Compliance | GHG Advisors

Four Easy Ways to Lose Revenue

Times are busy. We are all doing more with less these days. Sometimes we don't put processes in place to make sure functions continue when our focus is elsewhere. Here are four easy ways you could be losing revenue:

Member Experience and Claims Payment: Not storing all diagnostic codes for your provider and facility claims. Similar to working edits, if you have not reviewed your claims system to determine if it is accepting all diagnostic codes that come in on an electronic provider or facility claim, you don't know if you are capturing everything you need. If your system is dropping diagnostic codes, you could be dropping appropriate reimbursement for impacted members. John Gorman, Founder and Executive Chairman at Gorman Health Group (GHG), recently commented on the importance of the member experience in a new article stating, "Now more than ever, it's clear to us health plans and their stakeholders will thrive or die based on the member experience they provide."
Reconciliation: Not working Prescription Drug Events (PDEs), enrollment edits, or risk adjustment and encounter data claims and enrollment edits. Payments for Part C and Part D are based on information from the services members receive. If you don't have a good process in place to ensure all edits are resolved, you are more than likely leaving money on the table.
Hospice and Claims: Not having a tie between your claims system and hospice determinations. Hospice services are a carve-out for Medicare Advantage (MA). Typically, hospice providers don't bill for hospice-related services. Other providers may bill you for Medicare-covered non-hospice-related services. If your system is paying for those services, you are paying too much.
Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP): Not managing your MSP members. MSP impacts both premium received and the payment of claims. If you don't have processes in place to validate each MSP designated member, and either correct discrepancies with the Coordination of Benefits Contractor (COBC) or set up your system to pay secondary, that mismatch is costing your plan money.

In busy times, it can be difficult to monitor everything. Establishing procedures and controls in order to manage these processes without interruption is critical to the success of your organization. Our multi-disciplinary team of consultants knows how to set up the right controls to keep your department running in an efficient, productive, and compliant manner.

For actionable advice and best practices, join us at our annual Gorman Health Group 2016 Forum, April 19-20, at the Worthington Renaissance Fort Worth Hotel in Fort Worth, Texas.

During this year's information-packed two days, our elite team of experts, operators, clients, and partners will help you figure out what matters and what doesn't. We will share proven tactics to cut costs, increase member satisfaction, and manage and drive sustainable growth.

Specifically, attendees can expect from my presentation practical strategies for combining productivity and compliance in your Operations Department while gaining real-world examples of the holistic management of compliant Operations departments.

The preferred room rate expires on Monday, March 28, 2016. Register now >>

Resources

If you haven't had the chance to review all of the sessions we have slotted for the Gorman Health Group 2016 Forum, download the conference brochure >>

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

MA Plans' Must-Fix: the Member Experience

Now more than ever, it's clear to us health plans and their stakeholders will thrive or die based on the member experience they provide. The member experience, especially with drug benefits, now represents more than half of a health plan's Star Rating in Medicare Advantage (MA), with millions in bonuses and bid rebates hanging in the balance. It also drives member retention and thereby acquisition expense (now averaging $1,200 per/member, or more than an average month's premium), so how members are treated now determines both health plan revenues and costs.

Overall, the member experience in a Medicare plan is defined by an enrollee's ability to get timely appointments, care, and information, how well providers communicate, and whether member-facing health plan and provider staff are helpful, courteous, and respectful. It's driven by the company culture, its commitment to communication, and the empowerment of staff to solve problems. And despite two-thirds of plans saying the member experience is their top investment priority, we are losing ground.

In a few short years, the Star Ratings system has evolved from a crappy consumer information tool to a multi-billion dollar pay-for-performance (P4P) initiative investing in improved processes and outcomes of care in MA. In 2016, the scoring methodology for Star Ratings ensures the member experience measures, especially in Part D, count for more than half of a plan's rating. It also narrows the margin for error, so only a 10% deviation in performance on the critical Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) is the difference between a 2-Star Rating and a 4-Star Rating.

On an enrollment-weighted basis, MA averages a 4.03 rating, with 49% of contracts (179) and 71% of members in plans over 4 Stars. But on CAHPS®, the program dropped from 3.45 Stars in 2015 to 3.4 Stars this year. That's a big problem threatening to drag the program back below the all-important 4th Star and, taken in context of other recent data, gets downright scary.

Last week our friends at Deft Research released their latest Seniors Shopping survey on the 2016 open enrollment period. They found that for the first time in recent memory, far more seniors are leaving Medicare Advantage for Medigap than vice-versa.

On virtually every measure, they found declining loyalty to and retention with their health plan. That says a lot about the state of the member experience in MA despite the priority and focus. It says we're missing the point.

Meanwhile, Alegeus Technologies had some incredible findings in their annual health plan consumer survey presented at the recent AHIP conference. First, they found half of members (50%) do not want to "play an active role" in their healthcare. This argues plans' investments in "member engagement" may be backfiring with half their enrollees. And there was widespread confusion in what they're paying for, possibly delineating why appeals and grievances processing remains the top compliance challenge for plans:

66% of members think they're not paying the right amount
56% complain they don't know how much they are spending until after they receive services
45% of members say they simply do not know much they spend even after getting a bill
45% say they never know what is covered

All of this says the way we think of and invest in the "member experience" needs rethinking.

It reminds me of the seminal 2014 behavioral economics study that found that happiness is defined by expectations being exceeded a little bit on a regular basis. Because expectations are variable, everyone can be made happy. That begins during the marketing and sales process and continues throughout the member lifecycle.

Moving to proactive service models is only the beginning. Only half our members want to be involved — the rest are disappointed and confused enough to be leaving in growing numbers to join inferior and more expensive products. They need help navigating provider networks, better understanding of how to use their benefits, and what to expect in out-of-pocket spending in real time. They need in-plan service ninjas empowered to solve their problem on the first call. They need Pharmacy Benefit Managers to get it together and health plans to advocate and agitate for members with their vendors. They need constant improvement in the member experience to be the new normal in government programs.

Resources

For actionable advice and best practices, join us at our annual Gorman Health Group 2016 Forum, April 19-20, at the Worthington Renaissance Fort Worth Hotel in Fort Worth, Texas. During this year's information-packed two days, our elite team of experts, operators, clients, and partners will help you figure out what matters and what doesn't. We will share proven tactics to cut costs, increase member satisfaction, and manage and drive sustainable growth. Register now >>

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

Another Health Plan Cuts Commissions — Is there a trend developing?

Is there a trend developing with health plans and their offerings under the Affordable Care Act (ACA)?

Raising rates, high-risk members, and cutting agent commissions continue to be challenges for all health insurance companies offering plans under the ACA. Some of the big plans still in the game say it's too early to bail out, and they see the ACA as a big opportunity. But late last year, one of the largest health plans announced they would be pulling out of the ACA business. Following this news, multiple non-profit Co-Ops announced their closure, and, most recently, another large health plan providing ACA products is following suit, announcing late February they would be cutting commission on sales of individual health plans. We can all agree changes in the structure of the individual market need to happen, but how fast can these changes be made and still accomplish profitable enrollment goals?

With fewer options, will agents still be a necessary resource for the prospect?

In the last year, we have seen several health plans pulling back on their marketing and reducing the number of choices for the consumer. It appears health plans are still trying to figure out how to price the products and if they should pay commission to agents or have the prospects use online tools to navigate their health care options. Meanwhile, agents are left with less in their pockets and wondering if there is still an opportunity for them in the ACA.

If agents generally sell plans within the Marketplace, and these continue to dwindle, where will that leave the agent? With the uncertainty of how big plans will navigate the complexity of the ACA, it is anticipated that agents will redirect focus to Medicare for 2016:

Reason #1 — No doubt the Medicare space offers unprecedented opportunity! With the growing number of Baby Boomers, health plans and agents continue to see limitless earning potential (nearly 10,000 people turn 65 every day).

Reason #2 — Commissions for Medicare Advantage (MA) are typically paid on application submission for some of the large plans and include lifetime renewals, which means agents and agencies get paid as soon as an application is submitted, and, after 13 months of enrollment, the agent and agency receive a prorated monthly commission for the life of the policy.

Reason #3 — Year-round selling opportunities. These days, it's not just about the open enrollment period — many agents find a great deal of opportunity with the dual-eligible (Medicare and Medicaid) population, as these individuals can enroll year-round.

Don't get distracted by the ACA crisis, focus your time and energy on building a sustainable business in Medicare. For more information about Medicare, Field Marketing Organizations (FMOs), and year-round selling opportunities, please contact:

Carrie Barker-Settles
Director, Sales & Marketing Services
Gorman Health Group
cbarkersettles@ghgadvisors.com

Resources

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

Gorman Health Group's Sales Sentinel™ provides a platform for organizations to onboard their agents, adapt to any oversight program, as well as generate commission payments. To learn more about Sales Sentinel™ or to request a demo, visit our website >>

by GHG Advisors

CMS' Recent Enforcement Actions Show Agency Means Business in 2017

As we predicted, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) is off to an aggressive start on the compliance front in the last year of this administration and shows no signs of slowing down with $832,250 worth of fines levied in the month of February alone. The list of enforcement actions released comes with even graver announcements of two immediate suspensions of enrollment and marketing for the year. These fines augment two huge penalties with which CMS closed out last year âˆ’ $3.1 million and $1.3 million.

In recent news, CMS did announce it will revise its policy of automatically reducing the Star Rating of sanctioned contracts to 2.5 stars. Effective immediately, CMS will suspend this policy, and will re-examine its approach in the 2018 Call Letter. This is a bit of good news for plans currently suspended from marketing and enrollment activities.

From the Medicare Advantage (MA) Advance Notice and Call Letter, we glean further insight into CMS' agenda for 2016. CMS stressed its commitment to improving beneficiary protections for 2016. CMS stressed its plan to increase severity of compliance and enforcement actions in Parts C and D. Particularly, CMS pointed out their commitment to increase the severity of compliance and enforcement actions for Part D auto-forwarded cases, as they saw no significant reduction in the volume of Part D auto-forwarded coverage determinations and redeterminations in the past several years, despite continued warnings issued to organizations. CMS' warning also extends to audits and enforcement actions in network adequacy, provider directory adequacy, and medication therapy management programs.

Given this strong warning, it is no surprise most of the civil money penalties (CMPs) levied in February were due to audits of benefit administration in Part D which showed "inappropriate delays of Part D benefits and increased out-of-pocket costs." Several fines were also levied on Part C appeals and grievances and benefit administration.

Enhancing its theme of focusing on getting plans to tighten up their compliance programs, CMS will issue a memo of their interpretation of methodology for CMPs given the large amount of questions CMS receives related to CMP calculations, not so coincidentally, right before an audit.

CMS has also added a new avenue for enforcement actions — one-third financial audits. CMS is required to conduct these audits for 30% of MA plans each year and has announced they will move to include these in enforcement actions, including CMPs and sanctions, and not just corrective action plans.

If you think 2015 was bad with over $13 million in fines, 2016 is poised to be a record year for enforcement actions. If you're not ready yet, now is the time to cross your t's and dot your i's and get your compliance program in order and prepared for what is positioned to be a busy year.

Resources

GHG's renowned team of experts collaborated to provide the key features and implications of the 2017 Advance notice and Draft Call Letter for your organization in 2017 and beyond. Download our full summary and analysis >>

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

Provider Directory & Network Adequacy Highlights in the 2017 Draft Call Letter

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has emphasized the wide-scale monitoring efforts underway with respect to network adequacy and provider directory monitoring and the direct impact it has on not only the plan's ability to provide timely and adequate access to care, but the impact it has on the decision-making ability of the beneficiary and/or their caregiver to select the plan that best meets their needs.

While the new release cycle will affect CMS' ability to have gathered enough feedback and information to finalize the 2017 Audit Protocols, the Provider Network Adequacy (PNA) pilot is still at the forefront for CMS according to the recent release of the 2017 Medicare Advantage (MA) Advance Notice of Methodological Changes and Call Letter. Plans have a key opportunity to do a deep-dive into their provider networks and the policies and procedures governing their network, such as provider terminations, and prepare a monitoring protocol that will not only meet compliance but also take steps towards the future of network management that includes ensuring data integrity for the plan and its members.

It was previously anticipated the PNA would drive the sample of providers used to evaluate directory compliance. The 2017 Draft Call Letter indicates the opposite, noting specifically the data collected during the monitoring process could drive additional reviews of network adequacy as well as future monitoring and/or audit-based activities. CMS has given plans the ability to develop innovative pathways to ensure directory accuracy. Plans will need to close the loop and ensure interoperability between all systems, including those such as Health Services Delivery (HSD) tables and programs used to formulate both online and printed directories, to have a true impact on the data integrity presented to CMS and to their members.

Additionally, CMS continues to move in the direction of a uniform evaluation for both PNA and provider directories across all government-sponsored health plans. Given the fact Medicare Advantage (MA) plans currently have the fewest data elements required for provider directories and the least restrictive reporting requirements for network adequacy, plans should anticipate the need to augment the information they collect on providers, and, as with the requirement to submit your entire network during a service area expansion, gear up for more stringent network review requirements.

At Gorman Health Group, we have experts who have worked directly with managing provider networks and adequacy for over 20 years, including detailed analytics such as specialty code mapping and software, which is critical in building the infrastructure needed to fully support the quality and financial goals the network brings to your health plan.

If you have questions regarding the recent regulations proposed in the 2017 Draft Call Letter for MA and Part D around provider and network adequacy, please contact me directly at emartin@ghgadvisors.com.

Resources

Listen to John Gorman's recent podcast on his top line observations from the 2017 Draft Call Letter.

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

Operations Mistakes Will Be Costly — Highlights of the 2017 Draft Call Letter

There was a time when operational areas were shooting for 98% accuracy as the "golden" number. In today's age of data and focused audits, even 99% may not be enough. The Call Letter doesn't have many surprising new risk areas for Operations. No new crazy regulations to ponder how we can possibly implement them. Instead, they have something worse: the addition of teeth to the new regulations. Why is this worse? Because the focus is on areas Operations and plans often struggle with and eventually accept status quo as good enough. How many times have you heard or possibly said, "What are our peers doing?" and used them as the measuring stick.

Some of the key focuses to keep operational eyes on are:

One-Third Financial Audit Results — Don't skip this section thinking this is Finance and doesn't involve Operations. One-third financial audits are full of operational reviews with direct member impact. The Draft Call Letter is indicating, beginning with 2017, one-third financial audits for plan year 2015 will have potential enforcement action like civil money penalties (CMPs) assessed for findings with adverse beneficiary impact. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) specifically calls out increased or incorrect cost-sharing or copayments as items of concern. Reviewing your benefit setup and claims processing to ensure controls are in place for adequate application of copays is a fundamental process but one in which CMS is seeing discrepancies year after year. Plans should review their controls or Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) processes, their provider fee schedule process, and their benefit setup processes to ensure beneficiaries are protected and benefit designs are operationalized each year as filed with CMS.
Timely Processing of Coverage Determinations and Redeterminations — Your plan may delegate coverage determinations and possibly redeterminations, but whether delegated or processed in house, the plan is responsible. CMS is seeing a continued high volume of auto-forwards of coverage determinations and redeterminations to the Independent Review Entity (IRE) when these functions are not processed within required time frames. CMS is indicating they will be taking action against plans with high volumesâ€”no waiting for an audit and a review of the results. CMS has the data to know there is a problem. Have you looked at your numbers? Do you know your auto-forward volumes? Better yet, do you know the root causes and mitigations to ensure there are no auto-forwards and no negative beneficiary impact?
Data Integrity — Once again a misleading title that has big operational impacts. CMS is raising concerns CMS program audits are identifying issues that may impact Star Ratings data used for Star Ratings. CMS is indicating they are looking at tying audit findings to data submitted for Part C and Part D reporting and Star Ratings where the audit may have raised concerns. CMS is indicating finding issues within other reviews, such as program audits, may result in review of submitted data for Star Ratings. They are rightâ€”it is a holistic approach health plans should be using to get ahead of this curve. If during an internal audit at the health plan a finding occurred indicating grievances were under-reported, is there follow-through to reconcile that under-reporting and revise Part C and Part D grievance reports? In our often-siloed departments and processes, that type of follow through doesn't often occur.

We are all busy. Few of us in Operations have the luxury of focusing on one product or function. We are all trying to keep multiple balls in the air. But if we don't take time to evaluate, stabilize, and set up good controls, we won't survive unscathed. The last thing any of us want is an enforcement action that will take time and energy to resolve and will ultimately impact our members, resulting in most or all of the balls crashing down. Our multi-disciplinary team of consultants has been in your shoesâ€”we have juggled the same balls and are ready to partner with you. Contact us to get started >>

Resources

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

Noteworthy Evolution for Star Ratings in 2017 MA Draft Call Letter

Last week's release by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) of the 2017 Medicare Advantage (MA) Advance Notice of Methodological Changes and Call Letter ended the mystery surrounding potential policy and payment changes on the horizon. As our Founder and Executive Chairman, John Gorman, recently noted: "There's a lot to like — and much to fear." Although CMS is proposing higher-than-expected rates for 2017 and has introduced both payment and Star Ratings relief for plans serving dual-eligible beneficiaries, this positive news was counterbalanced somewhat by a number of factors, including proposals to increase compliance scrutiny in challenging areas such as network adequacy, provider directory accuracy, and medication therapy management programs.

As anticipated from a Star Ratings perspective, there were few surprises but quite a bit of noteworthy evolution for MA this year. CMS' proposals include:

Accounting for the Star Ratings Impact of Dual-Eligible and Disabled Beneficiaries:

After a lengthy research process and significant pressure from the industry, CMS proposes moving forward with an interim analytical solution to account for the Star Ratings impact of dual-eligible and disabled beneficiaries. Despite the fact only a handful of plans would likely gain or lose a full half-star in their rounded overall Star Rating, this is a huge methodological win for plans serving dual-eligible members and will be important to monitor closely. When combined with CMS' simultaneous proposal to adjust revenues based on beneficiaries' status as either full duals, partial duals, or non-duals, as well as for their status as both aged and/or disabled beneficiaries, my colleague, Dan Weinrieb, advises, "This will mean timely reconciliation and maintenance of clean enrollment data has never been more important for MA plans." This proposal, in combination with the proposed strategy to account for the lack of low-income subsidy (LIS) support to meet Puerto Rican beneficiary needs, reflects a noteworthy shift in CMS' willingness to adjust the Star Ratings program to account for scientifically-supported evidence of nuances within MA.

In-Home Risk Assessments

CMS' decision to leave in-home risk assessments untouched is great news for the many MA plans who are leveraging these important visits not only for risk adjustment, but also to connect members with needed care (as measured by Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set (HEDIS^®) and Prescription Drug Event (PDE) Star Ratings measures), to coordinate care across the spectrum of providers (as measured by Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS^®) Star Ratings measures), and to help support member's social and lifestyle challenges (as measured by Health Outcomes Survey (HOS) Star Ratings measures). We interpret this to mean CMS now better understands the incredible value in-home care can bring to a patient's holistic healthcare experience. However, despite this welcome news, plans should certainly ensure their program adheres to the best-practice expectations previously set forth by CMS, and supported by encounter data, in order to drive payment.

Termination of Contracts Below 3 Stars for 3 Years

CMS not only reaffirmed its previously-announced plans to terminate contracts earning 3 consecutive Part C or Part D Summary Ratings of less than 3 stars, but also set forth an annual calendar by which this practice will become standard. With CMS guidance indicating these termination decisions are non-negotiable, plans will likely expedite efforts to improve Star Ratings performance such that impactful work begins as soon as it looks possible their first Summary Rating below 3 stars may be on the horizon.

Connecting Compliance and Star Ratings

From a compliance perspective, CMS proposes to continue strengthening its connections between compliance, data integrity, and Star Ratings. CMS reminds organizations of its policy to reduce a contract's measure rating to 1 star if it's determined biased or erroneous data was submitted. Our experience this year indicates CMS is leveraging this authority much more frequently than it has in past years, which means plans will want to pay particular attention to Medicare Plan Finder and PDE data requirements, Organization Determinations, Appeals, and Grievances (ODAG) and Coverage Determinations, Appeals, and Grievances (CDAG) processes, internal controls to prevent errors in operational areas directly impacting the data reported or processed for specific measures, and Part C and D reporting requirements data validation for specific measures. CMS points out, and we're hearing evidence to support, it continues to identify new vulnerabilities where inaccurate or biased data could exist, which could result in the reduction of a star measure to 1 star. As my colleague, Regan Pennypacker, details in her recent article, CMS' proposed changes will require plans to "implement creativity and do more with less while enhancing the beneficiary experience." Certainly this will be no easy task as we survive 2016 and plan for 2017 under a new administration.

Measure Updates

CMS is not proposing to add any new measures to the 2017 Star Ratings, although several measure specification changes are proposed for use in the 2017 ratings. As previously proposed, CMS indicated both the Improving Bladder Control (Part C) and High Risk Medication (Part D) measures will be moved to the Display page for 2017.

CMS proposes the addition of two new measures to the 2018 ratings (based on 2016 services/operations): Medication Reconciliation Post-Discharge and Hospitalization for Potentially Preventable Conditions. Addition of previously-proposed statin therapy and asthma measures were pushed out at least another year, possibly as a show of support for the recently-released and newly-aligned quality measures, giving plans a bit of breathing room to work with providers in this new area.

As we look ahead with CMS' foreshadowing of future program updates, continued attention is being paid to Care Coordination measures (with the National Committee for Quality Assurance's (NCQA's) assistance) and Depression measures (with NCQA and Minnesota Community Measurement's support), and the Advance Notice highlights a number of potential measure specification changes, which may take effect for the 2018 ratings.

Whether your organization is working to improve performance on your entire Star Ratings program, or just a few Star Ratings measures, or needs assistance understanding how the proposals contained in the Advance Notice may impact your plan, we can help. For additional questions and inquiries about how Gorman Health Group (GHG) can support your organization's Star Ratings programs, please contact me directly at msmith@ghgadvisors.com.

Resources

On Tuesday, March 1, from 2:30-3:30 pm ET, join John Gorman, GHG's Executive Chairman, and colleagues Olga Walther, Senior Legislative & Policy Advisor, and Leslie Mullins, GHG's Senior Consultant, as they provide a hard-hitting analysis of critical areas addressed in the document. Learn what the proposed "methodology changes" could mean for your organization and your partners and the steps you can take to soften the impact. Register now >>

Register your team for the 2016 GHG Forum! For more details around the event and agenda, download the full conference brochure or visit our website. Register now >>

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

Compliance Highlights of the CY 2017 Draft Call Letter

According to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), the Call Letter activities follow four major themes: improving bid review, decreasing costs, promoting creative benefit designs, and improving beneficiary protections. This means implementing creativity and doing more with less while enhancing the beneficiary experience. To borrow from one of the earliest reality shows, this is the time when CMS stops being nice and starts getting real. There are some of the key items of which your Compliance Department needs to be aware outlined below; however, it is not all inclusive and a thorough read of the document is required.

Compliance Impact on Stars

Something that is highly detrimental to an organization is CMS' reduction of a Star measure to 1 Star if any compliance-related issues are identified with a measure's data. We have seen that applied repeatedly this year to a variety of measures. This Data Integrity initiative is not new; unfortunately, CMS notes in the Call Letter that the agency continues to identify new vulnerabilities where inaccurate or biased data could exist. You will hear more from my colleague, Melissa Smith, on the proposed Star Ratings changes here in this blog.

Program Audit Protocols and Enforcement Actions

In an effort to allow sponsors more time to implement new protocols, CMS is proposing to release the following year's protocols by the end of July, starting this year. How does this change impact an organization?

An earlier release means industry feedback received at certain times this year will most likely inform the 2018 protocol updates. Since the Medication Therapy Management and Provider Network Adequacy (PNA) pilots are scheduled to be released "a few months into" the pilot audit period, comments won't be received in time to inform 2017 protocol. Therefore, CMS proposes to extend the pilot into 2017.
CMS notes the PNA protocol will not be administered during the same time as the program audits. This is not surprising for two reasons. First, the current program audit schedule is jam-packed. It's tough to envision adding another layer of operational audits to an already taxing schedule. Second, CMS reminds sponsors that this is only one piece of their larger scale efforts at reviewing adequacy. Consider the provider directory requirements memo released on November 13, 2015. CMS will actually be using the PNA pilot to validate corrections required as part of monitoring completed by the Medicare Drug and Health Plan Contract Administration Group (MCAG).

Some of these changes may mean more impact to your Compliance staff day to day. Gorman Health Group (GHG) notes our sponsor partners are quick to dive into published protocols to update tools and programming. Oftentimes they identify unclear items and immediately contact CMS for clarification, so this change should not create a significant impact to those who follow suit.

Since CMS is focusing on network, this should drive renewed focus and monitoring as part of a risk assessment and current oversight activities. GHG is aware of at least one consistently rated five star plan that has conducted full network assessments on a quarterly basis for quite some time now. In addition, CMS, in working with a contractor, has developed what they believe is a comprehensive process for monitoring provider directory accuracy. Interpret as such: your focus on this area pays off. Our Network team will dive deeper into this area here in the GHG blog.

CMS plans to release a memo describing their interpretation of applicable rules in the methodology for civil money penalties and will provide a comment period to the industry. Compliance should distribute this memo and collect comments as the calculation is often questioned on user calls and during enforcement discussions.

The agency is also seeing no significant reduction in the volume of Part D auto-forwarded coverage determinations and redeterminations. For this reason, they plan to increase the level of severity of compliance and enforcement actions. This is an area of the program with direct impact on a beneficiary's ability to access his or her Part D benefit. It is hoped that turning up the heat in this area may encourage plans to implement changes to reduce that volume and start meeting time frames more regularly.

CMS also proposes to consider the findings of noncompliance from the one-third financial audits for potential enforcement actions. In the past, sponsors were required to implement a corrective action plan, but they have had this authority under 422.752 and 423.752.

Sensing a theme here? CMS has reached a tipping point, and as our Founder and Executive Chairman, John Gorman, has recently noted, it appears 2016 is the year they drop the gloves. If you've ever played hockey, that's when it starts getting good. We hope to see you at our webinar on March 1!

Resources

Join John Gorman, GHG Executive Chairman, and colleagues, Olga Walther, Senior Legislative & Policy Advisor, and Leslie Mullins, GHG's Senior Consultant, as they provide a hard-hitting analysis of critical areas addressed in the document. Learn what the proposed "methodology changes" could mean for your organization and its partners, and the steps you can take to soften the impact on Tuesday, March 1 from 2:30-3:30 pm ET. Register now >>

Register your team for the 2016 GHG Forum! For more details around the event and agenda, download the full conference brochure or visit our website. Register now >>

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

There's a Lot to Like and to Fear in the 2017 Medicare Advantage Call Letter

On Friday after the close, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released the 2017 Medicare Advantage (MA) Call Letter with proposed policy and payment changes. There's a lot to like — and much to fear. On payments, CMS came in with higher-than-expected rates that make clear the long walk in the desert from cuts in the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is over. But on compliance, they are rolling out the firing squad with a broad mandate, and the Administration will leave its mark long after Obama has left office.

What We Like:

The draft offers all-in rates of +1.35% and a trend of +3.05%, better than last year and better than expected.
CMS is leaving home visits for MA risk adjustment untouched. If ever CMS was going to clamp down on this after years of threats, this was the time — in the last year of the Administration. By not doing so, we think they're closing the book, acknowledging much good also comes from these house calls, and the home is the most underutilized source of care in the delivery system for seniors. Despite MedPAC recommendations and a drumbeat of op-eds, CMS didn't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
There are big proposed changes to risk adjustment and Star Ratingsfor MA plans serving dual eligibles.
- CMS would launch a new payment system with six subcategories: full duals, partial duals, and non-duals, for both aged and disabled beneficiaries. The net effect is like a crude, mega-risk adjuster, paying plans with more duals bigger, more accurate payments, while paying slightly less to plans with fewer duals.
- On Star Ratings, CMS is proposing an adjustment on three key measures — the overall plan rating, and Part C and D summary ratings — which will increase ratings for plans with higher proportions of duals and could increase bonus payments if the plan is 4+ stars. This is a big win for the industry.
The health insurer issuer tax has been suspended for a year (and will return in 2018).

What We're Worried About:

The rapid acceleration from 10% to 50% encounter data driving risk adjustment could depress risk scores. It's clear CMS is moving to 100% encounter data as quickly as possible and likely presages the use of encounters and not Fee-for-Service (FFS) claims to calculate risk factors as well as the phase-out of the coding intensity adjustment.
CMS is proposing changes for Employer Group Waiver Plans (EGWPs) that amount to a "tax" on sponsors designed to reduce Medicare's spend on these 3 million of the 18 million beneficiaries in MA. EGWPs typically bid much higher than individual MA plans, and the proposal will likely result in a cost-shift to group members or a reduction in supplemental benefits. There was no estimated impact given, so watch this closely.
CMS made it clear Star Ratings low performers will be executed by firing squad as early as next week. The Call Letter states plans rated below 3 stars for 3 consecutive years will be terminated in February 2016 for a December 31 effective date. Three to six plans qualify for termination. This will be the timeline for future years, and CMS states these decisions are non-negotiable.
Huge news here on the compliance front:
- CMS notified Part D sponsors it's stepping up enforcement actions on coverage disputes and complaints, the leading noncompliance issue for plans.
- Plans failing the financial audits conducted on one-third of plans each year will no longer be subject to corrective action plans but rather sanctions and civil monetary penalties.
- CMS is ramping up audits and enforcement actions in network adequacy, provider directory accuracy, and medication therapy management programs.

As always, we now enter the frenzied public comment/lobbying phase where the industry tries to get an even better deal, with the final policies announced April 4. As these things go, MA plans should be generally happy about the financial picture while getting down to the busy work of getting the compliance house in order. Most of what's proposed here, we think, becomes the "new normal" long after Obama has left office.

Resources

Register your team for the 2016 GHG Forum. For more details around the event and agenda, download the full conference brochure or visit our website. Register now >>

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors

This Is the Year to Get It Right

Five consecutive years of very similar audit protocol, continuous partnering with sponsors to identify improvements, and numerous best practice/common conditions memos. Where are you in audit readiness? Did you evaluate the items in the 2016 Readiness Checklist sent in November? I will get back to that! In the meantime, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has started sending audit letters, so we are aware of sponsors and Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) alike who are prioritizing CMS' requests. Early bird catches the worm, am I right? Presumably these plans have larger enrollment, since they will only be required to provide rejected claims for the one month of January.

Some priorities have not changed: Formulary Administration, Compliance Program Effectiveness, Organization Determinations, Coverage Determinations, Grievances and Appeals, and Model of Care activities are all still part of the base protocol. CMS has committed to releasing pilot protocol to review Medication Therapy Management (MTM) as well as Part C Provider Network Adequacy. Why this additional focus?

CMS' focus on the reduction of opioid use may be one aspect of piloting the MTM protocol.
The additional focus on Medicare Advantage (MA) networks is critical. In the past, there was not a requirement to evaluate providers to determine if they were open to new patients or not. If they were contracted and credentialed, then they were used for network adequacy. That does little good for a new member who cannot access that provider.

If you haven't done so, it is time to circle the wagons. CMS is managing a continuous cycle of new audits, audit report finalization, corrective action plan (CAP) review, and validation requests for a variety of sponsors. You cannot change past data, but you can put in place changes that could make improvements for you going forward. Nothing is more important (arguably) than ensuring your Compliance Program is strong. If you have a robust (and documented!) system for auditing and monitoring, you have a greater chance of finding shortfalls before CMS does. Earlier, I mentioned the 2016 Readiness Checklist, which was released on November 20, 2015. This is the sentence that keeps me up at night:

Should you identify areas where your organization needs assistance or is not/will not be in compliance, your organization must report those problems to your Account Manager directly by email in a timely manner.

While this could be viewed as a requirement to notify CMS upon checklist review (which should have been done prior to 1/1), a conservative interpretation would state that at any time, should you identify areas where the organization won't be in compliance, the organization must report to the Account Manager. If you look at it that way, then anything on that checklist pertinent to the program audit areas and identified as non-compliant in your audit period best be indicated as disclosed and not self-identified. Otherwise, CMS might ask why they didn't know about it prior. If you have not received an audit notice yet, do yourself a favor and evaluate your recent disclosures. The list you send to CMS will encompass items from January 1, 2016, through the start of the audit notice.

Resources

CMS audit practices have radically changed in recent years. Now with only days to prepare for CMS audits, organizations must become proactive in creating a culture of compliance. From a gap analysis to a comprehensive, deep-diving Part C and D audit, our team can help you minimize your compliance risk and maximize your time and resources. Visit our website to learn more >>

Register your team now through February 14 for the 2016 GHG Forum, and take advantage of our standard registration rate of $1,095 before the price goes up to $1,295 on February 15. Register now >> For more details around the event and agenda, download the full conference brochure or visit our website.

Stay connected to industry news and gain perspective on how to navigate the latest issues through GHG's weekly newsletter. Subscribe >>

by GHG Advisors