With the OIG’s May 30, 2025, announcement that they are seeking $454.4 million in funding to fight healthcare fraud, healthcare providers can expect increased governmental scrutiny despite Trump’s budget cutbacks and staff layoffs.  The OIG justifies its budget request by pointing out that for every $1 invested, there is an expected return of $11 in government recoveries and receivables, which fuels the Trump administration’s fight on fraud, waste, and abuse in health care. What this means for health care providers is intensified scrutiny and likely use of AI as a tool to evaluate big data to identify potential false claims, fraud, outliers, etc. Considering the OIG’s 90-page new General Compliance Guidance, healthcare providers’ self-policing strategies and internal audits are more important than ever as the heat turns up on alleged fraud and false claims.

In mid-February 2019, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”), Innovation Center and the Department for Health and Human Services (“HHS”) announced a ground-breaking payment and medical services initiative for ambulance providers called “Emergency Triage, Treat and Transport” (the “ET3”). This new model is the first step in allowing providers of Emergency Medical Services to finally “take off the gloves” to fully utilize both their medical skills and unique patient knowledge to implement a more efficient and effective care model.

Billing for medical services is never easy. Despite attempts by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) to simplify the rule regarding “incident to” billing for Medicare services, it remains misunderstood by a large swath of providers. This proves problematic, as incorrect billing practices may lead to overpayments and False Claims Act violations. Billing for “incident to” services is an important mechanism to reflect the actual value of mid-level services provided under the specific plan of a physician. When properly followed, the “incident to” rules allow physicians to bill for services provided by non-physician practitioners as if they were performed by the physician at physician reimbursement rates. Additionally, the non-physician provider can be an employee, an independent contractor or even a leased employee, provided that they are supervised by a physician and the requirements are met. Because of the confusing nature of allowing a physician to bill for services he or she did not directly provide to the patient, serious landmines exist that can create problems if the rules are not scrupulously followed and documented.

Similar to rules providing billing opportunities for chronic care management (as discussed in this McBrayer blog post), relatively new Medicare funds for Transitional Care Management (“TCM”) provide a new path for providers to supplement their Medicare practice with payment for services they may already provide. Beginning in 2013, Medicare, for the first time, allowed providers to bill for thirty days of TCM, incentivizing post-discharge care with an aim to prevent hospital readmission. The Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) requires five specific elements of TCM to be met before provider reimbursement. Those elements merit review and brief discussion today, while Thursday’s post will discuss five important points of consideration with regard to TCM.

The new enrollment and revalidation requirements for providers and suppliers for Medicare/Medicaid participation was previously  detailed on this blog. As promised as a follow-up, this blog post will describe enrollment best practices and tips for ensuring that enrollment or revalidation is properly accomplished. Not only is initial enrollment now more onerous, but revalidation is required for all physicians and other providers/suppliers who were enrolled before March 25, 2011, which generally means that all physicians and physician groups must complete the re-enrollment process. A failure to re-enroll means that CMS will de-activate payment until a successful re-enrollment process is completed. In some cases, CMS may even revoke participation. Thus, it is crucial that physicians, providers, and suppliers get it right the first time.

In 2011, the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”), as part of the reform instituted by the Affordable Care Act, required that home health agencies and hospice patients receive a face-to-face visit (at specified time periods) by a physician or nurse practitioner to ensure that they continue to meet Medicare and Medicaid eligibility criteria.

Earlier this week, I discussed CMS’ final rule on the prospective payment for acute care and long-term care hospital inpatient services for fiscal year 2014. The final rule provides guidance to physicians on how to designate a patient as inpatient or outpatient and the impact of the designation on Medicare Part A or Part B coverage. This blog will discuss the two midnight rule.

In August, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) announced a final rule regarding the prospective payment for acute care and long-term care hospital inpatient services for fiscal year 2014. This rule becomes effective on October 1, 2013.

In 2012, thirty-two organizations were selected to participate as “Pioneers” in a pilot Accountable Care Organization (“ACO”) program created through the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”).  The program’s goals were to revolutionize the health system and reduce medical costs by basing physician and hospital pay on quality rather than quantity.

The Supreme Court’s decision upholding the Affordable Care Act supports The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) different programs for the development of Accountable Care Organizations (ACOs).  In Kentucky, we are beginning to see these organizations emerge in different models.