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

Health Insurance Impact after Thompson’s Death

Advocacy

by Kristin Rowan | Dec 12, 2024 | Advocacy, Editorial, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Will Thompson's death change healthcare?

It's all Relative

On the same day that Brian Thompson died, Blue Cross Blue Shield announced a reversal of an earlier planned policy change. In November, the insurance giant announced it would change its process for anesthesia claims. The change would start in three states and begin on February 1st, 2025. The new process would limit the amount of time the company would cover anesthesia for surgeries and other procedures that called for anesthetization.

The announcements said the company would deny any claim for a surgery or procedure needing anesthesia that goes beyond the time limit they established. Reportedly, the policy would not apply to people under 22 or any maternity related care. A press release from the American Society of Anesthesiologists criticized the policy. It said BCBS “will no longer pay for anesthesia care if the surgery or procedure goes beyond an arbitrary time limit, regardless of how long the procedure takes.”

The new policy was confusing. Some reports indicated there would be a time limit set by the insurer and all claims over that time limit would be denied. Another interpretation said the company would initially approve the claim but would only cover the anesthesia up to a point, leaving the balance to the insured. Yet another report implied BCBS shield would still pay for the surgery, surgeon, and facility, but not for any of the anesthesia.

Reversal of Fortune

Though the initial announcement received backlash from anesthetists, surgeons, insured patients, and Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, the policy was not widespread news. That is, until the shooting of Brian Thompson shed light on all health insurance company policies. Citing “misinformation” the company announced on Thursday, December 4, that it would not proceed with the policy change.

To be clear, it never was and never will be the policy of Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield to not pay for medically necessary anesthesia services. The proposed update to the policy was only designed to clarify the appropriateness of anesthesia consistent with well-established clinical guidelines.

Spokesperson

Anthem Blue Cross Blue Shield

Social Media Backlash

The New York Times referred to the reactions to Thompson’s death as “morbid glee.” Comments on social media posts, videos, and news stories include:

“Thoughts and deductibles to the family.”

“Unfortunately my condolences are out-of-network.”

“I pay $1,300 a month for health insurance with an $8,000 deductible. When I finally reached that deductible, they denied my claims. He was making a million dollars a month.”

“Cause of death: Lead poisoning! It’s a pre-meditated condition. Payout denied.”

UnitedHealth Group Responds

UnitedHealth Group CEO Andrew Witty called the media interest in Thompson’s death “aggressive” and “frankly offensive.” In a video to UnitedHealth Group employees, Witty said, “I’m sure everybody has been disturbed by the amount of negative and in many cases citriolic media and commentary…particulary in the social media environment.” Witty noted there were few poeple who had a “bigger positive effect” on the U.S. healthcare system than Thompson.

From Bad to Worse

Witty’s leaked internal video compounded the negativity towards health insurance companies. Witty decryied the media and public vitriol. He then praised Thompson’s impact on healthcare and defended the company policy.

“Our role is a critical role, and we make sure that care is safe, appropriate, and is delivered when people need it,” Witty said, “What we know to be true is the health system needs a company like UnitedHealth Group.” Witty followed his seemingly innocuous statement with, “We guard against the pressures that exist for unsafe care or for unnecessary care to be delivered in a way which makes the whole system too complex and ultimately unsustainable.” Public outcry was amplified after the video was leaked, with insured persons using this as proof that the company’s policy is to deny care.

Experts Weigh In

Ron Culp, a public relations consultant at DePaul University said if the attack is related to health insurance policies it “could cause companies in the sector to make some changes,” noting that, “empathy and potential alternative solutions will play greater roles.”

Fortune predicts that the incident will cause fewer people to aim for the corner office.

While disgruntlement with corporate America is not new, The Wall Street Journal said this incident is “tinged with class rage and anti-corporate venom….[The] current outpouring is on a grander scale….”

Loss of Faith in Insurance Stock

Between close of business on Tuesday, December 3, the day before Thompson’s shooting, and Tuesday, December 10, major insurance stocks have dropped more than 6%. This includes UnitedHealth, CVS Health, and Cigna, three of the largest private health insurers in the country.

Jared Holz, a health-care equity strategist, said the stock performance appears to be in response to the rhetoric condemning health insurance business models that include denied claims in deference to higher profits.

Final Thoughts

After just one week, the public is still uncovering and pronouncing issues with the healthcare insurance industry. The long-term health insurance impact regarding company policies, denial rates, or anything else remains to be seen. The Rowan Report will never condone violence against another person. However, if Thompson’s death brings about changes in the corruption of for-profit insurance companies, we will all be the better for it.

This is an ongoing story. The Rowan Report will continue to provide updates as they become available.

# # #

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

Meet the CMS Administrator Nominee

Admin

by Tim Rowan | Dec 6, 2024 | Admin, Advocacy, Breaking News, CMS, Hospice, Medicare Advantage

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Mehmet Oz, MD, MBA is the CMS Administrator nominee in the new administration that assumes power on January 20. A popular TV personality and former gubernatorial candidate, the public side of Dr. Oz is well known, but the details of his life and his qualifications to head a $1.16 trillion government program less so. We reached out to the nominee’s PR firm on November 22 to request an interview but have not received a response. We gathered the following background information from his web site and other sources.

Heritage and Education

Mehmet Cengiz Öz was born on June 11, 1960 in Cleveland, Ohio, of Turkish immigrant parents. Raised in Wilmington, Delaware, he holds dual U.S. and Turkish citizenship and comes from healthcare roots. His father, Mustafa Oz, graduated at the top of his class at Cerrahpaşa Medical School in 1950 and moved to the United States to join the general residency program at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, where Mehmet was born. His mother, Suna Atabay, was the daughter of an Istanbul pharmacist.

Mehmet graduated with a biology degree from Harvard University in 1982. He earned an MD at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and an MBA from Penn’s Wharton Business School in 1986. He completed his surgical training at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital and served as a professor of surgery at Columbia University.

Completing his general surgery residency and cardiothoracic fellowship at Columbia-Presbyterian Medical Center in New York City, Oz became an attending surgeon at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital/Columbia University Medical Center in 1993. He was later appointed professor of surgery at Columbia University in 2001. An advocate for integrating alternative medicine with conventional practices, he co-founded the Cardiac Complementary Care Center in 1995.

During his time at New York-Presbyterian, Oz patented the Mitraclip, a small implantable clip that can be placed using a catheter to repair the heart’s mitral valve. Oz reported earning over $333,000 in royalties from that product in his 2022 disclosures.

Rise to Fame

Oz gained national attention through appearances on “The Oprah Winfrey Show.” Winfrey’s production company, Harpo Productions, and Sony Pictures produced the daytime syndicated program, “The Dr. Oz Show,” which debuted in 2009. It won 10 Emmy Awards during its run.

The program, which focused on health and wellness topics, aired until 2022, when he left it to run for the U.S. Senate in Pennsylvania, winning the Republican nomination and eventually losing to Democrat John Fetterman. Oz is also a prolific author, with eight of his books on the New York Times bestselling list. The Dr. Oz Show gained in popularity during its run but occasionally faced criticism for promoting unproven health products and practices.

Finances

Most of what can be learned about Oz’s personal finances comes from disclosures he made during his Senatorial campaign. He reported a salary of $2 million as host of The Dr. Oz Show and $7 million from his stake in Oz Media. He was also paid $268,000 as a guest host on Jeopardy in 2021. In addition to salaries, Oz and his wife, Lisa, reported investments in big tech, health care, private equity funds, and various real estate holdings.

Oz’s 2022 financial disclosures showed Amazon stock worth up to $25 million; Microsoft, Apple, and Alphabet (Google) stock, each valued up to $5 million, and Nvidia stock valued up to $1 million. He also owned stock in UnitedHealth Group worth up to $500,000, and in CVS Health (Aetna), valued at up to $100,000. They also owned shares in privately owned gas station and convenience store chain Wawa valued between $5 million and $25 million. His 2022 disclosures showed he earned $5 million in dividends from his investment in Wawa.

The Oz’s also reported a real estate portfolio that includes residential and investment properties in New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Florida, Maine, and his parents’ native country, Turkey, each valued from $1 million to $25 million. His 2022 disclosures also showed an investment property in Palm Beach and a cattle farm in Okeechobee, Florida, worth up to $5 million each, and $500,000 worth of cattle.

In addition to these investments, Oz currently runs the non-profit organization HealthCorps, which trains teenagers to share the organization’s curriculum on mental health, physical health, and nutrition. He also serves as Global Advisor and Stakeholder at iHerb, a company that sells supplements, personal care, grocery, and beauty products.

What Kind of CMS Would Oz Create?

What we know of Dr. Oz’s opinions regarding Medicare and Medicaid we learned from his 2022 Pennsylvania campaign message. During that campaign, Oz was a vocal supporter of privatizing Medicare. In 2020, Oz co-wrote an opinion piece in Forbes, suggesting “an affordable 20% payroll tax” to fund a “Medicare Advantage For All” program that could replace private insurance.

His plan, co-authored with Steve Forbes, suggested a 20% payroll tax, half paid by the employer, which the government would use to purchase a Medicare Advantage plan for everyone. The proposal did not explain how this would replace private insurance as MA plans are administered by insurance companies. Of course, this was four years ago, before it was widely known that MA plans pad patient assessments and deny care at a higher rate than straight Medicare does.*

CMS Administrator Nominee Outlook

Uncertainties to keep watch over include the CMS Administrator’s supervision over Medicaid and negotiating Medicare drug prices. If confirmed by the Senate, Oz would have the power to approve states’ requests to change their Medicaid plans, such as adding work requirements for beneficiaries.

He will also oversee drug price negotiations. The Inflation Reduction Act gave CMS the power to negotiate with pharmaceutical marketers to reduce the price of popular medications for people covered by Medicare Part D. The first round of negotiations concluded in August, and the next slate of drugs up for negotiations will be announced in February.

In nominating Dr. Oz, the President-elect said Oz will “help cut waste and fraud.” Whether that goal or seeing to the health of the more than a third of Americans insured through CMS programs becomes Mehmet Oz’s priority should be the first question asked in his Senate confirmation hearings.

Statement from National Alliance for Care at Home

I congratulate Dr. Oz on his nomination for CMA Administrator, I believe it generally is a good thing for patient care when physicians engage in public service and public policy leadership. I am still learning about his priorities and approaches for CMS and am looking forward to speaking with him about the importance of a vibrant and growing care at home sector. Home care and hospice offers CMS the greatest win-win opportunity in American healthcare; people get the independence and dignity they want and deserve while the taxpayers and families save on the costs of unnecessary hospitalization and institutionalization.

Steve Landers, MD, MPH

Chief Executive Officer, National Alliance for Care at Home

* Click to read previous Rowan Report news articles and analyses of Medicare Advantage plans.

# # #

Tim Rowan is a 31-year home care technology consultant who co-founded and served as Editor and principal writer of this publication for 25 years. He continues to occasionally contribute news and analysis articles under The Rowan Report’s new ownership. He also continues to work part-time as a Home Care recruiting and retention consultant. More information: RowanResources.com
Tim@RowanResources.com

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

Survive Medicare Advantage

Admin

by Rowan Report | Nov 15, 2024 | Admin, Clinical, Medicare Advantage

by Alexandria Nelson, Communications Specialist, Axxess

How to Survive Medicare Advantage in Home Health

Navigating the complexities of Medicare Advantage continues to be a sticking point for organizations trying to scale their business. In an education session at the 2024 Axxess Growth, Innovation and Leadership Experience (AGILE), Brent Korte, CEO of Frontpoint Health, and Wendy Conlon, MSPT, Senior Vice President of Client Experience at Axxesss, discussed the ways organization can adapt to the changing reimbursement landscape and ensure their survival.

The Evolution of Care

Conlon and Korte began the session by examining how care is delivered under Medicare Advantage, highlighting the differences in care rates among beneficiaries. They emphasized the importance of organizations being aware of these variations in care.

“I think it’s important that we recognize our role as providers of the target population while also considering the various factors that influence the care we provide,” Conlon said.

Conlon also encouraged organizations to understand the margin of care they provide, highlighting that the care at home industry, and healthcare in general, continues to be an undervalued space.

Korte added that organizations should focus on what Medicare Advantage is looking for in terms of providing care, and set expectations for beneficiaries.

Strategies for Success

Conlon noted that organizations providing care for Medicare Advantage beneficiaries need to have a plan in place to see success in their business.

“It’s about strategy,” Conlon said. “It’s truly about disciplined commitment to excellence when caring for patients and a plan to do so appropriately with appropriate measures in place to get to that success and to watch those margins.”

Operations and Structures

Conlon stressed the importance of organizations finding operational efficiencies and strategizing their approach to patient care. She encouraged them to embrace the financial and administrative aspects of home care, treating it as a business to ensure sustainability and growth.

Conlon and Korte also encouraged organizations to look at their staffing models and clinician structures when strategizing their business.

“Do we have all of our clinicians seeing all of our patients, or have we strategized and almost stratified our clinicians to understand how to see different subsets of patients very specifically and understand those payer models behind them?” Conlon asked.

Korte advised leaders to continue to advocate for an episodic payment model for Medicare Advantage to improve the quality of care patients receive.

“That really, really matters because not only do we get paid more so we can provide better care and get to that 24.9% margin or maybe 14.9% margin, but it doesn’t disrupt our model of episodic care which is very much, ‘give the patient what they need,’” Korte said.

Use Technology to Survive Medicare Advantage

Leaders were also encouraged to use technology to help streamline operations and keep their organizations accountable and their records accurate.

“How nimble is the technology and intuitive for setting up those payers to allow us to make those changes that we need to make when we need to make them, but also to ensure that we’ve got accuracy?” Conlon asked.

The pair concluded the session by emphasizing the importance of not only examining and refining internal organizational processes but also looking outward. They advised leaders to leverage community resources and collaborate with payers.

“Externally, understanding our community and our community resources and then also understanding how we can speak to the payers and negotiate with the payers [is essential],” Conlon said. “We may think, when there’s a group of folks that are advocating for that, that tends to bring about a lot of positive change, but that doesn’t mean that one person [or] one organization cannot be the catalyst for that change to happen.”

# # #

This article orginally appeared on the Axxess blog and is reprinted with permission. For more information or to request print permission, please contact Axxess.

UnitedHealth Group Acquisition of Amedisys Under Fire by DOJ

CMS

by Kristin Rowan | Nov 15, 2024 | CMS, M&A, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Justice Department Sues

In September of 2023, UnitedHealth Group made a bid to purchase Amedysis. That acquisition has been under scrutiny since last year. When the bid was announced, the Department of Justice began an inquiry, asking for additional information. At the time, Amedysis indicated that they anticipated the inquiry.

Now, more than a year later, the Department of Justice, along with the Attorneys General of Maryland, New York, New Jersey, and Illinois, have filed an antitrust lawsuit to block the acquisition. The proposed $3.3 billion acquisition would eliminate competition between the two companies. It would also give too much control to UnitedHealth Group, according to the suit.

Statement from the Department of Justice

The DOJ and the Attorneys General stated that the merger is illegal. The two companies own so much of the market share in the space already that combining the two would mean less choice for patients and fewer employment options for nurses seeking competitive pay and benefits.

UnitedHealth Group already acquired Amedisys’s biggest home health and hospice rival, LHC Group. Since that acquisition, UnitedHealth Group and Amedisys have been two of the largest providers of home health and hospice care in the United States.

American healthcare is unwell. Unless this $3.3 billion transaction is stopped, UnitedHealth Group will further extend its grip to home health and hospice care, threatening seniors, their families and nurses.

Jonathan Kanter

Assistant Attorney General, Justice Department anti-trust division

Surprisingly, the former CEO and current board chairman of Amedisys acknowledged the problems. He said that the competition between the two companies has helped keep them honest. He also said it has driven better quality to the benefit of their respective patients. The former CEO went on to say that the companies also compete for nurses and the merger may threaten the benefits nurses receive. It seems even the heads of the companies involved know this is a bad idea.

UnitedHealth Group's Proposed Solution

In response to the concerns voiced by the DOJ, UnitedHealth proposed to divest some of its facilities to VitalCaring Group. UnitedHealth said this would prevent the monopoly the merger creates. The DOJ responded to that proposal somewhat harshly.

The complaint alleges that the UnitedHealth Group’s market share would be illegal in home health markets in 23 states and the District of Columbia. It would also be illegal in hospice markets in 8 states, and in the nurse labor market in 24 states.

UnitedHealth’s proposed divestiture would only alleviate the monopoly in a few areas. This leaves hundreds of markets across the U.S. in jeopardy. Further, VitalCaring Group has poor quality scores and is facing its own legal judgement of close to half a billion dollars. Allegedly, the current CEO of VitalCaring Group was the CEO of a competitor while running VitalCaring behind the scenes.

Good News for Home Health and Hospice

The complaint describes home health and hospice services as “critically important parts of the American healthcare system….Patients rely on the skill and expertise of home health and hospice nurses, who must effectively treat patients at home.

Millions of patients depend on United and Amedisys to receive home health and hospice care in the comfort of their homes. The Department’s lawsuit demonstrates our commitment to ensuring that consolidation does not threaten quality, affordability, or wages in these vital healthcare markets.

Benjamin C. Mizer

Principal Deputy Associate Attorney General

Attorney General Merrick B. Garland said, “We are challenging this merger because home health and hospice patients and their families experiencing some of the most difficult moments of their lives deserve affordable, high quality care options. The Justice Department will not hesitate to check unlawful consolidation and monopolization in the healthcare market that threatens to harm vulnerable patients, their families, and health care workers.”

Final Thoughts

Mister Attorney General, please turn your attention to CMS and Medicare Advantage, as they continue to threaten the safety and well-being of patients, families, and caregivers with increasingly low reimbursement rates and denials of coverage.

# # #

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