Can This New Software Eliminate Fraud and Billing Errors?

by | Oct 9, 2025 | Admin, Medicaid, Product Review

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Software Eliminates Fraud and Errors

Like so many Home Care providers, Aspen Home Care in Kansas City, Missouri was drowning in paper. Two hundred caregivers turned in weekly timesheets every Friday. A large office staff had to go through them, looking for errors, omissions, and unauthorized visits and shifts. Submitting erroneous claims, of course, leads to payment denials, even fines. When an agency submits too many bad claims every week over a long period, a surveyor will soon be knocking at their door.

The Hurdles

On a good week, Aspen completed all necessary payroll and billing tasks and had bills ready to submit by end of business on the following Thursday. Slowing down the process were the usual errors — forgotten check-outs, more hours worked than authorized, and late timesheet submission. Caregivers grew weary of the weekly phone calls asking for clarification, even when the error was their fault. Aspen did have a basic billing system, but paper timesheets fed it too. Electronic Visit Verification was possible, but only via a patient’s landline, using punched-in identification codes.

Then... the call came

“After years of software design, we have completed our replacement for your billing and EVV system. We would like you to switch from the basic system we sold you a few years ago and beta test our better one.”

– Henry (Hank) Schwab, Owner, Compliance Plus

Beta testing is a risky venture, but both owner Ahmed Jara and Office Manager Mohammed Mohammed* trusted Hank and agreed to give it a try. After all, the agency was drowning in paper, they reminded each other.

Dramatic Process Improvements

We took part in a demo of the Compliance Plus system before speaking with Mohammed and hearing Aspen’s experience. We saw a comprehensive, user-friendly system, with a color-coded user interface, that includes scheduling, EVV, and billing for Medicaid, Managed Care, and all other payers an agency contracts with.

Time Tracking

Caregivers clock in and out with an app that is GPS-enabled down to exact longitude and latitude coordinates. Should a patient live in an internet dead zone, caregivers can use their landline. If there is no landline, Aspen will install a “smart fob” in the home. Aspen does not require specific visit start times, but once a check-in is recorded, the app knows the patient’s authorized hours and automatically alerts the caregiver when it is time to clock out.

Verification

Mistakes do happen, of course, but fixing them is not difficult. When the Compliance Plus back end sees a 14-hour visit, it assumes the caregiver forgot to check out. The visit flashes red on the screen, indicating it is not ready to bill, and displays the difference between authorized and recorded hours. The office employee managing exceptions simply calls the caregiver for verification and then manually edits the end time, and compliance is maintained.

Caregiver Feedback

Mohammed told us his caregiving staff is thrilled with the app, though he did say the transition was hard at first. “They learn to use it in about 30 minutes,” he said. “Check-in and check-in take a few seconds and now they are happy to be done with paper forever, not to mention no longer having to deliver paper timesheets to the office.” He added that fake check-ins from the car on the way to a patient’s home have been completely eliminated.

Most importantly, the three-person office staff now completes payroll and billing for 200 caregivers by midday on Tuesday instead of late on Thursday.

The "Plus" of Compliance Plus

Certainly, procedural efficiencies are important, and many scheduling and EVV systems force caregivers to check in and check out in the presence of the patient and alert office staff when a caregiver arrives late or is a no-show. What we saw during our demo, however, we have not seen elsewhere. Compliance Plus automates the tedious task of rooting out EVV, billing, and payroll errors so efficiently, payment denials, aggregator rejections, and incorrect paychecks are virtually eliminated.

Denials are Rare

Mohammed confirmed what we saw in the demo. The file that includes hours, authorizations, patient demographics, and pre-arranged pay rates is prepared and perfected in advance. Then, the system uploads the same corrected file to the aggregator and to state and other payers. “If we need to fix hours or a bill, we do it before uploading to all entities,” he said. “We rarely get rejections from the aggregator or denials from payers.”

Aggregated Data

One of the requirements of payers and EVV aggregators is that all patient and caregiver names and other information must be in their respective databases in advance. Compliance Plus finds missing data and removes a bill from the file before it is uploaded, notifying the user with a red flag. Mohammed added, “We have to make sure all patient data is in system, but that is easy to do.”

Implementation and Training

In every home care agency, there is always a measure of trepidation among the staff when switching from familiar paper to automation. Aspen Home Care was no different when owner Ahmed Jara announced that he had accepted Hank’s invitation to join a beta test. Mohammed told us that his staff’s time from implementation to software expertise took a little less than three months. Compliance Plus customer relationship manager Sara Moore conducted online training of key office staff, a service that is included in Aspen’s monthly fee. Mohammed and a couple others trained the rest of the staff on the full system and then caregivers on the use of the app.

“After a short while, the new system became our normal workflow,” Mohammed commented. “The only speed bump is when they upload new features. We need to spend a little time learning them, but ultimately, the new features improve our workflow. Our caregivers pick up the app in about 30 minutes, including new hires.”

Favorite Features

He added that his 200 caregivers like checking in and out on the app better than the legacy ANI system, which used the patient’s landline for automatic number identification. “English is a second language for some of our caregivers, and they sometimes had trouble with the ANI prompts spoken by the computerized voice,” he explained. “GPS verification is the best feature. If a caregiver checks in from too far away, we see their distance from the patient’s home on a map, and we gently ‘re-educated’ them and it does not happen again. In the past, they would sometimes get away with asking a family member to check in for them from the patient’s landline. Those days are gone.”

He also told us that Aspen does not insist on specific start times. What matters is that visit length matches authorized hours over a billing period. This is especially helpful for waiver and HCBS plans when the caregiver lives in the home. In those arrangements, checking in or out used to be easily forgotten. “I take care of her all day, how do I know when I start and stop?” The Compliance Plus app rings its cell phone loudly to remind visiting and live-in caregivers to check in and then to check out after the authorized number of hours have been reached.

Simplifying Complex Billing

Presently, Aspen exclusively serves Medicaid beneficiaries, though that can mean several managed care payers. With varying reimbursement rates from payers, combined with different caregiver hourly rates, getting a bill to match an authorization used to be a challenge for Office Manager Mohammed and his team.

It's Complicated

In the case of an agency employed family caregiver, there are often days when the family member will spend one hour toileting and feeding, the next hour doing reimbursable homemaking chores, and the third hour running care-related errands. Not only might those tasks be paid at different rates, but they can, and often are, reimbursed by different payers.

Patient Profiles

Mohammed emphasized that the way Compliance Plus handles these situations saves considerable time and reduces payer and aggregator rejections. Like in a Venn diagram, every combination of patient, payer, task type, and caregiver creates a “patient profile.” The user created most profiles in advance, based on known payer rates, etc. Occasionally, a patient’s profile is unique, but a user can easily enter the specifics into the system manually. Once a profile is built, the system calculates all of the billing accurately without additional user supervision.

Compliance Plus

Task Rates

If a payer’s rate for a task changes, Mohammed or another office staffer makes the change one time for all affected patients. In that scenario where the live-in caregiver performs three different tasks in one day, he or she checks in and out only once, before the first task and after the last, and designates each task performed. Compliance Plus does the rest.

Company Prospects

Hank Schwab told us that he is confident, after 100 successful beta customers, that Compliance Plus is ready for general release. At $10 to $12 per patient per month, he believes that supplementing word-of-mouth with a modest marketing effort will help him replace paper and strengthen the bottom line for many Medicaid and Personal Care agencies. Hank’s plan is to begin that effort as soon as he identifies an investor or two and hires a marketing director. “I already manage a team of coders and personally pay all the bills,” he laughed. “I’m ready for someone else to take on a few of my jobs.”
https://complianceplus.com/

*No, that is not a typo. We also enjoyed Mohammed Mohammed’s sense of humor. He tells people his parents were too cheap to give him a first name, so they just copied his last name.

# # #

Tim Rowan The Rowan Report
Tim Rowan The Rowan Report
Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.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

Impact of H.R. 1: The Homebound and Overlooked

by | Jul 24, 2025 | Medicaid, Regulatory

Analysis by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

The Impact of H.R. 1

Homebound and Overlooked

In early 2025, the Republican-led Congress introduced its proposed budget for FY2026 and beyond, a sweeping legislative effort aimed at curbing federal expenditures and restructuring entitlement programs. Medicaid, one of the largest healthcare safety nets in the United States, faces major revisions under this bill. Central to the proposed changes is the shift toward block grants or per-capita caps on federal funding. The legislation also rolls back incentives enacted into law by the Affordable Care act, including those that supported Medicaid expansion. The reconciliation bill, signed into law on July 4, also eliminates financial support for optional services such as home and community-based services (HCBS). A new set of work requirements in the new law will expand the paperwork burden for beneficiaries.

Risks for Home- and Community-Based Care

The figure below presents a visual from the Commonwealth Fund showing their projection of over $100 billion in cumulative federal Medicaid cuts by 2035. These reductions are expected to disproportionately affect non-mandated programs like HCBS, which are many times more economical than residential care. With diminished federal support, states will face pressure to reallocate limited resources, often at the expense of these optional, yet critical, programs. ¹

For nearly eight million elderly Americans, Medicaid-funded HCBS has helped reduce hospital admissions, extend independence, and relieve stress on long-term care facilities. However, the new budget cuts destabilize these programs. Barbara Merrill, CEO of ANCOR, expressed concern, stating, “When you cut federal Medicaid dollars, even for optional services, states have to make tough decisions about who gets care and when.”² Experts anticipate that approval delays, extended waitlists, and even termination of services could follow as states struggle to maintain existing infrastructure.

Bar chart of Medicaid spending.

Comparing the 2005 Budget Bill to the Affordable Care Act

Compared to the Affordable Care Act (ACA), the Republican budget bill marks a significant policy reversal. The ACA expanded Medicaid eligibility and incentivized states to develop non-institutional care models. It emphasized preventive care and home-based treatment options, helping shift care away from costly institutional settings. By contrast, the new bill eliminates such incentives and introduces fiscal and operational barriers. According to data from Medicaid.gov and the Kaiser Family Foundation, Medicaid enrollment, which rose steadily during the ACA years, is projected to drop by 10% nationwide once the budget bill is implemented³. This decline reflects both tightening eligibility and retreat from HCBS programs.

Healthcare providers will need to brace for substantial ripple effects. With fewer patients accessing home care, hospitals and emergency departments may see an uptick in acute episodes related to unmanaged chronic conditions. Providers may also encounter staffing shortages and reduced reimbursements, undermining service quality and sustainability. Richard Edwards, policy director at Amivie Home Health, warned, “If states cut home care services, many patients have no other choice but to enter a skilled nursing facility. That’s not just a shift in care—it’s often a worse outcome at a higher cost.” ⁴ These operational challenges could exacerbate pressure on an already strained healthcare workforce.

Scope and Severity of Coming Changes

Today, over eight million seniors rely on Medicaid-funded HCBS, with an average annual cost per recipient of $29,000. Thirty-three states use HCBS waivers to administer these services, yet the average state waitlist already exceeds 3,000 applicants. Institutional care costs remain 57% higher than home care, making HCBS not only more humane but more fiscally prudent. Despite that, projected federal cuts of $100 billion by 2035 threaten to replace HCBS with nursing home care. Meanwhile, a national enrollment drop of 10% would leave millions at risk of losing coverage and care.

Richard Edwards, policy director at Amivie Home Health, explains, “If states cut home care services, many patients have no other choice but to enter a skilled nursing facility. That’s not just a shift in care—it’s often a worse healthcare and social outcome at a higher cost.” ⁴

  • 8 million elderly rely on Medicaid HCBS
  • $29,000/year average cost per Medicaid home care recipient
  • 33 states use HCBS waivers
  • Average state waitlist for HCBS exceeds 3,000 applicants
  • Institutional care costs 57% more than home care
  • Estimated federal Medicaid cuts by 2035: $100 billion
  • Projected national enrollment drop: 10%

Implications for Care at Home: Next Steps

To mitigate these risks, policy experts are advocating for pragmatic alternatives, knowing that implementation depends entirely on the direction in which political winds blow. Federal stabilization grants could offer targeted relief to states with high HCBS enrollment, preserving continuity of care. Streamlining waiver approvals would reduce bureaucratic delays and ease access for both providers and patients. Retaining key ACA incentives could help maintain momentum in home-based care innovation. States would also benefit from flexible financing rules, including reformed provider tax policies, to better manage Medicaid funds under new constraints. 

Final Thoughts

Ultimately, the new budget, passed with no Democratic votes, may reshape eldercare delivery for years to come. With states facing hard choices, the healthcare community must prepare for transitions that could disrupt care and deepen inequities. Advocacy for vulnerable populations, investment in alternatives, and ongoing engagement in policy reform will be essential to ensure seniors receive the care they deserve in the setting they prefer.

# # #

____________________________________________

¹ Congressional Budget Office, Federal Healthcare Outlook 2025–2035
² Barbara Merrill, ANCOR Policy Brief, March 2025
³ Kaiser Family Foundation, Medicaid Enrollment Tracker, April 2025
⁴ Amivie Health, Testimony to House Budget Committee, June 2025

Tim Rowan The Rowan Report

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.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

Bill Cuts Medicaid Directly, Medicare Indirectly

by | Jul 2, 2025 | Admin, Legal, Medicaid, Medicare, Regulatory

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Bill Cuts Medicaid Directly, Medicare Indirectly

This is what online publishers call a “living article.” With the House and Senate passing different bills, progress toward the President’s desk changes by the hour. What follows is everything we knew to be true on Tuesday evening, July 1. However, this bill will impact Home Health, Home Care, and Hospice. To keep readers informed, we will continuously update this article as need through the weekend. We will not send our usual emails to subscribers with every update, so we urge you to return here from time to time for updates to this breaking news item. We will add the date and time to each update.

July 3: Bill Passes, The Alliance Responds

Nearly as soon as House Republicans began their celebration, Alliance President Dr. Steve Landers issued a response from the National Alliance for Care at Home. We reprinted the complete statement from The Alliance here.

“As these Medicaid provisions become law, the Alliance will work tirelessly to monitor their implementation and advocate for the protection of Medicaid enrollees, families, and providers nationwide. We will continue to champion the delivery of HCBS – proven services that are preferred by beneficiaries and save the system money.” 

Dr. Steve Landers

CEO, The National Alliance for Care at Home

Final House Vote: July 3

In spite of a couple of Republican holdouts, H.R. 1 passed the House on a 2018-2014 vote on Thursday afternoon. All of the Senate’s changes were approved, meaning the bill does not have to go back to Senate for re-approval. Now begin final assessments of the impact on Medicaid and SNAP. Changes made in the Senate, approved by the House, increased the size of spending cuts for those two programs. As analysts inside and away from our home care community weigh in, we will post them here.

As of the end of the day, July 1

It appears as though the stalemate, if there is to be one, will center around Medicaid and SNAP cuts. There are some House Republicans who are upset that the Senate increased their H.R. 1 proposed cuts to nearly $1 Trillion. Contrarily, other House Republicans threaten to vote no because cuts are not deep enough. They point to the predicted $3.3 trillion addition to the national debt over ten years. As of the evening of July 1, the House Rules Committee continues the debate. We will update this page as often as possible for you.

As of the morning of July 1

Early Tuesday morning, the Senate passed its version of Donald Trump’s bill. Among its changes are increased cuts to Medicaid. The Congressional Budget Office calculated that the House version would have resulted in $700 billion in spending reductions. It would also have removed health insurance from 10.9 million people over 10 years. The version the Senate sent back to the House Tuesday, according to the CBO, increases those cuts to $930 billion and 11.8 million people.

Senate passes bill

June 29th

The Senate reconciliation bill would cut gross federal Medicaid and Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) spending by $1.02 trillion over the next ten years.  These cuts are $156.1 billion (18%) larger than even the House-passed bill’s draconian cuts of $863.4 billion over ten years.

  • These larger gross Medicaid and CHIP cuts are driven by changes to the House-passed bill that would:

    • further restrict state use of provider taxes to finance Medicaid
    • eliminate eligibility for many lawfully present immigrants
    • cut federal funding for payments to hospitals furnishing emergency Medicaid services
    • further reduce certain supplemental payments to hospitals and other providers (known as state-directed payments)

  • The spending effect of these additional cuts is modestly offset by increased Medicaid and CHIP spending from provisions not in the House-passed bill

    • a rural health transformation program
    • increased federal Medicaid funding for Alaska and Hawaii (Already ruled out by the parliamentarian)
    • expanded waiver authority for home- and community-based services

  • Overall, the Senate Republican reconciliation bill’s Medicaid, CHIP, Affordable Care Act marketplace, and Medicare provisions would increase the number of uninsured by 11.8 million in 2034, relative to current law

    • In comparison, the House-passed bill would increase the number of uninsured by 10.9 million in 2034.
    • More detailed CBO estimates of the specific Medicaid health coverage effects under the Senate Republican reconciliation bill are not yet available
    • CBO estimates the House-passed bill’s Medicaid and CHIP provisions would cut Medicaid enrollment by 10.5 million by 2034 and by themselves, increase the number of uninsured by 7.8 million by 2034

How the Senate Pushed the Bill Through

Majority leader Thune could only afford to lose three Republican votes. With GOP Senators Thom Tillis (N.C.), Rand Paul (Ky.) and Susan Collins (Maine) voting against the measure, along with every Democrat, centrist Lisa Murkowski of Alaska became the sole target of Republican pressure. The tactic used to get the vote close enough for VP Vance to cast the deciding vote is disturbing. 

First, leadership wrote an amendment that would have exempted Alaska from Medicaid and SNAP cuts. The parliamentarian killed that idea, saying it violated the Senate’s “Byrd Rule.” Next, marathon negotiations brought Murkowski and Parliamentarian MacDonough together to appease both. The compromise became exceptions to Medicaid and SNAP cuts that had less of an appearance of a bribe. They devised a formula that delayed cuts to states with a history of high error rates in calculating who is entitled to benefits. The CBO said that would cover as many as 10 states. The parliamentarian decided this did not violate Senate rules because it did not specifically benefit one state. They also increased the federal subsidy for rural hospitals that will be harmed by the bill from $25 billion to $50 billion.

In agreeing to vote ‘yes,’ Murkowski essentially declared that she knows the cuts will be bad for most states but will be good for her state. With the Alaska Senator’s vote secured, the final count was 50-50, leaving the final decision up to the vice president.

# # #

Tim Rowan The Rowan Report
Tim Rowan The Rowan Report

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.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

Medicaid Cuts Update: Meet the Senate Parliamentarian

by | Jun 27, 2025 | Admin, Advocacy, Medicaid, Medicare

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Medicaid Cuts Update

Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough

The ongoing negotiations in Congress will impact Medicaid and Medicare. There has been little movement from the Senate since we reported on this last week, but here’s what we know now:

When H.R. 1 was passed by the House of Representatives and forwarded to the Senate, it was immediately subjected to scrutiny by the Senate Parliamentarian, Elizabeth MacDonough. The job of the parliamentarian is to ensure that every proposed bill complies with Senate rules. The story of Ms. MacDonough taking her scissors to the “One Big Beautiful Bill” requires more than a little unpacking, but it is a good story.

Problem with Medicaid Cuts: "One Bill"

It appears that the idea to put all of the President’s legislative agenda into a single bill is acceptable in the House, but the Senate has different rules. The Senate forces itself to live under the filibuster system. When the filibuster is evoked, a bill must receive 60 votes to pass, but there is an exception. “Budget Reconciliation” is a rule that allows expedited passage of certain specific budget-related bills with only a simple majority, 51 votes.

The problem of the week is that H.R. 1 includes dozens of provisions that have nothing to do with spending. The Senate parliamentarian took her scissors to parts of the bill that:

  • change environmental regulations to pave the way to sell public lands
  • reduce the ability of federal judges to block Presidential orders1
  • dissolve the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau
  • change the rules about who can be excluded from receiving Medicare benefits, even after contributing through FICA taxes
Medicaid Cuts

Cutting Medicaid Cuts

Parliamentarian MacDonough has also applied her scissors to the portion of the bill that would reduce Medicaid spending by nearly $800 billion over ten years. Writing for The Hill, Alexander Bolton reported on June 26:

“The Senate’s referee rejected a plan to cap states’ use of health care provider taxes to collect more federal Medicaid funding, a proposal that would have generated hundreds of billions of dollars in savings… The decision could force Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) to reconsider his plan to bring the Senate bill up for a vote this week.”

Alexander Bolton

Journalist, The Hill

The provision, which would have forced states to take over substantially more Medicaid costs, came under strong bipartisan opposition. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) warned deep cuts to federal Medicaid spending could cause dozens of rural hospitals in their states to close. Senate Democrats, led by Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), the ranking Democratic on the Senate Budget Committee, praised MacDonough’s exclusions.

The Hill reported, “Democrats are fighting back against Republicans’ plans to gut Medicaid, dismantle the Affordable Care Act, and kick kids, veterans, seniors, and folks with disabilities off of their health insurance – all to fund tax breaks for billionaires,” Merkley said in a statement.

The President pushed back against the parliamentarian’s rulings in a June 24 social media post:

“To my friends in the Senate, lock yourself in a room if you must, don’t go home, and GET THE DEAL DONE THIS WEEK. Work with the House so they can pick it up, and pass it, IMMEDIATELY. NO ONE GOES ON VACATION UNTIL IT’S DONE.”

Donald Trump

President of the United States

Sorting out the Complex Immigration Question

If the above seems complicated, it becomes rudimentary compared to the background that sets the stage for the parliamentarian’s next cut. Except for emergencies, most often crisis pregnancies, persons in the country illegally cannot, and do not, receive Medicaid-reimbursed healthcare. According to a study by Kaiser Family Foundation, however, fourteen states plus the District of Columbia use state taxpayer money, not federal funds, to cover children regardless of immigration status, Seven of those fourteen, and D.C., also cover some adults with state funds regardless of immigration status.

In the bill was a provision to punish these fourteen states and D.C. by reducing their federal Medicaid payments from 90 percent to 80 percent. Though there is no accusation in the bill that these states are guilty of improper use of federal funds, the states will lose some of those funds because of the way they have chosen to use their own funds. Parliamentarian MacDonough said that is not a budget line item but an attempt by the federal government to force states to change their own healthcare policies.

Medicare Restrictions also Scrapped

Almost as a postscript, a House restriction on Medicare eligibility also fell victim to the Senate Parliamentarian’s scissors. Non-citizens who work in W-2 wage jobs pay FICA taxes, many of them for 30 years or more. When these workers turn 65, they are eligible for Medicare benefits due to their contributions, regardless of their status. Though H.R. 1, the House version, would eliminate that eligibility, Ms. MacDonough said, “Nope, this is not a budget reconciliation issue.”

Although the White House is pressuring Senators to vote quickly — so that a joint House/Senate negotiating committee can hammer out differences and send their compromise version to the President’s desk by July 4 — that self-imposed deadline is up in the air at the moment. Both President Trump and House Speaker Johnson are adamant that every spending and every non-budgetary policy change they want must be enacted in one big bill. In spite of Ms. MacDonough’s cuts, the Senate it not exactly handcuffed either. Because it makes its own rules, Senators could simply decide, with a 51-49 party-line vote, to ignore the parliamentarian.

The power, as well as the future health of Medicaid, falls into the hands of the four dissenting Republican Senators. Home Health and Home Care folks in Missouri, Maine, Alaska and Kansas take note.

____________________________________

1  From White House correspondent Bart Jansen, writing for USA Today:

  • Currently, judges have discretion to set bonds on plaintiffs who file civil suits. Legal experts say judges often waive bonds in lawsuits against the government because the disputes are typically over policy rather than money.
  • A provision in the House-passed version of the bill would remove that discretion from federal judges and require litigants to post a bond when the issue under consideration is whether to block a Trump policy.
  • So far, judges have blocked Trump policies in 180 cases. All of them would have to be reviewed for bonds if the Senate approves the House provision and Trump signs it into law.
  • The law would effectively kill most of the limitations on Trump policies because bond amounts are determined by the dollar amount of the contested policy. In federal cases involving massive policy changes, those bonds can amount to hundreds of billions.

# # #

Tim Rowan The Rowan Report
Tim Rowan The Rowan Report

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.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

Medicaid Cuts Still Looming

by | Jun 20, 2025 | Clinical, Medicaid, Regulatory

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Medicaid Cuts Looming

Terminal Prognosis

Let me tell you about my brother. In his early 30’s, Tom was diagnosed with a rare disorder, one of the 25 versions of Ataxia. A disorder that is sometimes genetic, sometimes of unknown cause. It damages the part of the brain stem that controls balance, eye-hand coordination, and speech. He was supposed to be confined to a wheelchair by age 45 and not make it to 60.

Medicaid to the Rescue

Tom will celebrate his 71st birthday next week. Some years back, an experimental drug appeared that happened to be effective with his variation of Ataxia. That medication, administered intravenously in his home, is ridiculously expensive. If not for Medicare and Medicaid, those early prognoses would have come true. With the treatments, the disorder does still progress, though much more slowly. During my visits to his home — yes, he still manages on his own for now — he and I talk about the Assisted Living or Skilled Nursing Facility that looms in his future. Always with his head low and a sigh, he says he knows that day will come.

One in 71 Million

The 20 percent of American citizens who qualify for Medicaid are as nervous as Tom is about a bill making its way through Congress. As of May 22, 2025, H.R. 1 passed the House of Representatives by one vote. Today, it is still under debate in the Senate, where several amendments are being considered.

Medicaid Pays More than Medicare

In a February report, the Kaiser Family Foundation explained it this way:

Medicaid road sign "cuts ahead"

Four in ten adults incorrectly believe that Medicare is the primary source of coverage for low-income people. For those who need nursing or home care, Medicaid is the primary payer. Medicaid covered two-thirds of all home care spending in the United States in 2022. With House Republicans considering $2.3 trillion in Medicaid cuts over 10 years, the availability of home care could be affected in future years. Home care cannot afford the loss of almost one-third of the entire Medicaid budget.

Medicaid Cuts Impact

The February report indicates that H.R 1 could fundamentally change how Medicaid financing works. This would consequently impact enrollees’ access to care. The authors assert that “cuts of this magnitude would put states at financial risk, forcing them to raise new revenues or reduce Medicaid spending by eliminating coverage for some people, covering fewer services, and/or cutting rates paid to home care workers and other providers.”

“Such difficult choices would have implications for home care because over half of Medicaid spending finances care for people ages 65 and older and those with disabilities, the enrollees most likely to use home care and related services.”

Mohamed, A.; Burns, A.; O'Malley Watts, M.

Authors, What is Medicaid Home Care (HCBS)?

Medicaid Cuts Proposals

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has been listening to Senate debates and reading proposed amendments. In a news release this week, CBPP offered a dismal assessment.

“The health provisions in the Senate Republican leaders’ plan are, alarmingly, even harsher and more damaging than the health provisions in [H.R. 1]. Under both plans, tens of millions of people would face substantially higher health care costs and millions would lose access to life-saving treatments, routine care, and medications they need.”

Medicaid Cuts

Higher Costs, Less Access

Home Care and the Work Requirement

There is much talk in Congress and in social media about able-bodied Medicaid beneficiaries who sit at home and play video games all day. Not only does this indicate a confusion between healthcare and welfare (you can’t eat or sleep in Medicaid), but it also tends to exaggerate the scope of this fraud/waste/abuse target. 

As KFF points out, most Medicaid adults under age 65 are already working but are paid low enough that they still qualify. Many who are not working (12%) serve as caregivers for a family members. If they are removed from the home to go to a job, someone else would have to take over caregiving duties, probably a home care agency. Thus, there would be a net loss to the system. 

Net Loss

The Congressional Budget Office found when examining the House version that work requirements would decrease federal spending by reducing the number of uninsured. However, in the same report, the CBO notes that there would be no increase in employment numbers.

On top of the uncertain benefit of the work requirement, the bill as it stands today would greatly increase reporting requirements. In place of “once qualified, always qualified,” Medicaid eligibility will require regular reporting to prove employment and annual re-qualification paperwork. The new red tape burdens will be especially difficult on seasonal workers or those who frequently change jobs.

Medicaid Cuts and Rural Hospitals

No one is quite sure what the impact on home care will be when Medicaid cuts force rural hospitals to close, as the CBO predicts. Longer journeys to receive hospital care and doctor visits may push more beneficiaries to home care while home care will be struggling to find caregiving staff.

Before the bill becomes law, rural hospitals are already in trouble. The American Hospital Association says that 48 percent of rural hospitals operated at a loss in 2023 and 92 closed their doors over the past 10 years. There are 16.1 million Medicaid beneficiaries living in rural communities, including 65 percent of nursing home residents. Can home care cover the losses if a portion of the estimated $800 billion in Medicaid cuts over 10 years hit home care just as hard?  

Medicaid Support in Congress

There are home care champions on the Republican side of the House and Senate. Some of them have already expressed their doubts about whether cutting home care would decrease or increase overall spending. In the “strange bedfellow” category, conservative icon Josh Hawley of Missouri swore he would “tank any bill that cuts Medicaid benefits.”

Senate Republicans can afford to lose only three votes to get this bill passed and sent back to the House. Today would be the time for all of them to hear from the care at home industry. Call your Senator. All phone numbers start with 202-224-

# # #

Tim Rowan The Rowan Report
Tim Rowan The Rowan Report

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.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

Medicaid Cuts Remain Unknown So Far

by | May 1, 2025 | CMS, Medicaid, Regulatory

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

"Life and Death"

Medicaid Cuts are Looming

We don’t need to cut benefits, and it really infuriates me to hear people here talking about that because it stresses people out. This is life and death for them.     –Senator Bernie Moreno (R-OH)

Budget Reconciliation Threatens Medicaid

After last weeks HHS purge, all of Care at Home is on edge as the U.S. House and Senate negotiate differences in each body’s budget reconciliation bill. The same jitters are found among Medicaid-eligible citizens, especially those who hear more rumors than actual progress reports from Washington. All we know for sure this week are two things: Speaker Johnson has pushed his deadline for a vote on the bill, asking for $880 billion in cuts, from Memorial Day to Independence Day; and the parallel Senate budget bill, at this date, is quite different. Watching the reconciliation talks should be nerve-wracking but entertaining.

The House Version

As of May 1, it is too early to assign a dollar amount to the FY 2026 Medicaid budget. H.B. 1968, named “Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act of 2025,” delegates specific cut decisions to committees. It first directs the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which oversees Medicaid and part of Medicare, to reduce the federal deficit by $880 billion over ten years. The Agriculture Committee, which oversees SNAP, is ordered to cut $230 billion over the same time period.

Image of a Congressional Bill Document

Medicaid Cuts: Per Capita Caps

The Energy and Commerce Committee is the oldest standing legislative committee in the House. It has broad jurisdiction over our nation’s energy, health care, telecommunications, and consumer product safety policies. In the 119th Congress, it is chaired by Brett Guthrie (R-KY), a West Point graduate with a degree in Public and Private Management from Yale.

Guthrie has advocated changes to Medicaid since his days as a Kentucky state legislator. He pushed for the $880 billion in cuts that found life in H.B. 1968. Guthrie’s solution to growing Medicaid costs is “per capita caps” which would give states a fixed maximum amount of money for each person on Medicaid. According to an analysis by Axios, published after interviewing Guthrie:

  • “The federal government now covers a percentage of states’ Medicaid costs, so the amount reimbursed goes up or down depending on how much a state spends on the program.
  • Per capita caps would likely result in less money for states, forcing them to make up the difference by raising taxes or cutting spending elsewhere.”

In His Own Words

Guthrie told Axios he saw how the Medicaid program affected state budgets firsthand while serving in the Kentucky Statehouse. “I dealt with it,” he told Axios. “That is why I care about this…It just overwhelmed state budgets. What I’ve learned is, as we keep subsidizing health care, the price keeps going up. So, my idea with per capita allotments has always been that it will control costs.”

People might “fall off” Medicaid. “I’ve talked to a lot of providers, other groups, and they’re concerned. I’m not saying they’re not, but I think we can do it in a way that people get service.”
(202) 225-3501; (202) 225-3501

Brett Guthrie

Chairman, Energy and Commerce Committee

SNAP Cuts

Glenn Thompson (R-PA) chairs the Agricultural Committee, which will be asked to make cuts to SNAP. Prior to being elected to Pennsylvania’s Fifteenth District, Thompson spent 28 years as a therapist, rehabilitation services manager, and a licensed nursing home administrator.
(202) 225-5121; (814) 353-0215

Strange Bedfellows in the Senate

Along with every Democrat, at least two conservative Republicans have expressed uncertainty about putting budget savings on the backs of Medicaid beneficiaries. Senators Bernie Moreno of Ohio and Josh Hawley of Missouri both warned in interviews with newsmagazine Semafor that proposals to cut the federal government’s share of the costs in states that have expanded Medicaid, and to otherwise cap Medicaid expansion spending, could lead to coverage losses. Moreno bluntly told Semafor that both ideas amount to “cutting benefits.”

“There’s not 50 votes for any kind of cuts in benefits. That’s just a fact,” Moreno said.

Just A Skosh of A Difference to Negotiate

A detailed analysis by the Geiger Gibson Program in Community Health at the Milken Institute School of Public Health at George Washington University compares the House and Senate versions side by side. Their analysis points out that the Senate outline for its bill calls for at least $1 billion in Medicaid spending reductions over the 10-year budget window. As already noted, the House wants its committees to find at least $880 billion over the same window.

“The Senate bill also authorizes the Budget Committee to adjust the targets for the purpose of “protecting the Medicaid program,” which may include “strengthening and improving” Medicaid (undefined) in a deficit-neutral fashion. The Senate measure thus effectively prioritizes protections for Medicaid over other potential policy aims to be achieved through the reconciliation process. The House bill, by contrast, calls for scaling back tax relief if the spending reduction targets are not met, thereby placing additional pressure on the $880 billion floor.

The House and Senate now must reconcile two extremely different measures before the reconciliation process actually proceeds, the university report concludes. “Although it is unclear whether the House will proceed with a legislation to achieve reconciliation in advance of a final agreement.”

$779 billion is a lot of reconciling...

One final independent analysis may draw this discussion to a close that speaks directly to our industry’s concerns. The Commonwealth Fund, in a March 25 “Issue Briefing,” looked at the long-term consequences of deep Medicaid cuts. In its executive summary, the briefing says:

 

Key Findings and Conclusions

Combined losses from proposed Medicaid and SNAP cuts would reach $1.1 trillion over a decade, including a $95 billion loss of federal funding in 2026 alone. State gross domestic products (GDPs) would be $113 billion lower, exceeding federal budget savings. About 1.03 million jobs would be lost nationwide in health care, food-related industries, and other sectors. State and local governments would lose $8.8 billion in state and local tax revenues. Not extending the enhanced health insurance premium tax credits that are scheduled to expire after December 2025 would lead to an additional 286,000 jobs lost in 2026, for a combined total of more than 1.3 million jobs lost in the United States.

Stay tuned. We at the Rowan Report are committed to keeping a close eye on developments in this bi-partisan battle.

# # #

Tim Rowan Editor Emeritus

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.com

©2024 by The Rowan Report, Peoria, AZ. All rights reserved. This article originally appeared in Healthcare at Home: The Rowan Report. One copy may be printed for personal use: further reproduction by permission only. editor@therowanreport.com

Dr. Oz Nomination Advances to Full Senate

by | Mar 31, 2025 | Admin, CMS, Regulatory

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Dr. Oz Nomination Advance to Senate

“Given your close ties to the industry that you would regulate, if you are confirmed, the public would have reason to question your impartiality and commitment to serving the public’s interest.”  — Senator Elizabeth Warren, letter to Dr. Mehmet Oz

Reuter’s Ahmed Aboulenein reported on March 12 that “Warren called on Oz to divest from his financial holdings related to industries regulated by the agency and commit to strong ethics safeguards.” Oz, of course, is President Donald Trump’s nominee for CMS Administrator, the agency most important to Home Health and Hospice providers.

Across the aisle, Missouri Senator Josh Hawley peppered Oz with questions about his position on transgender therapy. “You previously praised trans surgeries for minors and supported the use of puberty blockers for children. You discussed transgender therapy on your TV program and hosted transgender children.”

Hawley also questioned Dr Oz’s previous comments on abortion, adding: “I hope he’s changed his views to match President Trump! We need the Trump agenda at CMS.”

It goes without saying that a nominee who encounters challenges from the left and the right is facing an uphill battle toward Senate confirmation, especially when nominees this year can only afford to lose three votes from the majority party. What exactly has Dr. Oz said or done over his long career that may put his nomination in jeopardy?

Pulling Back the Curtain

Becker’s Hospital Review summarized Oz’s history as well as his answers to questions during his three-hour Senate hearing on March 14.

“The former TV personality answered questions about potential Medicaid cuts, the focus of the House’s February budget instruction that the Energy and Commerce Committee cut $880 billion over 10 years. Medicare and Medicaid are the largest programs under the committee’s oversight. (A March 5 Congressional Budget Office report said the only way to reach the $880 billion saving goal over the next decade, without raising taxes, would be through Medicaid or CHIP cuts.)”

While Dr. Oz did not directly respond to questions or reveal his stance regarding Medicaid cuts, he did have a prepared non-answer for the Senators. “I commit to doing whatever I can, working tirelessly to ensure that CMS provides Americans with superb care. Especially Americans who are most vulnerable. Our young, our disabled and our elderly.”

CMS Administrator Nominee Dr. Oz

On March 25, the Senate Finance Committee voted to advance Oz’s nomination to the full Senate. The panel voted 14 to 13, along party lines. 

Vision Statement

Prior to facing the challenging questions thrown at him from both sides of the aisle, Dr. Oz used his opening statement to outline a vision focused largely on modernizing CMS’s systems; addressing waste, fraud and abuse; and incentivizing Americans to make healthier lifestyle choices.

In the past, Oz had endorsed privatizing Medicare through a change that would essentially result in something that might be called “Medicare Advantage for All.” In his Senate hearing answers, Oz pivoted to the opposite argument. He cited problems of overpayments to Medicare Advantage plans, the need to limit prior authorizations, and emphasized the need to halt the practice of “upcoding” where providers or plans bill for treating patients as sicker than they actually are.

In 2010, Dr Oz hosted a 15-minute segment on his show called “Transgender Kids: Too Young to Decide?” in which he spoke to transgender children, their parents and a doctor who provided gender-affirming care.

Outlook

Considering the slim Republican majority in the Senate, Ox can afford to lose only three Republican votes in his bid to become the next CMS administrator.

# # #

Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.com

©2024 by The Rowan Report, Peoria, AZ. All rights reserved. This article originally appeared in Healthcare at Home: The Rowan Report. One copy may be printed for personal use: further reproduction by permission only. editor@therowanreport.com

Agency Management System for Fractional Home Care

by | Mar 7, 2025 | Admin, Clinical, Product Review, Vendor Watch

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Agency Management System for Fractional Home Care

There is a growing service sector within Home Care to provide in-home care to seniors living in Independent Living and Assisted Living facilities. We described the basics of the way it works in last week’s interview with Jessica Nobles. She pointed out that there was no software available for the kind of scheduling required by this type of home care. She wound up creating her own software to schedule on-site caregivers performing visits that can be anywhere from five-minutes to full, four-hour shifts.

Right after building the customized scheduling tool, Ms. Nobles met Tim and Gina Murray, who had been through an identical experience with their own agency, Aware Home Care. The difference between their stories was that both the Nobles’ and the Murray’s, after selling their respective agencies, embarked on different paths. Jessica and Clint went the consulting route and Tim and Gina formed a software company, CinchCCM, Community Care Made Easy. We spoke to them this week to hear the rest of the story.

Agency Management System Win-Win-Win

At no cost to the residential facility itself, a home care agency places one or more caregivers on the premises. IL or AL residents join a kind of co-op to be eligible to request in-home services. Some agencies who offer this service accept requests for traditional shifts, five-minute check-ins, and pretty much everything in between.

Many request regular morning breakfast help, others tuck-in services. Most agencies in this sector allow registered members to request unscheduled, as-needed help. To accommodate the needs of all members, an agency will add caregivers as the number of participants grows. The Murray’s outlined the benefits to all involved.

Gina Murray
  • Caregivers like predictable income. They are paid for their entire time on-site, whether they are in a member home or on call between visits.
  • IL and AL owners find that the level of care keeps residents in their facilities longer by delaying the need to move to a nursing facility.
  • Families gain peace of mind, knowing their older loved ones have a caregiver nearby and on call all day, sometimes overnight.
  • Home Care agencies report enhanced caregiver satisfaction and retention, along with a steady, predictable payroll.

Clearly, agency management software was not intended to automate this type of arrangement.  

Not Your Parents' Agency Management System

CinchCCM Screenshot

The Murray’s designed a system that displays schedules on a color-coded, calendar grid, with a column for each day and row for each 15-minute unit. Then they began to add features.

  • caregivers can tweak scheduled visits by drag and drop
  • remote family members can see scheduled and completed visits as well as caregiver notes
  • on the system’s mobile app, each caregiver can see the schedule of all other on-site colleagues. If a client unexpectedly needs more time and a caregiver has another visit coming up, that caregiver can find an available colleague and ask, through a secure message on the app, for someone to fill in.
  • on the system’s mobile app, each caregiver can see the schedule of all other on-site colleagues. If a client unexpectedly needs more time and a caregiver has another visit coming up, that caregiver can find an available colleague and ask, through a secure message on the app, for someone to fill in.
  • a management dashboard displays real time charts of caregiver utilization and gross profit. Agencies with multiple sites can report each site’s data separately and roll all sites up into one combined report.

Tim Murray explained that version 5.0 is nearly finished and ready to be released later this year. “It has been a long, slow development process,” he said, “and the first version was functional but simple. Adding the mobile app was a big step forward and very popular with the field staff. Management reports and real-time charts brought CinchCCM from a scheduling application to a full agency management system.”

Pricing, Growth, Evolution

CinchCCM is priced per client, based on average daily census at the end of each month. The Murray’s found this policy to be both manageable and fair. Their customers have a predictable revenue stream if most residents choose the monthly retainer option, and they have a predictable software cost for budgeting.

As word spread and software sales grew, Tim and Gina Murray sold Aware Home Care, formed a corporation, and turned their efforts to feature development, customer support, and sales. Those efforts have led to growth to 60 clients across the country. “As the so-called fractional home care concept grows,” Gina Murray concluded, “we want to be there to make it a smooth experience for those who give it a try.”

# # #

Tim Rowan The Rowan Report
Tim Rowan The Rowan Report

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.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

Fractional Home Care

by | Feb 27, 2025 | Admin, Clinical, Recruitment & Retention

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Solve Nagging Problems; Raise Revenue

Along with the rest of the Private Pay sector, Jessica Nobles’ Eastern Tennessee agency was struggling with caregiver recruitment and retention. Finding good people is less than half the battle. To keep them, you have to pay a competitive wage and provide enough hours to ensure that wage translates into an attractive and predictable monthly income. We spoke with Jennifer, Founder of Home Care Ops, last week to learn one of her solutions.

Fractional Home Care

What Nobles calls “Fractional Home Care” is providing services in a senior living community with one or more caregivers stationed on site. Residents pay a membership fee or pre-purchase a package of hours. The agency is thus guaranteed a small revenue base and clients are free to request services for a few minutes or a few hours on an as-needed basis.

“Our caregivers love this arrangement because it virtually guarantees them full-time pay. They remain on site at the facility for a contracted shift, which can be their choice of daytime or night hours. If demand warrants it, we will assign more than one caregiver at a time.”

Jessica Nobles

Founder, Home Care Ops

She added that the advantage to the agency is that nearly all of a caregiver’s day is paid hours. There are no mileage reimbursements and no paying for travel time or idle time. “Think of it as a co-op,” she continued. Ten clients can share one caregiver. They get all the care they need and our caregivers are earning for their entire day.”

The benefit accrues to independent living communities as well. Their arrangement with an outside Home Care agency means they no longer have the burden of hiring and retaining a caregiving staff of their own and their residents get better care. The residents pay for the services, not the facility, and they have the option of using the on-site caregivers as needed or through the pre-purchase plan of a block of ten or twenty 15-minute units.

A Typical Scenario

Jessica offered an example of how Fractional Home Care often works. An Assisted Living Facility resident lives independently but occasionally needs help with showers, or help getting to and from the community center, etc. In a typical home care setting, that person would have to bring in a caregiver for four, six, or eight hours, though less than an hour is needed. The family speaks with the onsite agency to arrange for the specific help needed, whether it is a few minutes

Fractional Home Care ALF

every other day or an hour every day. The agency offers a membership at flat fee and both parties get exactly what they need. The caregiver is available to add other residents to his or her schedule, making it possible to achieve a 40-hour work week.

“Some patients might need traditional daily care as they might get from any other agency,” Jessica explained. “They can contract for that for around $1,600 per month. Our caregiver can come multiple times a day since there are no drive time concerns.” She said that not every client needs a membership program. Some prefer pre-sold units, perhaps buying five 15-minute visits in advance. “They never have to pay for down time. Our caregivers never sit idle should their work be done before their shift is up.” 

Jessica Nobles Fractional Home Care

Fractional Home Care Improves Agency Reputation

Jessica has found that her agencies have earned a reputation for such excellent care that they have occasionally replaced franchise home care organizations locally that have national contracts with national ALFs. Some of these facilities have been dissatisfied with the care they were getting with their national organization’s contracted agency. When this happens, they seek a local agency to replace them. Jessica has seen this several times when the franchise was not staying on site.

“We explain our fractional model, with someone on site at specified times when at least three residents have signed on, and one caregiver per 10 clients. The more clients who sign up, the more caregivers we station at the facility. This leads to an additional benefit for the ALF. This level of service delays the day the family decides to move Mom from their community to a nursing facility.”

Fractional Home Care has been so successful, the word spread to other residential communities. Nobles’ company had had to turn some away. When that happened, she and her partner and husband began to teach the system to other agencies.

There was one obstacle, she admits. There were no Agency Management Software systems that could be adapted to the fractional way of providing care. She and her team finally created their own…right before she found one on the market that met their needs. Jessica introduced us to Tim and Gina Murray, co-founders of Cinch CCM. Jessica recommends Cinch CCM to fractional home care agencies. We have scheduled a demo and will have a review in the near future.

# # #

About Jessica Nobles

With over a decade of Private Duty Home Care leadership and knowledge, Jessica Nobles worked her way up through every position from Caregiver, Operations Coordinator, Franchise Developer, and Independent Agency Owner. As the founder and operator of Nobility Care Solutions, she grew her revenue to six figures within the first year of business through grassroots marketing, creative community engagements, and referral partnerships. She is also the Executive Administrator for Home Care Ops where she coaches, consults, and empowers other home care owners and operators to create operational systems and strategies that build lasting business success and consistently increases revenue.

Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.com

©2024 by The Rowan Report, Peoria, AZ. All rights reserved. This article originally appeared in Healthcare at Home: The Rowan Report. One copy may be printed for personal use: further reproduction by permission only. editor@therowanreport.com

Threats to Your Business

by | Feb 14, 2025 | Editorial, Regulatory

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Threats to Your Business

Two seemingly unrelated news items jumped out at me that could be threats to your business while I was away tending to funeral preparations for my brother’s wife. Before I analyze those reports, please indulge me as I start with a personal note. I cannot speak highly enough of the end-of-life care my sister-in-law received from the team at Dynamic Hospice of the Los Angeles area, coordinated by longtime friend of The Rowan Report, Michelle Hofhine. They deserve more than this simple public thanks can accomplish.

Health Insurance's Uncertain Future

In a February 7 article for Axios, Caitlin Owens speculates that the Trump administration’s economizing efforts may eventually move to health insurance, particularly the excessive profits from their Medicare Advantage business lines. Explaining why both Moody’s and S&P Global Ratings downgraded their outlook from “stable” to “negative,” Owens cited rising medical costs, the inability to fully offset those costs by hiking premiums, pharmacy benefit manager tightening the screws, and recent strain in operating performance as regulators crack down on insurance abuses in both Medicare Advantage and Medicaid.

Image of letters spelling health and wealth

The author of the piece also mentioned the trend of large providers refusing to renew MA contracts due to underpayment and unjustified care denials. Some employers, she said, are bypassing insurers and contracting directly with providers. The inability to provide service to MA beneficiaries, who make up 50% of the Medicaid patients, could be a threat to your business and the care at home industry.

The downside of this analysis for Home Health and Hospice providers, as well as Medicare Home Care agencies, is that MA and Managed Care may start to shift more costs to their customers to make up their “losses.” The upside is that this is another opportunity for the industry as a whole to renew its advocacy efforts to try again to convince government payers that in-home care saves them more than it costs them.

It is too soon to predict what policy changes HHS Secretary Kennedy and CMS Administrator Oz will enact, but it is safe to assume they will adopt the White House’s goal to slash government spending. During a time when private payers see their margins squeezed and public payers are looking to cut costs, renewing our sector’s decades-long message that we are the quintessential economizing solution may mean that message will finally be heard.

Private Equity Bad for Patients, Senate Finds

Closed run-down hospital

The second surprising report came from the U.S. Senate Budget Committee. In a scathing bipartisan report of an in-depth investigation spearheaded by Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the committee declared that “private equity investment in health care has negative consequences for patients and providers.”

Titled “Profits Over Patients,” the 162-page report focuses on two of the largest private equity firms that have recently invested in two large hospital systems. We mention it because there has been an atmosphere of celebration in recent years at post-acute care conferences about the renewed interest in Home Health and Home Care among investors.

Here are some of the reasons the Senate recommends caution:

  • Emphasis on profit over quality of care: “Documents obtained by the Committee detailed how private equity’s ownership of hospitals earned investors millions, while patients suffered and hospitals experienced health and safety violations, understaffing, reduced quality of patient care and closures.”
  • “Chronic understaffing” leads to much longer wait times for patients
  • Closures for “economic reasons” force patients to drive long distances for care
  • Higher frequency of health and safety violations puts patients at risk
  • Minutes of some board meetings show discussions focus only on profit maximization tactics — cost cutting, increasing patient volume, and managing labor expenses — with little to no discussion of patient outcomes or quality of care at their hospitals
  • In one extreme case, according to Senator Whitehouse, one firm “paid out $645 million in dividends and preferred stock redemption to its investors and shareholders, while it took out hundreds of millions in loans that it eventually defaulted on.

Senator Whitehouse added in the report, “Private equity investors have pocketed millions while driving hospitals into the ground and then selling them off, leaving towns communities to pick up the pieces.”

Let's Finish With Optimism

Three weeks is not enough time to evaluate the impact of any one four-year term in office. We have clues about the new administration’s approach to healthcare in general and in-home care in particular, but only clues. Perhaps the future is malleable. Perhaps now is the time to turn up the volume. We know patients prefer care in the home. Maybe, with our advocacy, this government will prefer it too.

# # #

Tim Rowan Founder Editor Emeritus
Tim Rowan is a 30-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.com

©2024 by The Rowan Report, Peoria, AZ. All rights reserved. This article originally appeared in Healthcare at Home: The Rowan Report. One copy may be printed for personal use: further reproduction by permission only. editor@therowanreport.com