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

Vision for CMS

CMS

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

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Vision for CMS from Dr. Oz

Last week, Dr. Mehmet Oz issued a statement on his vision for the future of CMS. Dr. Mehmet Oz is a cardiothoracic surgeon and former host of his own TV show. Under the Department of Health and Human Services, CMS has a $1.7 trillion budget and oversees the health outcomes of more than 160 million people.

“I want to thank President Trump and Secretary Kennedy for their confidence in my ability to lead CMS in achieving their vision to Make America Healthy Again. Great societies protect their most vulnerable. As stewards of the health of so many Americans – especially disadvantaged youth, those with disabilities, and our seniors, the CMS team is dedicated to delivering superior health outcomes across each program we administer. America is too great for small dreams, and I’m ready to get work on the President’s agenda.”

Dr. Mehmet Oz

Administrator of CMS, Department of Health and Human Services

Make America Healthy Again

With HHS Secretary Kennedy, Oz is throwing his support behind Make America Healthy Again, under direction from President Trump. Senator Kennedy says that, under the leadership of Dr. Oz, CMS will work to modernize Medicare, the Marketplaces, and Medicaid. The goal is to get Americans the care they want, need, and deserve. The agenda includes:

Empowering the American People with personalized solutions with which they can better manage their health and navigate the complex health care system. As a first step, CMS will implement the President’s Executive Order on Transparency to give Americans the information they need about costs.
Equipping health care providers with better information about the patients they serve and holding them accountable for health outcomes, rather than unnecessary paperwork that distracts them from their mission. For example, CMS will work to streamline access to life-saving treatments.
Identifying and eliminating fraud, waste, and abuse to stop unscrupulous people who are stealing from vulnerable patients and taxpayers.
Shifting the paradigm for health care from a system that focuses on sick care to one that fosters prevention, wellness, and chronic disease management. For example, CMS operates many programs that can be used to focus on improving holistic health outcomes.

Letter to Medicaid

Following the vision statement, Dr. Oz released a letter to state Medicaid Agencies outlining the use of Medicaid dollars during his tenure as Administrator. The two-page letter, citing recent studies on gender dysphoria, directed Medicaid agencies to eliminate gender reassignment surgery from covered procedures, opting instead for psychotherapy. Hormonal interventions will be reserved for exceptional cases.

“My top priority is protecting children and upholding the law. Medicaid dollars are not to be used for gender reassignment surgeries or hormone treatments in minors – procedures that can cause permanent, irreversible harm, including sterilization. We have a duty to ensure medical care is lawful, necessary, and truly in the best interest of patients. CMS will not support services that violate this standard or place vulnerable children at risk.”

Read the full letter here.

Final Thoughts

We believe this will be the first of many changes made to Medicare and Medicaid rules under Dr. Oz. We will continue to share updates from the CMS newsdesk.

# # #

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

That’s a No-No

Admin

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. | Apr 24, 2025 | Admin, Hospice, Medicaid, Medicare, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

No-no # 1

“No-No” may seem like something you would say to a toddler, but there is a list of things agency owners do that they should not do. Many of these are things providers may not often consider. This article focuses on the use of private duty services by hospice and home health patients, and what hospices and home health agencies cannot do with regard to aide services.

Aide Services

Both home health and hospice services are usually intermittent and provided in patients’ homes. Patients and their families may elect to utilize the services of private duty/home care companies for additional assistance. At the same time, hospice and home health patients may receive aide services from hospices and home health agencies.

Conditions of Participation

According to Medicare Conditions of Participation (CoPs), hospice and home health aides can only provide personal care services, including bathing. Aides provided by private duty/home care companies may also provide personal care. Unlike aides provided by hospices and home health agencies, however, they can provide additional services; such as laundry, food preparation, light housekeeping, shopping, and running errands.

Private Duty Services

When patients use private duty services, they are often paying for these services out of their own pockets. Even if they have long-term care insurance, patients still bear the financial burden of paying for private duty services. Longterm care insurance often costs thousands of dollars that patients probably paid for themselves. Patients usually pay by the hour for these services.

That's a No-No

Patients may, of course, utilize private duty/home care services to perform any of the services described above. It seems, however, that hospices routinely tell patients who have private duty/home care that they will not provide aide services because private duty/home care aides are able to provide personal care for patients.

Breaking it Down

Here is an example: A hospice admitted a bedridden patient with urinary and fecal incontinence. The patient and caregiver requested aide services from the hospice five days a week to bathe him. He paid for a few hours of private duty/home care services each day. The hospice refused to provide aide services five days a week to bathe him because he had private duty/home care services. No-no!

Compelled to Provide Care

ospices must provide aide services consistent with patients’ needs related to their terminal illnesses. In the example above, the patient clearly had a need for aide services five days a week. If patients and their caregivers state that they prefer to use private caregivers for personal care, then hospices must document the refusal of hospice aide services offered, consistent with applicable standards of care. Then hospices are not required to provide aide services.

Profiteering

When hospices deny aide services that are consistent with applicable standards of care and require patients and caregivers to use private duty/home care services, hospices are shifting the cost of aide services onto patients and their families. Patients and their families may have to pay for additional private duty/home care services to meet patients’ needs. The result for hospices is that they do not incur the costs of aide services, thereby increasing their profits at the expense of patients and their families.

If hospice staff members who refuse to provide aide services to patients and require patients and their families to use private duty/home care services instead are compensated in any way based on the financial performance or profitability of the hospices, let’s hope they look good in orange jumpsuits!

Intent to Defraud

If the private duty/home care services are being paid for by any federal or state health care program; such as Medicaid, Medicaid waiver, VA, or TriCare; then both home health agencies and hospices have engaged in fraudulent conduct by shifting costs that they should have incurred onto other federal government programs.

God forbid that the hospice also owns the company from which patients receive private duty/home care services! Then hospices are limiting their costs while profiting from patients and their families.

Dig Deep and Find Your No-No's

Now is the time for all home health agencies and hospices especially to audit patients’ records to make certain that all patients have been offered services that they are required to provide. If patients and their families choose to use private duty/home care aides instead, documentation must show that they were offered the services but chose to use private duty/home care aides.

No-No's Final Thoughts

The bottom line is that hospices and home health agencies must always provide services needed by patients. Patients may choose to pay for services that are paid for by the Medicare hospice or home health benefits. Patients cannot be required to pay for services privately that hospices and home health agencies must provide. Unacceptable!

This article is the first in a series of “No-no” items for agency owners.

# # #

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

MedPAC Comments on CY 2026

CMS

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

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

MedPAC Comments on CY 2026

MedPac Sends Recommendations to Congress

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

Hospice

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

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

Opinion

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

Marginal Cost

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

Home Health

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

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

Image of letters spelling health and wealth

Opinion

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

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

One Point of Parity

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

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

Point of Contention

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

It Could be Worse

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

From the Alliance

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

# # #

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

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

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

Humana Thyme Agreement

Clinical

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

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Palliative Care for Medicare Advantage Members

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

Thyme Care

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

Palliative Care

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

Value-Based Care

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

Humana

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

Humana Thyme Palliative Care Collaboration

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

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

Prior Authorization Requirement Removed by UnitedHealthcare

Clinical

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

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Easier Access to Home Health

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

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

Limits on Where Changes Apply

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

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

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

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

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

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

Prior Authorization Additional Information

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

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

# # #

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

©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

Treatment in Place from Emergency Medical Services

Clinical

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. | Feb 14, 2025 | Clinical, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

Treatment in Place

Providers of services to patients in their homes are anecdotally familiar with situations in which patients need help at home, but do not qualify for home health services and have not arranged for or are unable to afford home care/private duty services. These patients need assistance, but do not need transport.

The Problem

The problem for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) is nonpayment for services if patients are not transported for services.

Can EMS Charge Without Transport

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has weighed in on whether local EMS can meet this need and bill patients’ insurance for treatment in place (TIP) services. The OIG has “blessed” the provision and billing of these services in Advisory Opinion No. 24-09 issued on November 21, 2024.

Treatment in Place Requirements to Bill Insurance

Specifically, the OIG says that EMS may provide services to patients in their homes or TIP services and bill Patients’ insurers if the following requirements are met:

Charges to patients’ insurers would be limited for emergency responses only.
Charges for TIP services must be based on the level of care furnished to patients and cannot exceed amounts currently claimed for payment for the same levels of care furnished in connection with ambulance transports.
Charges are made regardless of whether patients are enrolled in commercial insurance plans or federal health programs.
EMS accepts payment for TIP services from patients’ health insurances as payment in full.
Patients will not be billed for any cost-sharing amounts under patients’ health insurance, including federal health care programs for covered TIP services, regardless of whether they are residents or nonresidents of the county where TIP services are provided.
EMS cannot later claim cost-sharing amounts waived as bed debts for payments under federal health care programs or otherwise shift the burden of cost-sharing waivers onto federal health care programs, other payors, or individuals by, for example, balance billing.

Cost-Sharing

In light of the above, the OIG first acknowledged that the prohibition on waivers of cost-sharing under the federal anti-kickback statute (AKS) is applicable and that the requirements of a safe harbor that addresses waivers of cost-sharing amounts for municipally owned ambulances are not met by the proposed arrangement. The OIG also said that the proposed arrangement would result in remuneration in the form of cost-sharing waivers for TIP services and TIP services provided at no charge to patients. Consequently, remuneration provided implicates both the AKS and the Beneficiary Inducements CMP.

Risk

Nonetheless, the OIG concluded that the arrangement involves a low risk of fraud and abuse. In addition to the above requirements, the OIG concluded that neither Medicare Part B nor the State Medicaid Program currently covers TIP services; only a handful of Medicare Advantage Plans and some Medicaid Programs currently cover TIP services. This means that, in most circumstances, the arrangement will result in no costs to federal health care programs and, in fact, may reduce costs by avoiding ambulance transport or subsequent hospital care. Patients may also receive care more quickly and efficiently, and at more appropriate levels of care when they receive TIP services.

Treatment in Place Cost-sharing Waivers

Finally, according to the OIG, waivers of cost-sharing for TIP services or the provision of free TIP services are unlikely to affect patients’ decisions to use future emergency ambulance services reimbursed by federal health care programs.

Providers are increasingly aware that patients need a variety of services in their homes. The OIG has opened another door!

# # #

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

Medicare Advantage Lowers Home Health Care Use

Hospice

by Kristin Rowan | Feb 6, 2025 | Hospice, Medicare Advantage

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

End-of-Life Care in Medicare Advantage vs Traditional Medicare

Using research from CMS, researchers from Mt. Sinai in New York and Brown University in Rhode Island studied the data of adults aged 66 and older who passed away and had Medicare coverage in their final year of life. Included in the study were people potentially eligible for home health care and not in a nursing facility, hospital, or hospice care setting. Data from close to 1.8 million people was analyzed. The researchers identified whether the participants received home health care and how many days of end-of-life care they received.

Home Health Higher in Traditional Medicare

Of the nearly 1.8 million participants, the average age was 82. 51.5% were female and 36.5% were enrolled in Medicare Advantage. In the final year of life, home health care use was recorded at 37.5% for MA enrollees and 41.7% for traditional Medicare.

When the researchers looked at different demographic groups within the data sets, home health care usage was higher in traditional Medicare in most groups. However, among American Indian and Alaska Native groups, Medicare Advantage had a slightly higher rate of home health use at 37.9% compared with 37.1% in Traditional Medicare.

Conversely, in the Asian or Pacific Islander demographic, home health use rate was 32.6% in MA and 41.8% in TM. Similarly, the rate of use among the Hispanic group was 33% in MA and 44% in TM. Following a similar trend, in the non-Hispanic Black group home health usage in MA was 38.8% compared with 42.9% in TM. Likewise, among the non-Hispanic White group, home health use in MA was 37.9% versus 41.5% for TM. For those of unknown race, usage was 36.1% in MA compared with 40.1% in TM.

Days of Care Lower in Medicare Advantage

Home health users across all racial and ethnic demographic groups enrolled as Medicare Advantage beneficiaries had fewer days of care in home health than those enrolled in Traditional Medicare. The stand-out group in this part of the research was those of Hispanic descent, who averaged 81.9 days in home health care in Medicare Advantage compared with 111.9 days in Traditional Medicare.

Implications

The researchers indicated some limitations in the study, namely that data was pulled from pre-covid patients because of the changes in home health during covid. The study should be repeated with post-covid data. One of the researchers received personal fees while serving as a senior advisor to CMS. Another received personal fees as a section editor for UpToDate. A third researcher reported receiving personal fees from Abt and UpToDate.

Despite these limitations, the implications of the study show that end-of-life care is not the same between Medicare and Medicare Advantage patients. Medicare Advantage is largely operating on a Value-Based Purchasing Model. The fewer services the beneficiary receives, the more money the primary doctor, hospital, and payer keep. It is not surprising, therefore, that MA patients get fewer services for less time. Patients who switch from Traditional Medicare to Medicare Advantage, especially if they are your patients, should be informed that they are still eligible for home health care and hospice care, but they may have to ask for it.

# # #

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

Medicare Advantage Increase for Payers, not Providers

Artificial Intelligence

by Kristin Rowan | Jan 23, 2025 | Artificial Intelligence, Breaking News, CMS, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

CMS Announces Medicare Advantage Pay Hike

On January 13, 2025, CMS announced its plans to increase payments to Medicare Advantage plans by 4.33%. Policy changes for Medicare Advantage and Part D include changes in how the agency calculates payments to health plans. A spokesperson from CMS said that the policy change provides access to affordable, high-quality care. The changes, however, don’t increase payments to the people actually providing the care, only to the payers.

Opposition

While major health plans across the U.S. were thrilled with the announcement and saw substantial stock price hikes immediately after, not everyone is on board. The American Medical Association (AMA) outlined how physicians who treat Medicare patients are getting pay cuts from CMS for the fifth year in a row. Meanwhile, HHS OIG released a report finding that MA insurers profited $7.5 billion from risk-adjusted payments in 2023.

“It’s unbelievable they’re giving insurance companies that had record profits an increase while at the same time cutting payment to physician practices that are struggling to survive. This contrast highlights the urgent need for Congress to prioritize linking payment to physician practices to the cost of providing care.”

Bruce Scott, M.D.

President, American Medical Association

Out-of-Pocket Cost Increase

In addition to the higher payments, the advance proposal includes an increase in the Part D deductible from $590 to $615. With this proposal, the out-of-pocket maximum will increase from $2,000 to $2,100 as well. Cost sharing after the deductible is reached but before the out-of-pocket max is reached will also increase. There is no increase for beneficiaries whose income is less than 100% of the Federal Poverty Level.

Coverage Increase

The CMS advance proposal calls for coverage and policy changes. Medicare and Medicaid programs will now cover anti-obesity medications. The plan imposes stricter rules on MA policies to prevent denial of reasonable and necessary services that would be covered under Medicare Part A and B. Finally, imposed guardrails on the use of AI. The guardrails will ensure AI systems are unbiased in patient care decisions. Additionally, the guardrails will ensure they do not perpetuate existing inequity in access to and receipt of medical services. The American Hospital Association appplauded this last change.

“The AHA commends CMS for taking important steps to increase oversight of 2026 Medicare Advantage plans to help ensure enrollees have equal access to medically necessary health care services. The AHA has previously raised concerns about the negative effects of certain Medicare Advantage practices and policies…that are more restrictive than Traditional Medicare and can compromise enrollee access to Medicare-covered services.”

Ashley Thompson

Senior Vice President, American Hospital Association

Changes are not Definite

Even though CMS has announced these changes to start in January, 2026, they are not set in stone. As of January 20, 2025, we are operating under anew administration and the changes under Trump have already started. CMS intends to continue it’s three-year plan to update the MA risk adjustment model and the implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act. However, it seems likely that the Inflation Reduction Act will be replaced with a different plan for inflation.

Jeff Davis, director of health policy at McDermott+ believes it is likely that Trump’s team will throw out the updates to MA and Part D as well as Biden’s proposed staffing mandate for SNFs. In the first 24 hours of his Presidency, Trump revoked both Biden’s “Strengthening Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act” and “Continuing to Strengthen Americans’ Access to Affordable, Quality Health Coverage” executive orders. He also rescinded the Drug Pricing Model executive order that covered obesity drugs, lowered the price of some drugs, and accelerated FDA approval for drugs that address unmet medical needs.

As Yet Unknown

As was to be expected, many of Trump’s initial 78 executive orders are already facing lawsuits from various entities. There are as of yet no definitive answers to changes in Medicare, Medicare Advantage, or other policies that impact healthcare and care at home. The Rowan Report will continue to follow these stories as they unfold.

# # #

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

Whistleblower Case Impedes Lawsuits

CMS

by Kristin Rowan | Jan 16, 2025 | CMS, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Whistleblower Action

A United States District Court in Tampa, Florida ruled against a whistleblower action under the False Claims Act (FCA) against her former employer. In 2019, a family care physician filed a whistleblower, or qui tam, action against her employer for increasing the risk adjustment scores of Medicare Advantage patients in order to receive higher payments.

Whistleblower Protection

When an employee or person with information about a company’s wrongdoing, they can file a lawsuit against that company. Whistleblowers are protected under OSHA, EEOC, and several federal and state regulations against retaliation from their employer. A whistleblower, the person who brings evidence of wrongdoing to the court, is called a “relator.”

Before the Ruling

The False Claims Act is the first and one of the strongest whistleblower laws in the U.S. Under the FCA whistleblower rules, any private citizen can sue any individual, company, or other entity that is defrauding the government and recover damages and penalties on the government’s behalf. Whistleblowers also receive compensation when these suits are settled between 15% and 30% of the total proceeds. As the FCA has expanded since its passing in 1863, the law made it possible for anyone to serve as a whistleblower.

The Ruling

In the case noted above, the court ruled that FCA whistleblowers act as officers of the United States when they sue on behalf of the federal government. The decision reasoned that whistleblowers are appointing themselves as officers of the federal government by bringing these lawsuits.

Article II, Section 2, Clause 2 of the Constitution states that the President can appoint officers and officials to the government and that they require Senate approval for some of these. Cabinet appointments, judicial appointments, and other high ranking positions are often the subject of news stories during Senate hearings to confirm these appointments.

The court ruled that an FCA whistleblower becomes an officer of the federal government through self-appointment, violating the Appointment Clause of the Constitution. The court further ruled that the False Claims Act in itself is a violation of the Constitution, effectively nullifying the FCA, at least in Florida for now.

Widespread Implications

Any company who has lost a False Claims Act suit may now be able to challenge those rulings, using this case as precedent. However, there are some hoops they would need to jump in order to do so, depending on how this case is interpreted. Ironically, this case states that whistleblowers cannot be officers of the government without appointment, but if that’s true, then all False Claims Act decisions become easier to challenge.

If this decision stands and is adopted as precedent across the U.S., it could completely nullify the False Claims Act. It may even be considered for a Supreme Court ruling. In 2023, the U.S. government recouped $2.6 billion from FCA suits, nearly $2.3 billion of which were claims brought by whistleblowers.

Care at Home Implications

Medicare and Medicare Advantage are rife with fraudulent claims, “coding intensity“, upcoding, and predatory marketing. In 2024, CMS announced changes to the risk adjustment model in the Risk Adjustment Validation Final Rule after seeing higher-than-expected risk scores. The changes could help CMS recoup up to $4.7 billion in the next ten years.

MedPAC estimates that Medicare Advantage plans received as much at $88 billion in excess payments in 2024. The lowest share of overpayment reimbursement through the Fraudulent Claims Act would give whistleblowers a combined $13.2 billion. Eliminating the FCA may discourage employees and contractors from reporting fraudulent claims and overbilling through Medicare and Medicare Advantage.

Final Thoughts

A safeguard for people trying to do the right thing, a means to save the federal government billions of dollars that can be spent elsewhere, and ultimately better care for patients are all at risk if the FCA is struck down. A law that has been in place for more than 150 years should carry more weight than the ruling of one district court who applies a new definition to a long-standing term.

Whistleblowers and the federal government have generally been considered co-defendants in these suits. Two parties with separate interests in the same suit, acting independently, not a joint case like a class action suit would be. I anticipate an appeal on this decision and hopefully a panel of judges who better understand the necessity of the False Claims Act and the Whistleblower provisions.

# # #

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

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

Updates on UnitedHealthcare CEO Shooting

Breaking News

by Kristin Rowan | Dec 12, 2024 | Breaking News, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Last Week

As most of the U.S. now knows, last week, UnitedHealthcare CEO Brian Thompson was shot and killed outside a hotel in Manhattan just hours before the UnitedHealth Group Investor Event. The Rowan Report provided the breaking news story with the information available at the time.

Manhunt

According to reports, after the shooting, a man fled the scene on foot and then rode an e-bike toward Central Park. Police were in pursuit based on early descriptions of the shooter and later on video footage of the shooting. The suspect was wearing a hoodie in the images of the shooting. Further investigation found a photo of the suspect in the lobby of a hostel where it is believed he stayed, smiling. Police followed the suspect into Central Park, where it is believed he got into a taxi and left the park.

He was later spotted at a bus station near the George Washington bridge.

Conflicting Images

Images obtained of the suspect taken inside the hotel show a man appearing to be in his 20s, wearing a dark jacket with the hood up and a black face mask resting under his chin. An image of the suspect at a nearby Starbucks puts the suspect in a dark jacket with a black mask covering his mouth. Twenty minutes after the shooting, he is spotted getting into a taxi wearing a black jacket and a white surgical mask covering his mouth and nose. Conspiracy theories about why he would change his mask started circulating quickly.

Ongoing Investigation

A video shows the suspect entering the bus station near the George Washington Bridge. There is no video of him exiting the station. Police believe he got on a bus.

Meanwhile, police found a backpack in Central Park they believe belonged to the suspect. The investigation also discovered a cell phone that may be linked to the shooting. Early on Monday, December 9, police returned to Central Park with dive crews to search for evidence.

Delay, Deny, Defend

Delay Deny Defend by Jay M. Feinman is a book criticizing health insurance companies. The sub-title, “Why Insurance Companies Don’t Pay Claims and What YOu can Do About It,” supports the description of the book indicating that Feinman explains how to be more custios when shopping for policies and what to do when you have a disputed claim. Feinman also includes a play for the legal reforms he feels are needed to end the abuse.

NYPD officers found writing on the three shell casings left at the scene of the shooting. Initially reported as “Deny, Defend, & Depose”, police have now clarified that the permanent marker found on the casings read “Deny, Delay, & Depose.”

Former FBI agent Brad Garrett said he believes the shooter is “trying to send a message.” Police have not commented on what they think the words might mean. Meanwhile, “Deny Defend Depose merchandise appeared overnight, followed quickly by the corrected “Deny Delay Depose.”

Person of Interest

Around the time the dive crews arrived to search for clues in Central Park, a man entered a McDonald’s in Altoona, PA, nearly 280 miles away. An employee recognized him as the man from the photos and alerted local police. The person of interest, now identified as Luigi Nicholas Mangione, had a weapon, a mask, and writings that linked him to the shooting. The writings suggest he has issues with corporate America in general, and named several other people in the document in addition to Brian Thompson. He also had a fake ID that matches the one used to check in to the hostel in New York. Mangione has now been charged with Thompson’s murder.

Mangione was taken into custody by local police. Several members of the NYPD were later seen entering the police station in Altoona. As of Monday afternoon, Mangione was refusing to talk to police and did not have an attorney.

A DNA swab was taken and will be compared with DNA from a Starbucks cup found near the scene. Reports indicate Mangione will be extradited to New York. Mangione was denied bail and will remain in the Pennsylvania prison while he and his attorney fight the extradition to New York.

Additional information about Mangione surfaced on December 11. Mangione’s grandfather founded Lorien Health Services. The company, based in Maryland, operates six ALFs and eight nursing homes. Mangione often volunteered with the company in high school. Additionally, Mangione’s former roommate said in an interview that Mangione recently had surgery that was “heinous” and left him with multiple screws in his body.

Public Outcry

The customary sentiments of comfort, sympathy, and condolences were pointedly absent in the days after Thompson’s death. Instead, stories of denied claims, limitations on access to care, and other frustrations with the industry flooded social media. Of the 60,000 reactions to the UnitedHealth Group post about Thompson’s death, 57,000 were laugh emojis.

Many industry professionals noted that the incident has brought up bigger issues with healthcare insurance in general. The Rowan Report previously wrote about UnitedHealthcare using AI in place of medical professionals to determine medical necessity. This resulted in a much higher than expected denial rate and more than 90% reversal of denials on appeal.

For more information on how healthcare might change after the shooting death of Brian Thompson, please see our complimentary article this week, “Will Thompson’s death change healthcare?”

# # #

Kristin Rowan has been working at Healthcare at Home: The Rowan Report since 2008. She has a master’s degree in business administration and marketing and runs Girard Marketing Group, a multi-faceted boutique marketing firm specializing in event planning, sales, and marketing strategy. She has recently taken on the role of Editor of The Rowan Report and will add her voice to current Home Care topics as well as marketing tips for home care agencies. Connect with Kristin directly kristin@girardmarketinggroup.com or www.girardmarketinggroup.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