Blog Series Part 6: CMS Proposed Rule on Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage, Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, Medicaid Fee-For-Service and Medicaid Managed Care Programs for Years 2020 and 2021

Dual Special Needs Plans

This part 6 of our 7 part series focuses on the provisions regarding dual special needs plans (“D-SNPs”) released by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) in the proposed rule issued on November 1, 2018 (the “Proposed Rule”). D-SNPs enroll individuals who are entitled to both Medicare and medical assistance from a state under Medicaid. States cover some Medicare costs, depending on the particular state and the member’s eligibility. As reported by the Kaiser Family Foundation in “Medicare Advantage 2017 Spotlight: Enrollment Market Update,” Gretchen Jacobson, Anthony Damico, Tricia Neuman, and Marsha Gold ( June 6, 2017), enrollment in special needs plans increased from 2.1 million in 2016 to 2.3 million in 2017 – and 81% of members of these plans are enrolled in D-SNPs. Continue Reading

The New California Regulatory Scheme for Pharmacy Benefit Managers

By Eric Klein, Lynsey Mitchel and John Tilton* on November 13, 2018 Posted in Healthcare Law, Prescription Drug Issues

California recently passed Assembly Bill 315 to create greater regulatory oversight of pharmacy benefit managers (“PBMs”). ^[1] The bill requires PBMs to provide more transparency regarding their operations. PBMs will have to register with the California Department of Managed Health Care (“DMHC”) and provide new disclosures to the purchasers of their services. The bill will also establish a new pilot project and task force run by the DMHC to analyze how PBMs are affecting the pharmaceutical market. Continue Reading

Midterms Bring New Focus to Healthcare

By Jordan Grushkin, Matthew Goldman and Samuel Gilkeson on November 12, 2018 Posted in Affordable Care Act (ACA), Healthcare

Tuesday’s midterm elections showed that healthcare is now a top issue among voters, according to exit polls. In an NBC News poll, healthcare was the top issue for a plurality of voters, ahead of the economy, immigration, and gun policy. [1] As voters made their voices heard, they also helped to solidify the position of the Affordable Care Act (“ACA”) nationwide. While the country waits for final vote counts to be tallied, three key takeaways have emerged: Continue Reading

Blog Series Part 5: CMS Proposed Rule on Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage, Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, Medicaid Fee-For-Service, and Medicaid Managed Care Programs for 2020 and 2021

By Sean M. Cuddihy on November 5, 2018 Posted in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), Healthcare Legislation and Rulemaking, Medicare Advantage

Part D Plan Sponsors’ Access to Medicare Parts A and B Claims Data Extracts

As detailed in previous posts in this series, one major objective that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) addressed in a proposed rule issued November 1, 2018 (the “Proposed Rule”), was to implement new Social Security Act provisions that Congress added in the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (“BBA”). One such provision will open fee-for-service Medicare data up to prescription drug benefit (“Part D”) plans. Continue Reading

New California Law re HMO M&A

By Lynsey Mitchel, Matthew Goldman, Jordan Grushkin and Melissa Gertler* on November 2, 2018 Posted in Healthcare, Mergers and Acquisitions

On September 7, 2018, Governor Jerry Brown signed into law Assembly Bill No. 595, A.B. 595, which amends the California Health and Safety Code to increase oversight by the California Department of Managed Health Care (“DMHC”) of health care service plan mergers and acquisitions (M&A). (See, Cal. Health & Safety Code §§1399.65 and 1399.66). The law allows DMHC to reject M&A transactions that DMHC determines will have an adverse impact on, among other things, competition, subscribers and enrollees, and the stability of the health care delivery system. In addition, DMHC will be empowered to impose conditions that it believes will protect subscribers and enrollees and the public interest as a condition of approval of the transaction (as further described below). Continue Reading

Blog Series Part 4: CMS Proposed Rule on Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage, Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, Medicaid Fee-For-Service, and Medicaid Managed Care Programs for Years 2020 and 2021

By Kathleen Stratton on November 1, 2018 Posted in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), Healthcare Legislation and Rulemaking, Medicare Advantage

Quality Improvement Programs

The proposed rule issued November 1, 2018 (the “Proposed Rule”) by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) includes two technical changes to 42 C.F.R. Part 422. The first change involves a clarification regarding the accreditation “deeming” standard for Medicare Advantage (“MA”) quality improvement programs. The second change, also related to accreditation, simply proposes the deletion of language regarding the soon to be eliminated requirement that MA organizations (“MAOs”) conduct quality improvement projects. Continue Reading

Blog Series Part 3: CMS Proposed Rule on Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage, Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, Medicaid Fee-For-Service, and Medicaid Managed Care Programs for Years 2020 and 2021

By Michael Paddock on November 1, 2018 Posted in Healthcare Legislation and Rulemaking, Medicare Advantage

Medicare Advantage and Part D Preclusion List

The proposed rule issued November 1, 2018 (the “Proposed Rule”) by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) includes a number of regulatory changes to the manner in which providers are to be included on CMS’ Medicare Advantage and Part D “Preclusion List”, providers’ appeal rights prior to such inclusion, the timeframes that providers must remain on the list, and the financial impact to beneficiaries and claimants who receive and provide items and services furnished or prescribed by a precluded provider. Continue Reading

Blog Series Part 2: CMS Proposed Rule on Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage, Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, Medicaid Fee-For-Service, and Medicaid Managed Care Programs for Years 2020 and 2021

By Theresa Thompson on November 1, 2018 Posted in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), Healthcare Information Technology, Medicare Advantage

Requirements for MA Plans Offering Additional Telehealth Benefits

As part of the proposed rule issued November 1, 2018 by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) regarding updates to the Medicare Advantage (“MA”) and Medicare prescription drug benefit programs, CMS addressed expanding the ability of MA plans to offer telehealth benefits to their enrollees. The proposed telehealth regulations come on the heels of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 and implement § 50323 related to “additional telehealth benefits.” Continue Reading

Blog Series: CMS Proposed Rule on Policy and Technical Changes to the Medicare Advantage, Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit, Medicaid Fee-For-Service, and Medicaid Managed Care Programs for Years 2020 and 2021

By Christine Clements on October 29, 2018 Posted in Healthcare Legislation and Rulemaking, Medicare Advantage

On October 26, 2018, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) released for viewing a proposed rule that includes significant changes for Medicare Advantage organizations (“MAOs”), Part D prescription drug plan sponsors (“PDPs”), Medicaid managed care organizations (“MCOs”), and the providers and suppliers that contract with them (the “Proposed Rule”). CMS anticipates that the Proposed Rule will be formally published in the Federal Register on November 1, 2018. Continue Reading

How Broad is the Managed Care Safe Harbor?

By Christine Clements on October 26, 2018 Posted in Fraud and Abuse, Medicaid

In Advisory Opinion No. 18-11, the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General (the “OIG”) addressed a Medicaid managed care organization’s (“MCO”) proposal to pay its contracted providers and clinics (“Network Providers”) to increase the amount of Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic, and Treatment (“EPSDT”) services they provide to the MCO’s Medicaid members. Under the State’s MCO program, MCOs are required to provide EPSDT services and face liquidated damages for failing to do so. Under the proposed arrangement, the MCO would provide per member incentive payments (“Incentive Payments”) to Network Providers that meet certain benchmarks for increasing the amount of EPSDT services they provide to MCO members. The amount of the Incentive Payments would be determined based on the percentage increase of EPSDT services provided to the MCO’s existing members from one year to the next. Continue Reading

By scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to browse our website, you consent to our use of cookies as described in our Cookie and Advertising Policy. If you do not wish to accept cookies from our website, or would like to stop cookies being stored on your device in the future, you can find out more and adjust your preferences here.

Agree