On July 31, 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued its proposed rule (“Proposed Rule”) for the 2025 Medicare Physician Fee Schedule, which includes implications for telehealth services reimbursable by Medicare. Although the majority of telehealth waivers enacted during the COVID-19 public health emergency (the “PHE”) are set to expire at the end of 2024 in the absence of legislative action, CMS has proposed to leave certain key flexibilities in place, including the allowance for physicians and other practitioners to furnish remote “direct supervision” through their immediate availability via audio-video technology.Continue Reading Key Telehealth Updates in the CY 2025 Physician Fee Schedule Proposed Rule
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS")
Do You Catch Our Drift? Navigating the Waters of Offshoring and Patient Data
With technology rapidly evolving and jurisdictions appearing blurred, it is increasingly important to be mindful of data flow and use. This is particularly true where patient data is being accessed by offshore subcontractors.Continue Reading Do You Catch Our Drift? Navigating the Waters of Offshoring and Patient Data
CMS Proposes to Amend Overpayment Rule-Questions Remain Regarding How the Rule Will be Implemented Should CMS Adopt the False Claims Act’s “Reckless Disregard or Deliberate Ignorance” Standard
On July 10, 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued a proposed rule (“Proposed Rule”) in which it outlined proposed amendments to the suspension provisions and deadlines for reporting and returning Medicare Part A and Part B overpayments, and stated that it is continuing its review and evaluation of previously proposed changes to existing overpayment regulations.Continue Reading CMS Proposes to Amend Overpayment Rule-Questions Remain Regarding How the Rule Will be Implemented Should CMS Adopt the False Claims Act’s “Reckless Disregard or Deliberate Ignorance” Standard
SCOTUS Punts on EMTALA Preemption Question
On June 27, 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed Idaho v. United States on procedural grounds and sent the case back to the Ninth Circuit. By doing so, the Supreme Court reinstated the preliminary injunction issued by the district court and temporarily allows abortions to be performed when necessary to preserve the health of the pregnant woman. Mike Moyle, et al., v. United States, No. 23-726, and Idaho v. United States, No. 23-727. However, by failing to rule on the merits of the case and the core question of whether the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) preempts Idaho law, confusion and uncertainty are likely to continue for healthcare providers and hospitals seeking to provide care for pregnant women.Continue Reading SCOTUS Punts on EMTALA Preemption Question
Texas Court Stays CMS CY2025 Final Rule on Agent and Broker Compensation and Contract Term Restrictions
On Wednesday, a federal court in Texas stayed provisions of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (“CMS”) contract year 2025 Final Rule that amended the longstanding Medicare Advantage (“MA”) and Part D agent and broker compensation methodology and prohibited certain terms in contracts with third party marketing organizations (“TPMOs”). This decision follows two lawsuits filed against CMS and the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) arguing that the Final Rule exceeds CMS’s statutory authority, is arbitrary and capricious, and was promulgated without complying with procedural requirements.[1] The Texas federal judge stayed the effective date of the “Fixed Fee” and “Contract-Terms Restriction” (i.e., 42 C.F.R. § 422.2274(a), (c), (d), (e) and § 423.2274(a), (c), (d), (e)) of the Final Rule during the pendency of the lawsuits, and chose not to remand to the agency, instead promising an expeditious ruling on the merits at the parties’ request.Continue Reading Texas Court Stays CMS CY2025 Final Rule on Agent and Broker Compensation and Contract Term Restrictions
EMTALA: In the Spotlight
Almost 40 years after its passing, the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) remains not only a key consideration for hospitals with emergency departments, but also a significant federal enforcement priority. EMTALA requires hospitals with emergency departments that participate in Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) programs to provide medical screening, stabilizing treatment and transfer for patients with emergency medical conditions (EMCs) and women in labor.Continue Reading EMTALA: In the Spotlight
CMS Issues Final Rule on Medicaid and CHIP Managed Care Access, Finance, and Quality
On April 22, 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a Final Rule (CMS-2439-F), effective…
Continue Reading CMS Issues Final Rule on Medicaid and CHIP Managed Care Access, Finance, and QualityCMS Finalizes Federal Minimum Staffing Standards for Nursing Homes
In a long-awaited and controversial Final Rule posted on April 22, 2024,[1] the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) adopted new federal minimum staffing requirements that will require long-term care facilities to (1) ensure the presence of a registered nurse (RN) on-site 24 hours per day, seven days per week; and (2) provide a minimum of 3.48 total nurse staffing hours per resident day (HPRD), which includes at least 0.55 HPRD for RNs and 2.45 HPRD for nurse aides (NAs). Despite industry-wide opposition to federal minimum staffing standards and the lack of any new funding, CMS believes that these new standards will increase staffing in more than 79 percent of nursing facilities nationwide. Notably, the Final Rule establishes staffing requirements that exceed the current minimum staffing standards in all 50 states.Continue Reading CMS Finalizes Federal Minimum Staffing Standards for Nursing Homes
CMS Issues CY2025 Medicare Advantage and Part D Final Rule
On April 4, 2024, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) issued the contract year 2025 (CY2025) Medicare Advantage and Part D final rule (the “Final Rule”). In addition to finalizing its CY2025 proposed rule, CMS also addressed several key provisions that remained from the CY2024 proposed rule. According to CMS’ Fact Sheet, the Final Rule builds on existing Biden-Harris Administration policies to strengthen protections and guardrails, promote healthy competition, and ensure Medicare Advantage and Part D plans best meet the needs of enrollees. The Final Rule also promotes access to behavioral health care providers, promote equity in coverage, and improve supplemental benefits.Continue Reading CMS Issues CY2025 Medicare Advantage and Part D Final Rule
CMS Announces Medicare Advantage and Part D Rates for CY 2025
On April 1st, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) announced its Medicare Advantage (“MA”) Capitation Rates and Part C and Part D Payment Policies for Calendar Year (“CY”) 2025. This announcement builds on the Advanced Notice of Methodological Changes for CY 2025 for MA Capitation Rates and Part C and Part D Payment Policies (“Advanced Notice”) that CMS released on January 31, 2024. Continue Reading CMS Announces Medicare Advantage and Part D Rates for CY 2025
Closing the Loopholes: The Biden-Harris Administration’s Action Against “Junk Insurance”
On March 28, 2024, the Biden-Harris Administration released final rules intended to lower health care costs and protect consumers from being induced into purchasing so-called “junk insurance” policies (the “Final Rules”).[1] According to the press release, the Final Rules are intended to close loopholes that have permitted “junk insurance” issuers to mislead consumers into buying highly restricted and discriminatory plans that provide inadequate coverage when consumers need it the most. The Final Rules primarily realign federal definitions with intended scopes of coverage and increase transparency to allow consumers to make informed, beneficial choices about their health coverage for enhanced consumer protection.Continue Reading Closing the Loopholes: The Biden-Harris Administration’s Action Against “Junk Insurance”