Posted on

FWA- Investigation by Paxton’s Medicaid Fraud Unit Results in $1.1M in Restitution to Health Care Programs

 
 

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: These two yahoos stole $907k from Medicare and $218k from Medicaid- but really they stole the full $1.1M from you, the taxpayer.

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/news/releases/investigation-paxtons-medicaid-fraud-unit-results-11m-restitution-health-care-programs

An investigation by Attorney General Paxton’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit has led to the sentencing for health care fraud of two individuals in federal court in Del Rio, Texas.  

Melody Ann Villarreal and Oscar Gutierrez, Jr. were both found guilty of submitting fraudulent run sheets for ambulance transports that did not occur and submitting them to both Medicare and Medicaid for payment.  

Villarreal and Gutierrez were ordered to pay $907,376.41 in restitution to Medicare and $218,651.23 to Medicaid. Villarreal was sentenced to 48 months of incarceration, followed by three years of supervised release, and Gutierrez was sentenced to 60 months of incarceration, also followed by three years of supervised release. 

“My office will continue to crack down on those who commit fraud, drive up the cost of health care for Texans, and try to compromise the integrity of our health care system,” said Attorney General Paxton. “I’m proud to say that the hard work of my Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and our law enforcement partners has ensured that justice was done in this case and that Texas taxpayer funds were recovered.” 

The case was investigated by Lieutenant Jeff Winney, Investigative Auditor Michael Youngs, and Captain Raúl González of the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, in cooperation with the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Inspector General and the FBI. The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Rex Beasley out of the Western District of Texas. 

The Texas Medicaid Fraud Control Unit is responsible for investigating and prosecuting Medicaid fraud and patient neglect and abuse. If you suspect Medicaid fraud or abuse, or patient neglect, please report it by calling (512) 371-4700 or visiting the Texas Attorney General’s website.  

Posted on

FWA- Missouri should refund $34 million in Medicaid payments, federal agency says

 
 

 
 

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: The state IG says the Medicaid agency owes CMS a lot of cash because of poor oversight of personal care services payments. The Medicaid agency disagrees, and now its up to CMS to decide.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.stltoday.com/business/local/missouri-should-refund-34-million-in-medicaid-payments-federal-agency-says/article_9e65305d-2863-5d94-9046-7f963962c1fd.html

ST. LOUIS — A federal agency is pushing Missouri to refund more than $34 million in Medicaid payments, after an audit raised issue with some of the state’s policies for programs that help patients with day-to-day tasks.

In the audit, the Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General looked at claims filed for personal care assistance, which offers help with daily tasks like meal preparation, shopping, grooming and bathing.

The audit found that in some cases, time sheets couldn’t be provided or lacked detail. In other cases, documentation was missing for the attendants who provided the care.

It also looked at what emergency preparedness policies the state had during that period. Because the audit looked at the 2018 and 2019 fiscal years, it looked at plans in place prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

When HHS looked for “backup plans,” meant to ensure that patients are safe in the event that they can’t be reached in an emergency, in some cases it found little or no information or instructions.

The state objected to many of the audit’s findings. It said the federal agency looked at just a small sampling of claims. It argued that some of the documents it cited had all the information that is legally required. And it noted that the state health department established a Quality Assurance Unit in late 2020.

Still, HHS issued recommendations for repayments and policy changes this month, including a recommendation that the state refund at least $34.2 million to the federal government.

The Missouri Department of Social Services and the Department of Health and Senior Services reiterated Tuesday that they disagreed with the recommendations. The agencies do not believe “that any of these funds should be disallowed,” DHSS spokesperson Lisa Cox said in an email.

The suggestions by HHS will be reviewed by the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, which will make the final decision about what actions the state must take and whether it must make any refunds. If the state disagrees with CMS’ determination, it will have the option to appeal.

HHS called the state out for similar issues a decade earlier, also with personal care services. In a 2012 audit, the agency found problems like missing care plans and unsigned time sheets.

Posted on

FWA (AR)- doctor’s Medicaid billing suspended after fraud allegations

 
 

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: A doc in Arkansas appears to not be doing much at all.

 
 

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.nwahomepage.com/news/nwa-doctors-medicaid-billing-suspended-after-fraud-allegations/

 
 

FAYETTEVILLE, Ark. (KNWA/KFTA) — A Northwest Arkansas psychiatrist has had his Medicaid billing privileges suspended following allegations of fraud.

According to a letter from the Arkansas Office of Medicaid Inspector General Elizabeth Smith, Dr. Brian T. Hyatt of Rogers was informed of the suspension on February 24. It stated that the decision was made to suspend “all payments for Medicaid services” performed by Hyatt after the office received a “credible allegation of fraud.”

The suspension does not pertain to other individual members of the group provider “Brian T. Hyatt, MD, PLLC dba Pinnacle Premier Psychiatry,” but it added that no payments will be made to Hyatt’s provider number during the suspension.

Court denies NWA doctor’s international travel request before sexual assault trial

“This suspension is temporary and will continue until either the investigation authority determines there is insufficient evidence of fraud, or the legal proceedings related to the alleged fraud are completed,” it noted.

The letter added that illegal participation in the Arkansas Medicaid Program is a class A misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail and a fine of up to $2,500. Hyatt has the right to appeal the suspension within 30 calendar days of receiving notice.

Hyatt was named the medical director of the behavioral unit at Northwest Medical Center in Springdale in 2018 and worked there until he was “abruptly terminated” in May, 2022, according to court documents. The Medicaid Control Fraud Unit was contacted by a whistleblower and confidential informant (CI) who worked in that unit and indicated that Hyatt was only on that employee’s floor “a few minutes each day” and that the doctor had “no contact with patients.”

“The CI described him walking up and down the hall with a computer on wheels and never entering the rooms or meeting with patients. The CI said Dr. Hyatt did not want the patients to know his name and that he directed staff to mark through his name on the armbands of patients.”

Probable cause statement, Medicaid Fraud Investigator, January 17

The informant also provided investigators of a photo of a posted sign instructing staff to cross out his name on patient armbands, according to court documents. The CI believed that Hyatt was “fraudulently billing Medicaid, Medicare, and other health insurance companies.”

A probable cause report filed as part of the investigation noted that “some of the patients were being held against their will” and noted that “only a physician could make the decision to impose a 72-hour hold” under Arkansas law. It added that any false statement made in a claim that resulted in an overpayment of $2,500 or more is a felony offense.

Springdale psychiatrist appointed vice chairman of State Medical Board

That filing continued by stating that the fraud investigators obtained approximately two months of surveillance video from the behavioral unit at the Northwest Medical Center. Agents “have reviewed several days and hundreds of hours of video and have yet to observe Dr. Hyatt enter a patient’s room or otherwise have direct contact with a patient.”

“Sometimes he pauses at the rooms and may even look in,” it stated. “But he does not enter the room or have patients come out into the hall.” It went on to explain that the use of data analytics “identified several red flags,” and noted that Hyatt “is a clear outlier, and his claims are so high they skew the averages on certain codes for the entire Medicaid program in Arkansas.”

In January, investigators were granted a search warrant to obtain data from Hyatt’s cell phone through his wireless provider.

Posted on

FWA- South Plainfield health care provider ordered to repay $1 million in Medicaid overpayments

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: John stole $1M of your tax dollars and put kiddos at risk by not ensuring “providers” in his organization had basic background checks or licenses.

 
 

 
 

A South Plainfield man who works as a behavioral health provider has been ordered by the state to repay Medicaid more than $1 million for improperly billing the program.

John Gore, a licensed drug and alcohol counselor at Clear Conscience Counseling on Park Avenue in South Plainfield, also allowed behavioral assistants to provide services to minors in one-on-one settings without conducting criminal background checks on the staffers, an audit by the Office of the State Comptroller (OSC) found.

The audit determined that Gore improperly billed and received Medicaid payments of $1.1 million.

The audit also found Gore failed to comply with state regulations in about a third of claims the State Comptroller’s office sampled.

The OSC also found Gore billed for unsubstantiated services, maintained inaccurate and incomplete records and failed to ensure that his providers had current and valid drivers’ licenses before allowing them to provide services to Medicaid patients, according to a news release from the agency.

Other deficiencies discovered in the audit include Gore assigned cases to behavioral assistants without confirming they had the required professional licenses. The audit found that six did not.

Gore also failed to ensure that behavioral assistants had the required training certifications and the audit discovered 24 did not, according to the agency.

As a result of the audit’s findings, OSC has urged the New Jersey Division of Medicaid Assistance and Health Services (DMAHS), part of the Department of Human Services, to issue a rule requiring intensive in-community (IIC) providers to undergo fingerprint background checks before being allowed to treat children and young adults.

Get the Daily Briefing – Bridgewater newsletter in your inbox.

Start your day with the morning’s top news

Delivery: Daily

Your Email

IIC providers are now required to obtain criminal background checks of behavioral assistants, but there is no government oversight to enforce that requirement and no requirement for a fingerprint check, according to the OSC.

“It’s standard practice for teachers, doctors, coaches, and many others who work with children to undergo fingerprint checks. Children who are in these Medicaid-funded community programs are entitled to the same protection,” Josh Lichtblau, director of OSC’s Medicaid Fraud Division, said in the release.

In November 2021, the State Comptroller’s office notified DMAHS about flaws in the regulations and the risks they posed to children.

Almost a year later, in September 2022, DMAHS told providers that they should contact the state’s Children’s System of Care to initiate fingerprint background checks, but it left the responsibility for compliance on the provider.

DMAHS proposed a new rule in January that did not address the fingerprint requirement and state oversight.

“Our findings are serious. When providers fail to ensure that employees have clean criminal backgrounds, they’re placing vulnerable children in potentially unsafe circumstances,” said Lichtblau. “The state should work quickly to close this gap in oversight.”

Email: srussell@gannettnj.com

Suzanne Russell is a breaking news reporter for MyCentralJersey.com covering crime, courts and other mayhem. To get unlimited access, please subscribe or activate your digital account today.

 
 

From <https://www.mycentraljersey.com/story/news/health/2023/02/23/nj-health-care-john-gore-medicaid-insurance/69936127007/>

Posted on

REFORM (SD) – Work requirement resolution for expanded Medicaid recipients killed in committee

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: SD work requirements proposal lose an early key battle in committee.

 
 

Clipped from: https://listen.sdpb.org/politics/2023-02-24/work-requirement-resolution-for-expanded-medicaid-recipients-killed-in-committee

 
 

A proposal that would have paved the way to work requirements for expanded Medicaid recipients died in the Senate Health and Human Services Committee Friday.

While House Joint Resolution 5004 wouldn’t have made such work requirements law, it would have put the question to voters on a future ballot.

Voters approved Medicaid expansion in South Dakota last November.

Speaking during proponent testimony to committee, Rep. Tony Venhuizen said despite his initial opposition to Medicaid expansion, this bill is not designed to undo that vote.

“I can tell you that we are working very hard with the administration, that’s working very hard, to make sure Medicaid expansion is implemented faithfully,” Venhuizen said. “The issue of a work requirement as a possibility for Medicaid expansion was not really central to the issue of the expansion ballot last year, and I’m not so sure it’s been fully addressed by the voters.”

While framed as a solution to workforce issues, there was opposition to the proposal. Sister Kathleen Bierne, speaking on behalf of the Presentation Sisters in Aberdeen, questioned who this bill could affect.

“This resolution would result in nullifying the purpose of expanding Medicaid for some of the very people who are most in need,” Bierne said. “This resolution uses the term ‘able-bodied’ in its work requirement. ‘Able-bodied’ in its work requirement would have a lot of different meanings.”

That could include people like cancer patients, according to Matthew McLarty with the American Cancer Society.

“We see this resolution as potentially creating undue barriers for low-income South Dakotans who are cancer patients and those who will be diagnosed with cancer,” McLarty said. “Many cancer patients in active treatment are unable to work, or require significant work modifications, due to their treatment.”

The resolution was moved to the 41st legislative day on a 5-2 vote, killing it for this session.

Posted on

REFORM- Medicaid Buy In, Other Health Legislation Advances During Saturday Session

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: Another Buy-in program is up for discussion. Its been a hot minute.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://wvpublic.org/medicaid-buy-in-other-health-legislation-advances-during-saturday-session/

 
 

Legislation focused on West Virginia health issues was a topic of debate and lawmaking during Saturday’s legislative session with many bills being passed through both chambers.West Virginia Legislative Photography/Photo by Will Price

Legislation focused on West Virginia health issues was a topic of debate and lawmaking during Saturday’s legislative session with many bills being passed through both chambers.

HB 3274 – Affordable Medicaid Buy-In Program Passed the House

Affordable Medicaid Buy-In Programs were a topic for debate in the House of Delegates.

House Bill 3274 would create the Affordable Medicaid Buy-in Program to help alleviate financial strain on recipients of Medicaid who start a job that disqualifies them from receiving their benefits.

Medicaid buy-in programs soften the “cliff effect” for recipients who lose their coverage when starting a new job that pays too much for Medicaid eligibility, until they can earn enough to afford other health insurance plans.

According to 2023 data from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, an individual would lose their Medicaid benefits in West Virginia when they earn more than $20,120 annually. The Affordable Medicaid Buy-in Program would allow that threshold to rise to 200 percent, or $29,160 annually.

Del. Evan Worrell, R-Cabell, explained the bill on the house floor.

“The idea behind this legislation is an attempt to mitigate the cliff effect for those individuals on Medicaid,” Worrell said. “The cliff effect occurs when wages from a new employment opportunity do not make up for a family’s loss of state benefits, putting the family in a worse financial situation.”

Del. Riley Keaton, R-Roane, asked Worrell questions and spoke in opposition to the bill on the House floor.

“So, we’re actually going to see is the public payer mix of patients grow pretty substantially for our health care providers,” Keaton said. “And then we’ll be faced with politically complicated decisions about how to make that program make sense.”

Jordan Maynor, R-Raleigh, spoke in support of the bill.

“I think my friend from the 15th (Keaton) brings up a great point. And it did get me thinking, but I think the intent of the bill is to move people off of Medicaid, keep a job, keep climbing that ladder of economic success, if they get off Medicaid completely eventually,” Maynor said. “And right now, it seems to be if we don’t do this, we’re incentivizing them to not keep their job, not take that pay raise and just be on Medicaid completely, which means no buy in from the patient.”

The bill passed the House with a vote of 73 yays, 19 nays and 8 absent, or not voting. The Senate will decide whether or not the bill makes it to the governor’s desk for his signature.

 
 

Posted on

STATE NEWS (RI); SDH- Activists, legislators hope Medicaid, ‘Pay for Success’ can help alleviate the housing crisis in Rhode Island

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: More details on RI’s plan to try “all the things” for housing supports.

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.browndailyherald.com/article/2023/02/activists-legislators-hope-medicaid-pay-for-success-can-help-alleviate-the-housing-crisis-in-rhode-island

Rhode Island Pathways Project, nonprofit initiatives aim to help the chronically unhoused

 
 

 
 

Activists and state legislators are considering supportive housing — which combines affordable housing with wraparound social services — as a means of addressing Rhode Island’s homelessness crisis and reducing health care costs.

The “Rhode Island Pathways Project” bill presented in the state legislature and Rhode Island’s Pay for Success Permanent Supportive Housing Pilot Program — which will launch in April — are two programs that aim to include housing within the scope of health care.

‘Rhode Island Pathways’: Housing as a healthcare expenditure

The bill aims to address chronic homelessness by instructing Rhode Island’s Executive Office of Health and Human Services to “utilize any current Medicaid waiver funds to provide coverage for supportive housing for the chronically homeless population in the state” upon the bill’s passage. The conditions of the waiver “act as a contract that establishes the scope of the state’s flexibility under federal law relative to the Medicaid State Plan,” according to the EOHHS website.

The bill would also have EOHHS study “the impact of using Medicaid funds for the treatment of the chronically homeless.”

“The only way we’re going to do it is to try out-of-the-box things,” said State Rep. David Bennett, D-Cranston, Warwick, the Pathways Project bill sponsor in the Rhode Island State House. “This bill is out-of-the-box.”

The bill has passed the Senate five times in the last six years but has failed to pass in the House. But according to State Sen. Joshua Miller, D-Cranston, Providence, the bill’s sponsor in the Senate, believes there is now “consensus” that the legislation will save money, and there now exists a precedent for the granting of the federal waiver.

According to Miller, the legislation saves the state money by keeping chronically unhoused people out of emergency healthcare situations, reducing Medicaid expenditures. A one-night stay in a Rhode Island emergency room can cost $1,750, potentially equivalent to a month’s rent or more, Miller explained. If someone is unhoused with a medical or behavioral condition, they may need to seek emergency care several times a month, he added.

Studies have found that housing the chronically unhoused who frequently use emergency rooms reduces their use by about 50%.

“The savings accumulate very quickly, averting those (emergency) runs by having them sheltered,” Miller said.

Miller said he originally learned about the idea from current Hawaii Gov. Josh Green at the National Council on State Legislatures conference. Green, a former emergency room doctor, was then a Hawaii state senator and had been working on a similar proposal for funding housing for unhoused people. 

The idea of using Medicaid to address homelessness has gained traction in recent years. Arizona recently received approval from the federal government for a program which uses Medicaid dollars for supportive housing services, including up to six months of rent and temporary housing for those transitioning out of homelessness.

Similar programs exist in Arkansas and Hawaii, but in New York, a 2012 request to use federal dollars for supportive housing services was denied by Washington, D.C.

“We think there’s a better understanding, especially with other states doing the math on behalf of the same concept,” Miller said.

EOHHS has already begun to move forward with proposals similar to those advocated by Miller. A waiver submitted by McKee in December 2022 seeks to expand the usage of Medicaid dollars to more forms of transition-related support, including up to six months’ worth of rent payment. 

“Rhode Island sees the ability to pay for six months of rent as a substantial change to the Home Stabilization benefit that will have a significant impact on beneficiary outcomes,” according to the waiver, with the extension would also expand eligibility for the services and “relax” requirements for service providers.

“Historically, most of the funding for housing service providers has come from either (the Department of Housing and Urban Development) or different grants, either federal or other nonprofit,” said Gretchen Bell, healthcare initiatives lead at the Rhode Island Coalition to End Homelessness. “Using this Medicaid funding stream will hopefully prove to be impactful and sustainable.”

Pay for Success: Another strategy for addressing homelessness

Get The Herald delivered to your inbox daily.

Email

The legislation proposed by Miller and Bennett “is in line conceptually with projects that we’re already working on at the coalition,” such as the Pay for Success program, Bell explained.

Bell is working to launch the Pay for Success program, which aims to help those experiencing homelessness “successfully maintain permanent housing.” The pilot, co-led by the Coalition and EOHHS, will target 125 high utilizers of Medicaid, Department of Corrections and homelessness services, Bell explained.

Under the Pay for Success model, funding for housing is provided by the private sector. The program is then evaluated by a third party based on established benchmarks —  if they are met, public funding is made available to pay back the investment plus “a modest return,” Bell said.

“We’re hoping to see a shift in (the) health care utilization of that population,” Bell said. Like Miller and Bennett’s bill, the program aims to have unhoused people use more “preventative services” like primary care providers, dentists and mental health care instead of emergency room visits, Bell added.

The initiative is Rhode Island’s first Pay for Success project on permanent supportive housing, according to Bell.

The General Assembly allotted $6 million was allotted for the pilot program in the 2022 fiscal year budget, according to the Coalition.

But much remains unclear for the program, which Bell said was originally supposed to launch in January and now is set to begin in April. The private investment, program benchmarks and data use agreements with Medicaid and the Department of Corrections still need to be finalized, Bell said. The data use agreements are necessary in order to “pull those high utilizers to make” the eligibility list, she added.

The pilot also has to work within the confines of the current housing market.

“The biggest challenge will be the lack of housing,” Bell said. “There’s not a set-aside (portion) of affordable housing that comes with that state appropriation.” 

Bell hopes that the Pay for Success initiative and Miller’s bill will “provide a lot of data” on how to best serve those in need of housing support services and “how to creatively and strategically use different funding streams” to do so.

 
 

Jacob Smollen

Jacob Smollen is a Metro editor covering city and state politics and co-editor of the Bruno Brief. He is a sophomore from Philadelphia studying International and Public Affairs.

Posted on

MH/BH- A Look at Substance Use Disorders (SUD) Among Medicaid Enrollees

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: Medicaid members need help with this.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.kff.org/medicaid/issue-brief/a-look-at-substance-use-disorders-sud-among-medicaid-enrollees/

Deaths due to substance use disorder (SUD) have risen sharply during the pandemic, highlighting longstanding gaps—such as under-identification and undertreatment of SUD. Even before the pandemic, SUD contributed to a large and growing share of deaths. For example, alcohol was listed as a contributing factor in 20% of deaths in adults between the ages of 20 and 49 from 2015 to 2019 and drug overdose deaths increased by 35% over the same period. Yet in 2019, only 1 in 10 people (12 and older) with past year SUD received any treatment, including specialty treatment or self-help groups. The Medicaid population may be particularly impacted, as 21% have mild, moderate, or severe SUD, compared to 16% of commercially insured. In its role as a public program and the single largest payer of behavioral health services in the country, Medicaid is particularly positioned to implement policy to improve the delivery, quality, and effectiveness of behavioral health services. The detailed and comprehensive claims data available for Medicaid can help answer questions and inform policy.

Efforts are being made at the state and federal levels to increase SUD awareness, coordination, and treatment access—including some provisions that were recently passed as a part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act enacted in December 2022, such as expanding providers who are able to prescribe buprenorphine for treating OUD. In light of recent efforts to expand access to SUD treatment services, we examine the share of enrollees with SUD using both Medicaid claims and data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH).

What are the rates and characteristics of Medicaid enrollees with identified SUD?

In 2019, 7.3% of Medicaid enrollees ages 12 to 64 had at least one clinically-identified SUD in Medicaid claims data. Opioid use disorder was identified in 3.3% of Medicaid enrollees; alcohol use disorder in 2.5%; cannabis use disorder in 1.9%; stimulant use disorder (including cocaine or other stimulants) in 1.7%; and 1.7% of Medicaid enrollees had some other type of substance use disorder. These groups were not mutually exclusive, and while we did not look at the share of people with multiple substance use disorders, it is not uncommon for substance use disorders to co-occur. For this analysis, any diagnosis or prescription code that suggests the presence of a SUD is flagged as a “clinically-identified SUD.” This is not a measure of overall prevalence of SUD because not everyone is screened and diagnoses are not always recorded, but it does provide some insight into how often SUD is recognized and possibly treated in clinical settings (Figure 1).

People with clinically-identified SUD are more likely to be male, White, over 25 years old, and qualify for Medicaid based on a disability or through Medicaid expansion. At least one clinically-identified substance use disorder is found in Medicaid claims data for 8.9% of males, 10.0% of White people, and 11.6% of individuals aged 35 to 49. Medicaid beneficiaries who qualify as a result of a disability or through Medicaid expansion have higher rates of clinically-identified SUD than other groups. This pattern holds across most types of SUD, with only a few exceptions. For example, alcohol use disorder is most commonly identified among people aged 50 to 64, while cannabis use disorder is the most commonly identified among people aged 26 to 34. Clinically-identified SUD rates are highest among White people for all substance types except cannabis, where Black people have similar or slightly higher rates (2.4% versus 2.1%, respectively) (Figure 2).

Rates of clinically-identified SUD vary widely by state. Vermont has the highest share of any clinically-identified SUD, with 13.3% of Medicaid enrollees having a clinically-identified SUD, while Arkansas has the lowest rate, with only 3% of Medicaid enrollees having at least one clinically-identified SUD (Figure 3). Rates of clinically-identified SUD vary across states not only because of prevalence, but also because of other factors, such as provider screening behavior and variation in Medicaid coverage of SUD services.

What are implications of findings from claims data?

Other data sources generally suggest that SUD rates from Medicaid claims are undercounts—but even national survey data may undercount SUD for a variety of reasons. National prevalence of SUD is estimated through surveys such as the National Survey of Substance Use and Health (NSDUH), which uses questions based on diagnostic criteria to identify individuals with SUD, including those who haven’t already been diagnosed. We analyzed NSDUH data and found that the prevalence estimates of SUD among Medicaid enrollees is generally higher in national survey data than in Medicaid claims data, and that difference is greatest among adolescents, young adults, and Hispanic people. Even national survey data may undercount SUD due to underreporting of substance use and exclusion of unhoused, incarcerated, and institutionalized people—which are populations where SUD may be more prevalent. Research that adjusts for these undercounts estimates that alcohol and opioid use disorders are at least four times more prevalent than the NSDUH estimates.

National recommendations instruct providers to screen for substance use and conduct brief interventions for adults 18+, yet there may be gaps between SUD screening and referral. Research found that while most patients with an alcohol use disorder were screened for alcohol use, only 14.6% received brief interventions from their providers, and even fewer–about 6%–were referred to treatment.  Despite the serious
health consequences and comorbidity of physical health and SUD conditions, most doctors do not receive much training in substance use disorders. Even within psychiatric residency programs, only 2% of training time is dedicated to substance use disorders. According to fourth-year medical students in Massachusetts, fewer than one-fifth report feeling very prepared to screen for opioid use disorders and/or refer patients with related symptoms to treatment.

Other factors–such as patient privacy concerns or few healthcare visits–may also play a role in low identification of SUD. Even when providers ask about substance use, patients may feel uncomfortable disclosing their use or may be worried about stigma or legal consequences if they do. Even if a SUD is identified, providers may be hesitant to record it due to concerns about whether recording the SUD violates the privacy rules that add additional protections for people receiving SUD treatment. Other reasons may be population specific. For example, people who are younger and generally healthier may have fewer health care appointments and therefore fewer opportunities for providers to identify SUD. In at least one state, school-based screenings are required for younger populations. Growing drug overdose deaths among adolescents and people of color may suggest disparities in the identification and treatment of SUD.

There is broad variation in Medicaid policy and coverage of SUD services across states. Medicaid coverage of SUD services, as well as utilization management policies, such as prior authorization, can vary widely across states (and even across managed care organizations within states). Although more comprehensive coverage of SUD services has been linked to higher Medicaid acceptance by SUD treatment facilities, as of 2018, only 12 states covered the full continuum of SUD services. People experiencing symptoms of a substance use disorder may find it difficult to navigate this complex landscape, and difficulty accessing treatment is likely exacerbated in areas with workforce shortages.

Looking Ahead

In response to the growing number of overdose deaths and longstanding challenges accessing SUD treatment, state and federal governments have taken action to address ongoing gaps in SUD care—from identification of SUD to treatment. For example, many Medicaid programs have expanded coverage of SUD services and extended benefits to new eligibility groups; increased provider reimbursement rates for SUD services; and/or permanently adopted or continued pandemic-era telehealth expansions for behavioral health services.

At a federal level, HHS has issued notices of proposed rulemaking that may result in improved coordination of SUD services (42 CFR part 2) and expanded access to methadone for opioid use disorder treatment. Congress passed the Consolidated Appropriations Act (CAA) in December 2022, with funding to improve SUD awareness, prevention, treatment, coverage, and increase workforce. For example, the CAA added at least 100 new residency positions dedicated to psychiatry and required that all prescribers of controlled substances undergo training in managing and treating patients with SUD. CAA also lifted some administrative barriers to expand access to medications to treat opioid use disorder including the removal of additional registration requirements for prescribing buprenorphine (X-waiver) and reduced barriers to opioid treatment programs. Recent legislative efforts may lessen some longstanding barriers to SUD care, which could lead to better identification, referral, and treatment of SUD.

Methods

Medicaid Claims (T-MSIS) and State Exclusion Criteria

This analysis uses the following 2019 T-MSIS Research Identifiable claims files: demographic eligibility base (DE) and header and line files from inpatient (IP), long-term care (LT), other services (OT), and prescription (RX) claim files.

We use 48 states and D.C. in the main analysis and 29 states in our analyses that include race and ethnicity. We evaluated states’ claims data using the DQ Atlas criteria and by comparing SUD estimates from T-MSIS to NSDUH. Specific DQ Atlas measures used to determine state data quality include the restricted benefits code, Medicare benefits code, OT claims/encounter volume. We excluded Alabama because the Medicare coverage code was missing for more than 10% of enrollees and the T-MSIS SUD rates were 93 percent lower than NSDUH estimates. We excluded Colorado because the OT file encounter data volume was below 50% of the national median and the T-MSIS SUD rates were 156 percent lower than NSDUH estimates. For analyses involving race/ethnicity, the following states rated as “high concern” or “unusable” data by the DQ Atlas were also excluded:  AL, AZ, AR, CO, CT, DC, HI, IA, KS, LA, MD, MA, MO, MT, NY, OR, RI, SC, TN, UT, WV, WY.

T-MSIS Enrollee Sample Selection

Our sample includes nonelderly Medicaid and CHIP enrollees between the ages of 12 and 64 that have at least one day of enrollment in 2019. Enrollees were excluded if they did not have full or comprehensive Medicaid, had Medicare coverage, or were enrolled for less than one month in 2019. These exclusions are similar to those reported in the CMS SUD data book
technical specifications, but the CMS data book included people with Medicare coverage. After enrollee and data quality exclusions, our main sample includes 46,967,389 enrollees from 48 states and the District of Columbia.

Identification of SUD in T-MSIS

We linked header and line files using MSIS_ID and CLM_ID and linked claims files to the DE file using MSIS_ID (see the T-MSIS User Guide for information on linking variables) for fee-for-service and encounter claims. We identified ICD-9 and ICD-10 diagnosis codes and National Drug Codes (NDCs) from an adapted version of reference codes used in the 2019 CMS SUD data book. Modifications to CMS SUD reference codes include (1) exclusion of tobacco in our definition of “any SUD”; (2) removal of NDC codes primarily used to treat pain rather than opioid use disorder; and (3) removal of methadone NDC codes as these codes are thought to represent pain treatment, rather than opioid use disorder. One or more occurrence of a SUD diagnosis code or NDC code in OT, IP, LT, or RX files is coded as an SUD. Following CMS data book technical specifications, naltrexone—used to treat alcohol use disorder and opioid use disorder—is coded as alcohol use disorder when an alcohol use disorder diagnosis code is present, but coded as opioid use disorder in all other instances. “Any Substance Use Disorder” includes enrollees with at least one opioid, alcohol, cannabis, stimulant, or other SUD. “Other Substance Use Disorder” includes diagnosis codes for sedative, hallucinogen, caffeine, inhalant, unknown, or other SUD.

National Survey on Drug Use and Health. The National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) asks respondents 12 and older about substance use and symptoms of substance use disorders, and those who exceed certain thresholds are classified as having a SUD. This analysis uses 2018/19 NSDUH data and includes Medicaid enrollees between the ages of 12 and 64. Although the NSDUH collects nationally representative data and asks each respondent about their substance use and symptoms, it may still underestimate SUD prevalence. NSDUH only collects data from people with an address–excluding those who are unhoused, institutionalized, or incarcerated – which is relevant because these populations may have higher rates of substance use disorders.

This work was supported in part by Well Being Trust. KFF maintains full editorial control over all of its policy analysis, polling, and journalism activities.

Posted on

MCOs- CareSource, HAP’s joint venture to expand Medicaid coverage

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: The two MCOs will team up in the Michigan market, with HAP getting help on the exchange and CareSource getting HAP’s 2% of the local Medicaid lives as a starting point.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.modernhealthcare.com/medicaid/caresource-hap-joint-venture-medicaid-henry-ford-health?adobe_mc=MCMID%3D51072139927741433197045149676155828835%7CMCORGID%3D138FFF2554E6E7220A4C98C6%2540AdobeOrg%7CTS%3D1677142257&CSAuthResp=1%3A%3A840741%3A7461%3A24%3Asuccess%3ABC81500C8395D1FB26EE296B90FA68EB

Health Alliance Plan, the integrated insurer of Henry Ford Health, signed a letter of intent to create a joint venture with Dayton, Ohio-based CareSource to expand its Medicaid coverage and re-enter the public health care exchange program.

HAP currently provides Medicaid coverage to fewer than 40,000 in Michigan, exclusively in the thumb region and in Oakland, Macomb and Wayne counties. CareSource, one of the nation’s largest managed Medicaid providers, has 2.3 million members across seven states. Besides Medicaid, it offers marketplace and Medicare Advantage plans.

Related: Henry Ford Health’s $2.2B redevelopment to transform Detroit campus

Currently, HAP insures less than 2 percent of the statewide Medicaid population, but hopes to grow its Medicaid membership to 100,000 through the expansion, Dr. Michael Genord, president and CEO of HAP, told Crain’s.

“This joint venture brings national scale and innovation to our Medicaid line,” Genord said. “Leveraging CareSource’s abilities just makes sense … and drives forward the Henry Ford mission of caring for the most at-risk Michiganders and really drives this health equity mindset and delivers value.”

The JV product will operate as a separate entity and be headquartered in Detroit, said Erhardt Preitauer, president and CEO of CareSource. Terms of the deal are not finalized, both executives said, and will require approval from state and federal regulators.

Daily Dose Newsletter: Sign up to receive a late afternoon weekday roundup of that day’s breaking news and developments in healthcare.

Email Address

The JV will offer a new product line that will “capitalize on the (HAP) brand and name in the market,” Preitauer said.

The deal is expected to receive regulatory approval by the end of the first quarter this year, with expansion coming thereafter, Genord said.

HAP will also benefit from CareSource’s public marketplace product line. The Health Insurance Marketplace is a federally-operated insurance marketplace for citizens not offered insurance through an employer.

The new healthcare marketplace comes at a critical time. Medicaid coverage for hundreds of thousands of Michiganders could end in the next few months as the feds plan to roll back the pandemic health care emergency.

The state’s Medicaid population grew by approximately 700,000 during the pandemic thanks to the federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act, signed by President Donald Trump on March 18, 2020, which required states to continue enrollment of Medicaid beneficiaries for as long as the government declared the pandemic a public health emergency.

Not a Modern Healthcare subscriber? Sign up today.

That directive will end as part of the 2023 budget bill signed by President Joe Biden late last year. Beginning in April, states will have to start to re-establish their redetermination process, which assesses whether an individual receiving Medicaid benefits continues to be eligible.

“A lot of people will be leaving a Medicaid plan,” said Genord. That’s where our long-term vision for the marketplace comes in. We’ll have a value differentiation (from competitors).”

Genord did not provide details on how it plans to differentiate.

It’s unclear how the potential Medicaid purge will impact the new joint venture’s Medicaid line.

This story first appeared in Crain’s Detroit Business.
 

Posted on

FWA- Stacey Hayes Arrested for Medicaid Fraud

MM Curator summary

The article below has been highlighted and summarized by our research team. It is provided here for member convenience as part of our Curator service.

 
 

[MM Curator Summary]: Another member stole more money using NEMT. This is getting to be a thing.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.doj.nh.gov/news/2023/20230217-hayes-medicaid-fraud.htm

Concord, NH – Attorney General John M. Formella announces that Stacey Hayes, age 49, of Hudson, New Hampshire, has been indicted for theft and Medicaid fraud in connection with fraudulent claims for non-emergency medical transportation services.

On February 15, 2023, the Merrimack County Grand Jury indicted Hayes on charges of Theft by Deception, Medicaid Fraud – False Claims, and Medicaid Fraud – False Records. The indictments allege that between September 1, 2020, and September 30, 2021, Hayes, pursuant to one scheme or course of conduct, created false records that were kept as documentation of expenses for Medicaid services, which caused false claims for payment of Medicaid services to be filed, resulting in Hayes obtaining more than $1,500.00 in Medicaid funds. During that timeframe, Hayes allegedly submitted fraudulent mileage reimbursement forms for 337 non-emergency medical appointments that did not exist, which resulted in her receiving $7,232.18 for reimbursement of mileage expenses that she did not incur.

The maximum penalty on the Theft by Deception charge, a class A felony, is 7½ to 15 years in the New Hampshire State Prison. The maximum penalty for the False Claims and False Records charges, both class B felonies, are each 3½ to 7 years in the New Hampshire State Prison.

Hayes is next scheduled to appear in Merrimack County Superior Court at 8:30 a.m. on February 27, 2023. The charges and allegations are merely accusations, and Hayes is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.

Senior Assistant Attorney General Thomas T. Worboys and Attorney Andrew Yourell of the Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit are prosecuting this case. Investigator Eric Shirley, also of the Attorney General’s Medicaid Fraud Control Unit, investigated the matter based on a referral from the New Hampshire Department of Health and Human Services’ Program Integrity Unit and AmeriHealth Caritas New Hampshire’s Special Investigations Unit.

The Medicaid Fraud Control Unit investigates and prosecutes fraud by healthcare providers who treat Medicaid beneficiaries. Healthcare providers include, but are not limited to, hospitals, nursing homes, doctors, dentists, pharmacies, ambulance companies, and anyone else who is paid for providing healthcare services to Medicaid beneficiaries. If you would like to report a case of provider fraud, please contact the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit at (603) 271-1246.