Posted on

FWA (NJ)N.J. wins $1.6M judgment against adviser who allegedly scammed nursing home residents seeking Medicaid

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]: He told people he could get them Medicaid coverage for nursing home care, and charged them thousands of dollars each.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.nj.com/news/2021/02/nj-wins-16m-judgment-against-adviser-who-allegedly-scammed-nursing-home-residents-seeking-medicaid.html

 
 

Joe and Leslie Walsh. They hired Advanta Medicaid Specialists to assist Joe’s father Joseph Walsh, Sr., obtain Medicaid for nursing home care, but claimed the company scammed them.Andrew Miller | For NJ Advance Media

The owner of a Lakewood company alleged to have stolen hundreds of thousands of dollars from nursing home residents and their families seeking help with Medicaid applications was hit with a $1.6 million default judgment, state officials said Monday.

Attorney General Gurbir Grewal and the Division of Consumer Affairs secured the judgment against Nissim “Sam” Aryeh of Lakewood, the owner of the now defunct Advanta Medicaid Specialists.

Essex County Superior Court Judge James Paganelli found Aryeh personally liable for 131 violations of the state’s consumer protection laws and regulations, the attorney general’s office said.

The $1,630,194 judgment includes $226,450 in consumer restitution, $1,310,000 in civil penalties and $93,744 in attorneys’ fees and investigative costs, the state said.

It also permanently bars Aryeh from the Medicaid advisory business in the state.

Aryeh could not be reached for comment.

In a civil lawsuit filed in December 2019, the state charged Aryeh and company agent Chaim E. Feller with transferring company funds into their personal accounts to bankroll their own expenses.

State investigators said the firm took more than $300,000 from clients and used the money to pay for meals at high-end restaurants, car payments and furniture, and payments to local private schools and synagogues, and to bankroll expenses at Harrah’s Resort casino in Atlantic City — before it closed.

The investigation started after families reported that Advanta did not provide promised services or it did not provide promised refunds for nursing home residents who were not approved for Medicaid. Consumers paid between $3,000 and $9,000 each for the promised services, it said.

“Hopefully the people he took advantage of in times of having to make difficult family care decisions will be fully reimbursed,” said Leslie Walsh, who paid $6,000 to the company to help with the Medicaid application for her father-in-law, who died before the application was submitted. “However, no amount of money is recompense for the anxiety, frustration and trauma Nissim Sam Aryeh caused for so many people.”

The Walsh family said they never got any money back even though they were promised a refund, although they later won a default judgment against the company that they never were able to collect.

The state’s complaint accused the defendants of violating the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act and advertising regulations by failing to submit Medicaid applications for customers, falsely representing to customers that their applications had been submitted, refusing to honor the money-back guarantee and using company monies to bankroll their personal spending.

In a settlement with the Attorney General’s office announced in September, Feller agreed to pay $55,000 in restitution, to refrain from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts in violation of New Jersey’s Consumer Fraud Act and to provide the division with written notice of any future ownership interest in a registered business that offers Medicaid services to New Jersey consumers.

There was no admission of any wrongdoing.

At the time, the judge also entered a default judgment for over $1.66 million against Advanta itself, finding that the company committed 131 violations of the state’s consumer protection laws and regulations. He ordered $281,450 be returned to victims.

The case against Aryeh, though, was not resolved as his attorneys revealed that he was also under criminal investigation.

In filings with the court, his lawyer, A. Ross Pearlson, a former assistant U.S. attorney, said in a motion seeking a delay in the state’s civil proceedings that his client had no intention of settling with the state.

“The threat of Mr. Aryeh being criminally prosecuted is direct, real and ongoing,” Pearlson told the court. “Mr. Aryeh received a target letter from the DCJ (Division of Criminal Justice). In February, the prosecutor in charge of the case represented that the investigation was ‘active and ongoing.'”

The attorney general’s office did not immediately comment on Pearlson’s remarks.

“The defendant in this case participated in a scheme that callously preyed on elderly individuals seeking help in obtaining Medicaid coverage for their long-term care,” Grewal said of Aryeh. “We will continue to pursue these cases to hold businesses and owners accountable for their actions and send a strong message of deterrence to others.”

According to his LinkedIn page, Aryeh currently lists himself as the director of a candle company. Previously, he was listed as director of business development for a Lakewood software developer and a self-employed equity trader. In his filings with the court late last year, his attorney said he was fired and lost that job as a result of the pandemic and was in debt with no income or assets.

He was also no longer paying his lawyer, according to court records.

Reached through his LinkedIn account late last year, Aryeh declined to answer specific questions. But he said he wished to express his “sincerest apologies” to those who were hurt.

“Although it may take some time, I intend on giving a full refund to every person effected (sic) by this unfortunate situation,” he wrote.

Please subscribe now and support the local journalism YOU rely on and trust.

Karin Price Mueller may be reached at KPriceMueller@NJAdvanceMedia.com.

Ted Sherman may be reached at tsherman@njadvancemedia.com. Follow him on Twitter @TedShermanSL. Facebook: @TedSherman.reporter. Find NJ.com on Facebook.

Samantha Marcus may be reached at smarcus@njadvancemedia.com.

Posted on

FWA (CT)- $533K Settlement In Psychiatric Care Center Medicaid Fraud Case

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]: He upcoded visits to look like they took more time than they did.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://patch.com/connecticut/newhaven/533k-settlement-psychiatric-care-center-medicaid-fraud-case-ag

Crime & Safety


The deal “resolves allegations that New Haven-based psychiatrist Dr. Kishorchandra Gonsai over billed CT Medicaid for psychotherapy.”

 
 

Ellyn Santiago,

Patch Staff

 
 

Posted Tue, Nov 1, 2022 at 3:58 pm ET

 
 

CT AG William Tong announced a $532,830.33 Connecticut False Claims Act settlement with Psychiatric Care Consultants LLC and its owner, Dr. Kishorchandra Gonsai, resolving allegations that the New Haven-based psychiatrist over billed state Medicaid. (Shutterstock)

NEW HAVEN, CT — Connecticut Attorney General William Tong announced a $532,830.33 Connecticut False Claims Act settlement with Psychiatric Care Consultants LLC and its owner, Dr. Kishorchandra Gonsai, resolving allegations that the New Haven-based psychiatrist over billed the state’s Medicaid program for psychotherapy.

“Dr. Gonsai and PCC overbilled the state’s Medicaid program over a span of nearly five years for therapy services that were not provided at the level he claimed,” Tong said. “Our settlement forces Dr. Gonsai to return over half a million dollars to the state’s Medicaid program and sends a strong message that the Office of the Attorney General will not tolerate abuse of taxpayer dollars.”
 

Following a fraud referral from the Department of Social Services, an investigation by the Office of the Attorney General found that between June 1, 2017 and March 31, 2022 Psychiatric Care Consultants (PCC) repeatedly billed the Connecticut Medical Assistance Program (CMAP) for either 45-minute or 30-minute psychotherapy sessions that were not provided for the length of time claimed, Tong said.

Find out what’s happening in New Havenwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

PCC billed the CMAP for 45-minute sessions when the amount of psychotherapy provided was 30 minutes or less and also billed the CMAP for 30-minute sessions when the amount of psychotherapy provided was 15 minutes or less, Tong said.

“This unfortunate example of overbilling by a psychiatric care provider is a clear reminder that strong anti-fraud measures are in place to protect the integrity of our public health coverage programs. I join Attorney General Tong in welcoming the return of nearly $533,000 from the False Claims Act settlement, and in commending the investigators and attorneys who were instrumental in this resolution,” state Department of Social Services Commissioner Deidre S. Gifford said.

Find out what’s happening in New Havenwith free, real-time updates from Patch.

The Department of Social Services’ Office of Quality Assurance, Special Investigations Division, assisted in the case, Tong said.

Anyone with knowledge of suspected fraud or abuse in the public healthcare system is asked to contact the Attorney General’s Government Program Fraud Section at 860-808-5040 or by email at ag.fraud@ct.gov; the Medicaid Fraud Control Unit at 860-258-5986 or by email at conndcj@ct.gov; or the Department of Social Services fraud reporting hotline at 1-800-842-2155, online at www.ct.gov/dss/reportingfraud, or by email to providerfraud.dss@ct.gov.

Get more local news delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for free Patch newsletters and alerts.

Posted on

BH/SUD: Nearly Half Who Leave Rehab for Opioids Don’t Get Follow-Up 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]: 47% to be exact.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.upmc.com/media/news/102722-medicaid-health-policy

 
 

 
 

PITTSBURGH – Despite strong evidence for the importance of outpatient care after inpatient residential treatment for opioid use disorder, nearly half of Medicaid beneficiaries are not receiving follow-up care or medication-assisted treatment within a month of discharge, according to a new analysis led by University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health scientists.

Discharge from residential treatment is a sensitive time when people with opioid use disorder are at higher risk to relapse. Outpatient treatment with counseling, medication or both can reduce this risk. The findings, published this week in Drug and Alcohol Dependence, are the first to study patient and episode-level factors related to the likelihood of receiving post-discharge follow-up among recipients of Medicaid, which is the largest payer of opioid use disorder-related inpatient stays and emergency department visits. 

 
 

“Over the past few years, Medicaid programs have really expanded the scope of substance use disorder treatments they will cover, including residential treatment,” said lead author Evan Cole, Ph.D., research associate professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at Pitt Public Health. “But outpatient follow-up is key to predicting long-term recovery, and there is very little research – particularly in the past decade when the opioid epidemic has gripped the U.S. – into whether that critical follow-up care is actually happening.”

An estimated 10 million Americans have misused opioids in the past year, and more than 100,000 people died of drug overdoses in the U.S. last year, the majority after taking opioids, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Residential treatment for substance use disorder – commonly known as “rehab” – includes 24-hour living support with on-site clinical services, which can include counseling and addiction treatment. Most residential treatment stays are less than 30 days. 

Medicaid provides health insurance for low-income or disabled people, and, with more than 88 million enrollees, it is the largest health insurer in the U.S. It covers 38% of people with opioid use disorder. 

Cole and his colleagues looked at data from more than 90,000 residential treatment stays in 2018 and 2019 for Medicaid beneficiaries across 10 states – Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Michigan, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia – using the Medicaid Outcomes Distributed Research Network

Previous research has shown that after leaving residential treatment, timely follow-up for outpatient addiction treatment, which can include medications such as buprenorphine, methadone or naltrexone, reduces relapse and lowers risk of death.  

Cole’s team found that 47% of the time, Medicaid beneficiaries discharged from residential treatment did not receive follow-up care or a medication for opioid use disorder within 30 days. Medicaid enrollees who were male, lived in rural areas or were members of racial and ethnic minority groups were the least likely to receive follow-up care. 

“This was not what we’d hoped to see,” said Cole, who is also research director of the Medicaid Research Center at Pitt. “I’m sure Medicaid programs want people to be engaged in outpatient care to continue their treatment and successfully manage opioid use disorder after residential treatment.”

On a positive note, patients who had been prescribed medications to treat opioid use disorder before they’d been admitted to residential treatment were 24% more likely to get follow-up care and medication after discharge than their counterparts who hadn’t had such a prescription before entering residential treatment. 

Cole hypothesized that previous engagement in addiction treatment made it easier for patients to navigate to treatment after discharge. He said future research could test this by exploring whether patients were seeing the same outpatient provider before and after residential treatment, and, if so, more effort could be made to connect patients to outpatient providers before they enter residential treatment. 

Since Medicaid enrollment soared by 25% during the COVID-19 pandemic, it will be interesting to see if that impacted connection with care after residential treatment, Cole said. He also noted that some states, including Pennsylvania, have become more committed to “warm handoffs,” creating protocols intended to facilitate a seamless transition to addiction treatment after an emergency. 

“While our study wasn’t designed to see the impact of warm hand-off protocols, it certainly indicates that exploring whether or not these programs are working could be worthwhile for future research,” Cole said. 

Additional authors of this study are Lindsay Allen, Ph.D., of Northwestern University; Anna Austin, Ph.D., and Paul Lanier, Ph.D., both of the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill; Andrew Barnes, Ph.D., and Peter Cunningham, Ph.D., of Virginia Commonwealth University; Chung-Chou H. Chang, Ph.D., Joo Yeon Kim, M.S., Lu Tang, Ph.D., and Julie Donohue, Ph.D., all of Pitt; Sarah Clark, M.P.H., and Kara Zivin, Ph.D., both of the University of Michigan; Dushka Crane, Ph.D., and Rachel Mauk, Ph.D., both of The Ohio State University; Carrie E. Fry, Ph.D., of Vanderbilt University; Adam J. Gordon, M.D., M.P.H., of the University of Utah; Lindsey Hammerslag, Ph.D., and Jeff Talbert, Ph.D., both of the University of Kentucky; David Idala, M.A., and Shamis Mohamoud, M.A., both of the Hilltop Institute in Baltimore; Susan Kennedy, M.P.P., M.S.W., and Sunita Krishnan, M.P.H., of Academy Health in Washington, D.C.; Shyama Mahakalanda, Ph.D., of West Virginia University; and Mary Joan McDuffie, M.A., of the University of Delaware.

This research was funded by National Institute on Drug Abuse grant R01DA048029.

 
 


Left photo:

 
 

PHOTO DETAILS: (click images for high-res versions) 


CREDIT: University of Pittsburgh


CAPTION: Evan Cole, Ph.D.

 
 

Bottom photo:  


PHOTO DETAILS: (click images for high-res versions) 


CREDIT:  Cole, et al. Drug and Alcohol Dependence (2022)


CAPTION: Visual Study Abstract

Posted on

NH- Delta Dental would begin Medicaid dental benefits for adults under $33.5 million contract

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]: Delta beat out 5 other companies. Now they just have to convince the 80% of dentists who don’t take Medicaid to sign on the dotted line.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://newhampshirebulletin.com/briefs/delta-dental-would-begin-medicaid-dental-benefits-for-adults-under-33-5-million-contract/

 
 

The next challenge will be recruiting more dentists to take Medicaid. (Getty Images)

Adults insured by Medicaid may be a step closer to having their dental care covered. On Wednesday, the Executive Council will consider a $33.5 million contract with the Delta Dental Plan of New Hampshire to provide not only oral care but also oral education and transportation to appointments when needed.

The company would have until April to begin providing dental coverage to nearly 88,000 adults on Medicaid and expanded Medicaid under the 15-month contract. The state, which covers oral health care for children on Medicaid, was one of fewer than a dozen that did not also cover adults until legislation passed this year. Only emergency services were covered.

Lawmakers who have tried for more than a decade to expand benefits to adults overcame cost concerns this year by using nearly $21 million in settlement money, secured by the state against a company hired to manage Medicaid pharmacy benefits, to cover the first three years.

The next challenge will be recruiting more dentists to take Medicaid; currently fewer than 20 percent do, in part because of low reimbursement rates, tedious paperwork, and challenges caring for a population with significant health issues and difficulty showing for appointments.

Six companies submitted bids, according to documents provided to the council by the Medicaid division within the Department of Health and Human Services. The team that reviewed the bids scored Delta Dental and the other finalist, MCNA Dental, similarly on a number of program requirements, according to the documents. Delta Dental scored higher on cost savings, quality management, relevant experience, and having an adequate provider network. 

Tom Raffio, president and CEO of Northeast Delta Dental, told the Bulletin in August the company would likely submit a bid and highlight its existing relationship with nearly 851 New Hampshire dentists, 93 percent of all dentists in the state.

The new benefits would have no cap on benefits or copays for preventive services. Other dental care would be capped at $1,500 a year and require a 10 percent copay for those with household incomes above 100 percent of the federal poverty level, which is $27,750 for a family of four.

Coverage for dentures would be provided only for Medicaid recipients with developmental disabilities, acquired brain disorders, people in nursing homes, and those in the Choices for Independence program, which includes the elderly and people with chronic illness or disabilities.

Posted on

CO- Medicaid denials for Colorado children with severe disabilities set off panic

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 article gives no insight as to why the state made the changes in the first place.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://coloradosun.com/2022/10/28/medicaid-denials-colorado-children-disabilities/

Parents of children with medical needs so severe they need round-the-clock nursing care at home are in “sheer panic” as the state Medicaid program notified them this fall that their services have been denied or reduced. 

At least 20 families have hired legal counsel to fight the denials and about 150 people attended a Medicaid children with disabilities meeting to discuss the denial letters, which were received during the past few weeks. 

Two days before a planned family news conference at the state Capitol, officials from the state Medicaid division Wednesday offered a temporary fix. The Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing — which includes the Medicaid program for people with low incomes or disabilities — announced a 60-day reprieve on pending denials. 

But for families, it’s not enough. They want a permanent solution to an injustice they say the state should have fixed months ago. 

Family has 7 medically fragile children

Several parents gave emotional testimony this month during a medical services board meeting, a governor-appointed, rule-making group for the state department. Board members, after hearing parents speak, strongly urged the department to remedy the issue immediately. 

Katerina and Brad Evers, both nurses, have seven adopted children, all with severe medical needs — feeding tubes, oxygen machines, wheelchairs and 150 prescription medicines among them. The kids, ages 2-16, were all living at Children’s Hospital Colorado with no family capable of taking care of them. 

All have had 24/7 nursing services approved by Medicaid, a requirement of the hospital when each was discharged. But in the past few weeks, the Everses were notified that three of the children’s Medicaid services were cut in half, to 10 or 12 hours per day. They are expecting a similar reduction in services for two other kids with similar medical issues. 

“We are scared to death No. 1 because we don’t know what is going to happen to these children,” Brad Evers told the medical services board. “This is barbaric. This can’t happen this way. They were in the hospital and they didn’t have a mom or a dad.

“They were born broken, and now you are going to break them more because you want to stop some services? They get to call somebody a mom and a dad, and you want to cut hours?”

The family is able to function because the kids’ Medicaid services have paid four daytime nurses and Katerina and Brad to care for them at night, Katerina told The Colorado Sun. The children go to various schools, and some need a nurse with them at school all day. Katerina and Brad try to sleep some during the day, but also take children to doctor’s appointments. 

Families will have services through Dec. 31

Denver attorney Jack Robinson is representing about 20 children who used to have 24-hour services but were partially or fully denied. “This has been catastrophic for these vulnerable children and their families,” said Robinson, who represented a Douglas County family in a 2017 landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that required school districts to provide a higher standard of special education.

The denials, which are sent to families by a state contractor called Kepro, are filled with “glaring errors,” including no notice that state regulation requires that services must stay in place for 60 days after a denial, he said. The letters do not even include a date when services will end, Robinson said. 

This month’s turmoil is the latest point of frustration for Medicaid recipients after the department’s switch to the new contractor last year. Kepro, a national company, handles prior-authorization requests submitted by home health providers and agencies that supply private-duty nurses. Earlier this year, after a high number of denials for home-health services, Medicaid officials put the requirement for prior authorization on hold for those services. But prior authorization has been required for private-duty nursing since November.

Families say the vagueness of the denial letters has contributed to their panic, with many worried that their in-home nurses will quit for fear they won’t get paid or that families might end up owing the state Medicaid division money. 

In an emailed announcement Wednesday, the state Medicaid department said it was initiating a “temporary administrative approval process” through Dec. 31 for children who receive private-duty nursing benefits. The action means that families that received denial notices will still have services until Dec. 31.

In the meantime, the department will collect any required documentation from physicians and other caregivers to “ensure the right level of care is approved in a timely manner,” the announcement said. 

State officials also said they “heard feedback that our notices can be confusing” and that they “will be working to improve those notices over the coming months.” 

Stopping services would violate federal law, attorney says

Exactly how many families have received denials or reduced services is unclear. In a meeting two weeks ago, department officials said that 88% of private-duty nursing services for children were fully approved. Yet the data was from November through mid-August. Many families said they received denial notices after Aug. 15. 

In an interview Thursday, Bonnie Silva, the director of the Office of Community Living at the state department, said she did not yet have updated numbers. But she said the Department of Health Care Policy and Financing is committed to implementing new practices — including training for health agencies about the prior-authorization process and new denial letters that would clearly explain patients’ rights to appeal and keep services until an appeal is settled. 

“As department-level leadership, we were deeply concerned,” Silva said. “It is a core priority for us here at HCPF to make sure we have not just the services but also have policies in place that support people with really complex needs.

“We’ve heard that there are enough concerns and what we want to do is to take the time to really thoroughly evaluate those concerns. We try really hard to thread the needle between the right service package and also make sure that we have the right oversight of that. We certainly heard feedback that there was tension between the two.” 

Advocates for the families said the department’s numbers were incorrect and that more than half of families with that Medicaid benefit have been notified of a reduction in services. 

Katherine Wallat, a senior attorney at the Colorado Center on Law and Policy, warned that the state is not meeting its obligation under a federal law that gives people with disabilities the right to receive services at home instead of institutions. The 1999 U.S. Supreme Court ruling, called Olmstead, says the government must provide community-based services. 

“This current process is not only confusing but it’s unlawful,” Wallat said, adding that the denials have caused “sheer panic.” 

One mother, whose daughter choked and suffered a brain injury at age 2, and who has since adopted five medically fragile children, said she received notice that some of their services will be cut in half. “I am angry, sad and terrified,” Pam Rogers said. 

“What is going to happen to them?”

The department’s announcement of a 60-day pause comes about two weeks after members of the agency’s medical services board asked for an immediate response. 

“It’s urgent that this happen,” said board member Dr. Barry Martin, a physician at University of Colorado Hospital. “For these families, it sounds like it really needs to happen immediately.” 

For the Evers family, the two-month pause is welcome but does not relieve their stress. “I don’t know if it makes me feel better because I don’t know what is going to happen after the 60 days,” Katerina Evers said. 

With the help of two nurses, Katerina planned to bring three children to the Capitol on Friday for the news conference. Brad is taking two others to doctor’s appointments at the hospital.

The Everses feel abandoned by the system after believing their adopted children would always qualify for round-the-clock services at home. They modified their Conifer home to accommodate the children’s equipment, have a landline and generator in case of a power outage, and were inspected by a Medicaid compliance officer. Now, they fear they couldn’t get the kids to school or even leave the house or sleep if their services are reduced.

“So you tell me, please,” she asked, “what is going to happen to them?” 

Posted on

OP-ED: Podcasts – How Medicaid Compromised Long-Term Care (Guest: Stephen Moses)

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]: He has a point.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.heartland.org/multimedia/podcasts/how-medicaid-compromised-long-term-care-guest-stephen-moses

Medicaid is no longer a government program to benefit the poor. It’s a system people abuse to the detriment of the long-term care market.

 
 

Poverty is no longer a requirement to qualify for long-term care under Medicaid. An entire industry has cropped up over the years instructing families on how to maximize Medicaid’s loose financial guidelines.  While families save a bundle of money by having the government now pay for this care, the system has had a negative impact on the long-term care market. Reimbursement rates under Medicaid do not cover the actual cost of care which impacts quality and supply.  Families no longer save for long term care knowing that Medicaid can come to the rescue.  Stephen Moses, president of the Center for Long-Term Care Reform, has studied long-term care for decades. He joins the show to discuss the first segment of his new report with the Paragon Institute, “Long Term Care: The Problem.”

Read the report: https://paragoninstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/202208_Moses_LongTermCareTheProblem_FINAL_2.pdf

Seventy percent of people who reach age 65 today will require a severe need for long-term care. Long-term care provides medical and social services for those who are unable to care for themselves. 48 percent will receive paid care.  The need spikes after age 85. In ten years, the baby boomers will reach that threshold, causing demand for long-term care to soar.  Due to the loose financial guidelines, even well-off families can qualify for Medicaid coverage. This market manipulation crowds out private long-term care services. Our guest, Stephen Moses is about to release part two of a report which covers the solutions to this Medicaid problem.  His hope is that a new Congress will be open to better alternatives that improve care at more affordable prices.

In the interview, Moses discusses:

1.  How easy is it to get Medicaid to pay for long-term care?

2. How has this compromised the quality of long-term care over the decades?

3. Who will need long term care? Can any of us live independently until we die?

4. Baby boomers…most are now 65…what kind of pressure will that put on long-term care and Medicaid in 10, 20, and 30 years from now?

5. What about counting on family members to care for you? How about covering your care with your own wealth and investments?

Posted on

NC- Report claims NC hospitals made millions on Medicaid

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]: Translation: Hospitalling is hard, and we shouldn’t question big number mysteries.

 
 

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.thecharlottepost.com/news/2022/10/28/local-state/report-claims-nc-hospitals-made-millions-on-medicaid/

  

PHOTO | ATRIUM HEALTH

Carolinas Medical Center in Charlotte, seen on Oct. 24, is owned by Atrium Health. Atrium Health, North Carolina’s largest hospital system, has declared publicly that in 2019 it provided $640 million in services to Medicare patients that were never paid for.

 
 

Atrium Health, the largest hospital system in North Carolina, has declared publicly that in 2019 it provided $640 million in services to Medicare patients that were never paid for, by far the largest “community benefit” it provided that year.

Like other nonprofit hospitals around the nation, Atrium logs losses on the federal health insurance program for seniors and people with disabilities as a community benefit to satisfy legal requirements for federal, state, and local tax breaks.

But for the same year that Atrium’s website says it recorded the $640 million loss on Medicare, the hospital system claimed $82 million in profits from Medicare and an additional $37.2 million in profits from Medicare Advantage in a federally required financial document, according to a report released Oct. 25 by the North Carolina state treasurer’s office.

The lack of clarity about whether health systems like Atrium gain or lose money treating Medicare recipients reflects how loosely the federal government regulates the way hospitals calculate their community benefits.

As a result, the analysis of North Carolina hospitals’ financial data concluded, what taxpayers get from local nonprofit hospitals in return for tax exemptions worth billions of dollars a year is unclear.

There is no transparency, no accountability, and no oversight,” said North Carolina State Treasurer Dale Folwell, a Republican who is critical of Atrium and other hospitals’ business practices. “With the hospital cartel, it is always profits over people.”

Atrium did not make officials available for an interview. In a statement, spokesperson Dan Fogleman said the hospital system reported $85 million in services to Medicare patients that weren’t paid for in its most recent cost report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.

“And, as labor, equipment, supplies and inflation continue to drive health care costs higher, the gap between Medicare payments and costs incurred to deliver the quality care we provide has grown in the post-Covid inflationary environment,” Fogleman said.

More than half of the hospitals in the United States are nonprofits or government-run. The federal government requires them to operate emergency rooms open to all patients regardless of their ability to pay, accept patients insured by Medicare, and use surplus funds to improve facilities and patient care to demonstrate they are giving back to the community.

Even though their tax-exempt status is based on charitable acts, nonprofit hospital systems sat on more than $283 billion in assets from stocks, hedge funds, venture capital, and private equity and other investments in 2019, according to a 2021 KHN analysis of IRS filings.

The hospital systems used most of that to produce income and classified only $19 billion, or about 7% of their total investments, as principally devoted to their nonprofit missions, the analysis found.

The new North Carolina report describes how hospitals’ self-reported Medicare profit margins differed from the financial picture they provided to the public through IRS records, annual reports, and community benefit documents.

Although most hospitals have complained of significant Medicare losses, the analysis of data from more than 100 North Carolina hospitals found that most made profits on Medicare from 2015 to 2020.

IRS audits are supposed to protect the public from fraud and abuse, but the system has major gaps, said health economists and federal watchdog groups.

Federal law requires the IRS to review community benefit activities at least once every three years. Yet the agency did not “have a well-documented process to ensure that those activities are being reviewed,” said a 2020 report from the Government Accountability Office.

In response to GAO recommendations, IRS leaders updated the system last year to help ensure the agency could identify cases in which hospitals were suspected of not meeting requirements.

The IRS referred nearly 1,000 hospitals nationwide to its audit division for violations of the Affordable Care Act from 2015 to 2019, but the IRS could not identify if they were related to community benefits, the GAO said.

The tax agency has no authority to determine what activities hospitals must perform to comply with the law, the GAO said. An analysis of IRS data found 30 hospitals that reported no spending on community benefits in 2016, “indicating potential noncompliance,” the report said.

“Perhaps this is the result of the IRS being underfunded,” said Vivian Ho, a health economics professor at Rice University in Houston, who worked on the North Carolina report. “They don’t have the resources to reconsider what information they should seek.”

It is critical that the government collects accurate information from hospitals because the data affects all patients, Ho said.

Federal law forbids IRS employees from discussing tax information submitted to the agency by people or organizations, IRS spokesperson Anthony Burke said in response to questions about how effectively the government monitors hospitals.

Hospitals have long used what they report as losses on Medicare to justify charging patients with private insurance higher prices. According to a study released in 2021 by the Rand Corp., a nonprofit research organization, hospitals across the nation charge private insurers more than what they receive from Medicare for the same services.

In the Affordable Care Act, federal lawmakers mandated that to maintain their tax-exempt status, nonprofit hospitals must conduct a community health needs assessment, maintain a written financial assistance policy, set billing and collections limits, and set a limit on charges.

In written responses to KHN, the North Carolina Healthcare Association, which lobbies on behalf of hospitals, said hospitals provided $1.2 billion in charity care in 2020. It added that those community benefits can include a lot of different activities, such as covering the gap between how much a procedure costs and what a provider is reimbursed, volunteering by staff, and paying for medical outreach programs.

“Providing care to vulnerable populations is part of their nonprofit mission,” the statement said.

Atrium spends millions of dollars per year to provide care to people who need behavioral health care “but have no safety net — even from the state,” the association said.
Fogleman, the Atrium spokesperson, said an advisory commission has consistently told Congress that Medicare payments do not cover the full costs of services at most hospitals, including Atrium’s.

In North Carolina, large hospital systems received $1.8 billion in tax breaks in 2020, according to the state treasurer’s office.

The same year, lobbyists for North Carolina hospitals reported collectively losing $3.1 billion on Medicare, according to the office’s report. Other data shows they made $87 million in profit.

From 2015 to 2020, the report concludes, 35 hospitals posted profits from Medicare each year.

Other hospitals listed in the report did not respond to requests for comment.

The American Hospital Association contends that the federal government reimburses providers significantly less than it costs to care for Medicare recipients. Unlike private insurers, the federal government does not negotiate prices with hospitals. Medicare bases the amount it pays on hospitals’ locations, labor costs, and other factors.

Melinda Hatton, the association’s general counsel, said in a statement that “underpayments” totaled more than $75 billion in 2020. “These data show that few, if any, hospitals break even much less make a profit on the basis of Medicare payments,” she said.

But Glenn Melnick, a health economics and finance professor at the University of Southern California who reviewed the North Carolina data, said no one is certain how nonprofit hospitals are calculating their numbers.

“The nonprofit hospital systems are getting so big, we need greater transparency,” Melnick said. “Health care is amazingly expensive, and it will bankrupt us if we don’t get it under control.”

Nonprofit hospitals receive significantly more in tax breaks than they spend on community investment or charity care, according to a report released this year by the Lown Institute, a think tank in Needham, Massachusetts.

 
 

Using 2019 data from the IRS, researchers found that out of 275 hospital systems across the country, 227 spent less on community investments or charity care than they got in tax breaks. The deficit totaled more than $18 billion, the report said.

Leah Kane is a senior attorney for consumer protection at the Charlotte Center for Legal Advocacy, a nonprofit that provides civil legal assistance to people who cannot afford an attorney. She said her agency receives calls from people who were not offered charity care from hospitals.

She said her group is worried that hospitals are offering charity care to uninsured patients but not to other people, like the underinsured, who don’t have the income to pay thousands of dollars for treatment not covered by their insurance plans.

“People are angry and stressed out,” Kane said. “They don’t know what this [debt] will mean for their lives.”

KHN correspondent Aneri Pattani contributed to this report.

Atrium Health’s response:
 

The North Carolina State Treasurer’s latest attack against health care systems is based on a flawed and incomplete analysis resulting in invalid conclusions. Atrium Health completed a detailed review of the information supplied in the report commissioned by the Treasurer’s office, and it is clear the analysis did not follow the fundamental and basic accounting principle of matching revenue and associated expenses. One example of the many inaccuracies in the Treasurer’s report is that it includes 100% of the revenues associated with lifesaving organ transplant procurement but excludes the expenses. This alone is a $39 million error in the study – at just two of our hospitals.

For abundance of clarity, Atrium Health’s certified 2020 Medicare cost reports, submitted to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, shows Atrium Health incurred unfunded costs of $85 million for care provided at our hospital facilities in North Carolina. When taking into account the full care we provided to Medicare patients in North Carolina across all care locations, including care provided within our doctor’s offices, Atrium Health incurred unfunded Medicare costs of approximately $968 million in 2020.

Our accounting is consistent with the Medicare analysis computed by DataGen, an independent organization that provides health care policy analysis. Additionally, the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, an independent congressional agency whose membership includes leading academic and business leaders, has consistently reported to Congress that Medicare payments do not cover the cost of care provided by most hospitals, like Atrium Health.

Atrium Health is one of the largest Medicare providers in North Carolina. What we are paid by Medicare (and Medicaid) is set by the government – it is not negotiable. And, as labor, equipment, supplies and inflation continue to drive health care costs higher, the gap between Medicare payments and costs incurred to deliver care we provide has grown in the post-Covid inflationary environment. The losses we incur are a component of our audited community benefit we compile and report each year to the IRS. Atrium Health is privileged to serve our communities, providing more than $2.46 billion in free and uncompensated and undercompensated care, as well as other community benefits, last year.

Beyond Medicare, Atrium Health’s “for all” mission doubles down on providing health, hope and healing to our patients each day – regardless of their ability or inability to pay for care. In 2021, we provided over $437 million in care to more than 100,000 low income and uninsured patients who never received a bill for the care they received, with an additional 160,000 uninsured patients who automatically received discounts, totaling $150 million, thanks to our financial assistance policies that are designed to ensure access to the best care for underserved individuals and communities.

Posted on

Bowser fires official who took job at health insurer after Medicaid procurement

 
 

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 mayor did the right thing and fired a staff member who announced he was going to work for one of the winning MCOs.

 
 

D.C. Mayor Muriel E. Bowser (D) fired the interim director of her administration’s Office of Policy and Legislative Affairs this week. (Bill O’Leary/The Washington Post)


A week after the D.C. Council awarded multibillion-dollar contracts for insuring D.C.’s Medicaid patients to three insurers, seeming to finally end a years-long struggle to right the city’s Medicaid system after court and council fights, Mayor Muriel E. Bowser has called for a new ethics investigation related to the recently completed procurement.

Bowser announced this week that she fired the interim director of her administration’s Office of Policy and Legislative Affairs (OPLA) after he announced he took a new job with the parent company of one of the three insurers just awarded a lucrative Medicaid contract. Bowser (D) referred him to the city’s ethics board and inspector general.

Bryan Hum was promoted in February to the role at the agency, which is tasked with policy analysis and developing Bowser’s legislative agenda. Bowser on Tuesday indicated that Hum had worked on the contracts but said he was not involved in negotiations or deciding on them.

Story continues below advertisement

In an Oct. 23 letter to the city’s Board of Ethics and Government Accountability as well as D.C. Inspector General Daniel W. Lucas, Bowser said Hum had given his two-week notice to the city two days earlier, saying he would be joining Elevance Health, the parent company of Amerigroup. Earlier that week, the D.C. Council voted to award the city’s Medicaid contracts to Amerigroup, MedStar and AmeriHealth after a contentious, years-long procurement process.

Tony Felts, a spokesman for Amerigroup, said Hum applied for the job in response to a public job posting in August — after D.C.’s Office of Contracting and Procurement had already made its decision on awarding the Medicaid contracts, though the contracts had not yet come before the council for approval.

The city’s ethics rules restrict officials from obtaining future employment that overlaps with their responsibilities in government; two years ago, for example, a high-level Bowser appointee was fined $2,500 for taking a job at Howard University after negotiating a tax break for the school in his city position.

Story continues below advertisement

Bowser said Hum did not recuse himself from any work related to the Medicaid contracts before announcing his new position.

“While he is not a procurement official engaged in the evaluation or negotiation of contracts, Mr. Hum, in the course of his duties in transmitting and shepherding contracts to and through the Council, may be privy to non-public information,” Bowser wrote, while referring the matter to the agencies.

Hum began working in the Bowser administration in 2018 and held various roles with OPLA before he was named interim director. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment Wednesday.

CareFirst, an insurance company that lost its bid to win one of the Medicaid contracts after lobbying the D.C. Council and advertising on social media in an attempt to persuade council members that Amerigroup was unsuitable, sent a statement to The Washington Post on Wednesday saying that the contracts should not move forward in light of the request for an investigation into Hum’s conduct.

Story continues below advertisement

“We appreciate Mayor Bowser’s call for an investigation by the Inspector General and urge the District to halt the contracting process until officials and the public have a full understanding of the extent of Mr. Hum’s involvement in the procurement and approval of these contracts,” CareFirst spokeswoman Jen Presswood wrote.

Bowser’s spokesperson declined to comment on the call to halt the procurement.

At a news conference Tuesday, Bowser said she “won’t tolerate people who don’t follow ethics rules, even upon their exit.”

“People can go onto other jobs, but that’s why we have [the Board of Ethics and Government Accountability] — you can call BEGA and get advice on how you should proceed,” Bowser said. “But it should be obvious to everyone that you can’t be working on one matter while at the same time accepting an employment offer — especially relating to a contract that you have worked on.”

 
 

Clipped from: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/10/26/bowser-fires-official-medicaid-contracts/

Posted on

Medicaid expansion groups raises $2.3 million for Amendment D race

 
 

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 lotta cash was spent on all those Medicaid expansion ads. Where did it come from?

 
 

 
 

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) — The group wanting to pass Medicaid expansion in South Dakota reported raising more than $2 million since May 2022, campaign finance reports from the secretary of state’s office show. 

South Dakotans Decide Healthcare reported a total income of $250,000 ahead of the June 7 primary on May 23. That number increased to $2.3 million in the latest filing reported on Monday. 

Yes and no on Medicaid, recreational pot, poll says

In direct contributions from entities, South Dakotans Decide Healthcare received $500,000 payments from South Dakota’s three major hospitals – Avera, Sanford and Monument. 

SDAHO Enterprises, the wholly-owned subsidiary of South Dakota Association of Healthcare Organizations, contributed two payments of $500,000 and $100,000. 

South Dakotans Decide Healthcare reported spending $1.6 million on advertising and spending $2.1 million for an ending balance of $524,672. 

Constitutional Amendment D, which is one of two statewide ballot questions, would amend the South Dakota Constitution to expand Medicaid eligibility to help provide medical coverage for low-income people in designated categories.

The Legislative Research Council’s Fiscal Note for Amendment D says Medicaid expansion would cover 42,500 new individuals for a cost of $1.5 billion in the first five years, where the state would pay $166 million and earn a general fund savings of $162 million. 

Proponents – Rapid City Mayor Steve Allender and retired businessman Jim Woster – say passing Amendment D will return more federal tax money to the state and allow South Dakota to use more federal funds on resident’s health.  

“Amendment D will strengthen rural hospitals and clinics and make it easier for people in rural South Dakota to get health care,” Allender and Woster wrote in the proponent section in the Secretary of State’s official ballot question pamphlet

Opponents – Americans for Prosperity State Director Keith Moore – said Medicaid expansion in South Dakota will impact the state’s budget in the future. 

“Expanding Medicaid shreds our Constitution and expands services to able-bodied adults under ObamaCare,” Moore wrote in the opponent section in the Secretary of State’s official ballot question pamphlet

The “No on Amendment D” group created by state lawmakers John Wiik (R-Big Stone City) and Ryan Maher (R-Isabel) reported $3,646 in donated goods but no money raised. 

Dakotans for Health reports $93K 

Up until the final day listed by state law to withdraw an initiated measure, it appeared Medicaid expansion would be voted on with both Constitutional Amendment D, sponsored by South Dakotans Decide Healthcare, and Initiated Measure 28, sponsored by Dakotans for Health. 

That changed when Dakotans for Health contacted the secretary of state’s office to withdraw the measure from the November 2022 general election ballot. 

Dakotans for Health reported more than $72,000 in May 2022 and that increased to $93,120 in Monday’s filing. The group has changed its focus from Medicaid expansion to the issue of abortion. 

Dakotans for Health wants to put abortion on 2024 ballot

Dakotans for Health, chaired and co-founded by Rick Weiland, will be gathering signatures for a 2024 ballot measure on aborition. The group wants to create a Constitutional Amendment to establish a right to an abortion in South Dakota. 

Abortion is currently illegal in South Dakota under state law after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade with its ruling on the Dobbs v. Jackson case in June 2022.  

The group called Life Defense Fund, sponsored by state lawmaker Jon Hansen (R-Dell Rapids), has organized to oppose any measures to legalize abortion in South Dakota. The group officially filed paperwork to form in August 2022 and reports raising $17,529.

Clipped from: https://www.keloland.com/keloland-com-original/medicaid-expansion-groups-raises-2-3-million-for-amendment-d-race/

Posted on

Oswego Hospital to pay $98K for improperly billing Medicare, Medicaid, feds say

 
 

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 hospital falsified claims and said that unsupervised social workers were being supervised.

 
 

Oswego, N.Y. — Oswego Hospital has agreed to pay the federal government more than $98,000 for improperly billing Medicare and Medicaid, federal prosecutors said Wednesday.

The hospital billed the insurance programs for outpatient mental healthcare services that were conducted by clinical social workers not qualified to give the care, according to a U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of New York news release.

Under law, licensed master social workers must be supervised by a licensed clinical social worker to provide mental health services, prosecutors said. From January to May 2019, the hospital was allowing LMSWs to provide those services unsupervised and falsely claimed on forms that they were being supervised, prosecutors said.

A whistleblower who worked at the hospital first reported the violations to her supervisors but no action was taken, prosecutors said. The government and the employee took the hospital to court to resolve the violations.

Oswego Hospital agreed to settle the claims by paying $98,694. The whistleblower was awarded $19,738 from the settlement money, prosecutors said.

Staff writer Fernando Alba covers breaking news, crime and public safety. Have a tip, story idea, question or comment? Reach him at 315-690-6950, at falba@syracuse.com, or on Twitter at @byfernandoalba.

Clipped from: https://www.syracuse.com/crime/2022/10/oswego-hospital-to-pay-98k-for-improperly-billing-medicare-medicaid-feds-say.html