.1 percentage point reduction for FY 2014. In
addition, in accordance with section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, which
requires the application of the productivity adjustment that reduces
the update to the IPF PPS base rate for the FY beginning in CY 2013, we
are adjusting the IPF PPS update by a 0.5 percentage point reduction
for FY 2014.
For this notice, we are applying an annual update of 2.0 percent
(that is the FY 2008-based RPL market basket increase for FY 2014 of
2.6 percent less the productivity adjustment of 0.5 percentage point
less the 0.1 percentage point required under section1886(s)(3)(B) of
the Act), and the wage index budget neutrality factor of 1.0010 to the
FY 2013 Federal per diem base rate of $698.51, yielding a Federal per
diem base rate of $713.19 for FY 2014. Similarly, we are applying the
2.0 percent payment update, and the 1.0010 wage index budget neutrality
factor to the FY 2013 ECT base rate, yielding an ECT base rate of
$307.04 for FY 2014.
As noted above, section 1886(s)(4) of the Act requires the
establishment of a quality data reporting program for the IPF PPS
beginning in RY 2014. We finalized new requirements for quality
reporting for IPFs in the ``Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment
System for Acute Care Hospitals and the Long Term Care Hospital
Prospective Payment System and Fiscal Year 2013 Rates'' final rule
(August 31, 2012) (77 FR 53258, 53644 through 53360). Section
1886(s)(4)(A)(i) of the Act requires that, for RY 2014 and each
subsequent rate year, the Secretary shall reduce any annual update to a
standard Federal rate for discharges occurring during the rate year by
2.0 percentage points for any IPF that does not comply with the quality
data submission requirements with respect to an applicable year.
Therefore, we are applying a 2.0 percentage point reduction to the
federal per diem base rate and the ECT base rate as follows.
For IPFs that fail to submit quality reporting data under the IPFQR
program, we are applying a 0 percent annual update (that is 2 percent
reduced by 2 percentage points in accordance with section
1886(s)(4)(A)(ii) of the Act) and the wage index budget neutrality
factor of 1.0010 to the FY 2013 Federal per diem base rate of $698.51,
yielding a Federal per diem base rate of $699.21 for FY 2014.
Similarly, we are applying the 0 percent annual update and the
1.0010 wage index budget neutrality factor to
[[Page 46740]]
the FY 2013 ECT base rate of $300.72, yielding an ECT base rate of
$301.02 for FY 2014.
In the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH PPS final rule (78 FR 27485), we are
adopting two new measures for the FY 2016 payment determination and
subsequent years for the IPFQR Program. We are also finalizing a
request for voluntary information whereby IPFs will be asked to provide
information on the patient experience of care survey they use.
VII. Update of the IPF PPS Adjustment Factors
A. Overview of the IPF PPS Adjustment Factors
The IPF PPS payment adjustments were derived from a regression
analysis of 100 percent of the FY 2002 MedPAR data file, which
contained 483,038 cases. For this notice, we used the same results of
the regression analysis used to implement the November 2004 IPF PPS
final rule. For a more detailed description of the data file used for
the regression analysis, see the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69
FR 66935 through 66936). While we have since used more recent claims
data to set the fixed dollar loss threshold amount, we used the same
results of this regression analysis to update the IPF PPS for FY 2013
and for FY 2014. Now that we are approximately 8 years into the IPF
PPS, we believe that we have enough data to begin looking at the
process of refining the IPF PPS as appropriate. We expect that in
future rulemaking, we may propose potential refinements to the system.
As we stated previously, we do not plan to update the regression
analysis until we are able to analyze IPF PPS claims and cost report
data. However, we continue to monitor claims and payment data
independently from cost report data to assess issues, to determine
whether changes in case-mix or payment shifts have occurred among
freestanding governmental, non-profit and private psychiatric
hospitals, and psychiatric units of general hospitals, and CAHs and
other issues of importance to IPFs.
B. Patient-Level Adjustments
In the August 2012 IPF PPS notice (77 FR 47230 through 47233) we
announced payment adjustments for the following patient-level
characteristics: Medicare Severity diagnosis related groups (MS-DRGs)
assignment of the patient's principal diagnosis, selected
comorbidities, patient age, and the variable per diem adjustments.
1. Adjustment for MS-DRG Assignment
The IPF PPS includes payment adjustments for designated psychiatric
DRGs assigned to the claim based on each patient's principal diagnosis.
As we did in FY 2013 (77 FR 47231), for FY 2014, we will make a payment
adjustment for psychiatric diagnoses that group to one of the 17 MS-
IPF-DRGs listed in Table 2. The DRG adjustment factors were expressed
relative to the most frequently reported psychiatric DRG in FY 2002,
that is, DRG 430 (psychoses). The coefficient values and adjustment
factors were derived from the regression analysis.
In accordance with Sec. 412.27(a), payment under the IPF PPS is
conditioned on IPFs admitting ``only patients whose admission to the
unit is required for active treatment, of an intensity that can be
provided appropriately only in an inpatient hospital setting, of a
psychiatric principal diagnosis that is listed in Chapter Five (`Mental
Disorders') of the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth
Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM)'' or in the Fourth Edition,
Text Revision of the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual, (DSM-IV-TR). IPF claims with a principal diagnosis
included in Chapter Five of the ICD-9-CM or the DSM-IV-TR are paid the
Federal per diem base rate under the IPF PPS and all other applicable
adjustments, including any applicable DRG adjustment. Psychiatric
principal diagnoses that do not group to one of the 17 designated DRGs
will still receive the Federal per diem base rate and all other
applicable adjustments, but the payment will not include a DRG
adjustment.
The Standards for Electronic Transaction final rule published in
the Federal Register on August 17, 2000 (65 FR 50312), adopted ICD-9-CM
as the designated code set for reporting diseases, injuries,
impairments, other health related problems, their manifestations, and
causes of injury, disease, impairment, or other health related
problems. Therefore, we use ICD-9-CM as the designated code set for the
IPF PPS.
We believe that it is important to maintain the same diagnostic
coding and DRG classification for IPFs that are used under the IPPS for
providing psychiatric care. Therefore, when the IPF PPS was implemented
for cost reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2005, we
adopted the same diagnostic code set and DRG patient classification
system (that is, the CMS DRGs) that were utilized at the time under the
hospital inpatient IPPS. Since the inception of the IPF PPS, the DRGs
used as the patient classification system under the IPF PPS have
corresponded exactly with the CMS DRGs applicable under the IPPS for
acute care hospitals.
Every year, changes to the ICD-9-CM coding system are addressed in
the IPPS proposed and final rules. The changes to the codes are
effective October 1 of each year and must be used by acute care
hospitals as well as other providers to report diagnostic and procedure
information. The IPF PPS has always incorporated ICD-9-CM coding
changes made in the annual IPPS update. We publish coding changes in a
Transmittal/Change Request, similar to how coding changes are announced
by the IPPS and LTCH PPS. Those ICD-9-CM coding changes are also
published in the following IPF PPS FY update, in either the IPF PPS
proposed and final rules, or in an IPF PPS update notice.
In the May 2008 IPF PPS notice (73 FR 25709), we discussed CMS'
effort to better recognize resource use and the severity of illness
among patients. CMS adopted the new MS-DRGs for the IPPS in the FY 2008
IPPS final rule with comment period (72 FR 47130). A crosswalk, to
reflect changes that were made to the DRGs under the IPF PPS to the new
MS-DRGs, was provided (73 FR 25716). We believe by better accounting
for patients' severity of illness in Medicare payment rates, the MS-
DRGs encourage hospitals to improve their coding and documentation of
patient diagnoses. The MS-DRGs, which are based on the IPPS MS-DRGs,
represent a significant increase in the number of DRGs (from 538 to
745, an increase of 207). For a full description of the development and
implementation of the MS-DRGs, see the FY 2008 IPPS final rule with
comment period (72 FR 47141 through 47175).
All of the ICD-9-CM coding changes are reflected in the FY 2013
GROUPER, Version 31.0, effective for IPPS discharges occurring on or
after October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014. The GROUPER Version
31.0 software package assigns each case to an MS-DRG on the basis of
the diagnosis and procedure codes and demographic information (that is,
age, sex, and discharge status). The Medicare Code Editor (MCE) 31.0
uses the new ICD-9-CM codes to validate coding for IPPS discharges on
or after October 1, 2013. The complete documentation of the GROUPER
logic is available from 3M/Health Information System (HIS), which,
under contract with CMS, is responsible for updating and maintaining
the GROUPER program. The current MS-DRG Definitions
[[Page 46741]]
Manual, version 30.0, is available on a CD for $225.00. Version 31.0 of
this manual, which will include the final FY 2014 MS-DRG changes, will
be available on CD for $225.00. These manuals may be obtained by
writing to 3M/HIS at the following address: 100 Barnes Road,
Wallingford, CT 06492; or by calling (203) 949-0303, or by obtaining an
order form at the Web site: https://www.3MHIS.com. The IPF PPS has
always used the same GROUPER and Code Editor as the IPPS. Therefore,
the ICD-9-CM changes, which were reflected in the GROUPER Version 31.0
and MCE 31.0 on October 1, 2013, also became effective for the IPF PPS
for discharges occurring on or after October 1, 2013.
The impact of the new MS-DRGs on the IPF PPS was negligible.
Mapping to the MS-DRGs resulted in the current 17 MS-DRGs, instead of
the original 15, for which the IPF PPS provides an adjustment. Although
the code set is updated, the same associated adjustment factors apply
now that have been in place since implementation of the IPF PPS, with
one exception that is unrelated to the update to the codes. When DRGs
521 and 522 were consolidated into MS-DRG 895, we carried over the
adjustment factor of 1.02 from DRG 521 to the newly consolidated MS-
DRG. This was done to reflect the higher claims volume under DRG 521,
with more than eight times the number of claims than billed under DRG
522. For a detailed description of the mapping changes from the
original DRG adjustment categories to the current MS-DRG adjustment
categories, we refer readers to the May 2008 IPF PPS notice (73 FR
25714).
The official version of the ICD-9-CM is available on CD-ROM from
the U.S. Government Printing Office. The FY 2012 version can be ordered
by contacting the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office, Department 50, Washington, DC 20402-9329, telephone number
(202) 512-1800. Questions concerning the ICD-9-CM should be directed to
Patricia E. Brooks, Co-Chairperson, ICD-9-CM Coordination and
Maintenance Committee, CMS, Center for Medicare Management, Hospital
and Ambulatory Policy Group, Division of Acute Care, Mailstop C4-08-06,
7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850. The Web site
for the CD-ROM which contains the complete official version of the
International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical
Modification is located at: https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/ICD9ProviderDiagnosticCodes/CDROM.html.
Further information concerning the official version of the ICD-9-CM
can be found on the IPPS Web site at: https://cms.hhs.gov/medicare/coding/icd9providerdiagnosticcodes/addendum.html.
Transition to ICD-10-CM
We note that, in accordance with the requirements of the final rule
published in the Federal Register on September 5, 2012 (77 FR 54664),
we will be discontinuing our current use of the International
Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-
CM), effective with the compliance date for using the international
Classification of Diseases, 10th revision, Clinical Modifications (ICD-
10-CM) of October 1, 2014. The ICD-10-CM coding guidelines are
available through the CMS Web site at: www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/ICD10/downloads/pcs_2012_guidelines.pdf and https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Coding/ICD10/?redirect=/ICD10 or on the CDC's Web
site at www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/icd10/10cmguidelines2012.pdf.
The MS-IPF-DRG adjustment factors (as shown in Table 2) will
continue to be paid for discharges occurring in FY 2014. In FY 2015,
the MS-IPF-DRG adjustment factors will be updated effective with the
compliance date for using the ICD-10-CM of October 1, 2014.
Table 2--FY 2014 Current MS-IPF-DRGS Applicable for the Principal Diagnosis Adjustment
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
MS-DRG MS-DRG descriptions factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
056........................................ Degenerative nervous system disorders w MCC........... 1.05
057........................................ Degenerative nervous system disorders w/o MCC......... 1.05
080........................................ Nontraumatic stupor & coma w MCC...................... 1.07
081........................................ Nontraumatic stupor & coma w/o MCC.................... 1.07
876........................................ O.R. procedure w principal diagnoses of mental illness 1.22
880........................................ Acute adjustment reaction & psychosocial dysfunction.. 1.05
881........................................ Depressive neuroses................................... 0.99
882........................................ Neuroses except depressive............................ 1.02
883........................................ Disorders of personality & impulse control............ 1.02
884........................................ Organic disturbances & mental retardation............. 1.03
885........................................ Psychoses............................................. 1.00
886........................................ Behavioral & developmental disorders.................. 0.99
887........................................ Other mental disorder diagnoses....................... 0.92
894........................................ Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence, left AMA............ 0.97
895........................................ Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w rehabilitation 1.02
therapy.
896........................................ Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation 0.88
therapy w MCC.
897........................................ Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation 0.88
therapy w/o MCC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. Payment for Comorbid Conditions
The intent of the comorbidity adjustments is to recognize the
increased costs associated with comorbid conditions by providing
additional payments for certain concurrent medical or psychiatric
conditions that are expensive to treat. In the May 2011 IPF PPS final
rule (76 FR 26451 through 26452), we explained that the IPF PPS
includes 17 comorbidity categories and identified the new, revised, and
deleted ICD-9-CM diagnosis codes that generate a comorbid condition
payment adjustment under the IPF PPS for RY 2012 (76 FR 26451).
Comorbidities are specific patient conditions that are secondary to
the patient's principal diagnosis and that require treatment during the
stay. Diagnoses that relate to an earlier episode of care and have no
bearing on
[[Page 46742]]
the current hospital stay are excluded and must not be reported on IPF
claims. Comorbid conditions must exist at the time of admission or
develop subsequently, and affect the treatment received, length of stay
(LOS), or both treatment and LOS.
For each claim, an IPF may receive only one comorbidity adjustment
within a comorbidity category, but it may receive an adjustment for
more than one comorbidity category. Billing instructions require that
IPFs must enter the full ICD-9-CM codes for up to 24 additional
diagnoses if they co-exist at the time of admission or develop
subsequently and impact the treatment provided.
The comorbidity adjustments were determined based on the regression
analysis using the diagnoses reported by IPFs in FY 2002. The principal
diagnoses were used to establish the DRG adjustments and were not
accounted for in establishing the comorbidity category adjustments,
except where ICD-9-CM ``code first'' instructions apply. As we
explained in the May 2011 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR 265451), the code
first rule applies when a condition has both an underlying etiology and
a manifestation due to the underlying etiology. For these conditions,
ICD-9-CM has a coding convention that requires the underlying
conditions to be sequenced first followed by the manifestation.
Whenever a combination exists, there is a ``use additional code'' note
at the etiology code and a code first note at the manifestation code.
As discussed in the MS-DRG section, it is our policy to maintain
the same diagnostic coding set for IPFs that is used under the IPPS for
providing the same psychiatric care.
For FY 2014, we are applying the 17 comorbidity categories for
which we are providing an adjustment, their respective codes, and their
respective adjustment factors in Table 3 below. In FY 2015, the
diagnosis codes and adjustment factors for the comorbidity categories
will be updated effective with the compliance date for using the ICD-
10-CM of October 1, 2014.
Table 3--FY 2014 Diagnosis Codes and Adjustment Factors for Comorbidity Categories
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
Description of comorbidity Diagnoses codes factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developmental Disabilities............ 317, 3180, 3181, 3182, and 319............................. 1.04
Coagulation Factor Deficits........... 2860 through 2864.......................................... 1.13
Tracheostomy.......................... 51900 through 51909 and V440............................... 1.06
Renal Failure, Acute.................. 5845 through 5849, 63630, 63631, 63632, 63730, 63731, 1.11
63732, 6383, 6393, 66932, 66934, 9585.
Renal Failure, Chronic................ 40301, 40311, 40391, 40402, 40412, 40413, 40492, 40493, 1.11
5853, 5854, 5855, 5856, 5859, 586, V4511, V4512, V560,
V561, and V562.
Oncology Treatment.................... 1400 through 2399 with a radiation therapy code 92.21-92.29 1.07
or chemotherapy code 99.25.
Uncontrolled Diabetes-Mellitus with or 25002, 25003, 25012, 25013, 25022, 25023, 25032, 25033, 1.05
without complications. 25042, 25043, 25052, 25053, 25062, 25063, 25072, 25073,
25082, 25083, 25092, and 25093.
Severe Protein Calorie Malnutrition... 260 through 262............................................ 1.13
Eating and Conduct Disorders.......... 3071, 30750, 31203, 31233, and 31234....................... 1.12
Infectious Disease.................... 01000 through 04110, 042, 04500 through 05319, 05440 1.07
through 05449, 0550 through 0770, 0782 through 07889, and
07950 through 07959.
Drug and/or Alcohol Induced Mental 2910, 2920, 29212, 2922, 30300, and 30400.................. 1.03
Disorders.
Cardiac Conditions.................... 3910, 3911, 3912, 40201, 40403, 4160, 4210, 4211, and 4219. 1.11
Gangrene.............................. 44024 and 7854............................................. 1.10
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease. 49121, 4941, 5100, 51883, 51884, V4611, V4612, V4613 and 1.12
V4614.
Artificial Openings--Digestive and 56960 through 56969, 9975, and V441 through V446........... 1.08
Urinary.
Severe Musculoskeletal and Connective 6960, 7100, 73000 through 73009, 73010 through 73019, and 1.09
Tissue Diseases. 73020 through 73029.
Poisoning............................. 96500 through 96509, 9654, 9670 through 9699, 9770, 9800 1.11
through 9809, 9830 through 9839, 986, 9890 through 9897.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Patient Age Adjustments
As explained in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66922),
we analyzed the impact of age on per diem cost by examining the age
variable (that is, the range of ages) for payment adjustments.
In general, we found that the cost per day increases with age. The
older age groups are more costly than the under 45 age group, the
differences in per diem cost increase for each successive age group,
and the differences are statistically significant.
We do not plan to update the regression analysis until we are able
to analyze IPF PPS data. Therefore, for FY 2014, we are continuing to
use the patient age adjustments currently in effect as shown in Table 4
below.
Table 4--Age Groupings and Adjustment Factors
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
Age factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under 45................................................... 1.00
45 and under 50............................................ 1.01
50 and under 55............................................ 1.02
55 and under 60............................................ 1.04
60 and under 65............................................ 1.07
65 and under 70............................................ 1.10
70 and under 75............................................ 1.13
75 and under 80............................................ 1.15
80 and over................................................ 1.17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
4. Variable Per Diem Adjustments
We explained in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66946)
that the regression analysis indicated that per diem cost declines as
the LOS increases. The variable per diem adjustments to the Federal per
diem base rate account for ancillary and administrative costs that
occur disproportionately in the first days after admission to an IPF.
We used a regression analysis to estimate the average differences
in per diem cost among stays of different lengths. As a result of this
analysis, we established variable per diem adjustments that begin on
day 1 and decline gradually until day 21 of a patient's stay. For day
22 and thereafter, the variable per diem adjustment
[[Page 46743]]
remains the same each day for the remainder of the stay. However, the
adjustment applied to day 1 depends upon whether the IPF has a
qualifying ED. If an IPF has a qualifying ED, it receives a 1.31
adjustment factor for day 1 of each stay. If an IPF does not have a
qualifying ED, it receives a 1.19 adjustment factor for day 1 of the
stay. The ED adjustment is explained in more detail in section VII.C.5
of this notice.
For FY 2014, we are continuing to use the variable per diem
adjustment factors currently in effect as shown in Table 5 below. A
complete discussion of the variable per diem adjustments appears in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66946).
Table 5--Variable per Diem Adjustments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
Day-of-stay factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day 1--IPF Without a Qualifying ED......................... 1.19
Day 1--IPF With a Qualifying ED............................ 1.31
Day 2...................................................... 1.12
Day 3...................................................... 1.08
Day 4...................................................... 1.05
Day 5...................................................... 1.04
Day 6...................................................... 1.02
Day 7...................................................... 1.01
Day 8...................................................... 1.01
Day 9...................................................... 1.00
Day 10..................................................... 1.00
Day 11..................................................... 0.99
Day 12..................................................... 0.99
Day 13..................................................... 0.99
Day 14..................................................... 0.99
Day 15..................................................... 0.98
Day 16..................................................... 0.97
Day 17..................................................... 0.97
Day 18..................................................... 0.96
Day 19..................................................... 0.95
Day 20..................................................... 0.95
Day 21..................................................... 0.95
After Day 21............................................... 0.92
------------------------------------------------------------------------
C. Facility-Level Adjustments
The IPF PPS includes facility-level adjustments for the wage index,
IPFs located in rural areas, teaching IPFs, cost of living adjustments
for IPFs located in Alaska and Hawaii, and IPFs with a qualifying ED.
1. Wage Index Adjustment
a. Background
As discussed in the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27061) and
in the May 2008 (73 FR 25719) and May 2009 IPF PPS notices (74 FR
20373), in order to provide an adjustment for geographic wage levels,
the labor-related portion of an IPF's payment is adjusted using an
appropriate wage index. Currently, an IPF's geographic wage index value
is determined based on the actual location of the IPF in an urban or
rural area as defined in Sec. 412.64(b)(1)(ii)(A) and (C).
b. Wage Index for FY 2014
Since the inception of the IPF PPS, we have used the pre-
reclassified, pre-floor hospital wage index in developing a wage index
to be applied to IPFs because there is not an IPF-specific wage index
available and we believe that IPFs generally compete in the same labor
market as acute care hospitals so the pre-reclassified, pre-floor
inpatient acute care hospital wage index should be reflective of labor
costs of IPFs. As discussed in the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule for FY
2007 (71 FR 27061 through 27067), under the IPF PPS, the wage index is
calculated using the IPPS wage index for the labor market area in which
the IPF is located, without taking into account geographic
reclassifications, floors, and other adjustments made to the wage index
under the IPPS. For a complete description of these IPPS wage index
adjustments, please see the CY 2013 IPPS/IRF PPS final rule (77 FR
53365 through 53374). We are continuing that practice for FY 2014.
We apply the wage index adjustment to the labor-related portion of
the Federal rate, which is 69.494 percent. This percentage reflects the
labor-related relative importance of the FY 2008-based RPL market
basket for FY 2014 (see section V.C. of this notice).
Changes to the wage index are made in a budget neutral manner so
that updates do not increase expenditures. For FY 2014, we are applying
the most recent hospital wage index (that is, the FY 2013 pre-floor,
pre-reclassified hospital wage index because this is the most
appropriate index as it best reflects the variation in local labor
costs of IPFs in the various geographic areas) using the most recent
hospital wage data (that is, data from hospital cost reports for the
cost reporting period beginning during FY 2009), and applying an
adjustment in accordance with our budget neutrality policy. This policy
requires us to estimate the total amount of IPF PPS payments for FY
2013 using the labor-related share and the wage indices from FY 2013
divided by the total estimated IPF PPS payments for FY 2014 using the
labor-related share and wage indices from FY 2014. The estimated
payments are based on FY 2012 IPF claims, inflated to the appropriate
FY. This quotient is the wage index budget neutrality factor, and it is
applied in the update of the Federal per diem base rate for FY 2014 in
addition to the market basket described in section VI.B. of this
notice. The wage index budget neutrality factor for FY 2014 is 1.0010.
The wage index applicable for FY 2014 appears in Table 1 and Table 2 in
Addendum B of this notice.
In the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule for RY 2007 (71 FR 27061-27067),
we adopted the changes discussed in the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) Bulletin No. 03-04 (June 6, 2003), which announced revised
definitions for Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs), and the creation
of Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined Statistical Areas. In
adopting the OMB Core-Based Statistical Area (CBSA) geographic
designations, we did not provide a separate transition for the CBSA-
based wage index since the IPF PPS was already in a transition period
from TEFRA payments to PPS payments.
As was the case in FY 2013, for FY 2014, we will continue to use
the CBSA geographic designations. The updated FY 2014 CBSA-based wage
index values are presented in Tables 1 and 2 in Addendum B of this
notice. A complete discussion of the CBSA labor market definitions
appears in the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27061 through 27067).
In keeping with established IPF PPS wage index policy, we will use
the FY 2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital wage index (which is
based on data collected from hospital cost reports submitted by
hospitals for cost reporting periods beginning during FY 2009) to
adjust IPF PPS payments beginning October 1, 2013.
c. OMB Bulletins
OMB publishes bulletins regarding CBSA changes, including changes
to CBSA numbers and titles. In the May 2008 IPF PPS notice, we
incorporated the CBSA nomenclature changes published in the most recent
OMB bulletin that applies to the hospital wage index used to determine
the current IPF PPS wage index and stated that we expect to continue to
do the same for all the OMB CBSA nomenclature changes in future IPF PPS
rules and notices, as necessary (73 FR 25721). The OMB bulletins may be
accessed online at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/bullentins/.
In accordance with our established methodology, we have
historically adopted any CBSA changes that are published in the OMB
bulletin that corresponds with the hospital wage index used to
determine the IPF PPS wage index. For FY 2014, we use the FY 2013 pre-
floor, pre-reclassified hospital wage index to adjust the IPF PPS
payments. On February 28, 2013, OMB issued OMB Bulletin No. 13-01,
which
[[Page 46744]]
establishes revised delineations of statistical areas based on OMB
standards published in the Federal Register on June 28, 2010 and 2010
Census Bureau data. Because the FY 2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified
hospital wage index was finalized prior to the issuance of this
Bulletin, the FY 2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital wage index
does not reflect OMB's new area delineations based on the 2010 Census
and, thus, the FY 2014 IPF PPS wage index will not reflect the OMB
changes. CMS intends to propose changes to the hospital wage index
based on this OMB Bulletin in the FY 2015 IPPS/LTCH PPS proposed rule,
as stated in the FY 2014 IPPS/LTCH PPS proposed rule (78 FR 27552
through 27553). Therefore, we anticipate that the OMB Bulletin changes
will be reflected in the FY 2015 hospital wage index. Because we base
the IPF PPS wage index on the hospital wage index from the prior year,
we anticipate that the OMB Bulletin changes would be reflected in the
FY 2016 IPPS PPS wage index.
2. Adjustment for Rural Location
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we provided a 17 percent
payment adjustment for IPFs located in a rural area. This adjustment
was based on the regression analysis, which indicated that the per diem
cost of rural facilities was 17 percent higher than that of urban
facilities after accounting for the influence of the other variables
included in the regression. For FY 2014, we are applying a 17 percent
payment adjustment for IPFs located in a rural area as defined at Sec.
412.64(b)(1)(ii)(C). As stated in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule,
we do not intend to update the adjustment factors derived from the
regression analysis until we are able to analyze IPF PPS data. A
complete discussion of the adjustment for rural locations appears in
the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66954).
3. Teaching Adjustment
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we implemented regulations
at Sec. 412.424(d)(1)(iii) to establish a facility-level adjustment
for IPFs that are, or are part of, teaching hospitals. The teaching
adjustment accounts for the higher indirect operating costs experienced
by hospitals that participate in graduate medical education (GME)
programs. The payment adjustments are made based on the number of full-
time equivalent (FTE) interns and residents training in the IPF and the
IPF's average daily census.
Medicare makes direct GME payments (for direct costs such as
resident and teaching physician salaries, and other direct teaching
costs) to all teaching hospitals including those paid under a PPS, and
those paid under the TEFRA rate-of-increase limits. These direct GME
payments are made separately from payments for hospital operating costs
and are not part of the IPF PPS. The direct GME payments do not address
the estimated higher indirect operating costs teaching hospitals may
face.
For teaching hospitals paid under the TEFRA rate-of-increase
limits, Medicare does not make separate payments for indirect medical
education costs because payments to these hospitals are based on the
hospitals' reasonable costs which already include these higher indirect
costs that may be associated with teaching programs.
The results of the regression analysis of FY 2002 IPF data
established the basis for the payment adjustments included in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule. The results showed that the indirect
teaching cost variable is significant in explaining the higher costs of
IPFs that have teaching programs. We calculated the teaching adjustment
based on the IPF's ``teaching variable,'' which is one plus the ratio
of the number of FTE residents training in the IPF (subject to
limitations described below) to the IPF's average daily census (ADC).
We established the teaching adjustment in a manner that limited the
incentives for IPFs to add FTE residents for the purpose of increasing
their teaching adjustment. We imposed a cap on the number of FTE
residents that may be counted for purposes of calculating the teaching
adjustment. The cap limits the number of FTE residents that teaching
IPFs may count for the purpose of calculating the IPF PPS teaching
adjustment, not the number of residents teaching institutions can hire
or train. We calculated the number of FTE residents that trained in the
IPF during a ``base year'' and used that FTE resident number as the
cap. An IPF's FTE resident cap is ultimately determined based on the
final settlement of the IPF's most recent cost report filed before
November 15, 2004 (that is, the publication date of the IPF PPS final
rule).
In the regression analysis, the logarithm of the teaching variable
had a coefficient value of 0.5150. We converted this cost effect to a
teaching payment adjustment by treating the regression coefficient as
an exponent and raising the teaching variable to a power equal to the
coefficient value. We note that the coefficient value of 0.5150 was
based on the regression analysis holding all other components of the
payment system constant.
As with other adjustment factors derived through the regression
analysis, we do not plan to rerun the regression analysis until we
analyze IPF PPS data. Therefore, in this notice, for FY 2014, we are
retaining the coefficient value of 0.5150 for the teaching adjustment
to the Federal per diem base rate.
A complete discussion of how the teaching adjustment was calculated
appears in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66954 through
66957) and the May 2008 IPF PPS notice (73 FR 25721).
a. FTE Intern and Resident Cap Adjustment
CMS had been asked to reconsider the original IPF teaching policy
and permit a temporary increase in the FTE resident cap when an IPF
increases the number of FTE residents it trains due to the acceptance
of displaced residents (residents that are training in an IPF or a
program before the IPF or program closed) when another IPF closes or
closes its medical residency training program.
To help us assess how many IPFs had been, or were expected to be
adversely affected by their inability to adjust their caps under Sec.
412.424(d)(1) and under these situations, we specifically requested
public comment from IPFs in the May 1, 2009 IPF PPS notice (74 FR 20376
through 20377). A summary of the comments and our responses can be
reviewed in the April 30, 2010 IPF PPS notice (75 FR 23106 through
23117). All of the commenters recommended that CMS modify the IPF PPS
teaching adjustment policy, supporting a policy change that would
permit the IPF PPS residency cap to be temporarily adjusted when that
IPF trains displaced residents due to closure of an IPF or closure of
an IPF's medical residency training program(s). The commenters
recommended a temporary resident cap adjustment policy similar to the
policies applied in similar contexts for acute care hospitals.
We agreed with the commenters that, when a hospital temporarily
takes on residents because another hospital closes or discontinues its
program, a temporary adjustment to the cap would be appropriate for a
rotation that occurs in an IPF setting (freestanding or units). In
these situations, residents may have partially completed a medical
residency training program at the hospital that has closed its training
program and may be unable to complete their training at another
hospital that is already training residents up to or in excess of its
cap. We believe that it is appropriate to allow temporary adjustments
to the FTE caps for an IPF that provides residency
[[Page 46745]]
training to medical residents who have partially completed a residency
training program at an IPF that closes or at an IPF that discontinues
training residents in a residency training program(s) (also referred to
as a ``closed'' program throughout this preamble). For this reason, we
adopted the following temporary resident cap adjustment policies,
similar to the temporary adjustments to the FTE cap used for acute care
hospitals. We proposed and finalized that the cap adjustment would be
temporary because it is resident specific and would only apply to the
displaced resident(s) until the resident(s) completes training in that
specialty. As under the IPPS policy for displaced residents, the IPF
PPS temporary cap adjustment would apply only to residents that were
still training at the IPF at the time the IPF closed or at the time the
IPF ceased training residents in the residency training program(s).
Residents who leave the IPF, for whatever reason, before the closure of
the IPF hospital or medical residency training program would not be
considered displaced residents for purposes of the IPF temporary cap
adjustment policy. Similarly, as under the IPPS policy, medical
students who match to a program at an IPF but the IPF or medical
residency training program closes before the individual begins training
at that IPF are also not considered displaced residents for purposes of
the IPF temporary cap adjustments. For detailed information on these
acute care hospital GME/IME payment policies, we refer the reader to
the August 1, 2001 final rule (66 FR 39899), July 30, 1999 final rule
(64 FR 41522), and May 7, 1999 proposed rule (64 FR 24736). We note
that although we adopted a policy under the IPF PPS that is consistent
with the policy applicable under the IPPS, the actual caps under the
two payment systems may not be commingled.
b. Temporary Adjustment to the FTE Cap To Reflect Residents Added Due
to Hospital Closure
In the May 6, 2011 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR 26455), we indicated
that we would allow an IPF to receive a temporary adjustment to the FTE
cap to reflect residents added because of another IPF's closure. This
adjustment is intended to account for medical residents who would have
partially completed a medical residency training program at the
hospital that has closed and may be unable to complete their training
at another hospital because that hospital is already training residents
up to or in excess of its cap. We made this change because IPFs have
indicated a reluctance to accept additional residents from a closed IPF
without a temporary adjustment to their caps. For purposes of this
policy on IPF closure, we adopted the IPPS definition of ``closure of a
hospital'' in 42 CFR 413.79(h) to mean the IPF terminates its Medicare
provider agreement as specified in 42 CFR 489.52. Therefore, we added a
new Sec. 412.424(d)(1)(iii)(F)(1) to allow a temporary adjustment to
an IPF's FTE cap to reflect residents added because of an IPF's closure
on or after July 1, 2011, to be effective for cost reporting periods
beginning on or after July 1, 2011. Under this policy, we allow an
adjustment to an IPF's FTE cap if the IPF meets the following criteria:
(1) The IPF is training displaced residents from an IPF that closed on
or after July 1, 2011; and (2) the IPF that is training the displaced
residents from the closed IPF submits a request for a temporary
adjustment to its FTE cap to its Medicare contractor no later than 60
days after the hospital first begins training the displaced residents,
and documents that the IPF is eligible for this temporary adjustment to
its FTE cap by identifying the residents who have come from the closed
IPF and have caused the IPF to exceed its cap, (or the IPF may already
be over its cap), and specifies the length of time that the adjustment
is needed. After the displaced residents leave the IPF's training
program or complete their residency program, the IPF's cap would revert
to its original level. This means that the temporary adjustment to the
FTE cap would be available to the IPF only for the period of time
necessary for the displaced residents to complete their training.
Further, as under the IPPS policy, we also indicated that the total
amount of temporary cap adjustment that can be distributed to all
receiving hospitals cannot exceed the cap amount of the IPF that
closed.
c. Temporary Adjustment to FTE Cap To Reflect Residents Affected by
Residency Program Closure
In the May 6, 2011 final rule (76 FR 26455), we indicated that if
an IPF that ceases training residents in a residency training
program(s) agrees to temporarily reduce its FTE cap, we would allow
another IPF to receive a temporary adjustment to its FTE cap to reflect
residents added because of the closure of another IPF's residency
training program. For purposes of this policy on closed residency
programs, we adopted the IPPS definition of ``closure of a hospital
residency training program'' to mean that the hospital ceases to offer
training for residents in a particular approved medical residency
training program as specified in Sec. 413.79(h). The methodology for
adjusting the caps for the ``receiving IPF'' and the ``IPF that closed
its program'' is described below.
i. Receiving IPF
We proposed and finalized that an IPF(s) may receive a temporary
adjustment to its FTE cap to reflect residents added because of the
closure of another IPF's residency training program for cost reporting
periods beginning on or after July 1, 2011 if--
The IPF is training additional residents from the
residency training program of an IPF that closed its program on or
after July 1, 2011.
No later than 60 days after the IPF begins to train the
residents, the IPF submits to its Medicare Contractor a request for a
temporary adjustment to its FTE cap, documents that the IPF is eligible
for this temporary adjustment by identifying the residents who have
come from another IPF's closed program and have caused the IPF to
exceed its cap, (or the IPF may already be in excess of its cap),
specifies the length of time the adjustment is needed, and, submits to
its Medicare contractor a copy of the FTE cap reduction statement by
the IPF closing the residency training program.
In general, the temporary adjustment criteria established for
closed medical residency training programs at IPFs is similar to the
criteria established for closed IPFs. More than one IPF may be eligible
to apply for the temporary adjustment because residents from one closed
program may complete their training at one IPF, or at several IPFs.
Also, an IPF would be eligible for the temporary adjustment only to the
extent that the displaced residents would cause the IPF to exceed its
FTE cap.
Finally, we proposed and finalized that IPFs meeting the proposed
criteria would be eligible to receive temporary adjustments to their
FTE caps for cost reporting periods beginning on or after July 1, 2011.
ii. IPF That Closed Its Program
We indicated that an IPF that agrees to train residents who have
been displaced by the closure of another IPF's resident teaching
program, may receive a temporary FTE cap adjustment only if the IPF
that closed a program:
Temporarily reduces its FTE cap by the number of FTE
residents, in each program year, training in the program at the time of
the program's closure. The yearly reduction would be determined by
deducting the number of those residents who would have been training in
the program during the year of the closure, had the program not closed.
[[Page 46746]]
No later than 60 days after the residents who were in the
closed program begin training at another IPF, submits to its Medicare
contractor a statement signed and dated by its representative that
specifies that it agrees to the temporary reduction in its FTE cap to
allow the IPF training the displaced residents to obtain a temporary
adjustment to its cap; identifies the residents who were training at
the time of the program's closure; identifies the IPFs to which the
residents are transferring once the program closes; and specifies the
reduction for the applicable program years.
We proposed and finalized that the cap reduction for the IPF with
the closed program would be based on the number of FTE residents in
each program year who were in the program at the IPF at the time of the
program's closure, and who begin training at another IPF.
A complete discussion on the temporary adjustment to the FTE cap to
reflect residents added due to hospital closure and by residency
program appears in the January 27, 2011 IPF PPS proposed rule (76 FR
5018 through 5020) and the May 6, 2011 IPF PPS final rule (76 FR 26453
through 26456).
4. Cost of Living Adjustment for IPFs Located in Alaska and Hawaii
The IPF PPS includes a payment adjustment for IPFs located in
Alaska and Hawaii based upon the county in which the IPF is located. As
we explained in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, the FY 2002 data
demonstrated that IPFs in Alaska and Hawaii had per diem costs that
were disproportionately higher than other IPFs. Other Medicare PPSs
(for example, the IPPS and LTCH PPS) have adopted a cost of living
adjustment (COLA) to account for the cost differential of care
furnished in Alaska and Hawaii.
We analyzed the effect of applying a COLA to payments for IPFs
located in Alaska and Hawaii. The results of our analysis demonstrated
that a COLA for IPFs located in Alaska and Hawaii would improve payment
equity for these facilities. As a result of this analysis, we provided
a COLA in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule.
A COLA adjustment for IPFs located in Alaska and Hawaii is made by
multiplying the nonlabor-related portion of the Federal per diem base
rate by the applicable COLA factor based on the COLA area in which the
IPF is located.
The COLA factors are published on the Office of Personnel
Management (OPM) Web site (https://www.opm.gov/oca/cola/rates.asp).
We note that the COLA areas for Alaska are not defined by county as
are the COLA areas for Hawaii. In 5 CFR 591.207, the OPM established
the following COLA areas:
City of Anchorage, and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by
road, as measured from the Federal courthouse;
City of Fairbanks, and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by
road, as measured from the Federal courthouse;
City of Juneau, and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius by road,
as measured from the Federal courthouse;
Rest of the State of Alaska.
As previously stated in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we
update the COLA factors according to updates established by the OPM.
Sections 1911 through 1919 of the Nonforeign Area Retirement Equity
Assurance Act, as contained in subtitle B of title XIX of the National
Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2010 (Pub. L. 111-84,
October 28, 2009), transitions the Alaska and Hawaii COLAs to locality
pay. Under section 1914 of Public Law 111-84, locality pay is being
phased in over a 3-year period beginning in January 2010, with COLA
rates frozen as of the date of enactment, October 28, 2009, and then
proportionately reduced to reflect the phase-in of locality pay.
When we published the proposed COLA adjustment factors in the
January 2011 IPF proposed rule (76 FR 4998), we inadvertently selected
the FY 2010 COLA rates. The FY 2010 COLA rates were reduced rates to
account for the phase-in of locality pay. We did not intend to propose
reduced COLA rates, and we do not believe it is appropriate to finalize
the reduced COLAs that we showed in our January 2011 proposed rule. The
2009 COLA rates do not reflect the phase-in of locality pay. Therefore,
we finalized the FY 2009 COLA rates, which are the same rates that were
in effect for RY 2010 through RY 2012. We plan to address the COLA in
the future refinement process in FY 2015. For FY 2014, IPFs located in
Alaska and Hawaii will continue to receive the updated COLA factors
based on the COLA area in which the IPF is located as shown in Table 6
below.
Table 6--COLA Factors for Alaska and Hawaii IPFs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost of living
Area adjustment
factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska:
City of Anchorage and 80-kilometer (50-mile) 1.23
radius by road...................................
City of Fairbanks and 80-kilometer (50-mile) 1.23
radius by road...................................
City of Juneau and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius 1.23
by road..........................................
Rest of Alaska.................................... 1.25
Hawaii:
City and County of Honolulu....................... 1.25
County of Hawaii.................................. 1.18
County of Kauai................................... 1.25
County of Maui and County of Kalawao.............. 1.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
(The above factors are based on data obtained from the U.S. Office of
Personnel Management Web site at: https://www.opm.gov/oca/cola/rates.asp.)
5. Adjustment for IPFs With a Qualifying Emergency Department (ED)
The IPF PPS includes a facility-level adjustment for IPFs with
qualifying EDs. We provide an adjustment to the Federal per diem base
rate to account for the costs associated with maintaining a full-
service ED. The adjustment is intended to account for ED costs incurred
by a freestanding psychiatric hospital with a qualifying ED or a
distinct part psychiatric unit of an acute hospital or a CAH for
preadmission services otherwise payable under the Medicare Outpatient
Prospective Payment System (OPPS) furnished to a beneficiary on the
date of the beneficiary's admission to the
[[Page 46747]]
hospital and during the day immediately preceding the date of admission
to the IPF (see Sec. 413.40(c)(2)) and the overhead cost of
maintaining the ED. This payment is a facility-level adjustment that
applies to all IPF admissions (with one exception described below),
regardless of whether a particular patient receives preadmission
services in the hospital's ED.
The ED adjustment is incorporated into the variable per diem
adjustment for the first day of each stay for IPFs with a qualifying
ED. That is, IPFs with a qualifying ED receive an adjustment factor of
1.31 as the variable per diem adjustment for day 1 of each stay. If an
IPF does not have a qualifying ED, it receives an adjustment factor of
1.19 as the variable per diem adjustment for day 1 of each patient
stay.
The ED adjustment is made on every qualifying claim except as
described below. As specified in Sec. 412.424(d)(1)(v)(B), the ED
adjustment is not made where a patient is discharged from an acute care
hospital or CAH and admitted to the same hospital's or CAH's
psychiatric unit. An ED adjustment is not made in this case because the
costs associated with ED services are reflected in the DRG payment to
the acute care hospital or through the reasonable cost payment made to
the CAH. If we provided the ED adjustment in these cases, the hospital
would be paid twice for the overhead costs of the ED, as stated in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66960).
Therefore, when patients are discharged from an acute care hospital
or CAH and admitted to the same hospital's or CAH's psychiatric unit,
the IPF receives the 1.19 adjustment factor as the variable per diem
adjustment for the first day of the patient's stay in the IPF.
For FY 2014, we are retaining the 1.31 adjustment factor for IPFs
with qualifying EDs. A complete discussion of the steps involved in the
calculation of the ED adjustment factor appears in the November 2004
IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66959 through 66960) and the May 2006 IPF PPS
final rule (71 FR 27070 through 27072).
D. Other Payment Adjustments and Policies
For FY 2014, the IPF PPS includes an outlier adjustment to promote
access to IPF care for those patients who require expensive care and to
limit the financial risk of IPFs treating unusually costly patients. In
this section, we also explain the reason for ending the stop-loss
provision that was applicable during the transition period.
1. Outlier Payments
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we implemented regulations
at Sec. 412.424(d)(3)(i) to provide a per-case payment for IPF stays
that are extraordinarily costly. Providing additional payments to IPFs
for extremely costly cases strongly improves the accuracy of the IPF
PPS in determining resource costs at the patient and facility level.
These additional payments reduce the financial losses that would
otherwise be incurred in treating patients who require more costly care
and, therefore, reduce the incentives for IPFs to under-serve these
patients.
We make outlier payments for discharges in which an IPF's estimated
total cost for a case exceeds a fixed dollar loss threshold amount
(multiplied by the IPF's facility-level adjustments) plus the Federal
per diem payment amount for the case.
In instances when the case qualifies for an outlier payment, we pay
80 percent of the difference between the estimated cost for the case
and the adjusted threshold amount for days 1 through 9 of the stay
(consistent with the median LOS for IPFs in FY 2002), and 60 percent of
the difference for day 10 and thereafter. We established the 80 percent
and 60 percent loss sharing ratios because we were concerned that a
single ratio established at 80 percent (like other Medicare PPSs) might
provide an incentive under the IPF per diem payment system to increase
LOS in order to receive additional payments. After establishing the
loss sharing ratios, we determined the current fixed dollar loss
threshold amount of $11,600 through payment simulations designed to
compute a dollar loss beyond which payments are estimated to meet the 2
percent outlier spending target.
a. Update to the Outlier Fixed Dollar Loss Threshold Amount
In accordance with the update methodology described in Sec.
412.428(d), we are updating the fixed dollar loss threshold amount used
under the IPF PPS outlier policy. Based on the regression analysis and
payment simulations used to develop the IPF PPS, we established a 2
percent outlier policy which strikes an appropriate balance between
protecting IPFs from extraordinarily costly cases while ensuring the
adequacy of the Federal per diem base rate for all other cases that are
not outlier cases.
We believe it is necessary to update the fixed dollar loss
threshold amount because an analysis of the latest available data (that
is, FY 2012 IPF claims) and rate increases indicate that adjusting the
fixed dollar loss amount is necessary in order to maintain an outlier
percentage that equals 2 percent of total estimated IPF PPS payments.
In the May 2006 IPF PPS final rule (71 FR 27072), we describe the
process by which we calculate the outlier fixed dollar loss threshold
amount. We will continue to use this process for FY 2014. We begin by
simulating aggregate payments with and without an outlier policy, and
applying an iterative process to determine an outlier fixed dollar loss
threshold amount that will result in estimated outlier payments being
equal to 2 percent of total estimated payments under the simulation.
Based on this process, using the FY 2012 claims data, we estimate that
IPF outlier payments as a percentage of total estimated payments are
approximately 1.7 percent in FY 2013. Thus, for this notice, we are
updating the FY 2014 IPF outlier threshold amount to ensure that
estimated FY 2014 outlier payments are approximately 2 percent of total
estimated IPF payments. The outlier fixed dollar loss threshold amount
of $11,600 for FY 2013 will be changed to $10,245 for FY 2014 to
increase estimated outlier payments and thereby maintain estimated
outlier payments at 2 percent of total estimated aggregate IPF payments
for FY 2014.
b. Update to IPF Cost-to-Charge Ratio Ceilings
As previously stated, under the IPF PPS, an outlier payment is made
if an IPF's cost for a stay exceeds a fixed dollar loss threshold
amount. In order to establish an IPF's cost for a particular case, we
multiply the IPF's reported charges on the discharge bill by its
overall cost-to-charge ratio (CCR). This approach to determining an
IPF's cost is consistent with the approach used under the IPPS and
other PPSs. In the June 2003 IPPS final rule (68 FR 34494), we
implemented changes to the IPPS policy used to determine CCRs for acute
care hospitals because we became aware that payment vulnerabilities
resulted in inappropriate outlier payments. Under the IPPS, we
established a statistical measure of accuracy for CCRs in order to
ensure that aberrant CCR data did not result in inappropriate outlier
payments.
As we indicated in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, because we
believe that the IPF outlier policy is susceptible to the same payment
vulnerabilities as the IPPS, we adopted a method to ensure the
statistical accuracy of CCRs under the IPF PPS (69
[[Page 46748]]
FR 66961). Specifically, we adopted the following procedure in the
November 2004 IPF PPS final rule: We calculated two national ceilings,
one for IPFs located in rural areas and one for IPFs located in urban
areas. We computed the ceilings by first calculating the national
average and the standard deviation of the CCR for both urban and rural
IPFs using the most recent CCRs entered in the CY 2013 Provider
Specific File.
To determine the rural and urban ceilings, we multiplied each of
the standard deviations by 3 and added the result to the appropriate
national CCR average (either rural or urban). The upper threshold CCR
for IPFs in FY 2014 is 1.8644 for rural IPFs, and 1.7066 for urban
IPFs, based on CBSA-based geographic designations. If an IPF's CCR is
above the applicable ceiling, the ratio is considered statistically
inaccurate and we assign the appropriate national (either rural or
urban) median CCR to the IPF.
We apply the national CCRs to the following situations:
++ New IPFs that have not yet submitted their first Medicare cost
report.
++ IPFs whose overall CCR is in excess of 3 standard deviations
above the corresponding national geometric mean (that is, above the
ceiling).
++ Other IPFs for which the Medicare contractor obtains inaccurate
or incomplete data with which to calculate a CCR.
For new IPFs, we are using these national CCRs until the facility's
actual CCR can be computed using the first tentatively or final settled
cost report.
We are not making any changes to the procedures for updating the
CCR ceilings in FY 2014. However, we are updating the FY 2014 national
median and ceiling CCRs for urban and rural IPFs based on the CCRs
entered in the latest available IPF PPS Provider Specific File.
Specifically, for FY 2014, and to be used in each of the three
situations listed above, using the most recent CCRs entered in the CY
2013 Provider Specific File we estimate the national median CCR of
0.6220 for rural IPFs and the national median CCR of 0.4770 for urban
IPFs. These calculations are based on the IPF's location (either urban
or rural) using the CBSA-based geographic designations.
A complete discussion regarding the national median CCRs appears in
the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule (69 FR 66961 through 66964).
2. Expiration of the Stop-Loss Provision
In the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule, we implemented a stop-loss
policy that reduced financial risk to IPFs projected to experience
substantial reductions in Medicare payments during the period of
transition to the IPF PPS. This stop-loss policy guaranteed that each
facility received total IPF PPS payments that were no less than 70
percent of its TEFRA payments had the IPF PPS not been implemented.
This policy was applied to the IPF PPS portion of Medicare payments
during the 3-year transition.
In the implementation year, the 70 percent of TEFRA payment stop-
loss policy required a reduction in the standardized Federal per diem
and ECT base rates of 0.39 percent in order to make the stop-loss
payments budget neutral. As described in the May 2008 IPF PPS notice
for RY 2009, we increased the Federal per diem base rate and ECT rate
by 0.39 percent because these rates were reduced by 0.39 percent in the
implementation year to ensure stop-loss payments were budget neutral.
The stop-loss provision ended during RY 2009 (that is for
discharges occurring on or after July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2009).
The stop-loss policy is no longer applicable under the IPF PPS.
3. Future Refinements
As we have indicated throughout this notice, we have delayed making
refinements to the IPF PPS until we have adequate IPF PPS data on which
to base those refinements. Specifically, we explained that we will
delay updating the adjustment factors derived from the regression
analysis until we have IPF PPS data that include as much information as
possible regarding the patient-level characteristics of the population
that each IPF serves. Now that we are approximately 8 years into the
system, we believe that we have enough data to begin that process. We
have begun the necessary analysis to better understand IPF industry
practices so that we may refine the IPF PPS as appropriate. Using more
recent data, we plan to re-run the regression analyses and recalculate
the Federal per diem base rate and the patient-and facility-level
adjustments. While we are not making these refinements in this notice,
we expect that in the rulemaking for FY 2015 we will be ready to
present the results of our analysis.
For RY 2012, we published several areas of concern for future
refinement and we invited comments on these issues in our RY 2012
proposed and final rules. For further discussion of these issues and to
review public comments, we refer readers to the RY 2012 IPF PPS
proposed rule (76 FR 4998) and final rule (76 FR 26432).
VIII. Secretary's Recommendations
Section 1886(e)(4)(A) of the Act requires the Secretary, taking
into consideration the recommendations of MedPAC, to recommend update
factors for inpatient hospital services (including IPFs) for each FY
that take into account the amounts necessary for the efficient and
effective delivery of medically appropriate and necessary care of high
quality. Section 1886(e)(5) of the Act requires the Secretary to
publish the recommended and final update factors in the Federal
Register.
In the past, the Secretary's recommendations and a discussion about
the MedPAC recommendations for the IPF PPS were included in the IPPS
proposed and final rules. The market basket update for the IPF PPS was
also included in the IPPS proposed and final rules, as well as in the
IPF PPS annual update.
Beginning FY 2013, however, we only publish the market basket
update for the IPF PPS in the annual IPF PPS FY update and not in the
IPPS proposed and final rules. Furthermore, for any years in which
MedPAC makes recommendations for the IPF PPS, those recommendations
will be noted and considered in the IPF PPS update.
MedPAC did not make any recommendations for the IPF PPS for FY
2014. For the update to the IPF PPS standard Federal rate for FY 2014,
see section IV B. of this notice.
IX. Waiver of Notice and Comment
We ordinarily publish a notice of proposed rulemaking in the
Federal Register to provide a period for public comment before the
provisions of a rule take effect. We can waive this procedure, however,
if we find good cause that notice and comment procedures are
impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest and we
incorporate a statement of finding and its reasons in the notice.
We find it is unnecessary to undertake notice and comment
rulemaking for this action because the updates in this notice do not
reflect any substantive changes in policy, but merely reflect the
application of previously established methodologies. Therefore, under 5
U.S.C 553(b)(3)(B), for good cause, we waive notice and comment
procedures.
X. Collection of Information Requirements
This notice does not impose any new or revised information
collection, recordkeeping, or third-party disclosure requirements.
Consequently, it does not need additional Office of Management and
Budget review under the authority
[[Page 46749]]
of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
XI. Regulatory Impact Analysis
A. Statement of Need
This notice will update the prospective payment rates for Medicare
inpatient hospital services provided by IPF for discharges occurring
during the FY beginning October 1, 2013 through September 30, 2014. We
are applying the FY 2008-based RPL market basket increase of 2.6
percent, less the 0.1 percentage point required by sections
1886(s)(2)(A) (ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act and less the
productivity adjustment of 0.5 percentage point as required by
1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act.
B. Overall Impact
We have examined the impact of this notice as required by Executive
Order 12866 on Regulatory Planning and Review (September 30, 1993),
Executive Order 13563 on Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
(January 18, 2011), the Regulatory Flexibility Act (RFA) (September 19,
1980, Pub. L. 96-354), section 1102(b) of the Social Security Act,
section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (March 22,
1995; Pub. L. 104-4), Executive Order 13132 on Federalism (August 4,
1999) and the Congressional Review Act (5 U.S.C. 804(2)).
Executive Orders 12866 and 13563 direct agencies to assess all
costs and benefits of available regulatory alternatives and, if
regulation is necessary, to select regulatory approaches that maximize
net benefits (including potential economic, environmental, public
health and safety effects, distributive impacts, and equity). A
regulatory impact analysis (RIA) must be prepared for a major notice
with economically significant effects ($100 million or more in any 1
year). This notice is designated as economically ``significant'' under
section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866.
We estimate that the total impact of these changes for FY 2014
payments compared to FY 2013 payments will be a net increase of
approximately $115 million. This reflects a $100 million increase from
the update to the payment rates, as well as, a $15 million increase as
a result of the update to the outlier threshold amount. Outlier
payments are estimated to increase from 1.7 percent in FY 2013 to 2.0
percent in FY 2014.
The RFA requires agencies to analyze options for regulatory relief
of small entities, if a rule has a significant impact on a substantial
number of small entities. For purposes of the RFA, small entities
include small businesses, nonprofit organizations, and small
governmental jurisdictions. Most IPFs and most other providers and
suppliers are small entities, either by nonprofit status or having
revenues of $7 million to $34.5 million or less in any 1 year depending
on industry classification (for details, refer to the SBA Small
Business Size Standards found at https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/files/Size_Standards_Table.pdf), or being nonprofit
organizations that are not dominant in their markets.''
Because we lack data on individual hospital receipts, we cannot
determine the number of small proprietary IPFs or the proportion of
IPFs' revenue that is derived from Medicare payments. Therefore, we
assume that all IPFs are considered small entities. The Department of
Health and Human Services generally uses a revenue impact of 3 to 5
percent as a significance threshold under the RFA.
As shown in Table 7, we estimate that the overall revenue impact of
this notice on all IPFs is to increase Medicare payments by
approximately 2.3 percent. As a result, since the estimated impact of
this notice is a net increase in revenue across all categories of IPFs,
the Secretary has determined that this notice will have a positive
revenue impact on a substantial number of small entities. Medicare
fiscal intermediaries, Medicare Administrative Contractors, and
Carriers are not considered to be small entities. Individuals and
States are not included in the definition of a small entity.
In addition, section 1102(b) of the Social Security Act requires us
to prepare a regulatory impact analysis if a rule may have a
significant impact on the operations of a substantial number of small
rural hospitals. This analysis must conform to the provisions of
section 604 of the RFA. For purposes of section 1102(b) of the Act, we
define a small rural hospital as a hospital that is located outside of
a metropolitan statistical area and has fewer than 100 beds. As
discussed in detail below, the rates and policies set forth in this
notice will not have an adverse impact on the rural hospitals based on
the data of the 309 rural units and 73 rural hospitals in our database
of 1,624 IPFs for which data were available. Therefore, the Secretary
has determined that this notice will not have a significant impact on
the operations of a substantial number of small rural hospitals.
Section 202 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA) also
requires that agencies assess anticipated costs and benefits before
issuing any rule whose mandates require spending in any 1 year of $100
million in 1995 dollars, updated annually for inflation. In 2014, that
threshold is approximately $141 million. This notice will not impose
spending costs on state, local, or tribal governments in the aggregate,
or by the private sector, of $141 million.
Executive Order 13132 establishes certain requirements that an
agency must meet when it promulgates a proposed rule (and subsequent
final rule) that imposes substantial direct requirement costs on state
and local governments, preempts state law, or otherwise has Federalism
implications. As stated above, this notice would not have a substantial
effect on state and local governments.
C. Anticipated Effects
We discuss the historical background of the IPF PPS and the impact
of this notice on the Federal Medicare budget and on IPFs.
1. Budgetary Impact
As discussed in the November 2004 and May 2006 IPF PPS final rules,
we applied a budget neutrality factor to the Federal per diem and ECT
base rates to ensure that total estimated payments under the IPF PPS in
the implementation period would equal the amount that would have been
paid if the IPF PPS had not been implemented. The budget neutrality
factor includes the following components: outlier adjustment, stop-loss
adjustment, and the behavioral offset. As discussed in the May 2008 IPF
PPS notice (73 FR 25711), the stop-loss adjustment is no longer
applicable under the IPF PPS.
In accordance with Sec. 412.424(c)(3)(ii), we indicated that we
will evaluate the accuracy of the budget neutrality adjustment within
the first 5 years after implementation of the payment system. We may
make a one-time prospective adjustment to the Federal per diem and ECT
base rates to account for differences between the historical data on
cost-based TEFRA payments (the basis of the budget neutrality
adjustment) and estimates of TEFRA payments based on actual data from
the first year of the IPF PPS. As part of that process, we will
reassess the accuracy of all of the factors impacting budget
neutrality. In addition, as discussed in section VII.C.1 of this
notice, we are using the wage index and labor-related share in a budget
neutral manner by applying a wage index budget neutrality factor to the
Federal per diem and ECT base rates. Therefore, the budgetary impact to
the Medicare program of this notice will be due to the market basket
update for FY 2014 of 2.6 percent (see section V.B. of this notice)
less the ``other
[[Page 46750]]
adjustment'' of 0.1 percentage point according to sections
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886 (s)(3)(B) of the Act, less the productivity
adjustment of 0.5 percentage point required by section 1886
(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, and the update to the outlier fixed dollar
loss threshold amount.
We estimate that the FY 2014 impact will be a net increase of $115
million in payments to IPF providers. This reflects an estimated $100
million increase from the update to the payment rates and a $15 million
increase due to the update to the outlier threshold amount to increase
outlier payments from approximately 1.7 percent in FY 2013 to 2.0
percent in FY 2014.
2. Impact on Providers
To understand the impact of the changes to the IPF PPS on
providers, discussed in this notice, it is necessary to compare
estimated payments under the IPF PPS rates and factors for FY 2014
versus those under FY 2013. The estimated payments for FY 2013 and FY
2014 will be 100 percent of the IPF PPS payment, since the transition
period has ended and stop-loss payments are no longer paid. We
determined the percent change of estimated FY 2014 IPF PPS payments to
FY 2013 IPF PPS payments for each category of IPFs. In addition, for
each category of IPFs, we have included the estimated percent change in
payments resulting from the update to the outlier fixed dollar loss
threshold amount, the labor-related share and wage index changes for
the FY 2014 IPF PPS, and the market basket update for FY 2014, as
adjusted by the ``other adjustment'' according to sections
1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act and the productivity
adjustment according to section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i).
To illustrate the impacts of the FY 2014 changes in this notice,
our analysis begins with a FY 2013 baseline simulation model based on
FY 2012 IPF payments inflated to the midpoint of FY 2013 using IHS
Global Insight Inc.'s most recent forecast of the market basket update
(see section V.B. of this notice); the estimated outlier payments in FY
2013; the CBSA designations for IPFs based on OMB's MSA definitions
after June 2003; the FY 2012 pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital wage
index; the FY 2013 labor-related share; and the FY 2013 percentage
amount of the rural adjustment. During the simulation, the total
estimated outlier payments are maintained at 2 percent of total IPF PPS
payments.
Each of the following changes is added incrementally to this
baseline model in order for us to isolate the effects of each change:
The update to the outlier fixed dollar loss threshold
amount.
The FY 2013 pre-floor, pre-reclassified hospital wage
index and FY 2014 labor-related share.
The market basket update for FY 2014 of 2.6 percent less
the ``other adjustment'' of 0.1 percentage point in accordance with
sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act and less the
productivity adjustment of 0.5 percentage point reduction in accordance
with section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act.
Our final comparison illustrates the percent change in payments
from FY 2013 (that is, October 1, 2012 to September 30, 2013) to FY
2014 (that is, October 1, 2013 to September 30, 2014) including all the
changes in this notice.
Table 7--IPF Impact Table for FY 2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Projected Impacts (% Change In Columns 3-6)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBSA wage Adjusted
Facility by type Number of Outlier index & labor market basket Total percent
facilities share update \1\ change \2\
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Facilities.................. 1,624 0.3 0.0 2.0 2.3
Total Urban..................... 1,242 0.3 0.0 2.0 2.3
Total Rural..................... 382 0.2 -0.1 2.0 2.1
Urban unit...................... 834 0.4 0.0 2.0 2.5
Urban hospital.................. 408 0.1 0.0 2.0 2.1
Rural unit...................... 309 0.2 -0.1 2.0 2.2
Rural hospital.................. 73 0.3 -0.2 2.0 2.0
By Type of Ownership:
Freestanding IPFs:
Urban Psychiatric Hospitals:
Government.............. 130 0.3 -0.1 2.0 2.2
Non-Profit.............. 99 0.1 0.2 2.0 2.2
For-Profit.............. 177 0.1 0.0 2.0 2.0
Rural Psychiatric Hospitals:
Government.............. 36 0.5 -0.4 2.0 2.1
Non-Profit.............. 13 0.1 0.0 2.0 2.1
For-Profit.............. 23 0.1 -0.1 2.0 2.0
IPF Units:
Urban:
Government.............. 131 0.8 0.1 2.0 2.9
Non-Profit.............. 548 0.4 0.1 2.0 2.5
For-Profit.............. 155 0.3 -0.2 2.0 2.0
Rural:
Government.............. 80 0.2 -0.1 2.0 2.1
Non-Profit.............. 163 0.3 0.0 2.0 2.2
For-Profit.............. 66 0.3 -0.1 2.0 2.2
Unknown Ownership Type.......... 3 0.0 0.2 2.0 2.2
By Teaching Status:
Non-teaching................ 1,419 0.2 0.0 2.0 2.2
Less than 10% interns and 109 0.5 0.0 2.0 2.5
residents to beds..........
10% to 30% interns and 70 0.5 0.1 2.0 2.6
residents to beds..........
More than 30% interns and 26 0.9 0.5 2.0 3.5
residents to beds..........
By Region:
[[Page 46751]]
New England................. 111 0.4 0.5 2.0 3.0
Mid-Atlantic................ 256 0.4 -0.1 2.0 2.3
South Atlantic.............. 233 0.2 -0.3 2.0 1.9
East North Central.......... 258 0.3 0.1 2.0 2.4
East South Central.......... 171 0.2 -0.7 2.0 1.6
West North Central.......... 139 0.3 0.2 2.0 2.5
West South Central.......... 234 0.2 -0.2 2.0 1.9
Mountain.................... 99 0.3 -0.6 2.0 1.7
Pacific..................... 123 0.5 0.9 2.0 3.5
By Bed Size:
Psychiatric Hospitals:
Beds: 0-24.............. 82 0.2 -0.3 2.0 1.9
Beds: 25-49............. 75 0.1 -0.1 2.0 1.9
Beds: 50-75............. 79 0.2 0.0 2.0 2.2
Beds: 76 +.............. 245 0.1 0.0 2.0 2.1
Psychiatric Units:
Beds: 0-24.............. 684 0.4 0.0 2.0 2.4
Beds: 25-49............. 306 0.4 0.2 2.0 2.5
Beds: 50-75............. 94 0.4 -0.1 2.0 2.2
Beds: 76 +.............. 59 0.5 0.0 2.0 2.6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ This column reflects the payment update impact of the RPL market basket update for FY 2014 of 2.6 percent, a
0.1 percentage point reduction in accordance with sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act, and
a 0.5 percentage point reduction for the productivity adjustment as required by section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of
the Act.
\2\ Percent changes in estimated payments from FY 2013 to FY 2014 include all of the changes presented in this
notice. Note, the products of these impacts may be different from the percentage changes shown here due to
rounding effects.
3. Results
Table 7 above displays the results of our analysis. The table
groups IPFs into the categories listed below based on characteristics
provided in the Provider of Services (POS) file, the IPF provider
specific file, and cost report data from HCRIS:
Facility Type
Location
Teaching Status Adjustment
Census Region
Size
The top row of the table shows the overall impact on the 1,624 IPFs
included in this analysis.
In column 3, we present the effects of the update to the outlier
fixed dollar loss threshold amount. We estimate that IPF outlier
payments as a percentage of total IPF payments are 1.7 percent in FY
2013. Thus, we are adjusting the outlier threshold amount in this
notice to set total estimated outlier payments equal to 2 percent of
total payments in FY 2014. The estimated change in total IPF payments
for FY 2014, therefore, includes an approximate 0.3 percent increase in
payments because the outlier portion of total payments is expected to
increase from approximately 1.7 percent to 2 percent.
The overall impact of this outlier adjustment update (as shown in
column 3 of table 7), across all hospital groups, is to increase total
estimated payments to IPFs by 0.3 percent. We do not estimate that any
group of IPFs will experience a decrease in payments from this update.
The largest increase in payments is estimated to reflect a 0.9 percent
increase in payments for IPFs located in teaching hospitals with an
intern and resident ADC ratio greater than 30 percent.
In column 4, we present the effects of the budget-neutral update to
the labor-related share and the wage index adjustment under the CBSA
geographic area definitions announced by OMB in June 2003. This is a
comparison of the simulated FY 2014 payments under the FY 2013 hospital
wage index under CBSA classification and associated labor-related share
to the simulated FY 2013 payments under the FY 2012 hospital wage index
under CBSA classifications and associated labor-related share. We note
that there is no projected change in aggregate payments to IPFs, as
indicated in the first row of column 4. However, there will be small
distributional effects among different categories of IPFs. For example,
we estimate the largest increase in payments to be a 0.9 percent
increase for IPFs in the Pacific region and the largest decrease in
payments to be a 0.7 percent decrease for IPFs in the East South
Central region.
Column 5 shows the estimated effect of the update to the IPF PPS
payment rates, which includes a 2.6 percent market basket update less
the 0.1 percentage point in accordance with section 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii)
and 1886(s)(3)(B) and less the productivity adjustment of 0.5
percentage point in accordance with section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i).
Column 6 compares our estimates of the total changes reflected in
this notice for FY 2014, to our payments for FY 2013 (without these
changes). This column reflects all FY 2014 changes relative to FY 2013.
The average estimated increase for all IPFs is approximately 2.3
percent. This estimated net increase includes the effects of the 2.6
percent market basket update adjusted by the ``other adjustment'' of
minus 0.1 percentage point, as required by sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii)
and 1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act and the productivity adjustment of minus
0.5 percentage point, as required by section 1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the
Act. It also includes the overall estimated 0.3 percent increase in
estimated IPF outlier payments from the update to the outlier fixed
dollar loss threshold amount. Since we are making the updates to the
IPF labor-related share and wage index in a budget-neutral manner, they
will not affect total estimated IPF payments in the aggregate. However,
they will
[[Page 46752]]
affect the estimated distribution of payments among providers.
Overall, no IPFs are estimated to experience a net decrease in
payments as a result of the updates in this notice. IPFs in urban areas
will experience a 2.3 percent increase and IPFs in rural areas will
experience a 2.1 percent increase. The largest payment increase is
estimated at 3.5 percent for IPFs located in teaching hospitals with an
intern and resident ADC ratio greater than 30 percent and IPFs in the
Pacific region. This is due to the larger than average positive effect
of the CBSA wage index and labor-related share updates and the higher
volume of outlier payments for IPFs in these categories.
4. Effect on the Medicare Program
Based on actuarial projections resulting from our experience with
other PPSs, we estimate that Medicare spending (total Medicare program
payments) for IPF services over the next 5 years would be as shown in
Table 8 below.
Table 8--Estimated Payments Shown in Current Year Dollars
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dollars in
Fiscal year millions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
2014....................................................... 5,420
2015....................................................... 5,910
2016....................................................... 6,500
2017....................................................... 7,090
2018....................................................... 7,570
------------------------------------------------------------------------
These estimates are based on the current forecast of the increases
in the RPL market basket, including an adjustment for productivity, for
the FY beginning in 2014 and each subsequent RY, as required by section
1886(s)(2)(A)(i) of the Act, as follows:
2.1 percent for FY 2014.
2.3 percent for FY 2015.
2.6 percent for FY 2016.
2.6 percent for FY 2017.
2.5 percent for FY 2018.
The estimates in Table 8 also include the application of the
``other adjustment,'' as required by sections 1886(s)(2)(A)(ii) and
1886(s)(3)(B) of the Act, as follows:
-0.3 percentage point for rate years beginning in 2014.
-0.2 percentage point for rate years beginning in 2015.
-0.2 percentage point for rate years beginning in 2016.
-0.75 percentage point for rate years beginning in 2017.
-0.75 percentage point for rate years beginning in 2018.
We estimate that there would be a change in fee-for-service
Medicare beneficiary enrollment as follows:
2.2 percent in FY 2014.
4.1 percent in FY 2015.
5.0 percent in FY 2016.
5.5 percent in FY 2017.
4.4 percent in FY 2018.
5. Effect on Beneficiaries
Under the IPF PPS, IPFs will receive payment based on the average
resources consumed by patients for each day. We do not expect changes
in the quality of care or access to services for Medicare beneficiaries
under the FY 2014 IPF PPS but we continue to expect that paying
prospectively for IPF services would enhance the efficiency of the
Medicare program.
D. Alternatives Considered
The statute does not specify an update strategy for the IPF PPS and
is broadly written to give the Secretary discretion in establishing an
update methodology. Therefore, we are updating the IPF PPS using the
methodology published in the November 2004 IPF PPS final rule. Lastly,
no alternative policy options were considered in this notice, since
this notice does not initiate policy changes with regard to the IPF
PPS. This notice simply provides an update to the rates for FY 2014.
E. Accounting Statement
As required by OMB Circular A-4 (available at https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars_a004_a-4), in Table 9 below, we have
prepared an accounting statement showing the classification of the
expenditures associated with the provisions of this notice. This table
provides our best estimate of the increase in Medicare payments under
the IPF PPS as a result of the changes presented in this notice and
based on the data for 1,624 IPFs in our database. All expenditures are
classified as Federal transfers to IPF Medicare providers.
Table 9--Accounting Statement: Classification of Estimated Expenditures, From the 2013 IPF PPS FY to the 2014
IPF PPS FY
[In millions]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Transfers
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annualized Monetized Transfers........ $115.
From Whom To Whom?.................... Federal Government to IPF Medicare Providers.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In accordance with the provisions of Executive Order 12866, this
notice was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget.
(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.773,
Medicare--Hospital Insurance; and Program No. 93.774, Medicare--
Supplementary Medical Insurance Program)
Dated: May 29, 2013.
Marilyn Tavenner,
Administrator, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
Approved: June 28, 2013.
Kathleen Sebelius,
Secretary.
Addendum A--Rate and Adjustment Factors
Per Diem Rate:
Federal Per Diem Base Rate--$713.19
Labor Share--(0.69494)--$495.62
Non-Labor Share (0.30506)--$217.57
Per Diem Rate Applying the 2 Percentage Point Reduction:
Federal Per Diem Base Rate--$699.21
Labor Share (0.69494)--$485.91
Non-Labor Share (0.30506)--$213.30
Fixed Dollar Loss Threshold Amount: $10,245
Wage Index Budget Neutrality Factor: 1.0010
Facility Adjustments:
Rural Adjustment Factor--1.17
Teaching Adjustment Factor--0.5150
Wage Index--Pre-reclass Hospital Wage Index (FY2013)
[[Page 46753]]
Cost of Living Adjustments (COLAs)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cost of living
Area adjustment factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alaska:
City of Anchorage and 80-kilometer (50-mile) 1.23
radius by road.................................
City of Fairbanks and 80-kilometer (50-mile) 1.23
radius by road.................................
City of Juneau and 80-kilometer (50-mile) radius 1.23
by road........................................
Rest of Alaska.................................. 1.25
Hawaii:
City and County of Honolulu..................... 1.25
County of Hawaii................................ 1.18
County of Kauai................................. 1.25
County of Maui and County of Kalawao............ 1.25
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Patient Adjustments:
ECT--Per Treatment--$307.04
ECT--Per Treatment Applying the 2 Percentage Point Reduction--
$301.02
Variable Per Diem Adjustments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Day 1--Facility Without a Qualifying Emergency Department.. 1.19
Day 1--Facility With a Qualifying Emergency Department..... 1.31
Day 2...................................................... 1.12
Day 3...................................................... 1.08
Day 4...................................................... 1.05
Day 5...................................................... 1.04
Day 6...................................................... 1.02
Day 7...................................................... 1.01
Day 8...................................................... 1.01
Day 9...................................................... 1.00
Day 10..................................................... 1.00
Day 11..................................................... 0.99
Day 12..................................................... 0.99
Day 13..................................................... 0.99
Day 14..................................................... 0.99
Day 15..................................................... 0.98
Day 16..................................................... 0.97
Day 17..................................................... 0.97
Day 18..................................................... 0.96
Day 19..................................................... 0.95
Day 20..................................................... 0.95
Day 21..................................................... 0.95
After Day 21............................................... 0.92
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Age Adjustments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
Age (in years) factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under 45................................................... 1.00
45 and under 50............................................ 1.01
50 and under 55............................................ 1.02
55 and under 60............................................ 1.04
60 and under 65............................................ 1.07
65 and under 70............................................ 1.10
70 and under 75............................................ 1.13
75 and under 80............................................ 1.15
80 and over................................................ 1.17
------------------------------------------------------------------------
DRG Adjustments
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
MS-DRG MS-DRG descriptions factor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
056................................... Degenerative nervous system disorders w MCC................ 1.05
057................................... Degenerative nervous system disorders w/o MCC.............. ...........
080................................... Nontraumatic stupor & coma w MCC........................... 1.07
[[Page 46754]]
081................................... Nontraumatic stupor & coma w/o MCC......................... ...........
876................................... O.R. procedure w principal diagnoses of mental illness..... 1.22
880................................... Acute adjustment reaction & psychosocial dysfunction....... 1.05
881................................... Depressive neuroses........................................ 0.99
882................................... Neuroses except depressive................................. 1.02
883................................... Disorders of personality & impulse control................. 1.02
884................................... Organic disturbances & mental retardation.................. 1.03
885................................... Psychoses.................................................. 1.00
886................................... Behavioral & developmental disorders....................... 0.99
887................................... Other mental disorder diagnoses............................ 0.92
894................................... Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence, left AMA................. 0.97
895................................... Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w rehabilitation therapy.. 1.02
896................................... Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation therapy 0.88
w MCC.
897................................... Alcohol/drug abuse or dependence w/o rehabilitation therapy ...........
w/o MCC.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comorbidity Adjustments
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Adjustment
Comorbidity factor
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Developmental Disabilities................................. 1.04
Coagulation Factor Deficit................................. 1.13
Tracheostomy............................................... 1.06
Eating and Conduct Disorders............................... 1.12
Infectious Diseases........................................ 1.07
Renal Failure, Acute....................................... 1.11
Renal Failure, Chronic..................................... 1.11
Oncology Treatment......................................... 1.07
Uncontrolled Diabetes Mellitus............................. 1.05
Severe Protein Malnutrition................................ 1.13
Drug/Alcohol Induced Mental Disorders...................... 1.03
Cardiac Conditions......................................... 1.11
Gangrene................................................... 1.10
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease...................... 1.12
Artificial Openings--Digestive & Urinary................... 1.08
Severe Musculoskeletal & Connective Tissue Diseases........ 1.09
Poisoning.................................................. 1.11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Addendum B--FY 2014 CBSA Wage Index Tables
In this addendum, we provide the wage index tables referred to in
the preamble to this notice. The tables presented below are as follows:
Table1--FY 2014 Wage Index For Urban Areas Based on CBSA Labor
Market Areas.
Table 2--FY 2014 Wage Index Based On CBSA Labor Market Areas For
Rural Areas.
Table 1--FY 2014 Wage Index for Urban Areas Based on CBSA Labor Market
Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Urban area (constituent
CBSA code counties) Wage index
------------------------------------------------------------------------
10180........................ Abilene, TX.............. 0.8324
Callahan County, TX......
Jones County, TX.........
Taylor County, TX........
10380........................ Aguadilla-Isabela-San 0.3532
Sebasti[aacute]n, PR.
Aguada Municipio, PR.....
Aguadilla Municipio, PR..
A[ntilde]asco Municipio,
PR.
Isabela Municipio, PR....
Lares Municipio, PR......
Moca Municipio, PR.......
Rinc[oacute]n Municipio,
PR.
San Sebasti[aacute]n
Municipio, PR.
10420........................ Akron, OH................ 0.8729
Portage County, OH.......
Summit County, OH........
10500........................ Albany, GA............... 0.8435
Baker County, GA.........
Dougherty County, GA.....
[[Page 46755]]
Lee County, GA...........
Terrell County, GA.......
Worth County, GA.........
10580........................ Albany-Schenectady-Troy, 0.8647
NY.
Albany County, NY........
Rensselaer County, NY....
Saratoga County, NY......
Schenectady County, NY...
Schoharie County, NY.....
10740........................ Albuquerque, NM.......... 0.9542
Bernalillo County, NM....
Sandoval County, NM......
Torrance County, NM......
Valencia County, NM......
10780........................ Alexandria, LA........... 0.7857
Grant Parish, LA.........
Rapides Parish, LA.......
10900........................ Allentown-Bethlehem- 0.9084
Easton, PA-NJ.
Warren County, NJ........
Carbon County, PA........
Lehigh County, PA........
Northampton County, PA...
11020........................ Altoona, PA.............. 0.8898
Blair County, PA.........
11100........................ Amarillo, TX............. 0.8506
Armstrong County, TX.....
Carson County, TX........
Potter County, TX........
Randall County, TX.......
11180........................ Ames, IA................. 0.9595
Story County, IA.........
11260........................ Anchorage, AK............ 1.2147
Anchorage Municipality,
AK.
Matanuska-Susitna
Borough, AK.
11300........................ Anderson, IN............. 0.9547
Madison County, IN.......
11340........................ Anderson, SC............. 0.8929
Anderson County, SC......
11460........................ Ann Arbor, MI............ 1.0115
Washtenaw County, MI.....
11500........................ Anniston-Oxford, AL...... 0.7539
Calhoun County, AL.......
11540........................ Appleton, WI............. 0.9268
Calumet County, WI.......
Outagamie County, WI.....
11700........................ Asheville, NC............ 0.8555
Buncombe County, NC......
Haywood County, NC.......
Henderson County, NC.....
Madison County, NC.......
12020........................ Athens-Clarke County, GA. 0.9488
Clarke County, GA........
Madison County, GA.......
Oconee County, GA........
Oglethorpe County, GA....
12060........................ Atlanta-Sandy Springs- 0.9517
Marietta, GA.
Barrow County, GA........
Bartow County, GA........
Butts County, GA.........
Carroll County, GA.......
Cherokee County, GA......
Clayton County, GA.......
Cobb County, GA..........
Coweta County, GA........
Dawson County, GA........
DeKalb County, GA........
Douglas County, GA.......
Fayette County, GA.......
Forsyth County, GA.......
Fulton County, GA........
Gwinnett County, GA......
[[Page 46756]]
Haralson County, GA......
Heard County, GA.........
Henry County, GA.........
Jasper County, GA........
Lamar County, GA.........
Meriwether County, GA....
Newton County, GA........
Paulding County, GA......
Pickens County, GA.......
Pike County, GA..........
Rockdale County, GA......
Spalding County, GA......
Walton County, GA........
12100........................ Atlantic City-Hammonton, 1.1977
NJ.
Atlantic County, NJ......
12220........................ Auburn-Opelika, AL....... 0.7437
Lee County, AL...........
12260........................ Augusta-Richmond County, 0.9373
GA-SC.
Burke County, GA.........
Columbia County, GA......
McDuffie County, GA......
Richmond County, GA......
Aiken County, SC.........
Edgefield County, SC.....
12420........................ Austin-Round Rock, TX.... 0.9746
Bastrop County, TX.......
Caldwell County, TX......
Hays County, TX..........
Travis County, TX........
Williamson County, TX....
12540........................ Bakersfield, CA.......... 1.1611
Kern County, CA..........
12580........................ Baltimore-Towson, MD..... 1.0147
Anne Arundel County, MD..
Baltimore County, MD.....
Carroll County, MD.......
Harford County, MD.......
Howard County, MD........
Queen Anne's County, MD..
Baltimore City, MD.......
12620........................ Bangor, ME............... 1.0184
Penobscot County, ME.....
12700........................ Barnstable Town, MA...... 1.2843
Barnstable County, MA....
12940........................ Baton Rouge, LA.......... 0.8147
Ascension Parish, LA.....
East Baton Rouge Parish,
LA.
East Feliciana Parish, LA
Iberville Parish, LA.....
Livingston Parish, LA....
Pointe Coupee Parish, LA.
St. Helena Parish, LA....
West Baton Rouge Parish,
LA.
West Feliciana Parish, LA
12980........................ Battle Creek, MI......... 0.9912
Calhoun County, MI.......
13020........................ Bay City, MI............. 0.9181
Bay County, MI...........
13140........................ Beaumont-Port Arthur, TX. 0.8533
Hardin County, TX........
Jefferson County, TX.....
Orange County, TX........
13380........................ Bellingham, WA........... 1.1415
Whatcom County, WA.......
13460........................ Bend, OR................. 1.1119
Deschutes County, OR.....
13644........................ Bethesda-Frederick- 1.0374
Gaithersburg, MD.
Frederick County, MD.....
Montgomery County, MD....
13740........................ Billings, MT............. 0.8737
Carbon County, MT........
[[Page 46757]]
Yellowstone County, MT...
13780........................ Binghamton, NY........... 0.8707
Broome County, NY........
Tioga County, NY.........
13820........................ Birmingham-Hoover, AL.... 0.8516
Bibb County, AL..........
Blount County, AL........
Chilton County, AL.......
Jefferson County, AL.....
St. Clair County, AL.....
Shelby County, AL........
Walker County, AL........
13900........................ Bismarck, ND............. 0.7261
Burleigh County, ND......
Morton County, ND........
13980........................ Blacksburg-Christiansburg- 0.8348
Radford, VA.
Giles County, VA.........
Montgomery County, VA....
Pulaski County, VA.......
Radford City, VA.........
14020........................ Bloomington, IN.......... 0.8752
Greene County, IN........
Monroe County, IN........
Owen County, IN..........
14060........................ Bloomington-Normal, IL... 0.9502
McLean County, IL........
14260........................ Boise City-Nampa, ID..... 0.8897
Ada County, ID...........
Boise County, ID.........
Canyon County, ID........
Gem County, ID...........
Owyhee County, ID........
14484........................ Boston-Quincy, MA........ 1.2378
Norfolk County, MA.......
Plymouth County, MA......
Suffolk County, MA.......
14500........................ Boulder, CO.............. 1.0574
Boulder County, CO.......
14540........................ Bowling Green, KY........ 0.8665
Edmonson County, KY......
Warren County, KY........
14740........................ Bremerton-Silverdale, WA. 1.0829
Kitsap County, WA........
14860........................ Bridgeport-Stamford- 1.3170
Norwalk, CT.
Fairfield County, CT.....
15180........................ Brownsville-Harlingen, TX 0.8612
Cameron County, TX.......
15260........................ Brunswick, GA............ 0.8792
Brantley County, GA......
Glynn County, GA.........
McIntosh County, GA......
15380........................ Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY 0.9999
Erie County, NY..........
Niagara County, NY.......
15500........................ Burlington, NC........... 0.8485
Alamance County, NC......
15540........................ Burlington-South 0.9997
Burlington, VT.
Chittenden County, VT....
Franklin County, VT......
Grand Isle County, VT....
15764........................ Cambridge-Newton- 1.1262
Framingham, MA.
Middlesex County, MA.....
15804........................ Camden, NJ............... 1.0474
Burlington County, NJ....
Camden County, NJ........
Gloucester County, NJ....
15940........................ Canton-Massillon, OH..... 0.8834
Carroll County, OH.......
Stark County, OH.........
15980........................ Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL 0.9153
Lee County, FL...........
[[Page 46758]]
16020........................ Cape Girardeau-Jackson, 0.8860
MO-IL.
Alexander County, IL.....
Bollinger County, MO.....
Cape Girardeau County, MO
16180........................ Carson City, NV.......... 1.0559
Carson City, NV..........
16220........................ Casper, WY............... 1.0143
Natrona County, WY.......
16300........................ Cedar Rapids, IA......... 0.8944
Benton County, IA........
Jones County, IA.........
Linn County, IA..........
16580........................ Champaign-Urbana, IL..... 0.9907
Champaign County, IL.....
Ford County, IL..........
Piatt County, IL.........
16620........................ Charleston, WV........... 0.8050
Boone County, WV.........
Clay County, WV..........
Kanawha County, WV.......
Lincoln County, WV.......
Putnam County, WV........
16700........................ Charleston-North 0.8820
Charleston-Summerville,
SC.
Berkeley County, SC......
Charleston County, SC....
Dorchester County, SC....
16740........................ Charlotte-Gastonia- 0.9215
Concord, NC[dash]SC.
Anson County, NC.........
Cabarrus County, NC......
Gaston County, NC........
Mecklenburg County, NC...
Union County, NC.........
York County, SC..........
16820........................ Charlottesville, VA...... 0.9195
Albemarle County, VA.....
Fluvanna County, VA......
Greene County, VA........
Nelson County, VA........
Charlottesville City, VA.
16860........................ Chattanooga, TN-GA....... 0.8678
Catoosa County, GA.......
Dade County, GA..........
Walker County, GA........
Hamilton County, TN......
Marion County, TN........
Sequatchie County, TN....
16940........................ Cheyenne, WY............. 0.9730
Laramie County, WY.......
16974........................ Chicago-Naperville- 1.0600
Joliet, IL.
Cook County, IL..........
DeKalb County, IL........
DuPage County, IL........
Grundy County, IL........
Kane County, IL..........
Kendall County, IL.......
McHenry County, IL.......
Will County, IL..........
17020........................ Chico, CA................ 1.1197
Butte County, CA.........
17140........................ Cincinnati-Middletown, OH- 0.9508
KY-IN.
Dearborn County, IN......
Franklin County, IN......
Ohio County, IN..........
Boone County, KY.........
Bracken County, KY.......
Campbell County, KY......
Gallatin County, KY......
Grant County, KY.........
Kenton County, KY........
Pendleton County, KY.....
Brown County, OH.........
[[Page 46759]]
Butler County, OH........
Clermont County, OH......
Hamilton County, OH......
Warren County, OH........
17300........................ Clarksville, TN-KY....... 0.8082
Christian County, KY.....
Trigg County, KY.........
Montgomery County, TN....
Stewart County, TN.......
17420........................ Cleveland, TN............ 0.7592
Bradley County, TN.......
Polk County, TN..........
17460........................ Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, 0.9082
OH.
Cuyahoga County, OH......
Geauga County, OH........
Lake County, OH..........
Lorain County, OH........
Medina County, OH........
17660........................ Coeur d'Alene, ID........ 0.9218
Kootenai County, ID......
17780........................ College Station-Bryan, TX 0.9584
Brazos County, TX........
Burleson County, TX......
Robertson County, TX.....
17820........................ Colorado Springs, CO..... 0.9364
El Paso County, CO.......
Teller County, CO........
17860........................ Columbia, MO............. 0.8339
Boone County, MO.........
Howard County, MO........
17900........................ Columbia, SC............. 0.8560
Calhoun County, SC.......
Fairfield County, SC.....
Kershaw County, SC.......
Lexington County, SC.....
Richland County, SC......
Saluda County, SC........
17980........................ Columbus, GA-AL.......... 0.8857
Russell County, AL.......
Chattahoochee County, GA.
Harris County, GA........
Marion County, GA........
Muscogee County, GA......
18020........................ Columbus, IN............. 0.9564
Bartholomew County, IN...
18140........................ Columbus, OH............. 0.9763
Delaware County, OH......
Fairfield County, OH.....
Franklin County, OH......
Licking County, OH.......
Madison County, OH.......
Morrow County, OH........
Pickaway County, OH......
Union County, OH.........
18580........................ Corpus Christi, TX....... 0.8591
Aransas County, TX.......
Nueces County, TX........
San Patricio County, TX..
18700........................ Corvallis, OR............ 1.0715
Benton County, OR........
18880........................ Crestview-Fort Walton 0.8916
Beach-Destin, FL.
Okaloosa County, FL......
19060........................ Cumberland, MD-WV........ 0.8836
Allegany County, MD......
Mineral County, WV.......
19124........................ Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX.. 0.9835
Collin County, TX........
Dallas County, TX........
Delta County, TX.........
Denton County, TX........
Ellis County, TX.........
[[Page 46760]]
Hunt County, TX..........
Kaufman County, TX.......
Rockwall County, TX......
19140........................ Dalton, GA............... 0.8828
Murray County, GA........
Whitfield County, GA.....
19180........................ Danville, IL............. 0.9977
Vermilion County, IL.....
19260........................ Danville, VA............. 0.8218
Pittsylvania County, VA..
Danville City, VA........
19340........................ Davenport-Moline-Rock 0.9145
Island, IA-IL.
Henry County, IL.........
Mercer County, IL........
Rock Island County, IL...
Scott County, IA.........
19380........................ Dayton, OH............... 0.9136
Greene County, OH........
Miami County, OH.........
Montgomery County, OH....
Preble County, OH........
19460........................ Decatur, AL.............. 0.7261
Lawrence County, AL......
Morgan County, AL........
19500........................ Decatur, IL.............. 0.7993
Macon County, IL.........
19660........................ Deltona-Daytona Beach- 0.8716
Ormond Beach, FL.
Volusia County, FL.......
19740........................ Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, 1.0469
CO.
Adams County, CO.........
Arapahoe County, CO......
Broomfield County, CO....
Clear Creek County, CO...
Denver County, CO........
Douglas County, CO.......
Elbert County, CO........
Gilpin County, CO........
Jefferson County, CO.....
Park County, CO..........
19780........................ Des Moines-West Des 0.9616
Moines, IA.
Dallas County, IA........
Guthrie County, IA.......
Madison County, IA.......
Polk County, IA..........
Warren County, IA........
19804........................ Detroit-Livonia-Dearborn, 0.9361
MI.
Wayne County, MI.........
20020........................ Dothan, AL............... 0.7398
Geneva County, AL........
Henry County, AL.........
Houston County, AL.......
20100........................ Dover, DE................ 0.9893
Kent County, DE..........
20220........................ Dubuque, IA.............. 0.8662
Dubuque County, IA.......
20260........................ Duluth, MN-WI............ 1.0741
Carlton County, MN.......
St. Louis County, MN.....
Douglas County, WI.......
20500........................ Durham-Chapel Hill, NC... 0.9525
Chatham County, NC.......
Durham County, NC........
Orange County, NC........
Person County, NC........
20740........................ Eau Claire, WI........... 0.9705
Chippewa County, WI......
Eau Claire County, WI....
20764........................ Edison-New Brunswick, NJ. 1.0806
Middlesex County, NJ.....
Monmouth County, NJ......
Ocean County, NJ.........
[[Page 46761]]
Somerset County, NJ......
20940........................ El Centro, CA............ 0.8602
Imperial County, CA......
21060........................ Elizabethtown, KY........ 0.8294
Hardin County, KY........
Larue County, KY.........
21140........................ Elkhart-Goshen, IN....... 0.9097
Elkhart County, IN.......
21300........................ Elmira, NY............... 0.8205
Chemung County, NY.......
21340........................ El Paso, TX.............. 0.8426
El Paso County, TX.......
21500........................ Erie, PA................. 0.7823
Erie County, PA..........
21660........................ Eugene-Springfield, OR... 1.1454
Lane County, OR..........
21780........................ Evansville, IN-KY........ 0.8401
Gibson County, IN........
Posey County, IN.........
Vanderburgh County, IN...
Warrick County, IN.......
Henderson County, KY.....
Webster County, KY.......
21820........................ Fairbanks, AK............ 1.0816
Fairbanks North Star
Borough, AK.
21940........................ Fajardo, PR.............. 0.3663
Ceiba Municipio, PR......
Fajardo Municipio, PR....
Luquillo Municipio, PR...
22020........................ Fargo, ND-MN............. 0.8108
Cass County, ND..........
Clay County, MN..........
22140........................ Farmington, NM........... 0.9323
San Juan County, NM......
22180........................ Fayetteville, NC......... 0.8971
Cumberland County, NC....
Hoke County, NC..........
22220........................ Fayetteville-Springdale- 0.9288
Rogers, AR-MO.
Benton County, AR........
Madison County, AR.......
Washington County, AR....
McDonald County, MO......
22380........................ Flagstaff, AZ............ 1.2369
Coconino County, AZ......
22420........................ Flint, MI................ 1.1257
Genesee County, MI.......
22500........................ Florence, SC............. 0.8087
Darlington County, SC....
Florence County, SC......
22520........................ Florence-Muscle Shoals, 0.7679
AL.
Colbert County, AL.......
Lauderdale County, AL....
22540........................ Fond du Lac, WI.......... 0.9158
Fond du Lac County, WI...
22660........................ Fort Collins-Loveland, CO 0.9833
Larimer County, CO.......
22744........................ Fort Lauderdale-Pompano 1.0363
Beach-Deerfield Beach,
FL.
Broward County, FL.......
22900........................ Fort Smith, AR-OK........ 0.7848
Crawford County, AR......
Franklin County, AR......
Sebastian County, AR.....
Le Flore County, OK......
Sequoyah County, OK......
23060........................ Fort Wayne, IN........... 0.9633
Allen County, IN.........
Wells County, IN.........
Whitley County, IN.......
23104........................ Fort Worth-Arlington, TX. 0.9516
Johnson County, TX.......
Parker County, TX........
[[Page 46762]]
Tarrant County, TX.......
Wise County, TX..........
23420........................ Fresno, CA............... 1.1593
Fresno County, CA........
23460........................ Gadsden, AL.............. 0.7697
Etowah County, AL........
23540........................ Gainesville, FL.......... 0.9631
Alachua County, FL.......
Gilchrist County, FL.....
23580........................ Gainesville, GA.......... 0.9327
Hall County, GA..........
23844........................ Gary, IN................. 0.9259
Jasper County, IN........
Lake County, IN..........
Newton County, IN........
Porter County, IN........
24020........................ Glens Falls, NY.......... 0.8340
Warren County, NY........
Washington County, NY....
24140........................ Goldsboro, NC............ 0.8560
Wayne County, NC.........
24220........................ Grand Forks, ND-MN....... 0.7250
Polk County, MN..........
Grand Forks County, ND...
24300........................ Grand Junction, CO....... 0.9415
Mesa County, CO..........
24340........................ Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI. 0.9125
Barry County, MI.........
Ionia County, MI.........
Kent County, MI..........
Newaygo County, MI.......
24500........................ Great Falls, MT.......... 0.7927
Cascade County, MT.......
24540........................ Greeley, CO.............. 0.9593
Weld County, CO..........
24580........................ Green Bay, WI............ 0.9793
Brown County, WI.........
Kewaunee County, WI......
Oconto County, WI........
24660........................ Greensboro-High Point, NC 0.8638
Guilford County, NC......
Randolph County, NC......
Rockingham County, NC....
24780........................ Greenville, NC........... 0.9694
Greene County, NC........
Pitt County, NC..........
24860........................ Greenville-Mauldin- 0.9737
Easley, SC.
Greenville County, SC....
Laurens County, SC.......
Pickens County, SC.......
25020........................ Guayama, PR.............. 0.3696
Arroyo Municipio, PR.....
Guayama Municipio, PR....
Patillas Municipio, PR...
25060........................ Gulfport-Biloxi, MS...... 0.8544
Hancock County, MS.......
Harrison County, MS......
Stone County, MS.........
25180........................ Hagerstown-Martinsburg, 0.9422
MD-WV.
Washington County, MD....
Berkeley County, WV......
Morgan County, WV........
25260........................ Hanford-Corcoran, CA..... 1.0992
Kings County, CA.........
25420........................ Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA.. 0.9525
Cumberland County, PA....
Dauphin County, PA.......
Perry County, PA.........
25500........................ Harrisonburg, VA......... 0.9087
Rockingham County, VA....
Harrisonburg City, VA....
[[Page 46763]]
25540........................ Hartford-West Hartford- 1.0869
East Hartford, CT.
Hartford County, CT......
Middlesex County, CT.....
Tolland County, CT.......
25620........................ Hattiesburg, MS.......... 0.8035
Forrest County, MS.......
Lamar County, MS.........
Perry County, MS.........
25860........................ Hickory-Lenoir-Morganton, 0.8677
NC.
Alexander County, NC.....
Burke County, NC.........
Caldwell County, NC......
Catawba County, NC.......
25980........................ Hinesville-Fort Stewart, 0.8843
GA \1\.
Liberty County, GA.......
Long County, GA..........
26100........................ Holland-Grand Haven, MI.. 0.8024
Ottawa County, MI........
26180........................ Honolulu, HI............. 1.2156
Honolulu County, HI......
26300........................ Hot Springs, AR.......... 0.8944
Garland County, AR.......
26380........................ Houma-Bayou Cane- 0.7928
Thibodaux, LA.
Lafourche Parish, LA.....
Terrebonne Parish, LA....
26420........................ Houston-Sugar Land- 0.9933
Baytown, TX.
Austin County, TX........
Brazoria County, TX......
Chambers County, TX......
Fort Bend County, TX.....
Galveston County, TX.....
Harris County, TX........
Liberty County, TX.......
Montgomery County, TX....
San Jacinto County, TX...
Waller County, TX........
26580........................ Huntington-Ashland, WV-KY- 0.8635
OH.
Boyd County, KY..........
Greenup County, KY.......
Lawrence County, OH......
Cabell County, WV........
Wayne County, WV.........
26620........................ Huntsville, AL........... 0.8667
Limestone County, AL.....
Madison County, AL.......
26820........................ Idaho Falls, ID.......... 0.9114
Bonneville County, ID....
Jefferson County, ID.....
26900........................ Indianapolis-Carmel, IN.. 0.9870
Boone County, IN.........
Brown County, IN.........
Hamilton County, IN......
Hancock County, IN.......
Hendricks County, IN.....
Johnson County, IN.......
Marion County, IN........
Morgan County, IN........
Putnam County, IN........
Shelby County, IN........
26980........................ Iowa City, IA............ 1.0120
Johnson County, IA.......
Washington County, IA....
27060........................ Ithaca, NY............... 0.9249
Tompkins County, NY......
27100........................ Jackson, MI.............. 0.8511
Jackson County, MI.......
27140........................ Jackson, MS.............. 0.8177
Copiah County, MS........
Hinds County, MS.........
Madison County, MS.......
Rankin County, MS........
[[Page 46764]]
Simpson County, MS.......
27180........................ Jackson, TN.............. 0.7672
Chester County, TN.......
Madison County, TN.......
27260........................ Jacksonville, FL......... 0.8883
Baker County, FL.........
Clay County, FL..........
Duval County, FL.........
Nassau County, FL........
St. Johns County, FL.....
27340........................ Jacksonville, NC......... 0.7957
Onslow County, NC........
27500........................ Janesville, WI........... 0.9458
Rock County, WI..........
27620........................ Jefferson City, MO....... 0.8263
Callaway County, MO......
Cole County, MO..........
Moniteau County, MO......
Osage County, MO.........
27740........................ Johnson City, TN......... 0.7359
Carter County, TN........
Unicoi County, TN........
Washington County, TN....
27780........................ Johnstown, PA............ 0.8116
Cambria County, PA.......
27860........................ Jonesboro, AR............ 0.8084
Craighead County, AR.....
Poinsett County, AR......
27900........................ Joplin, MO............... 0.7828
Jasper County, MO........
Newton County, MO........
28020........................ Kalamazoo-Portage, MI.... 0.9834
Kalamazoo County, MI.....
Van Buren County, MI.....
28100........................ Kankakee-Bradley, IL..... 1.0127
Kankakee County, IL......
28140........................ Kansas City, MO-KS....... 0.9614
Franklin County, KS......
Johnson County, KS.......
Leavenworth County, KS...
Linn County, KS..........
Miami County, KS.........
Wyandotte County, KS.....
Bates County, MO.........
Caldwell County, MO......
Cass County, MO..........
Clay County, MO..........
Clinton County, MO.......
Jackson County, MO.......
Lafayette County, MO.....
Platte County, MO........
Ray County, MO...........
28420........................ Kennewick-Pasco-Richland, 0.9708
WA.
Benton County, WA........
Franklin County, WA......
28660........................ Killeen-Temple-Fort Hood, 0.9102
TX.
Bell County, TX..........
Coryell County, TX.......
Lampasas County, TX......
28700........................ Kingsport-Bristol- 0.7325
Bristol, TN-VA.
Hawkins County, TN.......
Sullivan County, TN......
Bristol City, VA.........
Scott County, VA.........
Washington County, VA....
28740........................ Kingston, NY............. 0.8953
Ulster County, NY........
28940........................ Knoxville, TN............ 0.7575
Anderson County, TN......
Blount County, TN........
Knox County, TN..........
[[Page 46765]]
Loudon County, TN........
Union County, TN.........
29020........................ Kokomo, IN............... 0.8756
Howard County, IN........
Tipton County, IN........
29100........................ La Crosse, WI-MN......... 1.0070
Houston County, MN.......
La Crosse County, WI.....
29140........................ Lafayette, IN............ 0.9316
Benton County, IN........
Carroll County, IN.......
Tippecanoe County, IN....
29180........................ Lafayette, LA............ 0.8565
Lafayette Parish, LA.....
St. Martin Parish, LA....
29340........................ Lake Charles, LA......... 0.7813
Calcasieu Parish, LA.....
Cameron Parish, LA.......
29404........................ Lake County-Kenosha 1.0558
County, IL-WI.
Lake County, IL..........
Kenosha County, WI.......
29420........................ Lake Havasu City-Kingman, 0.9760
AZ.
Mohave County, AZ........
29460........................ Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL 0.8262
Polk County, FL..........
29540........................ Lancaster, PA............ 0.9452
Lancaster County, PA.....
29620........................ Lansing-East Lansing, MI. 1.0065
Clinton County, MI.......
Eaton County, MI.........
Ingham County, MI........
29700........................ Laredo, TX............... 0.7486
Webb County, TX..........
29740........................ Las Cruces, NM........... 0.9044
Dona Ana County, NM......
29820........................ Las Vegas-Paradise, NV... 1.2076
Clark County, NV.........
29940........................ Lawrence, KS............. 0.8676
Douglas County, KS.......
30020........................ Lawton, OK............... 0.8351
Comanche County, OK......
30140........................ Lebanon, PA.............. 0.7994
Lebanon County, PA.......
30300........................ Lewiston, ID-WA.......... 0.9326
Nez Perce County, ID.....
Asotin County, WA........
30340........................ Lewiston-Auburn, ME...... 0.9178
Androscoggin County, ME..
30460........................ Lexington-Fayette, KY.... 0.9023
Bourbon County, KY.......
Clark County, KY.........
Fayette County, KY.......
Jessamine County, KY.....
Scott County, KY.........
Woodford County, KY......
30620........................ Lima, OH................. 0.9226
Allen County, OH.........
30700........................ Lincoln, NE.............. 0.9726
Lancaster County, NE.....
Seward County, NE........
30780........................ Little Rock-North Little 0.8595
Rock-Conway, AR.
Faulkner County, AR......
Grant County, AR.........
Lonoke County, AR........
Perry County, AR.........
Pulaski County, AR.......
Saline County, AR........
30860........................ Logan, UT-ID............. 0.8456
Franklin County, ID......
Cache County, UT.........
30980........................ Longview, TX............. 0.8550
[[Page 46766]]
Gregg County, TX.........
Rusk County, TX..........
Upshur County, TX........
31020........................ Longview, WA............. 1.0081
Cowlitz County, WA.......
31084........................ Los Angeles-Long Beach- 1.2293
Glendale, CA.
Los Angeles County, CA...
31140........................ Louisville-Jefferson 0.8862
County, KY-IN.
Clark County, IN.........
Floyd County, IN.........
Harrison County, IN......
Washington County, IN....
Bullitt County, KY.......
Henry County, KY.........
Meade County, KY.........
Nelson County, KY........
Oldham County, KY........
Shelby County, KY........
Spencer County, KY.......
Trimble County, KY.......
31180........................ Lubbock, TX.............. 0.8870
Crosby County, TX........
Lubbock County, TX.......
31340........................ Lynchburg, VA............ 0.8615
Amherst County, VA.......
Appomattox County, VA....
Bedford County, VA.......
Campbell County, VA......
Bedford City, VA.........
Lynchburg City, VA.......
31420........................ Macon, GA................ 0.8584
Bibb County, GA..........
Crawford County, GA......
Jones County, GA.........
Monroe County, GA........
Twiggs County, GA........
31460........................ Madera-Chowchilla, CA.... 0.8050
Madera County, CA........
31540........................ Madison, WI.............. 1.1264
Columbia County, WI......
Dane County, WI..........
Iowa County, WI..........
31700........................ Manchester-Nashua, NH.... 1.0042
Hillsborough County, NH..
31740........................ Manhattan, KS............ 0.7839
Geary County, KS.........
Pottawatomie County, KS..
Riley County, KS.........
31860........................ Mankato-North Mankato, MN 0.9413
Blue Earth County, MN....
Nicollet County, MN......
31900........................ Mansfield, OH............ 0.8993
Richland County, OH......
32420........................ Mayag[uuml]ez, PR........ 0.3586
Hormigueros Municipio, PR
Mayag[uuml]ez Municipio,
PR.
32580........................ McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, 0.8603
TX.
Hidalgo County, TX.......
32780........................ Medford, OR.............. 1.0400
Jackson County, OR.......
32820........................ Memphis, TN-MS-AR........ 0.9049
Crittenden County, AR....
DeSoto County, MS........
Marshall County, MS......
Tate County, MS..........
Tunica County, MS........
Fayette County, TN.......
Shelby County, TN........
Tipton County, TN........
32900........................ Merced, CA............... 1.2996
Merced County, CA........
[[Page 46767]]
33124........................ Miami-Miami Beach- 1.0130
Kendall, FL.
Miami-Dade County, FL....
33140........................ Michigan City-La Porte, 0.9694
IN.
LaPorte County, IN.......
33260........................ Midland, TX.............. 1.0640
Midland County, TX.......
33340........................ Milwaukee-Waukesha-West 0.9931
Allis, WI.
Milwaukee County, WI.....
Ozaukee County, WI.......
Washington County, WI....
Waukesha County, WI......
33460........................ Minneapolis-St. Paul- 1.1336
Bloomington, MN-WI.
Anoka County, MN.........
Carver County, MN........
Chisago County, MN.......
Dakota County, MN........
Hennepin County, MN......
Isanti County, MN........
Ramsey County, MN........
Scott County, MN.........
Sherburne County, MN.....
Washington County, MN....
Wright County, MN........
Pierce County, WI........
St. Croix County, WI.....
33540........................ Missoula, MT............. 0.9001
Missoula County, MT......
33660........................ Mobile, AL............... 0.7467
Mobile County, AL........
33700........................ Modesto, CA.............. 1.2841
Stanislaus County, CA....
33740........................ Monroe, LA............... 0.7717
Ouachita Parish, LA......
Union Parish, LA.........
33780........................ Monroe, MI............... 0.8472
Monroe County, MI........
33860........................ Montgomery, AL........... 0.7858
Autauga County, AL.......
Elmore County, AL........
Lowndes County, AL.......
Montgomery County, AL....
34060........................ Morgantown, WV........... 0.8284
Monongalia County, WV....
Preston County, WV.......
34100........................ Morristown, TN........... 0.6768
Grainger County, TN......
Hamblen County, TN.......
Jefferson County, TN.....
34580........................ Mount Vernon-Anacortes, 1.0340
WA.
Skagit County, WA........
34620........................ Muncie, IN............... 0.8734
Delaware County, IN......
34740........................ Muskegon-Norton Shores, 1.1007
MI.
Muskegon County, MI......
34820........................ Myrtle Beach-North Myrtle 0.8717
Beach-Conway, SC.
Horry County, SC.........
34900........................ Napa, CA................. 1.6045
Napa County, CA..........
34940........................ Naples-Marco Island, FL.. 0.9265
Collier County, FL.......
34980........................ Nashville-Davidson- 0.9061
Murfreesboro-Franklin,
TN.
Cannon County, TN........
Cheatham County, TN......
Davidson County, TN......
Dickson County, TN.......
Hickman County, TN.......
Macon County, TN.........
Robertson County, TN.....
Rutherford County, TN....
Smith County, TN.........
Sumner County, TN........
[[Page 46768]]
Trousdale County, TN.....
Williamson County, TN....
Wilson County, TN........
35004........................ Nassau-Suffolk, NY....... 1.2698
Nassau County, NY........
Suffolk County, NY.......
35084........................ Newark-Union, NJ-PA...... 1.1223
Essex County, NJ.........
Hunterdon County, NJ.....
Morris County, NJ........
Sussex County, NJ........
Union County, NJ.........
Pike County, PA..........
35300........................ New Haven-Milford, CT.... 1.2061
New Haven County, CT.....
35380........................ New Orleans-Metairie- 0.8932
Kenner, LA.
Jefferson Parish, LA.....
Orleans Parish, LA.......
Plaquemines Parish, LA...
St. Bernard Parish, LA...
St. Charles Parish, LA...
St. John the Baptist
Parish, LA.
St. Tammany Parish, LA...
35644........................ New York-White Plains- 1.2914
Wayne, NY-NJ.
Bergen County, NJ........
Hudson County, NJ........
Passaic County, NJ.......
Bronx County, NY.........
Kings County, NY.........
New York County, NY......
Putnam County, NY........
Queens County, NY........
Richmond County, NY......
Rockland County, NY......
Westchester County, NY...
35660........................ Niles-Benton Harbor, MI.. 0.8237
Berrien County, MI.......
35840........................ North Port-Bradenton- 0.9375
Sarasota-Venice, FL.
Manatee County, FL.......
Sarasota County, FL......
35980........................ Norwich-New London, CT... 1.1376
New London County, CT....
36084........................ Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, 1.6654
CA.
Alameda County, CA.......
Contra Costa County, CA..
36100........................ Ocala, FL................ 0.8455
Marion County, FL........
36140........................ Ocean City, NJ........... 1.0307
Cape May County, NJ......
36220........................ Odessa, TX............... 0.9741
Ector County, TX.........
36260........................ Ogden-Clearfield, UT..... 0.9031
Davis County, UT.........
Morgan County, UT........
Weber County, UT.........
36420........................ Oklahoma City, OK........ 0.8810
Canadian County, OK......
Cleveland County, OK.....
Grady County, OK.........
Lincoln County, OK.......
Logan County, OK.........
McClain County, OK.......
Oklahoma County, OK......
36500........................ Olympia, WA.............. 1.1397
Thurston County, WA......
36540........................ Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE- 1.0037
IA.
Harrison County, IA......
Mills County, IA.........
Pottawattamie County, IA.
Cass County, NE..........
Douglas County, NE.......
[[Page 46769]]
Sarpy County, NE.........
Saunders County, NE......
Washington County, NE....
36740........................ Orlando-Kissimmee, FL.... 0.9082
Lake County, FL..........
Orange County, FL........
Osceola County, FL.......
Seminole County, FL......
36780........................ Oshkosh-Neenah, WI....... 0.9433
Winnebago County, WI.....
36980........................ Owensboro, KY............ 0.8117
Daviess County, KY.......
Hancock County, KY.......
McLean County, KY........
37100........................ Oxnard-Thousand Oaks- 1.3079
Ventura, CA.
Ventura County, CA.......
37340........................ Palm Bay-Melbourne- 0.8838
Titusville, FL.
Brevard County, FL.......
37380........................ Palm Coast, FL........... 0.9880
Flagler County, FL.......
37460........................ Panama City-Lynn Haven- 0.7976
Panama City Beach, FL.
Bay County, FL...........
37620........................ Parkersburg-Marietta- 0.7487
Vienna, WV-OH.
Washington County, OH....
Pleasants County, WV.....
Wirt County, WV..........
Wood County, WV..........
37700........................ Pascagoula, MS........... 0.7662
George County, MS........
Jackson County, MS.......
37764........................ Peabody, MA.............. 1.0551
Essex County, MA.........
37860........................ Pensacola-Ferry Pass- 0.7819
Brent, FL.
Escambia County, FL......
Santa Rosa County, FL....
37900........................ Peoria, IL............... 0.8882
Marshall County, IL......
Peoria County, IL........
Stark County, IL.........
Tazewell County, IL......
Woodford County, IL......
37964........................ Philadelphia, PA......... 1.0806
Bucks County, PA.........
Chester County, PA.......
Delaware County, PA......
Montgomery County, PA....
Philadelphia County, PA..
38060........................ Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, 1.0477
AZ.
Maricopa County, AZ......
Pinal County, AZ.........
38220........................ Pine Bluff, AR........... 0.7847
Cleveland County, AR.....
Jefferson County, AR.....
Lincoln County, AR.......
38300........................ Pittsburgh, PA........... 0.8585
Allegheny County, PA.....
Armstrong County, PA.....
Beaver County, PA........
Butler County, PA........
Fayette County, PA.......
Washington County, PA....
Westmoreland County, PA..
38340........................ Pittsfield, MA........... 1.0721
Berkshire County, MA.....
38540........................ Pocatello, ID............ 0.9555
Bannock County, ID.......
Power County, ID.........
38660........................ Ponce, PR................ 0.4314
Juana D[iacute]az
Municipio, PR.
Ponce Municipio, PR......
Villalba Municipio, PR...
[[Page 46770]]
38860........................ Portland-South Portland- 0.9975
Biddeford, ME.
Cumberland County, ME....
Sagadahoc County, ME.....
York County, ME..........
38900........................ Portland-Vancouver- 1.1673
Beaverton, OR-WA.
Clackamas County, OR.....
Columbia County, OR......
Multnomah County, OR.....
Washington County, OR....
Yamhill County, OR.......
Clark County, WA.........
Skamania County, WA......
38940........................ Port St. Lucie, FL....... 0.9577
Martin County, FL........
St. Lucie County, FL.....
39100........................ Poughkeepsie-Newburgh- 1.1325
Middletown, NY.
Dutchess County, NY......
Orange County, NY........
39140........................ Prescott, AZ............. 1.2009
Yavapai County, AZ.......
39300........................ Providence-New Bedford- 1.0699
Fall River, RI-MA.
Bristol County, MA.......
Bristol County, RI.......
Kent County, RI..........
Newport County, RI.......
Providence County, RI....
Washington County, RI....
39340........................ Provo-Orem, UT........... 0.9133
Juab County, UT..........
Utah County, UT..........
39380........................ Pueblo, CO............... 0.8518
Pueblo County, CO........
39460........................ Punta Gorda, FL.......... 0.8590
Charlotte County, FL.....
39540........................ Racine, WI............... 0.9158
Racine County, WI........
39580........................ Raleigh-Cary, NC......... 0.9488
Franklin County, NC......
Johnston County, NC......
Wake County, NC..........
39660........................ Rapid City, SD........... 0.9823
Meade County, SD.........
Pennington County, SD....
39740........................ Reading, PA.............. 0.9072
Berks County, PA.........
39820........................ Redding, CA.............. 1.4555
Shasta County, CA........
39900........................ Reno-Sparks, NV.......... 1.0328
Storey County, NV........
Washoe County, NV........
40060........................ Richmond, VA............. 0.9695
Amelia County, VA........
Caroline County, VA......
Charles City County, VA..
Chesterfield County, VA..
Cumberland County, VA....
Dinwiddie County, VA.....
Goochland County, VA.....
Hanover County, VA.......
Henrico County, VA.......
King and Queen County, VA
King William County, VA..
Louisa County, VA........
New Kent County, VA......
Powhatan County, VA......
Prince George County, VA.
Sussex County, VA........
Colonial Heights City, VA
Hopewell City, VA........
Petersburg City, VA......
Richmond City, VA........
[[Page 46771]]
40140........................ Riverside-San Bernardino- 1.1396
Ontario, CA.
Riverside County, CA.....
San Bernardino County, CA
40220........................ Roanoke, VA.............. 0.9088
Botetourt County, VA.....
Craig County, VA.........
Franklin County, VA......
Roanoke County, VA.......
Roanoke City, VA.........
Salem City, VA...........
40340........................ Rochester, MN............ 1.0708
Dodge County, MN.........
Olmsted County, MN.......
Wabasha County, MN.......
40380........................ Rochester, NY............ 0.8704
Livingston County, NY....
Monroe County, NY........
Ontario County, NY.......
Orleans County, NY.......
Wayne County, NY.........
40420........................ Rockford, IL............. 0.9935
Boone County, IL.........
Winnebago County, IL.....
40484........................ Rockingham County- 1.0234
Strafford County, NH.
Rockingham County, NH....
Strafford County, NH.....
40580........................ Rocky Mount, NC.......... 0.8898
Edgecombe County, NC.....
Nash County, NC..........
40660........................ Rome, GA................. 0.8844
Floyd County, GA.........
40900........................ Sacramento-Arden-Arcade- 1.4752
Roseville, CA.
El Dorado County, CA.....
Placer County, CA........
Sacramento County, CA....
Yolo County, CA..........
40980........................ Saginaw-Saginaw Township 0.8820
North, MI.
Saginaw County, MI.......
41060........................ St. Cloud, MN............ 1.1010
Benton County, MN........
Stearns County, MN.......
41100........................ St. George, UT........... 0.8870
Washington County, UT....
41140........................ St. Joseph, MO-KS........ 0.9856
Doniphan County, KS......
Andrew County, MO........
Buchanan County, MO......
DeKalb County, MO........
41180........................ St. Louis, MO-IL......... 0.9420
Bond County, IL..........
Calhoun County, IL.......
Clinton County, IL.......
Jersey County, IL........
Macoupin County, IL......
Madison County, IL.......
Monroe County, IL........
St. Clair County, IL.....
Crawford County, MO......
Franklin County, MO......
Jefferson County, MO.....
Lincoln County, MO.......
St. Charles County, MO...
St. Louis County, MO.....
Warren County, MO........
Washington County, MO....
St. Louis City, MO.......
41420........................ Salem, OR................ 1.1069
Marion County, OR........
Polk County, OR..........
41500........................ Salinas, CA.............. 1.6074
Monterey County, CA......
[[Page 46772]]
41540........................ Salisbury, MD............ 0.9260
Somerset County, MD......
Wicomico County, MD......
41620........................ Salt Lake City, UT....... 0.9063
Salt Lake County, UT.....
Summit County, UT........
Tooele County, UT........
41660........................ San Angelo, TX........... 0.8221
Irion County, TX.........
Tom Green County, TX.....
41700........................ San Antonio, TX.......... 0.8936
Atascosa County, TX......
Bandera County, TX.......
Bexar County, TX.........
Comal County, TX.........
Guadalupe County, TX.....
Kendall County, TX.......
Medina County, TX........
Wilson County, TX........
41740........................ San Diego-Carlsbad-San 1.1922
Marcos, CA.
San Diego County, CA.....
41780........................ Sandusky, OH............. 0.8347
Erie County, OH..........
41884........................ San Francisco-San Mateo- 1.6327
Redwood City, CA.
Marin County, CA.........
San Francisco County, CA.
San Mateo County, CA.....
41900........................ San Germ[aacute]n-Cabo 0.4804
Rojo, PR.
Cabo Rojo Municipio, PR..
Lajas Municipio, PR......
Sabana Grande Municipio,
PR.
San Germ[aacute]n
Municipio, PR.
41940........................ San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa 1.7396
Clara, CA.
San Benito County, CA....
Santa Clara County, CA...
41980........................ San Juan-Caguas-Guaynabo, 0.4318
PR.
Aguas Buenas Municipio,
PR.
Aibonito Municipio, PR...
Arecibo Municipio, PR....
Barceloneta Municipio, PR
Barranquitas Municipio,
PR.
Bayam[oacute]n Municipio,
PR.
Caguas Municipio, PR.....
Camuy Municipio, PR......
Can[oacute]vanas
Municipio, PR.
Carolina Municipio, PR...
Cata[ntilde]o Municipio,
PR.
Cayey Municipio, PR......
Ciales Municipio, PR.....
Cidra Municipio, PR......
Comer[iacute]o Municipio,
PR.
Corozal Municipio, PR....
Dorado Municipio, PR.....
Florida Municipio, PR....
Guaynabo Municipio, PR...
Gurabo Municipio, PR.....
Hatillo Municipio, PR....
Humacao Municipio, PR....
Juncos Municipio, PR.....
Las Piedras Municipio, PR
Lo[iacute]za Municipio,
PR.
Manat[iacute] Municipio,
PR.
Maunabo Municipio, PR....
Morovis Municipio, PR....
Naguabo Municipio, PR....
Naranjito Municipio, PR..
Orocovis Municipio, PR...
Quebradillas Municipio,
PR.
R[iacute]o Grande
Municipio, PR.
San Juan Municipio, PR...
San Lorenzo Municipio, PR
[[Page 46773]]
Toa Alta Municipio, PR...
Toa Baja Municipio, PR...
Trujillo Alto Municipio,
PR.
Vega Alta Municipio, PR..
Vega Baja Municipio, PR..
Yabucoa Municipio, PR....
42020........................ San Luis Obispo-Paso 1.3081
Robles, CA.
San Luis Obispo County,
CA.
42044........................ Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, 1.2038
CA.
Orange County, CA........
42060........................ Santa Barbara-Santa Maria- 1.2670
Goleta, CA.
Santa Barbara County, CA.
42100........................ Santa Cruz-Watsonville, 1.8062
CA.
Santa Cruz County, CA....
42140........................ Santa Fe, NM............. 1.0400
Santa Fe County, NM......
42220........................ Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA.. 1.6440
Sonoma County, CA........
42340........................ Savannah, GA............. 0.8968
Bryan County, GA.........
Chatham County, GA.......
Effingham County, GA.....
42540........................ Scranton-Wilkes-Barre, PA 0.8260
Lackawanna County, PA....
Luzerne County, PA.......
Wyoming County, PA.......
42644........................ Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, 1.1771
WA.
King County, WA..........
Snohomish County, WA.....
42680........................ Sebastian-Vero Beach, FL. 0.8850
Indian River County, FL..
43100........................ Sheboygan, WI............ 0.9515
Sheboygan County, WI.....
43300........................ Sherman-Denison, TX...... 0.8544
Grayson County, TX.......
43340........................ Shreveport-Bossier City, 0.8412
LA.
Bossier Parish, LA.......
Caddo Parish, LA.........
De Soto Parish, LA.......
43580........................ Sioux City, IA-NE-SD..... 0.9010
Woodbury County, IA......
Dakota County, NE........
Dixon County, NE.........
Union County, SD.........
43620........................ Sioux Falls, SD.......... 0.8338
Lincoln County, SD.......
McCook County, SD........
Minnehaha County, SD.....
Turner County, SD........
43780........................ South Bend-Mishawaka, IN- 0.9531
MI.
St. Joseph County, IN....
Cass County, MI..........
43900........................ Spartanburg, SC.......... 0.9186
Spartanburg County, SC...
44060........................ Spokane, WA.............. 1.0824
Spokane County, WA.......
44100........................ Springfield, IL.......... 0.9179
Menard County, IL........
Sangamon County, IL......
44140........................ Springfield, MA.......... 1.0377
Franklin County, MA......
Hampden County, MA.......
Hampshire County, MA.....
44180........................ Springfield, MO.......... 0.8581
Christian County, MO.....
Dallas County, MO........
Greene County, MO........
Polk County, MO..........
Webster County, MO.......
44220........................ Springfield, OH.......... 0.9236
Clark County, OH.........
[[Page 46774]]
44300........................ State College, PA........ 0.9510
Centre County, PA........
44600........................ Steubenville-Weirton, OH- 0.7640
WV.
Jefferson County, OH.....
Brooke County, WV........
Hancock County, WV.......
44700........................ Stockton, CA............. 1.3356
San Joaquin County, CA...
44940........................ Sumter, SC............... 0.7454
Sumter County, SC........
45060........................ Syracuse, NY............. 0.9829
Madison County, NY.......
Onondaga County, NY......
Oswego County, NY........
45104........................ Tacoma, WA............... 1.1741
Pierce County, WA........
45220........................ Tallahassee, FL.......... 0.8521
Gadsden County, FL.......
Jefferson County, FL.....
Leon County, FL..........
Wakulla County, FL.......
45300........................ Tampa-St. Petersburg- 0.9032
Clearwater, FL.
Hernando County, FL......
Hillsborough County, FL..
Pasco County, FL.........
Pinellas County, FL......
45460........................ Terre Haute, IN.......... 0.9113
Clay County, IN..........
Sullivan County, IN......
Vermillion County, IN....
Vigo County, IN..........
45500........................ Texarkana, TX-Texarkana, 0.7967
AR.
Miller County, AR........
Bowie County, TX.........
45780........................ Toledo, OH............... 0.9034
Fulton County, OH........
Lucas County, OH.........
Ottawa County, OH........
Wood County, OH..........
45820........................ Topeka, KS............... 0.8969
Jackson County, KS.......
Jefferson County, KS.....
Osage County, KS.........
Shawnee County, KS.......
Wabaunsee County, KS.....
45940........................ Trenton-Ewing, NJ........ 1.0360
Mercer County, NJ........
46060........................ Tucson, AZ............... 0.9065
Pima County, AZ..........
46140........................ Tulsa, OK................ 0.8139
Creek County, OK.........
Okmulgee County, OK......
Osage County, OK.........
Pawnee County, OK........
Rogers County, OK........
Tulsa County, OK.........
Wagoner County, OK.......
46220........................ Tuscaloosa, AL........... 0.8533
Greene County, AL........
Hale County, AL..........
Tuscaloosa County, AL....
46340........................ Tyler, TX................ 0.8361
Smith County, TX.........
46540........................ Utica-Rome, NY........... 0.8653
Herkimer County, NY......
Oneida County, NY........
46660........................ Valdosta, GA............. 0.7918
Brooks County, GA........
Echols County, GA........
Lanier County, GA........
Lowndes County, GA.......
[[Page 46775]]
46700........................ Vallejo-Fairfield, CA.... 1.5844
Solano County, CA........
47020........................ Victoria, TX............. 0.8992
Calhoun County, TX.......
Goliad County, TX........
Victoria County, TX......
47220........................ Vineland-Millville- 1.0596
Bridgeton, NJ.
Cumberland County, NJ....
47260........................ Virginia Beach-Norfolk- 0.9208
Newport News, VA-NC.
Currituck County, NC.....
Gloucester County, VA....
Isle of Wight County, VA.
James City County, VA....
Mathews County, VA.......
Surry County, VA.........
York County, VA..........
Chesapeake City, VA......
Hampton City, VA.........
Newport News City, VA....
Norfolk City, VA.........
Poquoson City, VA........
Portsmouth City, VA......
Suffolk City, VA.........
Virginia Beach City, VA..
Williamsburg City, VA....
47300........................ Visalia-Porterville, CA.. 1.0349
Tulare County, CA........
47380........................ Waco, TX................. 0.8458
McLennan County, TX......
47580........................ Warner Robins, GA........ 0.8197
Houston County, GA.......
47644........................ Warren-Troy-Farmington 0.9543
Hills, MI.
Lapeer County, MI........
Livingston County, MI....
Macomb County, MI........
Oakland County, MI.......
St. Clair County, MI.....
47894........................ Washington-Arlington- 1.0659
Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV.
District of Columbia, DC.
Calvert County, MD.......
Charles County, MD.......
Prince George's County,
MD.
Arlington County, VA.....
Clarke County, VA........
Fairfax County, VA.......
Fauquier County, VA......
Loudoun County, VA.......
Prince William County, VA
Spotsylvania County, VA..
Stafford County, VA......
Warren County, VA........
Alexandria City, VA......
Fairfax City, VA.........
Falls Church City, VA....
Fredericksburg City, VA..
Manassas City, VA........
Manassas Park City, VA...
Jefferson County, WV.....
47940........................ Waterloo-Cedar Falls, IA. 0.8422
Black Hawk County, IA....
Bremer County, IA........
Grundy County, IA........
48140........................ Wausau, WI............... 0.8921
Marathon County, WI......
48300........................ Wenatchee-East Wenatchee, 1.0037
WA.
Chelan County, WA........
Douglas County, WA.......
48424........................ West Palm Beach-Boca 0.9661
Raton-Boynton Beach, FL.
Palm Beach County, FL....
48540........................ Wheeling, WV-OH.......... 0.6863
Belmont County, OH.......
[[Page 46776]]
Marshall County, WV......
Ohio County, WV..........
48620........................ Wichita, KS.............. 0.8681
Butler County, KS........
Harvey County, KS........
Sedgwick County, KS......
Sumner County, KS........
48660........................ Wichita Falls, TX........ 0.9048
Archer County, TX........
Clay County, TX..........
Wichita County, TX.......
48700........................ Williamsport, PA......... 0.8230
Lycoming County, PA......
48864........................ Wilmington, DE-MD-NJ..... 1.0687
New Castle County, DE....
Cecil County, MD.........
Salem County, NJ.........
48900........................ Wilmington, NC........... 0.9155
Brunswick County, NC.....
New Hanover County, NC...
Pender County, NC........
49020........................ Winchester, VA-WV........ 0.9249
Frederick County, VA.....
Winchester City, VA......
Hampshire County, WV.....
49180........................ Winston-Salem, NC........ 0.8660
Davie County, NC.........
Forsyth County, NC.......
Stokes County, NC........
Yadkin County, NC........
49340........................ Worcester, MA............ 1.1205
Worcester County, MA.....
49420........................ Yakima, WA............... 1.0097
Yakima County, WA........
49500........................ Yauco, PR................ 0.4059
Gu[aacute]nica Municipio,
PR.
Guayanilla Municipio, PR.
Pe[ntilde]uelas
Municipio, PR.
Yauco Municipio, PR......
49620........................ York-Hanover, PA......... 0.9557
York County, PA..........
49660........................ Youngstown-Warren- 0.8283
Boardman, OH-PA.
Mahoning County, OH......
Trumbull County, OH......
Mercer County, PA........
49700........................ Yuba City, CA \1\........ 1.2004
Sutter County, CA........
Yuba County, CA..........
49740........................ Yuma, AZ................. 0.9517
Yuma County, AZ..........
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ At this time, there are no hospitals located in this urban area on
which to base a wage index.
Table 2--FY 2014 Wage Index Based on CBSA Labor Market Areas for Rural
Areas
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wage
State code Nonurban area index
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1................................... Alabama................ 0.7121
2................................... Alaska................. 1.2807
3................................... Arizona................ 0.9182
4................................... Arkansas............... 0.7350
5................................... California............. 1.2567
6................................... Colorado............... 1.0208
7................................... Connecticut............ 1.1128
8................................... Delaware............... 1.0171
10.................................. Florida................ 0.8062
11.................................. Georgia................ 0.7421
12.................................. Hawaii................. 1.0728
13.................................. Idaho.................. 0.7583
14.................................. Illinois............... 0.8438
15.................................. Indiana................ 0.8472
16.................................. Iowa................... 0.8351
17.................................. Kansas................. 0.7997
18.................................. Kentucky............... 0.7877
19.................................. Louisiana.............. 0.7718
20.................................. Maine.................. 0.8300
21.................................. Maryland............... 0.8797
22.................................. Massachusetts.......... 1.3540
23.................................. Michigan............... 0.8387
24.................................. Minnesota.............. 0.9053
25.................................. Mississippi............ 0.7537
26.................................. Missouri............... 0.7622
27.................................. Montana................ 0.8600
28.................................. Nebraska............... 0.8733
29.................................. Nevada................. 0.9739
[[Page 46777]]
30.................................. New Hampshire.......... 1.0372
31.................................. New Jersey \1\.........
32.................................. New Mexico............. 0.8879
33.................................. New York............... 0.8199
34.................................. North Carolina......... 0.8271
35.................................. North Dakota........... 0.6891
36.................................. Ohio................... 0.8470
37.................................. Oklahoma............... 0.7783
38.................................. Oregon................. 0.9500
39.................................. Pennsylvania........... 0.8380
40.................................. Puerto Rico \1\........ 0.4047
41.................................. Rhode Island \1\.......
42.................................. South Carolina......... 0.8338
43.................................. South Dakota........... 0.8124
44.................................. Tennessee.............. 0.7559
45.................................. Texas.................. 0.7978
46.................................. Utah................... 0.8516
47.................................. Vermont................ 0.9725
48.................................. Virgin Islands......... 0.7185
49.................................. Virginia............... 0.7728
50.................................. Washington............. 1.0092
51.................................. West Virginia.......... 0.7333
52.................................. Wisconsin.............. 0.9142
53.................................. Wyoming................ 0.9238
65.................................. Guam................... 0.9611
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ All counties within the State are classified as urban, with the
exception of Puerto Rico. Puerto Rico has areas designated as rural;
however, no short-term, acute care hospitals are located in the
area(s) for FY 2013. The Puerto Rico wage index is the same as FY
2012.
[FR Doc. 2013-18445 Filed 7-29-13; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE P