A Timely Reminder: Virginia Hospitals, Even the Non-Profits, Are Very Profitable

Norfolk General Hospital, the crown jewel of the Sentara Health System, which reported annual profit of $229 million in 2013.
Norfolk General Hospital, the crown jewel of the Sentara Health System, which reported annual profit of $229 million in 2013.

One of the justifications given for expanding Virginia’s Medicaid program as part of the implementation of Obamacare is to shore up the financial condition of Virginia’s hospitals. On the assumption that Medicaid expansion would reduce the number of indigent (non-paying patients), Obamacare will cut back funds to hospitals under the established Disproportionate Share Hospital (DSH) program to help offset the cost of uncompensated care. If Virginia fails to expand Medicaid, as now seems likely, and the federal government cuts DSH funding as planned, Virginia hospitals will take a hit to the bottom line.

The debate may be academic now that Governor Terry McAuliffe has essentially punted on Medicaid expansion in the face of strong Republican opposition in the General Assembly and has proposed a scaled-down Healthy Virginia plan. But the issue still is worth revisiting. Virginia hospitals stand to lose about $386 million in payments from the DSH program between 2017 and 2022 — an average of $77 million per year. How badly will hospitals be hurt? Will cuts impair the quality of care? Do we need to worry?

Mike Thompson, president of the Thomas Jefferson Institute, a conservative think tank, has compiled the profit figures for Virginia hospitals from the Virginia Health Information Foundation. In the aggregate, in November 2013 Virginia’s hospitals had combined profits of $1.6 billion and net worth of $15 billion. The annualized DSH payments are equivalent to about 5% of 2013 profits.

One would think that hospitals should be able to absorb that hit to revenues — equivalent to a year or so of profit growth. Does the picture change when we drill into the numbers? The burden of indigent care is not apportioned equally between hospitals. Some facilities serve largely poor populations and provide extensive uncompensated care and rely more than others on the DSH funds. Also, hospital profitability varied widely from institution to institution. Several hospitals are losing money. In theory, a loss of funds could be devastating.

Thompson’s data reveals that several money-losing hospitals are part of larger health care systems; while they lose money, they feed profitable business to the tertiary care hospitals at the center of those systems, hence, they are not in danger of being shut down. Other facilities represent expansions into new markets — start-up enterprises, in effect. Their parent companies are fully prepared to bear the losses while the facilities ramp up to profitability. Then, too, there are some hospitals that appear to have serious problems. However, it’s not clear from one year’s data whether those losses are ongoing or simply the result of a one-year write-down.

It would be helpful to get a hospital-by-hospital breakdown of DSH funding and see how it compares to hospital profitability. The not-for-profit VCU Health System is reputedly the largest provider of uncompensated care in the state. But, then, it reported a profit of $130 million — a 12.8% return on equity (net worth). Would the loss of, say, $30 million a year in DSH funding be crippling? Maybe VCU could spin a tale of woe that would persuade me otherwise, but it sure doesn’t look like it.

Don’t get me wrong. Hospital profits are a good thing. Try getting your healthcare from money-losing hospitals — you won’t like it. Even not-for-profits need earnings to help fund expansions and new initiatives. But when hospitals are funded with public funds and receive special tax exemptions, the public has a right to ask tough questions.

Update: The Virginia Hospital and Healthcare Association response to Thompson’s study can be seen here. The main thrust: The data is two years old, and the financial pressure on Virginia hospitals has intensified since then.

— JAB


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

4 responses to “A Timely Reminder: Virginia Hospitals, Even the Non-Profits, Are Very Profitable”

  1. here’s one datapoint (selected excerpts – see link for full article):

    ” Mary Washington Healthcare cut 66 jobs Wednesday as part of an ongoing effort to pare $30 million in expenses. The layoffs were effective immediately. (3400 total employees)

    The system trimmed the paychecks of another 46 employees, whose hours are being reduced.

    “This is a difficult day,” Chief Executive Officer Fred Rankin said
    ….
    In the meetings, employees received letters detailing the company’s latest cost-reducing measures. The letters blamed the layoffs on “significant cuts” to the hospitals’ payments for patient care.

    MWHC will get about $31 million less this year in Medicare reimbursements because of a variety of factors, Fletcher said.

    Medicaid expansion could help MWHC’s bottom line by about $14 million annually—enough to recoup some losses from Medicare reimbursement cuts.

    The Fredericksburg-based health care system lost almost $8.2 million in 2013, according to an audit released this spring.

    The layoffs came a week after a report showed that nonprofit hospitals across the nation lost record amounts of money last year.

    The report from Moody’s Investors Services stated that nonprofit hospitals lost more money than larger, for-profit hospital systems.”

    http://news.fredericksburg.com/newsdesk/2014/09/04/mary-washington-healthcare-lays-off-66-workers/

    search ”
    Editorial: Non-profit hospitals losing money nationwide

    did Mr. Thompson’s report also cover the non-profits?

    which by the way returns this:

    ” the Page you are looking for cannot be found. Please use our site map to find the information you need.”

  2. TooManyTaxes Avatar
    TooManyTaxes

    Some people lost their jobs. It’s nothing to celebrate, but people lose jobs every day. No one argues public money needs to be spend to save them. I’ve worked in and near the telecom industry for more than 30 years. I’ve seen lots of friends lose their jobs & lost one myself. Maybe Congress should have ordered telephone subscribers to pay an extra buck a month on their bills.

    Maybe hospitals and other health care providers need to look at executive comp. If MWHC isn’t doing well, cut Rankin’s pay. He didn’t produce. His direct reports probably didn’t either. I’m sick of corporate welfare.

  3. ” National Report: U.S. Hospitals in Medicaid Expansion States Seeing More Medicaid Patients and Reduced Charity Care Levels”

    http://www.cha.com/Documents/Press-Releases/Medicaid-Expansion-Volume-Study-News-Release-June.aspx

    ” The Colorado Hospital Association (CHA) released a new study that shows hospitals in states that chose to expand Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act saw significantly more Medicaid patients and a related reduction in self-pay and charity care cases; whereas, hospitals in states that chose not to expand Medicaid experienced no changes outside normal variation in Medicaid volume or self-pay and charity care cases.

    The study, which is believed to be the first of its kind, used data from 465 hospitals in 30 states from the first quarter of 2014. Data was gathered from Jan. 1—the official launch of Medicaid expansion—to March 31.

    The increase in Medicaid volume (29 percent), which occurred only in expansion states, is demonstrably due to Medicaid expansion. However, the parallel decrease in self-pay (25 percent) and charity care (30 percent) shows that previously uninsured patients are the individuals newly enrolled in Medicaid.”

    The think tank that Mike Thompson and other Conservative critics do not seem to recognize or acknowledge is that hospitals already depend on government subsidies to treat charity cases and self-pay (that don’t) cases.

    if you are going to be relying on govt subsidies to provide care then shouldn’t you go for the most-cost effective rather than the most expensive?

    The MedicAid Expansion -does not provide care to people without care which is a misconception.

    it provides Primary Care in place of Urgent Care for charity and self-pay customers.

    but even if you buy the premise of the Jefferson Institute about for-profit hospitals – WHO do you think is paying for the charity and self-pay care?

    It would either have to be govt subsidies or higher charges to the paying customers… right?

    see the basic problem is that the Jefferson Institute and others like them are opposed to the govt being involved in health care from the get go.

    That’s fine – pursue the philosophy you believe in.

    but be honest about the realities.

    and the realities are that we have a law called EMTALA that requires all hospitals both for-profit and non-profit to treat people who can’t pay.

    A PRINCIPLED opposition would cite EMTALA as the root of all evil when it comes to things like MedicAid … if the law were repealed along with ObamaCare – we’d not have this ER cost problem nor would we need the govt to subsidize it nor patients with insurance and money subsidizing those who don’t have financial resources.

    that’s what I find so disingenuous about the think tanks. They nibble around the edges playing with carefully selected “gotcha” things (like for-profit hospitals) as a justification against MedicAid expansion and they never really get to the core of their philosophy in the introduction nor the conclusion.

    we need honestly in the positions. Its fine to advocate for what you believe – but playing games with the issues lacks integrity … which we seem to have far too much of these days – both sides…

    if you want to oppose the govt involvement in health care – do it forthrightly – lay it out .. advocate repeal of EMTALA and MedicAid – and if you are really going to be honest – providing full coverage health insurance to people who make 85K in income for $105.00 a month – i.e. Medicare.

    we’re not about solutions anymore. we’re about one battle after another int a polarized war of .. views but we’re not honest in our positions.

    we solve no problems like this – we just intensify the gridlock.

  4. two terms – “self pay” and Medicare are involved in the hit to hospitals.

    here’s how.

    Medicare Advantage is a hugely subsidized part of Medicare created in Congress at about the same time as Prescription Drugs subsidies were created.

    Medicare Advantage is also known as Part C while the Prescription Drug program is know as Part D.

    Okay -so what does Part C do?

    therein likes the problem.

    Original Medicare (Part B) pays 80% of the bill while requiring the insured to pay 20%. It was a good thing – it required the consumer of Medicare to have some skin in the game.

    Along comes Medicare Part C (Advantage) which allows private companies to “bundled” Part A, B, and D into one plan – AND to cover the 20% for an additional premium.

    The problem is that the additional premium is subsidized almost entirely by the Govt -and worse – it costs almost as much as original Medicare. Those who have Part C are subsidized by the govt to the tune of 10,000 a year – about a 1/3 of all Medicare subscribers.

    Well – Obama and the govt felt like this was not good because Medicare is already in trouble with the future and boomers.. so they cut the subsidy to these private companies.. for Medicare Advantage.

    In turn, these companies then increased the cost of Medicare Advantage – which, in turn cause seniors to pull out and go back to their original Medicare that covers only 80%.

    Then these seniors go to the hospital – and they get billed for the 20%.

    At that point – they become “self-pay” – which is the other category to charity care that the hospitals are taking the big hit on.

    as long as Medicare Advantage was covering the 20% – and the govt was paying a subsidy for the disproportionate share – the hospitals were making ends meet but once Medicare Advantages subsidies reduce – and people went back to owing the 20% themselves -things went bad.

    So what does this mean in the states that don’t do the MedicAid expansion?

    it means that hospitals are now going to have increased costs for charity care – and self-pay (who do not) – and they get squeezed.

    You don’t cut personnel without impacts. What this probably means is longer wait times in the ER and higher prices for those who do have insurance.

    it all comes back to how hospitals make up their losses on charity and self-ay care.

    The question is – what would the Jefferson Institute (and other think tanks) propose as a solution to this beyond asserting that for-profit hospitals don’t have this problem?

    What would Republicans in Virginia propose as a solution?

    see.. you have these impacts -and the opponents either 1. pretend they are not or 2. ignore them…

    but real people and real hospitals are being impacted but what are the think tanks saying ? that it’s not a problem?

Leave a Reply