<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
			<?xml-stylesheet type='text/xsl' href='https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/rss.xsl' ?>
			<rss version='2.0' xmlns:content='http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/'
					xmlns:atom='http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom'
					xmlns:dc='http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/'>
				<channel>
					<title>The New Health Care Law Reform Bill &amp; PPACA | Foster Swift</title>
					<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/2016/</link>
					<atom:link href='https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/2016/?rss' rel='self' type='application/rss+xml' />
					<description><![CDATA[The latest updates to The New Health Care Law Reform Bill &amp; PPACA.]]></description>
					<lastBuildDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2026 12:39:38 -0400</lastBuildDate>
					
				<item>
				<title>HHS OIG Report Identifies Non-Compliance in Hospice Documentation</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/Hospice-Documentation-Medicare</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet, Jennifer B. Van Regenmorter</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>Hospice-Documentation-Medicare</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2016 09:00:01 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/medicare2.jpg" width="200" height="133" alt="Medicare" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />Hospice care is intended to help terminally ill beneficiaries continue living with minimal disruptions and to provide support for a beneficiary&rsquo;s family and caregivers. In a recent report, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of Inspector General (OIG) found that hospices are not always meeting two key coverage requirements for the Medicare hospice benefit: (1) that beneficiaries sign an election statement and (2) that a physician certifies that the beneficiary is terminally ill. The purpose of these requirements is, among other things, to properly inform beneficiaries of the implications of hospice care and to prevent Medicare fraud.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>CMS Announces New Conditions of Participation for Long-Term Care Facilities</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/Conditions-Participation-Long-Term-Care</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet, Jennifer B. Van Regenmorter</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>Conditions-Participation-Long-Term-Care</guid>

					<pubDate>Tue, 06 Dec 2016 09:00:02 -0500</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/nursing%20home2.jpg" width="116" height="175" alt="" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />Recently, the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services (&ldquo;CMS&rdquo;) issued a final rule (&ldquo;Final Rule&rdquo;) updating the Medicare Conditions of Participation (&ldquo;CoPs&rdquo;) for long-term care (&ldquo;LTC&rdquo;) facilities. It is the first time in over 15 years that substantial LTC CoP revisions have been released.</p>  <p>LTC facilities affected by the Final Rule include skilled nursing facilities for Medicare and nursing facilities for Medicaid, or those facilities that are duly certified. The Final Rule took effect on November 28, 2016, however CMS has planned for a phased implementation. LTC providers must complete the three implementation phases by November 28 in the years 2016, 2017 and 2018, respectively. CMS has estimated that the costs of compliance will be $62,900 in the first phase of implementation, and $55,000 per year for phases two and three.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>DOJ Starts Cracking Down on Individual Health Care Executives for False
Claims Act and Stark Law Violations Committed by Their Companies</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/DOJ-Cracks-Down-on-health-care-executives</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>DOJ-Cracks-Down-on-health-care-executives</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2016 09:00:03 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/Handing-prescription-low-res.jpg" width="200" height="133" alt="" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />Healthcare executives and physicians take note: The Department of Justice is now cracking down on individuals, and not just companies, for False Claims Act, Stark law, and anti-kickback statute violations.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>CMS Final Rule on Reporting and Returning of Overpayments Has Potentially
Only an Eight-Month Safe Harbor</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/reporting-returning-overpayments-Medicare-providers</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>reporting-returning-overpayments-Medicare-providers</guid>

					<pubDate>Fri, 16 Sep 2016 09:00:04 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/Calendar-and-clock.jpg" width="175" height="131" alt="" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />The Final Rule on Reporting and Returning of Overpayments (&ldquo;Final Rule&rdquo;), which became effective on March 14, 2016, requires Medicare providers to report and return Medicare overpayments by the later of (i) 60 days after the date on which the overpayment was identified, or (ii) the date on which any corresponding cost report was due. This 60-day deadline for returning overpayments is suspended when any of the following occurs:</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Quality versus Quantity Transformation in Healthcare Picks Up Pace as CMS
Issues New Rules</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/quality-versus-quantity-transformation-healthcare</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>quality-versus-quantity-transformation-healthcare</guid>

					<pubDate>Thu, 25 Aug 2016 09:00:05 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/Health-care-piggy-bank2.jpg" width="200" height="135" title="cms issues new rules" alt="cms issues new rules" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />The march to transform Medicare from a quantity-based to a value-based system continues unabated - and the pace is quickening. Over the past several months, the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services (&ldquo;CMS&rdquo;) issued several final rules to update certain Medicare reimbursement rates and quality reporting requirements that impact vast numbers of healthcare providers.</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Nursing Homes Should Review Privacy Policies in Light of Recent CMS
Guidance</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/nursing-homes-review-privacy-policies</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet, Jennifer B. Van Regenmorter</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>nursing-homes-review-privacy-policies</guid>

					<pubDate>Wed, 24 Aug 2016 09:00:06 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/nursing%20home2.jpg" width="110" height="165" alt="" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />A recent <strong><a href="https://www.cms.gov/Medicare/Provider-Enrollment-and-Certification/SurveyCertificationGenInfo/Downloads/Survey-and-Cert-Letter-16-33.pdf">Memorandum</a></strong> issued by the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services ("CMS") to state survey agency directors (the "Memorandum") discusses a nursing home's responsibility to protect residents' privacy, particularly with regard to social media. The Memorandum was issued following a series of media reports documenting the inappropriate posting of residents' photographs on social media by nursing home staff.&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Data Breaches Lead to Record-Breaking HIPAA Settlement</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/data-breaches-hipaa-settlement</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>data-breaches-hipaa-settlement</guid>

					<pubDate>Tue, 16 Aug 2016 09:00:07 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/HIPAA.jpg" width="150" height="212" title="HIPAA" alt="HIPAA" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />Advocate Health Care Network (Advocate), one of the nation&rsquo;s largest health care systems, recently reached a $5.55 million settlement with the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) for potential violations of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). The $5.55 million settlement is the largest HIPAA settlement in history against a single entity.</p>
<p>OCR's investigation arose after Advocate reported three separate data breaches to OCR that occurred between July and November of 2013. The first breach occurred when four desktop computers were stolen from an Advocate administrative building. Another breach occurred when an unencrypted laptop was stolen from an Advocate employee's unlocked vehicle. A third breach occurred when an unauthorized third party accessed the network of a company that provides billing services to Advocate. A total of more than 4 million patient records were affected by the breaches.&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>CMS Expands Temporary Home Health Agency Enrollment Moratorium to all of
Michigan</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/home-health-agency-enrollment-moratorium-michigan</link>
<dc:creator>Julie LaVille Hamlet, Jennifer B. Van Regenmorter</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>home-health-agency-enrollment-moratorium-michigan</guid>

					<pubDate>Tue, 09 Aug 2016 09:00:08 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/medicare2.jpg" width="175" height="116" alt="" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />The Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services ("CMS") recently announced the statewide expansion of its temporary moratorium on the Medicare enrollment of new home health agencies ("HHAs"), subunits, and branch locations in Michigan. &nbsp;As a result of the moratorium expansion, effective as of July 29, 2016, new HHAs in Michigan are precluded from enrolling in Medicare until the moratorium is lifted. The temporary moratorium also precludes the Medicare enrollment of new HHAs in Florida, Illinois, and Texas.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>CMS Issues Proposed Provider-Based Status Rules</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/cms-proposed-provider-based-status-rules</link>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>cms-proposed-provider-based-status-rules</guid>

					<pubDate>Fri, 29 Jul 2016 09:00:09 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p class="BodySingleSp1"><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/health%20laptop.jpg" width="175" height="116" alt="" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />On July 6, 2016, the Centers for Medicare &amp; Medicaid Services ("CMS") released the 2017 Outpatient Prospective Payment System ("OPPS") Proposed Rule (the "Proposed Rule"). The Proposed Rule explains how CMS plans to implement Section 603 of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2015 ("Section 603"), which established a new site neutral payment policy for certain off-campus hospital outpatient departments.</p>  <p class="BodySingleSp1">Section 603 provides that, as of January 1, 2017, certain items and services provided by off-campus hospital outpatient departments will no longer be reimbursed under the more favorable OPPS, and will instead be paid under another "applicable payment system."</p>]]></description>
</item>

				<item>
				<title>Michigan’s Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act is Upheld Once Again</title>
				<link>https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/michigan-health-insurance-claims-act-upheld</link>
<dc:creator></dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink='false'>michigan-health-insurance-claims-act-upheld</guid>

					<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2016 09:00:10 -0400</pubDate>
					<description><![CDATA[<p><img src="https://www.healthlawyersblog.com/assets/htmlimages/Court%20Pillars.jpg" width="200" height="136" title="health insurance claims assessment" alt="health insurance claims assessment" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px; margin-bottom: 10px;" />Michigan&rsquo;s tax on paid health care claims is not preempted by ERISA, according to a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. On remand from the United States Supreme Court, the federal appellate court held that the Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act does not impermissibly interfere with the uniform administration of group health plans or impose additional burdens on self-insured plans and third-party administrators.</p>]]></description>
</item>

			</channel></rss>