Merit-Based Incentive Payment System: longitudinal performance and uneven rewards for safety-net providers over 5 years.

Abstract

Introduction: Medicare Merit-based Incentive Payment System (MIPS), established by Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to transition Medicare reimbursement toward value-based care, has faced criticism for its administrative complexity and potential inequities affecting safety-net providers (SNPs).

Methods: This study analyzed 5-year data (2018-2022) to evaluate the performance and financial outcomes of clinicians consistently participating in MIPS, focusing on disparities between SNPs and non-SNPs.

Results: We found that safety-net specialists were 31% more likely than non-safety-net specialists to consistently receive positive payment adjustments and earned modestly higher average adjustment rates (0.35% points). However, despite this superior performance, safety-net specialists did not achieve greater cumulative financial rewards due to MIPS's percentage-based adjustment structure, which disadvantages clinicians with smaller billing volumes. Our analysis also showed that MIPS financial incentives were generally modest-ranging from $300 to $4000 over 5 years-far below the estimated $12 000 in annual administrative compliance costs per physician reported in prior research.

Conclusion: To address these disparities and inefficiencies, policymakers should consider alternative models such as the American Medical Association's proposed Data-Driven Performance Payment System, which reduces administrative burden by simplifying the reporting process and ensures fairer financial rewards by uncoupling incentive payments from billing volume-thereby improving equity for safety-net clinicians.