For a rural family, a routine follow-up can mean missed work, several hours on the road, arranging childcare, and weather-dependent travel. Technology innovations in rural healthcare can change that equation when they are built around clinical workflows rather than convenience alone. The goal is not to replace local care relationships with a video visit. It is to give rural clinicians, care teams, patients, and caregivers better ways to assess, monitor, coordinate, and act between in-person encounters.

Rural health organizations are managing a difficult balance. They need to expand access while working with limited staffing, long distances, inconsistent broadband, and patients who may have complex chronic, behavioral, or pediatric needs. The most valuable technologies address those constraints directly and create a practical extension of the care team.

Why Rural Care Needs More Than Video Visits

Video-based telehealth has made care more reachable for many communities, but conversation alone does not always provide enough clinical information to guide a decision. A provider evaluating a child with respiratory symptoms, an older adult with heart failure, or a patient whose blood pressure is uncontrolled may need more than a visual check-in. They may need reliable examination findings, vital signs, symptom trends, and a clear route for escalation.

That distinction matters in rural settings, where the next available in-person appointment may be far away. Technology must help clinicians determine which patients can be safely supported at home or in a community setting, which need an urgent in-person evaluation, and which require a higher level of care. A virtual care program that simply adds another appointment channel can create fragmentation. A connected-care program can improve continuity.

The shift from access to clinical capability

The strongest rural health strategies combine access with clinical capability. This means providing patients with tools that capture clinically relevant data, giving clinicians a way to perform virtual physical exams when appropriate, and connecting those findings to established workflows for documentation, care coordination, and follow-up.

It also means designing around the people who make rural care work: nurses, medical assistants, community health workers, school staff, home health personnel, caregivers, and local clinicians. Technology should clarify their roles rather than add a disconnected set of tasks.

Technology Innovations in Rural Healthcare That Matter

Several technology categories are shaping rural care delivery. Their impact depends less on novelty than on whether they solve a defined clinical and operational problem.

Device-enabled virtual examinations

Connected examination devices allow a clinician to obtain more actionable information during a virtual encounter. Depending on the deployment, this can include measurements and assessments that supplement a video visit and support a more informed clinical decision.

For rural clinics, critical access hospitals, school-based programs, and community health centers, this capability can extend the reach of a clinician into locations where patients already are. A trained staff member or caregiver can support the encounter while the clinician guides the assessment remotely. This can be particularly meaningful for pediatric patients who are more comfortable at home, in school, or in a familiar community clinic.

The trade-off is clear: devices alone do not create a clinical service. Organizations need protocols that define appropriate use, staff training, device cleaning and logistics, documentation requirements, and escalation pathways. Remote examination is most effective when it augments a clinician-directed model of care.

Remote patient monitoring for chronic conditions

Remote patient monitoring can give care teams a fuller view of a patient’s condition between appointments. For patients managing hypertension, diabetes, heart failure, chronic respiratory disease, or other ongoing conditions, home-collected data can identify concerning trends earlier and support more timely outreach.

In rural communities, this can reduce unnecessary travel while helping teams prioritize patients who need attention. A sustained rise in blood pressure, a change in weight, or worsening symptom responses may prompt a nurse call, medication review, virtual visit, or in-person referral before the issue becomes an avoidable emergency.

However, remote patient monitoring is not a passive data collection exercise. Programs need clear enrollment criteria, clinical thresholds, response expectations, and staffing capacity. Too many unprioritized alerts can burden already stretched teams. The right model focuses on actionable data and assigns responsibility for reviewing it.

Care coordination platforms and customized pathways

Rural patients frequently receive care across multiple settings: a rural health clinic, hospital, specialist office, school, home health agency, or community program. Without a coordinated process, the patient and caregiver may become the only link between those settings.

Care coordination technology can organize communications, follow-up activities, patient education, and task ownership around a customized pathway of care. This is especially useful after hospital discharge, during chronic care management, and when a child has special healthcare needs involving several providers.

A pathway should not be a rigid script. Some communities have local transportation barriers, language needs, workforce limitations, or different referral patterns that require adaptation. The right platform supports standardization where it protects quality, while allowing workflows to reflect local realities.

Pediatric and caregiver-centered virtual care

Pediatric rural care has distinct requirements. Children depend on caregivers to manage appointments, devices, symptoms, and follow-up. For autistic children and pediatric patients with special healthcare needs, unfamiliar clinical environments, long travel, and disrupted routines can create significant stress.

Care delivered in a familiar setting can reduce those barriers while giving caregivers a more active role in the encounter. A clinician can observe the child in a setting that may better reflect daily functioning, coach the caregiver through next steps, and coordinate with the broader care team. This approach is not suitable for every condition or every child, but it can make follow-up and monitoring more accessible for families who face repeated travel burdens.

Building an Operationally Sound Rural Virtual Care Program

Successful adoption begins with a use case, not a device purchase. Organizations should identify a patient population and a measurable gap in care. That might be delayed pediatric follow-up after discharge, limited specialist access, uncontrolled hypertension, avoidable emergency department utilization, or the distance between a school and the nearest clinic.

From there, clinical and operational leaders should determine where the encounter occurs, who supports the patient, what data the clinician needs, and what happens when findings require escalation. These choices shape staffing, training, device configuration, technology support, and documentation.

Design for reimbursement and compliance from the start

Financial sustainability should be part of program design, not an afterthought. Remote patient monitoring, chronic care management, virtual services, and care coordination may have different coverage and documentation requirements depending on payer, care setting, and patient eligibility. CMS reimbursement policies can support certain models, but organizations should validate the current rules and payer-specific requirements that apply to their programs.

HIPAA compliance also requires attention to more than the video platform. Organizations should evaluate how devices transmit data, where information is stored, who can access it, how patients are onboarded, and how staff manage privacy in homes, schools, and community sites. A compliant program is one that can be used consistently and confidently by the people delivering care.

Measure outcomes that reflect the real problem

Virtual care metrics should go beyond visit volume. Rural health leaders may track time to appointment, completed follow-ups, patient travel avoided, blood pressure control, readmissions, emergency department utilization, missed appointments, caregiver satisfaction, and clinician workload. The right measures depend on the use case.

Qualitative feedback is equally useful. If a nurse spends too much time troubleshooting, if caregivers struggle with onboarding, or if clinicians cannot easily find remote findings in the record, the workflow needs adjustment. Technology adoption improves when organizations treat implementation as an ongoing clinical improvement process.

A Connected Model Can Strengthen Local Care

The concern that virtual care will pull services away from rural communities is understandable. The better model does the opposite: it reinforces local care teams by giving them access to additional clinical capacity and information. A community health worker can support a patient at home. A school nurse can facilitate a clinically appropriate visit. A rural clinician can consult and coordinate without asking every patient to travel.

Dr. Miltie’s Circle of Care™ model reflects this approach by bringing clinician-directed virtual examinations, remote monitoring, care coordination, and caregiver participation into a connected pathway. For organizations serving rural and underserved populations, the value is not technology for its own sake. It is the ability to deliver more complete care in the settings where patients can realistically receive it.

Rural healthcare transformation will not come from a single platform or reimbursement code. It will come from practical models that respect local capacity, protect clinical standards, and make it easier for patients to stay connected to care. When technology is selected around those priorities, distance becomes less of a barrier and local care becomes more sustainable.

The post Technology Innovations in Rural Healthcare appeared first on Dr. Miltie.

A missed follow-up in a rural community is rarely just a missed appointment. It can mean a long drive, lost wages, limited caregiver availability, delayed treatment, or a patient deciding the trip is simply too difficult. Effective rural health clinic technology strategies address those realities by bringing clinically meaningful care closer to the patient, without separating technology decisions from clinical workflow, reimbursement, or trust.

For rural health clinics, the goal is not to add more platforms. It is to create a care model that helps a limited workforce serve more patients reliably, supports clinicians with actionable information, and gives families practical ways to participate in care. The most successful programs start with a defined access problem, then select technology that supports a measurable clinical and operational response.

Start With the Care Gap, Not the Technology

A virtual care program should solve a specific point of friction. For one clinic, that may be delayed access to primary care after hospital discharge. For another, it may be frequent travel for chronic disease follow-up, behavioral health access, pediatric specialty support, or gaps in preventive care.

This distinction matters because a video visit platform alone may be sufficient for a medication check, but it is not always enough when a clinician needs a remote physical assessment. Programs should identify which patient populations, visit types, and clinical decisions can safely be supported outside the exam room. They should also establish when an in-person evaluation, emergency referral, or escalation to another care setting is required.

A useful planning question is: What information does the care team lack today because the patient is not physically present? The answer may include vital signs, lung sounds, ear images, skin observations, weight trends, or adherence data. That answer should drive the technology selection and the workflow design.

Build Virtual Visits Around Clinical Evidence

Video conferencing supports connection, counseling, and visual observation. It does not, by itself, recreate the clinical information available during an exam. Rural clinics that want virtual care to carry more clinical weight should consider device-enabled virtual physical exams and remote patient monitoring as part of their model.

Connected exam tools can allow a clinician to direct a caregiver, school nurse, community health worker, or another trained facilitator through elements of an assessment while viewing or receiving relevant clinical data remotely. This can help clinicians make better-informed decisions about whether a patient can be treated locally, needs an in-person visit, or should be referred.

The appropriate level of technology depends on the use case. A clinic managing hypertension may prioritize validated blood pressure readings and trend review. A pediatric program may need tools that support more complete assessments while reducing the stress of travel and unfamiliar clinical settings. For children with autism or special healthcare needs, a home, school, or trusted community setting can improve caregiver participation and make follow-up more feasible.

Technology should extend clinician judgment, not attempt to replace it. Clinical protocols must define eligible conditions, documentation requirements, supervision expectations, and escalation pathways. That is especially critical when services are delivered across distributed settings.

Design for the people in the room

The care experience may involve more than the patient and provider. Parents, grandparents, school staff, home health personnel, care coordinators, and specialists can all contribute to a successful virtual visit. A well-designed program clarifies each person’s role before the appointment begins.

Caregivers need plain-language instructions, a reliable contact for technical support, and confidence that they will not be blamed if a connection fails. Staff need clear guidance on device preparation, consent, patient identity verification, and what to do when clinical findings require urgent action. The easier these steps are to follow, the more likely virtual care will become a dependable service rather than an occasional pilot.

Treat Connectivity as a Clinical Requirement

Broadband limitations remain a practical barrier in many rural regions. Clinics should not assume that every patient has high-speed internet, current devices, or a private place for a video visit. A strategy that works only for well-connected patients can unintentionally widen the access gap it was meant to address.

Programs should assess connectivity at the patient and community level. This may lead to a mix of home-based care, cellular-enabled devices, clinic-based virtual exam rooms, school-based access points, mobile outreach, and community partnerships. Audio-only communication may remain useful for selected interactions, although its clinical capabilities and reimbursement requirements differ from a device-supported virtual exam.

Reliability matters as much as reach. Build a fallback plan for dropped video connections, delayed device transmissions, and equipment replacement. If the clinical workflow stops whenever connectivity is imperfect, adoption will erode quickly among patients and staff.

Make Workflow and Reimbursement Part of the Same Plan

The technology purchase is usually the visible part of a virtual care initiative. The harder work is determining who enrolls patients, schedules follow-ups, reviews incoming data, documents the service, contacts patients when readings are concerning, and closes the loop with the primary care provider.

Remote patient monitoring and chronic care management can support continuity for patients with ongoing needs, but only if the clinic has defined staffing and response processes. A dashboard full of readings has little value if no one owns review, triage, and outreach. Organizations should set thresholds, assign coverage, and establish realistic expectations for response times.

Financial sustainability also requires early review of payer policies, CMS requirements, state-specific rules, and rural health clinic billing guidance. Reimbursement rules can vary by service, care setting, payer, practitioner, and the details of how care is delivered. A reimbursement-aware implementation team should include clinical leadership, operations, compliance, revenue cycle, and technology stakeholders before the program expands.

This is not simply a coding exercise. Documentation must support the care provided, reflect clinical decision-making, and fit naturally into the electronic health record workflow. When documentation is an afterthought, clinicians often experience virtual care as extra work rather than a better way to reach patients.

Prioritize Interoperability, Privacy, and Operational Fit

A rural clinic does not need another isolated portal that requires staff to manually copy information into the medical record. Before selecting a solution, leaders should evaluate how patient data will move, where it will be stored, who can access it, and how it will be documented and acted upon.

HIPAA compliance, role-based access, encryption, audit trails, device management, and business associate agreements are foundational. But operational fit deserves equal attention. Can the system support the clinic’s current staffing model? Can it be configured for pediatric, adult, and chronic care pathways? Can clinicians access the information they need without navigating multiple screens during a visit?

Interoperability may take time and technical investment, particularly for smaller organizations. Even when full integration is not immediately feasible, a clinic should have a deliberate plan for avoiding duplicate work, lost data, and fragmented communication.

Measure Access, Outcomes, and Staff Burden

Virtual care should be evaluated as a care delivery service, not only as a technology deployment. Early metrics should connect directly to the original care gap. Depending on the program, that may include appointment completion rates, time to follow-up, avoided travel, emergency department utilization, chronic disease measures, patient satisfaction, caregiver participation, or referrals completed.

Staff experience belongs on the scorecard as well. If nurses spend substantial time troubleshooting devices, reconciling data, or chasing patients who were never successfully onboarded, leadership needs to see that burden. The right response may be more training, simpler enrollment, a different workflow, or a narrower initial use case.

Start with a defined population and a manageable number of measures. Scale after the clinic can demonstrate that the model is clinically sound, financially supportable, and workable for patients and staff.

Create a Connected Circle of Care

The strongest rural care models do not position telehealth as a separate service line. They use it to connect the relationships already surrounding the patient: the rural health clinic, family caregivers, local schools, specialists, community organizations, and other members of the care team.

Dr. Miltie supports this approach through the Circle of Care™ model, combining device-enabled virtual exams, remote patient monitoring, customized care pathways, and implementation support designed around real-world clinical operations. For rural clinics, this type of connected-care approach can help turn distance from a barrier into a design consideration.

The next technology decision should not begin with a feature list. It should begin with one patient who is currently hard to reach, one care team that needs better visibility, and one clinical moment that should not depend on a long trip to an exam room.

The post Rural Health Clinic Technology Strategies That Work appeared first on Dr. Miltie.

A missed follow-up is rarely just a scheduling problem. For a rural family, it may mean losing a day of work, driving hours for a 15-minute visit, arranging child care, and delaying treatment because the trip is too disruptive. For the provider organization, that same missed encounter can lead to avoidable utilization, poorer chronic disease control, and a more expensive episode of care. That is why reducing healthcare costs through telehealth has become less about convenience and more about care model design.

For healthcare leaders, the question is no longer whether virtual care can lower costs. The better question is where telehealth lowers costs, where it simply shifts them, and what infrastructure makes those savings real. Organizations serving pediatric populations, rural communities, and medically underserved patients often see the clearest benefit because travel burden, access gaps, and workforce constraints are already major cost drivers.

Where reducing healthcare costs through telehealth actually happens

Telehealth does not reduce spending by replacing every in-person visit. It reduces costs when it helps organizations match the level of care to the actual clinical need. A medication check, behavioral health follow-up, chronic care touchpoint, post-discharge review, or caregiver education session often does not require the same overhead as an office-based encounter. When those visits move into a virtual format, the savings can show up in several places at once.

First, there is the direct operational impact. Fewer unnecessary in-person appointments can reduce exam room pressure, lower no-show losses, and help clinicians use scarce time more effectively. Second, there is downstream utilization. Faster follow-up and earlier intervention can prevent emergency department use, avoid hospital readmissions, and keep lower-acuity issues from becoming higher-cost events. Third, there is the patient-side cost burden, which matters more than many health systems acknowledge. When care is easier to access, adherence tends to improve.

That last point is especially relevant in pediatrics and community-based care. Families caring for autistic children or pediatric patients with special healthcare needs may delay visits if the clinic environment is stressful or travel is disruptive. Delivering care in the home, school, or community setting can improve participation while lowering the hidden costs that often interfere with continuity.

Telehealth savings depend on clinical depth, not video alone

A common mistake in virtual care strategy is assuming that a basic video visit is enough to drive meaningful financial impact. It may help with access, but access alone does not always produce sustainable savings. Cost reduction becomes more credible when telehealth supports clinically informed decision-making.

That is where virtual physical exam capability, connected medical devices, and remote patient monitoring matter. If a clinician can assess relevant patient data remotely rather than referring the patient into a higher-cost setting just to gather basic information, telehealth becomes much more than a digital front door. It becomes a way to avoid unnecessary transfers, duplicate visits, and inefficient handoffs.

For example, a rural clinic managing limited staffing may use virtual tools to extend specialist or pediatric support without transporting every patient to a distant facility. A community health center may use remote monitoring to track blood pressure, oxygen saturation, or other relevant measures between visits, allowing the care team to intervene earlier. A school-based or home-based pediatric program may be able to evaluate a child in a more familiar setting, improving cooperation and reducing the chance that an incomplete exam triggers additional appointments.

In these models, telehealth does not reduce cost by doing less. It reduces cost by getting the right information sooner and using it to guide the next step appropriately.

The biggest savings often come from avoided escalation

Many healthcare organizations still evaluate telehealth by looking only at encounter revenue or substitution rates. That is too narrow. Some of the strongest financial returns come from events that never happen.

When patients can access follow-up care promptly, they are less likely to deteriorate between visits. When a care coordinator can connect with a high-risk patient at home, medication confusion or symptom changes may be addressed before they become urgent. When chronic care management is supported by regular virtual touchpoints and physiologic data, patients are less likely to cycle through expensive acute episodes.

This is especially true in safety-net settings, where transportation barriers, staffing shortages, and social complexity make continuity hard to maintain. Telehealth can help close those gaps, but only if workflows are designed around the realities of the population. A virtual strategy that assumes strong broadband, flexible schedules, and high digital literacy will miss the mark in many underserved communities.

That is why the operational model matters as much as the technology. Healthcare leaders need workflows for triage, escalation, documentation, caregiver engagement, and reimbursement. They also need to define which visits should remain in person. Telehealth works best when it is integrated into a broader care pathway rather than treated as a stand-alone service line.

Reducing healthcare costs through telehealth in pediatric and rural care

Pediatric and rural organizations often face a different cost equation than large urban systems. Their challenge is not only utilization management. It is maintaining access with limited staff, stretched budgets, and patients who may live far from the point of care.

In pediatrics, telehealth can lower costs by reducing family disruption and improving completion of care plans. Caregiver participation is often stronger when visits occur at home or in another familiar environment. That matters for developmental concerns, chronic condition follow-up, medication management, and ongoing support for children with special healthcare needs. The lower-stress setting can also lead to better patient engagement, particularly for autistic children who may struggle in busy clinical environments.

In rural health, telehealth can reduce the cost of distance. Critical access hospitals, rural health clinics, and federally qualified health centers frequently absorb inefficiencies tied to travel, delayed specialty input, and workforce shortages. A connected-care model can help extend clinical reach without requiring every patient to move through the same high-cost pathway. It can also support local care teams by bringing clinician-directed virtual examinations and monitoring into community settings.

One reason these models matter financially is that they support retention of care within the local network. If a patient can be assessed, monitored, and followed more effectively close to home, the organization may reduce leakage while improving patient experience. That combination is strategically valuable.

The trade-offs leaders should evaluate honestly

Telehealth is not a universal cost-cutting tool. In some cases, it can increase utilization if virtual visits are added without improving care coordination or replacing avoidable in-person services. It can also create workflow friction if staff must document in multiple systems, troubleshoot devices without support, or manage poorly defined escalation rules.

There are infrastructure costs as well. Organizations may need connected exam tools, training, workflow redesign, patient onboarding support, compliance oversight, and reimbursement planning. If leaders underestimate implementation, savings can be delayed or diluted.

Clinical appropriateness also matters. Not every complaint should be managed virtually, and not every patient is a strong fit for remote monitoring. Programs perform better when they are targeted. High-risk chronic disease populations, post-discharge patients, children needing frequent follow-up, and communities with significant travel barriers often offer a clearer return than a broad, undifferentiated rollout.

The most effective programs are reimbursement-aware from the start. That means aligning telehealth, RPM, chronic care management, and documentation practices with payer rules and operational capacity. Financial sustainability is stronger when virtual care is built as part of a governed model, not as a temporary access workaround.

What healthcare organizations should measure

If the goal is lower total cost of care, leaders should look beyond visit counts. Useful measures include no-show reduction, time to follow-up, avoidable emergency department utilization, readmissions, specialist access times, caregiver participation, and adherence to care plans. In pediatric and rural settings, travel avoided and care completed in local settings can also be meaningful indicators.

It is also worth measuring clinician efficiency and care team capacity. A telehealth model that improves scheduling flexibility, supports earlier intervention, and reduces unnecessary transfers can create value even before full cost savings are visible on a balance sheet.

Organizations adopting more advanced virtual exam and monitoring capabilities may find that the real advantage is not just lower cost per encounter. It is the ability to redesign care delivery around where patients actually are. That shift can support better outcomes, stronger patient relationships, and more resilient operations.

For health systems, community clinics, pediatric programs, and rural providers, telehealth is most effective when it moves beyond video and becomes part of a connected-care strategy. Platforms such as Dr. Miltie are built around that reality, helping organizations support virtual physical exams, remote monitoring, and caregiver-centered workflows in settings where access and cost are tightly linked.

The organizations seeing the greatest value are not asking how to digitize the old visit. They are asking how to deliver the right level of care earlier, closer to home, and with fewer avoidable steps along the way.

The post Reducing Healthcare Costs Through Telehealth appeared first on Dr. Miltie.

Critical Access Hospital is a designation given to eligible rural hospitals by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). Congress created the Critical Access Hospital (CAH) designation through the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (Public Law 105-33) in response to over 400 rural hospital closures during the 1980s and early 1990s. Since its creation, Congress has amended the CAH designation and related program requirements several times through additional legislation.

The CAH designation is designed to reduce the financial vulnerability of rural hospitals and improve access to healthcare by keeping essential services in rural communities. To accomplish this goal, CAHs receive certain benefits, such as cost-based reimbursement for Medicare services. (see What are the benefits of CAH status?)

Eligible hospitals must meet the following conditions to obtain CAH designation:

• Have 25 or fewer acute care inpatient beds
• Be located more than 35 miles from another hospital (exceptions may apply – see What are the location requirements for CAH status?)
• Maintain an annual average length of stay of 96 hours or less for acute care patients
• Provide 24/7 emergency care services

Congress also created the Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility Program (Flex Program) in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 to support new and existing CAHs.

This guide provides resources concerning the following CAH-related areas:

• Payment/reimbursement and financial information
• Regulations and information regarding CAH status and the Flex Program
• Key organizations in the field
• Funding opportunities
• Challenges to operation

Frequently Asked Questions

• What are the benefits of CAH status?
• How does Medicaid reimburse CAHs?
• Are all the benefits of CAH status available in every state?
• What types of facilities are eligible for CAH status?
• What are the location requirements for CAH status?
• How many CAHs are there and where are they located?
• What are the quality assurance and quality improvement options for CAHs?
• What is the Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility Program and how is it related to the CAH program?
• Where can I find CAH comparative information?
• Can a CAH own another healthcare facility?
• Can a CAH add an off-campus, provider-based clinic that does not meet the CAH distance requirements?
• What are the requirements for relocating an existing CAH under the Necessary Provider replacement rules?
• Is there a limit on the length of stay for patients at CAHs?
• How many beds are allowed?
• What is a swing bed?
• What emergency services are CAHs required to provide? What are staffing requirements for emergency services?
• What kinds of agreements does a CAH need to have with an acute care hospital?
• Where can I find examples of CAH network agreements, tools, and other materials?
• How do staffing and other requirements differ for CAHs, compared to general acute care hospitals?
• Are CAHs eligible for the 340B program?
• What sources of capital funding exist for CAHs?
• What is the CAH survey process?
• What legislation has affected the Critical Access Hospital program?
• What are Rural Emergency Hospitals?
• Who can answer questions about CAH status or reimbursement issues?

What are the benefits of CAH status?

CAH status includes the following benefits:

• Cost-based reimbursement from Medicare. As of January 1, 2004, CAHs are eligible for allowable cost plus 1% reimbursement. However, as of April 1, 2013, CAH reimbursement is subject to a 2% reduction due to sequestration. In some states, CAHs may also receive cost-based reimbursement from Medicaid.
• Flexible staffing and services, to the extent permitted under state licensure laws.
• Capital improvement costs included in allowable costs for determining Medicare reimbursement.
• Access to Flex Program educational resources, technical assistance, and/or grants.

For more information about CAH reimbursement and payment benefits, see the Medicare Learning Network: Critical Access Hospital booklet from CMS, the Small Rural Hospital and Clinic Finance 101 manual from the Technical Assistance and Services Center (TASC), or Medicare Payment Basics: Critical Access Hospitals Payment System from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC).

Critical Access Hospital (CAH) status does not guarantee a better financial situation. Some hospitals will find the cost-based reimbursement advantageous, and some will not. Each hospital must perform its own financial analysis to determine if being a Prospective Payment System (PPS) hospital or a CAH would result in a better financial return. For financially distressed hospitals, even if CAH status leads to increased reimbursement, it may not put the hospital in the black. In fact, some hospitals have closed even after converting to CAH status. The Flex Monitoring Team releases an annual CAH Financial Indicators Report that can be helpful in understanding financial performance of CAHs.

CAH status should be considered or maintained only if it is appropriate for the community need and hospital service area. In particular, consideration should be given to the bed limit for CAHs and potential service lines and whether they are sufficient to meet community need.

CAH status does not necessarily mean fewer services are offered compared to other facilities. Services offered by a CAH should be aimed to meet the community’s unique needs. Therefore, the number and type of services offered in one community may be different than in another community. A CAH can utilize a Community Health Needs Assessment (CHNA) to guide its review of current and future services needs.

For information about payment methods, eligibility criteria, and financial performance, see Medicare Payment for Rural or Geographically Isolated Hospitals and 2016-18 Profitability of Urban and Rural Hospitals by Medicare Payment Classification, which compare the following designations:

• Critical Access Hospital (CAH)
• Sole Community Hospital (SCH)
• Medicare-Dependent Hospital (MDH)
• Rural Referral Center (RRC)

How does Medicaid reimburse CAHs?

Each state determines how it will reimburse CAHs for services through Medicaid. Several states utilize some form of cost-based reimbursement for CAHs, while other states follow a prospective payment system (PPS). Additionally, variation may exist between inpatient and outpatient payment policies.

The Medicaid and CHIP Payment and Access Commission (MACPAC) compiled each state’s Medicaid payment policies for inpatient and outpatient services.

• State Medicaid Payment Policies for Outpatient Hospital Services (July 2016)
  State-specific payment details for CAHs are listed in row 28.
• State Medicaid Payment Policies for Inpatient Hospital Services (December 2018)
  State-specific payment details for CAHs are listed in row 17.

For additional information about your state’s payment policies, consult your State Rural Hospital Flexibility Program Contact.

Are all the benefits of CAH status available in every state?

No. Some states license CAHs under the same licensure rules as other hospitals, and CAHs must comply with those licensure rules. If those rules are stricter than the CAH CoP, the CAH is unable to benefit from the more flexible Medicare Conditions of Participation (CoP) for CAHs and the related cost savings. In addition, five states — Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and Rhode Island — do not have any hospitals with CAH status, and therefore do not participate in the Flex Program.

What types of facilities are eligible for CAH status?

Facilities applying to become Critical Access Hospitals must be currently participating in the Medicare program and have a current license as an acute care hospital. Hospitals closed after November 29, 1989, and hospitals that have downsized to health clinic or health center status may also qualify for CAH status if they meet all of the CAH Conditions of Participation.

What are the location requirements for CAH status?

Critical Access Hospitals must be located in rural areas and must meet one of the following criteria:

• Be more than a 35-mile drive from another hospital, or
• Be more than a 15-mile drive from another hospital in an area with mountainous terrain or only secondary roads.

CAHs designated by their state as a Necessary Provider prior to January 1, 2006, are exempt from these distance requirements. See the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ Clarification of Critical Access Hospital (CAH) Rural Status, Location and Distance Requirements and Critical Access Hospital (CAH) Recertification Checklist for Evaluation of Compliance with the Location and Distance Requirements for definitions.

How many CAHs are there and where are they located?

The Flex Monitoring Team maintains a list of Critical Access Hospitals, which includes the hospital name, city, state, zip code, and effective date of CAH status.

As of January 2023, there are 1,358 CAHs located throughout the United States.

The following map shows the locations of Critical Access Hospitals across the United States. State-level healthcare facility maps are also available.

What are the quality assurance and quality improvement options for CAHs?

Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) must have and maintain quality assurance arrangements with at least one of the following:

• One other CAH or hospital that is part of the network
• One quality improvement organization (QIO) or equivalent entity
• One other appropriate and qualified entity as identified in the state’s rural health care plan, such as an accrediting body.

In addition to quality assurance, quality improvement is important to CAHs. The Medicare Beneficiary Quality Improvement Project (MBQIP), under the Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility (Flex) Program, aims to improve quality of care in CAHs by encouraging self-reported quality data, which are analyzed and used to inform activities at the facility. The Flex Monitoring Team’s MBQIP Quality Measure Trends, 2011-2016 shows CAH performance trends and MBQIP reporting rates during that period. According to the May 2019 MBQIP Monthly, 99% of CAHs in the U.S. report on at least one domain and 93% reported quality measures in at least three domains in 2018. Any CAH wanting to receive benefits or services from the state’s Flex Program funding must participate in MBQIP and meet the minimum reporting requirements (or submit a waiver if necessary). The National Rural Health Resource Center also provides resources for State Flex Programs and providers regarding MBQIP, including Flex Eligibility Criteria for MBQIP Participation and Waiver Templates.

What is the Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility Program and how is it related to the CAH program?

The Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility Program (Flex Program) was created by the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and is administered through the Federal Office of Rural Health Policy. The Flex Program encourages states to take a holistic approach to strengthening rural healthcare with a focus on Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) and their Rural Health Clinics, rural emergency medical services (EMS), and rural communities. The Flex Program provides federal cooperative agreements to eligible states to help them achieve their strategic goals, particularly in the following areas for Fiscal Years 2019-2023:

• CAH quality improvement (required)
• CAH operational and financial improvement (required)
• Population health improvement (optional)
• Rural emergency medical services (EMS) improvement (optional)
• Innovative model development (optional)
• Critical Access Hospital designation (required if requested)

Specific goals within each priority area are updated for each program cycle to best reflect the needs of CAHs.

The Federal Office of Rural Health Policy also awarded supplemental funding to eight State Flex Programs to conduct demonstration projects to build an evidence base for rural EMS related to quality metrics and sustainable rural EMS models. Implementation of Flex EMS Supplemental Funding Projects: Year One Activities provides an overview of the implementation of the first year of these efforts, which spanned September 2019 to August 2020.

National infrastructure to support the Flex Program includes:

• Federal Office of Rural Health Policy (FORHP) – Administers the Flex Program and its associated grants to states. Located within the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA).
• Technical Assistance and Services Center (TASC) – Provides information and technical assistance to State Flex Programs and Critical Access Hospitals. Located at the National Rural Health Resource Center.
• Flex Monitoring Team – Conducts research and collects data on CAHs, evaluates the impact of the Flex Program, and maintains the list of CAH locations across the country. Also operates and maintains the Critical Access Hospital Measurement and Performance Assessment System (CAHMPAS).
• Rural Quality Improvement Technical Assistance (RQITA) – Seeks to improve healthcare quality and health outcomes in rural communities by providing information and technical assistance to State Flex Programs, Small Health Care Provider Quality Improvement grantees, CAHs, and other rural providers. Located at Stratis Health.

Where can I find CAH comparative information?

The Flex Monitoring Team has a number of resources that would allow you to benchmark your CAH or find data on CAH finances and quality measures. These include:

• The Critical Access Hospital Measurement and Performance Assessment System (CAHMPAS) – Offers the ability to compare data on community-benefit measures at a county and state level and quality indicators at a state level.
• CAH Financial Indicators Report: Summary of Indicator Medians by State – Provides annual state-specific data on revenues, costs, average census, and more. The CAH Financial Indicators Primer and Calculator Resources explains how the measures are calculated and provides tools to enter your own data.
• Patients’ Experiences in CAHs: HCAHPS Results, 2018 – Provides state and national averages for CAH performance on the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey and state-specific reports.
• Hospital Compare Quality Measure Results for CAHs, 2018 – Offers state-specific CAH data on inpatient and outpatient quality-reporting measures from Hospital Compare.
• Critical Access Hospital (CAH) State Profiles – Allows users to search for state-level reports on community benefit, quality, and financial indicators by year.
• Community Impact and Benefit Activities of Critical Access, Other Rural, and Urban Hospitals, 2020 – Examines the economic and healthcare benefit of Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) on rural communities and enables State Flex Programs and CAH administrators to compare the community impact and benefit profiles of CAHs in their state to CAHs and other hospitals nationwide.

The National Rural Health Resource Center’s Population Health Toolkit incorporates County Health Rankings, Hospital Compare, Medicare data, and Census data to help Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs), Flex Coordinators, and rural health networks use a systems-based approach to move towards population health.

If you are interested in comparing the number of beds, operating rooms, or staff, use the HRSA Data Explorer:

• Select “Health Care Facilities” and “Choose Indicators”
• Select indicators of interest, such as “Facility Physicians Full-Time Equivalent,” and “View Data”
• Under “Facility Subcategory,” type in “Critical Access” and select “Contains”

For additional quality reporting information, Medicare’s Care Compare provides data on some CAHs. You can search by state, county, city, or zip code to compare up to three hospitals, or download CMS Provider Data Catalog datasets.

Can a CAH own another healthcare facility?

According to Critical Access Hospital Measurement and Performance Assessment System (CAHMPAS) Data Summary, 60.4% of Critical Access Hospitals managed Rural Health Clinics and 38.4% provided skilled nursing care in 2018.

A survey of Critical Access Hospitals in Illinois found CAHs are most likely to operate (versus own) dental offices, mental health practices, community health centers, retail pharmacies, and EMS, and were most interested in adding community wellness centers and behavioral health practices. The study notes CAHs may choose to collaborate with or operate other facilities rather than owning them, most often citing financial or workforce concerns.

Regarding Federally Qualified Health Centers, see Can another healthcare organization, such as a Critical Access Hospital, own an FQHC? on the Federally Qualified Health Centers topic guide.

Even if a CAH does not own another healthcare facility, it can also benefit from collaboration and network agreements. Demonstrating Critical Access Hospital Value: A Guide to Potential Partnerships identifies potential partners for CAHs and discusses how CAHs can demonstrate their value to them. A Guide for Rural Health Care Collaboration and Coordination, a publication from the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), describes how rural organizations and facilities, including CAHs, can develop partnerships to address the needs of their community.

See Who can answer questions about CAH status or reimbursement issues? for experts to contact for additional guidance on ownership issues.

Can a CAH add an off-campus, provider-based clinic that does not meet the CAH distance requirements?

As of January 1, 2008, all CAHs, including Necessary Provider CAHs that create or acquire an off-campus, provider-based facility, such as a clinic or a psychiatric or rehabilitation distinct part unit, must meet the CAH distance requirement of a 35-mile drive to the nearest hospital or CAH (or 15 miles in the case of mountainous terrain or secondary roads). This provision excludes Rural Health Clinics, as defined under 405.2401(b), from the list of provider-based facilities that must comply with this requirement. Details about this requirement are available in a final rule published in the November 27, 2007 issue of the Federal Register as part of the Medicare Program: Changes to the Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and CY 2008 Payment Rates. See Section XVIII. Changes Affecting Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) and Hospital Conditions of Participation (CoPs), beginning on page 66877.

What are the requirements for relocating an existing CAH under the Necessary Provider replacement rules?

Critical Access Hospitals that were granted Necessary Provider designation prior to January 1, 2006, and choose to rebuild in a new location that does not meet the current distance requirements, are treated in the same manner as if they were building a replacement facility at the original location. In order to maintain CAH status and the necessary provider designation, the new facility must satisfy the following requirements:

• Meet the same criteria that led to its original state designation
• Serve at least 75% of the same service area
• Offer at least 75% of the same services
• Utilize at least 75% of the same staff in its new location

See the September 7, 2007, letter from CMS to state survey agency directors titled Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs): Distance from Other Providers and Relocation of CAHs with a Necessary Provider Designation for more detailed information.

Is there a limit on the length of stay for patients at CAHs?

Critical Access Hospitals must maintain an annual average length of stay of 96 hours or less for their acute care patients. The following are not included when calculating the 96-hour average:

• Time spent in the CAH as an outpatient
• Time spent in a CAH swing bed
• Time spent in a CAH distinct part unit (DPU)

How many beds are allowed?

CAHs may have a maximum of 25 acute care inpatient beds. For CAHs with swing bed agreements, any of their beds can be used for inpatient acute care or for swing bed services. Any hospital-type bed which is located in, or adjacent to, any location where the hospital bed could be used for inpatient care counts toward the 25-bed limit.

Certain beds do not count toward the 25-bed limit, including examination or procedure beds, stretchers, operating room tables, and beds in Medicare certified rehabilitation or psychiatric distinct part units. For a complete list of beds that do not count toward the 25 bed limit, please see Section C-0211, §485.620(a) Standard: Number of Beds: Interpretive Guidelines of the CMS State Operations Manual: Appendix W.

What is a swing bed?

A swing bed is a bed that can be used for either acute care or post-acute care that is equivalent to skilled nursing facility (SNF) care. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services approves CAHs, and other hospitals, to furnish swing beds, which gives the facility flexibility to meet unpredictable demands for acute care and SNF care.

The Rural Monitor article History of the Swing Bed: A Look Through the Rural Rearview Mirror describes the evolution of the swing bed program to meet the acute and post-acute care needs of rural residents. Swing beds offer an alternative to skilled nursing facilities. This option may be useful in rural areas, which are less likely to have a stand-alone SNF. In addition, populations in rural areas tend to be older, and swing beds are well-adapted for treating health problems typically seen in aging patients. The most commonly reported need was for aging patients who require rehabilitation following their hospital stay, according to Why Use Swing Beds? Conversations with Hospital Administrators and Staff. Furthermore, swing beds help stabilize healthcare facilities’ census and may provide financial benefits. Swing bed services in CAHs are eligible for cost-based reimbursement, while swing bed services in non-CAH small rural hospitals are paid under the SNF prospective payment system.

For these reasons, swing bed post-acute care is common in rural healthcare facilities. According to Post-Acute Skilled Nursing Care Availability in Rural United States, 56% of all rural counties have at least one facility that provides post-acute skilled nursing care through a swing bed program.

For more details about the swing bed program, see the Medicare Learning Network: Swing Bed Services fact sheet and the Rural Monitor article Understanding the Rural Swing Bed: More than Just a Reimbursement Policy.

What emergency services are CAHs required to provide? What are staffing requirements for emergency services?

Emergency Department Services

CAHs must provide 24-hour emergency services.

Qualifying medical staff must be onsite or on-call and available onsite within 30 minutes at all times. Onsite response times may be extended to 60 minutes if certain frontier or remote area criteria are met.

The staff onsite or on-call must meet state licensure requirements. CAH Condition of Participation: Emergency Services specifies that coverage may be provided by a doctor of medicine (MD) or doctor of osteopathy (DO), a physician assistant, a nurse practitioner, or a clinical nurse specialist with experience and training in emergency care. Under temporary, limited circumstances, coverage may be provided by a registered nurse. In a June 7, 2013, memorandum, CMS clarified these requirements by stating that under CAH CoPs, an MD or DO is not required to be available in addition to a non-physician practitioner. Additionally, this requirement may be met in whole or in part through the use of an MD or DO via telemedicine.

As of October 1, 2007, CMS requires that any hospital, including a CAH, that does not have a physician on site 24 hours per day, 7 days per week, provide a notice to all patients upon admission. The notice must address how emergency services are provided when a physician is not onsite. For more information, please see page 47413 of the August 22, 2007, Federal Register notice, Medicare Program; Changes to the Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment Systems and Fiscal Year 2008 Rates; Final Rule.

Emergency Medical Services

Unlike emergency department services, CAHs are not required to provide emergency medical services.

Characteristics and Challenges of Rural Ambulance Agencies – A Brief Review and Policy Considerations notes that unlike Critical Access Hospitals, ambulance services are typically not reimbursed at-cost. As a result, many CAHs are not inclined to maintain an ambulance service. According to Community Impact and Benefit Activities of CAHs, Other Rural, and Urban Hospitals, 2020, 22.4% of Critical Access Hospitals provided ambulance services in 2020. However, after accounting for the role of hospital health systems and joint ventures, 54.5% of CAHs had access to ambulance services. In addition, 47.8% of CAHs were designated as certified trauma centers.

The Frontier Community Health Integration Project (FCHIP) Demonstration, a joint demonstration project between the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Federal Office of Rural Health Policy, reimbursed two participating CAHs 101% of reasonable costs of furnishing Medicare Part B ambulance services instead of being paid under the Medicare ambulance fee schedule. These CAHs utilized the funding to provide increased stipends to volunteer emergency medical technicians (EMTs), hold additional EMT training classes, and purchase equipment. Although FCHIP initially concluded in 2019, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, extended the program for an additional 5 years.

For more information on Emergency Medical Services in rural communities, see RHIhub’s Rural Emergency Medical Services (EMS) and Trauma topic guide.

What kinds of agreements does a CAH need to have with an acute care hospital?

As part of the agreements provision in the CAH Conditions of Participation, a CAH must develop agreements with an acute care hospital related to patient referral and transfer, communication, and emergency and non-emergency patient transportation. The agreement must include at least one other hospital that furnishes acute care services and can receive transfers of patients requiring services that are not available in the CAH.

The CAH may also have an agreement with its referral hospital for quality assurance, or choose to have that agreement with another organization. State networking requirements vary. For more information on quality assurance options, see What are the quality assurance and quality improvement options for CAHs?

Where can I find examples of CAH network agreements, tools, and other materials?

RHIhub’s Resources by Topic: Critical Access Hospitals lists hundreds of resources from organizations across the country. You can narrow the list by selecting resource type “Tool” for a number of financial and quality tools specific to CAHs.

The Arizona Critical Access Hospital Designation Manual provides samples of a:

• Rural Health Network Agreement (p. 23-27)
• Rural EMS Agreement (p. 28)
• Community Needs Assessment Template (p.31-33)

How do staffing and other requirements for CAHs differ from those of general acute care hospitals?

Under the Medicare Conditions of Participation (CoP), CAHs are granted greater staffing flexibility through two main provisions:

• Medical Staff
  A Critical Access Hospital must have at least one MD or DO physician, but that person is not required to be onsite. Advanced practice providers, such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners, and clinical nurse specialists can be an independent part of the medical staff and can provide direct service to patients, including emergency services.
• Nursing Staff
  General acute care hospitals are required to have a registered nurse onsite 24/7. Federal requirements allow for CAHs to close, and therefore have no nursing staff on duty, if the facility is without inpatients. Additional requirements vary by state. For example, some states may offer flexibility by allowing an LPN to cover a shift in place of an RN when there are no acute patients. Contact your state survey agency for details.

CAHs must continue to meet their state licensure laws if those are stricter than the Medicare CoP.

Aside from staffing differences, requirements for CAHs and general acute care hospitals are very similar. CAHs must meet the requirements for the services they choose to provide. For example, if a CAH provides surgical services, it must meet the same relevant surgery requirements as a general acute care hospital.

Some issues may vary from state to state based on state licensure laws or other factors. To find out more about your state’s requirements, contact your State Rural Hospital Flexibility Program Contact.

Are Critical Access Hospitals eligible for the 340B program?

The 340B program allows certain eligible healthcare facilities to purchase prescription and non-prescription medications at reduced cost. Critical Access Hospitals that meet the eligibility criteria are able to participate in the 340B program as a Covered Entity. A 2018 report from the Government Accountability Office indicated that 77% of all CAHs participated in the 340B program in 2016 and accounted for 45% of all hospitals participating in the program that year.

See RHIhub’s Rural Pharmacy and Prescription Drugs topic guide for more information about the 340B program.

What sources of capital funding exist for CAHs?

Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) qualify for a variety of capital funding opportunities, such as grants and loans. Among others, the following two federal programs focus on helping CAHs with their capital funding needs:

• USDA Community Facilities Loan and Grant Program – Provides funding to construct, expand, or improve rural healthcare facilities, including CAHs.
• HUD Section 242: Hospital Mortgage Insurance Program – Helps rural healthcare facilities finance new construction, refinance debt, or purchase new equipment such as hospital beds and office machines.

Visit the funding section of this guide and the Capital Funding topic guide for additional opportunities and information.

What is the CAH survey process?

A facility interested in CAH status should contact its state survey agency to request application materials. The state agency will review and forward the application to a CMS regional office. The CMS regional office will authorize a survey, and the state agency will then contact the facility to arrange a survey date. The survey will verify that the CAH meets the federal facility requirements. Details about the survey process are available in Appendix W of the CMS State Operations Manual.

A facility will also need to be recertified by the state survey agency on a schedule consistent with the survey guidelines issued by CMS each year. A facility may be decertified if a situation or issue presents immediate jeopardy and is not resolved quickly. Details about the recertification process are in Chapter 2 of the CMS State Operations Manual.

Additionally, facilities may obtain deemed status if accredited by a CMS-approved Medicare accreditation organization. In the case of a deemed provider, the state agency does not conduct an initial survey. While the facility seeking deemed status must still contact the state agency to acquire the Medicare and/or Medicaid certification materials, initial certification and subsequent recertification is performed by the accrediting organization. CMS maintains a list of Approved Accreditation Organization Contacts for Prospective Clients. The following accreditation organizations are approved for CAH certification:

• DNV GL – Healthcare (DNV GL)
• The Joint Commission (TJC)

What legislation has affected the Critical Access Hospital program?

According to the American Hospital Association, several pieces of legislation have modified the Critical Access Hospital (CAH) program since its creation through the Balanced Budget Act of 1997. The following legislation are integral to the Critical Access Hospital (CAH) program:

• Balanced Budget Act (BBA) of 1997
  Created the CAH program, outlining all details of the program including eligibility and operational regulations.
• Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Refinement Act (BBRA) of 1999
  Corrected unanticipated adverse payment and regulatory consequences of the BBA of 1997.
• Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits Improvement and Protection Act (BIPA) of 2000
  Provided further exemptions and reimbursement improvements to CAHs, which strengthen the overall program.
• Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act (MMA) of 2003
  Enhanced CAH payments, expanded bed-size flexibility, provided continued funding for the Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility (Flex) Program grants, and increased Medicare payments to 101% of reasonable costs. It also enacted a sunset of the necessary provider provision, effective January 1, 2006.
• Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA) of 2008
  Further expanded Flex grants, and allowed CAHs to receive 101% of reasonable costs for clinical lab services provided to Medicare beneficiaries even if the specimen was collected offsite or at another CAH-operated facility.
• American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009
  Created several grant, loan, and incentive programs to support the adoption of new health information technology (HIT) in CAHs.
• Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA)
  Included several efforts aimed at reducing workforce shortages, such as expanding Area Health Education Centers (AHECs) and further investing in the National Health Service Corps. It also allowed CAHs to participate in the 340B program, making reduced cost pharmaceuticals accessible in rural communities.
• Budget Control Act of 2011
  Imposed mandatory across-the-board reductions in federal spending to achieve $1.2 trillion in budget savings over a 10-year period (also known as sequestration).
• Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013/Pathway for SGR Reform Act of 2013
  Extended sequestration for an additional two years (2022 and 2023) beyond the period specified in the Budget Control Act of 2011 at the same percentage of spending. The Bipartisan Budget Acts of 2015 and 2018 extended sequestration through 2027. The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act further extended sequestration through fiscal year 2030. However, the CARES Act also paused sequestration amid the COVID-19 pandemic, and legislation passed in April 2021 extended the pause through December 2021.

RHIhub’s Rural Health Policy guide provides additional information on policies and legislation affecting rural healthcare.

What are Rural Emergency Hospitals?

The United States Congress established the Rural Emergency Hospital (REH) as a new Medicare provider type in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021. Effective January 1, 2023, this law will allow Critical Access Hospitals and other small rural hospitals meeting eligibility criteria to convert to Rural Emergency Hospital (REH) status. REHs will be reimbursed at 105% of the outpatient prospective payment system (OPPS) for emergency and outpatient care services in addition to a fixed monthly payment. Unlike Critical Access Hospitals, REHs will not be allowed to provide inpatient services.

For additional information on Rural Emergency Hospitals, including eligibility criteria, staffing and service requirements, and technical assistance resources, see the Rural Emergency Hospitals topic guide.

Who can answer questions about CAH status or reimbursement issues?

Your State Rural Hospital Flexibility Program Contact can provide ongoing guidance about CAH issues. Other important contacts include:

• CMS Regional Office Rural Health Coordinator – for questions about CMS regulations
• State Survey Agency – for survey and certification questions
• National Rural Health Resource Center’s Technical Assistance and Services Center (TASC) – for technical assistance, information, and other resources
• Medicare Administrative Contractor (MAC) – for questions about Medicare claims, reimbursement, and billing issues

The post Critical Access Hospitals (CAHs) appeared first on Dr. Miltie.