A common basis for comparison
Start with the regional role and the current payment baseline. Then compare selected designs by the resources retained, the conditions to satisfy and, where cash is proposed, the first feasible payment date.
Verified services and use, service-specific alternatives, travel and receiving capacity.
Which regional functions a sustainable design would need to protect.
Examine the regional roleAvailable funds, ownership and restrictions; the payment authority, eligible recipient, limits and required approvals.
Whether the proposed funding and payment can form a workable arrangement.
Test the two tracksThe same-period baseline, new receipts, required contributions, displaced payments and new costs. Document any expense that actually falls.
The additional resources retained, keeping cost avoidance distinct from new cash.
Compare the retained benefitCovered services, a funding source, the risk bearer, needed approvals, implementation work; for cash designs, a first feasible payment date.
Which two or three designs warrant initial modeling and who must act next.
Review the design requirementsKeep each hospital’s baseline and regional differences visible. Regional importance, payment eligibility and retained benefit each require their own evidence.
