Long Term Care Hospitals

The New York Times had an interesting article about the growing industry of long term care hospitals.  The greedy owners manipulate the Medicare and Medicaid regulations on reimbursement to make even more money and profit.

Fewer than 10 hospitals dedicated to long-term care existed in the early 1980s, according to Medicare officials.  More than 400 long term care hospitals have opened nationally in the last 25 years.   These hospitals have sprouted driven by Medicare rules that offer high payments for hospitals that treat patients for an average of 25 days or more.  Long-term care hospitals now treat about 200,000 patients a year, including 130,000 Medicare patients — at a projected cost of $4.8 billion to the government this year, up from $400 million in 1993. 

Among the more peculiar aspects of long-term care hospitals is that nearly half of them, and almost all of Select’s, are actually “hospitals within hospitals.” They do not have their own buildings and instead occupy a floor or two of an existing hospital. They contract most services from the host hospital, so they can be opened quickly and cheaply.

Yet under Medicare rules, because they have different owners, the two hospitals are considered separate for payment purposes. This means there can be a second reimbursement when a patient is simply transferred between floors.  Under Medicare payment rules, traditional hospitals often lose money on patients who stay for long periods. So they have a financial incentive to discharge patients to long-term hospitals, which then receive new Medicare payments for admitting the patients. Both hospitals benefit financially.  The industry’s growth is an example of how health care companies can exploit the $450 billion Medicare program.

 

Few long term care hospitals have doctors on staff. Select, which has 23,000 employees and provided care to 42,000 patients in 2009, has no physicians on its board or in management. In 2007, it hired a physician for a new position, national medical director. The physician, Dr. David Jarvis, does not work at Select’s headquarters in Mechanicsburg, Pa., and has no management responsibilities. He estimated he spent only 10 hours a week working for Select Medical. Select Medical Corporation is a publicly traded Pennsylvania company that runs 89 long-term hospitals, more than any other company.

Lawsuits, state inspection reports and statistics deep in federal reports paint a troubling picture of the care offered at some Select hospitals, and at long-term care hospitals in general. For-profit long-term hospitals generally spend less on patients and have higher margins than comparable nonprofits, according to data from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, a Congressional research agency. In 2007, for-profit long-term care hospitals had margins of 6 percent on Medicare patients, while regular hospitals lost an average of 6 percent on Medicare patients, according to the commission. In a presentation to investors last month, Select Medical reported that it improved its margins by lowering staffing levels and supply costs. Medicare inspection reports, however, describe preventable patient injuries and deaths, and they portray Select’s hospitals as understaffed and with high turnover.

In 2007 and 2008, Select’s hospitals were cited at a rate almost four times that of regular hospitals for serious violations of Medicare rules. Other long-term care hospitals were cited at a rate about twice that of regular hospitals. Long-term care hospitals also had a higher incidence of bedsores and infections than regular hospitals in 2006, the most recent year for which federal data is available.

Unlike other specialized hospitals, like psychiatric or children’s hospitals, long-term care hospitals do not treat specific types of patients or offer services unavailable in regular hospitals. They are defined solely by the fact that they keep patients longer than other hospitals. They are also smaller than a typical hospital, averaging about 60 beds.

Despite the rapid expansion of long-term care hospitals, Medicare has never closely examined their care. Unlike traditional hospitals, Medicare does not penalize them financially if they fail to submit quality data.

Select also manipulates how long patients stay, to maximize its profits. A hospital is certified as a long-term care hospital and receives high Medicare reimbursements if most patients stay at least 25 days. But Medicare pays the hospital a set amount for each patient, meaning that patients who stay longer than that become less profitable. Therefore, long-term care hospitals are most profitable if most patients are discharged at or just after their 25th day, with a few discharged earlier. Select adheres closely to this formula, with an average length of stay at its hospitals of about 24 days, according to public filings. At some Select hospitals, the 25th day is called the “magic day,” ex-employees say.

Partly owned by a private equity firm, Select Medical sold shares to the public in September. Its top two executives, a father and son named Rocco and Robert Ortenzio, have made about $200 million from salary, benefits and share sales since founding Select in November 1996. The Ortenzios, who are veterans of the for-profit hospital industry, still own about 10 percent of the company, worth about $200 million.
 

Millions in Medicaid Fraud?

Palm Beach Post ran an interesting article about possible Medicaid Fraud.  As taxpayers, we should all be outraged when nursing homes take money for patient care and use it for other reasons such as perks, bonuses, and profit.  Medicaid auditors have disallowed more than a half-million dollars in "operating costs" at a Pahokee nursing home.  The audit only looked at a limited period, 2003-2004, and concluded nearly $672,000 in operating expenses did not merit reimbursement by the government.  Hopefully, they will audit additional years to find the millions taken in Mediciad funds.  Government money provides most of the revenue at the 120-bed nursing home, where the annual operating budget runs between $5 million and $10 million.

Among the red flags: Billing the government for automobile expenses "not supported as business-related" at Glades Health Care Center.  The Post examined spending on hot tubs, Cadillacs, BMWs and other luxury cars, along with hefty pay for executives and their family members at Glades Health Care Center and related organizations over several years.

A spokeswoman for the state's Agency for Health Care Administration said she was not aware of other audits currently under way against the chain of nursing homes, though she could not rule out further inquiries.  Why aren't they doing audits for other years?

 

Disparate treatment based on race/ethnicity?

I saw this press release from Brown University.  Interesting conclusions based on data.

Hispanic senior citizens are living in nursing homes in ever-increasing numbers, but they face a gap in their quality of care compared to white residents, according to new research from Brown University. 

A team led by Mary Fennell, professor of sociology and community health, found that Hispanic elderly are more likely than whites to live in nursing homes of poor quality. These residences are often faced with structural problems, staffing issues and financial trouble.

Details will be featured in the January 2010 edition of Health Affairs. The research follows up and expands upon a landmark 2007 study, also published in Health Affairs, suggesting that blacks are more likely than whites to live in poor-quality nursing homes. Vincent Mor, chair of the Department of Community Health, was a lead author in that study and is a co-author in the new work looking at nursing home care for Hispanics. Temple University was also a partner in the previous research.

Fennell said the paper is the first full-scale analysis of its kind to attempt to look broadly at Hispanics in nursing homes — what kind of nursing homes they live in and how care at those facilities compares to nursing homes which care mostly for white elderly people. She said the data revealed a sharp disparity in care.

"The most shocking finding is the pervasiveness of disparities in nursing home care that are primarily white, compared to nursing homes that are a mix of whites and Hispanic residences," Fennell said.

Fennell said the findings, in part, reflect a departure from prior patterns of elder care among Hispanic families in the United States. Traditionally, the group has used formal long-term care services less frequently than any other U.S. ethnic group. They had also been less likely than white or black residents to live in nursing homes. In Hispanic households, elder care has traditionally been handled by adult daughters at home, but acculturation and financial issues have forced a growing number of young Hispanic women into work outside the home.

As a result, Fennell said, the loss of home caregivers is occurring even as the growth of the elderly Hispanic population rises dramatically. The authors estimate that more than 5 percent of the current Hispanic population is elderly, a number that is expected to quadruple during the next 10 years. That number should rise to 4.5 million by 2010, according to Fennell and her team.

Fennell and her colleagues found that the overall use of nursing homes has declined since 1985, but the racial/ethnic mix of the national population of nursing home residents has shifted. From 2000 to 2005 — the period of data used in the study — the percent of Hispanic residents increased from 5 percent to 6.4 percent, but the percentage of non-Hispanic white residents dipped from just under 83 percent to 79.4 percent.

Nursing home residents are coming increasingly from the lower end of the socio-economic scale, Fennell said, lacking resources for better quality care in assisted living facilities or elsewhere.

Fennell argues that the impact of substandard nursing home care is a complex issue. Residents admitted to nursing homes have often already endured hospitalizations or a health issue that required expensive, high-level care. Once admitted, the individual is then often caught in a spiral of long-term lower quality of life, multiple episodes of poor health and ongoing chronic conditions without a way out.

"People with resources can get into very good places or alternatives for nursing home care," Fennell said. "Everyone else is left with not-very-good facilities that are not performing well."

Fennell is hoping that both federal and state policy-makers pay attention to the data as they shape health care reform policy.


 

 

 

Fennell and Mor, with Zhanlian Feng, assistant professor (research) of community health and Melissa Clark, associate professor of community health, looked at a number of federal sources for their research, including the federal Minimum Data Set on nursing home care, the Online Survey Certification and Reporting Database (OSCAR), and U.S. Census Bureau data. Their nursing home sample included 5,179 nursing homes in operation across the country from 2000 to 2005. About 80 percent of all Hispanic nursing home residents are counted in the analysis.

Fennell's research is part of the program project funded by the National Institute on Aging, on Shaping Long-Term Care in America, based at the Center for Gerontology and Health Care Research at Brown. The datasets used by Fennell and colleagues can be accessed through the program project's web site, LTCFocUS.org, which was launched in early November.

Editors: Contact: Mark Hollmer
Mark_Hollmer@brown.edu
401-863-1862
Brown University

Brown University has a fiber link television studio available for domestic and international live and taped interviews, and maintains an ISDN line for radio interviews. For more information, call (401) 863-2476.

 

Lack of end of life programs in nursing homes

McKnight's had an article about end of life programs in nursing homes.  Fewer than one in five nursing homes provide end-of-life care services, according to new research from the American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging.   However, any expansion would have to deal with the "death panel" demagoguery.  These programs are necessary to assist residents and their families regarding their rights to end of life decisions.

As many as 25% of all deaths occur in the U.S. occur in a nursing home, according to the report from AAHSA's Institute for the Future of Aging Services.  Despite this, less than 20% of nursing homes offer end-of-life programs. Nursing homes were more likely to participate in end-of-life programs if they also offered specialty programs for hospice, pain management or dementia care, according to the report.  

There is also a link between staff training in end-of-life care services and a facility's participation in end-of life-programs, the report showed. Providing appropriate staff training may be the key to expanding program participation, according to Helaine Resnick, director of research at IFAS. The research was published in the online version of the American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care Medicine.
 

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.

 

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.



 

Eviction of mentally ill residents

The West Virginia Gazette had an interesting article on a nursing home's attempt to evict a mentally ill resident from the facility.  The judge has ruled that 77-year-old Helen Shank gets to stay at Golden Living Center in Morgantown...for now.  Medicaid must continue providing nursing home care for Shank, who is mentally ill and also a "brittle diabetic".


West Virginia Department of Health and Human Services tried to take federal Medicaid benefits away from Shank, despite recommendations by several of her physicians and psychiatrists. 
Shank has lived in the Golden Living Center since October 2004. But last year, a DHHR evaluator said she no longer qualified for nursing home care.

Dr. Ward Paine, a physician who treated Shank at the Golden Living Center, said she would be at a "very high risk of hospitalization" if she were released from the home.  Others agreed, including: Dr. Pamela Sullivan, another physician who saw Shank, and Dr. Janis Boury, a psychologist and case manager who gave Shank a mental-health evaluation in June 2008.  Dr. Logan Graddy, a psychiatrist at West Virginia University Hospital, diagnosed Shank as suffering from developing dementia, "a severe, persistent and progressive psychiatric illness."

In his ruling, Judge Kaufman wrote, "The U.S. Congress defined a nursing facility as an institution which is primarily engaged in providing ... health-related care and services to individuals who because of their mental or physical conditions require care and services which can be made available to them only though institutional facilities."   Shank's failure to meet "the minimum five daily living deficits," which do not include any psychological problems, does not make her ineligible to receive Medicaid benefits under federal guidelines, Kaufman ruled.

Once again, the nursing home industry proves that they are more concerned about making money than providing the care thier residents need.


 

 

Fraud and eviction led to death

The Daily Journal of New Jersey had an article about a lawsuit filed against a facility that intentionally misled a resident by promising she could remain in the facility after she depleted her substantial personal savings, and then threatening her with eviction when she did. 

The family of the late May Elizabeth Hunish contends in the complaint that the threat of eviction from Maurice House was a factor in her death soon after she received the notice in June 2007. The  lawsuit echos the findings of an 18-month investigation by the state Office of the Public Advocate. The results prove that Assisted Living Concepts Inc. involuntarily discharged or threatened with discharge from the company's facilities several elderly residents like Hunish when they drained their personal savings and became eligible for Medicaid.

Wisconsin-based Assisted Living Concepts operates Maurice House and seven other assisted living facilities in New Jersey.

Ronald Chen, state public advocate, said that administrators at the facilities "failed to inform and misled some residents" about their policy for accepting Medicaid.   Chen said the problem was caused by a change in corporate policy at the company in 2006, in which it sought to increase profits by reducing its number of Medicaid residents.

The lawsuit was filed in state Superior Court on behalf of Todd and Warren Buirch, the executors of Hunish's estate.  Todd Buirch is Hunish's grandson and Warren Buirch is her son.  The lawsuit  accuses Assisted Living Concepts of consumer fraud, breach of contract and negligence. The lawsuit contends that officials at Maurice House made verbal promises to Hunish's family that she could remain in the facility once she depleted her personal savings and became eligible for Medicaid. But after Hunish did become eligible for Medicaid in March 2007 by spending her savings of $150,000, the facility informed her family that she'd have to move into an apartment at Maurice House with another resident or leave the facility.  Two months later, Hunish slipped and fell while she was unattended in her bathroom at Maurice House, shattering her femur. While she was hospitalized, her family told her about a discharge notice issued by Maurice House to her on June 12.

"She grew increasingly distraught and her will to live decreased," the lawsuit contends. "She constantly cried and expressed that life was no longer worth living."

Hunish died on June 16, 2007. She was 84.

Todd Buirch said in an interview Monday his family filed the lawsuit "to prevent any other parents or grandparents from having to go through this with Assisted Living Concepts. It's not about money; it's about stopping this. We want to change the way they do business. We don't want to see any more people being evicted."

 

 

 

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