Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

DOJ Updates Corporate Compliance Plan Guidance

Client Alert
June 18, 2020

With the passage of the Affordable Care Act in 2010, all healthcare providers were required to adopt and implement a corporate compliance plan. Historically, having an effective corporate compliance plan in place has been key to defending healthcare providers in fraud and abuse actions by Medicare, Medicaid, and commercial payers. Over the past couple of years, the U.S. Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Criminal Division has increased the number of prosecutions against U.S. corporations, including healthcare providers. Earlier this month, the DOJ’s Criminal Division updated its “Evaluation of Corporate Compliance Programs” guidance to educate prosecutors on how a corporate compliance program will be evaluated going forward. https://www.justice.gov/criminal-fraud/page/file/937501/download

If a healthcare provider is able to actively demonstrate its commitment to a culture of compliance as reflected in a comprehensive program, an Assistant U.S. Attorney (hereinafter “AUSA”) may elect to not file charges and/or may seek reduced charges. Regardless if an AUSA does bring formal charges, the new guidance allows a federal judge to impose a reduced sentence. Now, more than ever, it’s critically important that healthcare providers have an effective compliance program in place as it materially affects the penalties imposed for healthcare fraud and abuse violations. Having an effective compliance program can mean the difference in whether criminal charges are brought (which could result in prison time or large fines).

The June 2020 update from the DOJ covers a variety of specific topics, but essentially focuses on three questions in relation to an organization’s compliance program: 

  1. Is the compliance program well designed?
  2. Is the program applied earnestly and in good faith?
  3. Does the program work in practice?

In other words, an effective compliance plan must be a “living, breathing document” and not just a generic set of policies and procedures that is left forgotten on a shelf or computer system. 

A successful compliance program should focus on the provider’s internal compliance training program. The DOJ described an appropriately tailored training as “the hallmark of a well-designed compliance program” and periodic training helps to ensure that a compliance program is integrated into the organization. Relevant employees, as well as, senior managers (and in some situations, agents and business partners) should have training provided by the company regularly so that they may properly communicate and implement compliance policies and procedures. Furthermore, the organization must pay special attention to providing employees with the tools in which to seek assistance and/or respond to any potential compliance issues.

Throughout the update, the DOJ identifies specific areas where AUSA’s should focus in their determination of whether a compliance program is well-designed, earnestly implemented and effective. Two of these areas assist providers in designing, implementing and improving their compliance-based programs.

  1. Risk-Bask Training

Providers are expected to conduct an in-depth analysis of which employees require training and on what subjects. The organization should provide tailored trainings which reflect the specific risks in the work environment. Any employee who works in a high-risk role, has been involved in prior misconduct, or is senior management should receive ongoing trainings. 

  1. Form/Content/Effectiveness of Training

AUSA’s will not be impressed by merely having a program designed. They will instead focus on the form in which the training is being provided, including who is presenting the trainings. Real-world compliance lapses and testing by companies should be frequent.

The attorneys of Brennan, Manna & Diamond’s healthcare team are available to assist healthcare providers in drafting, implementing and improving their corporate compliance programs, trainings, and implementation processes.  Please contact Jeana Singleton at jmsingleton@bmdllc.com or 330-253-2001, Richard Crosby at rlcrosby@bmdpl.com or 614-246-7500, or your BMD healthcare attorney for more information. 

DOJDepartment of JusticeHealthcare ProvidersComplianceCompliance Planrisk-bask trainingeffectiveness of trainingAUSACompliance Programcompliance plan guidanceevaluation of corporate compliance programhealthcare fraud and abusehealthcare abuse violationhealthcare fraud violationmedicaremedicaidcommercial payersBMD Attorney Richard CrosbyJeana Singleton
Client Alert

Laboratory Specimen Collection Arrangements with Contract Hospitals - OIG Advisory Opinion 22-09

May 3, 2022On April 28, 2022, the Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Inspector General (“OIG”) published an Advisory Opinion[1] in which it evaluated a proposed arrangement where a network of clinical laboratories (the “Requestor”) would compensate hospitals (each a “Contract Hospital”) for specimen collection, processing, and handling services (“Collection Services”) for laboratory tests furnished by the Requestor (the “Proposed Arrangement”). The OIG concluded that the Proposed Arrangement would generate prohibited remuneration under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute (“AKS”) if the requisite intent were present. This is due to both the possibility that the proposed per-patient-encounter fee would be used to induce or reward referrals to Requestor and the associated risk of improperly steering patients to Requestor.Client Alert

Property Owner Protection from Tax Valuation Challenges

April 29, 2022New legislation provides significant new protections for commercial property owners against challenges to valuation primarily by local school boards and prohibiting side agreements to avoid tax valuation changes. The Ohio Legislature has approved House Bill 126 which will go into effect July 2022 but will effectively apply to the 2023 tax valuation year.Client Alert

No Surprises Act Update: The IDR Portal is Open

April 25, 2022The No Surprises Act (“NSA”) became effective January 1, 2022, and has been the subject of lawsuits and criticisms since its inception. The goals of the No Surprises Act are to shield patients from surprise medical bills, provide to uninsured and self-pay patients good faith estimates of charges, and create a process to resolve payment disputes over surprise bills, which arise most typically in emergency care settings. We have written about Part I and Part II of the NSA previously. This update concerns the Independent Dispute Resolution (“IDR”) procedure created by Part II but applicable to claims covered by Part I. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) finally opened the Portal for providers to submit disputes to the IDR process following some updated guidance regarding the arbitration process itself.Client Alert

Updated FAQs for the No Surprises Act - Good Faith Estimates

April 7, 2022The No Surprises Act (“NSA”) became effective January 1, 2022. Meant to protect consumers from surprise medical bills, the new law is good for consumers, but vexatious for health care providers and facilities. One particular source of frustration is the operationalization of the Good Faith Estimate (“GFE”) requirement, governed by Part II of the regulations that implement the NSA. The GFE requirements apply broadly to all healthcare providers and facilities that practice within the scope of their state-issued license.Client Alert

IMPORTANT PRF UPDATE! HRSA Allows Providers the Opportunity to Correct Missed Period 1 Reporting

April 7, 2022Late Wednesday, April 6, HRSA announced that it was going to allow providers with extenuating circumstances that prevented them from preventing a completed Period 1 Report to submit a Request to Report Late Due to Extenuating Circumstances.
Older posts
Newer posts