Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

EKRA Updates: COVID-19 Testing, Employment Agreements, and More

Client Alert
May 7, 2021

Ever since the Eliminating Kickbacks in Recovery Act (“EKRA”) was passed by Congress in 2018, we have been waiting to see how the law is interpreted and ultimately enforced. As a reminder, EKRA seeks to eliminate kickbacks in return for patient referrals to facilities that treat those overcoming addiction, such as recovery homes, clinical treatment centers, and laboratories.[1] (NOTE: EKRA applies to all laboratories, not just those related to addiction treatment.) It is essentially an expansion of the Anti-Kickback Statute, which only applies to those services that are reimbursable through federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, to now also cover services reimbursable through private insurers.[2]

Guidance and enforcement actions pertaining to EKRA are still sparse.  However, this is a good time to remember that our addiction treatment provider and laboratory clients should keep EKRA top of mind. All compliance policies, training, and risk assessments for addiction treatment homes and centers, as well as all laboratories, should address EKRA. Here is a quick summary of some key developments since EKRA went into effect.

First Criminal Conviction Under EKRA – January 2020

The first criminal conviction under EKRA occurred in January 2020. In that case, a Kentucky woman received $40,000 in kickbacks from the CEO of a toxicology laboratory for referring patients for urine tests at the CEO’s lab.  

COVID-19 Testing – March 2020

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) issued a warning that EKRA also applies to COVID-19 testing sites. On March 30, 2020, the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) released information that a Georgia man, Erik Santos, was prosecuted for receiving kickbacks on a test-by-test basis from testing facilities for referring people to get tested for COVID-19 at their sites.[3] Santos ran his own marketing firm, which was supposed to help people find testing companies for a variety of services, not just for COVID-19. However, when the pandemic hit the United States, he expanded his business to those companies testing for the illness. Specifically, he received kickbacks for referring patients and then bundled them with a respiratory pathogen panel (RPP) test that was unnecessary in determining whether someone has COVID-19.[4]

Profiting off COVID-19 in particular was especially heinous, per the DOJ, because those that are affected by COVID-19 the most are people over the age of 65, a large number of which are covered under Medicare, implicating the Anti-Kickback Statute as well. Therefore, the DOJ stated that “Santos sought to maximize his kickback profits and to bleed federal health care resources at a time when Medicare beneficiaries across the United States were in dire need of coverage for medical treatment and services.”[5]

Employment Agreements – February 2021

In February 2021, a case was heard before the U.S. District Court of Hawaii that involved a medical laboratory, S&J, changing their sales team’s employment agreements from compensation-based to a flat-rate in order to comply with EKRA.[6] One of the employees argued that the laboratory did not have to change its employment agreements, and was subsequently fired for threatening to leave and refusing to sign the new agreement. The employee then sued S&J, and S&J filed counterclaims against him.[7]

Thus far, the only matter that has been resolved is whether or not summary judgment was proper in favor of the employee, for the counterclaims that S&J had brought against him.[8] Therefore, the decision of whether or not it was proper for the employment agreements to be changed to a flat-rate has yet to be decided, but the decision will impact other laboratories and other entities covered under EKRA.

Compliance Plan Updates

All healthcare providers should have a living, breathing compliance plan that addresses key healthcare regulations. For those in the addiction treatment space, as well as laboratories, it is important that these plans include EKRA compliance. 

If you have questions concerning EKRA, policies and forms you can use to comply with EKRA, or healthcare regulatory compliance in general, please contact Jeana M. Singleton at jmsingleton@bmdllc.com or 330-253-2001, or any member of the BMD Healthcare and Hospital Law group.

[1] 18 U.S.C. § 220

[2] JDSUPRA, EKRA Guidance for Clinical Laboratories in the Wake of COVID-19 Testing Surge, https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/ekra-guidance-for-clinical-laboratories-24711/#:~:text=EKRA%20broadly%20prohibits%20soliciting%2C%20receiving,are%20significant%2C%20and%20penalties%20per, (accessed April 22, 2021).

[3] United States Department of Justice, Georgia Man Arrested for Orchestrating Scheme to Defraud Health Care Benefit Programs Related to COVID-19 and Genetic Cancer Testing, (Mar. 30, 2020), https://www.justice.gov/usao-nj/pr/georgia-man-arrested-orchestrating-scheme-defraud-health-care-benefit-programs-related (accessed April 20, 2021).

[4] Id.

[5] Id.

[6] S&G Labs Hawaii, LLC v. Graves, 2021 IER Cases 54692, 2021 WL 621429, at *1 (D. Haw. Feb. 17, 2021), reconsideration denied, No. CIVIL1900310LEKWRP, 2021 WL 1081114 (D. Haw. Mar. 19, 2021)

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

Healthcare LawHospital LawJeana SingletonBMD Healthcare & Hospital Law GroupRachel Stermer
Client Alert

Enhancing Privacy Protections for Substance Use Disorder Patient Records

February 16, 2024On February 8, 2024, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) finalized updated rules to 42 CFR Part 2 (“Part 2”) for the protection of Substance Use Disorder (“SUD”) patient records. The updated rules reflect the requirement that the Part 2 rules be more closely aligned with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) privacy, breach notification, and enforcement rules as mandated by the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020.Client Alert

Columbus, Ohio Ordinance Prohibits Employers from Inquiries into an Applicant’s Salary History

January 30, 2024Effective March 1, 2024, Columbus employers are prohibited from inquiring into an applicant’s salary history. Specifically, the ordinance provides that it is an unlawful discriminatory practice to:Client Alert

The Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board’s Latest Batch of Rules: What Providers Should Know

January 26, 2024The Ohio Chemical Dependency Professionals Board has introduced new rules and amendments, covering various aspects such as CDCA certificate requirements, expanded services for LCDCs and CDCAs, remote supervision, and reciprocity application requirements. Notable changes include revised criteria for obtaining a CDCA certification, expanded services for LCDCs and CDCAs, and updated ethical obligations for licensees and certificate holders, including non-discrimination, confidentiality, and anti-sexual harassment measures.Client Alert

Governor Mike DeWine and The Ohio State University Introduce the SOAR Study on Ohio Mental Illness

January 22, 2024On January 19, Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine and The Ohio State University announced a new research initiative, the State of Ohio Adversity and Resilience (“SOAR”) study, which will investigate all factors influencing Ohio’s mental illness and addiction epidemic.Client Alert

CHANGING TIDES: Summary and Effects of Burnett et. al. v. National Ass’n of Realtors, et. al.

January 17, 2024In April 2019, a class-action Complaint was filed in federal court for the Western District Court for Missouri arguing that the traditional payment agreements employed by many across the United States amounted to conspiracy resulting in the artificial increase in brokerage commissions. Plaintiffs, a class-action group comprised of sellers, argued that they paid excessive brokerage commissions upon the sale of their home as a result of the customary payment structure where Sellers agree to pay the full commission on the sale of their property, with Seller’s agent notating the portion of commission they are willing to pay to a Buyer’s agent at closing on the MLS or other similar system.
Older posts
Newer posts