MedPAC Comments on CY 2026

by Kristin Rowan | Mar 22, 2025 | CMS, Editorial, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

MedPAC Comments on CY 2026

MedPac Sends Recommendations to Congress

MedPAC makes recommendations to Congress and HHS on issues affecting the Medicare program. The March report for 2025 includes recommendations for hospice, home health, and SNFs, in addition to in-patient and out-patient hospital services.

Hospice

Using the exact terminology from the 2024 report, MedPAC recommends that Congress eliminate the update to the 2025 Medicare base payment rates for hospice. MedPAC pointed to a number of statistics to support the evaluation:

The number of hospice providers increased in 2023
Some of the growth in hospice providers occurred in states where CMS has concerns over program integrity
The percentage of patients using hospice increased by .8 percent nationwide, as did the days of care and visits per week
Medicare payments exceeded marginal costs by 14 percent

Opinion

The population of the U.S. is aging as more and more Baby Boomers qualify for Medicare; there is an increased need for hospice agencies to accommodate the volume of patients
Whether there are more hospices in states where program integrity is questioned does not impact the need for hospice care; program integrity reform changes this, not reimbursement rates
The rise in use, length of stay, and days of care explain the increase in the number of hospice; need, not profitability drives this growth
The average markup in 2022 was 72 percent above marginal cost

Marginal Cost

Marginal cost is the cost of adding one more unit of production. In simple terms, that would be the overall costs of adding one hour of care for a hospice patient. This would include scheduling, hourly wage, and other operational costs. MedPAC believes that if an agency adds one hour of care and make 14 percent more than their costs, that is sufficient.

Home Health

Keeping with tradition, MedPAC used the same language again from 2024 to recommend that Congress reduce the 205 Medicare base payment rate for home health agencies by 7 percent.

The number of HHAs participating in Medicare increased by 3.4 percent.
Most of the growth in HHAs was in LA County. Outside LA County, the number of HHAs decreased by 2.8 percent.
The number of 30-day episodes per beneficiary decreased by 1.8 percent, but is still higher than in prepandemic years
MedPAC was unable to compute the marginal profit for 2023
Quality of care (percent discharged to community) increased by 1.3 percent
The all-payer margin in HHAs was 8.2 percent, attracting investors
The projected Medicare payment margin for 2025 is 19 percent

Image of letters spelling health and wealth

Opinion

LA County has more HHAs, but the rest of the country has fewer. We believe if you ask The National Alliance for Care at Home, Bill Dombi, or any number of prior HHA owners, low reimbursement rates forced them out of business

Pandemic numbers skewed the need for care at home because everyone was at home; if you only look at prepandemic numbers compared with 2023 numbers, the need for home health is increasing
HHAs keep patients out of the hospital, which accounts for more Medicare payments and higher costs
Again, the average margin across the U.S. is 72 percent, but MedPAC somehow believes 8 percent will attract investors and buyers; volume is attracting buyers, not margins
The projected 2025 margin is 19 percent and MedPAC recommends lowering it to 14 percent, matching hospice, and is 58 percent lower margins than the average industry

One Point of Parity

Surprisingly, there is an overlap in thinking between providers and MedPAC. In the February 2025 comment on the CMS notice of proposed rulemaking for 2026, MedPAC addressed the coding intensity and increased Medicare Advantage payments.

Last summer, Editor Emeritus Tim Rowan reported on the inflated health conditions filed by payers. Medicare Advantage payers also routinely deny care that traditional Medicare plans would cover. MA payers are collecting on both the front and back ends of the “Bank of CMS.” According to the Center for Economic Policy Research, upcoding by MA plans costs CMS 106 percent of traditional Medicare costs. Quality bonus payments add an additional 2 percent. Operating surplus from enrolling healthier beneficiaries adds another 11 percent. Payments to MA plans are 19 percent higher. MedPAC agrees and urges CMS to further investigate coding intensity from MA payers.

Point of Contention

Although we agree with MedPAC’s assessment of MA coding intensity, that is where the similarity ends. Let’s take that recommendation one step further and require that MA plans pay hospice and home health providers a higher percentage of their risk-assessment adjustment and let the payers make their profits elsewhere.

It Could be Worse

Given the recent upheaval in D.C. and the fear that Medicare, Medicare Advantage, Medicaid, Social Security, and other benefits would be done away with completely, we are relieved to see the House Budget Bill passing without the drastic reductions to care at home.

From the Alliance

Following the passing of the House Budget Bill, The National Alliance for Care at Home issued a response statement. We’ve published the full response here for you.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news. She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

©2025 by The Rowan Report, Peoria, AZ. All rights reserved. This article originally appeared in The Rowan Report. One copy may be printed for personal use: further reproduction by permission only. editor@therowanreport.com

Underlying Causes of Health Issues

by Kristin Rowan | Mar 13, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Outcomes, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Underlying Causes of Health Issues

Underlying causes of health issues are common. Not all health issues come directly from infections, medical conditions, or genetics. Lifestyle, environmental factors, and social determinants can cause and/or increase the severity of health issues. Beginning in the winter of 2023, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services posted guidance on approving coverage for these social needs, acknowledging that they contribute to poor health outcomes. CMS named the social needs that could be covered by Medicaid, CHIP, Section 1115, and Home and Community Based Services. These include help finding new housing, one-time moving costs, eviction prevention, respite care, sober centers, home improvements, meals, and case management.

Guidance Rescinded

CMS referred to both the 2023 and 2024 documents as “Center Informational Bulletins” (CIB) meant as guidance, not rule of law. The 2024 document provided updates and clarifications to the 2023 document. According to the statement from CMS, dated March 4, 2025, they have rescinded both CIBs “to evaluate policy options consistent with Medicaid and CHIP progam requirements and objectives.” Moving forward, CMS will consider each application to cover these services on a case-by-case basis using the Social Security Act, not the HRSN Framework or the CIBs.

Opposition

Former chief medical officer of the US Medicaid program Andrey Ostrovsky, MD, FAAP said that removing coverage for social determinants of health will harm patients and taxpayers.

Sen Ron Wyden (D, Oregon) agrees, stating that addressing the underlying causes of health issues is key to keeping America healthy.

Underlying Causes of Health Issues Andrey Ostrovsky

“It’s unlikely we see an easy, smooth approval process for such services moving forward….I think that the bar to getting it approved will be higher. States are going to have to make individualized decisions around where their priorities are and where they want to continue to focus on expansion — and maybe focus a little bit more on cost constraint and financially effective services under the new administrative priorities.”

Damon Terzaghi

Senior Director of Medicaid Advocacy, National Alliance for Care at Home

On the Other Hand

Despite the opposition to this change, there does seem to be some validity to the move. There should be some discussion about where Medicaid services should end and another department begins. The question here is whether a different federal program should be providing coverage for these social determinants of health. According to Terzaghi, this could be the beginning of an improvement to the system, rather than the dismantling of it.

Final Thoughts

The changes coming out of D.C. recently seem to be coming like rapid fire. See this weeks related press release on the continuing resolution passed by Congress. As with most of these edicts, executive orders, and other changes, the long-term impact and the eventual goal remain to be seen. We will continue to follow these and other stories as new information becomes available.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

Update on Public Participation in Rule Making

by Kristin Rowan | Mar 13, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Update

Last week, we reached out to some of our contacts for responses to this change.

Former President of NAHC and current Senior Counsel at Arnall Golden Gregory Bill Dombi said:

It is difficult to discern the impact of the rescission of the waiver. One concern is whether the administration considers Medicaid a grant or benefit program thereby exempting it from APA public notice and comment rulemaking.

With respect to Medicare, if it is considered a benefit, there is still a Medicare statutory requirement of public notice and opportunity for comment through formal rulemaking that should effectively nullify the practical impact of the rescission of the waiver. All that said, we will need to see more before being to judge the impact.

Frequent guest author and Fellow, American Healh Law Association, Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. had this to say:

Recission of the Richardson Waiver is not good news for providers.

Many federal agencies voluntarily committed to give notice and comment for actions that otherwise would be exempt. The US Department of Health and Human Services was one of the federal agencies that adopted this policy in October, 1970, in a memorandum commonly referred to as the “Richardson Waiver.” This policy was published in the Federal Register in 1971. HHS did not, however, promulgate the Waiver through notice and comment rulemaking.

The open process of give and take between agencies and providers under the Richardson Waiver resulted in resolution of important issues relatively informally. Now it appears that only policies mandated by statute will go through the rulemaking process. In other words, opportunities to resolve issues without formal resolution will be compromised.

The recission of the Waiver may also make administration of both the Medicaid and Medicare programs more complicated and less effective, especially in view of US Supreme Court decisions that say everything that hasn’t gone through the notice and comment process is not binding on providers.

# # #

Below is the original article, published March 6, 2025

Public Participation Rescinded

The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) requires that an agency public a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register; allow sufficient time for public participation via written data, views, or arguments; and then publish a final rule. Matters relating to agency management, personnel, or public property; loans, grants, benefits, or contracts; and for “good cause” are exempt from the reporting requirements. The Richardson Waiver, adopted in 1971, waived the exemption and instructed agencies to use the good cause exemption sparingly. Effective immediately, the Richardson Waiver is rescinded.

“The policy waiving the statutory exemption…imposes on the Department obligations beyond the maximum procedural requirements specified by the APA, adds costs [that] are contrary to the efficient operation of the Department, and impedes the Department’s flexibility to adapt quickly to legal and policy mandates.”

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services

What it Means

Public participation is now optional. Agencies and offices of the Department of HHS can, if desired, use the public notice and comment procedures for these matters, but are no longer required to do so. The Department will continue to follow these procedures in all circumstances in which they are required to do so.

Law firm Hogan Lovells, experts in healthcare law, wrote about the potential implications for the health care industry in a recent blog post. According to the firm, it is unclear how HHS will interpret the “benefits” portion of the exemption. HHS, and specifically CMS, currently uses the notice and comment procedure for various benefits programs, including Medicare and Medicaid. Secretary Kennedy’s statement clearly calls out the limitation in impacting any other law requiring notice and comment periods.

Public Participation in Medicare Rules

Hogan Lovells indicates that few if any policies written under the Medcare Act will be impacted by this change. The Medicare Act operates under additional rulemaking requirements under section 1871(a) of the SSA. Additionally, Azar v. Allina Health Services, 587 U.S. 566 (2019) confirms that Medicare rulemaking is independent from the APA. Some policies are currently exempt from the notice and comment obligations under the Medicare Act and will remain exempt.

Public Participation in Medicaid and CHIP rules

Medicare and CHIP fall under Title XIX of the SSA, which does not contain its own notice and comment requirements separate from the APA. HHS has used the APA notice and comment rules for many of the changes made to the Medicaid program. HHS could interpret the “benefits” clause as exempting Medicaid changes from the rule. Hogan Lovells states it is currently unclear whether HHS will take this route. They also purport the courts have not ruled on whether APA excludes Medicaid from the notice and comment requirements, and may not agree with that exclusion. Until the term “benefits” is better defined, Medicaid, CHIP, the insurance exchange marketplace, and TANF, among others, may be impacted.

Department of Veterans Affairs

A notable exception to these changes is the rulemaking in the Department of Veterans Affairs as it relates to the Veterans Health Care act of 1992. This program implemented Federal contractor requirements that established pricing and contracting standards for drug manufacturers. The VA policies and rules have historically been enacted using guidance letters, avoiding the rulemaking process altogether.

Final Thoughts

There is too much that is yet unknown regarding this change to understand its full impact. There will be immediate changes, court rulings, further changes, and likely a lot of advocacy from national organizations fighting for transparency for Medicare, Medicaid, and other “benefit” programs. This will be an ongoing story and The Rowan Report will bring updates as they happen.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

Humana Thyme Agreement

by Kristin Rowan | Mar 7, 2025 | Clinical, Hospice, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Palliative Care for Medicare Advantage Members

Cancer is one of the highest leading causes of death in the United States, second only to heart disease. The challenges for cancer patients are not only physical, but emotional and financial as well. The consequences of these challenges are often devastating to the patient and their families. Providing additional care, support, and pharmaceutical interventions through value-based care can improve patient outcomes and reduce out-of-pocket costs.

Thyme Care

Thyme Care is a Nashville-based cancer treatment center that operates in seven states. The centers provide not just treatment, but cancer care navigation, designed to work within the value-based framework, keeping the patient at the center of care. Thyme Care includes an oncology care team, a patient app with multiple resources and 24/7 access to support. Patient surveys track symptoms and reduce barriers to care. This approach combines cancer treatment and palliative care for whole-person cancer care support.

Palliative Care

Palliative care works alongside medical care to improve the quality of life for the patient, addressing physical, emotional, and spirtual needs. Strictly speaking, it is not medical care, and not specifically covered by most insurance plans. The out-of-pocket costs for palliative care can be extremely high, making this kind of care an inaccessible amenity for most patients.

Value-Based Care

Value-based care reimburses care providers partially based on patient outcomes and patient satisfaction. Providers also share the financial risk of care with health insurance companies. Care providers who can both improve outcomes and patient satisfaction can be reimbursed more through health insurance plans, which can cover the costs of palliative care, even when it is not explicitly covered by the plan.

Humana

Humana is a payer with plans for Medicare, Medicaid, and Individual/Family beneficiaries. The Medicare Advantage value-based care plans allow Humana to disperse payments for covered services in partnership with care provider teams across a patient’s care journey. The better the outcome and satisfaction, the more Humana can pay a provider for care. Better outcomes often means reduced hospital visits, a longer time at home before requiring skilled nursing facilities, and lower costs.

Humana Thyme Palliative Care Collaboration

The recently announced partnership between payer and provider will give eligible patients access to palliative care support as part of the whole-person cancer care navigation provided by Thyme. Humana patients can also receive, as needed, 24/7 virtual care, medication guidance, symptom management, chronic condition management, community-based resources, financial assistance, transportation, food assistance, and/or access to stable housing.

Prior Authorization Requirement Removed by UnitedHealthcare

by Kristin Rowan | Mar 7, 2025 | Clinical, CMS, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Easier Access to Home Health

Prior authorization requirements can be cumbersome, delaying or even preventing care in some cases. Patients who need prior authorization to get he care they need also generally have form after form to fill out or to have completed by their PCP or hospital physician, who doesn’t have time for adequate visits, much less more paperwork.

As part of their ongoing efforts to reduce prior authorization volume by 10%, UnitedHealthcare has just announced a change in their home health services requirements.

Limits on Where Changes Apply

Beginning April 1, 2025, UHC will no longer require prior authorization or concurrent reviews for home health services managed by Home & Community (formerly naviHealth). This is the next step in an ongoing effort to modernize the authorization process and simplify health care for its members and providers.

These changes will apply to Medicare Advantage and Dual Special Needs Plan (D-SNP) beneficiaries in 36 states and the District of Columbia.

Alabama
Alaska
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Florida*
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas

Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Nebraska
Nevada
New Mexico
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon

Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Tennessee*
Texas
Utah
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Washington, D.C.

*In Florida and Tennessee, the changes will not apply to D-SNP plans that are not managed by Home & Community.

Prior Authorization Additional Information

You should continue to request prior authorization and concurrent review through March 31, 2025. UHC reminds all providers that following CMS guidelines for providing home health care services is still required. And in states where a Medicare denial is required to get Medicaid prior authorizations, providers should submit their requests through the UHC provider portal.

The available information on this pending change is limited. We will provide updates should they become available. Please contact UHC directly through the provider portal if you have specific questions.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

BREAKING NEWS: Kennedy Rescinds Public Participation in Rule Making

by Kristin Rowan | Mar 7, 2025 | Advocacy, Breaking News, CMS, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Public Participation Rescinded

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

Secretary, Department of Health and Human Services

What it Means

Public Participation in Medicare Rules

Public Participation in Medicaid and CHIP rules

Department of Veterans Affairs

Final Thoughts

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

Safeguarding Caregivers from Violence

by Kristin Rowan | Feb 27, 2025 | Admin, Caregiver Safety, Caring for the Caregiver, Clinical

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

We’ve published and talked a lot about caregiver safety, lone worker safety, and keeping your caregivers safe. Until the risk of violence to care at home workers is 0%, we will continue to provide this information and urge you to implement plans to lower the risk.

It’s nice to see that we’re not the only ones. Much of the following information comes from Lockton Affinity Home Care, along with reports from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Workplace Violence in Care at Home

Workplace violence is at a much higher risk among home care workers than other professions. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics says that home health aides and home nursing assistance are five to seven times more likely to experience workplace violance than the average U.S. worker. Workplace violence can include verbal, non-verbal and written harrassment, bullying, sexual harassment, and physical attacks, up to and including death. A study from the CDC is discouraging:

Violence Stats from Centers for Disease Control & Prevention

18% to 65% of workers experiencing verbal abuse from patients
As many as 41% workers have reported sexual harassment
Between 2.5% and 44% of workers have reported being physically assaulted

Negative Consequences to Your Agency

According to Lockton, caregivers are impacted by violence in more ways than one. In addition to the physical and mental harm done by the violence itself, caregivers suffer from lower job satisfaction and higher burnout rates. They also may provide lower quality of care. Some start abusing drugs and alcohol. All of these lead to higher employee turnover and greater cost to the agency to hire and train new staff. Additionally, the poor quality of an abused worker can damage an agencies efficiency as well as their reputation.

Collect information and monitor conditions in the environment

Training, Policies, and Reporting

Lockton offers some specific recommendations to reduce the likelihood of your caregivers experiencing workplace violence.

Home care businesses should implement a monitoring and reporting process to demonstrate their commitment to recognizing and mitigating the risks associated with workplace violence.

By proactively managing workplace violence risks, your business can enable staff protection and support, align with regulatory compliance, emphasize a culture of safety, inform data-driven decision-making and contribute to the overall well-being of both employees and clients.

Implementation recommendations include:

A zero-tolerance policy towards workplace violence.
Policies and rules on the safety of lone caregivers in the field, such as regular cell phone contact or check-ins, and conducting home visits in pairs and/or with security escorts.
Rules and strategies related to visits in homes where violence has occurred in the past.

Require staff to participate in ongoing education and training

Many incidents of workplace violence go unreported in the industry. Caregivers may perceive incidents as minor or as part of the job, leading to a lack of action and normalization of such behavior.

Training employees on the types of physical and nonphysical acts and threats of workplace violence can increase awareness and reduce normalization. Additional education and training can focus on how to:

Assess the work environment and surroundings for safety, including the presence of drugs of abuse, drug paraphernalia, weapons, and aggressive pets.
Recognize signs of imminent violence, including verbal abuse and aggressive body language and/or posturing.
Employ verbal de-escalation techniques.
Utilize escape and egress techniques.

Create and maintain a culture of safety and quality throughout the organization

Identify an individual to be responsible for your organization’s workplace violence prevention program. They can implement policies and a standardized process to report and follow up on events or near-misses. Data collection and simple, accessible reporting structures show commitment to providing a safe and secure work environment. Regularly reporting incidents and trends to governance promotes transparency and further establishes accountability for the program.

Post-incident support services can also have great value for home healthcare workers’ well-being. These services may include peer support, formal debriefing, trauma-crisis counseling and employee assistance programs.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

Special Focus Program Ends

by Kristin Rowan | Feb 20, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Hospice, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Special Focus Program Not Well Received

When the Hospice Special Focus Program (SFP) first appeared, the industry was told the program would help CMS identify and improve the performance of hospice providers that were struggling to meet quality standards. CMS developed the program to strenthen oversight, promote quality improvements, and ensure compliance for underperforming hospice agencies.

Soon after its inception and implementation in 2022, numerous concerns emerged. The National Alliance for Care at Home (then NAHC and NHPCO) voiced concerns over the program’s reliance on incomplete data as well as the potential for the program to unfairly targed providers in underserved communities.

Between February 2020 and January 2025, numerous state and national organizations have introduced Hospice Acts to Congress, given feedback to CMS on improvements to SFP, and filed lawsuits against the CMS.

Ramping Up the Opposition

In mid-2024, following the Council of States meeting, monthly opposition to the SFP became standard:

The McDermott Report highlighted significant flaws in the algorithm used for the program. Again, there was an objection over the use of incomplete and inconsistent data.
Bi-partisan Congress members sent a letter to CMS requesting revisions to SFP, criticizing outdated survey data and suggested that the quality metrics were inappropriately weighted.
Alliance CEO Steve Landers publicly criticized the implementation of SFP in his op-ed.
Representatives introduced Bill H.R. 10097 to delay SFP implementation, stating it would give CMS time to address the problems with the program and ensure fair application of standards for low-performing hospices without impacting quality programs.
The Texas Association for Home Care & Hospice; Indiana Association for Home & Hospice Care; Association for Home & Hospice Care of North Carolina; South Carolina Home Care & Hospice Association; and Houston Hospice filed a lawsuit challenging the SFP as unlawful and arbitrary.

CMS Backs Down

This week, CMS announced that it has paused the implementation of SFP for the calendar year 2025. The CMS statement say the pause will allow CMS to “further evaluate the program.” There is no mention of the opposition or the ongoing lawsuits.

The hospice special focus program page on the CMS website reads:

Effective February 14, 2025, implementation of the Hospice Special Focus Program for CY 2025 has ceased so that CMS may further evaluate the program. Please contact QSOG_Hospice@cms.hhs.gov for policy questions.

All additional information about the program has been removed from the website page.

Special Focus Program gets First Positive Feedback

For the first time since 2020, industry leaders are applauding a CMS move regarding SFP. The move is halting the program altogether, but at least its positive feedback.

“This decision is a positive move acknowledging that the current approach is not working as intended. The hospice community has long advocated for strong oversight and patient protections, but the SFP, as implemented, was deeply flawed, unlawful, and harmful to the very patients it was meant to protect.”

National Alliance for Care at Home

You can read the full statement from The Alliance in their press release.

Final Thoughts

It seems it is not often that CMS hears what the industry tells them. Reimbursement rates continue to drop, documentation is increasingly complex, and the industry has suffered from their misconceptions about what we need. This time, at least, there was enough pressure and advocacy from Congress and from you, the people who are impacted daily by their decisions, to cause them to rethink this program. Keep up the good work and continue to advocate for yourself and for care at home. Perhaps this is not the last time CMS will listen.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

Creditable Coverage for Medicare Part D

by Kristin Rowan | Feb 14, 2025 | Admin, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

CMS 2026 Updates to Prescription Plan

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), as part of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA), released a draft of the calendar year 2026 redesign program instructions. The new provisions for Medicare Part D include:

An annual out-of-pocket maximum of $2,100, up from $2,000 in 2025
A selected drug subsidy program
The requirement that Part D plans offer enrollees the option to spread out their out-of-pocket costs over the year
Maximum charge of $35 for insulin regardless of deductible, co-pay, or out-of-pocket spending reached
No out-of-pocket costs for recommended vaccines
New requirements for Creditable Coverage

Current Creditable Coverage Determination

The current simplified determinations method is as follows:

The plan provides coverage for brand and generic prescriptions;
The plan provides reasonable access to retail providers;
The plan is designed to pay on average at least 60% of participants’ prescription drug expenses; and
The plan satisfies at least one of the following:
- The coverage has no annual benefit maximum or maximum annual benefit payable by the plan of at least $25,000;
- The coverage has an actuarial expectation that the amount payable by the plan will be at least $2,000 annually per Medicare-eligible individual; or
- For employer plan sponsors that have integrated prescription drug and health coverage, the integrated plan has no more than a $250 deductible per year, has no annual benefit maximum or a maximum annual benefit of at least $25,000, and has no less than a $1,000,000 lifetime combined benefit maximum.

Creditable Coverage

Medicare beneficiaries must enroll in Medicare Part D, unless they have other prescription coverage. If a beneficiary goes more than 63 days without prescription coverage, they may incur a late enrollment penalty. Creditable coverage has to have a value equal to or greater than the defined coverage for Part D. This requirement is not new. Group health plans have been calculating creditable coverage since the inception of the Part D program. What is new is that CMS has determined that the simplified method of determining creditable coverage is no longer accurate. The revised method must include all of the following:

Provide reasonable coverage for brand name and generic prescription drugs and biological products
Provide reasonable access to retail pharmacies
Is designed to pay on average at least 72% of participants’ prescription drug expenses

Impact

Persons over the age of 65 who qualify for Medicare, but who are still employed may have an employer sponsored or paid health insurance plan. Many of these plans have combined health and drug coverage. These plans will now have to provide creditable coverage, presumably for all beneficiaries, not just those who are eligible for Medicare.

The coverage has no annual benefit maximum or maximum annual benefit payable by the plan of at least $25,000;
The coverage has an actuarial expectation that the amount payable by the plan will be at least $2,000 annually per Medicare-eligible individual; or
For employer plan sponsors that have integrated prescription drug and health coverage, the integrated plan has no more than a $250 deductible per year, has no annual benefit maximum or a maximum annual benefit of at least $25,000, and has no less than a $1,000,000 lifetime combined benefit maximum.

For Additional Information

If you are currently offering an employee sponsored health plan, or need more information on Part D coverage, refer to the CMS Fact Sheet and the Program Instructions.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

Is Medicaid Down for the Count?

by Kristin Rowan | Feb 6, 2025 | Breaking News, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Medicaid Payment System Goes Dark

On Monday, January 27, President Trump, through the Office of Management and Budget, announced a temporary freeze on federal spending while his newly designated head of the Department of Government Efficiency ensures all spending follows the executive orders the President has signed. The memo was vague and caused widespread confusion across government departments. Almost immediately after the memo was circulated, Medicaid programs could not access the Payment Management Services web portal, the entity responsible for paying Medicaid claims.

The Memo

The language used in the memo on federal spending was broad and overreaching. As such, many federal organizations were unclear as to whether the memo applied to them. The message in the memo was that the administration intended to curb any spending that does not improve the day-to-day lives of the people. Throughout the day Monday, the White House sent clarifications about what programs would not be impacted. Among them were food assistance programs like SNAP, WIC, and Meals on Wheels, and Medicaid. The medicaid payment portal went down, despite this clarification.

Exclusions

Multiple state and federal agencies reached out to the White House for clarification following the release of the memo. Explicitly excluded from the freeze are direct benefit plans like Social Security and Medicare. In addition to the programs named in the memo, clarification on additional programs that would not be impacted included Medicaid. Despite the temporary website outage, claims were still being processed and payments were still being made.

Immediate Lawsuits

Almost simultaneously with the distribution of the memo, several non-profit organizations filed suit against the federal government. They called Trump’s action an “unlawful and unconstitutional” act, even temporarily. The pause on federal spending was set to go into effect at 5 p.m. ET on Tuesday. Minutes before, U.S. District Judge Loren L. AliKhan put a pause on the pause.

Temporary Freeze on the Temporary Freeze

To allow both sides time to construct an argument, the judge stayed the funding freeze until Monday, February 3. That morning, the judge will hear arguments and consider the issue. After the stay, attorneys general from 22 states and D.C. filed their own lawsuit to permanently block the freeze and prevent any future attempts to cut off already approved federal funding.

Then Comes the Thaw

If the judge allows the freeze to move forward, Trump has given every agency until February 10 to account for and explain all spending programs within their departments. Once the accounting has been reviewed, likely the OMB and the Department of Government Efficiency will determine which federal spending programs can resume operation.

There is no indication yet as to whether Trump will extend the February 10 deadline, given the delay in the courts. By the time the judge rules on Monday, however, we hope the White House will have issued additional details and guidance to avoid additional disruption to essential services like Medicare and Medicaid.

Final? Ruling

Early Monday, Judge AliKhan said she was not convinced by the argument that nonprofit groups have no case against the funding freeze since the OMB rescinded the memo. The administration argued that a brief pause on funding to align federal spending is within the law. The administration also suggests that the courts have no standing to block it. AliKhan has indicated that she will likely grant a longer temporary order to stay the funding freeze.

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at The Rowan Report since 2008. She is the owner and Editor-in-chief of The Rowan Report, the industry’s most trusted source for care at home news .She also has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in content creation, social media management, and event marketing. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.com

« Older Entries

Next Entries »