President Barack Obama signed the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, often called the “fiscal cliff” agreement, on January 2, 2013. Buried in the 59 pages of the act is a seven-line amendment to Section 1870 of the Social Security Act. This section bars recovery of overpayments from providers who are “without fault” and automatically deems a provider to be without fault three years from the year in which the original payment was made (unless there is evidence of fault). The three-year “without fault” limitation provision was enacted in 1972. Without much notice, the fiscal cliff deal extended this to five years.

The push for extension of the limitation began when the Department of Health and Human Service’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) issued a report recommending to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) that it pursue legislation to extend the statute of limitations. (See OIG, Obstacles to Collection of Millions in Medicare Overpayments.) This report blamed the time limitations on reopening and recovery of payments (four years and three years, respectively) as the reason why approximately $330 million in overpayments could not be recovered by CMS. The OIG also concluded that CMS’ inadequate guidance and monitoring of contractors was to blame. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) has issued a report estimating that $500 million would be added to the federal treasury by 2022 as a result of the statute of limitation change. (See CBO, Detail on Estimated Budgetary Effects of Title VI.)

The biggest question for providers is how to deal with this change going forward. The following illustration demonstrates how the three-year limitation period applied: Provider was notified on February 22, 2009, that it had been paid for services provided to beneficiary. On January 2, 2013, the contractor determined that provider was overpaid for these services. If there was no evidence that provider acted fraudulently, this overpayment could not be recovered because under the statute of limitations the right to do so expired on December 31, 2012. Had the contractor determined that the provider was overpaid on any date prior to December 31, 2012, it would have been recoverable. (See Medicare Financial Management Manual, Chapter 3, Section 80.1.) Accordingly, any payments made in 2009 or before were not recoverable as of January 1, 2013.Continue Reading “Fiscal Cliff” Deal Extends Collection Time for Medicare Overpayments

In its Semi-Annual Report to Congress, OIG announced that expected recoveries for FY 2012 are $6.9 billion.  The $6.9 billion consists of $923.8 million in audit receivables and $6 billion in investigative receivables.  The investigative receivables include criminal restitution, settlements pursuant to False Claims Act (FCA) cases and Civil Monetary Penalty (CMP) actions, and

The Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the Department of Health and Human Services has concluded that a per diem payment structure between a not-for-profit hospital and specialist physicians would not result in administrative sanctions under OIG’s civil monetary penalties law that relates to prohibited remuneration by the anti-kickback statute. According to an OIG Advisory Opinion that was posted this week:

Each year, [the hospital] allocates an aggregate annual payment amount per specialty for on-call coverage payments to participating physicians based on: (1) the likely number of days per month the specialty would be called; (2) the likely number of patients a participating physician would see per call day; and (3) the likely number of patients requiring inpatient care and post-discharge follow-up care in a participating physician’s office (OIG Advisory Opinion 12-15)

Once the aggregate amount per specialty is determined, the hospital divides this amount by 365 days to create the on-call coverage per diem fee to be paid to the specialty physicians. Notably, these physicians receive the per diem fee for each day of coverage under the arrangement even if they are not contacted by the emergency department to treat a patient.

Numerous elements of the particular arrangement at issue were highlighted by OIG as minimizing the risk of fraud and abuse. First, the per diem payment was certified by an independent consultant as commercially reasonable and within the range of fair market value for actual and necessary services. It was also calculated without regard to referrals or other business generated by the participating physicians. The OIG highlighted that the per diem amount was calculated annually in advance and was uniformly administered without regard to the individual physician’s referrals.
Continue Reading OIG Finds Hospital-Physician Call Coverage Arrangement Poses Little Risk Under Anti-Kickback Statute

The heads of both the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) sent a joint letter on Monday, September 24, to five hospital industry groups, including the American Hospital Association, threatening to prosecute providers that use electronic health records (EHR) to “game” the system and improperly obtain federal monies for

In August, the Office of Inspector General (OIG) of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services released a report describing inappropriate and questionable billing by home health agencies.  The OIG conducted the study because recent investigations and studies showed that home health agencies are vulnerable to fraud, abuse, and waste.  The OIG identified inappropriate claims by examining claims data from home health, inpatient hospital, and skilled nursing facilities.  The OIG also looked at HHAs that billed unusually high amounts according to at least one of its six measures of questionable billing.  The report determined that Medicare inappropriately paid $5M for home health claims with three specific errors in 2010.  To read the report, click here.

Attorney Elizabeth Hogue prepared a concise, helpful summary of the report as follows:

The OIG issued Report OEI-04-11-00240 in August, 2012, entitled “Inappropriate and Questionable Billing by Medicare Home Health Agencies.” Unlike some other guidance published the OIG, this Report provides detailed information about inappropriate and questionable billing practices by home health agencies (HHA’s). Specifically, the OIG concluded that HHA billing is questionable or unusually high on the six measures below, if greater than the 75th percentile plus 1.5 times the interquartile range. The six measures are as follows:

 1. High average outlier payment amounts per beneficiary

According to the OIG, HHA’s with outlier payments above $403 per beneficiary have unusually high outlier payments and are likely engaging in questionable billing practices.


Continue Reading Home Health Billing Practices to Fix Now