Copyright
Thursday, June 27, 2013
CMS Consolidates Web Portals for Coordination of Benefits & Recovery
Monday, June 1, 2015
GAO calls for better Medicare fee setting data and more transparency
The American Medical Association/Specialty Society Relative Value Scale Update Committee (RUC) has a process in place to regularly review Medicare physicians' services' work relative values (which reflect the time and intensity needed to perform a service). Its recommendations to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the agency within the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) that administers Medicare, though, may not be accurate due to process and data-related weaknesses.
First, the RUC's process for developing relative value recommendations relies on the input of physicians who may have potential conflicts of interest with respect to the outcomes of CMS's process. While the RUC has taken steps to mitigate the impact of physicians' potential conflicts of interest, a member of the RUC told GAO that specialty societies' work relative value recommendations may still be inflated.
RUC staff indicated that the RUC may recommend a work relative value to CMS that is less than the specialty societies' median survey result if the value seems accurate based on the RUC members' clinical expertise or by comparing the value to those of related services.
Second, GAO found weaknesses with the RUC's survey data, including that some of the RUC's survey data had low response rates, low total number of responses, and large ranges in responses, all of which may undermine the accuracy of the RUC's recommendations. For example, while GAO found that the median number of responses to surveys for payment year 2015 was 52, the median response rate was only 2.2 percent, and 23 of the 231 surveys had under 30 respondents.
CMS's process for establishing relative values embodies several elements that cast doubt on whether it can ensure accurate Medicare payment rates and a transparent process.
First, although CMS officials stated that CMS complies with the statutory requirement to review all Medicare services every 5 years, the agency does not maintain a database to track when a service was last valued or have a documented standardized process for prioritizing its reviews.
Second, CMS's process is not fully transparent because the agency does not publish the potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC in its rulemaking or otherwise, and thus stakeholders are unaware that these services will be reviewed and payment rates for these services may change.
Third, CMS provides some information about its process in its rulemaking, but does not document the methods used to review specific RUC recommendations. For example, CMS does not document what resources were considered during its review of the RUC's recommendations for specific services.
Finally, the evidence suggests—and CMS officials acknowledge—that the agency relies heavily on RUC recommendations when establishing relative values. For example, GAO found that, in the majority of cases, CMS accepts the RUC's recommendations and participation by other stakeholders is limited. Given the process and data-related weaknesses associated with the RUC's recommendations, such heavy reliance on the RUC could result in inaccurate Medicare payment rates.
CMS has begun to research ways to develop an approach for validating RUC recommendations, but does not yet have a specific plan for doing so. In addition, CMS does not yet have a plan for how it will use funds Congress appropriated for the collection and use of data on physicians' services or address the other data challenges GAO identified.
Why GAO Did This Study
Payments for Medicare physicians' services totaled about $70 billion in 2013. CMS sets payment rates for about 7,000 physicians' services primarily on the basis of the relative values assigned to each service. Relative values largely reflect estimates of the physician work and practice expenses needed to provide one service relative to other services.
The Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 included a provision for GAO to study the RUC's process for developing relative value recommendations for CMS. GAO evaluated (1) the RUC's process for recommending relative values for CMS to consider when setting Medicare payment rates; and (2) CMS's process for establishing relative values, including how it uses RUC recommendations. GAO reviewed RUC and CMS documents and applicable statutes and internal control standards, analyzed RUC and CMS data for payment years 2011 through 2015, and interviewed RUC staff and CMS officials.
What GAO Recommends
CMS should better document its process for establishing relative values and develop a process to inform the public of potentially misvalued services identified by the RUC. CMS should also develop a plan for using funds appropriated for the collection and use of information on physicians' services in the determination of relative values. HHS agreed with two of GAO's recommendations, but disagreed with using rulemaking to inform the public of RUC-identified services. GAO clarified that the recommendation is not limited to rulemaking.
Click here to read the full report.
Better Data and Greater Transparency Could Improve Accuracy
GAO-15-434: Published: May 21, 2015. Publicly Released: May 21, 2015.
Related articles
- CMS To Publish Financial Interactions Between Industry and Physician and Teaching Hospitals (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Look Who Is Prescribing What (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Changes to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for Calendar Year 2014 (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Doctors and hospitals' use of health IT more than doubles since 2012 (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- CMS Comments: "No Comment" on The Forthcoming Smart Act Regulations (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Friday, September 27, 2024
Chevron's Fall: Medicare Set-Asides Face Legal Shake-Up
Sunday, December 19, 2021
CMS Announces 2022 Workers' Compensation Recovery Threshold to Remain at $750.00
Computation of Annual Recovery Thresholds for Certain Liability Insurance, No-Fault Insurance, and Workers' Compensation Settlements, Judgments, Awards, or Other Payments for 2022 were announced this week.
Friday, September 30, 2016
CMS 2016 Recovery Thresholds for Workers’ Compensation Settlements, Judgments, Awards or Other Payments
Thursday, February 21, 2013
CMS Announces New WCMSA Re-Evaluation Procedure
February 12, 2013
Effective immediately, if a WCMSA proposal amount was originally submitted via the web-portal, a re-evaluation of an approved WCMSA amount can be requested through the WCMSA web portal, if the claimant or submitter believes that a CMS determination:
• contains obvious mistakes, such as mathematical errors or a failure to recognize that medical records already submitted show a surgery CMS priced has already occurred, or
• misinterpreted evidence previously submitted, a re-evaluation maybe requested.
Please refer to Question # 12 of the July 11, 2005, procedure memorandum located in the “downloads” section of this page for detailed information regarding when a re-evaluation request maybe submitted. The CMS Regional Offices will continue to review the requests submitted through the portal.
Posted on CMS Workers Compensation Agency Services
Read more about WCMSA and workers' compensation
Related articles
- Class Action by Medicare Advantage Beneficiares Dismissed By Federal Court (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- State Audit Reveals North Carolina Needs To Combat Employer Fraud (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Medicare Conditional Repayment Procedures: Former Judge to Speak About New Law (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Protect American workers from exposure to silica on the job (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Citing Violations Medicare Ends Contract with Fox Insurance Company Drug Plan
Members Will Be Provided Access to Drugs While Transitioning to New Plans.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) today terminated its contract with Fox Insurance Company. After an onsite review of the plan and its services, CMS determined that the plan’s significant deficiencies – not meeting Medicare’s requirements to provide enrollees with prescription drugs according to recognized standards of care – jeopardized the health and safety of Fox enrollees. CMS found that Fox committed a series of violations, including improperly denying its enrollees coverage of critical HIV, cancer, and seizure medications. The termination of the contract is effective immediately.
The immediate termination will not impact or delay access to drugs for the more than 123,000 Medicare beneficiaries currently enrolled in Fox plans. Beginning tomorrow, all enrollees will obtain their drugs through LI-NET, a program run by Medicare and administered by Humana, to ensure that beneficiaries receive their Medicare prescription drugs. Fox enrollees will be able to choose a new Medicare prescription drug plan through May 1, 2010. Current enrollees who do not choose a plan will be enrolled into a new plan by Medicare.
CMS issued an enrollment and marketing sanction to Fox on Feb. 26, 2010, because the organization was not following Medicare’s rules for providing prescription drug coverage to its enrollees. After an onsite audit, which ran between March 2 and March 4, CMS found Fox’s problems persisted and it continued to subject its enrollees to obstacles in getting needed and, in many cases, life–sustaining medicines. CMS also found that many of the obstacles were in place to limit access to high-cost drugs, which could have led to enrollees’ clinical needs not being met. In many cases, Fox enrollees were required to have unnecessary and invasive medical procedures before they were able to obtain drugs. Fox was unable to satisfactorily address these compliance concerns and furnish medicines to its Medicare enrollees.
Among the audit findings CMS found include:
· Failing to provide access to Medicare prescription drugs benefits by imposing unapproved prior authorization and step therapy criteria that made it more difficult for beneficiaries to get drugs that are protected by law.
· Not meeting the plan’s appeals deadlines,
· Not complying with Medicare regulations requiring enrollees to be transitioned to new drugs at the beginning of the new plan year.
· Failing to notify enrollees about prior authorization and step therapy determinations as required by Medicare.
According to CMS auditors, Fox was unable to satisfactorily address compliance concerns cited in the enrollment and marketing sanction and meet contractual obligations to provide medicines to Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in their plans.
“We take our oversight role of Medicare prescription drug plans seriously,” said Blum. “We review and take action on all complaints received about Medicare health and drug plans and will take appropriate and immediate actions wherever necessary.”
CMS encourages Medicare prescription drug plan enrollees having concerns with access to drug coverage to contact 1-800-MEDICARE (1-800-633-4227) or the state health insurance assistance program (SHIP) to help get them resolved. Medicare enrollees, their families and their caregivers can contact a SHIP near them by visiting:http://www.medicare.gov/Contacts/staticpages/ships.aspx
# # #
NOTE: States in which the Fox plan was available were: Arkansas, Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Louisiana, Maryland, Missouri, North Carolina, New Jersey, New York, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas and West Virginia.
Wednesday, June 22, 2011
Congress Told CMS Must Continue to Stop Work Comp Cost Shifting
- Medicare Secondary Payer: Process for Situations Involving Non-Group Health Plans, US GAO Study James C. Cosgrove, Director, Health Care - 6.22.11
- Should CMS be A Joint Payee in a Workers Comp Settlement? (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Medicare to Partially Resume Workmens Comp Collection Letters (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- CMS Recovery Contractor Publishes New Rights and Responsibilities Letter (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Proposed CMS Legislation Cannot be Resuscitated Following the Wall Street Bailout (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Industry Coalition Wants to Cut CMS Condition Payments (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Health Reform Coverage for Asbestos Victims Expands (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Saturday, March 21, 2009
CMS Publishes a User Manual for MSP Reporting
July 1, 2009 is the implementation date for mandatory reporting in workers' compensation claims. Section 111 adds reporting requirements and does not eliminate any existing statutory provisions or regulations. CMS' existing processes, including for example, CMS’ process for self-identifying pending liability insurance (including self-insurance), no-fault insurance, or workers’ compensation claims to CMS’ Coordination of Benefits Contractor (the COBC) or the processes followed by CMS’ Medicare Secondary Payer Recovery Contractor (the MSPRC) for MSP recoveries, remain undisturbed. The Act does impose penalties for noncompliance.
CMS has announced that it will offer a "query function" to required reporting entities to ascertain whether or not the claimant is a Medicare beneficiary. The query will be based upon identifying data including: HICN or SSN; first initial of the last name; first 6 characters of the last name; date of birth and gender.
Yet to be determined are a host of reporting issues including:
- Interim dollar reporting threshold for "Total Payment Obligation to the Claimant" (TPOC) amounts -- CMS’s decision on this issue will be released separately in the near future.
- Interim dollar reporting threshold for "Ongoing Responsibility for Medicals" (ORM) -- CMS has this issue under consideration.
- Further information regarding reporting for mass torts – This issue is still under discussion.
- ICD9 Codes – CMS is reviewing the codes to determine if there are certain codes which Responsible Reporting Entities (RREs) will be prohibited from submitting.
- Examples regarding "Who is the RRE" -- CMS is reviewing additional examples submitted by the industry for possible inclusion in the User Guide.
Monday, June 5, 2017
Chaos for Workers' Compensation Programs--The Elimination of Social Security Numbers?
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Federal Court Enjoins CMS From MSP Recovery Procedures
"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant's demand for payment of her MSP reimbursement claims, under threat of collection actions before there has been a resolution of an appeal regarding the amount of the Defendant's MSP claim or a waiver request, exceeds her authority under the Medicare statute, and Defendant is enjoined from demanding payment of a MSP reimbursement claim with threats of commencing collection actions before there is a resolution of an appeal or waiver request.
"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Defendant's demand that attorneys withhold liability proceeds from clients pending payment of amounts claimed by the Defendant as MSP reimbursement exceeds her authority under the Medicare statute, and Defendant is enjoined from demanding that attorneys withhold liability proceeds from their clients pending payment of disputed MSP reimbursement claims.In reaching its decision to allow discovery, the Court held that the putative class, that is challenging the recovery methods of Medicare, is permitted to extend discovery beyond the limited administrative record action without the necessity of the exhaustion of administrative remedies since constitutional and due process were collateral to any individual claim.
The issues reviewed by the court were:
"1) whether Defendant [CMS] can require prepayment of an MSP recovery claim before the correct amount is determined through the administrative appeal procedures, and
2) whether Defendant [CMS] can make plaintiffs' attorneys financially responsible if they do not hold or immediately turn over to the Defendant [CMS] their clients' litigation proceeds.
These questions involve a due process analysis, which consists of a three part balancing test:
1) the private interest affected;
2) the risk of erroneous deprivation and probable value of additional safeguards, and
3) the government or public interest in current procedures. "
Haro v. Sebelius, (A. Ariz.) CV 09-134 TUC DCB
Related articles
- Industry Coalition Wants to Cut CMS Conditional Payments (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Proposed CMS Legislation Cannot be Resuscitated Following Wall Street Bailout (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Insurance Industry Again Offers MSP Legislation That Would Discourage Workers' Compensation Periodic Payments (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Medicare Secondary Payment Interest Calculation Tool Updated(workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Common Themes, The Green Mountain System & Newt Gingrich (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Tuesday, January 18, 2022
CMS Health Care Workers Vaccination Deadline March 15, 2022
The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) issued guidance that the full vaccination compliance deadline is March 15, 2022, for all health care workers subject to the Omnibus Health Care Staff Vaccination rule.
Tuesday, November 30, 2021
CMS stopped from imposing vaccine mandate
Friday, December 28, 2012
Legislation Goes to President Obama on CMS Condition Payment Procedures
Under the proposed legislation time periods for reporting by parties to CMS (The Center for Medeicare and Medicaid Services) are eased, penalities for insurance carriers are reduced, and a 3 year statute of limitations is established.
The legislation was merged into another pending bill for medical services and was rushed to a favorable vote in both the House and Senate in the last moments before Christmas.
What remains to be determined are the regulations that will be established to implement the legislation. In the past, such regulations usually set boundries for such legislation and may in the end further complicate and even prolong resolution of the issues.
Read more about "The Medicare Secondary Payer Act" and workers' compensation
Related articles
Friday, September 30, 2011
CMS Announced Status Update and Future Changes
1) An ALERT delaying the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 (MMSEA) Section 111 MSP reporting requirement for certain liability insurance (including self-insurance) settlements, judgments, awards, or other payments is now posted at www.cms.gov/MandatoryInsRep.
2) Policy guidance related to Exposure, Ingestion, and Implantation issues, and December 5, 1980, is now posted at www.cms.gov/MandatoryInsRep and www.cms.gov/COBGeneralInformation.
3) An ALERT related to Qualified Settlement Funds, under Section 468B of the Internal Revenue Code, is now posted at www.cms.gov/MandatoryInsRep.
4) A policy memorandum, for liability insurance (including self-insurance), on the acceptance of the treating physician's certification, and its impact on the issue of protecting Medicare's interests with respect to future medicals is now posted at www.cms.gov/COBGeneralInformation.
In addition, on September 30, 2011, the MSPRC will implement a self-service information feature to its customer service line. This feature gives callers the ability to get the most up-to-date Demand/Conditional Payment amounts, and the dates that those letters were issued, without having to speak to a customer service representative. The self-service feature will be available for extended hours, and callers will have the option of requesting information on multiple cases during one phone call.
Beginning in October 2011, CMS will implement an option to pay a fixed percentage of certain physical trauma-based liability cases with settlement amounts of $5000 or less. Detailed information on this option will be posted as an ALERT, on or before October 21, 2011, on the MSPRC website at www.MSPRC.info.
Upcoming improvements to the MSP program, expected within the next 3-9 months, include the following:
• The implementation of a MSPRC portal, where the beneficiary/representative can obtain information about Medicare's claim payments, demand letters, etc., and input information related to a settlement, disputed claims, etc.
• The implementation of an option that allows for an immediate payment to Medicare for future medical costs that are claimed/released/effectively released in a settlement.
• The implementation of a process that provides Medicare's conditional payment amount, prior to settlement in certain situations.
Related articles
- CMS Announces Four Additional Hardship Exemptions from the 2012 Medicare Payment Reduction and Extends the Exemption Deadline (managemypractice.com)
- Workers' Compensation Medicare Set-Aside Web Portal (WCMSAP) Webinar (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Qui Tam Action for MSP Results in Costs to Plaintiff (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Nebraska Law Would Deny Disability and Death Payments to First Responders in a 9/11-Type Event (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Monday, May 23, 2011
CMS Announces Review is Only a Recommended Process for Set-Aside Agreements
- Federal Court Enjoins CMS From MSP Recovery Procedures (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Industry Coalition Wants to Cut CMS Conditional Payments (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Workers Compensation Act Does Not Bar A Negligence Action Against A General Partner (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- North Carolina Proposes to Reduce Worker Benefits and Abolishe Privacy Rights (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Common Themes, The Green Mountain System & Newt Gingrich (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
Friday, March 29, 2013
CMS Publishes Brand New Reference Guide for Medicare Set-Aside Arrangements
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
NJ WC Reports a Drop of 46% of CMS Backlog in 60 days
The memo encourages and the use of "specialists" and suggestions that the cost for that service be shared among the parties. It also suggested that some cases be tried fully or partially and that special language be incorporated in Judgments/Settlements where cases have been compromised, providing the opportunity for the cases to be re-heard at a later date to address Medicare issues when reviews are actually completed by CMS. It is difficult to determine whether the CMS issues are actually being completely resolved or whether they are deferred to a later date. The State of NJ continues to offer the judicial assistance of the Division of Workers' Compensation to reduce the backlog of cases designated as MCARE matters.
The memo also recognizes that little action has occurred on the Industry supported, and previously ill fated, Medicare Secondary Payer Statute which attempts to modify the CMS recoupment procedure for conditional medical payments. The proposed admendments discourage the periodic payments of compensation benefits, a basic premise of the entire workers' compensation system.
Attention was brought to the NJ situation when local attorneys enlightened Senator Lautenberg who then introduce Federal legislation requesting the that CMS provide status on the CMS recovery effort.
“These delays mean that thousands of workers in New Jersey and across the country are waiting months and even years to be compensated for their workplace injuries. Workers who are hurt on the job rely on these payments for medical expenses and to get their lives back on track. Medicare needs to provide information to Congress immediately on the number and length of these delays so we can determine the best way to end them and get workers the settlements they need and deserve,” said Sen. Lautenberg, who is a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee.
CMS has since supported newely enacted legislation and Rules to place an increased burden on primary medical providers, major medical carriers and employers to comply with reporting issues.
Saturday, December 29, 2012
Class Action by Medicare Advantage Beneficiares Dismissed By Federal Court
The court ruled that the interpretation of the secondary payer provision of Medicare part C, 42 USC section 1395W-22 (a)(4), preempted any state law provisions.
Meek-Horton v. Trover Solutions, Inc., No. 11 CV 6054(RPP), 2012 WL 6699776, (SD-NY 2012) Decided December 26, 2012
Read more about "The Medicare Secondary Payer Act" and workers' compensation
Related articles
Thursday, July 9, 2015
CMS Announces Changes to Physician Fee Schedules: End of Life Care Discussion Payments Proposed
“CMS is building on the important work of Congress to shift the Medicare program toward a system that rewards physicians for providing high quality care,” said Andy Slavitt, Administrator of CMS. “Thanks to the recent landmark Medicare and children’s health insurance program legislation, CMS and Congress are working together to achieve a better Medicare payment system for physicians and the American people.”
In the proposed CY 2016 Physician Fee Schedule rule, CMS is also seeking comment from the public on implementation of certain provisions of the MACRA, including the new Merit-based Incentive payment system (MIPS). This is part of a broader effort at the Department to move the Medicare program to a health care system focused on the delivery of quality care and value.
The proposed rule includes updates to payment policies, proposals to implement statutory adjustments to physician payments based on misvalued codes, updates to the Physician Quality Reporting System, which measures the quality performance of physicians participating in Medicare, and updates to the Physician Value-Based Payment Modifier, which ties a portion of physician payments to performance on measures of quality and cost. CMS is also seeking comment on the potential expansion of the Comprehensive Primary Care Initiative, a CMS Innovation Center initiative designed to improve the coordination of care for Medicare beneficiaries.
The proposed rule also seeks comment on a proposal that supports patient- and family-centered care for seniors and other Medicare beneficiaries by enabling them to discuss advance care planning with their providers. The proposal follows the American Medical Association’s recommendation to make advance care planning services a separately payable service under Medicare.
The release of the rule triggers a 60-day comment period, during which time CMS welcomes the input of stakeholders and the public. A final rule will be published this fall. For a fact sheet on the proposed rule, Proposed policy, payment, and quality provisions changes to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for Calendar Year 2016, please see here. For further information, please see the rule on display here.
Related articles
- Medicare Plans To Pay For Voluntary End-Of-Life Counseling (wnyc.org)
- Coverage for End-of-Life Talks Gaining Ground (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- Growth In U.S. Health Spending In 2013 Is Lowest Since 1960 (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)
- The Affordable Care Act and Workers' Compensation: The Known Unknowns (workers-compensation.blogspot.com)