Hospice Fraud Oversight

Admin

by | Sep 12, 2024 | Admin, CMS, Hospice, Regulatory, Waste Fraud and Abuse

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

CMS Oversight in Fraud-Ridden States

In 2023, The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) cited research suggesting that hospices profit from fraud far too often. CMS has identified cases of hospices certifying benficiaries who are not terminally ill, providing little to no services, and still billing CMS. Four states have had rapid growth in fraudulent hospices: Arizona, California, Nevada, and Texas.

Churn-and-Burn

Some of the registered hospices had non-operational addresses. This information led to an investigation that resulted in evidence of the fraud dubbed “Churn and Burn.” This scheme involves registering a new hospice and billing for services until there is an audit or the agency maxes out on yearly payments. Then, the hospice closes, keeps the money, registers for a new Medicare billing number, and starts all over again.

Program Integrity Strategy

As a result of  the findings of this research, CMS put more effort behing the hospice program integrity strategy to find and address fraudulent activity. Part of the strategy was unannounced visits to hospices nationwide. Hospices not active at listed addresses were deactivated and Medicare billing privileges were revoked. Of the more than 7,000 hospices visited, 400 had potential administrative action pending.

Enhanced Oversight

In the four states identified as having higher instances of fraud, CMS implemented a provisional period of enhanced oversight. During the provisional period, CMS conducted a medical review prior to payment for hospices in these states that have identified problems.

Nationwide Pilot Project

In addition to the provisional period for the four identified states, CMS started a pilot project to review hospice claims after a patient’s intitial 90 days of hospice care. This pilot project was not limited to the four states, but was implemented nationwide. CMS launched the program to help inform medical reviews in determining whether hospices are submitting claims for eligible patients.

Regulatory Changes

CMS also proposed some regulatory changes to combat hospice fraud. Some of these regulatory changes were initially suggested by hospice providers. The proposals include:

Hospice Fraud
    • Prohibiting the transfer of Medicare billing privileges of a new hospice for 36 months
    • Clarifying the definition of “Managing Employee” to include the administrator and medical director of a hospice
    • Implementing a Special Focus Program to increase oversight on poor-performing hospices that have ongoing health and safety deficiencies
    • Adding criminal background checks for owners when they initially enroll for Medicare billing privileges.

Prepayment Review Expanded

CMS has just announced that they will expand the prepayment review process in the four states beginning in September, 2024. Information from CMS is limited and states that prepayment review volume will start low to protect compliant hospices, but will increase if a hospice is found to be non-compliant. Consequences for non-compliance includes delays in payment, extended review, or additional administrative actions.

According to preliminary information we received from a hospice consultant, the expanded program puts all new hospices or hospices with ownership changes into prepayment review even if they have not had identified problems. 

We have reached out to both CMS and some of our expert hospice consultants to get more information and will update this story as information becomes available.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

NHPCO and NAHC Announce New Name and Website

Advocacy

by | Sep 12, 2024 | Advocacy, Breaking News, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

The Alliance

Since the announcement that the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization and the National Association for Home Care and Hospice would merge, the default name for the combined entities has been “The Alliance.” NAHC President Bill Dombi and Interim NHPCO CEO Ben Marcantonio, along with a transition board and other members have been working since August of 2023 on the merger. In June of 2024, the two organizations signed an official affiliation agreement.

Alliance Updates

In the last year, the two organizations have spoken about the work they’ve been doing to create the new affiliation. They jointly hosted a town hall to answer questions, and Bill Dombi has spoken at state and national association meetings about the merger. On August 26, 2024, The Alliance named its inaugural CEO, Dr. Steven Landers.

National Association for Care at Home (NACH)

Our industry loves its acronyms and this one rolls off the tongue like we’ve been using it for years. Although, we may all need to perfect the German guttural sound to differentiate it from NAHC.

In a press release on Sept. 5, 2024, the two associations officially announced that The National Alliance for Care at Home (NACH) is the new name of the combined organizations. Along with this announcement, The Alliance has also launched its new logo (below) and new website at www.AllianceForCareAtHome.org.

From The Alliance

Statements from both organizations outline the path forward and the mission and vision for the new affiliation:

    • The National Alliance for Care at Home will Combine the Strengths of the Two Largest National Organizations Representing Healthcare Providers Delivering Care Primarily in Homes
    • The Alliance Will Provide Unparalleled Resources and Representation to Support the Care-at-Home Community
    • This Alliance will be the leading authority on transforming care in the home. We will implement that mission under a new name that welcomes providers across the care continuum to join – the National Alliance for Care at Home
    • The Alliance will be your advocate, your resource, and your network to help you reach your goals

The new logo for NACH is, according to the press release, both an homage to the past and a symbol for the future. It creates a visual representation of both NAHC and NHPCO. The star shape of the logo is representative of the stars on the American flag, part of the NAHC logo. The visual aesthetic of the logo is reminiscent of the lotus flower from the NHPCO logo. The individual sections of the logo represent people holding hands, the visual representation of the coming together of types of care. The white space in the middle is meant to symbolize a house or home.

The logo is based on guidance from a workgroup comprised of members from both organizations, whose input has helped shape the Alliance brand.

The National Alliance for Care at Home

About Us

This press release also included a new boilerplate, describing the National Association for Care at Home, rather than two separate descriptions of each organization. This is probably still a temporary description, as it mentions that they are still in the process of combining operations and Communications Officers from both separate organizations are listed as press contacts. 

More to Come

Despite the announcement of the new CEO and the new name, the merger is far from over. There are logistical and operational hurdles still to overcome, a new board to enstate, the combining of assets and competencies, and a restructuring of existing employees. We will continue to report on press releases coming from NACH.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

HHA to pay Nearly $4 Million after False Claims Act Violations

Regulatory

by | Aug 23, 2024 | Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

False Claims Act Violations

According to allegations in U.S. es rel. Jones v Intrepid U.S.A. Healthcare Inc. and U.S. es rel. Rigney v Intrepid U.S.A. Inc., Intrepid U.S.A. Inc. (Intrepid) violated the False Claims Act multiple times over five years.

Intrepid is based in Texas and includes more than 80 Personal Care, Home Health, Palliative Care, and Hospice Care agencies across 18 states. Intrepid describes their services as “concierge medical home healthcare, hospice at home, private duty home care, and independent living support.”

Whistleblowers

Whistleblowers filed Civil cases against Intrepid under the whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act. A former travel nurse and a former Director of Quality and Improvement for Intrepid filed the first case. A former Director of Clinical Excellence and Integrity and a former Regional Manager of Clinical Excellence for Intrepid filed the second. Under the False Claims Act, a private party can file an action against a company on behalf of the United States. Should there be a settlement or resolution, the filing party(ies) receive a portion of any recovery.

Allegations

Each of the cases addresses different lines of business for Intrepid. The first case alleges that Intrepid knowingly submitted home healthcare Medicare claims for patients who did not qualify for the home healthcare benefit, or where services did not qualify for reimbursement. The second case alleges that Intrepid knowlingly submitted Medicare claims for patience who did not qualify for the hospice benefit.

More Allegations

Additionally, the United States claims that from 2016 to 2021, Intrepid submitted claims for services that were not reasonable or medically necessary, services provided by untrained staff, and services that were never provided at all. Separately, the United States alleges that Intrepid admitted patients who were ineligible for hospice benefits because they were not terminally ill and continued providing services to patients who should have been discharged because they no longer met the requirements to qualify for the hospice benefits.

Settlement

The Justice Department’s Civil Division, Commercial Litigation Branch, Fraud Section, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Kentucky and U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Minnesota worked together to investigate and resolve these matters. According to the Department of Justice report, no liability or admission of guilt was determined and the settlement resolved allegations only.

Repeat Offender

It seems this is not the first run-in with the law that Intrepid U.S.A. has faced.

2014: a class action suit alleged unpaid wages.

2019: Intrepid settled a class action suit where employees alleged unpaid overtime.

2021: William Buchanan filed a civil right – employment discrimination suit against Intrepid in Indiana.

Intrepid in Minnesota and North Carolina faced similar Medicare fraud charges as well.

Intrepid USA False Claims Act

Not Alone

Intrepid U.S.A. Inc. is not the only home health or hospice agency to face these types of allegations.

Evolution Health LLC

In July, 2024, Guardian Health Care, Inc., Gem City Home Care LLC, and Care Connection of Cincinnati LLC, together with their parent company Evolution Health LLC, settled a False Claims Act case in which the Companies were accused of providing illegal kickbacks to ALFs and physicians in exchange for referrals. That settlement totaled almost $4.5 million dollars.

Halo Home Healthcare

Similarly, in June, 2024, the former owner of Halo Home Healthcare pled guilty to billing more than $8.5 million in fraudulent claims to Medicare, Medicaid, and Veterans Affairs from 2015 to 2021. Halo Home Healthcare hired more than 50 employees with criminal backgrounds that should have excluded them from providing home health services, one of whom was charged with a quadruple murder during their employment at Halo. The former owner also hid her ownership of the company because she had been convicted in 2013 of passing forged and fraudulent prescriptions for oxycodone and hydrocodone.

Atlantic Home Health Care

In January, 2024, Atlantic Home Health Care was accused of falsely billing the Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program. The claim alleges Atlantic charged for in-home nursing and personal care when employees weren’t providing services and paying kickbacks for patient referrals. The Arizona-based company paid almost $10 million to resolve that case.

Speak Up, Speak Out

Fraudulent billing, up-coding, and other illegal acts from home health and hospice agencies put additional strain on the already stretched CMS budget for reimbursement. The millions of dollars recovered just this calendar year is just a portion of fraudulent claims filed. Whistleblower laws protect employees from retaliation by their employers. Fraudulent practices that send money directly to an agency without benefitting a patient hurts the whole industry. The only way the Department of Justice can address and stop these billing practices and keep that money going directly to patient care is with the help of whistleblowers.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

HHVBP Model Payments Begin January 1, 2025

Admin

by | Aug 23, 2024 | Admin, CMS, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Background on the HHVBP Model

The Home Health Value Based Purchasing (HHVBP) Model, implemented by CMS in 2016, began in nine states. The goal is “to provide incentives for better quality care, to study new quality and efficiency measures, and to enhance the reporting process.” It may also provide new avenues for payment models.

According to the CMS website, the original HHVBP Model, launched in nine states, improved an average of 4.6 percent HHA performance scores and saved Medicare $141 million. Additionally, the model lowered unplanned hospitalizations for acute care and reduced skilled nursing facility (SNF) stays.

HHVBP Model Expansion

From the initial study, CMS surmised that expanding the model would increase performance, increase savings, and further reduce hospitalizations and SNF stays. Early in 2021, CMS announced the nationwide expansion of the HHVBP Model.

The expanded model started on January 1, 2022. In its first expansion year, CMS provided training and allowed HHAs time to adjust practices based on HHVBP expectations and requirements. During the transition year, HHA performance did not risk future payment rates.

HHVBP Model Performance Year

January 1, 2023 marked the beginning of the performance year, in which all HHA results would impact future payments. CMS will adjust fee-for-service payments based on performance relative to other HHAs. CMS groups HHAs into cohorts determined by beneficiary count the previous year. Cohorts include large- and small-volume for agencies above and below 60 unique HHCAHPS eligible beneficiaries, respectively.

Using data already reported by HHAs through the Home Health Quality Reporting Program (HH QRP) and HHCAHPS surveys, CMS compares an HHAs data to similar agencies. Based on this comparison, CMS adjusts future payments between -5% and 5% for fee-for-service payments.

Interim Performance Report

The Interim Performance Report (IPR) is a quarterly report with performance data for all HHAs participating in the HHVBP Model. Active HHAs that were Medicare certified before January 1, 2022, are eligible for payment adjustment, and meet the minimum threshold of data for at least one quality measure receive the reports. Reports are available at iQIES. Registration on the portal is required.

CMS publishes new reports every quarter and eligible HHAs should receive an email when a new report is available. 

Points System

Payment adjustments for the next calendar year are based on an HHAs performance in the last report. For CY 2025, payment adjustments will use the Final Annual Performance Report, published 30 days prior to each payment year.

The process to determine your HHAs ranking in relations to the other HHAs in your cohort can be confusing and has many steps. Payment adjustments are based on “Care Points”, which are calculated on a weighted scale, using the higher of the agency’s earned achievement points or improvement points. An HHA must have at least 20 quality stays for claims-based measures and at least 40 surveys for the HHCAHPS survey-based measure.

Achievement Points

Achievement points are earned by scoring above the median performance on each quality measure (better than half of the agencies in your cohort) and dividing that by the difference between your score and the top 10 percent in your cohort.

HHVBP Model Calculate Achievement Points
Improvement Points

Improvement points are calculated using an HHAs prior year performance measure, current measure and the mean score of the top 10 percent of agencies in your cohort.

HHVBP Model Calculate Improvement Points
Care Points

Care points are the higher of Achievement Points or Improvement Points for each quality measure. Each quality measure is weighted differently in each category of OASIS-based Measures, Claims-based Measures, and Survey-based Measures.

The higher of each agency’s achievement and improvement scores is multiplied by its assigned weight to calculate the weighted score within each measure. Each measure then has its own weight. OASIS- and Claims-based measures each count for 35% of the total score while Survey-based measures make up 30% of the final score.

The HHA score is measured against all HHAs in the cohort to determine your rank. Where your weighted points fall in comparison with the rest of your cohort determines whether your next payment cycle will go up or down by as much as 5 percent. 

HHVBP Model Weighted Scores

Public Reporting

Your scores will not only be used to determine your payment increase or decrease. These reports will be made public as well. CMS will publicly report each quality measure’s benchmark and achievement threshold. For every HHA that qualifies for a payment adjustment, CMS will also publish:

      • Measure results and improvement thresholds
      • Total Performance Score and Percentile Ranking
      • Payment adjustment percentage

Scoring well on the Achievement and Improvement markers for each measure may offer an HHA an opportunity to gain more referrals, recruit talented clinicians, and gain a reputation for quality care.

On the other hand, scoring low may hurt an agency irreparably. HHAs who think there is an error in the initial reporting can submit a recalculation request within 15 days of the publishing of a preview report. Based on CMS’s decision, HHAs have 15 days to submit a reconsideration request if they submitted a recalculation request and are not happy with the decision. If the HHA is still not in agreement with the decision of the reconsideration request, they have seven days to submit a request for administrative review.

Next Steps

According to the information we can find on CMS, these reports will be published quarterly. Logically, then, the recalculation requests can also be submitted quarterly along with reconsideration and administrative review requests. We will continue to follow this and provide updated deadlines to submit requests as we find them.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

Medicare Advantage Predatory Marketing

CMS

by | Aug 16, 2024 | CMS, Editorial, Marketing, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Leading Associations Attempt to Curb Medicare Advantage Marketing Practices that Prey on the Unsuspecting

For some time now, we’ve been reporting on the marketing practices that Medicare Advantage uses to lure new members. And, it’s working, as more than 50% of eligible patients are now on Medicare Advantage plans. From federal lawsuits to fraud, to upcoding, Medicare Advantage has made headlines more often than almost any other topic in the industry in the last few years. A joint move last week by two national associations may bring the issue to a head once and for all.

The National PACE Association (NPA) and LeadingAge wrote to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) urging them to employ stricter oversight on Medicare Advantage marketing practices. The letter, dated July 25, 2024, cited the impact of these marketing tactics on adults served by Programs for All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE). They called the marketing “aggressive and misleading” and called upon CMS to protect PACE beneficiaries from harm.

 One of the selling points in the marketing of Medicare Advantage is the supplemental benefits. Medicare Advantage plans are allocated nearly $64 billion dollars to pay for dental, vision, gym memberships, and other benefits that are not available with traditional Medicare. However, the government has no idea where this money is going, who is using it, and what it’s for. Limited available data suggests that a very low number of Medicare Advantage enrollees are using these supplemental benefits. The rest of the money just sits with the payers at taxpayer expense.

The false promise of cash benefits draw even more of this population away from traditional Medicare and into Medicare Advantage plans. Cash benefits from MA plans are only available to dual eligible members. What they don’t tell you, though, is that if you are dual eligible and you switch from Medicare to Medicare Advantage, you are subject to prior authorization rules, care denials, and smaller networks, meaning you may lose your physician when you switch plans. Some of those cash benefits are restricted to use in particular stores. For example, Aetna restricts the use of cash benefits to stores owned by CVS Health. If there isn’t a CVS Health near you, the cash benefits can’t be used.  

PACE Programs

Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) are typically traditional Medicare and Medicaid joint programs that provide medical and social services in home and community-based care settings. The programs cover prescriptions, dental care, emergency services, home care, meals services, primary care providers, nurses, social workers, and more. The program’s goal is to keep patients at home or in their communities and get the health care they need. There is no out-of-pocket costs to these programs for dual eligible members. Medicare only members have a monthly premium and prescription drug (Part D) premium. There are no additional deductibles or copayments for any service or level of care.

Bait and Switch

The marketing messages from Medicare Advantage are pulling PACE eligible members into dual MA and Medicaid plans, which significantly reduce the level of care, access to care, and continuity of care. The MA/Medicaid programs also have higher out-of-pocket costs to members, despite having no monthly premium. Research shows that Medicare Advantage is targeting healthier individuals who will use the provided benefits less often and that when Medicare Advantage patients become sicker, they switch back to traditional Medicare plans if they can.

Your content goes here. Edit or remove this text inline or in the module Content settings. You can also style every aspect of this content in the module Design settings and even apply custom CSS to this text in the module Advanced settings.

PACE LeadingAge MA ReformThe financial and health implications of uninformed disenrollment from PACE to conventional MA plans are significant. The needs of PACE beneficiaries, most of whom have multiple complex medical conditions, cognitive or functional impairments – or all three – are not comprehensively addressed by MA plans. The loss of PACE services is harmful and, in some cases, can be life-threatening.

Katie Smith Sloan

president and CEO, LeadingAge

Dire Need for Change

In their letter to CMS, NPA and LeadingAge called for the following changes to be made:

  • Require MA plans to explain, clearly and without embellishment, all out-of-pocket costs and network/coverage limitations. using easy to understand terms
  • When a member disenrolls from a PACE program, additional steps should be taken to ensure the disenrollment is voluntary and that the member is fully informed of the differences in coverage before leaving the PACE program.
  • Increased leniency in re-enrolling in PACE programs after leaving a Medicare Advantage program by allowing re-enrollment mid-month.
  • Require MA brokers, when providing comparative benefit information of their current coverage (e.g., PACE) to an alternate MA plan, to also inform them, in plain language, if the new plan does not cover or coordinate their Medicaid benefits; and any benefits the individual would “lose” under the new plan (e.g., transportation to groceries).

Pace LeadingAge MA ReformWe share CMS’ stated desire that people have access to accurate and complete information when they make health care choices. We have numerous examples of vulnerable seniors being induced to enroll in MA plans without being fully-informed of what they are giving up when they enroll.

Shawn Bloom

president and CEO, National PACE Association

The Rowan Report reached out to LeadingAge to see if CMS has responded to their letter.

Updates will be provided when we have them.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

Sources:

https://prospect.org/health/2024-05-30-medicare-advantage-64-billion-supplemental-benefits/

https://leadingage.org/associations-urge-tougher-enforcement-of-anti-predatory-medicare-advantage-marketing-practices/

 

Cat on a Hot Tin…Keyboard?

Admin

by | Aug 9, 2024 | Admin, Clinical, Regulatory

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

HIPAA Violation

HIPAA violation: Trent James Russell was convicted in federal Court on charges of obtaining another person’s health care information in violation of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Russell was employed by an organ transplant organization. As a transplant coordinator, he had access to electronic medical records at George Washington University Hospital in Washington, DC.

Justice Ginberg

In January of 2019, Russell accessed the medical records of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg even though Justice Ginsburg had not been referred as a possible organ donor. He took a screenshot of the records and then posted them on a message board called “4chan.” Ginsberg’s records quickly appeared on Twitter and YouTube, including her name and the exact dates and times when she received radiology, oncology, and surgical treatments at the Hospital between 2014 and 2018.

Hospital officials traced the search of Ginsburg’s records to one of Russell’s home computers. As soon as Russell was identified as a suspect, his access was denied by the Hospital. His request to have access restored was also denied. 

Tall Tales RBG

The Cat Made me Violate HIPAA Laws

Russell initially told federal agents that his “cats had run across his keyboard.” He later characterized this statement as a “nervous joke.” Russell said that he had no idea how his computer searched terms that produced the Justice’s records and that “everyone makes typos.”

Online users who viewed Ginsberg’s records promoted various antisemitic conspiracy theories. One theory was that Ginsburg had died in late 2018 and that democrats were hiding her death in order to deny President Trump an opportunity to appoint her replacement. A search of Russell’s computer also revealed a search for the term “dirty jew.”

An FBI agent said that she found an image on Russell’s hard drive that mimicked a poster for the film “Weekend at Bernie’s.” The caption said “Weekend at Ginsburg’s” and showed leaders of the U.S. House of Representatives propping Ginsburg up from both sides in a morbid play on how the movie characters covered up Bernie’s death so that they could use his beach house.

Ignorance of HIPAA Law is not a Defense

But, he didn’t even have that. The Chief Executive Officer of the transplant organization at the time the access occurred testified that coordinators like Russell had “no business being inside the chart” of patients who had not been referred to the organization. The CEO said that Russell was certainly aware of this prohibition because of numerous agreements he signed with his employer and the extensive training he received.

Lessons Learned

There are several important takeaways from this case. First, it is important to note that Russell had extensive training about the requirements of the HIPAA Privacy Rule. He also agreed to comply with these requirements. The temptation is great, but employees must be reminded not to succumb. In addition, practitioners should take note of the fact that Russell was criminally prosecuted. Since he was convicted, he faces up to twenty-two years in prison and fines in the tens of thousands of dollars. Serious business!

# # #

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.

©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

©2024 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.

NAHC NHPCO Town Hall

Advocacy

by | Aug 9, 2024 | Advocacy, CMS, Hospice, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

The Alliance

On June 18, 2024, the National Association for Home Care & Hospice (NAHC) and the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO) announced they had met in Washington D.C. to formally sign an affiliation agreement between the two organizations. After 18 months of meetings, conversations, and compromises, the two groups announced their “Alliance” would be the leading authority of the care at home community.

Bill Dombi Ken Albert Town Hall Alliance

During the opening keynote address at the NAHC Financial Management Conference in July, Bill Dombi, President of NAHC and interim President of The Alliance, and Kenneth Albert, Chair of the Transition Board of Directors overseeing the merger, spoke about the progress they have made.

Albert spoke of the thoughtful consideration the board and members of both organizations have put into this change. They are focusing on the biggest concerns of home health and hospice providers both now and in the future. The unification will create one voice as they advocate for home health and hospice in Washington D.C.

New Leadership

Albert and Dombi shared the stage at the NAHC Financial Management Conference about the ongoing search for a CEO of the new organization. According to Albert, there were some candidates who were very excited about the role, but whom the board did not feel there was a great fit. Contrarily, there were candidates the board eagerly wanted to move forward with who declined to continue the process. According to Dombi, the search has gone outside care at home as they look for the right fit from qualified candidates from multiple industries. Both agreed that they felt the search was close to over and they should have an announcement about the new CEO, and possibly the new name, sometime in August of this year.

New Resources

The conjoined organization promises more than just new leadership. Currently under construction is a new logo and website to encompass both groups. Dombi alluded to new resources for providers, training for quality care, and other tools for the industry. While the organization’s name and leadership are forthcoming, the website is projected to launch sometime in the spring of 2025. 

Operating as One

Since the announcement of the merger last year, and even before the deal was inked, NAHC and NHPCO have already been integrating. Dombi told The Rowan Report in a previous interview that the two groups have already been lobbying together, working on policy together, and integrating the management of the two associations. 

The Last NHPCO Conference and the First Alliance Conference

September, 2024 marks the final standalone event for the NHPCO. The 2024 NHPCO Annual Leadership Conference runs September 16-18, with a pre-conference September 14-15 in Denver, CO. The conference will have on-demand access until December 31, 2024. NAHC members will receive member rates to the NHPCO conference. 

The “2024 Home Care and Hospice Conference and Expo” will be the last conference held solely by NAHC, but we are seeing quite a few hospice companies on the exhibitor list and expect this to be a sneak peek at future conferences. The national conference is scheduled for October 20-24, 2024 in Tampa, Florida. This will also mark the final conference for Bill Dombi as President. Dombi announced earlier this year that he will retire at the end of 2024.

NAHC NHPCO Alliance Town Hall
NAHC NHPCO Alliance Town Hall

Town Hall

With quite a few remaining unanswered questions about the future of the two organizations, NAHC and NHPCO hosted a virtual Town Hall on July 31, 2024. With more than 250 association members from both groups in attendance, Bill Dombi and Ben Marcantonio, interim-CEO for NHPCO, along with Kenneth Albert and Melinda Gruber, Vice Chair of the Transition Board of Directors.

Naming "The Alliance"

Albert mentioned that there has been some success using the term Alliance, but it is not a long term solution. The finalization of the name is awaiting some trademark issues to be ironed out and that announcement, which they had hoped to be able to make in July, is coming soon.

CEO Search Update

Gruber thanked the search committee and recruiting firm for their work on the CEO search. Gruber reiterated that they are nearing the final selection phase and after board approval, an announcement will be made. 

Website

Ben Marcantonio, current interim CEO of NHPCO and future CIO of The Alliance confirmed that the new website will allow access to both legacy websites (the current NAHC and NHPCO websites). The new website will have a preliminary version this fall with a fully completed version next spring.

Members of either organization will have full access to the preliminary version of the website this fall. Currently, members can only access information from their own organization, but Marcantonio stressed that if there is information you need, they can help you access it.

Integration

There are eleven committees working together to integrate the two associations. advocacy, programs, education, and HR are a few of these workgroups that each have two to three high priority goals that will most effectively bring about the integration of the two groups. Work plans are now in place to create significant integration by the end of the calendar year. 

Policy and Advocacy

Bill Dombi presented an updated on the joint policy and advocacy issues The Alliance is undertaking. “What stands out for the immediate term has been how the resources have been employed of the two legacy organizations under the banner of The Alliance, focusing on hospice and palliative care,” Dombi said, “In a matter of weeks we saw significant regulatory and legislative action taking place.”

Hospice

The Hospice Final Rule 2025 has undergone an intense review and indepth analysis by members of both teams. The rule will have “tremendous impact” under the Medicare hospice program.

According to Dombi, the two organizations have come together to jointly fund a research project for the Special Focus Program to understand the impact and targeting. Dombi is hopeful that U.S. Representative Earl Blumenauer’s (D-OR) discussion draft will serve as a stepping stone for Hospice reform.

Home Health

The ongoing battle in Congress against CMS is gaining momentum. Dombi said there is a “tremendous amount of support” in Congress to role back the authority of CMS to institute rate changes and rate cuts under the Patient Driven Groupings Model (PDGM). “We have gained a seat at the table, which really helps,” Dombi said. We are continuing with litigation challenging Medicare’s validity of the regulation which has set all these rate cuts in motion.

Medicaid Home and Community-Based Services

The Final Rule modified in a positive way the 80/20 requirement. “We agree with the intentions of improving the status of direct care workers who positively impact so many lives. But in the absence of additional funding, it’s very very difficult to support this rule,” Dombi said. The modification stepped back from the more “draconian” interpretation, but The Alliance is not yet satisfied with the result. There is talk of a joint lawsuit challenging the validity of that rule.

Private Duty

The Private Duty Home Care world, one of the less regulated in the industry, is gaining a lot of attention from Fair Labor Standards as well as Non-Compete Laws. There is currently a joining of forces around solutions that will help Private Duty in the workforce arena, more specifically the Credit for Caring Act, which is gaining some traction, and would offer some financial support for family members who are paying for home care services directly.

The Alliance Needs You

Bill Dombi’s final statement in the Town Hall meeting centered on advocacy. He called for everyone who was in attendance and every member of both legacy organizations to join the fight. Everyone needs to part of that team of advocacy.

Final Thoughts

There is much more news to come out of these to associations as we near the end of 2024, and still more through the first quarter of 2025. The Rowan Report expects additional announcements to be made at both the NHPCO and NAHC annual conferences and we will be there to update everyone on the progress and statements coming out of those two meetings. 

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

2025 Hospice Final Rule

CMS

by | Aug 1, 2024 | CMS, Hospice, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

2025 Hospice Final Rule Update

On July 30, 2024, CMS issued its final rule for the 2025 Hospice Final Rule Update (CMS-1810-F), with updates to HQRP and HOPE. The rule also finalizes a proposal to change the statistical area delineations. This will impact the hospice wage index. The rule includes clarifications on the hospice election statement and notice of election as well as clarifying language around hospice admission and certification of terminal illness.

Wage Decrease for Some Hospices Assigned to a New Area

The change in area delineations will have a negative impact on some hospices. They will see a decrease in payments based on their new area. However, CMS emphasizes that, regardless of the area change, the maximum change is a 5% decrease from the 2024 wage index, as there is a 5% cap on any decrease to the wage index. 

2025 Hospice Final Rule Routine Annual Rate Setting Changes

Just one month after proposing additional deduction to the home health payment rate, the 2025 hospice final rule increases the base rate by 2.9%. This is an aggregate of a 3.4% inpatient hospital increase and a 0.5% productivity decrease. The quality data reporting requirement remains. Hospices that do not submit quality data would still see a 4% decrease in payment rates, yielding an aggregate 1.1% decrease. The payment update also includes an aggregate cap of $34,465.34 per individual per year.

Hospice Quality Reporting Program (HQRP)

The new rule includes two new process measures to HQRP:

    • Timely Follow-up for Pain Impact
    • Timely Follow-up for Non-Pain Symptom Impact 

These two measures are expected to begin in 2028 and address hopsice care delivery documentation on whether a follow-up visit occurred with 48 hours of the first assessment. The measures include visits where there was an impact of moderate to severe symptoms, both with and without pain.

Adoption and Implementation of HOPE

Hospice Outcomes and Patient Evaluation (HOPE) will replace the current Hospice Item Set (HIS) structure. The gradual roll-out will begin in FY 2025 and will collect data at different time points throughout a hospice stay. In contrast, HIS only collected data at admission and discharge.

New or expanded categories of HOPE relative to HIS include:

Hospice Payment Rule 2025

Changes to CAHPS Survey

CMS conducted an experiment in 2021 surrounding the Hospice CAHPS Survey. Based on those results, the final rule will implement these change to the survey:

    • The addition of a web-mail mode (email invitation to a web survey, with mail follow-up to non-responders).
    • A shortened and simplified survey.
    • Modifications to survey administration protocols to include a pre-notification letter and extension of the field period from 42 to 49 days.
    • The addition of a new, two-item Care Preferences measure.
    • Revisions to the existing Hospice Team Communication measure and the existing Getting Hospice Care Training measure.
    • The removal of three nursing home items and additional survey items impacted by other proposed changes in this rule.

Hospice Special Focus Program (SFP)

The SFP allows CMS to monitor those hospices that are identified as poor performers based on quality indicators from the CAHPS surveys. Additional oversight from CMS will “enable continuous improvement” for those hospices identified. The four measures used to determine poor performance are Help for Pain and Symptoms, Getting Timely Help, Willingness to Recommend this Hospice, and Overall Rating of this Hospice.

According to CMS, the final rule includes changes to the Overall Rating of this Hospice measure. CMS states that these changes are not substantive and will not impact the SFP algorithm. “CMS adjusts measure scores for mode of survey administrations, so the introduction of a new mode should not impact measure scores.” 

NAHC previously submitted comments to CMS stating that some aspects of the Hospice Special Focus Program are flawed and need to be adjusted for accuracy and fairness. NAHC/NHPCO has created a research project to understand the impact and validity of the Hospice Special Focus Program.

2025 Hospice Final Rule Conditions of Participation and Payment Requirements

There are language discrepancies in existing hospice requirements for medical director and physician designee, physician member, and payment requirements for the certification of the terminal illness and admission to hospice care. Therefore, CMS is making technical changes to the CoPs by adding the physician mmever of the hospice IDG as someone who can review technical information and provide certification of life expectancy. 

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

Sources:

CMS Newsroom

HOPE Guidance Manual

CMS-1810-F

MA Past, Present, and Possible Future: Nothing Good to Report

CMS

by | Jul 26, 2024 | CMS, Editorial, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Past

For at least the last five years, every Home Health conference this reporter has attended has featured at least one keynote speaker or expert panelist complaining about sparse and shrinking payments from Medicare Advantage plans. As thousands of seasonal TV ads convince more and more Medicare beneficiaries to enroll in what insurance company executive-turned-whistleblower Wendell Potter called “neither Medicare nor an advantage,” the calls from Home Health executives to turn away MA members, following the lead of many hospitals, have grown louder and more frequent.

Originally designed to extend the lifespan of the Medicare Trust Fund by bringing managed care practices to the federal healthcare program for seniors and disabled, Medicare Advantage has failed to do so. As long ago as 2021, an exposé by Fred Schulte in Kaiser Family Foundation Health News found that MA costs to taxpayers began to explode in 2018 and today equal 119 percent of what traditional Medicare should cost. We looked at more recent studies and found similar reports.

From the Experts

Referencing a study by Richard Kronick, a former federal health policy researcher and a professor at the University of California-San Diego, Schulte said, “his analysis of newly released Medicare Advantage billing data estimates that Medicare overpaid the private health plans by more than $106 billion from 2010 through 2019 because of the way the private plans charge for sicker patients. A third of that overpayment occurred in 2018 and 2019.”

Since Kronick’s 2021 report, more beneficiaries have opted in to Medicare Advantage. So far, just over half have switched from straight Medicare, with or without a supplement, and that number may reach 100 percent if those who profit most from the option have their way.

Present

In recent months, we have investigated and reported on the insurance industry’s practice of exaggerating MA member health conditions and denying care that traditional Medicare would have covered, collecting from both ends of the CMS trough. We have also mentioned several federal and state lawsuits piling up against insurance companies for both of those practices. One of our sources, The Center for Economic and Policy Research, said this in the Executive Summary of its detailed, September 2023 study:

Profiting at the Expense of Seniors: The Financialization of Home Health Care

“The nonpartisan Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) estimates that upcoding by MA plans that make enrollees appear to be sicker than they are costs CMS 106 percent of what traditional Medicare costs; adding in the quality bonus payments brings it to 108 percent. MA plans also enroll healthier Medicare beneficiaries, increasing their operating surplus by another 11 percent, making the payments to MA plans 19 percent higher than the payments to traditional Medicare. 

CMS’s announced goal for traditional Medicare beneficiaries is to move all of them to Accountable Care Organizations, which use the valued-based payment model, or other similar care arrangements, by 2030. CMS’s leading model to accomplish this shift is ACO REACH — a gentler, kinder version of the Trump administration’s backdoor enrollment of traditional Medicare beneficiaries in a capitated payment model.”

The Center for Economic Policy Research

Future

Past Present Future Medicare Advantage

Depending on results in the unpredictable world of politics later this year, CMS may or may not see its shift to value-based ACO models come to fruition. Kaiser News‘ Schulte examined the Heritage Foundation’s “Project 2025,” the conservative think tank’s blueprint for any possible future Republican administration, and found an entire section on the Department of Health and Human Services.

Within its “Mandate for Leadership,” the authors identify Medicare and Medicaid as “the principal drivers of our $31 trillion national debt.” While admitting that Medicare and Medicaid “help many,” the authors assert that the programs “operate as runaway entitlements that stifle medical innovation, encourage fraud, and impede cost containment, in addition to which their fiscal future is in peril.”

Rebuttal

Commenting on the Heritage Foundation’s claim, researcher Sonali Kolhatkar, writing for “OtherWords.org,” counters that this opinion is often used to justify ending social programs, but actual CMS data indicates that per person Medicare spending has plateaued for more than a decade and represents one of the greatest reductions to the federal debt. Even with 10,000 to 11,000 Boomers reaching Medicare eligibility every day, total per beneficiary expenditures have stopped climbing, hovering around $12,000 per year since 2010. Before reaching that 2010 plateau, per beneficiary spending had steadily risen from $2,000 at the program’s 1965 inception.

Medicare Advantage for All

Project 2025 proposes making Medicare Advantage the default enrollment option rather than a choice beneficiaries can opt into. With 100 percent of seniors on MA plans, already historic insurance profits will skyrocket further. But will Medicare beneficiaries benefit as well?

The Center for Economic and Policy Research cites multiple lawsuits that have proven eight of the ten largest MA plans routinely add chronic conditions – some non-existent – to patient assessments at enrollment…or later. We reported recently that UnitedHealth Group, operator of the largest MA plan, recently began sending nurses into homes to search for additional health conditions that would raise company payments from the trust fund. The report we quoted included evidence that these home visit upcodes do not lead to any treatments. The Center added that MA’s “heavily restricted networks damage one’s choice of provider along with introducing dangerous delays and denials of necessary care.”

As we have mentioned before, Medicare Advantage is neither Medicare nor an Advantage.

Medicaid also Attacked

Project 2025 also proposes restrictions on Medicaid eligibility by imposing work requirements. The blueprint sees the program for low-income Americans as a  “cumbersome, complicated, and unaffordable burden on nearly every state.” Their plan includes bringing private insurance companies in to “manage” care.

A June, 2024 report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities concluded that the ACA’s expansion of Medicaid helped millions of Americans who would otherwise be uninsured, and that its enabling and encouragement of preventive care actually saved money in state budgets. Last month’s report asserted “the people who gained coverage have grown healthier and more financially secure, while long-standing racial inequities in health outcomes, coverage, and access to care have shrunk.”

Project 2025 authors make no mention of a KFF News report from April 2023 that said most Medicaid-eligible people are already working. Nor does it take into account a Government Accountability Office report to Congress October 2020 and again in 2023 that determined that hourly wages in many large companies are low enough to keep even full-time workers eligible for Medicaid and SNAP. Walmart and McDonalds, to name two, land in the top five in almost every state for having Medicaid-eligible workers.

EVEN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL IS CRITICAL

Under the front page Headline “Medicare paid $50 billion to insurers for untreated ills,” a detailed WSJ investigation highlighted a number of findings, including:

  • “The questionable diagnoses included some for potentially deadly illnesses, such as AIDS, for which patients received no subsequent care, and for conditions people couldn’t possibly have, the analysis showed. Often, neither the patients nor their doctors had any idea.”
  • “Instead of saving taxpayers money, Medicare Advantage has added tens of billions of dollars in costs, researchers and some government officials have said.”
  • “Medicare Advantage has cost the government an extra $591 billion over the past 18 years, compared with what Medicare would have cost without the help of the private plans, according to a March report of the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, or MedPAC, a nonpartisan agency that advises Congress. Adjusted for inflation, that amounts to $4,300 per U.S. tax filer.”
  • “The Journal reviewed the Medicare data under an agreement with the federal government. The data doesn’t include patients’ names, but covers details of doctor visits, hospital stays, prescriptions and other care.”
People voting

Now it is in the Hands of Voters

Home Health, Hospice, and Home Care owners, management, and workers will be voting in November. Consideration of what four years under a Project 2025-friendly administration will mean to businesses dependent on Medicare and Medicare will weigh heavily on their minds as they enter their polling booths.

# # #

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.homecaretechreport.com One copy may be printed for personal use: further reproduction by permission only. editor@homecaretechreport.com

Federal Regulations for Adult Protective Services

Regulatory

by | Jul 26, 2024 | Regulatory

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

Dept of Health & Human Services Final Rule

On May 7, 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) issued a final rule establishing the first federal regulations for Adult Protective Services (APS). The regulations took effect on June 7, 2024. The entire rule is at https://acl.gov/apsrule.

One goal of the new regulations is to promote high quality APS that better meet the needs of adults who experience or are at risk of maltreatment and self-neglect. Another goal is to improve consistency in services among the states. 

APS services have historically been funded by state and local governments. There has been wide variation in APS services and practices between and even within states. New regulations, along with recent funding from HHS to state APS programs, now make it possible to improve consistency.

Adult Protective Services

The APS final rule:

    • Establishes a set of national minimum standards for the operation of APS programs that all state APS systems meet
    • Requires APS systems to ensure that planning and delivery of all services respect the fundamental right of adults to make their own life choices and that services are driven by the person receiving them
    • Establishes stronger protections for clients subject to, or at risk of, guardianship. Specifically, APS must consider guardianship only when there are not alternatives.
    • Requires responses within 24 hours of screening cases that are life-threatening or likely to cause irreparable harm or significant loss of income, assets, or resources
    • Requires APS to provide at least two ways, at least one of which must be online, to report maltreatment or self-neglect 24 hours per day, seven days per week
    • Requires robust conflict of interest policies to support ethical APS practice
    • Establishes definitions for key APS terms to improve information sharing, data collection, and program standardization
    • Promotes coordination and collaboration with state Medicaid agencies, long-term care ombudsmen, tribal APS, law enforcement, and other partners.

The Need for Adult Protective Services

Adult Protective Services

HHS points out that at least one in ten older adults who live in communities experience some form of maltreatment each year.

All providers have been involved in situations in which adult protective services are needed. Case managers/discharge planners in hospitals and long-term care facilities are especially likely to encounter and to be expected to assist with situations involving APS.

Providers of services to patients in their homes; including home health agencies, hospices, home medical equipment (HME) companies, and home care or private duty companies; are on the “front lines” with regard to identifying situations in which APS is needed. At least anecdotally, however, providers have received very little assistance and support from APS in situations of abuse and neglect.

Hopefully, providers can look forward to greater assistance in view of enhanced funding and standards.

# # #

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.

©2024 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.

BREAKING NEWS: Warren, Cassidy React to Supreme Court Ruling

CMS

by | Jul 26, 2024 | CMS, Medicare Advantage, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

The Background

Senators Warren and Cassidy react to the landmark decision by the Supreme Court in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo. That decision effectively overturned the Chevron Doctrine, which gave deference to federal agency decisions in interpreting ambiguous statutes. Eliminating the Chevron Deference puts more responsibility on federal agencies to show reason behind their interpretations. Likewise, it requires Congress to be less ambiguous in its wording of statutes. This decision would impact CMS’s ability to create their own definitions of terms when calculating reimbursement rates, implementing rules.

Senator Elizabeth Warren Reacts

Warren Chevron Bill

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA)

Less than one month after the U.S. Supreme Court decided the case that overturned Chevron Deference, Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) introduced a bill in the Senate that would override the Supreme Court’s decision and establish Chevron Deference as law.

“Giant corporations are using far-right, unelected judges to hijack our government and undermine the will of Congress,” Warren said. According to Warren, the pending legislation, “The Stop Corporate Capture Act”, will stop corporate interest groups from using their own interpretations of statutes over the judgment of Congress or expert agencies.

Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) called the Supreme Court decision “an egregious power grab from the US Supreme Court.”

Warren asserts that the overturning of Chevron Deference would put more power in the hands of industry-backed lobbyists who already have more negotiating power than the general public. This assertion is contrary to the majority opinion from Chief Justice John Roberts, who wrote, “Courts must exercise their independent judgment in deciding whether an agency has acted within its statutory authority.”

Increasing Congressional Authority

In addition to making Chevron Deference law, the Stop Corporate Capture Act would also:

Modernize and Reform the Regulatory Process

    • Streamline the White House’s review period for regulations, creating a 120-day time limit for review.
    • Authorize agencies to reinstate rules that are rescinded by Congress through the Congressional Review Act.
    • Reform agencies’ cost-benefit analysis to emphasize public benefits of a rule, including non-quantifiable benefits like promoting human dignity, securing child safety, and preventing discrimination.

Empower and Expand Public Participation in Rulemaking

    • Create an Office of the Public Advocate to help members of the public participate more effectively in regulatory proceedings.
    • Strengthen agency procedures for notifying the public about pending rulemakings.
    • Provide the public with greater authority to hold agencies accountable for unreasonable delays in completing rules. 
    • Require agencies to respond to citizen petitions for rulemaking that contain 100,000 or more signatures.

Increase Transparency and Protect Independent Expertise in Rulemaking

    • Require all rulemaking participants to disclose industry-funded research or other related conflicts of interest.
    • Require any submitted scientific or other technical research that raises a specified corporate conflict of interest be made available for independent public review. 
    • Bring transparency to the White House regulatory review process by requiring disclosure of changes to draft rules during that process and the source of those changes.
    • Require agency officials to provide justification when the regulatory review process ends with a rule being withdrawn.  
    • Establish financial penalties for corporate special interests that knowingly submit false information during the rulemaking process. 

Senator Bill Cassidy Responds

At the same time that Warren introduced her bill overriding Loper v. Raimondo, Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) introduced the “Upholding Standards of Accountability (USA) Act of 2024.” Cassidy’s bill takes the removal of the Chevron Deference further than simply overturning the previous ruling. According to the description, the USA Act imposes additional accountability in agency rulemaking. 

Senator Cassidy is the ranking member of the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. He stated, “For decades, the executive branch has exploited Chevron deference to increase its power beyond what Congress intended, all while skirting congressional oversight. Now, with Chevron deference overturned, Congress must work to rein in the executive branch and hold it accountable to the people and their elected representatives.”

Cassidy Chevron Bill

Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA)

Decreasing Agency Authority

The direct impact of the Supreme Court decision is that federal agencies do not get preferential treatment when interpreting a statute. Cassidy’s bill requires the head of any federal agency signing a major rule to testify before the committee of jurisdiction within 30 days of the rule’s publication.

Additionally, the bill would:

    • Require each person nominated to a Senate-confirmed position to testify before the committee of jurisdiction prior to Senate confirmation; 
    • Improve cost-benefit analyses by requiring federal agencies to conduct retrospective reviews of such analyses for major rulemakings within five years of each rule’s effective date; 
    • Clarify that federal agencies are permitted to communicate with Congress at all times regarding proposed rules; and  
    • Require timely, substantive responses to congressional oversight from federal agencies. 

Cassidy Challenges Existing Rules

Immediately after the Loper v Raimondo decision, Sen. Cassidy sent a letter to the U.S. Secretary of Education Miguel Cardona asserting that the Education Department has established rules outside of the authority given to it by Congress. He specifically alluded to the new Title IX rule. Cassidy asked Cardona, “How will the department change its current practice to enforce the laws as Congress writes them, and not to improperly legislate via agency action?”

Given Cassidy’s position in the Senate HELP Committee and his previous statements on medical debt, the multitude of bills he introduced on transparency, accountability, and decreasing authority, this is likely not Cassidy’s last attempt to challenge agency rules.

Likely Outcomes

Senator Warren's Bill

There are ten co-sponsors of Warren’s bill and a long list of endorsing organizations. Despite that, experts say the bill has only a slim chance of passing in an election year in the Senate, where Democrats currently have a narrow majority control. The bill is even less likely to pass in the Republican controlled House of Representatives. 

Senator Cassidy's Bill

Similar to Warren’s bill, Cassidy’s bill has a low likelihood of passing. The Democrat majority in the Senate may dismiss the bill before it ever reaches the house. In 2023, the 118th Congress passed only 34 bills, the lowest number in decades. With only a few months remaining for the Congress, and the focus turning to a new Democratic nominee, passing this, or any other, bill seems improbable.

Final Thoughts

Regardless of your political affiliation, the overturning of the Chevron Deference is good news for home health, hospice, and palliative care. This ruling puts more pressure on CMS to justify its reasoning for certain decisions it has made. Senator Warren’s bill threatens the advantage given to the home health industry related to NAHC’s senate and house bills and pending lawsuits. Senator Cassidy’s bill ensures federal agency oversight and requires CMS to rationalize their decisions and prove budget-neutrality.

We will continue following these and other Chevron Deference related stories.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

Kickbacks for Referrals are Costly…and Illegal

Admin

by | Jul 19, 2024 | Admin, Regulatory

by Elizabeth E Hogue, Esq.

Kickback on Kickbacks

Three home health agencies and their parent company in Cincinnati, Ohio, must pay $4,496,330 to resolve alleged violations of the federal False Claims Act by providing kickbacks to assisted living facilities in exchange for referrals of Medicare patients. The settlement resolves allegations that, between 2013 and 2022, the companies provided lease payments and other valuable benefits; including wellness health services, sports tickets, and meals; to numerous ALFs and their residents. The companies then billed Medicare for the services provided to patients referred by the ALFs.

Referrals from ALFs

Getting more referrals from ALF’s and retirement communities seems to be a crucial piece of the puzzle for all types of providers. As the number of years in which they have been in business increases, ALF’s and retirement communities are more eager to assist their residents to “age in place.” This means that they often view availability of services from post-acute providers as essential to allow them to achieve this goal. 

While providers compete aggressively in the marketplace, they cannot, however, lose sight of the fact that the healthcare industry is highly regulated. With ever-increasing emphasis on fraud and abuse compliance, providers cannot afford to violate the law.

Kickbacks for Referrals

How can providers get more referrals from ALF’S and retirement communities? What are the potential legal pitfalls that providers must avoid? 

The most effective way to maximize referrals from these sources may be to take a multi-pronged approach that includes:

Assigning at least one coordinator/liaison to each referral source on at least a part-time basis

Use of coordinators/liaisons at ALF’s and retirement communities raises issues related to violation of the federal anti-kickback statute. This statute generally prohibits providers from either offering to give or actually giving anything to referral sources in order to induce referrals. Consequently, liaisons and coordinators must be scrupulous about avoiding the provision of free services to ALF’s and retirement communities and/or their residents. Possible violations include “staffing” an office with an RN who responds to requests from residents in their apartments or has “office hours” to address health conditions of residents.

Renting space for coordinators/liaisons to occupy so that providers have a frequent or continuous presence on the premises of referral sources to better serve patients

Renting space from referral sources also involves potential kickbacks, so providers must meet the requirements of the space rental exception or safe harbor. In order to do so, providers must enter into a written lease with the facility/community for a term of least one year. The lease must include the number of square feet providers are renting. Rent must be set in advance at fair market value and cannot take into account either the volume or value of referrals received. Finally, providers may rent only the amount of space that is commercially reasonable or that they actually need.  

The OIG has provided significant guidance about these requirements, which providers must master before they establish these types of relationships. Common pitfalls for providers is insistence by ALFs that providers must rent an entire apartment, whether or not they need it, and must pay an amount equal to the residents’ monthly rent, which includes food and other services. 

Entering into Preferred Provider Agreements

Preferred Provider Agreements may be verbal or in writing. There may be significant value in reducing these preferred provider relationships to writing. These types of relationships raise issues related to patients’ right to freedom of choice of providers. The common law or court decisions require providers of all types to honor patients’ right to freedom of choice. There are also federal statutes that guarantee this right to Medicare and Medicaid patients. In addition, states sometimes address these issues in applicable statutes and regulations. For this reason, providers should not attempt to use standard or “sample” Agreements, but must adhere to requirements in all of the states in which they use these types of Agreements.

Providing a full range of screenings and educational events for and about common chronic illnesses or community awareness activities

ALF’s and retirement communities often ask providers to conduct educational events and basic screenings for common chronic conditions. Generally, providers may do so if they walk a relatively fine line between engaging in community awareness activities and providing free skilled services to residents that exceed $15.00 in value at a time. At a minimum, such activities must be conducted consistent with a detailed policy and procedure that governs the provision of such services, so that providers do not violate the anti-kickback statute.

No kickbacks for referrals

Establishing relationships with ALF’s and retirement communities may result in numerous referrals to post-acute providers. Such relationships should be based on standard documents and comprehensive policies, as described above, in order to ensure compliance. Legal representation is essential for the development and implementation of these documents due to the complexity of the issues involved. 

Enforcement actions like those described above are avoidable.

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.

©2024 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.

HIPAA Violations

Clinical

by | Jul 12, 2024 | Clinical, Privacy and Security, Regulatory

by Elizabeth E. Hogue, Esq.

Mom Needs More Fiber?

Imagine that a celebrity receives care where you work and curiosity gets the better of you, or someone you know is admitted and you would love to know the details. It’s oh so very tempting! So, you access records of care provided to patients that you have no legitimate need to view. The HIPAA police are on it! Because let’s not forget that the HIPAA Privacy Rule is a criminal statute.

An emergency room physician, for example, pled guilty to illegally obtaining the personal health information of multiple individuals. He was convicted of one count of wrongfully obtaining individually identifiable health information under false pretenses. The physician received a resident physician license and participated in an emergency medicine residency program at a university hospital. He worked in the emergency room of two hospitals in the university system.

The doctor used his access as a resident physician to the hospitals’ electronic health record to access the records of two patients without their knowledge or consent. He was never the patients’ physician. The patients were not receiving care in the emergency rooms where the doctor worked at the time he accessed the records.

HIPAA Violations Oops

The doctor also admitted that he sent a photograph to someone else of one of the patients wearing a hospital gown in which the patient’s rectum was hanging out of the patient’s body. And now for the “best” part: the doctor also admitted that he falsely wrote in a letter that he sent the picture of the patient with a prolapsed rectum to his mother to remind her of the importance of fiber intake! 

Do you remember the comedian, Flip Wilson, who repeatedly claimed that the devil made him do it? When it comes to accessing patients’ medical records in violation of HIPAA, you must “put the devil behind you!” Protecting patients’ private health information is serious business – serious criminal business. Be vigilant! 

By the same token, providers must also always remember that the HIPAA Privacy Rule isn’t just about protecting health information; it’s also about giving appropriate access to it. In the zeal to protect information, it anecdotally seems that practitioners have lost sight of the fact that access to information is at least as important as protection of information. In fact, the Office for Civil Rights, the federal enforcer of HIPAA violations, has focused on denial of access in enforcement actions for the past several years. 

Remember that, however tempting the information you would like to have may be, temptation pales in comparison to jail time!

# # #

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.

©2024 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.

Chevron Deference Derailed

Advocacy

by | Jul 12, 2024 | Advocacy, CMS, Regulatory

by Kristin Rowan, Editor

Chevron Deference

“A government agency must conform to any clear legislative statements when interpreting and applying a law, but courts will give the agency deference in ambiguous situations as long as its interpretation is reasonable.”

This statement followed the unanimous (minus the three who did not take part in the decision) U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council. The case is known for establishing the extent to which a federal court should defer to a government agency’s interpretation of an ambiguous statement when constructing statutes.

Breaking Down Chevron Deference

For those of you who don’t have a law degree, here’s what that means:

  • When a statutory term (required by law) is not explicitly defined and explained by Congress, there is room for interpretation
  • When a government agency interprets that statutory term, the interpretation may come under question
  • As long as the interpretation is not arbitrary (random), capricious (impulsive or unpredictable), or contrary to the statute (opposite the intent when put into practice), federal courts should give more weight to the government agency’s interpretation than to any other interpretation

Implications

At the time, the Supreme Court argued that if Congress leaves a term open to interpretation, it is either stated openness to interpretation, or an implied openness to interpretation. If a statute is implicity open, the intent of Congress is to allow a government agency to create provisions and regulations from that statute as they see fit. 

No one foresaw the impact this ruling would have on commerce and regulation in the U.S. To date, the Chevron Doctrine has been cited nearly 18,000 times in federal court decisions. The application of a statute based on agency interpretation could no longer be questioned or changed by judicial review.

Chevron Deference in Home Health

Since the advent of the PDGM model, CMS has calculated payment rates based on its interpretation of budget neutrality. The National Association for Home Care and Hospice has disputed the validity of both the interpretation of budget neutrality and the formulas used to calculate it.

Last year’s 2024 CMS Proposed Rule cut payment rates even further with a 2.890% Budget Neutrality permanent payment rate adjustment and a temporary rate adjustment to account for alleged overpayments from 2020-2022.

The lawsuit filed against CMS in response to the 2024 Final Rule was dismissed. NAHC began pursuing an administrative review with CMS. However, CMS has already stated that their final position is that budget neutrality has been calculated within the law. 

NAHC Comment: 2023 CMS Rule

“That proposal also fails logically in that it puts care access in severe jeopardy in applying a budget neutrality reconciliation methodology that takes PDGM-induced behavior changes to assess what otherwise would have been expended by Medicare in the absence of PDGM. In doing so, CMS fully fails to meet its obligation to ensure that the transition to a new payment model is budget neutral.”

  1. NAHC Comment Source

Chevron Deference Repealed

In a landmark ruling on Friday, June 28. 2024, the Supreme Court removed the power of federal agencies to interpret laws and ruled that the courts should rely on their own intrepretation of ambiguous laws. Justice Elena Kagan, who dissented the ruling, predicts this change “will cause a massive shock to the legal system.”

Chief Justice John Roberts explained in his opinion that the Chevron Deference is inconsistent with the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The APA is a federal law which contains instructions for courts to review actions by federal agencies. According to Roberts, the APA directs courts to decide legal questions using their own judgment. Therefore, he noted, agency interpretations of statutes are not entitled to deference. “…it remains the responsibility of the court to decide whether the law means what the agency says,” concluded Roberts.

NAHC to Refile Lawsuit after Chevron Deference Repeal

2024 Final Rule

In April, 2024, the lawsuit filed against CMS regarding the methodology for calculating budget neutrality was dismissed. Now, NAHC can refile the lawsuit and force CMS to justify its decision to enact repeated reimbursement cuts for home health.

In an interview on Wednesday, Bill Dombi told The Rowan Report, “This improves the chances of success for our lawsuit. CMS is going to have to support their regulatory interpretations going forward. Congress is going to have to offer more detail in its legislative language, leaving less to being open to interpretation.” Regarding the PDGM lawsuit, CMS argued that the law was clear and the agency’s interpretation was valid. The overturning of Chevron Deference allows the possibility of arguing that CMS’s interpretation of the law is flawed. 

80/20 Rule

Dombi also explained that the Ensuring Access to Medicaid Services rule, also known as the 80/20 rule, was “drawn out of a whole cloth.” Previously, there were limited avenues available to challenge this rule. The repeal of Chevron Deference significantly improves the ability to challenge the 80/20 rule. The argument now, Dombi told The Rowan Report, is “Does CMS even have the authority to do this?”

More to Come

The Rowan Report anticipates more news coming out of Washington D.C. and the NAHC office regarding the 2024 pay cuts and the 80/20 rule. We will provide ongoing updates and information as it becomes available.

# # #

Kristin Rowan, Editor
Kristin Rowan, Editor

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

Department of Labor Changes Exemption and Overtime Thresholds

Admin

by | Jul 12, 2024 | Admin, Regulatory

by Tim Rowan, Editor Emeritus

Overtime and exemption thresholds impact employers trying to balance cost-effective policies with employee fairness. As such, they keep a close eye on rules they must follow that come down from the U.S. Department of Labor. When those rules change, remaining compliant requires a company HR leader to adapt those policies. One of those times is at hand.

 

Exemption and Overtime Thresholds for Hourly and Salaried Earners

Effective last week, July 1, the annual salary threshold for overtime exemption increased from $35,568 to $43,888. The DoL’s final rule does not stop there but sets another increase on January 1, 2025, to $58,656 per year or $1,128 per week. Salaries below those thresholds cannot be declared “exempt,” meaning they must be paid overtime rates for hours worked over eight per day and forty per week.

 

Executive Salaries also Affected

In addition to overtime and exemption thresholds, the new rule increases the highly compensated employee threshold twice as well. On July 1, the annual salary threshold increased from $107,432 to $132,964. That annual threshold will increase again on January 1 to $151,164.

Going forward, the DOL will increase all thresholds every three years starting July 1, 2027, relying on up-to-date wage data.

We learned these DoL rule details from Angelo Spinola, Executive Director and lead home care attorney with Polsinelli, a national law firm. 

Federal Overtime Rule

Angelo Spinola Comments

“Home care providers that have been making adjustments to comply with the July 1 deadline may have heard about a recent case out of Texas blocking the July 1 increases. While the Texas court did use a partial injunction blocking the July 1 increase, it only applies to Texas government employees. It does not affect any private employers.”

He recommended that all home health and home care employers continue to make changes as planned to comply with the July 1 increases. Spinola stated that his statements are for informational purposes only and are not intended to be legal advice. His comments quoted here should not be relied upon or used without consulting a lawyer to consider your specific circumstances, possible changes to applicable laws, rules and regulations and other legal issues.

Spinola Concludes

“There are still challenges pending that could affect the January 1, 2025 increases, however, those decisions are not expected for several months, and it is too soon to predict whether that deadline will be affected. We will continue to monitor these cases and provide any updates that may have an effect on the home care industry.”

Angelo Spinola can be reached via email at onlinesolutions@polsinelli.com. 

NAHC Comments on Exemption and Overtime Thresholds

“The long-awaited U.S. Department of Labor rule regulating minimum salaries levels to qualify for exemption to the Fair Labor Standards Act was issued today. We strongly advise the home care community to gain a comprehensive understanding of the rule and institute steps for timely compliance. While the changes may have limited impact on most home care companies, noncompliance comes with serious penalties.” – NAHC President Bill Dombi

# # #

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.homecaretechreport.com One copy may be printed for personal use: further reproduction by permission only. editor@homecaretechreport.com