MIPS Value Pathways (MVPs) represent the most significant evolution of MIPS reporting since the Quality Payment Program launched. Rather than navigating the sprawling catalog of Quality measures and Improvement Activities to assemble a Traditional MIPS submission, Georgia specialty clinicians can now select a CMS-curated bundle of measures and activities specifically aligned to their specialty, condition, or patient population, submitting under an MVP. For Atlanta cardiology practices, Macon orthopedic surgeons, Savannah ophthalmologists, and Augusta emergency physicians, MVPs offer a substantially streamlined path through MIPS. And because CMS has signaled MVPs as the long-term direction of MIPS reporting, with Traditional MIPS likely sunsetting in future years, understanding MVPs is no longer optional for Georgia specialty practices.

By Brevy Care Team

The statutory and regulatory foundation

MIPS Value Pathways exist under the same statutory authority as Traditional MIPS:

  • Section 1848(q) of the Social Security Act: MIPS statutory authority added by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (MACRA)
  • 42 CFR Part 414, Subpart O: MIPS implementing regulations
  • CY 2022 PFS Final Rule: established the MVP framework, the first MVPs, and the Subgroup reporting concept
  • Annual PFS Final Rules: add new MVPs, modify existing MVPs, refine the Foundational Layer, and adjust Subgroup reporting

MVPs are available as a voluntary reporting option. CMS has signaled that MVP-only reporting may eventually replace Traditional MIPS, though the timing of any mandatory transition remains subject to future rulemaking.

What an MVP Is and What It Isn't

An MVP is a CMS-curated reporting bundle aligned to a specialty, condition, or patient population. Each MVP includes:

  • A Foundational Layer (common to all MVPs):
    • A Population Health Measure (e.g., Hospital-Wide All-Cause Readmissions)
    • Promoting Interoperability measure set (same as Traditional MIPS PI)
  • A Quality measure subset: 4 Quality measures including at least 1 outcome or high-priority measure (selected from a smaller MVP-specific list, not the full catalog)
  • Cost measures auto-attributed based on MVP scope (e.g., Heart Disease MVP attributes cardiology-related Episode-Based Cost Measures)
  • Improvement Activities: selected from an MVP-aligned subset of activities with the same scoring structure as Traditional MIPS

What MVPs do not change:

  • Final Score is still calculated 0-100 from the same four MIPS categories with the same category weights
  • Performance Threshold remains unchanged from Traditional MIPS
  • Maximum payment adjustment remains unchanged from Traditional MIPS
  • Eligible clinician types are the same as Traditional MIPS
  • Low-volume threshold exclusion is the same as Traditional MIPS
  • Performance Year to Payment Year offset is unchanged

MVPs change the measure selection process, not the scoring methodology or payment consequences.

The MVP inventory (illustrative, annually updated)

CMS publishes the full MVP inventory annually. The inventory has grown each year since launch and now spans many specialties and conditions. Notable MVPs include (without enumerating every measure within each):

Primary care and chronic conditions:

  • Value in Primary Care MVP
  • Coordinating Care for Patients With Chronic Conditions MVP
  • Promoting Wellness MVP
  • Patient-Centered Specialty Care MVP

Cardiology:

  • Heart Disease MVP (formerly Advancing Care for Heart Disease)
  • Stroke Care MVP

Orthopedics and Surgery:

  • Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP
  • Surgical Care MVP

Emergency Medicine and Hospital-Based:

  • Emergency Medicine MVP
  • Anesthesia MVP

Specialty Medicine:

  • Rheumatology MVP
  • Ophthalmologic Care MVP
  • Pulmonology MVP
  • Dermatologic Care MVP
  • Gastroenterology MVP
  • Infectious Disease MVP

Behavioral and Specialty Populations:

  • Mental Health and Substance Use Disorder MVP
  • Neurodegenerative Conditions MVP

Post-Acute and Long-Term Care:

  • Skilled Nursing Facility MVP

Renal:

  • Optimal Care for Kidney Health MVP

Additional MVPs are added annually via the PFS Final Rule rulemaking process. CMS works with specialty societies (AMA, American College of Cardiology, American Academy of Ophthalmology, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, etc.) to develop and refine MVPs.

The Foundational Layer

Every MVP includes the same Foundational Layer:

Population Health Measure

  • Auto-calculated by CMS from administrative claims
  • Typically Hospital-Wide All-Cause Readmissions (CMS-developed measure)
  • Or a similar population-health-focused measure
  • One required for the Foundational Layer
  • Subject to case minimum

Promoting Interoperability

  • Same PI measure set as Traditional MIPS
  • CEHRT required (ONC-certified)
  • Electronic Prescribing, HIE, Patient Access, Public Health and Clinical Data Exchange
  • Security Risk Analysis, SAFER Guides, information blocking attestation
  • Same scoring as Traditional MIPS PI

The Foundational Layer ensures that every MVP submission includes population health accountability and certified EHR technology demonstration, even as the Quality measure subset narrows.

Subgroup reporting under MVPs

A key innovation of the MVP framework is Subgroup reporting, authorized for MVP submissions:

  • A Subgroup is a subset of a TIN with a shared specialty or care focus
  • A multi-specialty group can register multiple Subgroups
  • Each Subgroup reports under its own MVP
  • Each Subgroup receives its own Final Score and payment adjustment
  • Different Subgroups can submit different MVPs

This solves a key Traditional MIPS problem: in a multi-specialty group reporting at the TIN level, all clinicians received a single Final Score regardless of specialty, often producing measure mismatch for specialty clinicians. Subgroup MVP reporting allows orthopedics within a multi-specialty group to report Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP while primary care reports Value in Primary Care MVP, with each Subgroup scored on its specialty-aligned measure set.

Subgroup reporting requires:

  • Group registration during the MVP registration window
  • Designation of Subgroup composition (NPIs)
  • Selection of the MVP for each Subgroup
  • Coordination of submission across Subgroups

The MVP registration process

MVP reporting requires registration during a CMS-designated window. Steps include:

  1. Identify eligible clinicians: Individual NPIs, Group TIN, or Virtual Group must be MIPS-eligible
  2. Select the MVP: Choose from the published MVP inventory aligned to specialty/condition
  3. Register during the MVP registration period: Typically opens in spring of the performance year, closes in late fall of the performance year
  4. For Groups: register at TIN level
  5. For Subgroups: register Subgroup composition and MVP selection
  6. For Virtual Groups: register Virtual Group composition first (December 31 of year before the performance year), then MVP at the Virtual Group level
  7. For Individuals: register at NPI level

Note: Individual MVP reporting does not require formal pre-registration. Individual clinicians may simply select an MVP at submission time. Group, Subgroup, and Virtual Group MVP reporting requires registration.

The MVP Quality measure subset (4 measures)

Under Traditional MIPS, clinicians select Quality measures from the full catalog. Under MVPs:

  • 4 Quality measures required
  • Selected from the MVP's curated measure subset (typically 8-15 measures per MVP)
  • Including at least 1 outcome measure or high-priority measure (same as Traditional MIPS)
  • Same scoring (1-10 points per measure based on national benchmarks, deciles)
  • Same data completeness threshold as Traditional MIPS
  • Same topped-out measure cap as Traditional MIPS
  • Same submission options (eCQMs, MIPS CQMs, QCDR measures, administrative claims, Medicare Part B claims for small practices)

The reduced measure count (4 vs. the Traditional MIPS requirement) and reduced selection pool (8-15 per MVP vs. the full catalog) substantially simplifies measure selection for specialty practices.

Cost measure attribution under MVPs

Each MVP specifies which Cost measures attribute to MVP participants:

  • Heart Disease MVP: Acute Myocardial Infarction episode-based cost measure, Heart Failure EBCM, Coronary Artery Bypass Graft EBCM (where applicable), TPCC
  • Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP: Elective Primary Hip Arthroplasty EBCM, Elective Primary Knee Arthroplasty EBCM
  • Emergency Medicine MVP: MSPB Clinician (episode around ED visit), specific ED-related EBCMs
  • Value in Primary Care MVP: TPCC, certain primary-care-relevant EBCMs

CMS auto-attributes Cost measures based on claims; clinicians need not "select" Cost measures. The MVP framework simply narrows which Cost measures will be scored.

If no Cost measures meet case minimum thresholds, Cost weight is reweighted to other categories (same as Traditional MIPS).

Improvement Activities under MVPs

Each MVP specifies a subset of Improvement Activities aligned to the specialty or condition. Clinicians select from this subset rather than the full Improvement Activities catalog. The scoring rules are unchanged from Traditional MIPS:

  • Same point total required as Traditional MIPS
  • High-weighted activities worth more points than medium-weighted activities
  • Same minimum activity period as Traditional MIPS
  • Double weighting for small practice, rural, HPSA, non-patient facing

The MVP IA subset typically includes 10-20 activities aligned to the specialty, making selection much faster than navigating the full catalog.

Final Score, Performance Threshold, and payment adjustment

MVP submissions produce a Final Score 0-100 calculated exactly the same way as Traditional MIPS, with the same category weights:

  • Quality
  • Cost
  • Promoting Interoperability
  • Improvement Activities

The Performance Threshold and maximum payment adjustment remain the same as Traditional MIPS. The budget-neutral methodology remains in place.

MVPs do not provide a scoring bonus relative to Traditional MIPS; they provide a reporting simplification.

Eligible reporting paths under MVPs

MVPs can be reported via:

  • Individual (NPI-level)
  • Group (TIN-level)
  • Subgroup (TIN-subset; MVP-specific innovation)
  • Virtual Group (small clinician group across multiple TINs)
  • APM Entity reporting under APP (parallel pathway for ACO participants)

Note: APP and MVP are alternative streamlined reporting paths. Clinicians submit one or the other, not both. APP is specifically for MIPS APM participants (e.g., MSSP ACO members); MVP is for non-APM specialty reporting.

Future trajectory: MVP-only reporting?

CMS has signaled that MVPs are the long-term direction of MIPS reporting:

  • CY 2022 PFS Final Rule stated CMS's intent to eventually transition all MIPS reporting to MVPs
  • Subsequent PFS Final Rules have expanded the MVP inventory and added Subgroup reporting
  • CY 2024 PFS Final Rule signaled MVP expansion intent
  • Mandatory MVP reporting has not yet been finalized; future rulemaking will determine timing

For Georgia specialty practices, this trajectory means:

  • Investing in MVP reporting infrastructure now positions practices for future mandatory transition
  • Choosing the right MVP for each specialty/Subgroup matters more over time
  • Specialty society engagement in MVP development is increasingly important

Georgia provider implications

Wellstar Health System

Wellstar's specialty service lines (cardiology, orthopedics, neurology, oncology, women's health, etc.) are well-positioned for MVP and Subgroup reporting. Wellstar's group-level reporting infrastructure under Traditional MIPS can be re-organized into Subgroups aligned to MVPs.

Emory Healthcare Network

Emory's multi-specialty academic medical center setup is a textbook case for Subgroup MVP reporting: different MVPs for primary care, cardiology, oncology, neurology, surgery, etc., all under the Emory TIN.

Piedmont Healthcare

Piedmont's broad multi-specialty footprint similarly benefits from Subgroup MVP reporting, especially as Piedmont expands across Georgia.

Northside Hospital System

Northside Physician Network's specialty practices (cardiology, OB-GYN, oncology, orthopedics) align well with available MVPs.

Independent Georgia specialty practices

Solo and small Georgia specialty practices benefit most from MVPs:

  • Reduced measure selection burden
  • Specialty-aligned measures
  • Less catalog navigation
  • Lower compliance complexity

A Macon ophthalmologist reporting Traditional MIPS must navigate the full Quality measure catalog looking for cataract surgery measures, glaucoma measures, etc. The Ophthalmologic Care MVP curates these measures, dramatically simplifying selection.

Georgia Subgroup-eligible multi-specialty groups

Multi-specialty groups in Georgia, both major systems and large independent groups, gain the most from Subgroup MVP reporting. A 50-physician multi-specialty group can register Subgroups for primary care, cardiology, orthopedics, and behavioral health, each reporting a different MVP aligned to its specialty.

FQHCs and RHCs

  • FQHC PPS-paid services remain not subject to MIPS (and therefore not MVPs)
  • Part B-billed FQHC clinicians may participate in MVPs
  • RHC AIR-paid services remain not subject

Worked examples

Example 1: Fulton 70, Atlanta PCP using Value in Primary Care MVP

Dr. Patel, age 70, solo internal medicine in Buckhead. PY 2024:

  • MVP selected: Value in Primary Care MVP
  • Foundational Layer: Hospital-Wide All-Cause Readmissions (auto-calculated); PI via Athenahealth CEHRT
  • Quality (4 measures): CMS122 (HbA1c control), CMS165 (Hypertension Control), CMS147 (Influenza Immunization), CMS122 outcome, all curated within Value in Primary Care MVP
  • Cost: TPCC auto-attributed
  • IA: Activities from MVP IA pool meeting the required point total; small practice double weighting applies
  • Final Score 84, Payment Year 2026 adjustment positive

Example 2: DeKalb 75, Emory cardiologist using Heart Disease MVP

Dr. Hoang, age 75, interventional cardiology at Emory Saint Joseph's. PY 2024 reporting via Heart Disease MVP at Subgroup level under Emory TIN:

  • MVP selected: Heart Disease MVP
  • Foundational Layer: Population health measure; PI via Emory CEHRT
  • Quality (4): Heart-disease-specific measures (e.g., Antiplatelet Therapy in CAD patients, ACE Inhibitor/ARB in HF, Lipid Management, Beta Blocker in MI patients)
  • Cost: AMI episode-based cost measure auto-attributed
  • IA: Cardiology-aligned activities from MVP IA pool
  • Subgroup Final Score 83 specific to Emory cardiology subgroup
  • Payment Year 2026 adjustment positive

Example 3: Cobb 68, Marietta orthopedic practice using Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP

Dr. Williams, age 68, leads a four-orthopedic-surgeon practice in Marietta. PY 2024:

  • MVP selected: Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP
  • Foundational Layer: Population health measure; PI via Athenahealth CEHRT
  • Quality (4): TKA-specific outcome measure (postoperative complications, readmissions), preoperative process measures
  • Cost: Elective Primary Hip Arthroplasty EBCM + Elective Primary Knee Arthroplasty EBCM auto-attributed
  • IA: Orthopedic-aligned activities
  • Small practice bonus and double-weighted IA apply
  • Final Score 79, Payment Year 2026 adjustment positive

Example 4: Worth County 72, rural Coordinating Care MVP

Albany Area Primary Health Care FQHC Worth County site. Dr. Johnson, age 72, internist:

  • FQHC PPS-paid services NOT subject to MIPS
  • Part B-billed chronic care management (CCM) services subject to MIPS
  • MVP selected: Coordinating Care for Patients With Chronic Conditions MVP (for the Part B-billed CCM clinician portion)
  • However, Aledade Georgia ACO MSSP BASIC E participation provides QP status, making Dr. Johnson MIPS-exempt
  • Illustrates MVP relevance when not in QP status

Example 5: Bibb 80, Macon Ophthalmologic Care MVP

Dr. Chen, age 80, solo ophthalmologist in Macon. PY 2024:

  • MVP selected: Ophthalmologic Care MVP
  • Foundational Layer: Population health measure; PI via specialty EHR
  • Quality (4): Cataract surgery outcome measures, diabetic retinopathy screening, glaucoma management measures, AMD measures, all curated within Ophthalmologic Care MVP
  • Cost: Ophthalmology-relevant cost measures (where attributable)
  • IA: Ophthalmology-aligned activities (e.g., implementing tools for ophthalmology continuity of care)
  • Final Score 78, Payment Year 2026 adjustment positive

Example 6: Hall 67, Northside Subgroup MVP reporting

Northside Hospital Gainesville multi-specialty practice. Dr. Singh, age 67, cardiologist:

  • Northside multi-specialty TIN
  • Multiple Subgroups registered: Primary Care Subgroup (Value in Primary Care MVP), Cardiology Subgroup (Heart Disease MVP), Orthopedics Subgroup (Lower Extremity Joint Repair MVP), Surgery Subgroup (Surgical Care MVP)
  • Each Subgroup receives own Final Score and payment adjustment
  • Dr. Singh's Cardiology Subgroup Final Score 85
  • Payment Year 2026 adjustment positive for all Cardiology Subgroup clinicians

Best practices for Georgia MVP reporters

  1. Review the MVP inventory annually: CMS adds new MVPs each year; the right MVP for a practice may shift
  2. Choose the MVP closest aligned to specialty/condition: Better alignment means more relevant measures and easier reporting
  3. Plan Subgroup reporting for multi-specialty groups: Register Subgroups during the MVP registration window; coordinate across specialty service lines
  4. Coordinate MVP registration with QPP timeline: Group/Subgroup/Virtual Group registration deadlines differ; don't miss them
  5. Map MVP Quality measures to existing reporting: Many practices already submit relevant measures; MVP often consolidates rather than introducing new measures
  6. Verify Cost measure attribution: Check that MVP-relevant Cost measures will actually attribute to MVP clinicians based on case volume
  7. Select IA activities efficiently: MVP IA pool is curated; small/rural/HPSA double weighting still applies
  8. Engage specialty society resources: AMA, ACC, AAO, AAOS, etc. publish MVP guidance
  9. Test reporting through CEHRT vendor: Confirm EHR can submit MVP measures correctly
  10. Train coding/billing staff on MVP submission: Submission paths and identifiers differ slightly from Traditional MIPS
  11. Monitor MVP performance feedback: Review July performance feedback; submit Targeted Review within 60 days if errors
  12. Watch for future MVP mandate rulemaking: Stay current with annual PFS Final Rules
  13. Document Subgroup composition: NPI lists, specialty justification, MVP selection rationale
  14. Coordinate with ACO participation: If APM participant, use APP instead of MVP (cannot do both)

Common MVP issues for Georgia clinicians

  1. Missing the MVP registration window: Group/Subgroup MVP registration requires action during the registration period
  2. Selecting an inappropriate MVP: Choosing an MVP that doesn't align with practice mix means measure mismatch
  3. Subgroup composition errors: Including NPIs in wrong Subgroups produces misattributed Final Scores
  4. Confusing MVP and APP: APP for ACO participants; MVP for non-APM specialty reporting; clinicians can't do both
  5. Inadequate Cost measure case volume: MVP-relevant Cost measures may not meet case minimum if practice volume insufficient
  6. Forgetting Foundational Layer: Population health measure and PI are required even within MVP; missing means score reduction
  7. Treating MVPs as automatic bonus: MVPs simplify reporting but don't provide scoring bonus
  8. Missing Subgroup registration deadline: Cannot retroactively form Subgroups; must register during window
  9. MVP-IA mismatch: Selecting non-MVP-aligned IA activities means inefficiency (use MVP IA pool)
  10. CEHRT vendor not MVP-ready: Some EHRs lag on MVP submission support; verify before performance year
  11. Specialty society MVP unavailable: If no MVP for the specialty, must use Traditional MIPS
  12. Multi-MVP confusion: One MVP per clinician/Subgroup per performance year
  13. Virtual Group MVP coordination: Virtual Group MVP requires Virtual Group registration first
  14. Mid-year Subgroup composition changes: Cannot change Subgroup composition after registration deadline

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is a MIPS Value Pathway (MVP)? An MVP is a CMS-curated MIPS reporting bundle that combines a Foundational Layer (Population Health Measure + Promoting Interoperability), 4 Quality measures (including 1 outcome or high-priority), MVP-aligned Cost measures, and MVP-aligned Improvement Activities. MVPs are aligned to specialties, conditions, or patient populations.

2. When did MVPs launch? MVPs were established by the CY 2022 PFS Final Rule and launched as a voluntary reporting option.

3. Is MVP reporting mandatory? Not currently. MVPs are voluntary. CMS has signaled mandatory MVP transition in the future, but timing remains subject to future rulemaking.

4. How is an MVP different from Traditional MIPS? MVPs use a curated measure subset (smaller measure pool aligned to specialty/condition) and require only 4 Quality measures. Scoring methodology, Final Score, Performance Threshold, and maximum payment adjustment are the same as Traditional MIPS.

5. What MVPs are currently available? The inventory grows annually. Examples: Heart Disease, Lower Extremity Joint Repair, Value in Primary Care, Emergency Medicine, Anesthesia, Ophthalmologic Care, Rheumatology, Stroke Care, Mental Health and SUD, Pulmonology, Dermatologic Care, Gastroenterology, Surgical Care, Skilled Nursing Facility, Optimal Kidney Health, Coordinating Care for Chronic Conditions, and many more.

6. What is the Foundational Layer? Components common to every MVP: a Population Health Measure (auto-calculated, e.g., Hospital-Wide All-Cause Readmissions) and the Promoting Interoperability category (same as Traditional MIPS PI).

7. What is Subgroup reporting? A reporting innovation specific to MVPs allowing a subset of a TIN to report under its own MVP with its own Final Score and payment adjustment. Enables multi-specialty groups to apply different MVPs to specialty subsets.

8. How does MVP registration work? Individual clinicians can select an MVP at submission time. Groups, Subgroups, and Virtual Groups must register during the MVP registration window (typically spring through late fall of the performance year).

9. Can I do both MVP and APP? No. APP (APM Performance Pathway) is for MIPS APM participants (e.g., MSSP ACO members). MVP is for non-APM specialty reporting. Clinicians choose one streamlined path or report Traditional MIPS.

10. How many Quality measures does an MVP require? 4 Quality measures, including at least 1 outcome measure or high-priority measure. Selected from the MVP-curated subset (typically 8-15 measures per MVP).

11. Are Cost measures different under MVPs? The Cost calculation methodology is unchanged (auto-attribution from claims). MVPs specify which Cost measures are scored for MVP participants (typically those aligned to the MVP's specialty/condition focus).

12. Are Improvement Activities different under MVPs? The point total requirement and high-weighted/medium-weighted structure are unchanged. MVPs specify a subset of Improvement Activities aligned to the specialty/condition, making selection easier.

13. Does the Performance Threshold change for MVPs? No. The Performance Threshold for MVPs is the same as Traditional MIPS.

14. Does the maximum payment adjustment change for MVPs? No. The maximum payment adjustment is the same as Traditional MIPS, with budget-neutral scaling.

15. Does Special Status (small practice, rural, HPSA, non-patient facing) still apply? Yes. Special status determinations and associated bonuses/reweighting apply the same way under MVPs as under Traditional MIPS.

16. Does the low-volume threshold exclusion still apply? Yes. The low-volume threshold exclusion is unchanged.

17. Can solo clinicians use MVPs? Yes. Solo clinicians can select an MVP at the individual NPI level without pre-registration (though confirming MVP capability with the CEHRT vendor is recommended).

18. How do major Georgia integrated systems use MVPs? Wellstar, Emory, Piedmont, and Northside use Subgroup MVP reporting to apply specialty-aligned MVPs across their multi-specialty TINs. Each specialty Subgroup receives its own Final Score.

19. What happens if no MVP exists for my specialty? You can report Traditional MIPS instead. Specialty societies are working with CMS to add MVPs annually.

20. Can I submit multiple MVPs? No. One MVP per clinician/Subgroup per performance year. If a clinician spans multiple specialties, choose the MVP best aligned to the practice mix or use Subgroup reporting.

21. How is the MVP Final Score calculated? Same as Traditional MIPS: Quality, Cost, Promoting Interoperability, and Improvement Activities categories with the same weights. Categories sum to 0-100 with weighted aggregation.

22. What is the Targeted Review process for MVPs? Same as Traditional MIPS: request correction of scoring errors within 60 days of receiving performance feedback (typically available in July following the performance year).

23. Are MVPs available for FQHC clinicians? FQHC PPS-paid services remain not subject to MIPS (and therefore not MVPs). Part B-billed FQHC clinicians may use MVPs where applicable.

24. What is the relationship between MVPs and Advanced APMs? MVPs are within MIPS. Clinicians achieving QP status in an Advanced APM are exempt from MIPS (including MVPs). MIPS APM participants who are not QPs can use APP rather than MVP.

25. Where can Georgia specialty clinicians get MVP technical assistance? QPP Service Center (qpp.cms.gov); Acentra Health QIO (free Georgia MVP technical assistance); specialty societies (AMA, ACC, AAO, AAOS, etc.); Medical Association of Georgia (MAG).

Resources and Contacts

For MVP questions:

  • QPP Service Center: qpp.cms.gov
  • Medicare: 1-800-MEDICARE (1-800-633-4227)
  • Palmetto GBA Part A/B MAC Jurisdiction J: 1-866-238-9650
  • Acentra Health QIO (Georgia): free MVP technical assistance available
  • GeorgiaCares SHIP: Georgia's State Health Insurance Assistance Program
  • Medicare Rights Center: 1-800-333-4114
  • Atlanta Legal Aid Society: 404-377-0701
  • Georgia Legal Services Program: 1-800-498-9469
  • 211 Georgia: Dial 211
  • Eldercare Locator: 1-800-677-1116
  • Social Security Administration: 1-800-772-1213
  • Benefits Coordination & Recovery Center (BCRC): 1-855-798-2627
  • Medical Association of Georgia (MAG): mag.org
  • Georgia Composite Medical Board: 404-656-3913
  • AMA CPT/Coding Resources: ama-assn.org
  • Specialty Society Resources: ACC, AAO, AAOS, ACEP, ACS, etc.
  • CMS Innovation Center: innovation.cms.gov

Why MVPs matter for specialty-focused Georgia clinicians

MIPS Value Pathways represent the future of MIPS reporting. For Atlanta cardiology practices billing across Emory or Piedmont, for Macon orthopedic groups, for Augusta ophthalmologists, for Savannah emergency physicians, MVPs offer measurable simplification: fewer Quality measures; a curated subset of specialty-aligned measures instead of the full catalog; a curated IA pool; auto-attributed specialty-relevant Cost measures; and Subgroup reporting that finally allows multi-specialty groups to apply specialty-aligned measures to specialty subsets. The same Final Score methodology. The same Performance Threshold. The same maximum payment adjustment. The same budget-neutral methodology. Different, and substantially better, measure selection. As CMS moves toward potential mandatory MVP reporting, every Georgia specialty practice should evaluate the available MVPs aligned to its specialty mix, plan Subgroup composition for multi-specialty groups, and integrate MVP-aligned measures into its existing quality reporting infrastructure. MIPS Value Pathways are the QPP's specialty future, and that future is already here.

Find personalized help navigating MIPS Value Pathways at brevy.com.

BC

Brevy Care Team

Expert eldercare guidance from Brevy's team of healthcare professionals and researchers.