The task of allocating scarce health care resources among different population groups falls to policymakers. Too frequently, the task is not easy because policy makers have to consider numerous, potentially competing options. Furthermore, the time to evaluate various options is limited, and the information provided about the options is often less than clear.

At Dobson | DaVanzo, our consultants have a long history of helping public and private-sector policy makers by providing sophisticated, yet clear, analyses supported by objective research. Our analyses synthesize quantitative and qualitative data from multiple sources. Our analytic models support decision making, and are developed to allow alternative policy scenarios to be tested.

We evaluate our clients' goals and needs, and then tailor an individual approach to the needs of each client. Our methods are varied and frequently include the following:

CBO-type Scoring
Federal policymakers use cost estimates (scores) prepared by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) in their consideration of proposed legislation. CBO scores provide policymakers with an understanding of the impact of proposed actions on federal program spending over one-, five- and ten-year periods of time.

We perform these analyses in order to enhance our clients' understanding of the programmatic costs associated with proposed policies. This enhanced understanding creates a shared perspective leading to more effective and efficient communication between our clients and policymakers.
 
Support for Public Comments on NPRMs
Each year, a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) is published by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) for each type of service covered by Medicare. NPRMs encompass a range of issues, from payment rates to medical coding requirements. Although CMS develops NPRMs with considerable care, CMS is required to solicit comments from the public.

We study NPRMs, identify the key proposed regulatory changes, and model the budgetary and other impacts of these changes. We use these analyses to help our clients draft comments to CMS that support or oppose proposed regulatory changes and suggest alternatives.