Posted on

FWA CO- 3 charged in Medicaid scheme claiming inmate was providing in-home care

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]: Stephanie, Quinetta and Bobby stole $134k claiming Quinetta was providing home health services while she was in jail.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.denver7.com/news/local-news/3-colorado-woman-charged-in-medicaid-scheme-claiming-inmate-was-providing-in-home-care

 
 

DENVER — Three Colorado women were charged in an alleged Medicaid fraud scheme in which they claimed one provided home healthcare services to the others from prison. The total value of the theft is $134,235.25, according to the Colorado Attorney General’s Office.

Attorney General Phil Weiser today announced Monday that all three suspects — Stephanie Hudgins, 50, Quinetta Hunter, 40, and Bobby Hunter, 68 — were charged with several felony counts, including violation of the Colorado Organized Crime Control Act, money laundering, theft, and forgery.

According to Weiser, the alleged fraud occurred between Aug. 1, 2020, and June 6, 2022, when Quinetta Hunter was in custody at the La Vista Correctional Facility in Pueblo. The charges allege Hudgins and Bobby Hunter filed claims and received Medicaid reimbursement for home care services that did not occur.

Hudgins and Bobby Hunter claimed that Quinetta Hunter provided those services, but she was, and remains, in the custody of the Colorado Department of Corrections, according to a news release from the Colorado Attorney General’s Office.

Quinetta Hunter had previously worked for a Northglenn-based home care business that provided Medicaid-funded home services to patients.

All three suspects “worked together to submit falsified work timesheets and cash checks under Quinetta Hunter’s name, and then to pocket money paid by the business out of Colorado Medicaid funds,” the release read.

Posted on

FWA OR- Former Co-Owner and Sales Manager of defunct medical testing lab sentenced to prison

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]: Richard Reid ran a kickback scheme that stole $6.5M for two labs.

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwa/pr/former-co-owner-and-sales-manager-defunct-medical-testing-lab-sentenced-prison

Illegally profited from kick-backs for referring government funded lab testing business

Seattle – A resident of Astoria, Oregon was sentenced today in U.S. District Court in Seattle to two years in prison for five federal felonies connected to his scheme to profit from illegal kickbacks in the medical testing industry, announced U.S. Attorney Nick Brown.  Richard Reid, 53, was convicted in March 2022, following a six-day jury trial.  At today’s sentencing hearing, U.S. District Judge John C. Coughenour denied a defense motion to postpone the prison sentence while Reid appeals his conviction.

“Mr. Reid was the architect of a scheme to illegally profit on toxicology tests that were paid for by government insurance,” said U.S. Attorney Brown. “The web of referrals and kick-backs led to significant profits for NWPL and its owners.  Such illegal kick-backs simply inflate medical costs for the rest of us.”

The activities of Bellevue-based Northwest Physicians Laboratory (NWPL) have been the subject of extensive civil and criminal litigation.  Richard Reid was one of the owners and the Vice President of Sales for NWPL.  Reid helped NWPL obtain more than $3.7 million in kickback payments by steering urine drug test specimens to two labs that could bill the government for testing. This resulted in government payments to those two labs of more than $6.5 million.

According to records filed in the case between January 2013 and July 2015, two labs, that were not physician owned, made payments to NWPL in exchange for referrals of Medicare and TRICARE program business, in violation of the Anti-Kickback Statute.  Paying remuneration to medical providers or provider-owned laboratories in exchange for referrals encourages providers to order medically unnecessary services.  The Anti-Kickback Statute functions, in part, to discourage such behavior. NWPL was physician-owned, and for that reason could not test urine samples for patients covered by government health programs such as Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE.  In order to conceal the payment of the kickbacks, Reid and other co-conspirators involved described the fees as being for marketing services; however, no marketing services were performed. 

In the sentencing memo asking that Reid receive the same two-year sentence as CEO Jae Lee, prosecutors described his role writing, “Reid hid the truth and kept the cover story in place by lying to his sales force, lying to providers, and sharing fraudulent opinion letters from attorneys.  NWPL grew and the money – including illegal kickbacks – rolled in.  The kickbacks increased as time went on, and totaled almost $5 million.  As the proceeds of the crime rose, so did Reid’s monthly distributions — from $10,000 in 2013 to $50,000 in 2015.” 

Reid was convicted of one count of conspiracy to solicit and receive kickbacks involving health care programs and four counts of receipt of kickbacks.

The company, NWPL, pleaded guilty in February 2021 and was sentenced to pay $8,114,417 in restitution joint and several with the other criminal defendants.  NWPL has dissolved. To date, the labs and individuals involved in this investigation have paid more than $14 million to settle related civil allegations

In addition to Reid, three other defendants have pleaded guilty and await sentencing.  Former NWPL CEO Jae Lee was sentenced to two years in prison in May 2022.  Kevin Puls, the former Executive Director of NWPL was sentenced to 90 days in prison and a year of supervised release.

“Mr. Reid’s sentencing culminates his part in a years-long investigation wherein he was convicted last year for actively orchestrating and personally benefiting from a scheme to corrupt and defraud the healthcare system, including the Department of Defense’s TRICARE program,” said Bryan D. Denny, the Special Agent in Charge of the DoD Office of Inspector General, Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS), Western Field Office.  “DCIS will continue to work with its partners to root out fraudulent activities, like those in this particular investigation, that weaken TRICARE and inevitably increase costs unnecessarily.”

“Mr. Reid let his greed get in the way of doing what was right by taxpayers” said Richard A. Collodi, Special Agent in Charge of the FBI’s Seattle field office. “He solicited and received hundreds of thousands of dollars in kickbacks. Ultimately, frauds like these inflate health care costs for the rest of us. I applaud the work of our investigators and partners to hold Mr. Reid accountable, provide justice to the victims, and bring his crimes to an end.”

The case was investigated by the FBI, Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (HHS-OIG), and the Defense Criminal Investigative Service (DCIS).

The case was prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Michael Dion and former Assistant United States Attorney Brian Werner.

Posted on

PHE- Nebraska Medicaid to resume regular reviews of Medicaid eligibility

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]: Nebraska says “its go time.”

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.custercountychief.com/news/nebraska-medicaid-to-resume-regular-reviews-of-medicaid-eligibility/article_e08df62c-91d9-11ed-a53e-2316311697b9.html

 
 

Following the recent passage of federal legislation, the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is preparing to resume regular reviews of Medicaid eligibility. Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medicaid members have kept Medicaid coverage even if no longer eligible.

Starting March 1, 2023, each Medicaid member’s current eligibility will be reviewed. It will take approximately twelve months to review all cases.

Medicaid members must ensure their contact information is up to date with Nebraska Medicaid. If information is needed from a member to confirm current Medicaid eligibility, Nebraska Medicaid needs to be able to reach the member. If Nebraska Medicaid is not able to reach the member, the member could unnecessarily lose Medicaid coverage.

Members can make sure their contact information is up to date by logging into their ACCESSNebraska account or calling toll-free (855) 632-7633.

In partnership with its health plans, Nebraska Medicaid will take extra steps to reach its members. These steps will include not only traditional letters but also phone calls and other outreach.

In partnership with provider and advocacy organizations, Nebraska Medicaid will be providing written materials in coordination with the organizations who have helped develop the materials for provider’s offices and other locations. Social media will also be used for outreach.

“Our goal is to make sure that Medicaid members who remain eligible keep their Medicaid coverage,” DHHS CEO Dannette R. Smith, said.

“This will be an historic effort,” Kevin Bagley, Nebraska Medicaid director, said. “We will continue to work with our health plans, our providers, and our community partners to ensure that our members can continue to access the coverage for which they are eligible.”

Members who are found ineligible for Medicaid will have their information forwarded to the federal marketplace. The marketplace will follow up with members about other coverage options; depending on the member’s situation, coverage may be at no or relatively little cost.

Posted on

PHE- As Congress Sunsets a Covid-Era Medicaid Program, Millions Could Lose 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]: Some more deets on the rules on how to do the wind-down. Key fact- CMS will hit states with $100k/day penalties if a state decides to start back eligibility determinations and doesn’t do it the way CMS likes. Class- where do we think this is headed?

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.route-fifty.com/health-human-services/2023/01/congress-sunsets-covid-era-medicaid-program-millions-could-lose-coverage/381571/

 
 

 

By Kery Murakami,
Senior Reporter

Millions of low-income people could begin losing their Medicaid coverage as soon as April after Congress in last month’s $1.7 trillion omnibus bill lifted a Covid-era ban on states that prevented them from removing people from the health care program.

But in what Medicaid experts see as a positive step, lawmakers put in place several requirements states must meet before removing recipients. They also opted to gradually sunset the roughly $90 billion in federal Medicaid funding states have been receiving the last two years instead of simply shutting it off. Experts agree that these provisions will lead to less people losing coverage by mistake and will ease the pressure on states to quickly remove people from the rolls.

In the early days of the pandemic, Congress passed a coronavirus relief bill that prevented states from kicking people off Medicaid. To help pay the cost for states, the bill increased the federal government’s share of Medicaid, known as the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, or FMAP, by 6.2%.

Both the ban and additional funding were set to end when the Covid-19 public health emergency was lifted. Instead, it has continually been extended, most recently in November until Jan. 11. This has left states unsure of when they will have to take on the mammoth task of reevaluating who among the 90.6 million people on Medicaid will still be eligible for the program.

“There’s been a lot of uncertainty about how long this will be in place,” said Robin Rudowitz, vice president of the Kaiser Family Foundation and director of the health policy organization’s Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured. “It’s been hard for states to plan, not knowing exactly what the end time is.”  

The federal spending law now answers that question. Starting April 1, Medicaid offices will have to begin determining who on the rolls is eligible. 

“Getting a set date is really helpful. It gets us out of this kind of guessing around the future of the public health emergency,” said Jack Rollins, director of federal policy for the National Association of Medicaid Directors. “That allows states to begin making real concrete plans around what operationally needs to happen in advance of that date and after that date.”

Rollins says Medicaid directors are waiting for the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to issue specific guidance on implementing the requirements in the federal spending law, like whether states have to give recipients 60 days notice before removing them from the program. The law does require states to make a “good faith effort” to reach people, including reaching out in a way other than by mail to let them know they have to reapply before kicking them off of Medicaid.

Determining eligibility can be complicated for a number of reasons. Medicaid officials and health experts acknowledge that notices asking people to verify their income and other information can get lost in the mail. Addresses and phone numbers for enrollees can be out of date. There can also be language barriers. 

Black and Latino enrollees are particularly at risk of having a difficult time with the process, according to an Urban Institute report, which looked at the plans of 11 states. They are more likely to lose housing, leading to address and phone number changes that can cause difficulties reaching them.

If states do not make a good faith effort to notify recipients of the need to re-enroll, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services can require states to submit a plan to come into compliance. If a state does not submit a plan, the department can forbid them from removing people from Medicaid and can fine them $100,000 for every day they are not in compliance.

“This basically stops a state from saying, ‘Oh, I got this piece of returned mail. I’m just going to send out a termination notice,'” said Rudowitz.

The federal spending law will also gradually sunset the roughly $90 billion a year in increased federal Medicaid funding states have been receiving. Instead of it coming to a screeching halt, the federal government will continue to pick up the additional 6.2% of the cost through March 31. The additional aid will drop to 5% in the quarter that ends June 30, to 2.5% in the quarter that ends Sept. 30, and then to 1.5% through the end of the year.

Not ending the federal aid in April could lead some states to take the full year to reevaluate all Medicaid recipients, said Tricia Brooks, a professor at the Georgetown University Center for Children and Families. “It does provide an incentive for states to not barrel ahead too quickly.”

The problem with “front-loading” or moving quickly, according to Brooks, is that those state’s Medicaid offices will be overloaded at a time when they are already short-staffed.  According to the National Association of Medicaid Directors, 1 in 4 state Medicaid agencies have more than 20% of their positions unfilled.

Another reason not to rush is that states could lose the additional federal funding if they fail to meet reporting requirements. Under the law, states will have to submit monthly reports to HHS beginning in April with information like how many people were renewed, how many were dropped, and how many were able to get health care coverage through the subsidized Affordable Care Act insurance. Should they not file a report, a state could lose as much as one percentage point of their enhanced FMAP. 

Brooks surveyed state Medicaid directors’ plans for the reevaluations with the Kaiser 

Family Foundation last January. The survey had found that 41 states were planning to complete their reevaluations in nine to 12 months. But other states were planning to move more quickly. Texas, for example, has been compiling a list of people who are no longer eligible, and will likely move quickly to get them off of the rolls once they can on April 1. And Arkansas has a law that requires the state’s Medicaid program to complete the reevaluations and return to normal operations within six months.

Posted on

PHE; MCOS- JPM23: Centene gears up for Medicaid redeterminations to begin

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]: Centene is ready to help make sure revenues transition seamlessly from Medicaid rate cells to ACA rate cells on the exchange.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.fiercehealthcare.com/payers/jpm23-centene-gears-medicaid-redeterminations-begin-spring

 
 

SAN FRANCISCO—States now finally have a timeline for when Medicaid redeterminations, which were paused during the COVID-19 pandemic, can resume.

Centene, a major player in Medicaid managed care, is gearing up to assist in this endeavor, executives said Monday during a J.P. Morgan Healthcare Conference session. CEO Sarah London said that because the timetable for the COVID public health emergency was nebulous, many state agencies have had a year to think about their strategy around redeterminations.

Thanks to the recently passed omnibus bill, states know they now can begin redeterminations April 1 even if the public health emergency remains in effect. London said that 88% of the states Centene works with believe they’ll need at least 10 months to complete the redeterminations.

But the extra planning time has afforded states the ability to design a plan to avoid too much “member abrasion,” she said.

“One of the benefits of the fact that we were all preparing for redeterminations at this time last year is that it has allowed a year to think about the right administrative approach,” London said.

She added that the omnibus bill also enables Medicaid managed care plans to assist states more effectively in member outreach, which can also ease the landing for them if they lose Medicaid coverage.

Many in the industry have sounded the alarm about the potential for the redetermination process to boot significant numbers of people off of their health coverage. A report released last month by Urban Institute, a left-leaning think tank, estimated that 18 million people could lose Medicaid coverage because of the redeterminations.

While that figure is bleak, the individual market does offer an opportunity to catch some of the people who may be forced out of the Medicaid program. Enhanced premium subsidies for exchange plans were extended for several years, making coverage more affordable for a broader swath of people.

London said that the enhanced subsidies also offered a path to reach people who have been chronically uninsured and would likely never otherwise have signed up for an Affordable Care Act exchange plan.

“The marketplace subsidies taught the industry where to find those members,” she said.

Enrollment in exchange plans has skyrocketed to record highs over the past two years, thanks in large part to the enhanced subsidies as well as rolling special enrollment windows that have captured more people.

However, as enrollment increases, the Biden administration has looked to push insurers to offer more standardized coverage options, which can make it easier for consumers to select a plan.

London said Centene has rolled out multiple new product designs on the exchanges in the past year and that it’s clear what works for one consumer may not work for another.

“I think limiting product design for something that is hyper-standardized is not good for consumers in the long term,” she said.

Posted on

MCOs; IN- New contract for Medicaid operator

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]: MDWise gets another 4 (or 6 with options) to keep running managed care in the state (its been doing it for almost 30 years).

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.wowo.com/new-contract-for-medicaid-operator/

INDIANAPOLIS (Inside Indiana Business) – The operator of Indiana’s Medicaid program will continue to run the healthcare insurance system for the state. The Family and Social Services Administration has awarded MDwise a four-year contract to provide risk-based managed care services statewide.

MDWise has managed healthcare benefits to low-income residents through Hoosier Healthwise and the Healthy Indiana plan since 1994.

The new contract includes the possibility of two one-year extensions.

Meanwhile, the nonprofit health maintenance organization has hired its first health equity officer. MDwise says Anye Carson will oversee an action plan to reduce health disparities in its coverage.

The organization says Carson will incorporate culturally and linguistically appropriate services for MDwise members.

Carson most recently worked North Carolina-based clinical research organization Parexel. She also previously worked for the IUPUI Extension for Community Health Outcomes Center.

Posted on

AK- Average wait time 90 to 120 days for state to process Medicaid applications

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]: Alaska may be pulling a Missouri.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.wrangellsentinel.com/story/2023/01/11/news/average-wait-time-90-to-120-days-for-state-to-process-medicaid-applications/11310.html

Alaska has violated state and federal law by failing to process Medicaid applications in a timely manner, according to an Anchorage-based civil rights law firm that settled a class-action lawsuit in federal court with the state three years ago.

The Alaska Department of Health’s figures last week showed that there are 8,987 outstanding Medicaid recertifications and applications to be processed by the state Division of Public Assistance, which is contending with a major backlog in application processing that officials attributed to a staffing shortage and other issues.

“This number includ…

Posted on

NMI’s 83 pct. federal match rate for Medicaid is now permanent

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]: One of the territories now has 87% of its Medicaid costs paid for by federal taxpayers. 4-Eva.

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.saipantribune.com/index.php/nmis-83-pct-federal-match-rate-for-medicaid-is-now-permanent/

 
 

Esther Muña

Thanks to the CNMI’s health partners as well as the efforts of Delegate Gregorio Kilili C. Sablan (D-MP), the federal match rate for the CNMI’s Medicaid program will now permanently remain at the current 83%.

Commonwealth Healthcare Corp. CEO Esther Muña shared the good news during a news briefing yesterday that Sablan recently informed CHCC that the Biden administration has decided to permanently keep the federal match rate for the CNMI’s Medicaid at 83%, meaning the CNMI would only shoulder 17% of Medicaid-related costs.

“I did get a call from Congressman Sablan…that we’re getting the 83% and it’s permanent. That’s obviously great news. It’s been something that we’ve been fighting for—equitable funding financing for the territories,” she said.

Essentially, Muña said, the CNMI government would now only have to shoulder 17% of medical costs accrued by the Medicaid program. Previously, the CNMI was shouldering 50% before it was lowered to 45% and the CNMI still could not afford it.

CHCC hopes that the 17% match will prove more affordable for the CNMI as it would come from the Commonwealth’s general fund.

“The 83% is going to come from the federal [government] and the 17% is going to come from the local funds appropriated for CHCC. The reason why we opted to do this is because, in the past, we’ve always struggled to find the funds to cover our match. It used to be 50%, then our match was lowered to 45% and that obviously was still very difficult. We are hoping that now, the CNMI can afford 17%,” she said.

Muña said this is a great opportunity for CHCC to look at how it can better address health care access with the extra funding it would save with the federal government shouldering 83% of Medicaid costs.

“This is a great opportunity for us to plan better and also to really address the health issues of the CNMI and even for public health,” she said.

According to Saipan Tribune archives, the Marianas’ current 83% federal match rate, technically called the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, or FMAP, is higher than it is for any state.

The FMAP was set in U.S. Public Law 116-94 in 2019, extended in U.S. Public Law 117-103, in a previous continuing resolution in early 2022, and again in another fiscal 2023 continuing resolution which was passed on Dec. 20, 2022.

The continuing resolution provided appropriators more time to draft an omnibus spending bill to cover the entire fiscal year which has since been passed, permanently keeping the FMAP for the CNMI at 83%.

Posted on

WY- Legislators explain Medicaid opposition

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 good example of the use of Rule #8 from Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals.

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.thesheridanpress.com/news/local/legislators-explain-medicaid-opposition/article_8995bad2-8e0d-11ed-a768-fbdd0e82c10e.html

 
 

SHERIDAN — Three Sheridan County state legislators explained their opposition to Medicaid expansion during a pre-legislative luncheon hosted by Sheridan County Chamber of Commerce Wednesday. 

Sen. Dave Kinskey, R-Sheridan; Rep. Cyrus Western, R-Big Horn; and Rep. Ken Penderraft, R-Sheridan; were the three legislators present out of the full Sheridan County delegation. Sheridanite Cathi Kindt asked legislators, “If there were a solid business case for Medicaid expansion, would you support it?”

All three legislators said no, but for varying reasons. 

“This thing has been brought up like eight times in the last couple of years,” Pendergraft said. “The answer to your question, ma’am is no. Even if he could show me that it would make Wyoming a great deal of money, I’m opposed. And the reason that I’m opposed is also philosophical. With liberty comes responsibility. If I cede responsibility, I give up some of that liberty, and on that philosophical basis, I would be opposed.”

Pendergraft believes there’s already too much governmental involvement in health care already and believes there should not be more. 

Western said he also does not prescribe to Medicaid expansion for philosophical reasons. 

“Are people fundamentally entitled, at a constitutional rights level, to free health care?” Western posed. “I understand the the reasoning and the rationale behind it, I really do, to the extent that it makes sense, but everything costs something. And so given how expensive it is, given how much money we’d have in debt. Those are my biggest concerns. It’s not that I can’t appreciate the benefits that it brings.”

Kinskey said other states reported costs well beyond what was budgeted and the federal government not coming through with its promises to help pay for expansion. 

“They end up being a budget buster everywhere it’s adopted,” Kinskey said. “…So if we adopted Medicaid expansion and the Feds did not keep their word and they went to spend to paying half like they do on all the other Medicaid, that difference is equal to the maintenance on every school in the state of Wyoming for a year.”

“Budget-wise, I just don’t think that this case can be made (for Medicaid expansion),” Kinskey said. 

Four bills are currently listed that address aspects of Medicaid: Medicaid twelve month postpartum coverage; medical treatment opportunity act-Medicaid reform; Medicaid coverage-licensed pharmacists; and podiatry medical services-Medicaid. To read the bills, see wyoleg.gov

The general session begins Jan. 10 in Cheyenne. 

Posted on

REGs; Prior Auth- CMS Proposed Rule Seeks to Provide Transparency and Efficiency in Preauthorization Process

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 the proposed rule to increase what payers (mostly plans) need to do around prior auth.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/cms-proposed-rule-seeks-to-provide-1575175/

 
 

Introduction

On 13 December 2022, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) published CMS-0057-P (the Rule),1 a proposed rule that, if adopted, will place new requirements on a number of entities, including Medicare Advantage (MA) organizations, state Medicaid fee-for-service programs, Medicaid managed care plans, and Qualified Health Plan (QHP) issuers on the Federally-facilitated Exchanges.2 The rule is an effort by CMS to “improve the electronic exchange of healthcare data and streamline processes related to prior authorization, while continuing CMS’ drive toward interoperability in the healthcare market.”3 CMS envisions that the proposed rule will “play a key role in reducing overall payer and provider burden and improving patient access to health information.”4 The comment period for the proposed rule closes on 13 March 2023. If adopted, the key components of the Rule would go into effect in 2026.5

Improved Prior-Authorization Processes

Of particular relevance to hospital and physician provider clients, the Rule seeks to improve prior- authorization processes to streamline prior-authorization submissions and decisions between providers and payers. The prior-authorization process allows providers to request approval from payers for coverage of specific medical treatment, including elective surgeries and inpatient-level-of-care admissions, in advance of the treatment. Payers typically require health care providers to obtain prior authorization for elective treatment and inpatient hospital treatment to confirm that the treatment is both covered by the payer and medically necessary. However, the prior- authorization process is often burdensome, requiring providers to determine whether specific services require preauthorization and the requirements of that process across varying systems. The requirements for each payer are also often different. For example, one payer might require submission of documents via fax where another requires medical records sent via CD. These document submission requirements often involve repeated follow-up by providers to confirm receipt or, if documents do not reach the intended recipient, resubmissions. As CMS’ own guidance explains, requiring health care providers to undertake onerous prior-preauthorization procedures can risk patient health when inefficiencies cause a delay in care.6 It also forces providers to expend their thin resources parsing varying documentation, submission, and approval requirements. These inefficiencies can result in unnecessary out-of-pocket payments from patients, or even abandonment of treatment if prior-authorization delays persist. Through the proposed rule, CMS hopes to “alleviate some of the burden of prior authorization processes and to improve the patient experience” in order to provide efficiency and transparency to the prior-authorization process.7

For example, the rule would require payers to set up new software systems specific to prior authorizations. The previously finalized Interoperability and Patient Access Rule, 85 Fed. Reg. 25510 (codified at 42 C.F.R. 406), required impacted payers to implement a Patient Access Application Programing Interface (API). Building off of the Patient Access API, the proposed rule would require payers to build and maintain a Prior Authorization Requirements, Documentation and Decision (PARDD) API, create efficiencies through automation of the processes for providers to determine whether a prior authorization is required, easily ascertain any documentation requirements for the prior authorization, and enable the interchange of prior authorization requests and decisions between a provider’s electronic health records system and the PARDD API.8 All providers would be able to electronically submit requests for prior authorization to impacted payers. Notably, covered entities under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act must use a specifically adopted, current standard for prior authorization transactions. The proposed rule would not modify or impact that standard.9

Importantly, to better facilitate payer and provider transparency, the rule would require payers to identify a specific reason when denying a prior authorization request.10 Payers would also have to publicly report some prior authorization metrics by publishing them annually on the payer’s website.11 This data would be “compiled from multiple sources, on multiple measures and individuals,” in the hopes that the data’s availability would further promote consumer transparency.12 Among other categories, the rule would require payers to report a complete list of all items and services requiring preauthorization, the approval and denial percentages of standard and expedited prior-authorization requests aggregated by item and service, the percentage of approvals after appeal, and the average time between submission and determination.13 These requirements should help foster greater efficiency in the claim appeal process and also provide benchmarks for analysis of appropriate documentation required by providers in order to support medical necessity and avoid denials for certain medical services.

The rule would also set timeframes for certain payers to provide prior authorization decisions. Payers would have 72 hours to render a decision on an urgent submission, and seven calendar days for nonurgent requests.14 Though these timeframes are proposed under the rule, CMS is also currently seeking comment on shorter timeframes (e.g., 48 hours for expedited requests and five calendar days for standard requests).15

In addition to creating preauthorization efficiencies, the Rule also seeks to impose a series of varying requirements for patient data sharing of patient health information among payers to decrease the burdens of patient data submissions by patients and providers throughout a patient’s health care journey. For examples, the rule, if adopted, will require payers to electronically transfer a patient’s health data, with permission, to that patient’s new health plan as a patient changes plans and require payers to share quarterly patient data where patients have concurrent coverage with two or more payers.16

Conclusion

While the comment period closes in March of 2023, the proposed rule, if adopted, would not take effect until early 2026. Though the date may seem distant, the rule has the potential to simplify and modernize some otherwise archaic and onerous prior-authorization procedures. Providers will no longer have to guess whether certain services require preauthorization, will be able to better determine medical necessity of services, and more efficiently and, hopefully, effectively engage in the claims denial appeals process with payers. Time will tell whether this rule will yield the transparency and efficiency it seeks to promote.

1 Advancing Interoperability and Improving Prior Authorization Processes for MA Organizations and Medicaid Managed Care Plans, State Medicaid Agencies, State CHIP Agencies, CHIP Managed Care Entities, and Issuers of QHPs in the Federally-Facilitated Exchanges, 87 Fed. Reg. 76238 (Dec.13, 2022).

2 Ctr. for Medicare & Medicaid Servs., Advancing Interoperability and Improving Prior Authorization Processes Proposed Rule CMS-0057-P: Fact Sheet (Dec. 2022), https://www.cms.gov/newsroom/fact-sheets/advancing-interoperability-and-improving-prior-authorization-processes-proposed-rule-cms-0057-p-fact.

3
Id.

4
Id.

5 Advancing Interoperability and Improving Prior Authorization Processes for MA Organizations and Medicaid Managed Care Plans, State Medicaid Agencies, State CHIP Agencies, CHIP Managed Care Entities, and Issuers of QHPs in the Federally-Facilitated Exchanges, 87 Fed. Reg. at 72329.

6
Id.

7
Id.

8
Id.

9
Id.

10
Id.

11 Id.

12 Id. at 76304.

13
Id. at 76305.

14 Ctr. for Medicare & Medicaid Servs., supra note 2.

15
Id.

16
Id.