The PACE KPIs That Belong Next to Your Enrollment Report

Net enrollment and disenrollment already get executive-level attention in PACE, and for good reason. Not only are they critical business drivers, but the underlying activity is subject to CMS and state reporting, so there must be real process and rigor around getting that data right. What these numbers don't do is tell leadership why enrollment landed where it did, or give them any warning before the reporting period closes. They're a look in the rearview mirror. The metrics that actually help a leadership team act, rather than just report, tend to live upstream of that number in the referral and enrollment process itself.

Referral source mix and conversion, not just referral volume

Most PACE organizations can point to their busiest referral sources. Fewer can say which ones convert well versus which ones just generate volume that goes nowhere. That distinction matters more than it gets credit for. A hospital discharge team that sends ten referrals a month with a 60% conversion rate is a fundamentally different asset than a source that sends twenty per month and converts at 15%.

The bigger risk hiding in this data is concentration. Programs that rely heavily on one or two referral relationships are one leadership change, one competing relationship, or one shift in discharge protocol away from a real enrollment problem. Tracking referral source performance at the portfolio level, not just logging where leads came from, is what turns this into a risk management tool instead of just a reporting exercise.

Time-in-stage, tracked as an ongoing number

Every PACE program has an enrollment sequence: referral, intake, assessment, enrollment. Most only notice a problem when monthly enrollment numbers come in low, at which point the cause is already weeks old. Time-in-stage flips that. Tracked continuously, by stage, it shows where candidates are sitting at any given moment, not just where they ended up.

This is less about diagnosing a single bottleneck and more about giving leadership a live gauge. If time in assessment starts creeping up, that's a staffing or scheduling signal showing up in real time, well before it’s recorded as a soft enrollment month. It turns a lagging monthly total into something closer to a leading indicator leadership can respond to mid-cycle.

Early-month pacing, once source-level conversion is established

This is the one most PACE organizations aren't doing yet, and it's arguably the most useful. Once a program has a reasonably established lead-to-enrollment volume pipeline averages and conversion rates for each referral source, this data can be used to project the month's likely enrollment total from just the first one to two weeks of referral activity, rather than waiting until the month closes to find out.

If a referral source category such as “medical community” is expected to yield five enrollments for the month based on historical averages or goals that have been set, the organization can work backwards to understand how many assessments, leads, etc. are needed in order to hit that goal. If at the midpoint of the month the assessment volume is not where it needs to be to hit the enrollment target, the team can be proactive in determining the constraint.

Why these metrics belong alongside the numbers leadership already watches

Net enrollment and disenrollment aren't going anywhere, and they shouldn't. They're critical business measures tied to regulatory reporting and oversight. But they're also largely backward-looking. Referral mix, time-in-stage, and early-month pacing give leadership visibility into what's happening before those final numbers are reported, while there's still time to influence the outcome. The goal isn't to replace the compliance numbers. It's to see where they're headed much sooner, when actions can be taken to impact them.

Not sure where your program is losing participants? That's where we come in. Get more information on what we do for PACE, here.