Skip to main content

The Business Case for Integrated Behavioral Healthcare Delivery

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Training to Deliver Integrated Care
  • 449 Accesses

Abstract

The need for integrated behavioral health leaders to develop competencies for financial management is growing as healthcare delivery transitions from traditional fee for service to value-based models of reimbursement. This chapter is focused on developing a business case for sustainable integrated behavioral health programs. Key competencies include determining program costs, projecting revenue, completing a pro forma, and calculating return on investment (ROI) for integrated behavioral healthcare delivery. Examples of measurement and evaluation of these competencies are included.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Other models of integrated behavioral healthcare refer to the role as a behavioral health provider (BHP). This is the term used in this chapter except when referring to the PCBH model.

References

  • Basu, S., Landon, B., William, J., Bitton, A., Song, Z., & Phillips, R. (2017). Behavioral health integration into primary care: A microsimulation of financial implications for practices. Journal of General Internal Medicine, published online doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-017-4177-0j.

  • Beacham, A., Khatri, P., Reimer, D., Sickle, K., Ali, M., Farber, E., et al. (2017). Meeting evolving workforce needs: Preparing psychologists for leadership in the patient-centered medical home. American Psychologist, 72(1), 42–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berwick, D., Nolan, T., & Whittington, J. (2008). The triple aim: Care, health and cost. Health Affairs, 27(3), 759–769. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.27.3.759.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chiles, J. A., Lambert, M. J., & Hatch, L. (2002). Medical costs offset: a review of the impact of psychological interventions on medical utilization over the past three decades. In N. A. Cummings, W. T. O’Donohue, & K. E. Ferguson (Eds.), The impact of medical cost offset on practice and research: making it work for you (pp. 47–56). Reno: Context Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corso, K., Hunter, C., Owen, D., Kallenberg, G., & Manson, L. (2016). Integrating behavioral health into the medical home: A rapid implementation guide. Williamsport, PA: Greenbranch.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gerrity, M. (2016). Evolving models of behavioral health integration: Evidence update 2010–2015. Rockport, MD: Milbank Memorial Fund.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoge, M., Morris, J., Laraia, M., Pomerantz, A., & Farley, T. (2014). Core competencies for integrated behavioral health and primary care. Washington, DC: SAMHSA-HRSA Center for Integrated Health Solutions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kathol, R. G., deGruy, F., & Rollman, B. L. (2014). Value-based financially sustainable behavioral health components in patient-centered medical homes. The Annals of Family Medicine, 12(2), 172–175. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.1619.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, A. (2012). Why nobody believes the numbers: Distinguishing fact from fiction in population health management. New Jersey: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDaniel, S., Grus, C., Cubic, B., Hunter, C., Kearney, L., Schuman, C., et al. (2014). Competencies for psychology practice in primary care. American Psychologist, 69(4), 409–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B., Gilchrist, E., Ross, K., Wong, S., Blount, A., & Peek, C. (2016). Core competencies for behavioral health providers working in primary care. Prepared from the Colorado Consensus Conference.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, B., Ross, K., Melek, S., Davis, M., & Kathol, R. (2017). Payment reform in the Patient-Centered Medical Home: Enabling and sustaining integrated behavioral health care. American Psychologist, 72(1), 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., & Lee, T. (2016). From volume to value in health care: The work begins. JAMA, 316(1), 1047–1048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ratzliff, A., Unutzer, J., Katon, W., & Stephens, K. (2016). Integrated care: Creating effective mental and primary health care teams (p. 2016). Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P., & Reiter, J. (2016). Behavioral consultation and primary care: A guide to integrating services (2nd ed.). New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Van Leusen, P. (2013). Assessments with rubrics. Arizona State University. Teach Online: Resources for Teaching Online. Accessed 25 July 2016 at https://teachonline.asu.edu/2013/08/assessments-with-rubrics/#more-2246.

Download references

Summary

This model for training the value-based business case for integrated behavioral health combines the strengths of the PCBH and COCM within the framework of value-based, population health management approaches proposed by Kathol et al. (2014). The PCBH is necessary for active patient management using PCP-led, team-based care in the PCMH. In addition, the PCBH BHC is ideally suited to provide consultation, training, and education to the PCMH team on all aspects of integrated behavioral care. The CoCM care manager is necessary to deliver the patient outreach and long-term follow-up treatment essential to achieving improved health, decreased utilization, and resultant cost savings.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ronald O’Donnell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendices

Appendix A: Degree Program Discussion Board Rubric

Criteria

Unacceptable

Acceptable

Good

Excellent

Quality of initial post (2 points)

Post meets one or fewer of the four criteria or did not submit

(0 points)

Post meets two of the four criteria

(1 point)

Post meets three of the four criteria

(1.5 points)

Initial post meets all of the following criteria

Is well developed

Fully addresses all aspects of the discussion board question

Meets criteria for substantive (**salutations and references do not count toward minimum word requirements**)

Post is factually correct

(2 points)

References and support

(.5 points)

Post incorporates zero course materials or did not submit

(0 points)

Post incorporates one piece of information

or

meets one of the three required criteria

(0.1 point)

Post incorporates two pieces of information

or

meets two of the three required criteria

(0.3 point)

Post incorporates three pieces of information from course materials (e.g. assigned readings, lectures, etc.)

and

meets all of the following criteria:

Includes in-text citations

Includes reference list

At least one reference is from an assigned reading

(0.5 point)

Clarity and mechanics

Post meets two or fewer of the required criteria or did not submit

(0 points)

Post meets three of the five required criteria

(0.1 point)

Post meets four of the five required criteria

(0.3 point)

Post meets all of the following criteria:

Reference is in APA style (indentation not required due to formatting limitation of discussion board)

In-text citation is in APA style

Has no more than two errors in clarity/mechanics and/or grammatical/spelling errors

Communicates in a friendly and courteous manner

Post is well organized and easy to read

(0.5 point)

Follow-up postings

Post meets two or fewer of the required criteria

or

post does not add to the discussion or did not submit

(0 points)

Response post adds to the discussion

and

post meets three to four of the nine required criteria

(0.5 point)

Response post adds to the discussion

and

post meets five to six of the nine required criteria

(0.75 point)

Response post adds to the discussion through the provision of a new idea or concept based on course content

and

meets six of the nine following criteria:

Is well developed

Meets criteria for substantive (**salutations and references do not count toward minimum word requirements**)

Post is factually correct

Post does not merely restate the student’s initial post

Includes in-text citations and/or a reference list

Reference list and/or in-text citations are in APA style

Post is free of grammatical/spelling errors

Communicates in a friendly and courteous manner

Post is well organized and easy to read

(1 point)

Appendix B: Assignment Instructions and Grading Rubric for Written Assignment: Integrated Behavioral Health Intervention Utilization, Cost, Cost Savings, and Return on Investment Results and Analysis (25 points)

Assignment #1 Instructions

Complete a proposal for the design, implementation, and evaluation of an integrated behavioral health intervention designed to result in cost savings and a return on investment. The intervention must address at least two conditions: one must be medical (e.g., diabetes, hypertension) and one must be behavioral (e.g., depression, anxiety, substance use disorder). The intervention should be based on the population health management (PHM) model. Examples and instructions for the PHM model are included in the assigned readings. You will write the proposal as an integrated behavioral health provider. The intended audience for this report is the CEO for a Patient-Centered Medical Home and Accountable Care Organization primary care clinic network. The proposal must include each of the following sections:

Program/Intervention Costs

List staffing, administrative support, supplies, physician and nurse time, data entry and analysis, etc. You must use dollar estimates for each cost category and a grand total for program costs.

Pre-intervention (Baseline) Utilization and Cost

List each category of utilization and associated dollar cost (e.g., physician visits, emergency department visits, hospital admissions and days, pharmacy, specialist referral visits, labs, and imaging). Include aggregate mean utilization and cost for at least 2 years and ideally 3 years pre-intervention. For each unit of service, assign a specific dollar amount. Compute the total pre-intervention cost based on the mean (average) annual utilization multiplied by the unit cost for each category.

Post-Intervention Utilization and Cost

List each category of utilization and associated dollar cost (e.g., physician visits, emergency department visits, hospital admissions and days, pharmacy, specialist referral visits, labs, and imaging). Include aggregate mean utilization and cost for at least 1 year post-intervention. For each unit of service, assign a specific dollar amount. Compute the total post-intervention cost based on the mean (average) annual utilization multiplied by the unit cost for each category.

Return on Investment Calculation

Use the formula listed in the readings to calculate return on investment: total cost savings (pre-intervention costs minus post-intervention costs) divided by the total cost of the intervention.

ROI Analysis

Executive summary: brief summary of entire project, rationale for leadership investment in project, overall benefits, and long-term sustainability of program.

Assignment #1 Grading Rubric (Edited, Selected Sections Only for Illustrative Purposes)

Item

Excellent

2.0

Fair

1.0

Unacceptable

0

Problem statement

Clear statement of need based on evidence for high costs for the selected conditions and population

Vague or partial statement of need based on evidence for high costs for the selected conditions and population

No statement of need based on evidence for high costs for the selected conditions and population

Population

All key elements described: age, gender, ethnicity, setting

Partial description of key elements: age, gender, ethnicity, setting

No description of key elements: age, gender, ethnicity, setting

Patient identification

Clear description of how patients will be identified based on more than one criteria, such as patient self-report measures, claims data, lab, or diagnostic data in the electronic medical record, physician referral

Vague or partial description of how patients will be identified based on more than one criteria, such as patient self-report measures, claims data, lab, or diagnostic data in the electronic medical record, physician referral

No description of how patients will be identified based on more than one criteria, such as patient self-report measures, claims data, lab, or diagnostic data in the electronic medical record, physician referral

 

Excellent

5.0

Fair

4.0

Poor

3.0

Program costs

Clear description of costs for program including staffing, administrative support, supplies, physician and nurse time, data entry and analysis, etc. Use dollar estimates for each cost category and a grand total for program costs

Vague or partial description of costs for program including staffing, administrative support, supplies, physician and nurse time, data entry and analysis, etc. Incomplete use of dollar estimates for each cost category and a grand total for program costs

Poor description of costs for program including staffing, administrative support, supplies, physician and nurse time, data entry and analysis, etc. No use of dollar estimates for each cost category and a grand total for program costs

Pre- and post-intervention utilization and cost intervention costs)

Clear, detailed description of each key type of utilization such as physician visits, emergency department visits, hospital admissions and days, pharmacy, specialist referral visits, labs, and imaging that you will report based on the mean number of visits per patient for at least 1 year prior to the intervention and 1 year post-intervention. For each unit of service, assign a specific dollar amount, and compute the total cost of pre- and post-intervention based on utilization. Includes a total dollar amount for pre-intervention utilization/costs and post-intervention utilization/costs

Vague or partial description of each key type of utilization such as physician visits, emergency department visits, hospital admissions and days, pharmacy, specialist referral visits, labs, and imaging that you will report based on the mean number of visits per patient for at least 1 year prior to the intervention and 1 year post-intervention. Unclear description of how each unit of service is assigned a specific dollar amount and unclear computation of the total cost of pre- and post-intervention based on utilization. Unclear plan to have a total dollar amount for pre-intervention utilization/costs and post-intervention utilization/costs

Poor description of each key type of utilization such as physician visits, emergency department visits, hospital admissions and days, pharmacy, specialist referral visits, labs, and imaging that you will report based on the mean number of visits per patient for at least 1 year prior to the intervention and 1 year post-intervention. Poor description of how each unit of service you will assign a specific dollar amount and compute the total cost of pre- and post-intervention based on utilization. Lacking plan to have a total dollar amount for pre-intervention utilization/costs and post-intervention utilization/costs

ROI calculation

Clear description of the ROI calculation based on the formula listed in the readings to calculate return on investment: total cost savings (pre-intervention costs minus post-intervention costs) divided by the total cost of the intervention

Vague or partial description of the ROI based on the formula listed in the readings to calculate return on investment: total cost savings (pre-intervention costs minus post-intervention costs) divided by the total cost of the intervention

No description of ROI based on the formula listed in the readings to calculate return on investment: total cost savings (pre-intervention costs minus post-intervention costs) divided by the total cost of the intervention

Appendix C: Sample Quiz Question

Multiple choice: PCMH and diabetes cost savings

Points:1

Question

In the article by Wang et. al., “Patient-centered medical home impact on health plan members with diabetes,” Table 3, which of the following outcome measures was not associated with a significant reduction in costs between baseline and at least one year 1, 2, or 3 in the study for the PCMH?

Answer

Total medical care PMPM

Inpatient PMPM

ED PMPM

Pharmacy (Rx) PMPM

Appendix D: Group Activity: Billing and Reimbursement in Integrated Healthcare (Edited)

Overview

In this assignment, you will research billing codes and reimbursement for integrated healthcare services in a primary care clinic. This group activity is designed to help you prepare for written assignment #1.

Instructions

In this week Chap. 7 in Corso et al. (2016) “Integrating Behavioral Health into the Medical Home,” a strong emphasis is on analyzing reimbursement rates as a component of your business case or integrated behavioral health. In this group assignment, I would like each of you to research the billing codes specific to the institution, payer, and provider license for either (a) your current clinical practice (if you work in a clinical setting) or (b) a primary care Accountable Care Organization (ACO) clinic in your state (for students who do not work in a clinic). Approach this with the assumption that you are the clinic leader interested in developing/enhancing integrated behavioral health in your clinic. You plan to evaluate which reimbursement codes your clinic is eligible for and what types of clinicians are eligible for reimbursement for reimbursement codes that are available in your clinic.

Evaluate each of the specific codes listed below for your clinic scenario. Which codes are eligible for reimbursement? For those codes that your clinic is eligible for, answer these questions: What provider license types? What payers? What reimbursement rates (if available)?

  • Health and Behavior Codes

  • Psychotherapy Codes

  • Screening, Brief Assessment, Referral and Treatment Codes

  • Wellness Codes

  • Screening and Prevention Codes

  • Care Coordination/Chronic Care Management

The presentation should be brief, simple, and delivered as if you were in a team meeting in a clinic setting making your presentation to your integrated behavioral health “team.” You are making a presentation to your “team” based on your initial analysis and expect questions, discussion, and next steps.

Instructions for Discussion Board Post and Substantive Reply

After the meeting is completed, each student should write a summary post on the group discussion board that describes his/her experience in the group. Was the group meeting helpful? Were there challenges? Describe how the group discussion helped to refine your approach to this assignment. Finally, post a brief (one paragraph) summary of your research on reimbursement for services in support of integrated behavioral health in your scenario. What services in support of integrated care are reimbursable in your scenario? Which one’s are not?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

O’Donnell, R. (2018). The Business Case for Integrated Behavioral Healthcare Delivery. In: Macchi, C., Kessler, R. (eds) Training to Deliver Integrated Care. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78850-0_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics