Using Facebook’s New Job Search Feature


by Noreen Quadir, Social Media and Communications Specialist

Facebook has released a new feature that allows employers to post career opportunities for free, making it easier for prospective candidates to find and apply for jobs online. As a private practice, you can quickly find the right fit for a position by posting the job opportunity on your Facebook page under the new “Jobs on Facebook” section. This new section has listings in the local area so users in your community can come across your post and apply directly on the social platform. Candidates can fill out their name, education and employment history, and a short cover note (1,000-character limit). You will then receive their application in your Facebook message inbox. Candidates will also be able to apply on your page under the new “Jobs” tab, where your career opportunities will be listed. Simply post your job listings in this section and your current openings will show up in people’s newsfeeds.

Advantages

There are many advantages to using Facebook’s new job search feature. With 1.87 billion active users, your Facebook job listings will reach a larger talent pool, as compared to LinkedIn which has 467 million users. More users means you will have a higher chance of finding the most qualified candidate for a position through this platform than other job boards. The network also simplifies the employee search by allowing you to receive applications through the Facebook Messenger app, where you can reply back via text or a video/audio call. Conducting pre-screenings and interviews can be done through Messenger as well. Another advantage is the ability to review applications on the go with your mobile device. If you have a really busy day, you can quickly check your phone to see messaged applications between appointments or on a coffee break. People following your page will see your job postings and can also share them on their page where their friends can also see it. You may also have businesses in the medical community that are following your page — if they share your post it will reach even more people with an interest in medicine and healthcare. Consider reaching out and asking if others will share your post, giving it a wider reach and greater access to potential talent for your practice.

Easy to Post and Share

Posting a job opportunity on Facebook is very easy and takes little time. When you go to your business page, you will see an option that says “Create Job”. By clicking on that, you will be asked to fill out the details for the job, including title and description of duties and requirements. As this feature is somewhat new, not all Facebook pages have the Jobs tab showing yet, but you can also create a job listing simply by going to your status box on the main page. Underneath the box where you can type an update, you will see various options for postings, such as sharing a photo or video. In the second row, there’s an option to Publish a job post — click on that and you will be taken to the same form to fill out your job details.

publish job fb

You can and should add a visual component to your job posting. An appealing photo will make your job listing attractive and will result in more interest. Choose a photo that best represents your practice’s office and environment. A photo of your staff smiling at work or a photo that displays the beautiful interior design of your office are always good options. You want to show potential employees what’s great about working at your practice. WIthin the job posting form, you can fill out include salary, location and job type (part-time, full-time, contract, etc.). Once you finish filling out the job description, just click “Publish Job Post” and it will immediately be published on your page and appear in people’s newsfeeds.

After you publish your job listing, you will have the opportunity of boosting the post to reach even more people and target the audience for your post, making it an even more effective strategy for finding candidates. Once your post is live, you can click on the “Boost” button below it. You will then be asked to pick a targeted audience, where you can enter interests your prospects might have (i.e. medicine, healthcare, etc.) and an age range. If the position is entry-level, you may want to select a typical age range for recent grads. And if it’s a role that requires years of experience, you may want to select an age range that is older. It’s important to keep in mind what the role is and what interests, skills and experience your ideal candidate has. That will help you to determine the targeted audience for your boosted post. Once you choose your audience, you can enter the budget you want to spend. The more you pay, the more people the post will reach. By entering a certain amount of money, Facebook will let you know the average number of people the post will reach. This usually depends on your targeted audience and will help you determine how much money you should spend. You will only get charged when a candidate clicks on the job post.

Facebook has long been a very useful marketing tool for private practices, offering opportunities to communicate with their patients and the community through business pages. With the addition of the Jobs section, medical practices now also have the ability to quickly and easily find qualified employees and choose candidates from a larger talent pool through Facebook.

 

CMS Proposes Updates to Medicaid Managed Care Organizations


By Jose Lopez, Senior Consultant, The Verden Group

On May 26th, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a proposed rule aimed at “improving the quality and performance of Medicaid Managed Care Organizations (MCOs).” The proposed rule is vast, with more than 650 pages of proposed reforms that attempt to align MCOs with existing regulations for other private and public payers. More than half of all Medicaid beneficiaries (at least 39 million individuals in 39 states and the District of Columbia) have coverage through MCOs.

Amongst the proposed provisions are:

  1. Application of a Minimum Loss Ratio (MLR) to Medicaid and CHIP. The most sweeping change is the application of a federal 85% minimum MLR to MCOs beginning in 2017. MLRs measure how much a managed care plan spends on the provision of covered services compared to the total revenue it receives in capitation payments from the state. Applying a common national standard for calculating MLR is intended to allow comparability across states, facilitate more accurate rate setting, and reduce the administrative burden on managed care plans that operate in multiple states or have multiple product lines.
  2. Greater transparency in how states determine plan payment rates. States will be required to give CMS enough information for the agency to understand the data and the reasoning for the rate.
  3. Apply minimum standards to screen and enroll providers.
  4. Increase Provider Network Access by decreasing time and distance limitations for beneficiaries, particularly from services for Pediatric CHIP providers, OB/GYNs, behavioral health providers, and dentists.
  5. Expanding health plans’ responsibilities in program integrity efforts through administrative and managerial procedures that prevent, monitor, identify, and respond to suspected provider fraud.
  6. Establish a Quality Rating System for Medicaid Plans, based on quality factors including clinical effectiveness, patient safety, care coordination, prevention, member experience, plan efficiency, affordability, and management.
  7. Strengthen encounter data submissions from managed care plans to states, and from states to CMS.
  8. Allow Long-Term Care Beneficiaries to change plans or cancel enrollment and move to standard Medicaid coverage if their preferred providers are out of the managed care networks.

The Verden Group applauds these much-needed reforms. The proposed rule will provide greater access for Managed Medicaid beneficiaries located in rural areas, especially for at-risk children enrolled in CHIP. With greater transparency and provider choice, patients will be able to select plans that include practices that have differentiated themselves through innovative and high quality programs.

The two trade groups representing insurers, America’s Health Insurance Plans and Medicaid Health Plans of America, are generally supportive of the regulatory modernization and the thrust of CMS’ proposals, except for the national 85% minimum MLR. However, there is little evidence to suggest it will negatively impact their profits as many states already mandate MLR requirements.

The Verden Group is concerned the MLR mandate may create difficulties for not-for-profit safety-net insurers, which usually cover large numbers of Medicaid beneficiaries with serious and chronic health issues. These plans have profit margins that vary year over year, meaning a large profit surplus one year could be needed to offset significant losses in another year. In addition, state Medicaid agencies may not have enough resources to implement the proposed regulations. As with all regulations, it is important that sufficient resources are provided to ensure the proposed rule does not become an unfunded mandate where the fiscal responsibility falls to those it is intended to help.

The Verden Group encourages our clients to share their thoughts on the proposed rule by commenting publicly at:

https://www.federalregister.gov/public-inspection before the deadline of July 27, 2015.

 

Does the “Doc Fix” Bill Help Telemedicine and Telehealth?


By Sumita Saxena, Senior Consultant, The Verden Group

In a word, yes. According to an article recently published by a leading expert in healthcare law, the “Doc Fix” could just be the solution providers have been wanting.  Telemedicine was one of the many beneficiaries of changes introduced by the so-called “doc fix” bill, formally titled the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act (H.R. 2). The legislation was passed by Congress on April 15, 2015 and signed into law by the President on April 16, 2015. It introduces sweeping changes to the reimbursement methodologies and financing of health care in the United States, including a notable shift away from the traditional fee-for-service model and towards accountable care organizations (ACOs), risk-based payment, and a focus on quality and population health.

As organizations embracing telemedicine recognize, these new payment models are ideally suited to the improved access, quality and care management offered by telemedicine technologies. The Act is a signal to the provider community that embracing innovative care delivery, such as telemedicine and telehealth, is an important step to positioning your organization to best capture these new payment opportunities.

But the Act also includes specific provisions benefiting telehealth and remote patient monitoring (RPM), particularly for the Medicare program. It states:

  • Telehealth and remote patient monitoring are expressly recognized as, and included in the definition of, “Clinical Practice Improvement Activities” along with care coordination, population health management, and monitoring of health conditions.
  • New “Alternative Payment Models” may include payment for telehealth services, even if the service is not otherwise covered by the traditional Medicare program (42 U.S.C. 1395(m)).
  • The GAO is required to conduct a study on telehealth and the Medicare program, publishing the report no later than April 2017. Specifically, it states:

STUDY ON TELEHEALTH SERVICES

The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the following:

  • How the definition of telehealth across various Federal programs and Federal efforts can inform the use of telehealth in the Medicare program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.).
  • Issues that can facilitate or inhibit the use of telehealth under the Medicare program under such title, including oversight and professional licensure, changing technology, privacy and security, infrastructure requirements, and varying needs across urban and rural areas.
  • Potential implications of greater use of telehealth with respect to payment and delivery system transformations under the Medicare program under such title XVIII and the Medicaid program under title XIX of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.).
  • How the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services monitors payments made under the Medicare program under such title XVIII to providers for telehealth services.

The GAO is required to conduct a second study on remote patient monitoring and the Medicare program, publishing the report no later than April 2017. Specifically, it states:

 STUDY ON REMOTE PATIENT MONITORING SERVICES.

 The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study:

  • of the dissemination of remote patient monitoring technology in the private health insurance market;
  • of the financial incentives in the private health insurance market relating to adoption of such technology;
  • of the barriers to adoption of such services under the Medicare program under title XVIII of the Social Security Act;
  • that evaluates the patients, conditions, and
  • clinical circumstances that could most benefit from remote patient monitoring services; and
  • that evaluates the challenges related to establishing appropriate valuation for remote patient monitoring services under the Medicare physician fee schedule under section 1848 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–4) in order to accurately reflect the resources involved in furnishing such services.

REMOTE PATIENT MONITORING SERVICES — The term ‘‘remote patient monitoring services’’ means services furnished through remote patient monitoring technology.

REMOTE PATIENT MONITORING TECHNOLOGY — The term ‘‘remote patient monitoring technology’’ means a coordinated system that uses one or more home-based or mobile monitoring devices that automatically transmit vital sign data or information on activities of daily living and may include responses to assessment questions collected on the devices wirelessly or through a telecommunications connection to a server that complies with the Federal regulations (concerning the privacy of individually identifiable health information) disseminated under section 264(c) of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as part of an established plan of care for that patient that includes the review and interpretation of that data by a health care professional.

The Act contains many provisions intended to promote innovation and care delivery by incentivizing health care organizations to invest in and use the powerful telemedicine tools and technologies available in the marketplace.

How Does This Affect Your Practice?

As with practically all healthcare legislation the catch, not surprisingly, is how these changes will play out for physicians and their reimbursements. Payers are claiming the field and limiting the scope to only those specific telemedicine companies they decide to work with in order to provide such services. For example, UnitedHealthcare is partnering with Doctor On Demand, Optum’s NowClinic and American Well’s Amwell to provide video-based virtual visits in 47 states and Washington, D.C. to its participants through the UnitedHealthcare’s Health4Me™ mobile app, using its in-network virtual care provider groups. Because of this, physicians are finding a third party in their relationships with their patients, disrupting the continuum of care, fragmenting delivering and running opposite to the tenets of the triple aim and goals of unifying and centralizing patient care…

As healthcare and technology continue to evolve and interlink to provide greater access and convenience to the consumer, the question remains how this changing landscape will ultimately impact physicians and their relationships with patients and payers. One thing is for certain, telemedicine is poised to take off, as industry leaders further develop their programs and explore new payment options. The law, in turn, will catch up, it’s just a matter of time. Meanwhile, make your voice heard to the commercial Payers about the disruption to care posed by having third party entities deliver services to YOUR patients, and demand the same accessibility and coverage that companies such as Doctor On Demand currently enjoy.

 

 

Cyber Risk Insurance – Should you consider getting it for your practice?


By Sumita Saxena, Senior Consultant, The Verden Group

The cyber-attack on Anthem, which left 80 million customers and employees vulnerable to identity theft, has quickly elevated the question of whether to purchase cyber risk insurance to the forefront of discussion among healthcare providers. The attack will certainly impact the market of cyber security insurance for healthcare providers, payers and others. Small to medium-sized healthcare organizations that have not considered such coverage may do so now while insurers will be re-evaluating underwriting standards and likely premium levels in the wake of the Anthem attack.

Most policies provide broad coverage for what constitutes a privacy breach, whether it results from a hacker, unauthorized access by an internal rogue employee or a laptop that was lost or stolen. Coverage can be divided into two categories: first-party and third-party costs.

Typically first-party costs involve those direct costs related to responding to a privacy breach or security failure. Such costs include forensic investigation of the breach, legal advice to determine notification obligations, notification costs of communicating the breach, offering credit monitoring to customers or patients as a result, and loss of profits and extra expenses during time network is down (business interruption).

Generally third-party costs include legal defense, settlements or damages or judgments related to the breach, liability to banks for re-issuing credit cards, cost of responding to regulatory inquiries and regulatory fines and penalties. Optional coverage can encompass underwriting for cyber-extortion, where hackers access a network and demand a ransom in exchange for not stealing data (many companies would rather pay the ransom and make the problem go away).

Larger organizations are more likely to purchase coverage than smaller ones given their access to risk managers and in-house IT security. Smaller companies, like physician practices and local clinics, may not have access to such resources and may forego coverage as unnecessary or too expensive. Data breaches, however, are continuing to garner significant attention and some insurance experts have commented that more and more small and mid-sized organizations are actively seeking out this coverage. Premiums for a $1 million plan are generally $5,000 to $10,000 annually though the cost can vary based on several factors, including company revenue, cyber-risk management efforts and the coverage chosen.

The cost of insurance coverage and breach response is minimal, however, when compared to the legal and regulatory costs associated with a data breach, which depending on the size of the attack, can run into the millions and substantially impair a company’s profitability if the response is not adequate.

Any large, well-publicized breach such as the one that struck Anthem will affect the market for cyber security insurance, as noted by industry experts, by influencing coverage terms, increasing coverage prices and making underwriting requirements more stringent, especially for healthcare companies as the industry sees more large-scale breaches. In light of these changes, it is prudent to re-assess network security and adequacy of breach notification, and to consider cyber risk insurance as an additional safeguard against the substantial cost associated with data breaches.