The Alliance Responds

Advocacy

by Kristin Rowan | Jun 13, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Hospice

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

The Alliance Responds to CMS Hospice Update

The Alliance responds to CMS-1835-P, the FY 2026 Hospice Wage Index, Conditions of Participation, and Quality Reporting Program Requirements updates. On June 10, 2025, in a 25 page letter to Dr. Mehemet Oz, CEO for The National Alliance for Care at Home Steve Landers, MD, MPH lays out the constraints and financial burdens hospice agencies will face if these updates are enacted.

Payment Rate Update

Increase Less than Inflation

In the rule for FY 2026, CMS proposes a 3.2 percent market basket increase and a .8 percent productivity decrease, yielding a 2.4 percent increase overall. According to the letter, inflation has raised medical care prices by 3.1 percent, leaving a shortfall of .7 percent. Hospices are also plagued by the same workforce shortage the rest of the medical industry faces. Workforce shortages result in fewer qualified people than there are available positions, which drives wages up. BLS data indicates the wage increase for 2025 was 4.4%. The Alliance argues that the 2.4% net increase falls well short of the actual expense increase.

Faulty Data

In a recent article, we outlined the process that CMS uses to determine the market basket update. The Alliance echos our information, showing the market basket forecast is well below actual increases. The Alliance further argues that the shortfall compounds, leaving the base rate increasingly smaller with each forecast. The current estimate is a 4.9% pay rate gap. CMS contends there is no way to adjust for forecast errors. The Alliance has a simple solution: manually adjust the payment rate every year when the finalized number are above the forecasted numbers BEFORE adding the next year’s payment rate increase.

Likewise, The Alliance concurs with The Rowan Report sentiment that productivity cannot increase in hospice like it does in less labor-intensive sectors. Landers also mentions the failure to consider travel costs, the wage differences in rural areas, and the lack of reclassification options in hospice care.

Payment Rate Recommendations

As any well-drafted response should, The Alliance provides actionable recommendations in each section. For payment rate updates, The Alliance recommends:

We recommend CMS examine closely more recent data and increase final payment rates for FY 2026.
We urge CMS to explore all available avenues to address the forecast error shortfall, such as through a one-time adjustment.
We encourage CMS to collaborate with stakeholders to address the shortcomings of relying upon hospital data to determine hospice payment rates, and ways to achieve parity across provider types with respect to geographic area wage adjustments.

HIS to HOPE Transition

Also addressed in the letter is opposition to the timeline of the HIS to HOPE transition. The Alliance restates much of what was in the joint letter to CMS urging the delay of the HOPE tool adoption. That letter was a joint venture between The National Alliance for Care at Home (The Alliance), LeadingAge, and the National Partnership for Healthcare and Hospice Innovation (NPHI).

The consequence of adverse outcomes cannot be understated. The risk of negative financial consequences for hospice providers is
largely dependent this year on the success of two transitions—iQIES and HOPE— neither of which are within their control.

Steve Landers, MD, MPH

CEO, National Alliance for Care at Home

HOPE Transition Recommendations

Considering the volatility inherent in a reporting transition of this magnitude and the lack of clear information provided to date, we respectfully request CMS waive the HOPE timeliness submission requirement for two calendar quarters post implementation.
We further respectfully request that CMS delay the HOPE implementation date until at least six months after CMS education and training, beyond that which is introductory and that is scheduled for spring/summer 2025, the final validation utility tool specifications are available and the application for iQIES access has been opened for hospices.

Digital and Future Hospice Measurements

Among the digital hospice measurements is an interoperability measurement. The Alliance supports interoperability and data exchange across medical care entities, but stresses to CMS that many hospices do not have digital EHR systems, cannot afford to maintain such systems, and have not received the federal financial support necessary to meet this objective.

The Alliance also objects, not in theory, but in practical application, to the nutrition measure noted in future hospice measures. Nutrition for a hospice patient is vastly different than for other patients and should be implemented as a process measure, rather than having specific goals for food intake and nutrition.

Similarly, the well-being measure is not designed for hospice care. In other sectors of healthcare, well-being incorporates measures for mental, social and physical health and focuses on curative plans. Hospice care focuses on person-centered care, emphasizing the desires of the patient as they are balanced against religious, cultural, and personal beliefs. The well-being measure must be curated to fit hospice care.

The Alliance - Conclusion

The Alliance values CMS’s ongoing commitment to enhancing hospice care quality,
ensuring program integrity, and improving patient outcomes. We appreciate your
consideration of our comments and look forward to ongoing dialogue to achieve these
shared objectives.

The Rowan Report - Conclusion

The Alliance has, as always, done an exemplary job at explaining the industry position on the CMS rule. Likewise, it has outlined each step CMS should take to view the updates through a hospice lens rather than a hospital lens. We commend and support The Alliance statement and position. As this is an ongoing topic until the final rule is implemented, we will continue to provide updates as they become available.

If you are a member of The Alliance, you can read the full 25 page letter here.

# # #

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, and speaker on Artificial Intelligence and Lone Worker Safety and state and national conferences.

She also 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

Delay HOPE Tool

Advocacy

by Kristin Rowan | Jun 6, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Hospice, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Advocacy Groups to CMS:

Delay HOPE Tool Implementation

“Delay HOPE Tool Implementation,” say multiple hospice advocacy groups. LeadingAge, the National Alliance for Care at Home (The Alliance), and the National Partnership for Healthcare and Hospice Innovation (NPHI) are urging CMS to delay the transition from HIS to HOPE. The three groups sent a joint letter to Dr. Mehmet Oz, CMS Administrator, earlier this week.

“Our associations remain fully committed to the [Hospice Quality Reporting Program (HQRP)], including the payment penalties for non-compliance, and recognize the critical importance of accurate, timely data submission to inform the delivery of high-quality hospice care. However, we have serious concerns about the potential for successful implementation of the HOPE tool.”

LeadingAge, The Alliance, NPHI

Hospice Advocacy

The concerns over agency readiness to implement the new tool center on the new reporting platform. Hospice agencies state they don’t have all the necessary information to develop a workable tool for submission. Therefore, the agencies have asked CMS to delay the implementation of the HOPE tool. They have called on CMS to wait until six months after agencies have access to education, training, and final validation specifications.

Hospice Rule Penalty

The hospice program through CMS requires substantial reporting for payment. Hospices that do not submit the required 90% of records, they receive an annual payment penalty of 4%. Combined with lower than sustainable payment increases, the 4% penalty results in a lower reimbursement rate over prior years. The associations worry that the lack of information and education will lead to lower reporting. In turn, the lower reporting lowers reimbursement rates. For hospices that are already struggling to survive, the penalty is devastating. The letter to CMS asked to waive the timeliness requirement for two quarters after implementation.

HOPE Tool Lacks Validation

CMS will have a Validation Utility Tool that agencies will need to use in order to ensure their software can successfully submit their data. CMS has not released the tool and indicates they may not until sometime in September. The HOPE tool is scheduled for implementation in October. There is not enough time between release of the validity tool and implementation of the HOPE tool for proper testing.

Hospice Agencies Lack Validation

In addition to validating data submission, hospice agencies have to enroll in the new submission portal, iQUIES. Enrollment requires a privacy security official and other staff. Additionally, it requires an application to access the system, background checks, and other actions. Thus far, hospice agencies do not have access to begin this process and there is no indication of how long it will take. The associations are concerned that the process may also involve significant financial cost to hospice agencies.

Resources

CMS released the Hospice Outcomes and Patient Evaluation (HOPE) Guidance Manual v1.01, a 138 page PDF, available here. The manual includes links to other resources for hospice agencies. Namely, a webpage with information on HOPE Data Submission Specifications has a “final” version of data specs available for download. Additionally, there are links to the Main Page here and technical information and updates here. The document urges vendors to register to get updates and important announcements.

Final Thoughts

There is no information yet as to a response to the letter from CMS. Thus far, CMS is still planning on keeping the October 1, 2025 HOPE implementation date. We will continue to report on updates from CMS and the advocacy groups.

# # #

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, and speaker on Artificial Intelligence and Lone Worker Safety and state and national conferences.

She also 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

Trouble in MA Paradise?

Advocacy

by Kristin Rowan | May 1, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Editorial, Medicaid, Medicare, Medicare Advantage

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Medicare Advantage

It’s no secret within the care at home community that Medicare Advantage is not without its problems. Coverage and care are good when the beneficiary is relatively healthy. When it’s really needed, MA plans deny coverage. Multiple insurance companies have upcoded patient care for higher reimbursements. And predatory marketing tactics target our most vulnerable.

Predatory Marketing

Medicare Advantage payers use unethical marketing to target seniors, sometimes going as far as to call unwitting customers and strong-arm them into changing from their traditional Medicare plans to MA. Anecdotally, a family friend was convinced to switch to Medicare Advantage three times. Each time, his family caregiver reversed that change before any real damage was done. Similarly, our own Editor Emeritus, Tim Rowan, fielded calls aimed at his disabled, grieving brother, urging him to change to a MA plan. Luckily, those calls were deflected by someone who knew better. Not everyone is as lucky.

UHC Projects Lower Earnings

Despite a 9.8 billion dollar year-over-year increase in revenue in the first quarter of 2025, UnitedHealth Group last week submitted a lower earnings outlook for 2025. UHG attributed the revision to “increased care activity” in its Medicare Advantage business.

UHG has strong growth in providing benefits and services to more members. In Massachusetts, for example, the company reported 100% growth in care activity. Simultaneously, Optum Health, the arm responsible for home health, took on more clients with lower reimbursement rates, impacting overall revenue. Optum cites changes to the CMS risk adjustment model particularly for complex patients as a contributor to the problem.

Breaking it Down

UHG initially projected strong growth through 2025. The projection was partly based on the expection of a gradual increase in care activity. More members should increase revenue. What UHG did not account for was rapid growth of high-risk members in a risk-adjustment model that had not yet been thoroughly tested. Medicare Advantage is a money losing model that is propped up by Traditional Medicare. UHG is finally feeling that impact and it will only get worse as HHS cracks down on waste, fraud, and abuse in MA.

Elevance Pulls Plug on MA Marketing

One week after UHG revised its earnings projections for 2025, Elevance announced plans to cut is Medicare Advantage marketing. EVP of payer solutions at ATI Advisory, a consulting firm in the healthcare space, says cutting spending on MA marketing happens for different reasons.

“It’s often a temporary decision to give an MAO a year to ‘catch up’ or right-size impacts from the prior year. For example, it might be in response to larger-than-expected enrollment during the prior year, higher-than-expected utilization the plan is trying to get under control, or a change in federal policy.”

Breaking it Down

Elevance reported better earnings in Q1 2025 than were expected. The company listed home health as one of its key revenue drivers. The operating revenue increase came from higher premiums and growth in MA membership. The announcement to cut marketing spend came less than a week later.

In other words, the company had a surge of MA sign-ups at the beginning of the year when plan coverage started after open-enrollment. Now that the company is seeing how many of those members actually need care and how much they will have to spend to provide that care, they no longer want to enroll additional MA members.

Opposition

The National Association of Benefits and Insurance Professionals expressed “deep concern” over Elevance’s announcement. NABIP represents licensed health insurance agents and brokers with a stated goal of promoting access to affordable health insurance coverage.

“This decision directly harms Medicare beneficiaries by limiting their access to essential healthcare options and support during Medicare’s enrollment period,” NABIP CEO Jessica Brooks-Woods said.

NABIP asked CMS, Congress, and health plans to mitigate the effects of this announcement. They urged CMS to “freeze any carrier-initiated changes after October 1 that would limit agent access.

Breaking it Down

NABIP represents agents and brokers who sell insurance plans to eligible members. They are membership based and rely on member fees as a main revenue stream along with fees collected for education, advertising, and sponsorships. Their PAC raises money from members to support political candidates.

Agents and brokers make money from commissions on sales of healthcare plans. The commission on Medicare Part D is around $109 per member per year. The commission on Medicare Advantage plans varies by state and carrier, but is as high as $780 per member per year. Commissions for Medicare Supplement plans are a percentage of premiums. The average commission for supplement plans is $322.

But, of Course...

It is not surprising, then, that the member-based advocacy group on behalf of sales people who earn nearly 7 times the commission on MA plans wouldn’t want companies like Elevance to stop marketing them.

Final Thoughts

I don’t believe Medicare Advantage is going anywhere anytime soon. I also don’t believe any government agency can monitor itself for fraud, waste, and abuse. Further, I don’t believe an association that makes its living on commissions has the best interest of its customers as its first priority.

Perhaps fewer beneficiaries will be subjected to the predatory marketing and sales calls pushing them into Medicare Advantage plans. Perhaps knowledgeable, well-intentioned individuals and associations can shed light on the real advantages of Traditional Medicare. Perhaps CMS, under the direction of HHS, will turn the “waste, fraud, and abuse” mirror in the direction it belongs.

# # #

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, and speaker on Artificial Intelligence and Lone Worker Safety and state and national conferences.

She also 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

Industry Update

Admin

by Kristin Rowan | Apr 24, 2025 | Admin, Advocacy, Medicaid, Medicare, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Industry Update with Dr. Steve Landers

At last week’s New England Home Care & Hospice Conference, Dr. Steve Landers, President of The National Alliance for Care at Home (The Alliance) gave the keynote address and offered some industry insights and updates.

A Heartfelt Introduction

Ken Albert, Chairman of the Board at The Alliance introduced Dr. Landers before his address. After reading Dr. Landers’s official biography, Albert offered his own thoughts on the first few months of Landers’ tenure.

Last year, five colleagues from organizations across the country sat in D.C. interviewing candidates. While interviewing Landers, I was remarkably engaged by someone who is deeply passionate about care at home. Steve describes hospice care as a national treasure, and I don’t disagree. More than just his passion for care at home, Dr. Landers is savvy in navigating the political paradigms driving policy. He artfully combines data and stories to navigate relationships with policy makers. What I see every day is someone who roles up his sleeves for the patients we take care of with tremendous respect for the caregivers who are in the patients’ homes.

Ken Albert

Chairman of the Board, The National Alliance for Care at Home

Industry Changes, Advancements, and Ongoing Advocacy Efforts

Dr. Landers attributes much of the positive changes in D.C. to the efforts of volunteer leaders looking to move the industry forward. Care at home needs to become more streamlined, more efficient, and with a better voice.

His vision for the care at home industry is an America where everyone can access high-quality care wherever they call home.

Strong Admonition for CMS

Dr. Landers noted positive movement in some areas. However, he became passionately adamant that a payment update is not an increase if it doesn’t keep up with inflation or pay increases. “The Alliance represents providers delivering high-quality, person-centered care to million of individuals in the home, and they deserve to be recognized and compensated for the work they do,” he said.

Our Aging Nation

It should come as no surprise that older adults have a strong preference for aging at home. They prioritize living where they feel in control and connected. They want to be in familiar surroundings and to maintain their routines.

The U.S. population over the age of 85 is expected to triple from 2020-2060 to more than 19 million people. Despite medical advances, only 1/3 of those over the age of 85 say they are free of disability or free of difficulty with daily living.

With the rising number of older individuals, caregiver to patient ratios are falling nearly everywhere across the country. Dr. Landers and The Alliance urge policymakers to make promoting the dignity and independence of our aging population one of their highest health policy priorities. The Alliance will continue to tell anyone and everyone who will listen that care at home offers the win-win solution that policymakers are looking for.

Changes at the Top

We’ve already seen numerous and sometimes drastic changes at the federal level. Dr. Landers points out that eight years ago the “Trump 1.0 Administration” developed the PDGM framework and signed hospice reform legislation. On the campaign trail, President Trump stated he would not be making cuts to Medicare. The “Trump 2.0” care at home priorities are not yet clear, but The Alliance will continue to emphasize cost savings and the preference to age in place.

Secretary Kennedy, head of HHS, placed his emphasis on the chronic disease epidemic, launching Making America Healthy Again. He has stated a preference for community-based solutions and patient-centered care.

New CMS Administrator Dr. Oz seems to be supportive of Medicare Advantage, but did have some critique of the program during senate hearings. Dr. Oz has a stated focus of finding and eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse.

Changes Near the Top

At the congressional level, The Alliance lost a few key supporters with the last election, but many care at home advocates remained. Of the returning members of the Senate and House, care at home advocates include:

Senators Collins (R-ME), Hassan (D-NH), Tillis (R-NC), Barrasso (R-WY), Blackburn (R-TN), CortezMasto (D-NV), and Rosen (D-NV)
Representatives: Adrian Smith (R-NE), Sewell (D-AL) Van Duyne (R-TX), Panetta (D-CA), Guthrie (RKY), and Carter (R-GA)

The support in Congress leaves us hopeful. Large Reconciliation Packages dominate the current conversation. Many questions remain as to what is at risk for care at home and what Medicaid’s future might hold.

Later this year, The Alliance sees opportunities for care at home outside of reconciliation. These include Home Health PDGM reform, hospice reform, the telehealth extension, revocation of the Medicaid HCBS 80/20 rule, tax credits, and long term care insurance.

Public Policy Priorities

As The Alliance moves forward, several key issues will remain priorities:

Access to Care at Home

PDGM Implementation
Telehealth Extension
Medicare Advantage Dynamics
Care for High Needs Beneficiaries

Quality Care at Home

Special Focus Program Implementation
DEA Telehealth Provisions
HOPE tool implementation?

Eliminating Fraud and Abuse in Care at Home

Hospice Concurrent Care
Hospice and Medicare Advantage
Medicaid 80/20 Rule
Caregiver Tax Credits / LTCI

Growing the Care at Home Workforce

Supply is simply not meeting demand
Strengthened rates, incentives, and educational opportunities will attract and retain a qualified workforce

Follow Up

I spoke with Dr. Landers after the keynote address to ask him why lone worker safety was not among the top priorities of The Alliance. He assured me that there is a position within The Alliance who, among other tasks, is focusing on lone worker safety. I urged him to make it a higher priority and will follow up to get the contact information for the position he mentioned.

# # #

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, and speaker on Artificial Intelligence and Lone Worker Safety and state and national conferences.

She also 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

Alliance Statement on Congressional Budget

Advocacy

by Rowan Report | Mar 21, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Partner News, Regulatory

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contacts: Tom Threlkeld
202-547-7424
Email

Elyssa Katz
571-281-0220
Email

The Alliance Comments on Recent Congressional Budget and Reconciliation Activity

ALEXANDRIA, VA and WASHINGTON, DC, March 5, 2025 – The National Alliance for Care at Home (the Alliance) released the following statement regarding recent legislative developments that may impact the Medicaid program. These include the passage of the House Budget Bill and the reconciliation framework that includes instructions for the House Energy and Commerce Committee to find $880 billion in reductions to programs under its jurisdiction; passage of the Senate Budget framework that does not include such drastic reductions; and comments by Speaker of the House Johnson (R-LA) that any changes to Medicaid will not include caps on federal funding or changes to the state matching formulas.

“The Alliance is reassured by affirmations that the congressional majority will not pursue some of the most drastic proposals previously discussed as options for reducing federal expenditures. Our members will not support any policies that reduce access to essential home and community-based services for eligible individuals. As Congress continues to assess options to reduce federal spending, we encourage leaders to continue to look favorably on high-value services that reduce costs and improve participant satisfaction.

“Care in the home is a proven model that reduces costs and is preferred by patients and families. An independent evaluation of Money Follows the Person, a grant program that transitioned individuals from institutional settings to the community, found that total spending on older adults decreased by 20 percent during the first year and 27 percent during the second year following their move to the community.[1] If Congress wishes to seek opportunities to reduce spending, we recommend they advance care models that provide cost-effective care without limiting access to services.

“We also recognize that there are opportunities to strengthen program integrity and reduce instances of fraud, waste, and abuse in the health care sector. The Alliance supports actions that reduce fraud, waste, and abuse from bad actors without placing unnecessary burdens or unfairly punishing providers and beneficiaries who are acting in good faith. We look forward to working with Congress to advance policies that strengthen federal health care program oversight.

“Medicaid is a complex program and changes to one part of the statute may have unanticipated negative outcomes on other aspects of services, financing, or reimbursements. We encourage Congress to be extremely careful to avoid making changes that could lead to unintended outcomes. We stand ready to provide our expertise to help strengthen Medicaid for all individuals and providers.”

# # #

About the National Alliance for Care at Home

The National Alliance for Care at Home (the Alliance) is a new national organization representing providers of home care, home health, hospice, palliative care, and other health care services mainly delivered in the home. The Alliance brings together two organizations with nearly 90 years of combined experience: NAHC and NHPCO. NAHC and NHPCO have combined operations to better serve members and lead into the future of care offered in the home. Learn more at www.AllianceForCareAtHome.org.   

[1] https://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid/long-term-services-supports/downloads/mfpfieldreport21.pdf

Underlying Causes of Health Issues

Advocacy

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

©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

Alliance Member Testifies Before Congress

Advocacy

by Rowan Report | Mar 13, 2025 | Advocacy, Outcomes, Partner News, Regulatory

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contacts: Elyssa Katz
571-281-0220

Tom Threlkeld
202-547-7424

communications@allianceforcareathome.org

Alliance Member, Jonathan Fleece, Testifies Before Congress on the Value of Care at Home

Ways & Means Health Subcommittee Hearing on “After the Hospital: Ensuring Access to Quality Post-Acute Care”

(Washington, DC and Alexandria, VA) – The National Alliance for Care at Home (the Alliance) released the following statement at the conclusion of a hearing conducted by the House Ways & Means Subcommittee on Health on After the Hospital: Ensuring Access to Quality Post-Acute Care:

“The Alliance thanks Chairman Vern Buchanan (R-FL), Ranking Member Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), and all members of the Health Subcommittee for convening this important discussion on post-acute care. This hearing provided an opportunity to amplify the voices of home health and hospice providers and reinforce the essential role they play in delivering high-quality, patient-centered care in the setting people prefer—at home.”

Dr. Steve Landers

CEO, The Alliance

Alliance Member Testifies: Thank you, Jonathan Fleece

“We are especially grateful to Jonathan Fleece, CEO of Empath Health, for sharing his expertise and for his service on behalf of patients and families. Empath Health has long been a leader in setting the standard for high-quality, patient-centered care, and we appreciate its commitment to advancing care at home.

“As our nation’s population rapidly ages, it is more critical than ever to get these policies right and ensure that home health and hospice remain accessible and protected from harmful cuts and unnecessary administrative burdens. Not only is care at home beloved by patients and families, but it is also cost-efficient, easing strain on the healthcare system by reducing reliance on institutional care and allowing people to heal where they feel most comfortable.”

Jonathan Fleece The Alliance Testifies Before Congress

Continued Advocacy from The Alliance

“Coming out of this hearing, the Alliance remains committed to working with Congress and the Administration to strengthen home health and hospice, safeguard access to these essential services, and advance policies that support their long-term sustainability. We will continue advocating against payment cuts that threaten access, promoting value-based care models, and ensuring regulatory oversight enhances—rather than hinders—the ability of providers to deliver the best possible care.”

To read the full subcommittee hearing testimony of Jonathan Fleece, CEO of Empath Health, click here.

# # #

About the National Alliance for Care at Home

The National Alliance for Care at Home (the Alliance) is a new national organization representing providers of home care, home health, hospice, palliative care, and other health care services mainly delivered in the home. The Alliance brings together two organizations with nearly 90 years of combined experience: NAHC and NHPCO. NAHC and NHPCO have combined operations to better serve members and lead into the future of care offered in the home. Learn more at www.AllianceForCareAtHome.org.   

ATA Applauds Telehealth Inclusion

Advocacy

by Rowan Report | Mar 13, 2025 | Advocacy, CMS, Partner News, Regulatory, Telehealth

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact: Gina Cella
781-799-3137
gcella@americantelemed.org

ATA ACTION APPLAUDS INCLUSION OF MEDICARE TELEHEALTH FLEXIBILITIES IN DRAFT CONTINUING RESOLUTION, URGES CONGRESS TO REINSTATE PROVISIONS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

WASHINGTON, D.C., MARCH 8, 2025 – ATA Action, the advocacy arm of the American Telemedicine Association, today praised Congress for including Medicare Telehealth Flexibilities and the Acute Hospital Care at Home Program in the draft Continuing Resolution (CR) released today by appropriators. These critical provisions, which were originally implemented under President Trump’s leadership in his first term, will now remain in place through September 30, 2025, ensuring that millions of Americans continue to have access to high-quality, convenient, and affordable care.

“We appreciate Congress taking action to prevent a lapse in these vital telehealth flexibilities. While we would have preferred a longer extension, this step ensures uninterrupted access to telehealth services for patients and clinicians, as we continue working toward permanent solutions that reflect the needs of modern healthcare.”

Kyle Zebley

Executive Director, ATA Action

“But there remains work to be done. The CR must still be passed by Congress, and its path forward remains uncertain,” Zebley noted. “However, we are encouraged that, this past week, we submitted a detailed letter to House and Senate Appropriations Committee leaders, expressing urgency in extending these essential provisions, and clearly Congress listened and is responding to the needs of patients and the healthcare community, for which we are deeply grateful.”

Eliminated Coverage

However, key provisions – including first-dollar coverage for High Deductible Health Plan-Health Savings Accounts (HDHP-HSA), telehealth as an excepted benefit, an expanded Medicare Diabetes Prevention Program (MDPP) that would include telehealth components, and expanded, in-home cardiopulmonary rehabilitation services – were once again left out of the final CR, as they were at the end of 2024. These essential provisions now remain expired, leaving millions of Americans without the telehealth coverage they need.

“We strongly urge Congress to reinstate these provisions as soon as possible,” Zebley said. “Every day these flexibilities remain lapsed is another day that patients cannot access the care they need, employers struggle to provide affordable coverage, and critical gaps in healthcare widen.

“Telehealth remains a bipartisan issue, and we deeply appreciate the longstanding leadership of President Trump, who put these provisions in place during his first term, as well as our policy champions in Congress,” Zebley added. “We will continue to work in earnest with the administration and lawmakers to solidify telehealth as a lasting pillar of American healthcare.”

# # #

About the ATA

As the only organization completely focused on advancing telehealth, the American Telemedicine Association is committed to ensuring that everyone has access to safe, affordable, and appropriate care when and where they need it, enabling the system to do more good for more people. The ATA represents a broad and inclusive member network of leading healthcare delivery systems, academic institutions, technology solution providers and payers, as well as partner organizations and alliances, working to advance industry adoption of telehealth, promote responsible policy, advocate for government and market normalization, and provide education and resources to help integrate virtual care into emerging value-based delivery models.

About ATA Action

ATA Action recognizes that telehealth and virtual care have the potential to transform the healthcare delivery system by improving patient outcomes, enhancing the safety and effectiveness of care, addressing health disparities, and reducing costs. ATA Action is a registered 501c6 entity and an affiliated trade organization of the American Telemedicine Association (ATA).

© 2025 This press release was submitted to The Rowan Report by ATA Action via prnewswire.com and is reprinted here with permission. For additional information, please see the contact information above.

Update on Public Participation in Rule Making

Advocacy

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

©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

BREAKING NEWS: Kennedy Rescinds Public Participation in Rule Making

Advocacy

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

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

©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

Special Focus Program Ends

Advocacy

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

©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 Dombi to Continue the Care at Home Fight in D.C.

Advocacy

by Kristin Rowan | Feb 6, 2025 | Advocacy, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Bill Dombi Key Supporter of Care at Home

The end of 2024 and the official merger of NAHC and NHPCO also brought to a close the extensive service to the care at home industry by former NAHC President Bill Dombi. Dombi served as vice president for law from 1987 to 2017. He was named interim presidnt in 2017 and president in 2018, where he served until 2024.

Bill has been instrumental in the advancement of care at home policies at the federal level, a champion for advocacy for care at home at local, state, and national conferences and organizations, and spearheaded lawsuits and challenges to CMS rulings for year. His retirement, though well-earned, was a great loss to the industry.

Back in Action

On February 4, 2025, Arnall Golden Gregory law firm, of Atlanta and Washington D.C. an Am Law 200 law firm with a client-service model of “business sensibility” announced the additional of Bill Dombi to the firm as senior counsel. With more than 40 years of experience with litigation and policy in the care at home industry, Bill will continue his fight to advance care at home in D.C.

“It’s not a stretch to say that Bill is the face of the home healthcare space and the standard-bearer for advocating on its behalf, whether in state or federal court or through his deep-rooted experience and relationships within Congress and various federal agencies. In addition to tackling major policy issues, Bill has fiercely defended providers and patients in litigation across the country. His broad perspective and exceptional legal acumen will be invaluable to our already outstanding Healthcare practice, particularly in the areas of home health, hospice, and post-acute and long-term care litigation, benefitting both our teams and the clients we serve.”

Jason E. Bring

Healthcare Litigation co-chair, Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

From AGG

Bill has been actively involved with significant litigation matters affecting home health policy since 1976. Notably, he served as lead counsel in the lawsuit that resulted in the expansion of Medicare home health coverage in 1980, and he was pivotal in the creation of the Medicare hospice benefit in 1983, the institution of the Medicare Prospective Payment System (PPS) for home health in 2000, and national healthcare reform legislation in 2010. In 2017, Bill was selected as NAHC’s president and served through 2024, ultimately concluding his tenure as president emeritus and counsel of the National Alliance for Care at Home, the combined organization of NAHC and the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization.

“To call Bill a major addition to AGG’s Healthcare practice would be an understatement,” said Sean P. Fogarty, AGG’s managing partner. “Bill has been a pillar in the home health industry for years, and I know I speak on behalf of the entire firm when I say we we’re thrilled to have him join our team.”

Bill is renowned for his commitment to advancing care at home through legal, legislative, and regulatory advocacy. His background spans all key advocacy forums, including Congress, regulatory bodies, and the courts, where he has engineered laws and regulations that directly impact home health and hospice providers. This breadth of experience empowers his private practice to offer clients with a practical framework for compliance standards and operational excellence.

“As I look to the next chapter of my career after almost 40 years at NAHC, it’s exciting to join such an impressive firm and group of professionals with a well-established and supportive culture. AGG is so unique in its earnest focus on collegiality and collaboration, and I look forward to continuing my hard work with my new colleagues on behalf of the dedicated home health providers we serve.”

Bill Dombi

Senior Counsel, AGG

A hall of famer among several home care and hospice organizations, Bill has also served as executive director for the Center of Health Care Law and Home Care and Hospice Financial Managers Association at NAHC. He continues to serve the industry as a member of the board of directors of the Research Institute for Home Care and the Hospice and Home Care Foundation of North Carolina. With Medicaid expenditures now exceeding $130 billion annually and Medicare home health services growing from $300 million to over $25 billion, Bill’s work has seen the evolution of home care from a cottage industry to a cornerstone of long-term care in the U.S.

Bill attended the University of Connecticut, where he earned his law degree, as well as a B.A. in political science.

About Arnall Golden Gregory LLP

Arnall Golden Gregory (AGG) is an Am Law 200 law firm with offices in Atlanta and Washington, D.C. Our client-service model is rooted in taking a “business sensibility” approach of fully understanding how our clients’ legal matters fit into their overall business objectives. Our transaction, litigation, regulatory, and privacy counselors serve clients in healthcare, real estate, retail, technology, fintech/payment systems, global commerce/global mobility, life sciences, logistics and transportation, government investigations, and government contracts. With our rich experience and know-how, we don’t ask “if,” we figure out “how.” Visit us at www.agg.com.

# # #

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

Care at Home Coming to Medicaid?

Advocacy

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. | Jan 16, 2025 | Advocacy, Regulatory

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

Brown v D.C. Decision is Another Boost for Care at Home

In Olmstead v. L.C., the U.S. Supreme Court decided that unjustified segregation of disabled persons constitutes discrimination in violation of Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The Court said that public entities must provide community-based services to disabled persons when such services are:

- Appropriate;
- Unopposed by disabled persons; and
- Reasonable accommodations taking into account resources available to public entities and the needs of other disabled individuals receiving services from the entity.

This decision gave a tremendous boost to the provision of home and community-based services of all types. Since Olmstead was decided in 1999, there have been more court decisions that require services to be provided at home based on this opinion.

Support for Olmstead

One recent decision is Brown, et al v. District of Columbia (Brown v D.C.) that was decided on December 31, 2024. The Court decided that the District of Columbia violated the rights of D.C. residents with disabilities under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Rehabilitation Act. According to the Court, D.C. failed to inform nursing facility residents who receive Medicaid that they could leave nursing facilities and receive home health services in their communities and failed to assist them to do so. The D.C. government also failed to help them access community-based services and housing options needed to transition back to the community.

The Court recognized that individuals living in nursing facilities often need help learning about and applying for available community services to help them transition out of the institution and into their own homes. Even when residents learn about services, navigating the complicated Medicaid-funded long-term care program can cause confusion and anxiety that sometimes causes facility residents to lose hope that they can live in their own homes again.

Consequently, the decision applies to

“All persons with physical disabilities who, now or during the pendency of this lawsuit: (1) receive DC Medicaid-funded long-term care services in a nursing facility for 90 or more consecutive days; (2) are eligible for Medicaid-covered home and community-based long-term care services that would enable them to live in the community; and (3) would prefer to live in the community instead of a nursing facility but need the District of Columbia to provide transition assistance to facilitate their access to long-term care services in the community.”

Brown v D.C. Says That D.C. Must

- Develop and implement a working system of transition assistance for [nursing home residents that], at a minimum
  - informs DC Medicaid-funded residents, upon admission and at least every three months thereafter, about community-based long-term care alternatives to nursing facilities
  - elicits DC Medicaid-funded nursing facility residents’ preferences for community or nursing facility placement upon admission and at least every three months thereafter
  - begins DC Medicaid-funded nursing facility residents’ discharge planning upon admission and reviews at least every month the progress made on that plan
  - provides DC Medicaid-funded nursing facility residents who do not oppose living in the community with assistance accessing all appropriate resources available in the community
- Ensure sufficient capacity of community-based long-term care services for [residents] under the EPD, MFP, and PCA programs and other long-term care service programs, to serve [residents] in the most integrated setting appropriate to their needs, as measured by enrollment in these long-term care programs.
- …[D]emonstrate [its] ongoing commitment to deinstitutionalization by, at a minimum, publicly reporting on at least a semi-annual basis the total number of DC Medicaid-funded nursing facility residents who do not oppose living in the community; the number of those individuals assisted by [DC] to transition to the community with long-term care services [described above]; and the aggregate dollars [DC] saves (or fails to save) by serving individuals in the community rather than in nursing facilities.

Final Thoughts on Brown v D.C.

As indicated above, there continues to be a clear mandate for Medicaid Programs to provide services to individuals in the community, which is a significant impetus to provide services to patients in their homes. This mandate, however, does not directly address practical aspects of implementation, such as reimbursement at appropriate rates for providers or availability of staff to provide services at home. Nonetheless, the Olmstead and Brown cases provide an important basis for further development of in-home services of all types to meet the needs of disabled persons.

Elizabeth Hogue is an attorney in private practice with extensive experience in health care. She represents clients across the U.S., including professional associations, managed care providers, hospitals, long-term care facilities, home health agencies, durable medical equipment companies, and hospices.

No portion of this material may be reproduced in any form without the advance written permission of the author.

©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

Congress Allows Medicare Advantage to Deny Coverage

Advocacy

by Kristin Rowan | Jan 9, 2025 | Advocacy, Editorial, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Medicare Advantage Bill Dies in Congress

The 118th United States Congress, ran from January 3, 2023 to January 3, 2025. This Congress’s first law was passed on March 20, 2023, much later than most previous congressional sessions. In its first year, it passed only 34 bills. In the two years of this congressional run, the 118th passed 209 public laws, almost half the average since 1989. Among the many bills that died on the floor before time ran out was the Improving Seniors’ Timely Access to Care Act (H.R. 8702/S. 4532). Senate and House members introduced the bill on June 12, 2024.

Improving Seniors' Timely Access to Care

In June of 2024, senators and representatives introduced bipartisan legislation that would have curbed Medicare Advantage’s ability to deny claims. The bill included language that allowed CMS the authority to establish standard timeframes for electronic prior authorizations requests including expedited requests and real-time decisions for routinely approved services. The bill also included requirements for transparency and reporting, including:

- establishing an electronic prior authorization process
- establishing a process for real-time decisions for routine services
- providing more detailed reports on use of prior authorization including
  - rates of approvals
  - denials
  - average time for approvals
- pressing Medicare Advantage providers to incorporate input from health care providers on their authorization processes and decisions
- adopting prior authorization programs that adhere to evidence-based medical guidelines
- requiring Medicare Advantage providers to report on the percentage of denied claims that were later overturned

Overwhelming Support

At the time this bill was reintroduced to Congress in June, 135 House co-sponsors and 44 Senate co-sponsors signed on. By the end of July, the bill had been read, sent to the House Ways and Means Committee, and passed. Representative Mike Kelly (R-PA) noted that more than 500 organizations had endorsed the act.

Urgent Need for Change

In early 2024, an audit from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) revealed that Medicare Advantage plans eventually approve 75% of authorization requests for services that were initally denied. More recently, HHS OIG released a report showing that MA plans incorrectly denied services to beneficiaries even though they met the requirements for coverage. Following the report, HHS OIG made the following recommendations to CMS:

- issue new guidance on the use of MAO clinical criteria in medical necessity reviews
- update audit protocols for Medicare Advantage to address the issues of MAO use of clinical critera and examining service types
- direct MAOs to indentify and address the causes for manual review errors and system errors.

CMS agreed with all three recommendations.

Dead in the Field

Despite the bipartisan, bicameral support of this much needed overhaul of Medicare Advantage providers, the bill is currently in pile of unaddressed issues that the 118th Congress just didn’t get to. Despite having it in front of them for five months, and despite passing nearly half the legislation of the 17 most recent congressional sessions, the bill that would keep MA beneficiaries from waiting inordinate amounts of time for routine care will have to wait for the next session to resume. Let’s hope the 119th Congress is more productive.

# # #

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

Good News for Veterans and Care at Home

Advocacy

by Kristin Rowan | Jan 9, 2025 | Advocacy, Hospice, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Biden's Final Acts

With only a short number of days left in office, President Joe Biden has been making headlines. Not all of his final decisions have been met with absolute approval, but his latest one will make a difference for our veterans wanting Care at Home. On Thursday, January 3, 2025, President Biden signed into law the Senator Elizabeth Dole 21st Century Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act.

The Dole Act

The Elizabeth Dole Act improves upon much of the benefits, programs, and services provided by the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). Some of these changes include providing protections for care agreements between veterans and clinicians, modifications to educational assistance programs and benefits, expansion of the Native American Direct Loan program, increases per diem rates for veteran transitional housing, and various administrative and oversight tasks.

Elizabeth Dole Home Care Act

The Elizabeth Dole Home Care Act is a bill within the larger act specific to home- and community-based services (HCBS). The home care act aims to enhance veterans’ access to the Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) nationwide. The new law also allows the VA to increase funding for HCBS. Prior to this, the VA was able to allocate 65% of nursing home care to home care services.

Additionally, the home care bill will provide support and benefits to caregivers of some disabled veterans, start a pilot to provide non-medical supportive care at home to veterans with limited access to home health aides, and increase access to HCBS for Native American Veterans.

The Industry Responds

The National Alliance for Care at Home responded to the landmark legislation, specifically siting section 301 of the bill, known as Gerald’s Law. Gerald’s is so named for a Michigan veteran who was denied his non-service related burial and plot benefit after he died at home while under VA hospice care. Gerald’s Law requires the VA to provide a burial and funeral allowance for veterans who were receiving VA hospice care in a home or other setting outside a hospital or nursing home.

“We are deeply grateful for the bipartisan support of Gerald’s Law and its inclusion in the Dole Act. This legislation ensures that Veterans and their families can choose hospice care in the setting that best meets their needs without risking the loss of crucial burial benefits. We thank Senators Moran, Tester, and Hassan, Representatives Ciscomani, Bost, Brownley, and Takano, and many others for their leadership, as well as President Biden for signing this important bill into law.”

Dr. Steve Landers

CEO, The Alliance

HCAOA, Leading Age, National PACE Association (NPA), and many others joined the Alliance in applauding Biden for signing the bill into law. They noted that providing care at home and in the community improves the quality of life for veterans and their caregivers. HCBS also come at a much lower cost than hospital and institutional care.

HCAOA said in a statement that the bill is “…a crucial victory for both veterans and their caregivers.” The President and CEO of NPA said the bill would dramatically increase options for veterans who want to age in place and that Congress can “…easily implement PACE for hundreds of thousands of additional seniors and their families.”

The VA has found that HCBS can delay or remove the need for nursing home or assisted living admission. Care at Home also reduces the risk of preventable rehospitalizations.

Final Thoughts

Once again, it seems the world is “discovering” that which we have known for ages: Home based care is better, cheaper, and more effective than institutional care. In the last few years, doctors and hospitals have figured this out and implemented hospital at home care. Now, the VA has finally figured it out as well. When this law takes effect, we as an industry will breathe a collective sigh when our veterans see better outcomes, their caregivers are better supported, the cost for their care decreases, and especially when our veterans enjoy a better quality of life in their final days without sacrificing the benefits to which they are so richly entitled.

One small step for veterans, one giant leap for Care at Home.

# # #

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