Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

Altru Cuts Costs


Cratter

Recommended Posts

Main reason is obamacare. It's going to hurt many medical facilities. Less staff will be asked to do more. Hospitals will be receiving reimbursement cuts for early re-admits for certain diagnosis. I understand it was common practice at altru to simply code a different primary dx in the past and they will no longer be able to do this.

With that said altru knew this was coming so it should come as no surprise. The money was spent on the south end simply to ensure they wouldn't have competition in grand forks.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Main reason is obamacare. It's going to hurt many medical facilities. Less staff will be asked to do more. Hospitals will be receiving reimbursement cuts for early re-admits for certain diagnosis. I understand it was common practice at altru to simply code a different primary dx in the past and they will no longer be able to do this.

With that said altru knew this was coming so it should come as no surprise. The money was spent on the south end simply to ensure they wouldn't have competition in grand forks.

BS. "Reisnour said because of federal budget sequestration cuts enacted by Congress, Altru had budgeted for a $300,000 drop in monthly Medicare reimbursements this year. But that reduction has actually been about a $1 million more than that a month, he said". This is what the teapublicans wanted and you blame it on Obama?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS. "Reisnour said because of federal budget sequestration cuts enacted by Congress, Altru had budgeted for a $300,000 drop in monthly Medicare reimbursements this year. But that reduction has actually been about a $1 million more than that a month, he said". This is what the teapublicans wanted and you blame it on Obama?

Not blaming it on Obama.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Altru will not sell. The Mayo affiliate partnership was designed to ensure independence in perpetuity.

Healthcare economics are not like typical economics- competition does not lower costs, it raises them. Federal reimbursement is also dramatically cut if a community hospital ceases to be a sole community provider. That revenue to Altru is federally funded. Add a second hospital, that money goes to California or wherever else the feds decide to send it.

Decisions are being made looking out the windshield. One result of the ACA is that access to capital has tightened up in the industry making financing options more limited. You have to be prepared for that to be the new normal. If Medicare reimbursement goes down, and access to capital tightens, and commercial insurers cut allowed amounts...result is less revenue and less cash than before. You don't stimulate demand in healthcare, so you have to tighten your belt.

The senior staff decision to cut pay for the remainder of the year is simply an optics play- but a good one in my opinion- tough to justify higher comp for senior staff during a bad year

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS. "Reisnour said because of federal budget sequestration cuts enacted by Congress, Altru had budgeted for a $300,000 drop in monthly Medicare reimbursements this year. But that reduction has actually been about a $1 million more than that a month, he said". This is what the teapublicans wanted and you blame it on Obama?

BS...The sequestration was a device created by Jack Lew and the Obama administration as a way to force republicans to accept the debt ceiling raise...the bet that they would rather raise the debt ceiling than cut defense was a poorly played hand by O and Lew...Also, if you think O'care isn't going to impact the hospital's bottom line, then I have some pixie dust to sell you for a good deal.

"On August 2, 2011, Congress passed the Budget Control Act (BCA), which raised the debt limit, cut $917 billion in federal spending over 10 years, and established the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (the “super committee”). The super committee was supposed to produce legislation by November 23, 2011 to further reduce spending by at least $1.5 trillion over 10 years.

If the super committee failed to propose legislation reducing federal spending by the minimum amount, $1.2 trillion in automatic cuts would be divided equally between defense and various domestic spending programs. This sequestration process was intended to serve as a poison pill to force the committee to present a reasonable plan to Congress. Predictably, this less-than-super committee failed to even submit a proposal, meaning that when Congress failed to pass $1.2 trillion in cuts by the end of 2012, the automatic sequestration cuts kicked in on January 2, 2013."

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, regarding the initial post, capital investment is always looked at differently than operating income decisions.

If you can't plan and see that far ahead, If you don't have enough cash reserves, that you have to resort to cutting pay. You are doing a bad job. It's bad for publicity and workers moral and puts a black eye when needing to hire more in the future...major fail.

If I work for a construction company and the boss is driving a new truck every year, bought a large new house, then work suddenly slows down but he has more bills to pay, and say "hey I need you to take a pay cut."

Nothing was stopping altru from saving ten million dollars by not donating it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS. "Reisnour said because of federal budget sequestration cuts enacted by Congress. This is what the teapublicans wanted and you blame it on Obama?

BS again. Go rewind the speech where Obama spoke out IN FAVOR of these automatic cuts taking place...before he decided to come out AGAINST them when they actually went into effect.

And feel free to explain to me how a near 9 trillion dollar deficit under Bush is 'unpatriotic' but a near 17 trillion dollar deficit now is apparently a requirement for good government.

EDITED

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Youd think forcing people to buy insurance would mean a busy hospital and more money coming in...but many are saying that won't be true.....defies all logic...

You're making the same assumption that Obama is - that Americans (and non-Americans for that matter) will prefer paying $1000 a month for health care coverage over a $700 a year penalty for NOT buying coverage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS again. Go rewind the speech where Obama spoke out IN FAVOR of these automatic cuts taking place...before he decided to come out AGAINST them when they actually went into effect.

And feel free to explain to me how a near 9 trillion dollar deficit under Bush is 'unpatriotic' but a near 17 million dollar deficit now is apparently a requirement for good government.

Hey if our deficit went from $9 trillion to $17 million, I'd say we're moving in the right direction. ;)

Unfortunately that hasn't happened.

This is 2 active threads with politics now. Let's swing the conversation back to Altru-bashing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're making the same assumption that Obama is - that Americans (and non-Americans for that matter) will prefer paying $1000 a month for health care coverage over a $700 a year penalty for NOT buying coverage.

For $300 more you get something. But for some it seems easier to spend $700 and get nothing. But they are making a point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BS again. Go rewind the speech where Obama spoke out IN FAVOR of these automatic cuts taking place...before he decided to come out AGAINST them when they actually went into effect.

And feel free to explain to me how a near 9 trillion dollar deficit under Bush is 'unpatriotic' but a near 17 trillion dollar deficit now is apparently a requirement for good government.

EDITED

Actually Bush raised the debt from 5 trillion to 12 trillion and not a word from the right the whole time. So feel free to explain to me how Bush was patriotic for doing this. Over 2/3rds of the debt is on Republican presidents. And it was not a 9 trillion dollar deficit nor a 17 trillion dollar deficit. Furthermore Obama's deficit has been cut in half from the Bush deficit.
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you can't plan and see that far ahead, If you don't have enough cash reserves, that you have to resort to cutting pay. You are doing a bad job. It's bad for publicity and workers moral and puts a black eye when needing to hire more in the future...major fail.

If I work for a construction company and the boss is driving a new truck every year, bought a large new house, then work suddenly slows down but he has more bills to pay, and say "hey I need you to take a pay cut."

Nothing was stopping altru from saving ten million dollars by not donating it.

Only senior staff is taking a paycut. They are not in trouble financially. They are missing a budget target.

If I have a million in savings, but my monthly expenses are running a thousand bucks in the red, do I stop investing? Do I pull out of savings? No, I'd rather do things like spend less on beer.

Read the bios of senior staff- masters degrees and twenty plus years in the business- they get it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...