• Home
  • About Us
  • Services
    • Financial Improvement
    • Denial Management / Revenue Cycle
    • Physician Advisor Services
    • Clinical Operations / Improvement
    • Quality Improvement Programs
    • Accreditation
    • Human Resources / Interim Staffing
    • Training
  • Case Studies
  • FAQ
  • News
    • News and Events
    • Newsletter Sign Up
    • Read Newsletters
    • View our Blog
  • Careers
  • Library
  • Contact Us
  • Login
    • PRS
    • PM
    • SP
 

Connect

Recent Posts

  • What the Hill? The Latest in Healthcare News from Capitol Hill
  • Consumer-Driven Health Plans – What Should You Consider When Choosing?
  • Success of PCMH Could Mean Expansion
  • Move Fast or Slow on Insurance Exchanges…
  • Healthcare Reform: Insurance Rate Battle Brewing

Archives

  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • January 2011
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • April 2008
  • March 2008

Categories

  • Accreditation
  • Clinical Operations Improvement
  • Compliance
  • financial
  • Gues Post
  • Health Care Reform
  • Health Insurance
  • Healthcare Fraud and Abuse
  • Healthcare Prevention
  • Learning Series
  • News and Events
  • Quality Improvement Programs
  • Services
  • Uncategorized

Author Archives: Vickie Axsom Brown

RAC Learning Series Part Four – Demystifying the Query (Audit) Process

Posted on January 17, 2012 by Vickie Axsom Brown

Demystifying the Query (Audit) Process

Vickie Axsom-Brown, Senior Consultant, BHM Healthcare Solutions

RAC Audit Image

BHM assists organizations mitigate RAC audit risk

Demystifying the Query Development process is key to every health care provider’s success regardless of the type of services delivered.  It requires an understanding of the resources, references and tools used by RACs so providers can maintain their organization’s preparation for CMS audit “participation.”

The tools used by RACs are vast and may look like alphabet soup.  The “New Issue” process begins with the responsible team’s identification of potential billing/reimbursement issues.  The typical “New Issues” team is comprised of experienced claims’ processing representatives with Part A, Part B, DME, pharmacy, home health, hospice, hospitals, providers, SNFs, et. al. specific backgrounds. This team uses their experience and multiple resources to identify potential issues for which analysis will be done to validate issue value.

 

In addition to experience, the following data sources are used (the alphabet soup):

 

  • Raw Data – RAC database, routine CMS RAC Data Warehouse downloads, industry trends…
  • Outcome Reports – CERTs[i], OIG[ii], PEPPER[iii], GAO[iv], QIOs[v]….
  • Industry Experience[vi] & Information – AAHAM, AHA, AMA, AAASC, JCAHO, JCAHACO…
  • Policy/Rules and Regulations[vii] – LCDs, NCDs, CRs[viii], IOMs, MLN…
  • CMS Programs – ZPICS[ix], DOJ[x], Vulnerabilities Reports[xi], Carriers, FIs, MACs

 

Information is collected and evaluated to determine potential improper payment trends, type of provider(s) involved, resources and financial impacts, and projected outcomes.  Data are analyzed by statisticians and/or SAS analysts to define the each of these elements by targeted provider type(s). Once analytical results are provided to the New Issue team, the list of improper payments is prioritized and the New Issue submission type/preparation begins.

 

Different submission criteria exist for New Issue automated reviews (examples of findings and results required) and New Issue complex reviews (medical record documentation and evaluation findings required).  The RACs preparation and submission processes vary due to CMS Review Board supportive information/analytical requirements and can range from 30 to 120 days preparation prior to RAC submission to CMS.

 

All New Issues require complete data presentation with projected Medicare Trust Fund returns.  The CMS New Issues submission package is well-defined and must meet all specifications before presentation to the CMS Review Board.  If a New Issue package fails any defined criterion, it is returned to the RAC for re-submission.  This means the RAC loses a place in line for the CMS Review Board’s review/approval of a New Issue. 2010, the CMS New Issues Review Board had an ever-increasing New Issues backlogs resulting in their encouragement that all RACs collaborate on a list of New Issues for Board consideration.  RACs pursued the recommendation and drafted eight (8) New Issues for collaborative submission to the CMS Review Board.

 

Upon receipt of a New Issue package, designated CMS Review Board representative(s), review(s) the package for submission compliance, content, New Issue review type (automated/complex), value (financial returns), and review submission direction.  The New Issue package may be presented to the RAC Validation Contractor for assessment and recommendations and/or to the CMS Review Board (physicians, policy makers, et. al.).  Once reviewed, the CMS Board generates a decision:

1-      Approved as submitted.

2-      Approved with modifications.

3-      Approved with defined limitations.

4-      Denied for current review period, resubmit in one year.

5-      Denied.

 

Approved New Issues are posted on the RACs’ provider portals and are available for the RACs inclusion in future audits.

 


[i] Comprehensive Error Rate Testing (CERT) Program reports (www.cms.gov/CERT/CR/LIST.asp.  Lists reports by hear and Report Type, e.g., Over utilized codes, CERT findings, Use corrective actions to monitor improper payment findings.  This website usually accessible from Carrier/FI/MAC Website link.

 

[ii] Office of Inspector General Reports (www.hhs.gov/reports.asp

 

[iii] Program for Evaluating Payment Patterns Electronic Report (PEPPER); Published by TMF Health Quality Initiative under contract with CMS…Audio on demand for Pepper information; PEPPER 2011: Identify Changes, Address Vulnerabilities and Be Audit-Ready

 

[iv] General Accounting Office “GAO” Reports (www.gpoaccess.gov)

 

[v] Quality Improvement Organization Reports, www.cms.gov/QualityImprovementOrgs/

 

[vi] Inpatient, Ambulatory, Outpatient, DME, SNF, CORF, Rehab, Hospice, Physician, et.al.; www.beckerhospitalreview.com;  high risk coding errors, duplicate claims, pricing errors, billing excessive units, failure to meet LOC requirements,  payment errors, SNF consolidated billing, cross over coverage (ambulance, medications, ), questionable level of care, improper diagnosis codes, mismatched codes, et.al.

 

[vii] Local Coverage Determinations (LCDs), National Coverage Determinations (NCDs) www.cms.gov/medicare-coverage-database/

 

 

[viii] CMS Change Requests www.cms.gov/Transmittals/downloads

 

[ix] Zone Program Integrity contractor – ZPICs (former Program Safeguard Contractors) www.zpicaudit.com

 

[x] Department of Justice, www.justice.gov/oig/reports/index.htm

 

[xi] Vulnerability Reports (multiple references); www.gao.gov – Spotlight or Key Issues section  or www.gao.gov/docsearch/repandtest.html

 

 


Posted in Learning Series | Tagged compliance in healthcare, healthcare fraud and abuse, RAC Appeals, RAC audits, Recovery Audit Contractos | Leave a comment

RAC Learning Series Part Two – New RAC Statement of Work

Posted on January 5, 2012 by Vickie Axsom Brown

RAC ALERT

NEW RAC STATEMENT OF WORK

RAC Audit Wheel

BHM assists organizations prepare for RAC audits

Vickie Axsom-Brown, Senior Consultant, BHM Healthcare Solutions

In the recent year a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Cms.hhs.gov- Recovery Audit Contractor Update was generated.   The new update was the 090111 Recovery Audit Program Final SOW [PDF, 292 KB] (an updated State of Work for the Recovery Auditors).  Several key areas were revised, updated and/or clarified.  A summary of these include:

  • Recovery Audit Contractors revised to Recovery Auditors.
  • Additions and Clarifications that the Recovery Audit Program includes ALL contracts, all types of claims with the focus being on lower error rates and identifying improper payments with the greatest impact on the Trust Fund to prevent misunderstandings. Medicaid RAC documents have referred to Medicare Recovery Auditor focus limitations as acute care facilities.
  • Addition of a new type of review – “semi-automated review” a new 2 part review process which can include both automated and complex reviews.  This review type does not pay providers for medical record submissions.
  • Clarification of DRG Validation versus Clinical Validation by adding definitions.
  • Addition of language for “Allowance for a Discussion Period” to clarify this process – e.g., an escalation process for the discussion period, where a physician (or a physician employed by the provider) may request to speak to the Recovery Auditor physician and new directives that once an appeal is filed with the MAC, the discussion period must be discontinued.  This minimizes duplications of effort by the Recovery Auditor and MAC.
  • Change to the Recovery Auditor website’s listing of new issues whereas the new issue list must be sortable by a minimum provider type by June 1, 2011.
  • Addition that CMS reserves the right to share new issues with all CMS review entities. (Collaboration)
  • Clarification of Recovery Auditors and MACs roles.
  • Addition of Recovery Auditor activities when CMS refers potential improper payment notices (Technical Direction Letter) to them.
  • Further clarification on the Adjustment Process as it relates to associated findings.

 

More information to follow….

 

 

 

 

 


[i]  Medicaid RAC FAQ, Question 13, “You stated that the scope of the Medicaid RACs must be “broad”.  Can you expand on this?”


Posted in Learning Series | Tagged compliance in healthcare, healthcare fraud and abuse, RAC audits, Recovery Audit Contractor | 4 Comments

RAC Learning Series Part One – RAC Statement of Work

Posted on January 3, 2012 by Vickie Axsom Brown

RAC ALERT

NEW RAC STATEMENT OF WORK

image of RAC Audit suvival guide

BHM provides key 'survival" preparation for RAC audits

Vickie Axsom-Brown, Senior Consultant, BHM Healthcare Solutions

 Recently,  a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) Cms.hhs.gov- Recovery Audit Contractor Update was generated.   The new update was the  090111 Recovery Audit Program Final SOW [PDF, 292 KB] (an updated State of Work for the Recovery Auditors).  The following areas were updated:

  1. Page 1 – Recovery Audit Contractor Program changed to Recovery Audit Program with contractors called “Recovery Auditors.”
  2. Page 1 – Addition – “The CMS expects Recovery Auditors to review all claim types to assist the Agency in lowering the error rate and in identifying improper payments that have the greatest impact on the Trust Fund.”
  3. Page 1 – Addition – “…review of all claim and provider types and a review of claims/providers that have a high propensity for error based on the CERT program and other CMS analysis.”
  4. Page 6 – Addition (collaboration for program improvements) – “The Recovery Auditors will identify and report LCDs that can benefit from central office evaluation and identify their characteristics (out of date, technically flawed, ambiguous, and/or superficial). Identification of these LCDs will improve the integrity of the Medicare program and the performance of the Recovery Auditor program.”
  5. Page 7 – Additional clarification to address large organizations who have multi-sited locations across Recovery Auditors – “Unless otherwise directed by CMS through technical direction, the claims being analyzed for this award will be all fee-for-service claims processed in Region ___ regardless of the providers’ or suppliers’ physical locations. Exception: Claims processed by the legacy fiscal intermediary Wisconsin Physician Services (WPS) will be subject to review exclusively by the Recovery Auditor with jurisdiction over the provider’s physical location.”
  6. Pages 8-9 Improper Payments INCLUDED in the State of Work include the list of provider types to eliminate  misunderstandings.  Medicaid RAC documents have referred to Medicare Recovery Auditor focus limitations as acute care facilities. [i]
  7. Page 20 – New Review Type – “Through ‘semi-automated review’ which entails an automated review using claims data and potential human review of a medical record or other documentation.”
  8. Page 22 – “Semi-Automated Review is a two-part review. The first part is the identification of a billing aberrancy through an automated review using claims data. This aberrancy has high indexes of suspicion to be an improper payment. The second part includes a Notification Letter that is sent to the provider explaining the potential billing error that is identified. The letter also indicates that the provider has 45 days to submit documentation to support the original billing. If the provider decides not to submit documentation, or if the documentation provided does not support the way the claim was billed, the claim will be sent to the Medicare claims processing contractor for adjustment and a demand letter will be issued. However, if the submitted documentation does support the billing of the claim, the claim will not be sent for adjustment and the provider will be notified that the review has been closed. This type of review is to be used in which a clear CMS policy does not exist but in most instances the items and services as billed would be clinically unlikely or not consistent with evidence-based medical literature.
  9. Page 22 – “The Recovery Auditor is not required to reimburse providers for the additional documentation submitted for semi-automated reviews.”
  10. Page 23 – Section Addition – “DRG Validation vs. Clinical Validation – DRG Validation is the process of reviewing physician documentation and determining whether the correct codes, and sequencing were applied to the billing of the claim; Clinical validation is a separate process, which involves a clinical review of the case to see whether or not the patient truly possesses the conditions that were documented.

[i]  Medicaid RAC FAQ, Question 13, “You stated that the scope of the Medicaid RACs must be “broad”.  Can you expand on this?”


Posted in Learning Series | Tagged compliance in healthcare, healthcare fraud and abuse, RAC audits | 2 Comments

RAC Learning Series Part Three – After the Demand Letter Receipt……

Posted on December 21, 2011 by Vickie Axsom Brown

RAC 201 – After the Demand Letter Receipt……

RAC Audit checklist image

BHM assists clients prepare for RAC Audit.

Vickie Axsom-Brown, Senior Consultant, BHM Healthcare Solutions

The notification letter arrives….What next?

FIRST, review the notification letter to determine if it is an overpayment or underpayment notice.  If it is an underpayment notice, there is no rebuttal (discussion) or redetermination (appeal) process because none is needed.  The amount the claims processing contractor (CPC) reimbursed on the claim(s) in the notification was less than the correct Medicare reimbursement amount; therefore, additional payment is due to the billing entity. While this notification seems very clear, the discussion and/or appeal requests for underpayment notices have been troubling.  Please review the underpayment notice and if the audit finding is accurate, accept the additional funds. Remember RAC activities involve identification of both overpayments and underpayments.

If the notification letter is for Medicare overpayment(s), here are some quick tips.

(1) Carefully review the claim(s) audit list and overpayment rational as soon as information is received. An overpayment notification may be issued if requested medical records are not received by the RAC within 45 days of the initial request after one additional contact requesting the medical records.

(2) Assess each claim to determine if documentation exists that could alter the audit finding (e.g., the submitted claim shows 4 units of services billed/paid; however, RAC audit documentation shows 8 units of services billing/paid).

(3) Post notification review, if supportive documentation does not exist, decide on the recoupment option that best meets needs.  Make sure you understand your CPC’s preference so there is clean accounting for any recoupment payments.  Recoupment is not initiated until DAY 41 post receipt of the Demand Letter (automated reviews) or Review Results Letter (complex reviews).

(4) If supportive documentation exists that could alter the overpayment determination, contact the RAC and initiate a discussion. The initiation of a discussion does not impede the Appeals Process….it may make it unnecessary if the RAC agrees to overturn their determination.

The discussion period is not part of the Appeals Process.  It is a CMS RAC feature outside the Appeals process.  Remember, the RAC is only reimbursed for claims that are not successfully appealed.

The benefits the Discussion Period offer include a direct conversation with a RAC Provider Services representative to: (1) gain clarification/understanding of the audit finding rational; (2) obtain further RAC


RAC Statement of Work (SOW), Task 3-Underpayments, Pages 27-28 for Underpayment processes (www.cms.gov/recovery-audit-program/).

RAC SOW, Task 3-Underpayments, Page 27 for underpayment details.

 RAC SOW, Task 2 Identification of Improper Payments, Page 6 and E. The Claim Review Process, Pages 14-16 for improper payment types.

 RAC SOW, Task 2-Identification of Improper Payments,  D. Obtaining and Storing Medical Records for reviews, 3. Assessing an overpayment for failing to provide requested medical records, Page 13.

 RAC SOW,  E. The Claim Review Process. 7. Automated Review vs. Complex Review, Pages 17-19 for review details.

www.cms.gov/RAC/Downloads/ProviderOptionsChart.pdf, RAC Overpayment Determination

 RAC SOW, Task 7-Administrative and Miscellaneous Issues,  C. Payment Methodology (Page 43) last bullet regarding RAC return of payment for Appeals adjudicated in provider’s favor.


Posted in Learning Series | Tagged compliance in healthcare, healthcare reform, RAC Appeals Process, RAC audits, Recovery Audit | Leave a comment

BHM Healthcare Solutions
Healthcare Management and Consulting Firm Improving Financial &
Operational Performance of Health Care Enterprises
Suite 102, 1033 Corporate Square Drive St. Louis, MO 63132
888-831-1171 Office, 888-818-2425 Fax
email: results@bhmpc.com

 


Copyright © 2011 BHM. All rights reserved
  • Home
  • |
  • About Us
  • |
  • Services
  • |
  • BHM Staff
  • |
  • Case Studies
  • |
  • Contact Us
  • |
  • FAQ
  • |
  • Newsletter
  • |
  • Careers
  • |
  • Privacy Policy & Terms of Use