Health Care Law Blog

In recent years, Michigan has been home to two of the largest sexual abuse scandals involving doctors in history: the sexual abuse committed by Larry Nassar while employed by Michigan State University and the sexual abuse committed by Robert Anderson while employed by the University of Michigan. In both circumstances, the former doctors carried out their sexual abuse under the guise of medical procedures and without the informed consent of their targets. Michigan is not alone in being home to these types of sexual abuse scandals as similar acts have been alleged to have been committed by many other health care providers, such as Richard Strauss (Ohio State University), George Tyndall (University of Southern California), Derrick Todd (Bringham and Women’s Faulkner Hospital (Boston, MA)), Major Michael Stockin (United States Army), amongst others.

On April 7, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued an update to the COVID-19 emergency declaration blanket waivers for specific providers. The memorandum, which was issued by the Director of the Quality, Safety & Oversight Group, details the numerous changes that will take place within 30 or 60 days of the memorandum’s publication.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) have recently released updated guidance regarding hospital co-locations arrangements. After nearly two years of deliberations and revisions, the final Guidance for Hospital Co-location with Other Hospitals or Health Care Facilities (the “Final Guidance”) was released on November 12, 2021 and took effect immediately upon publication. The Final Guidance is meant to address how CMS and other state agency surveyors will evaluate how hospitals share their space, services, and staff.

On April 23, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) updated its guidance on infection control and prevention of COVID-19 for Home Health Agencies (HHAs). CMS provided initial guidance on March 10, 2020, which addressed the concerns of COVID-19 and provided answers to practical questions impacting HHAs. In this update, CMS has expanded the COVID-19 guidance and regulations to apply to Religious Nonmedical Healthcare Institutions (RNHCIs).

This blog has since been updated with new information since its original publication. Due to rapidly changing laws and regulations surrounding COVID-19 matters, please consult your attorney and/or advisor for the latest information before taking any action.

The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA) and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES) require insurers to cover diagnostic testing for COVID-19 without any cost-sharing or prior authorization requirements. The Trump Administration and Centers for Medicare and Medicaid recognize that financial barriers that deter individuals from receiving testing for COVID-19 must be eliminated, since testing is critical to slowing the spread of the virus.

Nursing homes are potential hotspots where COVID-19 can quickly spread to vulnerable individuals. Life Care Center in Kirkland, Washington became the epicenter of the outbreak in Washington after the virus spread rapidly among residents. Life Care Center is not the only nursing home affected, as the CDC reported on March 23, 2020 that 147 nursing homes in 27 states have at least one COVID-19 positive patient. Recognizing the need to keep nursing home residents and healthcare workers safe, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has implemented an enhanced, focused inspection process for nursing homes to combat the spread of COVID-19.

In response to COVID-19, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services has issued blanket waivers of certain requirements so that hospitals and health care systems have the flexibility needed to manage potential surges. The waiver of these requirements is retroactively effective as of March 1, 2020 and lasts until the end of the emergency declaration for COVID-19.

Last year, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued long-anticipated draft guidance concerning shared space and co-location arrangements between hospitals and other providers. The guidance is meant to clarify how CMS and state agency surveyors will evaluate a hospital’s space sharing or contracted staff arrangements when assessing the hospital’s compliance with the Medicare Conditions of Participation (CoPs).

On May 28, 2019, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ("CMS") finalized a rule (the "Final Rule") to update and modernize requirements for the Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly ("PACE").

The Michigan Health Insurance Claims Assessment (“HICA”) tax has been repealed, effective as of October 1, 2018. On June 11, 2018, Governor Snyder signed a series of bills repealing the HICA tax.

Effective November 28, 2016, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services published a final rule which revised the Medicare Conditions of Participation for Long-Term Care Facilities. There are three different phases of implementation.

Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly (PACE) organizations provide certain medical and social services to eligible individuals who meet the Long Term Care level of care criteria.

Chemed Corporation and various of its subsidiaries, including Vitas Hospice Services LLC and Vitas Healthcare Corporation (collectively “Vitas”), recently settled allegations brought by the federal government that Vitas violated the False Claims Act by submitting to Medicare false claims for hospice services.

The U.S. Department of Health & Human Services ("HHS") Office of Inspector General ("OIG") recently issued a preliminary report regarding quality-of-care concerns at skilled nursing facilities ("SNFs"). The report was issued in connection with the OIG's ongoing review of potential abuse and neglect of Medicare beneficiaries in SNFs.

In order to encourage health providers to use electronic medical records (“EHRs”) in lieu of paper records, Congress passed the Medicare and Medicaid Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (“HITECH Act”) in 2009.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ("CMS") recently extended the temporary moratorium on the Medicare enrollment of new home health agencies ("HHAs"), subunits, and branch locations in Michigan.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ("CMS") recently announced that they will delay enforcement penalties related to Phase 2 of their revised nursing home Requirements for Participation (commonly referred to in the industry as the "Mega Rule").

For the past decade, health care has remained one of the most tumultuous and dynamic industries; uncertainty, along with opportunity, are likely to continue in 2017. This three-part series will discuss some of the most important health care trends. This section will focus on some of the largest factors affecting costs and reimbursement in health care: 1) MACRA Implementation; 2) Medicaid Reimbursement; 3) Shifting Payment Models; and 4) Drug Pricing.

On April 14, 2017, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services issued its 2018 Medicare Inpatient Prospective Payment System proposed rule (the “Proposed Rule”). The Proposed Rule was published in the Federal Register on April 28, 2017, and comments will be accepted through June 13, 2017.

The Proposed Rule suggests a number of changes that would affect hospital rates, inpatient quality reporting and readmissions reduction programs. Some of the most significant changes are highlighted below.

On January 9, 2017, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued final rules that establish minimum standards for home health agencies (the “Rules”). According to CMS, the Rules are intended to improve the quality of health care services for Medicare and Medicaid patients and strengthen patients’ rights.

The Rules, which were published in the Federal Register on January 13, 2017, come more than two years after a draft proposal was introduced in October 2014. The Rules are mostly adopted as proposed, with a few clarifying changes. The Rules will become effective on July 13, 2017. This means agencies have less than six months to make changes necessary to comply with the revisions.

Hospice care is intended to help terminally ill beneficiaries continue living with minimal disruptions and to provide support for a beneficiary’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.

Recently, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued a final rule (“Final Rule”) updating the Medicare Conditions of Participation (“CoPs”) for long-term care (“LTC”) facilities. It is the first time in over 15 years that substantial LTC CoP revisions have been released.

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.

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.

The Final Rule on Reporting and Returning of Overpayments (“Final Rule”), 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:

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 & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued several final rules to update certain Medicare reimbursement rates and quality reporting requirements that impact vast numbers of healthcare providers.

A recent Memorandum issued by the Centers for Medicare & 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. 

The Centers for Medicare & 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.  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.  

On July 6, 2016, the Centers for Medicare & 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.

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."

On March 31, 2016, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama granted summary judgment for AseraCare in one of the largest False Claims Act (FCA) lawsuits against a hospice provider. In this whistleblower case, the government sought over $200 million, alleging that defendant AseraCare overbilled Medicare for hospice services by falsely certifying that patients were eligible for hospice care.

The litigation began when six AseraCare employees in Alabama, Wisconsin and Georgia (the "relators") filed whistleblower cases under the FCA. The employees alleged that AseraCare knowingly submitted false claims to Medicare by falsely certifying that patients met the Medicare eligibility requirements for the hospice benefit. In order to be eligible for the Medicare hospice benefit, a patient's physician must certify that "the individual's prognosis is for a life expectancy of 6 months or less if the terminal illness runs its normal course." 42 C.F.R. § 418.22(b)(1). The Department of Justice (DOJ) intervened in January 2012.

The Michigan Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act is back for reconsideration before the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. The act imposes a tax on paid health care claims that is used to fund the state share of Michigan’s Medicaid program. The act had been upheld by the federal appeals court in 2014 against an ERISA preemption challenge brought by an organization representing self-insured group health plans and third-party administrators.

The Supreme Court recently remanded the case to the federal court of appeals for reconsideration in light of a decision holding that a Vermont all-payers claim database statute interfered with the uniform administration of ERISA plans and was therefore preempted.

Modern Health Care has reported that hospitals often lose approximately $176,000 a year per each employed physician.

While this initially seems like a surprising statistic, it is understandable that hospitals lose money when they employ physicians. Physicians in private practice often pay their staff less than comparable hospital employees. When a hospital buys a physician’s practice, the benefit costs typically increase if the staff receives the hospital’s fringe benefit package. Moreover, hospital overhead is typically higher than a private physician practice with regard to HR costs and other support services.

Many systems claim that the only way to manage the health of a given population (which is what ACO and other similar payment structures are requiring) is to be fully integrated with employed physicians, so covering the losses incurred by employing physicians is the necessary cost of preparing for the new paradigm. The ugly, and legally problematic, truth is that most health systems look beyond the income generated by physicians for treating patients but also at income from physician ancillary referrals to justify the economic losses caused by acquiring physician practices. This raises concerns under the Stark law.

On February 11, 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued its long-awaited Final Rule on Reporting and Returning of Overpayments (the “Final Rule”). The Final Rule, which will become effective on March 14, 2016, implements section 1128J(d) of the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”). This Section of the ACA requires that Medicare providers report and return Medicare overpayments by the later of (A) the date that is 60 days after the date on which the overpayment was identified; or (B) the date any corresponding cost report is due, if applicable (the “60-day rule”). According to CMS, the purpose of the Final Rule is to provide “needed clarity and consistency in the reporting and returning of self-identified overpayments.”

CMS issued a Proposed Rule on Reporting and Returning of Overpayments (the “Proposed Rule”) on February 16, 2012. The Final Rule includes some important changes to the provisions of the Proposed Rule. A summary of the major provisions of the Final Rule appears below.

As part of the continuing transition toward a physician payment system based more on quality than quantity, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) recently released a draft Quality Measure Development Plan (the “Plan”). The Plan is authorized by the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015 (“MACRA”), which mandated that CMS post a draft plan for the development of quality measures by January 1, 2016. The Plan explains how CMS will support the transition to the new Merit-Based Incentive Payment System (“MIPS”) and Alternative Payment Models (“APMs”).

On October 29, 2015, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued the final home health prospective payment system (PPS) rule for calendar year (CY) 2016. CMS projects that the impact of the final rule will result in a 1.4 percent (or $260 million) reduction in Medicare payments to home health agencies (HHAs) from 2015 payment levels. 

The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), and a handful of states, recently reached a settlement agreement with Adventist Health System (Adventist), resolving Stark Law issues, as well as allegations in two separate qui tam actions that included false claims. Generally speaking, the Stark Law limits physician referrals of designated health services or “DHS” for Medicare and Medicaid patients in instances where the physician - or an immediate family member of the physician - has a financial relationship with the DHS entity. 

On July 31, 2015, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued final Medicare payment rules for federal fiscal year 2016 (the “Rules”). The Rules affect hospitals, hospices, psychiatric facilities, and rehabilitation facilities. 

In a first-of-its-kind and closely followed case, a U.S. district court denied a New York health system's (Healthfirst’s) motion to dismiss the U.S. government's and State of New York's complaints in intervention under the federal False Claims Act (FCA) and New York state counterpart. This case represents the first time that the government has intervened in an FCA case based upon an allegation that a party violated the "60 day rule." The 60 day rule came into existence with the passage of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2010 and subjects parties to FCA liability for failing to report and refund an overpayment within 60 days of identification, even if the defendant received the payment through no fault of its own.

The case, Kane ex rel. United States et al. v. Healthfirst et al., involves three hospitals that were part of the Healthfirst health system network and provided care to patients that were part of Healthfirst's Medicaid managed care plan. Healthfirst received payments from the New York State Department of Health (DOH) in return for services provided to Medicaid eligible enrollees.

The government's allegations stem from overpayments to Healthfirst as a result of a software glitch. Healthfirst was first questioned about the possible overpayments by the New York State Comptroller's office in 2010. The health system tasked Kane, an employee and the eventual whistleblower in the case, to look into the payments. Five months later Kane emailed Healthfirst management a spreadsheet listing over 900 claims totaling more than $1 million that contained an erroneous billing code that may have led to the overpayments.

Last month, for the first time in over a decade, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) published proposed revisions to the Medicaid managed care regulations. According to CMS, the proposed rule aims to reflect the changes in delivery systems, strengthen the system’s ability to serve diverse populations, and promote greater alignment of Medicaid managed care policies with those of other payers. A summary of the key provisions of the proposed rule appears below.

On April 30, 2015, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued a proposed rule that would update fiscal year (“FY”) 2016 Medicare payment rates and the wage index for hospices serving Medicare beneficiaries (the “Proposed Rule”). CMS estimates that the Proposed Rule would result in a 1.3 percent ($200 million) increase in hospice payments for FY 2016. The highlights of the Proposed Rule are summarized below. 

On February 18, 2015, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) provided further guidance related to the issue of how certain employer health insurance reimbursement arrangements are treated under the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).

As we explained in a previous post, after the Health Insurance Marketplace opened for business, many employers recommended that their employees use it to purchase individual health insurance policies, with the promise that the premium costs would be reimbursed by the employer. In fact, such employee reimbursement strategies were aggressively marketed to employers as a solution to reduce costs and comply with the requirements of the ACA. Little did these employers (and marketers) know, such arrangements exposed the employers to significant penalties under the ACA. 

Prior guidance made clear that such arrangements – whether funded on a pre- or post-tax basis – may be subject to the ACA’s market reforms. Employers that offer reimbursement arrangements that violate the ACA are subject to a $100 per day per affected employee penalty.

Notice 2015-17 clarifies previous guidance and provides transition relief to certain small employers from ACA penalties. Key aspects of the new guidance are noted below.

On March 12, 2015 Foster Swift Attorney Jennifer Van Regenmorter co-presented the Michigan Health Law Update (“Annual Update”) at the 21^st Annual Health Law Institute. The Annual Update provides an overview of the most significant Michigan-specific health law developments from the past year, many of which have been covered on this blog. This article will summarize the highlights from this year’s Annual Update.

The February issue of the American Health Lawyers Association’s AHLA Connections features a list of the top ten issues that will impact healthcare law in 2015. We summarized the first five topics in a previous blog. (Miss our summary of the first five? Please click here.)

Here are the remaining trends to think about: 

The February issue of the American Health Lawyers Association’s AHLA Connections features a top-ten list of the issues that will impact healthcare law in 2015. This two-part series discusses these important trends.

Here are the first five:

The Medicaid program, a public insurance program serving approximately 66 million low-income Americans, is at risk for losing participating providers who claim they are not being compensated fairly for their services. On January 19, 2015, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Armstrong v. Exceptional Child Center, a case that could impact the rights of healthcare providers to sue states for higher Medicaid payments. Five private companies brought suit against the director of Idaho’s health department, arguing that the state unfairly reimbursed them at rates set in 2006, despite the fact that higher rates have since been approved by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”).

Federal law provides that state Medicaid programs must ensure payments are “sufficient to enlist enough providers,” but states have discretion to decide what that means. 42 U.S.C. § 1396a(a)(30)(A) (the “Medicaid Statute”).  Central to this case is whether providers have a cause of action that allows them to seek enforcement of a federal statute.

Accountable Care Organizations (ACO) are still a relatively new concept in the healthcare world. ACOs emerged in 2011 as a result of an initiative by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), as we documented in our blog articles ACO Regulations Finally Released, Braving the New Frontier of Accountable Care Organizations, and Final ACO Regulations are Released - Is this the Beginning of a New Era for Health Care?

While what exactly is an ACO is still kind of nebulous, ACOs generally are groups of doctors, hospitals, and other health care providers, who voluntarily join forces for the purpose of providing coordinated care to Medicare patients. The goal of ACO’s coordinated care is to ensure that patients, especially the chronically ill, receive the correct care at the right time, while avoiding unnecessary duplication of services and preventing medical errors. ACOs that achieve cost saving from providing timely and accurate care that meet quality benchmarks share in Medicare savings. Lofty and worthy goals, no doubt.

On August 5, 2014, the Michigan Supreme Court (the "Court") declined to reconsider its decision to reject two class actions and a qui tam action against CVS Caremark Corporation, Rite Aid of Michigan, Inc., and several other pharmacies. The lawsuits were based on allegations that the companies had overcharged Medicaid for generic prescription drugs.

The underlying case was argued before the Court on January 16, 2014, and the Court ruled against the plaintiffs on June 11, 2014. The plaintiffs argued that the pharmacies violated Michigan Public Health Code, MCL 333.17755(2), which requires a pharmacist to “pass on the savings in cost” when dispensing a generic drug instead of a brand name drug.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services ("CMS") recently announced proposed changes to the Medicare home health prospective payment system (“PPS”) for the 2015 calendar year. CMS is proposing to tighten eligibility requirements for home health services and set a minimum requirement on Home Health Agencies ("HHAs") to prove their effectiveness, as well as revise how much CMS will pay for certain services. These proposed changes are expected to reduce Medicare payments to HHAs by $58 million next year alone, a reduction of .30 percent.

To qualify for the Medicare home health benefit, a beneficiary must be under the care of a physician, have a need for skilled nursing care, physical therapy, speech-language pathology, or continued need for occupational therapy. Further, the beneficiary must be homebound and receive home health services from a Medicare approved agency.

The proposed changes include the following:

Due to regulatory and reimbursement constraints, health care providers are increasingly merging, affiliating, and acquiring other health care entities. In these transactions, the Medicare providers must identify whether a Medicare change of ownership (“CHOW”) will occur. Although it may appear, from a business standpoint, that a change of ownership will occur, the transaction may not necessarily be considered a CHOW for Medicare. Essentially, if the person or entity with ultimate responsibility for the provider changes, typically there will be a Medicare CHOW. Sometimes, but not always, this will be indicated by whether there has been a change in the taxpayer identification number.

CHOWs impact the Medicare provider agreement involved in the sale. Unless the buyer takes steps to affirmatively reject the seller's provider agreement, in a Medicare CHOW, the seller's provider agreement is automatically assigned to the buyer. This provides billing advantages for the buyer without having to enroll as a new Medicare provider, go through the initial enrollment process, and be re-surveyed or re-accredited, which takes several months.  

In March of 2014, the Office of the Inspector General ("OIG") released the "OIG Compendium of Priority Recommendations." The recommendations offered are designed to help current programs for the Department of Health and Human Services ("HHS") run more effectively. The recommendation discussed twenty-five "opportunities" which, if addressed, would help to eliminate fraud and waste among HHS programs. The “opportunities” include the following:

The New York Times (We have identified that the following link is no longer active, and it has been removed) recently reported that the Health and Human Services Department ("HHS") is changing its stance regarding Medicare payments for physical and occupational therapy treatments.  Previously, coverage was only afforded for treatment that actually helped to improve a patient's condition.

On May 7, 2014, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued a Final Rule to reform Medicare regulations identified as “unnecessary, obsolete, counterproductive or excessively burdensome” to hospitals and other health care providers. The changes are part of the Obama administration’s “regulatory lookback” in connection with Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review.” The Final Rule makes a number of clarifications and revisions to policies set forth in both the May 16, 2012 final rule and the February 7, 2013, proposed rule. CMS estimates the reforms could save providers nearly $660 million annually and $3.2 billion over five years.

Below is a brief summary that highlights some of the issues CMS is attempting to address. Please refer to the Final Rule, or contact us, to explore the full extent of the changes in more detail.

Approximately 9 million people in the United States are covered by both Medicare and Medicaid, including seniors with low income and younger people with disabilities. These so-called "dual eligibles" often have complex and costly health needs, and lawmakers have been seeking ways to reduce costs while maintaining and improving care for this segment of the population. Traditionally, coverage and care for dual eligibles has tended to be fragmented and expensive given the challenges posed by separate entities (Medicare and Medicaid) with separate coverage policies.

A number of states, including Michigan, have been working with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to develop proposals to address these challenges, based on new authority in the Affordable Care Act. Through this initiative, 15 states were granted federal funding to help them better coordinate care for dual eligibles. Each of the states, including Michigan, was awarded up to $1 million to help develop new strategies and programs addressing these challenges.

On Thursday, April 3, 2014, the Obama administration announced that it was taking steps to bring its Medicare rules in line with the United States Supreme Court's ruling in US v. Windsor. Specifically, the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) announced that same-sex marriages would be recognized for determining Medicare entitlement and eligibility.

Foster Swift health care attorneys are getting ready to attend the 20^th Annual Health Law Institute March 6 and 7. The Institute provides attorneys with the opportunity to learn about the most recent statutory, regulatory, and case law developments in the health care industry. Co-sponsored by the Health Care Law Section of the State Bar of Michigan, this educational opportunity offers a range of presentations from numerous leaders in the health care legal community.

Omnicare Inc., the nation's largest dispenser of prescription drugs in nursing homes, announced on October 23, 2013, that it has agreed to pay $120 million to settle a whistleblower lawsuit alleging kickbacks to nursing homes.

The whistleblower in the case, an Ohio pharmacist named Donald Gale, worked for Omnicare from 1993 until 2010. The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Cleveland in 2010, accused Omnicare of giving discounts for prescription drugs to nursing homes for certain Medicare patients in return for referrals of other patients at higher prices paid for by the federal government.

The Michigan Medicaid expansion saga has seemingly come to an end, as the Republican-led state Senate narrowly approved Medicaid expansion on Tuesday, August 27 in a 20-18 vote. Eight Republicans joined 12 Democrats to pass a bill that will bring billions of dollars in federal dollars to Michigan to implement a major element of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Under this bill, approximately 400,000 additional Michigan residents will be eligible for Medicaid coverage.

The vote came after lengthy debate in the Senate on the measure, and passed after "eleventh hour" legislative maneuvering. The Michigan House, which previously passed a Medicaid expansion bill, will likely approve the Senate version of the bill next week. If passed, it will be sent to Governor Snyder's desk for his signature.

In early July, we updated our readers regarding the status of the Medicaid expansion debate in Michigan. At that time, a House-passed bill - supported by Governor Snyder - languished in a Senate committee because it was blocked by Senate Republicans who opposed the measure.

So far, July has been a busy month for health care fraud enforcement across the country.

On July 18, Divyesh Patel, owner of Alpine Nursing Care Inc. in North Randall, Ohio, was sentenced to two years in prison after pleading guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit health care fraud and four counts of health care fraud. Patel was also ordered to pay total restitution of $1,939,864 to the Medicaid Program in Ohio. According to court documents, Patel hired Belita Mable Bush as the office manager despite knowing that Bush had been convicted of a health care-related felony and excluded from involvement in billing federal health care programs. From June 1, 2006 to October 18, 2009, Patel conspired with Bush to defraud Medicaid by billing for services that had never been performed or that had been performed by excluded individuals. The conspiracy resulted in losses of approximately $1.9 million to the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Bush was convicted on similar charges and will be sentenced next month.

According to a recent Modern Healthcare article, up to 9 of the 32 Pioneer Accountable Care Organizations ("ACOs") may be leaving the program. Four have already notified providers of such withdrawal. Of the 9, 4 of the departing ACOs tentatively say they will be joining Medicare's lower- risk ACO alternative – the Medicare shared savings program. The deadline for deciding whether or not to remain in the Pioneer program is July 31, 2013.

A key component of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act ("PPACA") involves expanding Medicaid to anyone who earns up to 133 percent of the poverty level. In its landmark ruling last year the Supreme Court, while upholding PPACA, ruled that states could not be compelled to expand the joint federal-state Medicaid program.

State legislatures and governors across the country have considered whether to expand Medicaid, with only 23 states and the District of Columbia implementing an expansion according to the (We have identified that the following link is no longer active, and it has been removed.) Under the PPACA, 100 percent of the cost of the Medicaid expansion will be covered by the federal government from 2014 through 2016. The federal government's contribution will gradually decline until reaching 90 percent in 2022 and beyond.

Governor Rick Snyder announced that his 2014 budget includes support for the expansion of Medicaid eligibility to Michigan residents without insurance. Speaking at a press conference in Lansing on Wednesday, February 6^th, Governor Snyder said expansion would save costs, increase care, and help businesses.

Foster Swift lawyers were well represented at the Annual Meeting of the State Bar of Michigan's Health Care Law Section held on September 19th. Gilbert Frimet, Gary McRay, Jennifer Kildea Dewane, and Nicole Stratton, members of Foster Swift Health Care Law Practice Group, all traveled to Detroit to attend the meeting. 

Health care reform law requires that providers who enrolled in Medicare prior to March 25, 2011, submit enrollment revalidation information upon request by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS") or its contractors.  Any provider that fails to submit the requested revalidation information within 60 days of receiving such a request risks interruption or deactivation of Medicare billing privileges.  Revalidation for all providers who enrolled in Medicare prior to the above date will occur between now and March of 2015 on a steady basis.  Providers can check the lists provided at CMS's website to determine if they were already sent a revalidation notice that was perhaps overlooked in the mail.

On April 26, 2012, the State of Michigan submitted its Integrated Care Proposal (Pilot Program) to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), for review and approval.  The Pilot Program is Michigan’s plan to jointly manage the care of approximately 200,000 residents who are eligible for both Medicare and Medicaid.  The Pilot Program submitted to CMS is not yet available on the Internet for public review.  However, the Department of Community Health has prepared a list of FAQs about the Program on its website.

The Office of Inspector General ("OIG") for the Department of Health and Human Services recently issued an alert, which warned that “physicians who reassign their right to bill the Medicare program and receive Medicare payments by executing the CMS-855R application may be liable for false claims submitted by entities to which they reassigned their Medicare benefits.”  The OIG stressed that physicians remain liable for claims submitted using their provider numbers, even when the claims for services are submitted by another party under a contractual arrangement.  The potential for liability also exists for other types of practitioners who enter into reassignment agreements.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has ruled that Medicare is not limited to the portion of a settlement or verdict designated for medical losses when seeking reimbursement under the Medicare Secondary Payer Act, 42 USC § 1395(b)(2) ("MSP"). Hadden v United States (Lawyers Weekly No. 01-76843).  This ultimately could lead to a chilling effect on settlements.

The latest edition of the Foster Swift Health Care Law Newsletter has just been released.  Topics include Electronic Health Records, Medicare Reimbursement for Resident Research and Hospital Community Needs Assessments.  In order to whet your appetite, below is a brief summary of the articles:

All providers and suppliers that were enrolled with the Medicare program prior to March 25, 2011 will be asked to revalidate their enrollment information in the near future.  According to a statement issued by the Department of Health and Human Services' Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), intermediaries will begin contacting providers and suppliers to do the following:

On August 24, the Michigan legislature passed two bills which are expected to be signed by Governor Snyder, which will be known as the "Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act".  The Health Insurance Claims Assessment Act will assess a 1% health care claims tax on paid health insurance claims in Michigan.  This tax will be paid by health insurers and replaces an existing 6% assessment on Medicaid health claims.  The tax will be assessed for a period of two years, beginning January 1, 2012 and ending January 1, 2014.

The Medicare Data Access for Transparency and Accountability Act ("DATA Act") was introduced in the United States Senate on April 7, 2011.  The DATA Act seeks to make public the Department of Health and Human Services' claims and payment data, which would include data on payments made to medical providers pursuant to the Social Security Act (i.e., Medicare).  Specifically, the data made available to the public would include the following:

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services' ("CMS") long-awaited proposed regulations for the Medicare Shared Savings Program ("Regulation") were released on March 31, 2011.  The Regulation is set to be published in tomorrow's (April 7^th's) Federal Register.  The Regulation is part of a coordinated effort among CMS, the Department of Health & Human Services’ Office of Inspector General, the Federal Trade Commission, United States Department of Justice, and Internal Revenue Service to address the various legal issues facing the Accountable Care Organizations ("ACOs") that will participate in the Medicare Shared Savings Program.  CMS is requesting comments through June 6, 2011, while the other agencies will accept public comment on their respective documents only through May 31, 2011.

In conjunction with a step-up in other fraud and abuse enforcement activities, CMS recently announced new screening procedures, which will be applicable to newly enrolling providers and suppliers as well as to providers and suppliers who are currently enrolled in Medicare, Medicaid and CHIP who revalidate their enrollment information.