HIMSS Davies Enterprise Application Submission Form
Hilo Medical Center – ROI Core Case Study
--- Cover Page --Name of Applicant Organization:
Organization’s Address:
Submitter’s Name:
Submitter’s Title:
Submitter’s E-mail:
Core Item:
Hilo Medical Center
1190 Waianuenue Avenue, Hilo, HI 96720
Money Atwal
CIO & CFO
matwal@hhsc.org
Return on Investment (ROI)
Executive Summary
Hilo Medical Center (HMC) began pursuing selection of an electronic health record (EHR) in
2009 to address the challenges in billing, revenue cycle management and the lack of integration
in providing clinical patient care. HMC went live with the core clinical and revenue cycle EHR
modules in May 2010, which was followed over the next three years with the remaining
applications required to fulfill all clinical and financial integration needs in its hospitals and
clinics, including the financial General Ledger and Cost Accounting applications. This case
study reviews the value of the EHR investment over time. HMC’s efforts were recognized by
being awarded HIMSS Analytics Stage 7 status in November 2013.
1. Background Knowledge
Hilo Medical Center (HMC) is a part of the East Hawai’i Region of the Hawai’i Health Systems
Corporation (HHSC) serving as a safety-net hospital for two critical access hospitals, Hale
Ho’ola Hamakua and Ka’u Hospital. The East Hawai’i Region also includes nine outpatient
clinics with specialties. HMC is a 276-bed facility comprised of 137 acute beds, 20 bed
behavioral health facility, and 119 bed long-term care facility. Overall, 72% of HMC's patients
have Medicare or Medicaid insurance.
Hilo Medical Center’s Emergency Department is an established Level III Trauma Center
providing 24 hour care for the community. The Emergency Department visits total
approximately 45,000 patients annually making it the second busiest in the State of Hawai’i.
Emergency Department visits range in caring for critically ill or critically injured to low acuity
patients not able to obtain primary care services.
The island of Hawai’i, also referred to as Hawai’i County can be compared in size to the land
area of Connecticut, Hawai’i Island is home to approximately 194,000 residentsi. The county
has three major hospitals and four critical access hospitals covering a land mass of 4,028 square
miles. Geographically, the three main hospitals are separated by at least 50 miles in distance and
an idyllic scenario for development of a robust EHR system.
Page | 1
The population by county shows Hawai’i County appropriating 15% of adults who are uninsured
in comparison to the City and County of Honolulu at 9.2%, Hawai’i County includes a higher
number of uninsured seniors than any other countyii. Death rates for cardiovascular disease,
smoking, and diabetes are also highest in the state compared to other countiesiii. As a whole,
Hawai’i County is designated as a Medically Underserved Area (MUA), 18.3% of the population
is living below the poverty level and 16% of patients stating they do not have a usual source of
health careiv. Physician shortages are estimated at 36% indicating an 18% higher rate than the
City and County of Oahuv.
Health care on Hawai’i Island is a collaboration of safety net services with limited access,
funding, and capacity when compared to the island of Oahu or large medical centers. Hilo
Medical Center is also the sole provider of emergency and acute care for the East Hawai’i region
and for the majority of Hawai’i County. Without the services provided by HMC health care in
the East Hawai’i community would be drastically affected.
2. Local Problem Addressed and Intended Improvement
As operating losses increased in 2009, HMC needed to invest in an EHR to address two major
problems: 1) the lack of an integrated clinical and hospital billing system had a negative impact
on revenue cycle operations and management; and, 2) the absence of a complete patient record
across the continuum of care adversely affected the availability of complete clinical information
and negatively impacting the provision of care in a timely manner.
HMC realized the entire revenue cycle process needed improvement from charge capture to
timely documentation in order to achieve a hard ROI (return on investment). Prior to the EHR
implementation, HMC had a high Bill Hold Days and Accounts Receivable Days. The previous
AR days were in excess of 100 days with 15% of the overall AR balance being contained in the
365+ aging bucket. The previous system and workflow limited patient account representative’s
ability to identify claims requiring higher priority due to revenue cycle staff focused on
collecting small balances that were remaining. HMC also needed to begin meaningfully using an
EHR by 2012 to meet the Federal Senate and 2013 Federal House Meaningful Use attestation
schedules.
HMC desired a complete patient record across the continuum of care with better confidentiality,
improved patient safety, 24-hour access to providers and patients, and improved productivity to
address the growing costs of the non-integrated system. HMC decided to consolidate 15 separate
systems into a single EHR, realizing that some users of specialized systems would lose
functionality for the greater good.
Prior to implementing the EHR, HMC’s Gross Revenues in Fiscal Year 2009 were
approximately $242M. Comparatively, in Fiscal Year 2011 revenues increased approximately
10%, which was primarily due to the increased charge capture by the EHR while census
remained primarily flat year over year. Software and hardware maintenance costs for the
existing applications were in excess of $2.5M annually. After the EHR implementation, annual
maintenance decreased to less than $1.0M for an annual savings of $1.5M.
Page | 2
3. Design and Implementation
Hilo Medical Center is a quasi-state facility affiliated with the State of Hawai’i to fulfill the
promise of providing quality rural healthcare and safety-net services. HMC faced two major
challenges:


First, to transform the organization from paper to electronic processes while maintaining
engagement with the hospital workforce and local physicians.
Second, to find a system with minimal resource and capital investment amid decreased
reimbursement rates and dependency on state appropriations.
HMC sought an all-inclusive solution built with the infrastructure to withstand numerous federal
mandates, incorporate other vendor systems, and integrate with legacy systems. The
organization searched for a partner with strong industry prominence, avoiding selecting a vendor
based solely on their software. It was essential the system be user friendly, provided quality
analytics, increased productivity and enhanced the delivery of safe patient care. If the system
selected did not prove its value or removed providers from direct patient care, overall adoption
would be at risk.
In January 2009, a multidisciplinary team assembled to complete a vendor selection process
through a stringent RFP, site visit and vendor demonstration endeavor. MEDITECH was
selected for its fully integrated clinical and financial system along with its single database
structure and robust data repository. The decision was approved by the East Hawai’i Regional
Board, and Hilo Medical Center hosted the official project kick-off in the fall of 2009.
HMC utilized a HSi product called valueTRAX® to monitor key metrics for the purpose of
“Measuring the Value of Change”, a hybrid model to achieve process and outcomes
optimization. The focus to achieve “Value On Investment” (VOI) from the EHR implementation
and other major process and workflow changes in the organization. A few of the key focus areas
are measurable targets, tangible results and change management. Dashboards and reports were
defined to fit HMC’s custom needs with the focus on achievement and sustainability of value.
Dashboards created and reported by HMC are Executive Dashboard, Total Cost of Change
(TCC), Benefits, Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), and Value on Investment (VOI). See
Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: valueTRAX Executive Dashboard
Page | 3
The methodology used by valueTRAX® is to define broad Key Performance Indicators for both
Benefits and Costs and then populate with more detailed metrics to accumulate value for each.
Ultimately, the “Total Cost of Change” TCC is deducted from the cumulative benefits to
calculate the “Value On Investment” (VOI); see Figure 2.
Figure 2: Value Management – Basic Model
4. How Health IT Was Utilized
HMC IT worked hand-in-hand with the EMR vendor to rapidly assimilate an EHR project team.
Application teams were largely comprised of resources from clinical and financial departments
in the organization and were established under the IT umbrella – most were new to system
implementation work. It was decided to bring experienced HSi consultants in to work alongside
team members as mentors, including the Project Director role. All IT technical resources were
involved in the implementation from new hardware assessment, ordering, rollout, desktop
support, Helpdesk support and interfaces development. It proved challenging shipping
workstations on wheels (WOWs) from the mainland in time to meet the go-live date.
The go-live on EHR core modules occurred in May 2010. In early 2011, HMC continued
implementing operating room management, community-wide scheduling, and bedside
medication verification followed by a “big bang” CPOE (Computerized Provider Order Entry)
Go-live in May 2011. During the fall of 2011 and early 2012, critical access hospitals Hale
Page | 4
Ho’ola Hamakua and Ka’u Hospital were added to the East Hawai’i electronic health record.
Throughout 2013, the region continued to optimize and added the EHR financials, cost
accounting, budget and forecasting, physician documentation and patient portal.
As a result of the valueTRAX® system and reports, HMC was able to monitor and trend areas
for improvement. HMC began mapping the key high impact processes for both current state and
best practice. Performance baselines for Metrics and KPI’s were then determined based on
historical performance using the current state processes. The cumulative value to benefits were
tracked over a 60 month period and can be seen below in the valueTRAX® screenshot; see
Figure 3.
Figure 3: Benefits (Cumulative)
Page | 5
The valueTRAX® dashboard screenshot below in Figure 4, depicts a graphical view of the Benefits
vs. TCC over 60 months. You can clearly identify when the benefits exceeded the monthly cost
and when the breakeven point occurred.
Figure 4: Value on Investment
Benefits: $35.874M
TCC: $31.890M
TCC Trend Line
VOI: $4.0M
Benefits Trend Line
VOI/Breakeven Point
EHR system tools were implemented by the revenue cycle teams to help reduce AR days. For
example, specific worklists were developed for key categories such as Financial Class, Aging,
Patient Account Follow-up and Bad-Debt. The system would assist staff to identify and
prioritize specific accounts requiring resolution. This enhancement allowed for clean claims to
be processed quickly and allowing funds to be received sooner. The new worklists helped
identify aged accounts to be transferred to the collection agencies or closed. Another
enhancement implemented in the EHR system were daily transmission of insurance claims and
receiving of electronic remittances automatically. Copayment and coinsurance cash collections
at the time of service was implemented using the EHR electronic “cash drawer” functionality.
The system workflow assisted staff to automate the receipt and posting of patient cash
collections. These processes and system changes were primary factors of reducing AR days
from a high of 109 days to a low of 52 days over a period of 3 years.
5. Value Derived/Outcomes
Hard ROI: Two primary reasons HMC selected MEDITECH over other vendors was: 1) the
requirement to control ongoing IT support costs that were in alignment with pre-implementation
levels; and, 2) minimal capital funding. HMC was able to maintain this goal and expanded the
IT support team with 5 clinical analyst to support the EHR. In total, the East Hawaii Region is
able to maintain the EHR system and all other IT operations with 21 FTEs. The IT staffing
model of 21 FTEs, is a remarkable achievement in supporting over 1,500 end-users across the
State of Hawaii. The targeted level was achieved even in light of supporting 3 separate hospitals
and 9 outpatient clinics in the East Hawaii Region. Total IT annual support cost averages $5M,
the EHR capital expenditures have all been funded from operations rather than financing. To
Page | 6
date, HMC has spent approximately $5M for software, hardware, and maintenance. HMC is
expected to receive a total of $5M in CMS and Medicaid Meaningful Use funds ($2.5M already
received). This represents a 100% ROI in less than 5 years.
HMC designed the EHR implementation timeline to begin addressing the core modules, to
include revenue cycle management. Accounts Receivable (AR) open days were consistently
above 100 days for the clinics prior to implementation of the system. The hospital goal was to
decrease AR days to less than 50. Post-implementation HMC’s hospital monthly data reflects a
steady fall of AR days to 58 by Q4 2013 where it has consistently remained (see Figure 1),
resulting in a hard ROI of $10M. HMC’s clinic monthly AR days fell from 107.1 days (Q1 2014)
to 33.3 days (Q4 2014) resulting in a hard ROI of $4M.
Figure 5: Financial Performance - AR Days
Additionally, the emergency department increased injection/infusion charges from $129,613 to
$2,262,900 between January 2012 and June 2014, i.e., a remarkable increase in revenue of
$2,133,287 for the period was achieved.
Figure 6: Imaging Film Savings
This was accomplished by revising the
assessments in the ED EHR module.
Integrated patient information addressed significant costs
incurred in imaging services. HMC removed film
processors and implemented a Radiology Information
System and Picture Archiving and Communication
System (RIS/PACS). Film storage was purged
and space repurposed. The Ultrasound
Department relocated and PowerScribe 360 was
implemented to improve report turnaround time. Imaging
report turnaround time decreased from 72 hours to 19
minutes. Imaging identifiers now appear in the EHR when
the final report is available to the clinicians. Since the EHR
implementation, imaging has accounted for $1,286,000 in
Figure 7: Film Storage Savings
Page | 7
film savings and $246,000 in imaging storage savings; see Figures 6 and 7. An additional
savings of $25,000 was derived from implementing the electronic signature. Achieving ARRA
Meaningful Use Stage 1 (2011) and 2 (2014) resulted in $2.5M in incentives.
Soft ROI: Improved EHR medication ordering, monitoring and reporting processes resulted in
decreasing costly duplicate orders, and providing cost savings for both the hospital and the
patient. Physicians now receive readily-accessible and accurate dose warnings, drug allergy
warnings and interaction warnings ensuring patients are receiving the right medication at the
right time, and with the right dose, route and reason. As a result, medication error rates dropped
from 23 to an average of 2.7 per 10,000 administered doses per month; see Figure 8.
Figure 8: Medication Error Rates
Page | 8
Operative report compliance was a
forward facing issue prior to
implementing the EHR. With effective
changes in management and processes,
improvement in the percentage of report
compliance from 12% in 2012 to 98%
by October 2014 occurred; see Figure
9.
Figure 9: Operative Report Compliance
Built in logic for physician orders elicit
healthcare providers to consider
alternatives or add instructions for
discharge. Order logic also associates
nursing assessments and reassessments
to the work list ensuring accurate core
measure reporting and compliance for stewardship programs. Nursing assessments and
interventions prompt reminders to nursing status boards, screen patients for risk, and reduce
redundant documentation across visits.
6. Lessons Learned
HMC’s goal was to create a system that increased the efficiency of clinical workflows. HMC
was faced with a decision to replace a Radiology Information System (RIS) that was
implemented the year prior. The decision to keep a newly implemented RIS or implement
MEDITECH’s Imaging and Therapeutic Module (ITS) was analyzed, HMC heavily weighed the
risk-to-benefit ratio and strived for one integrated system. HMC was determined not to settle for
anything less. HMC was able to complete a 6-month implementation in 3 months and went live
with ITS alongside the core modules.
In order to complete the project with broad organization input, HMC integrated formal change
control with the implementation. The culture of the organization was changed by engaging IT,
clinical analysts and department leaders in governance and change control. A newly formed
committee called Integrated Operation Review Forum (iORF) met weekly. Changes approved
by iORF moved to the Physician Integrated Review Forum (PiORF), which was composed of
physician leaders. PiORF presented key changes to the Medical Informatics Subcommittee and
Medical Executive Committee, resulting in effective physician communication and change
management.
As we have shown, there are real and tangible benefits to be achieved. The executive dashboard
displays approximately $4.0M net benefits realization (Value On Investment) at the 60 month
mark. The VOI has continued to accrue savings through continued monitoring and managing the
changes. Given the minimal on-going costs, the system will continue to increase its value
through future system optimizations and process management efficiencies.
The valueTRAX® methodology and tool has been used to both define and measure hard benefits
from our major organizational initiatives including an EHR implementation, Meaningful Use
Attestation and achievement of HIMSS Analytics Stages 6 and 7. Moreover, we have proven
Page | 9
clinical changes that yield improved quality outcomes and patient safety can also be measured in
fiscal terms. To achieve measurable value, there are a few core requirements to include a
commitment by leadership, measuring and managing the targets, process re-design, and
accountability.
7. Financial Considerations
HMC did not use external funding for the EHR project. All funding was from internal
operational sources, including hardware, software, consultant implementation resources, and
labor costs. The low cost of ownership for the EHR system was a key in eliminating the need for
external funding of approximately $8M.
Throughout the implementation initiative, HMC invested $31.01M in total costs with a resultant
net benefit value of $4M over the period. The actual-to-date cost breakdown is divided into the
following categories: a) operational costs: $19,379,517; b) vendor costs: $12,199,986; and, c)
on-going annual maintenance costs: $2,311,266.
The financial benefits of the EHR implementation are noted in the spreadsheet; see Figure 10
below.
Figure 10: HMC Financial Information
Benefits Realization
2009
Reduced Drug Costs
Reduced OT: Nursing
Decreased Payment Denials
Reduced A/R Days
Paper Cost and Coordination
Increased Charge Capture
Increased Physician Satisfaction
Increased Employee Satisfaction
Reduced Length of Stay (ALOS)
Increased Patient Co-Pay Collections
Incorrect Coding Improvement
Increased CPOE Utilization
Decreased Transcription Costs
Decreased Ulcer Rates
Reduce Software Maintenance Costs
Reduced Writeoffs
Meaningful Use
2010
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
-
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
991,359.00
19,558.00
74,475.00
22,856.00
-
$ 1,108,248
2011
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,456,648.00
1,003,331.00
559,091.00
503,021.00
407,113.00
593,900.00
248,767.00
99,412.00
291,740.00
148,076.00
1,001,887.00
252,199.00
$ 6,565,185
2012
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1,539,053.00
499,431.00
1,002,951.00
574,348.00
523,545.00
1,573,856.00
600,881.00
248,002.00
101,345.00
464,226.00
151,426.00
1,007,277.00
1,010,741.00
$ 9,297,082
2013
Total
$ 2,697,642.00 $
$
515,045.00 $
$ 1,003,040.00 $
$
575,151.00 $
$
526,341.00 $
$ 10,073,234.00 $
$
$
$
$
$
627,136.00 $
$
246,947.00 $
$
$
$
$
$
101,771.00 $
$
673,127.00 $
$
152,394.00 $
$
702,884.00 $
$ 1,009,169.00 $
$18,903,881
5,693,343.00
1,014,476.00
4,000,681.00
1,708,590.00
1,552,907.00
12,054,203.00
1,821,917.00
763,274.00
302,528.00
1,503,568.00
474,752.00
2,712,048.00
2,272,109.00
$ 35,874,396
Page | 10
Total Cost of Change
Key Performance Indicators
2009
Vendor Proposed Cost
$
Software License - Interfaces & Conversions
Hardware Configuration and Cost
System Customization/Additional License Fees
Implementation Resource requirements - Vendor
Training - Project Team
Travel Expenses - Vendor
3rd Party Standard Content Vendor - Zynx Health
3rd Party Standard Content Vendor - First Databank
3rd Party Standard Content Vendor - Intelligent Medical Objects (IMO)
3rd Party Standard Content Vendor - DrFirst
3rd Party Consulting Resources (Implem. support and process redesign)
3rd Party Hardware and Maintenance
Critical Care Device Interfaces
On-Going Annual Maintenance
Software Maintenance (Annual)
Hardware Maintenance Costs (Annual)
Interface Maintenance (Annual)
3rd Party Maintenance (Annual)
Organizational Costs
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
GRAND TOTAL
(1,890,000.00)
(750,000.00)
(1,200,000.00)
(219,999.00)
(300,000.00)
(75,000.00)
(110,000.00)
(100,000.00)
(1,300,002.00)
(49,998.00)
-
2011
(3,959,996.00) $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(309,999.00)
(499,998.00)
(600,000.00)
(99,999.00)
(150,000.00)
(1,300,002.00)
(49,998.00)
(950,000.00)
(451,254.00) $
$
-
$
$
$
$
$
-
$
$
$
$
$
PC/Printer Requirements ($1500) Compaq Desktop/HP Laser Jet
Laptop Requirements (300 Laptops)
Citrix Servers
Wireless Requirements ($1400-$1700) Fujitsu P1000 Lifebook (250 Devices)
Wireless Hub configuration - hardware - installation costs
BarCode Readers (300)
Mobile Carts for Devices (300 Carts)
PDAs - Sleds ($1000) 250 Devices
Internal Implementation Resource requirements - including Go Live
3rd Party Resource Requirements
Remote Connectivity (Physician Offices/Homes - Remote Clinics)
End User Training - 3rd Party Vendor
Trainers - Nursing
End User Training - classroom projectors - video dev - software/courseware
Staff Backfill - Nursing
Staff Backfill - Other Clinical
Staff Backfill - Business
Staff Backfill - Technical (Financial)
Travel Expenses - Vendor Training
Travel Expenses - Consulting Resources
Travel Expenses - 3rd Party Vendor Training
Single Sign-on Software
Nursing Station Build out
IT Computer Room Build out
Contingency Funds
2010
(5,994,999.00) $
(8,198,509.00) $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(300,000.00)
(200,004.00)
(170,000.00)
(5,300,004.00)
(600,000.00)
(100,000.00)
(8,500.00)
(999,996.00)
(200,004.00)
(20,001.00)
(50,000.00)
(250,000.00)
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(14,193,508) $
(200,004.00)
(150,000.00)
(45,000.00)
(56,250.00)
(199,998.00)
(249,999.00)
(249,999.00)
(120,000.00)
(499,998.00)
(24,999.00)
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(620,004.00) $
$
$
$
$
(300,000.00)
(200,004.00)
(45,000.00)
(75,000.00)
(7,721,007.00) $
(300,000.00)
(140,004.00)
(40,000.00)
(680,000.00)
(1,200,000.00)
(450,000.00)
(451,000.00)
(50,000.00)
(2,150,001.00)
(400,000.00)
(250,000.00)
(50,000.00)
(999,996.00)
(200,004.00)
(125,001.00)
(35,001.00)
(200,000.00)
2012
(1,344,993.00) $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(199,998.00)
(300,000.00)
(200,004.00)
(45,000.00)
(75,000.00)
(50,001.00)
(9,999.00)
(250,000.00)
(300,000.00)
(1,050,003.00)
(499,998.00)
-
(12,132,257) $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(4,124,998) $
$
$
$
$
Total
-
$
(11,499,986.00)
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(2,399,997.00)
(999,999.00)
(749,997.00)
(1,800,000.00)
(319,998.00)
(450,000.00)
(75,000.00)
(110,000.00)
(120,000.00)
(100,000.00)
(3,300,000.00)
(124,995.00)
(950,000.00)
(620,004.00) $
(2,311,266.00)
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(620,004.00) $
(2,160,001.00) $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
2013
(199,998.00) $
(300,000.00)
(200,004.00)
(45,000.00)
(75,000.00)
$
$
$
$
(1,100,004.00)
(750,012.00)
(180,000.00)
(281,250.00)
-
$
-
$
(18,079,517.00)
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
-
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
(650,001.00)
(350,007.00)
(40,000.00)
(1,100,000.00)
(1,500,000.00)
(450,000.00)
(451,000.00)
(50,000.00)
(8,500,008.00)
(1,000,000.00)
(250,000.00)
(150,000.00)
(8,500.00)
(2,499,990.00)
(400,008.00)
(125,001.00)
(55,002.00)
(50,000.00)
(250,000.00)
(200,000.00)
(620,004) $
(31,890,769)
(820,002) $
Value On Investment
2009
Benefits $
2010
-
2011
2012
2013
Total
$
1,108,248 $
6,565,185 $
9,297,082 $
18,903,881
$
35,874,396
TCC
$
(14,193,508) $
(12,132,257) $
(4,124,998) $
(820,002) $
(620,004)
$
31,890,769
VOI
$
(14,193,508) $
(11,024,009) $
2,440,187 $
8,477,080 $
18,283,877
$
3,983,627
HMC is a 2015 recipient of Healthgrades Patient Safety Excellence Award™ and Get With The
Guidelines®–Heart Failure Gold Quality Achievement Award for implementing specific quality
improvement measures outlined by the American Heart Association/American College of
Cardiology Foundation and a past recipient of the Mountain Pacific Quality Health's Quality
Achievement Award. In 2012, HMC was recognized by the insurer HMSA as Hawaii's leading
hospital in improving quality and reducing the cost of providing care. HMC was also named 2012
Press Ganey Top Improver Award winner for patient satisfaction for improvements. In 2014,
HMC received the American Heart Association Silver Award for cardiac care. In 2013 and 2014,
HMC was recognized for quality long term care by Providigm for Quality Assurance &
Performance Improvement Accredited Facility and Embracing Quality Award for the Prevention
of Hospital Readmissions. HMC’s long term care met the requirements for the American Health
Care Association's Three Tier Level Quality Initiative Recognition Program. These awards speak
Page | 11
to HMC’s dedication to achieving effective, affordable care across the continuum for its diverse
patient population.
i
Hawaii Island Beacon CoMunity. (2013). Final Report. Retrieved from:
http://hibeacon.org/images/uploads/HIBC_FINAL_REPORT_12-27-2013.pdf
ii
University of Hawai’i System Report. (2015). Hawaii Physician Workforce Assessment Project. Retrieved from:
http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/eaur/govrel/reports/2015/act18-sslh2009_2015_physician-workforce_report.pdf
iii
Hawaii Island Beacon CoMunity. (2013). Final Report. Retrieved from:
http://hibeacon.org/images/uploads/HIBC_FINAL_REPORT_12-27-2013.pdf
iv
Hawaii Health Matters. (2015). Disparities Dashboard, indicators for county: Hawaii. Retrieved from:
http://www.hawaiihealthmatters.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=NSIndicator&file=index&topic=0&topic1=County&topic2=Hawaii&breakout=all&regname=Hawaii
v
University of Hawai’i System Report. (2015). Hawaii Physician Workforce Assessment Project. Retrieved from:
http://www.hawaii.edu/offices/eaur/govrel/reports/2015/act18-sslh2009_2015_physician-workforce_report.pdf
Page | 12