Healthcare Law Blog

Watch out MCOs--What to do with Medicaid Managed Care Organizations’ Payment Denials. Medicaid’s Findings of Alleged Overpayments—Relief?

With reported revenues in the billions of dollars and net profits not far behind, insurance companies providing a Medicaid Managed Care product are making huge profits on Kentucky’s Medicaid business.  Across the country, lawsuits are being filed that go so far as to allege that these Medicaid Managed Care Organizations (“MCOs”) have been unjustly enriched and have made fraudulent misrepresentations, as well as negligent misrepresentations to providers and their staff. WellCare, in particular, is the subject of a new action in Florida based, in part, on its Kentucky Medicaid business.  While these lawsuits create a very important way to address reimbursement issues, Kentucky providers have a new avenue to pursue claims against MCOs.  In April of 2016, the Kentucky legislature directed that health care providers have a process by which a Medicaid MCO’s final decision denying a healthcare service or claim could be reviewed and appealed.  Under the statute, providers could receive an independent, third-party review of denied Medicaid managed-care claims, as well as an administrative process for review. Prior to the new process in Senate Bill 20, the only avenue for appeal was to the MCO itself or through the Department of Insurance’s policy of reviewing claims regarding failure to make prompt payment, which was a process established by policy, not regulation.   Finally, in December 2016, the final regulations implementing the statute and providing the process for appeal were promulgated by Kentucky’s Department for Medicaid Services (“DMS”), making available long-awaited relief for health care providers facing denied claims from Medicaid MCOs.  More >

Recap of the Webinar, "What Providers Should Know: Overpayments and the False Claims Act"

On May 24th and 25th, 2016, McBrayer held a webinar on what providers should know regarding overpayments and the False Claims Act.  Lisa English Hinkle and Chris Shaughnessy, McBrayer healthcare law attorneys, guided participants through the interplay between overpayments from various federal healthcare programs and violations of the False Claims Act that can accrue heavy penalties. For further information on this webinar, contact McBrayer’s Marketing Director, Morgan Hall.

Some of the information shared by the presenters is also summarized below. More >

The One Simple Rule for Practitioners to Avoid Overpayments and False Claims Act Penalties

In December, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) released its “Supplementary Appendices for the Medicare Fee-for-Service 2015 Improper Payments Report,”[1] an annual compilation of statistics from investigations into overpayments and other instances of fraud, waste and abuse in Medicare payments. What should shock Kentucky providers is that Kentucky has the seventh highest percentage of projected overpayments at 15.4%, or $897.7 million.[2] More than one out of every seven Medicare fee-for-service payments made in the Commonwealth is projected to be an overpayment in 2015, yet many of these problems could have been avoided by following one simple rule: document claims properly.

[1] U.S. Department for Health and Human Services, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. (2015). The Summary Appendices for the Medicare Fee-for-Service 2015 Improper Payments Report. Retrieved from  https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Monitoring-Programs/Medicare-FFS-Compliance-Programs/CERT/CERT-Reports-Items/Downloads/AppendicesMedicareFee-for-Service2015ImproperPaymentsReport.pdf

[2] Ibid. at 13. More >

Good News, Providers: A Mere Difference of Medical Opinion Does Not A False Claim Make

FINALLY, some good news for providers related to false claims. In a very important Alabama case, a federal trial court granted summary judgment to AseraCare, Inc., in a False Claims Act[1] action where it had been alleged that the hospice program had knowingly submitted false claims to Medicare for patients who were allegedly not terminally ill. In its opinion, the U.S. District Court ruled that the Government may not prove falsity for purposes of the False Claims Act based solely upon the opinion of one medical expert who disagrees with the certifying physician and the patient's treating physicians about whether the medical records reported eligibility for the hospice benefit. In a ruling that all health providers can cheer, the court held that "[a] mere difference of opinion between physicians, without more, is not enough to show falsity."[2]

[1] 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729–3733

[2] United States v. AseraCare, lnc., No. 2:12-CV-245-KOB (MD

Alabama March 31, 2016) at 2. More >

HHS Finalizes Exception to HIPAA Privacy Rule for Firearm Background Checks

In January of 2016, the Department of Health & Human Services (“HHS”) issued a final rule modifying the HIPAA Privacy Rule.[1] This modification allows certain covered entities to disclose the identities of certain individuals to the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (“NICS”), a database maintained by the FBI. The information disclosed by the entities would pertain to an individual’s mental health, preventing those subject to a federal “mental health prohibitor” from possessing or receiving a firearm. Such a disclosure naturally creates a tension in the patient-provider relationship, however, and critics contend it could potentially discourage mentally ill individuals from seeking treatment.

[1] 45 C.F.R. §164 (2016) More >

New Stark Law Exception Breathes Life into Primary Care, Especially in Underserved Areas

With the recent and significant shortages of primary care providers, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) recently created a rather important exception to the Stark Law as a means to expand access to primary care and mental health care through incentives for non-physician practitioners.  The Stark Law prohibits referrals for Medicare and Medicaid services from physicians to other entities if the physician has a financial relationship with that entity, such as ownership, investment or a structured compensation arrangement. Under the new exception, hospitals, federally qualified health centers (“FQHCs”) and rural health clinics (“RHCs”) may give financial assistance to a physician or a physician practice to hire a non-physician provider (“NPP”), and this relief opens the door for expanded practices in primary care and mental health at a time when the need is critical. More >

CDC Releases New Guidelines for Prescribing Opioids for Chronic Pain

This week, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released new guidelines for the prescribing of opioids for treatment of chronic pain. The guidelines can be found here:

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/rr/rr6501e1.htm

Resources for healthcare providers regarding the guidelines can be found here:

http://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/prescribing/resources.html

Up, Up and Away: Penalties and CMPs to be Adjusted for Inflation

As part of the recent bipartisan budget deal, the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Improvements Act of 2015 (the “Improvements Act”) requires that all federal agencies make inflation-based adjustments to all civil monetary penalties (CMPs) within their jurisdictions beginning no later than August 1, 2016. In the health care context, the legislation means that the penalties available to the government under the Civil Monetary Penalties Law (CMPL), as well as the False Claims Act (FCA), must be adjusted for inflation and increased. More >

Tidbits and Takeaways from OIG’s 2016 Work Plan

The Office of Inspector General for Health and Human Services (“OIG”) recently issued its 2016 Work Plan, which sets the agenda for its auditing and investigation in the year ahead. The broad mandate of the OIG is to eliminate fraud, waste and abuse. With the requested FY 2016 budget of $417 million, the OIG will continue its fraud-fighting efforts and heighten it focus on reducing waste in HHS programs. Waste includes not only fraud, but also unnecessary services, inefficient delivery of care or service, poor quality of care or services, inflated prices, excess administrative costs, or mismanagement of grant or contract funds. With a 2015 track record of $3 billion in recoveries; 4,112 provider exclusions from participation in federal health care programs; 925 criminal actions and 682 civil and administrative enforcement actions and a return on investment of $8 for every $1 spent, the OIG is a force to be avoided. The yearly work plan provides a list of priorities for the office, and in turn gives providers insight into areas of concern in practice. The following areas are on OIG’s radar for the coming year: More >

Primary Care Providers – Are you feeling the pinch?

It was nice while it lasted – due to a provision of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), services furnished by certain primary care providers (“PCPs”) were subject to an enhanced payment rate for Calendar Years 2013 and 2014. These PCPs had to have (a) been Board certified in the specialty designation of family medicine, general internal medicine or pediatric medicine or have a subspecialty designation recognized by specific boards or associations, or (b) furnished more than 60% of claims in specific evaluation and management or vaccine administration services under certain codes to have been eligible for these enhanced payments.[1] The payments were raised to the level of the Medicare Part B fee schedule rate (unless the actual billed charge for the service was lower), and providers had until April 1, 2013 to self-attest to being eligible.[2] The increase applied to both fee-for-service and managed care Medicaid plans. More >