Medicare Secondary Payer Act

Mother Jones had an article explaining the practical problems with the Medicare Secondary Payer Act which allows the government to take money from settlements of victims of neglect and abuse.

In 1995, Sumaya Coury was driving her 81-year-old mother, Mollie Coury, back to Los Angeles after a trip to San Diego to play bingo. Sumaya's Cadillac slammed into the car of a drunk driver who'd parked and passed out in the middle of the five-lane 210 freeway, east of Pasadena. Mollie's legs were crushed; doctors thought she'd never walk again. But after weeks in hospital, she regained her mobility, and eventually put the accident behind her. Then, 13 years later, in the fall of 2008, Medicare sent Mollie some staggering news: She owed $66,000 for what the agency said were medical expenses related to the accident. If she didn't pay within 60 days, the Treasury Department would seize her Social Security checks until the money was repaid.

After the accident, Coury had received about $20,000 from her daughter's insurance policy for medical bills, permanent impairment, and pain and suffering. This settlement subjected her to  Medicare Secondary Payer Act, created decades ago to prevent Medicare from paying medical expenses that were the responsibility of private insurers or other parties. Here's how it works: If a Medicare recipient gets in a car crash or is injured by a defective pacemaker, the government picks up the hospital tab. But if that person receives a payment from a legal settlement, insurance policy, or jury award that covers accident-related medical bills, Medicare is entitled to its money back.

Reimbursements saved taxpayers nearly $7 billion in 2008, according to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). In recent years, Congress has pushed Medicare to aggressively pursue debts from injured elderly people who have won compensation through lawsuits or liability insurance.

Coury actually got snared in Medicare's net twice, the first time in 2002, when the agency began seizing her only income, a $498 monthly Social Security check, for nearly three years until she repaid more than $16,000 (her settlement minus some legal fees). After that, she thought her troubles were over. But in 2008, Medicare returned for more. Its $66,000 bill not only failed to recognize that Coury had already repaid what she owed; it also far exceeded the $20,000 she'd received from her daughter's insurance company in the first place. Eventually, Sumaya, a former accountant, discovered that Medicare had included every procedure Mollie had undergone since her accident, including unrelated care like open-heart surgery and treatment for emphysema.

Sumaya, who was herself battling lung cancer, tried repeatedly to straighten out the problem. Instead, Medicare stopped paying her mother's medical bills. Mollie so feared visiting the doctor that when she suffered internal bleeding from complications from a hiatal hernia, she refused to go to the hospital and nearly died. "It's like a nightmare," says Sumaya. "They should be paying her for all the harassment."

Medicare's debt recovery program has not been a model of efficiency. The Government Accountability Office discovered that during the 2001 fiscal year, other parties were responsible for nearly $2 billion in outstanding Medicare debts, but the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services had only referred about $47 million for collection. In the 2003 fiscal year, the agency employed more than 50 collection contractors, yet recouped just 38 cents for every dollar it spent trying to gather old debt from employer-sponsored health plans. During that same period, eight of those contractors didn't process a single case, yet still received a total of $1.8 million.

Congress pressed CMS for improvements. So in 2006, the agency consolidated collection activities into one massive contract, worth $72.5 million in the first two years. Under a law permitting the government to grant no-bid contracts to Native American corporations, it awarded the deal to Chickasaw Nation Industries, based just outside of Oklahoma City. The contract gave the firm $32.5 million the first year and $40 million the second. (Michael Webb, CNI's head of business development, says the agency granted the sole-source contract based on work the company was already doing handling medical records for the Indian Health Service.) It was CNI that sent Coury her $66,000 bill. However, agency officials said mistakes were inevitable in a system that processes more than 300,000 new liability claims and more than a million pieces of correspondence every year.

According to CMS officials, the Chickasaws have stepped up Medicare recoveries, but errors persist.  The issue was headed to the Supreme Court, but in 2003, Congress passed the Medicare drug benefit and included a small provision that officially put the onus on lawyers to make sure Medicare got its money.

Medicare often can't tell them just how much their clients owe. When it does, it's often spectacularly wrong.   After forcing plaintiffs' lawyers to serve as Medicare's debt collectors failed to produce the desired results, Congress passed new debt-collection measures as part of the 2007 SCHIP reauthorization. Starting next year, insurance companies must report any settlements or judgments involving Medicare beneficiaries to CMS. If a Medicare beneficiary fails to reimburse the agency for health care costs it paid, the agency can punish the insurance company with double damages.

Take the case of 87-year-old Hannah Cohen, who was hit by a car in 2005. She sued the driver and got an $18,000 settlement in December 2007. Knowing that the feds were more aggressively pursuing such payments, the driver's insurance company had a policy of making Medicare a payee on any settlement check for plaintiffs older than 62. But Cohen, an Israeli citizen, was ineligible for Medicare, and therefore owed nothing. Still, it took more than a year—and a lawsuit—for Cohen's lawyer to extract her money from the insurance and Medicare bureaucracy. Cohen's lawyer has another similar case pending.

After all of Sumaya Coury's calls and letters, in March, a contractor working for Medicare wrote to say that her mother, who is now 95, now owes only $18,378.40—a little more than the amount she repaid four years ago. Sumaya hired a lawyer to deal with the mess. One day, she says, she complained to an employee of the Chickasaw contractor that the situation was "totally bizarre." The woman replied, "Oh no, it's not. It happens every day."
 

 

 

 

False Claims Act

Mark S. Armstrong wrote an interesting article about using the federal False Claims Act (FCA) in nursing home cases primarily involving Medicare and Medicaid claims.  Armstrong is a member of Epstein Becker Green Wickliff & Hall in its Health Care and Life Sciences practice group. He focuses primarily on regulatory, reimbursement and litigation matters.

Recently, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania employed the FCA to settle with a nursing home for submitting claims for payment for inadequate care involving the treatment and prevention of pressure ulcers, incontinence care, infection control, diabetic care, weight monitoring, nutritional provision and physician care. The theory in this case was that the nursing home submitted a false claim each time a bill to the government was presented for inadequate care. While this was not the first instance in which the FCA was used to target substandard care, it may signal a renewed prosecutorial interest as the government seeks to heighten its efforts to prevent fraud, waste and abuse, and increase quality of care.

The FCA makes it unlawful for a person to “knowingly” make a “false or fraudulent” claim to the government for payment of government funds. Although the FCA imposes liability only when the claimant acts knowingly, it does not require that the person submitting the claim have actual knowledge that the claim is false. A person who acts in reckless disregard or in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information can also be found liable under the FCA.

The government has routinely pursued FCA cases when nursing homes submit fraudulent claims, including, but not limited to, 1) bills for services that were not provided, 2) bills for services that were medically unnecessary, 3) bills for services or items that were included in the facility's per diem rate, and 4) claims to Medicare Part A when the resident is not eligible for the Part A benefit. In addition to these more typical enforcement actions, the FCA is being expanded to include billing for services where the care was substandard.

To participate in Medicare or Medicaid, providers must certify that they are abiding by all applicable statutes, rules and regulations regarding the provision of quality of care and safety. In FCA substandard care cases, the government alleges that by merely requesting payment, the provider implicitly certifies compliance with governing federal rules, regulations and contractual provisions that are a precondition to receiving payment. The government asserts this FCA implied certification theory when a nursing home submits a claim for Medicare or Medicaid reimbursement but is not fully compliant with quality of care regulations, including the Nursing Home Reform Act (“NHRA”).

The NHRA establishes quality of life and quality of care requirements that facilities must meet in order to participate in the Medicare and Medicaid programs. For example, under the NHRA, a “skilled nursing facility must provide services to attain or maintain the highest practicable physical, mental and psychosocial well-being of each resident,” including but not limited to nursing services, specialized rehabilitative services, pharmaceutical services and dietary services.

By submitting bills to Medicare or Medicaid, nursing homes implicitly certify to the government that they are in full compliance with applicable statutes, rules and regulations regarding the appropriate quality of care and safety. In its case against Willowcrest Nursing Home and Willow Terrace at Germantown (collectively, “Willowcrest”), the government pursued an implied certification theory claiming that by providing inadequate or worthless services, Willowcrest submitted false claims for reimbursement to the federal healthcare programs.

Facing a potential civil penalty in the maximum amount of $10,000 per claim, plus three times the amount of damages, Willowcrest settled its claim with the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Willowcrest's settlement requires that it 1) make a cash payment to the United States in the amount of $305,072, 2) hire a full-time physician assistant or nurse practitioner, and 3) retain a qualified monitor for three years who will assess the effectiveness, reliability and thoroughness of its internal control systems, training programs, and its response to quality of care issues.

It is likely that federal prosecutors will continue to use the theory of implied certification to combat substandard care when the government is paying for the provision of healthcare services. Accordingly, to minimize the risk of defending itself against the government's FCA claims for substandard care, a nursing home should develop and implement a comprehensive compliance program that serves to reduce fraud and abuse, enhance operational functions, improve the quality of healthcare services, and decrease the cost of health care. At a minimum, a comprehensive compliance program should contain written policies and procedures that are adopted to prevent fraud and abuse and ensure an appropriate level of care for the residents.

Even if a nursing home has current compliance policies and procedures, it should conduct a baseline assessment of risk areas, particularly in the area of quality of care. According to the OIG, common risk areas for a nursing home involving quality of care include:

* Inappropriate or insufficient treatment and services to address residents' clinical condition;

* Inadequate staffing levels or insufficiently trained or supervised staff to provide medical, nursing and related services;

* Failure to accommodate individual needs and preferences;

* Failure to properly prescribe, administer and monitor prescription drug usage;

* Failure to provide appropriate therapy services; and

* Failure to provide appropriate services to assist residents with activities of daily living (e.g. feeding, dressing)

The goal for a nursing home in conducting the risk assessment for quality of care is to ensure that the employees, managers and directors are aware of the risks and that it takes steps to minimize the types of problems identified. Written policies and procedures are an effective tool for improving quality of care for nursing home residents. But it is equally important to implement such policies through effective training and supervision.

By taking steps proactively to address quality of care deficiencies, a nursing home may not have to later defend itself from the government's FCA claim of substandard care.

 

Overpayments to Nursing Homes

Center for Medicare Advocacy issued a bulletin about overpayments to nursing homes.  The bulletin explains the long history of nursing homes collecting more money than they deserve or are entitled to for services especially for nonexistent rehabilitation.  Changes have recently been made to rein in wasteful spending and overpayments.

In March 2009, as in previous years, Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) recommended that Congress not increase Medicare nursing home rates.   MedPAC reported that "the aggregate Medicare margin for freestanding" nursing homes was 14.5% in 2007; that for the seventh consecutive year, the aggregate Medicare margins exceeded 10%; and a one quarter of SNFs show profit margins of at least 24.8%.   That is a big profit margin paid for by taxpayers.

 

How overpayments occur:

SNFs are paid for services they do not provide. PPS pays SNFs a daily rate based on the assessed needs of the resident.  Although getting paid based on the assessment, most residents were not provided the therapy they required in order to be placed into those assessment categories.  SNFs did not provide the amount of rehabilitation services they were paid to provide and rehabilitation services actually provided to residents under PPS decreased.  Now it will pay only for services that are actually provided in the SNF. Billions of dollars in overpayments have been wasted.  CMS is not recouping the billions of dollars of overpayments from the previous four years.
 

The falsity of "concurrent" therapy.  SNFs shifted from one-on-one therapy to "concurrent" therapy, a method by which one professional therapist works with multiple residents on different therapy tasks at the same time, but SNFs still bill Medicare as if each resident received 100% of the therapist's attention. For example, SNF Medicare reimbursement rules have allowed a therapist treating four patients concurrently during the course of one hour to bill Medicare for four full hours of therapy. CMS reports that more than a quarter (28.26%) of therapy provided in SNFs is now concurrent. CMS will close this loophole when it implements revisions to Medicare by requiring allocation of concurrent therapy time and by limiting concurrent therapy to two residents.  CMS is not recouping overpayments for the many past years of "concurrent therapy."

Greed.  When several large multi-state nursing home chains filed for bankruptcy protection in the late 1990s, Congress responded by increasing Medicare reimbursement rates for SNFs in multiple ways. Although Congress increased the nursing component of all SNF rates by 16.66%, SNFs did not spend the billion-dollar rate increase on nurse staffing, as Congress intended. The GAO found, "in the aggregate, SNFs' nurse staffing ratios changed little after the increase in the nursing component of the Medicare payment rate took effect. Overall, SNFs' average nursing time increased by 1.9 minutes per patient day."  The national for profit chains took the increase and put it in profits to increase their stock instead of using the money to increase staffing to provide proper and adequate care.

CMS has taken strong steps to eliminate some of the waste and overpayments to SNFs that have been well-documented by MedPAC and the GAO for many years. In the final regulations published in August, CMS eliminated the look-back period; recalibrated the rates to maintain budget neutrality; revised the rules for concurrent therapy; and is considering development of a SNF-specific wage index. These changes and the changes included in H.R. 3200 should not result in reduced staffing and quality of care, as suggested by the nursing home industry. Instead, they will improve the integrity of the Medicare program by ensuring that SNFS are reimbursed accurately and fairly for the services they actually provide.

 

 

Medicare and Medicaid Cost Reports

Nursing homes continue to object and try to prevent residents from getting copies of medicaid and medicare cost reports despite the fact that this are public documents and federal regulations require the disclosure of the documents.  When the nursing home objects, inform the Court about the specific regulation requiring disclosure:

42 U.S.C. §1395i-3(g)(5)(A) which states,

Each State, and the Secretary, shall make available to the public–

(i) information respecting all surveys and certifications made respecting skilled nursing facilities, including statements of deficiencies, within 14 calendar days after such information is made available to those facilities, and approved plans of correction,

(ii) copies of cost reports of such facilities filed under this subchapter or subchapter XIX of this chapter,

(iii) copies of statements of ownership under section 1320a-3 of this title . . .
 

Study on Health Insurance Fraud

The George Washington University School of Public Health did a study about health insurance fraud.  Here are some interesting excerpts from the study:

In 2007, the U.S. spent nearly $2.3 trillion on health care and public and private insurers processed more than 4 billion health insurance claims.  The National Health Care Anti-Fraud Association (NHCAA) has estimated that, conservatively, 3% of all health care spending—or $68 billion—is lost to health care fraud. Other estimates by government and law enforcement agencies place fraud-related losses as high as 10% of annual health care spending; at this rate, the losses in 2007 alone –over $220 billion – would have been enough to cover the uninsured.

Medicare and Medicaid may be susceptible to fraud in part because many investigative reports on victims of consumer swindles suggest that financial fraud is not uniformly distributed across all households; instead, it disproportionately targets the elderly, women, minorities, the less educated, and the poor.  In other words, Medicare and Medicaid fraud may reflect the vulnerable nature of the populations that depend on the program rather than any failing on the part of either program.

CMS issues new guidelines

U.S. News & World Report had a great article summarizing the spirit and intent of the new federal regulations for nursing homes. The article states "A warm, welcoming environment where residents are free to make choices regarding their care."  These recommendations or standards are long overdue and need to be enforced right away.

The CMS guidance aim to "transform nursing homes into environments that are more like [residents'] homes through both environmental changes and resident-centered caregiving," CMS wrote in an agency news release.  The guidance will serve as an outline that CMS nursing home inspectors will use to make sure a particular facility is reaching federal regulations on good quality care.

Included in the new proposals:

A call to "de-institutionalize" the nursing home's physical environment by doing away with things such as meals served on "institutional" trays, blaring noise from overhead paging speakers, and large nursing stations.

Efforts to individualize and personalize care, stressing the importance of personal one-on-one relationships between residents and staff, and a warm, welcoming environment.

Giving residents real choice over daily routines, including the scheduling of waking, bathing, mealtimes and bedtimes.



 

New addition to CMS website

Mcknight's had a recent article about the changes to the CMS ranking website.  The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services has announced a number of updates to its Web site. These include new information about the Five-Star rating system for nursing homes, which became available Thursday, May 28.

Five-Star provider preview reports were released May 20. Nursing home providers can access that information through the Minimum Data Set (MDS) State Welcome pages that are available at the state servers for the submission of MDS data, according to CMS.

May's Five-Star data was added to the Nursing Home Compare Web site on May 28. For more information, visit www.medicare.gov/NHcompare.

CMS has also updated the information under its FAQ section of the Recovery Audit Contractor (RAC) portion of its Web site. On May 19, CMS added answers to questions such as "Why is CMS using recovery audit contractors?" and "Who should providers contact with questions concerning recovery audit contractor communications?" For more information, visit www.cms.hhs.gov/RAC.

 

Sun Healthcare Group's profits soar

Barron's Online recently discussed Sun Healthcare Group's stock prices, and future expected profits.  The company gets three-fourths of its revenues from Medicare and Medicaid.  Though up since late March, the stock is 54% off the record high from January 2008.  Barron's argues that  investors underestimate Sun's prospects for expanding profits next year especially with a record-low price-to-earnings multiple that's well below the broader industry.

In August, the federal government will set Medicare rates for 2010. Though officials have proposed a 1.2% cut, rates should remain flat, or rise slightly, boosting Sun's profits beyond what's expected next year.  Meanwhile, Sun remains focused on improving profitability by reducing its dependence on Medicaid, which covers two-thirds of the nation's nursing-home patients. (Medicaid pays for custodial or long-term care for poor seniors who are too frail and sick to live alone. It's Sun's single largest revenue source.)  Sun and other operators want more patients coming off hospital stays, and are thus eligible for Medicare or private-insurance benefits that doll out far bigger payments.  Last quarter, Medicaid generated 43.7% of Sun's in-patient revenues, down from 45% the previous year. Medicare's contribution rose to 33.2% from 31.7%. Private insurers made 6.3% of Sun's revenues, up from 5.5% last year, while private-paying patients fell below 16%, thanks to a weak economy.

Founded in 1989, Sun has survived bankruptcy and grown into the fifth-largest player in the $99 billion nursing-home industry.  The vast majority of the company's revenues come from 185 nursing homes that provide short- and long-term skilled nursing care. This year, profits are expected to grow 23% to $1.14 a share, and climb another 8% in 2010, according to Thomson Reuters.

Thankfully, Sun has plenty of cash -- almost $100 million as of March 31. Meanwhile, the company sees free cash flow rising as much as 17% this year to $53 million. And Oppenheimer's Wiederhorn expects almost 57% of revenues next year to come from Medicare, private-pay and privately insured patients.

 


 

False Claim Act

Regency Nursing and Rehabilitation Centers Inc. nursing home chain will pay the United States $4 million for submitting false claims to Medicare and the Texas Medicaid program, the Justice Department and the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of Texas announced today. The Victoria, Texas-based chain currently owns and operates 24 nursing home facilities located through the state.  The amount they stole it undetermined.  The charges included false hours and payment for services not rendered to residents.

The False Claims Act settlement resolves allegations that Regency submitted claims for reimbursement to Medicare and Medicaid for rehabilitation and skilled nursing services that were not reimbursable because the nursing home residents were not qualified for the services, the services were not medically necessary, or they were not supported by adequate documentation.

"Nursing home providers participating in Medicare should be on notice that taxpayers will not absorb the costs of improper or false billings submitted to the government and that the Department of Justice will take action against them for submitting such claims," said Tony West, Assistant Attorney General for the Department's Civil Division.



 

Flaws in Medicare rating system

WCCO out of Minnesota had an article about how most violations in nursing homes are under reported.  This seems like common sense since most employees do not want to risk their jobs admitting mistakes, and there is not enough personnel to enforce the regulations or conduct proper investigations. Many complaints are ignored because the nursing home claims the resident was demented.

The system designed to help Minnesotans choose a nursing home for loved ones is under fire. Serious flaws in the system have been uncovered by a nursing home watchdog group.  You might not know about physical and sexual abuse happening inside the nursing home.

Wes Bledsoe, the founder of a nursing home watchdog group, says he can prove that the rating system on Medicare.gov does not show what is really going on in nursing homes.  For example, after all of the well known abuse at Good Samaritan Society in Albert Lea, a report from the Minnesota Department of Health says no deficiencies were noted at the nursing home.

At a different facility in the state, someone saw an employee pick up a nightgown soaked with urine and that worker "shoved it in the resident's mouth and told her to shut up." Again, the Department of Health didn't note any deficiencies.

A spokesperson from the Minnesota Department of Health said "If a facility has taken appropriate steps to correct problems, they may not be cited with deficiencies."  However, when deficiencies aren't noted, they don't show up on the Medicare site, so there's no way you could know if you've only checked that Web site.

Bledsoe said it's happening all the time. He found that 80 percent of confirmed abuse cases in Minnesota in the last four years didn't get reported to the feds.

"I think it's bureaucratic mumbo-jumbo that's deceiving the consumers and the American public about what's really going on in our long-term care facilities," said Bledsoe.

Bledsoe said another big problem is the star system on the Medicare Web site. On a lot of the nursing home Web sites, a lot of the information is not available, so he's wondering how they can give a place four or five stars when there's no information.

Poliakoff & Associates, P.A., is one of South Carolina’s most respected and distinguished law firms. The Poliakoff firm began nearlyMore...