5years. For example, our Medicare hospital admissions per 1,000 members was 140 vs 196 for the region. Our ED visits per 1,000 members were 269 vs 463 for the region. Based on our 2013-2014 data we have shown no improvement; not surprising since we were already "performing at a high level of cost savings." Costs that occur once a patient is in the ED, hospital, or cardiology office are not in our control. Also, there is little room for improvement. Ninety eight percent of ED visits were appropriate for time, place, or diagnosis. Onehalf of the increase in Medicare hospitalizations were due to elective joint replacements; any change would be rationing. The other half of the increased costs were for appropriate hospitalizations for acute myocardial infarctions or stroke; none were for out-of-control diabetes or congestive heart failure. We fell out of compliance with our 1 hospital readmission in 6 months.First, we believe that the question is not whether small practices are missing out on the new methods of reimbursement, but whether the reimbursement models are correct. PCPCC data does not conclusively show an improvement in the Triple Aim by a movement to PCMH, and we may be driving already high-quality small practices to consolidate. Until we have definitive proof that these surrogate measures of quality from many and competing entities (many of whom are seeking to control cost over quality) actually do what they say, we should resist the idea that PCMH will improve practice. In our small practice, this has not been the case, and the costs will not be reimbursed to us for doing all the quality work. The unintended consequence of using poorly conceived surrogate measures may be that more individual practices are forced into larger institutions. Second, family medicine and other primary care organizations need to be drivers of correct quality measures that make sense. Lastly, it appears to us that a return to transparency and a free market model (for all medical care) such as direct primary care (DPC) is a better solution for small practices than joining larger groups or participating in externally driven quality programs. In DPC, the consumer judges quality and cost directly and will reward or punish the provider of care in a timely manner.