BREAKING NEWS: House Passes Bill

Breaking News

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

House Passes Bill

House passes bill in early-morning vote. The House of Representatives, predictably split along party lines, passed the “Big, Beautiful Bill” in a 215-214 narrow win. All but three Republican representatives cheered at its passing. Republicans who previously stated they would not vote for a higher deficit caved and voted along party lines. The House expects an uphill battling getting the bill passed through the Senate.

House Objections

All House Democrats and two House Republicans voted against the bill. One Republican voted “present.” Democrats were vocal in their opposition.

“Children will get hurt. Women will get hurt. Older Americans who rely on Medicaid for nursing home care and for home care will get hurt. People with disabilities who rely on Medicaid to survive will get hurt. Hospitals in your districts will close. Nursing homes will shut down. And people will die. That’s not hype. That’s not hyperbole. That’s not a hypothetical.”

Hakeem Jeffries

Representative, D-NY

Medicaid Changes

Work Requirement

One controversial change in Medicaid is the community engagement requirement for eligibility. Eligibility is at least one of the following:

  • Working at least 80 hours in a month
  • Completing at least 80 hours of community service
  • Participating in a work program for at least 80 hours
  • Enrolling at least part-time in an educational program
  • Any combination of the above totaling at least 80 hours
  • Having a monthly income greater than minimum wage for 80 hours per month

Exceptions

This rule applies to all eligible individuals at least 19 years old and is under 65 years old, is not pregnant, does not have children under age 7, and is not enrolled in or eligible for Social Security benefits. Mandatory exceptions to the community engagement requirement are:

  • Indian, Urban Indian, California Indian, or eligible as an Indian for the Indian Health Service
  • The parent, guardian, or caretaker of a disabled individual or dependent child
  • A veteran with a total disability rate
  • Medically frail or has special medical needs including those who:
    • are blind or disabled
    • have a substance use disorder
    • have a disabling mental disorder
    • live with a physical, intellectual, or developmental disorder that impairs 1 or more activities of daily living
    • live with a serious and complex medical condition
    • have any other medical condition approved, but not listed here
  • In compliance with requirements imposed by the State
  • The member of a household receiving SNAP benefits
  • Participating in a drug or alcohol rehabilitation program
  • An inmate of a public institution
  • Meet other criteria deemed appropriate

Senate Poised for a Fight

After the vote, the Senate made it clear that it will not send the bill to the President without “major changes.” The problem, however, is that different members of the Senate are calling for different changes. Some want even more spending reductions, others want to keep more of Biden’s green-energy incentives, and still others want to soften the Medicaid cuts. Here is some of the feedback from Senators:

Ron Johnson, Senator (R-Wis.) wants to take the bill “line by line” to find $6.5 trillion in cuts over 10 years.

Rand Paul, Senator (R-Ky.) supports the tax agenda, but not the debt ceiling hike.

Lisa Murkowski, Senator (R-Alaska) is expecting significant changes and wants to address the Medicaid cuts, call them “challenging.”

Patty Murray, Senator (D-WA) called the bill a “scam” and urged Republican senators to vote against it.

“House Republicans don’t want you to know they just passed a bill that makes health care MORE expensive and kicks MILLIONS off Medicaid, all to pass tax cuts for billionaires & giant corporations. We need to make sure America knows. And we need to kill this bill in the Senate.”

Patty Murray

Senator, D-WA

House Passes Bill to Senate

Because of the way the House presented the bill, designed to prevent a filibuster, there are constraints on what can be included.

First, everything included in the bill has to be about the budget. Challenges to parts of the bill and whether they are directly related to the budget go to the Senate parlimentarian. A non-partisan advisor, the parlimentarian advises the Senate if a provision is challenged. Elizabeth MacDonough is the current Senate parlimentarian and has served under Senate Majority Leaders from both parties.

Second, the Senate gets to make its own changes to the bill. If the House does not accept those changes, the debt ceiling will not go up. An impasse means the government defaults on its debt. Congress has to raise the debt ceiling by the summer to avoid default. This could put pressure on the House to accept whatever changes the Senate makes.

More to Come

This is an ongoing story and The Rowan Report will continue to provide updates as they become available. Read our accompanying article this week on organizations and courts attempting to stop Trump’s sweeping changes.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

 

Pushback on Trump Initiatives

Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Pushback on Trump Initiatives From All Sides

Pushback on Trump initiatives, including the steep cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, Social Security, and VA benefits erupted this week. Coalitions, associations, and members of Congress seek to stop the cuts before the new bill is passed. The Republican-backed bill, under direction from President Trump, called the “Big, Beautiful Bill” would cut federal spending by billions of dollars over ten years. Pushback on Trump’s executive orders is also making headway, with temporary and preliminary injunctions.

Protect Our Healthcare Coalition

Protect Our Healthcare Coalition is a group of consumer and non-profit organizations in Rhode Island. This week, they joined with Medicaid members and Senators Reed and Whitehouse to speak out against the Medicaid cuts in the bill. The coalition also released a report on the impact of Medicaid services in the state.

“Republicans…want to whack Medicaid so fewer people have coverage and costs go up. These cuts will do real harm, pushing seniors out of nursing homes, increasing hospital closures, and denying families access to preventative care. If you think the emergency room is crowded now, just wait until Trump’s Medicaid cuts happen.”

Jack Reed

Senator, (D) Rhode Island

Protecting Retirement and Health Benefits

Congresswoman Mikie Sherrill (NJ-11) introduced the Protecting Retirement and Health Benefits for Working Families Act. The bill is in response to the recent federal program and job cuts. The legislation requires that before any cuts are made to jobs or programs that the administration can prove those cuts won’t harm to benefits and those who rely on them. It also requires a study within one year of any mass layoffs or closures to ensure no harm was done.

Federal Judge Blocks...

DoE Layoffs

More than 1,300 employees of the Department of Education received notice of termination in March from then-Secretary of Education Linda McMahon. The layoffs reduced the staff by nearly half. McMahon initially said they were part of the plan to reorganize and streamline the department for efficiency and accountability. Trump later revealed the layoffs to be the first step in dismantling the Department of Education altogether. District Judge Myong Joun, a Biden appointee, said, “The record abundantly reveals that defendants’ true intention is to effectively dismantle the department without an authorizing statute.” Judge Joun issued an injunction blocking the mass layoff.

Sweeping Agency Changes

In February, the Trump administration issued an executive order, followed by a number of memos, instructing multiple federal agencies to cut staff. The executive order called for the immediate dismissal of temporary and reemployed annuitant staff members. Specifically, it called out those performing functions not mandated by statute or other law, not designated as essential, or is not suited to federal service due to failure to comply with federal employment requirements. The order also reduced hiring ratios to 1:4, permitting agencies not under a hiring freeze to hire one person for every four that leave.

U.S. District Judge Susan Illston, in San Francisco, as part of a lawsuit filed by labor unions, nonprofits, and local governments, issued a temporary block on the overhaul. The lawsuit alleges that Trump needs authorization from Congress to restructure the federal government. Judge Illston says the office of the president can seek changes to agencies, but only through Congress. Illston also issued a temporary restraining order barring agencies from any further implementation of the executive order. This includes the final dismissal of employees who have received layoff notices that have not yet been executed. The temporary restraining order expires May 23, 2025. Additionally, Illston ordered the administration to submit restructuring plans to the court.

Revoking Student Status

The administration attempted end the legal status of international students. This would effectively nullify their right to stay in the United States. Some individual students challenged the action successfully. On May 22, 2025, a federal judge in California blocked the action. He prohibited the administration from arresting or detaining foreign-born students on the basis of their immigration status. The administration insists the immigration status was only revoked for students who had criminal charges.

Pushback on Trump Initiatives is Ongoing

Along with the passing of the “Big, Beautiful Bill,” these issues are ongoing and The Rowan Report will provide updates as they become available.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

 

Shoot the Messenger

Admin

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

Shoot the Messenger at Your Own Risk

Shoot the messenger of fraud and abuse at your peril. Providers must take seriously the concerns of employees about possible fraudulent and abusive practices. Most whistleblowers take their concerns to their employers first, especially if they are required to do so by employers’ Compliance Plans. When employers ignore their concerns or, even worse, retaliate against employees or contractors for raising issues in the first place, employees may turn to outside enforcers for assistance in addressing their concerns. Providers must take employees’ allegations seriously whether or not they are valid. Thorough investigations are required in order to demonstrate to employees that there is no problem or that the problem has been corrected.

Shoot the Messenger

Qui Tam

Private citizens may initiate so-called “whistleblower” or qui tam lawsuits to enforce prohibitions against fraud and abuse in the Medicare, Medicaid, and Medicaid Waiver Programs and other state and federal health care programs, such as VA and Tri-Care. 

False Claims Act

One of the federal statutes that allows for whistleblower actions is the False Claims Act (FCA). This Act generally prohibits providers from “knowingly” presenting or causing to be presented false or fraudulent claims for payment by the government. Whistleblowers continue to be a major source of information for government enforcers.

Whistleblower Requirements

In order to bring a qui tam action under the FCA, private parties must have direct and independent knowledge of fraud by providers against whom suits are filed. Thus, current or former employees who are familiar with providers’ practices may often initiate whistleblower actions under the FCA. As you can imagine, employees and contractors who are ignored or retaliated against when they bring possible violations to the attention of employers or partners by firing them, for example, are likely to initiate whistleblower suits.  

Here is an example:

In United States ex rel. Chorches v. American Medical Response [No. 15-3920 (2d Cir. July 27, 2017)], Paul Fabula worked as an emergency medical technician (EMT) for American Medical Response. Fabula realized that his employer fraudulently sought reimbursement from the Medicare Program by falsely claiming that ambulance services were medically necessary when they were not. Specifically, EMTs were asked to falsify electronic Patient Care Reports (PCRs) to make it appear that services were medically necessary. Supervisors printed copies of PCRs, revised them, and directed staff members to sign the revised forms.

In one instance, Fabula provided services with another staff member who prepared the PCR. A supervisor instructed the staff member to fraudulently revise the form. When the staff member refused, the supervisor directed Fabula to sign the revised form. When Fabula refused, he was fired.

Don't Shoot the Messenger

What did Fabula do? Why, of course, he filed a whistleblower suit! The message from this case and numerous others is clear: don’t shoot the proverbial messenger who brings information about possible fraud and abuse violations. Listen up!

# # #

Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.
Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

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.

©2025 Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. All rights reserved.

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

Interoperability

Clinical

by Ben Rosen, Sr. Client Success Manager, Netsmart

Interoperability

What you need to know and how it affects you

For over two decades, tech companies and government agencies have been moving toward the goal of interoperability in healthcare technology. At long last, standards and protocols are in place — and continually being improved — to support open data exchange networks. As a result, healthcare providers, including human services, post-acute providers, and specialty practices, have more opportunities to participate in alternative payment models and adapt more readily to the evolving payment landscape.

Interoperability in Healthcare

What's driving the need for change?

Government regulatory agencies, together with payers and healthcare organizations, have long recognized the need to improve care coordination among healthcare providers. Making it easier to share information via a nationwide data sharing network is a critical component of this effort.

End Game

The ultimate goal of providing access to complete, accurate patient information is to help drive down costs to providers and electronic health record (EHR) users. Through exhaustive work and years of innovation, we’re seeing the tangible outcome of this effort. Information now flows seamlessly across multiple healthcare networks. Using a concise view of the data, we can focus on broader population health initiatives that improve outcomes for chronic conditions, reduce emergency department (ED) visits, and prevent hospitalizations. The interoperability market is moving ahead at blazing speeds. Therefore, we must understand the players who are the driving forces behind the movement.

Interoperability

The Interoperability Highway

Who are the players and how do they work together?

Healthcare technology is complex. It’s not surprising, then, that getting the disparate systems to share information seamlessly and securely is a complicated process. In the last decade an increasing number of vendors, organizations, and healthcare players started working together to advance a useful interoperability market.

Some of the larger players in this space include government and regulatory agencies. To understand the role these entities play and how they coordinate with other organizations and efforts, let’s compare the process to building a national highway system.

Building an open data exchange network

  • Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy and Office of the National Coordinator for Health (ASTP/ONC): This federal agency sets the vision, rules and regulations for health information technology policy. Compare it to the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the federal agency that provides stewardship over the construction, maintenance, and preservation for all interstate highways.
  • Trusted Exchange Framework and Common Agreement (TEFCA): Established by the ASTP/ONC, TEFCA sets the rules for health data exchange over the network. This is similar to plans or blueprints for highway construction. This would also include engineering, construction and safety standards for the highway.
  • The Sequoia Project (RCE): The Sequoia Project is the Recognized Co-ordinating Entity (RCE) for TEFCA and is appointed by the ASTP/ONC. The Sequoia Project is a non-profit, public-private collaborative that leads the implementation project for nationwide data exchange. They approve and help regulate the TEFCA exchange, via QHINs. The Sequoia Project can be compared to a construction manager that approves contractors and oversees quality control measures to ensure standards are met.
  • Qualified Health Information Networks (QHIN)s: QHINs are data sharing networks built to operate the exchange network as outlined by TEFCA. In our analogy, QHINs are the highways, and the companies that build QHINs can be compared to the construction companies that physically build and maintain the roadways themselves.

Now that you’re familiar with the entities involved in developing the standards for interoperability and building the data exchange networks that make it a reality, we will next look at how these enhanced capabilities can impact your organization.

This is part one of a four-part series covering the forces that are driving interoperability, as well as the future vision of open networks, and what it all could mean to your organization. Check back for part 2, “How TEFCA affects your technology and what the heck is a QHIN?” coming soon.

# # #

Interoperability Ben Rosen Netsmart
Interoperability Ben Rosen Netsmart

Ben Rosen is a senior client success manager and business unit owner for the interoperability solution suite at Netsmart. With more than a decade of healthcare experience, Ben has led numerous initiatives to integrate healthcare systems and enhance data sharing across the care continuum. His dedication to advancing healthcare interoperability drives his active involvement in industry initiatives and standards organizations, where he provides insight for frameworks such as HL7 FHIR, USCDI and others. Ben holds a Bachelor of Science in kinesiology from Kansas State University and a Bachelor of Science in nursing degree from the University of Nebraska Medical Center.

©2025 by The Rowan Report, Peoria, AZ. All rights reserved. This article originally appeared in the Netsmart blog and is reprinted here with permission. For more information or to request permission to print, please contact Netsmart.

DOJ Rejects Plan

M&A

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

DOJ Rejects Plan to Divest Assets

DOJ rejects plans to divest assets from UnitedHealth and Amedisys to BrightSpring Health Services and the Pennant Group. Last week, we reported that Amedisys and UnitedHealth had entered an agreement to divest certain home health and hospice agencies to satisfy anti-trust concerns. The plan is contingent on the finalization of the merger between UnitedHealth and Amedisys.

Divesting Assets

The merger between UnitedHealth and Amedisys has been ongoing since last summer. Shortly after the announcement, the Department of Justice sued under anti-trust allegations to stop the merger. According to the DOJ, even if the companies offload the 120 planned locations, it would not safeguard competition in home health and hospice markets. The DOJ cited overlap in certain markets where UnitedHealth and Amedisys both currently have agencies.

This could spell T-R-O-U-B-L-E

Following the lawsuit, Amedisys and UnitedHealth started talks with VitalCaring to divest properties. That deal fell through after VitalCaring lost its own lawsuit last year. This latest blow could stall the merger altogether. The DOJ reportedly rejected the divestiture stating that it wasn’t enough. Unless Amedisys and UnitedHealth divest more properties in certain markets, the DOJ is unlikely to approve the merger. 

Mediation

The parties are scheduled to enter mediation on August 18th. The judge has now scheduled a follow-up mediation appointment on August 25th, anticipating that one day of mediation will not resolve the lawsuit. Amedisys and UnitedHealth have 90 days to secure additional divestiture that will satisfy the DOJ before mediation begins. 

DOJ Rejects Plan

This is an ongoing story and The Rowan Report will continue to bring you the latest news on the merger. Please see our accompanying articles this week on the new UnitedHealth CEO and the new DOJ investigation on UnitedHealth Group.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

 

Update is Not an Increase

Hospice

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Updates to Hospice Rule

On April 11, 2025, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued their proposed rule for hospice rates, Conditions of Participation (CoPs) and face-t0-face encounter requirements for FY 2026. The proposed rule also includes a change in regulatory text for the Hospice Quality Reporting Program.

Following Executive Order 14192, an attempt to reduce the expense attached to following Federal regulations, CMS is seeking feedback on streamlining regulations and reducing expenses. The RFI to submit responses can be found here.

Payment Updates

The proposed update to the hospice payment rate yields a net increase of 2.4 percent. This change includes a 3.2 percent market basket increase based on the estimate cost increase for inpatient hospitalization. The 0.8 percent productivity adjustment offsets the market basket increase. The quality data penalty of 4 percent remains in place.

Market Basket Objections

Not for the first time, commentors on CMS proposed rules objected to the use of the hospital wage index in determining hospice pay rates. According to a report from the Federal Register, a few commenters on the FY 2025 payment update opposed using the IPPS wage index to determine the hospice wage index. According to the commenters, the hospital wage index uses cost report wage data that excludes hospice wage costs. The exclusion of hospice costs skews the accuracy of wage adjustments for hospice providers.

In response to the same proposed rule, MedPAC recommended that wage index policies be repealed and replaced by new Medicare wage index systems that use all-employer, occupation-level wage data; account for wage differences across geographical areas, and match wages in adjacent local areas. 

CMS Ignores Objections

Despite years of comments, objections, and suggestions to update the hospice wage index calculations using more accurate data, CMS continues to insist that using the pre-floor and pre-reclassified hospital wage index is the more appropriate for determining hospice payment rates. CMS states that this position is “longstanding and consistent with other Medicare payment systems.”

Productivity Adjustment

The productivity adjustment started with the Affordable Care Act. It’s stated purpose is to “reduce Medicare spending by recognizing that hospitals can improve their efficiency and productivity.” Average efficiency and productivity gains in all private non-farming businesses form the productivity adjustment.

The most recent document from CMS about the productivity adjustment comes from 2022, using data from 2019. The report shows that hospital growth falls far below the average growth of private non-farming businesses. Using two different methods of calculations, hospital growth falls between 0.2 and 0.3 percent. Non-farming business growth is 0.8 percent. 

Labor Productivity

CMS uses labor productivity as its measure for the productivity adjustment for Medicare hospitals and hospices. The estimate for labor productivity across all private non-farming businesses is 2.0 percent. The calculation for hospital labor productivity is 0.8 percent. This is the number used in this year’s productivity adjustment. Actual labor productivity growth in hospitals from 1993 to 2018 was 0.4 percent.

Quality Reporting Reduction

Hospices that do not submit the required quality data incur a payment reduction of 4 percent. This yields a 1.6 percent decrease over last year’s rates after factoring in the 2.4 percent increase. Quality data reporting includes the HIS tool, administrative data, and CAHPS hospice survey. The threshold to avoid the 4 percent reduction includes submitting at least 90 percent of HIS records within 30 days of an event date and ongoing monthly participation in CAHPS surveys.  The HOPE reporting tool replaces the HIS system beginning October 1, 2025. These requirements are not changing with the FY 2026 proposed rule, with the exception of the change from the HIS tool to the HOPE tool.

Comment from The Alliance

In last week’s newsletter, we summarized Dr. Steven Landers’s keynote address from the New England Home Care & Hospice Conference and Expo. Always passionate about care at home, and particularly about hospice, which he describes as “a national treasure,” Dr. Landers strongly stated that an “update is not an increase” when it doesn’t keep up with inflation and pay increases. 

Final Thoughts

Every year, CMS, MedPAC, and HHS make changes to hospice and home health payment rates based on faulty information that doesn’t account for the nature of the work or the person-centered requirements of the industry. Non-farming industries can increase efficiency and productivity in myriad ways that cut staff. We see it in grocery stores with the increasing number of self-checkout lines. We see it in restaurants with QR code menus, ordering kiosks, and payment kiosks. There is no substitute for one-on-one contact in a home setting for care at home, particularly in hospice. Nurses can’t take on enough more patients in a day to make a meaningful impact on efficiency and productivity without sacrificing quality of care.

AI for Efficiency and Productivity

I’ve been speaking for some time now on the advantages of using augmented and generative intelligence in care at home. As long as CMS continues to lower reimbursement rates using the collective productivity rates of impertinent industries, care at home has to embrace the technology that increases productivity and efficiency in the office and in the field. Talk to text, documentation, scheduling, onboarding, and data analytics are readily available through AI platforms and drastically reduce costs across departments.

You can read about some of the AI tools here. For more information or to engage our consulting services for AI adoption, contact me directly.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

 

Medicaid Cuts Remain Unknown So Far

CMS

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

"Life and Death"

Medicaid Cuts are Looming

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

Budget Reconciliation Threatens Medicaid

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

The House Version

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

Image of a Congressional Bill Document

Medicaid Cuts: Per Capita Caps

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

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

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

In His Own Words

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

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

Brett Guthrie

Chairman, Energy and Commerce Committee

SNAP Cuts

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

Strange Bedfellows in the Senate

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

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

Just A Skosh of A Difference to Negotiate

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

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

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

$779 billion is a lot of reconciling...

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

 

Key Findings and Conclusions

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

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

# # #

Tim Rowan Editor Emeritus

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

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

Vision for CMS

CMS

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, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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, 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
Industry Update with Dr. Steve Landers

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, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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.

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 no-no

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. 

Private Duty Aide Services No-No

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 E. Hogue, Esq.
Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

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.

©2025 Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. All rights reserved.

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

Mass Layoffs in HHS “Overhaul”

CMS

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Mass Layoffs at HHS

HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced more than 10,000 position cuts within the department this week. The layoffs impact employees at the FDA, the CDC, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, and CMS, among others.  

The 10,000 layoffs come after 10,000 additional employees left the department this year through retirement and deferred resignation programs. The HHS overall staff is currently at around 75% of its previous numbers.

Kennedy Promises no Cuts to Essential Services

Despite the 25% reduction in workforce, Secretary Kennedy insists that no essential services will be cut. Native American tribes across the Southwest disagree with that statement and met with Kennedy to discuss the support they need. Kennedy left those meetings saying, “We are all going back with a long laundry list of tasks that we need to perform. And I’m going to give you my commitment today that I am available and listening to you.” Kennedy promised to look into cuts that disrupted scientific research and reinstate them.

Mass Layoff Impact to Care at Home

Of the 10,000 layoffs, approximately 300 of them came from within CMS. The agency lost roughly 4% of its total workforce. The administration pointed to “minor duplication” across the agency that the layoffs will eliminate.

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE), and CMS will share critical programs within the Administration for Community Living (ACL) that support older adults and people with disabilities.

Long-Term Goals

Multiple departments within HHS are consolidating, removing overlapping positions, research, and efforts. The stated goal of the department is to implement Make America Healthy Again, aimed at ending the chronic disease epidemic.

Make America Healthy Again

From the office of the President, Make America Healthy Again focuses on combatting rising rates of mental health disorders, obesity, diabetes, and other chronic diseases. According to the Presidential Action, agencies should prioritize gold-standard research, work with farmers to ensure food is the healthiest and most affordable possible, and ensure the availability of treatment options and the flixibility for health insurance coverage to provide benefits that support healthy lifestyles and disease prevention.

Make America Healthy Again

Final Thoughts

The current upheaval and overhaul within HHS does not seem to be impacting CMS or Medicare and Medicaid services at this time. The 4% reduction is staff is negligible and there have been no cuts to services or programs within CMS. Word from HHS is that no additional cuts are planned and their next focus will be on streamlining efficiency. The new Assistant Secretary for Enforcement position to combat waste, fraud, and abuse will oversee the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeal. We will continue to follow this story as it develops.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

 

CDPAP Overhaul Under Scrutiny

Medicaid

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

CDPAP Overhaul in NY Medicaid Program

New York State Department of Health issued a comprehensive plan to overhaul the state’s Medicaid program. The state’s program, Consumer Directed Personal Assistance Program (CDPAP), allows patients to hire the caregiver of their choice. Eligible participants like the program for its autonomy. The redesign of the program’s execution reduces payment processors from more than 600 to just one company: Public Partnerships, LLC of Georgia.

The Need for the CDPAP Overhaul

New York Governor Kathy Hochul points to waste, fraud, and abuse in the Medicaid program as the drivers of the change. According to the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the cost for CDPAP rose from $2.5B in 2019 to $12B in 2025. Despite drawing national criticism, Hochul maintains that the program needs stronger oversite to ensure adequate care. Additionally, the state’s Medicaid program has recently suffered more than $143 million in clawbacks from kickbacks and improperly claimed reimbursements.

Brakes Applied

Last week, a judge issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) blocking the consolidation of the payer system down to a single entity. The TRO was issued following a lawsuit filed on behalf of individuals and independent living centers. The parties claim that the transition to Public Partnerships LLC has been delayed by technical challenges. The delays threaten to remove beneficiary access to home health services. The litigants also cited failure on the part of the state to serve notice and to allow for a fair hearing to challenge the change.

CDPAP Overhaul

A judge has extended that TRO through April 14th, blocking additional changes. Beneficiaries who have already switched to the new payer are not impacted by the TRO. HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. stated there will be a 90-day review period to assess whether the change complies with federal law.

Hit From Both Sides

For or against the transition to a single payer, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle are in agreement on one thing: Public Partnership LLC should not be that single payer. The company has a history of financial mismanagement, no experience working in New York, and may have engaged in bid rigging.

Dubious Reassurances

The NY Department of Health issued a public service announcement saying access to home health care will remain intact and that members will be able to keep their current caregiver. Following the review period from HHS and the pending lawsuits, residents of New York may experience familiar disappointments.

This is an ongoing story and we will provide updates as the story develops.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

 

Relief for Providers

Admin

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

Relief for Providers from Devastating Penalties?

A judge in the Northern District of Texas recently decided that even the minimum penalties mandated under the False Claims Act (FCA) violate the Eighth Amendment’s Excessive Fines Clause [see U.S. ex rel. Taylor v. Healthcare Associates of Tex. (N.D. Tex. Feb. 26, 2025)]. The FCA punishes providers for submission of information that is not true in order to get paid by the federal government.

Life Threatening Penalties

The penalties assessed against providers under the FCA may be described as “life threatening.” That is, it may be difficult for providers’ businesses to survive payment of such severe penalties. The minimum penalty increased from $13,946 to $14,308 in 2025. The maximum penalty per claim increased from $27,894 to $28,619.

Ex Post Facto

These increased penalties will be assessed for violations that occurred prior to the change, but that are assessed after they are in effect. These penalties certainly make it clear why it is difficult for providers to survive violations of the FCA.

False Claims

In the Taylor case above, for example, the defendants allegedly submitted false claims as follows:

  • As “incident to” a physician’s care without proper documentation
  • For services by providers who were not eligible to bill the Medicare Program
  • For services performed by medical assistants instead of qualified practitioners
Ex Post Facto

FCA Math Doesn't Add Up

The jury found that one of the defendants, a primary care medical group practice, submitted 21,944 false claims for $2,753,641.86 in actual damages. After trebling the damages as required by the FCA, the Court said it would enter judgement against the defendant for approximately $8 million. The Court acknowledged, however, that penalties under the FCA are fines subject to the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Gravity of Penalties

Grossly Disproportional to the Gravity

The Court then applied the following four factors to decide whether the “fine was grossly disproportional to the gravity of the offense” under the Eighth Amendment:

  • The essence of the defendant’s crime and its relationship to other criminal activity
  • Whether the defendant was within the class of people for whom the statute of conviction was principally designed
  • The maximum sentence, including the fine that could have been imposed
  • The nature of the harm resulting from the defendant’s conduct

Fraud...or a Reporting Error?

With regard to the first factor, the Court emphasized that the defendant’s misconduct involved violations of Medicare billing rules, but did not include billing for services that were not provided. In fact, the Court said that even though the defendant violated Medicare billing rules, the misconduct was “closer in gravity to something like a ‘reporting offense.’” There was, said the Court, no evidence that the defendant’s conduct was “related to other criminal or fraudulent activity.

Magnitude of Harm

The Court also focused attention on the fourth factor. The defendant’s harm was certainly significant, but the harm, according to the Court, did not necessitate a penalty “two orders of magnitude greater than the actual financial harm,” especially when the actual damages were substantial, i.e., one hundred times the amount of actual damages. That ratio was “grossly out of alignment with the ratios in other similar cases.” The Court imposed a civil penalty of $8,260,925.58 that represents less than 3% of the statutory minimum.

Final Thoughts

Whether other Courts follow the Taylor case described above remains to be seen, but it is quite clear that providers need relief from the penalties of the FCA.

# # #

Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.
Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

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.

©2025 Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq. All rights reserved.

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

Dr. Oz Nomination Advances to Full Senate

Admin

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Dr. Oz Nomination Advance to Senate

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

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

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

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

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

Pulling Back the Curtain

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

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

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

CMS Administrator Nominee Dr. Oz

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

Vision Statement

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

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

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

Outlook

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

# # #

Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

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

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

MedPAC Comments on CY 2026

CMS

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. 

Home Health & Hospice
  • 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, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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