Daybreak Venture, a company providing skilled nurses, has settled charges brought by the Office of the Inspector General that they hired staff that had been excluded from employment with federal health programs, authorities announced.
The OIG’s Office of Audit Services did an investigation that turned up five excluded employees. During the federal investigation, Daybreak Venture revealed they had hired two additional unauthorized employees, according to the announcement.
In March 2014 the OIG initially contacted Daybreak regarding this matter and as a result the company performed it’s own audit covering about 5,000 staffers and entities that are presently or had been linked with Daybreak Venture.
The CEO of Daybreak, Michael A. Rich has assured the federal government that since the company discovered these transgressions, they have pledged additional resources and people to work in its Compliance Department to conduct ongoing re-verifications of staff members and entities to prevent those on OIG’s excluded list from employment. He went on to state that the company is fully committed to hiring only those people who are eligible.
Individuals can lose their eligibility to work with federal health programs like Medicaid and Medicare for a number of different reasons, but the most serious would be that they have a criminal record of being convicted of abuse or fraud. Providers are barred from hiring these individuals and then charging the government program for the services provided by them.
A Deputy Chief in one of the branches of the Office of the Inspector General says they’ve found that nursing homes tend to employ excluded individuals more than other health care providers. The updated guidelines provide a time period for employers to check the database online that lists all the excluded or unauthorized individuals, entities and organizations.
The settlement with Daybreak Venture took effect October 24, 2014.
A provider who employs an excluded individual to provide items or services that are reimbursed by Federal health care program funds will be required to pay back 100% of the funds improperly received and may be subject to liability under the Civil Monetary Penalties Law.
The Bulletins and relevant sections of the SSA should be reviewed by all health care providers who receive funds from Federal health care programs to ensure liability is avoided. Read More Here
The Justice Department is investigating whether several medical labs violated the federal anti-kickback statute. One of them, Health Diagnostic Laboratory Inc. of Richmond, Va., has collected hundreds of millions of dollars from Medicare for advanced blood tests that help predict heart disease. HDL and other cardiac-biomarker labs paid doctors a fee for each sample of blood they sent for testing until a Department of Health and Human Services fraud alert on June 25 cast doubt over the payments’ legality, as a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal reports. Read More at http://tinyurl.com/okjz4e7
The Office of the Inspector General (OIG) in the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) is a statutorily created independent entity whose mission is to detect and deter waste, fraud, abuse, and misconduct in DOJ programs and personnel, and to promote economy and efficiency in those programs. The Inspector General, who is appointed by the President subject to Senate confirmation, reports to the Attorney General and Congress. The OIG investigates alleged violations of criminal and civil laws by DOJ employees and also audits and inspects DOJ programs.
The OIG’s nationwide workforce of 420 employees includes auditors, program analysts, criminal investigators, attorneys, and administrative and support personnel. In addition to headquarters’ units in Washington, D.C., and Audit and Investigations Division field offices in Rosslyn, Virginia, the OIG has offices in the following cities: Chicago, Dallas, Houston, El Paso, New York, Trenton, Boston, Philadelphia, Detroit, Atlanta, Miami, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Tucson, and Denver.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, North Arkansas Regional Medical Center (NARMC), Arkansas, agreed to pay $395,591.50 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that NARMC improperly billed separately for “incident to” services that were included in its Rural Health Center payment.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, Saint Luke’s Health System (SLPS), Missouri, agreed to pay $142,740 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that SLPS improperly billed Medicare and Medicaid for interventional radiology services furnished by a radiology practitioner assistant (RPA) in SLPS’s Radiology Department. Specifically, SLPS separately and improperly billed Medicare for services furnished by an RPA even though, under Medicare rules, payment for services furnished by an RPA in a hospital setting are bundled and paid to the hospital as part of its facility payment.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, Sonora Regional Medical Center (SRMC) California, agreed to pay $597,193 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. SRMC contracted with a physician to provide professional services at SRMC’s medical oncology outpatient center. The OIG alleged that SRMC submitted claims containing CPT codes 99204, 99205, 99214, and 99215, that it submitted for services provided by the physician that were upcoded and that the physician engaged in a pattern or practice of coding at a higher level that he knew or should have known would result in a greater payment than the code applicable to the services he was actually providing.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, Rutherford Hospital, Inc. (Rutherford), North Carolina, agreed to pay $706,090.46 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that Rutherford submitted or caused to be submitted claims for physicians’ services provided by a doctor to beneficiaries of Federal health care programs using the provider identification numbers of another doctor, who did not further the services. The OIG contends that Rutherford knowingly misused provider identification numbers, which resulted in improper billing of the claims identified and disclosed by Rutherford.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, Mercy Clinic Oklahoma Communities, Inc. (Mercy Clinic), Oklahoma, agreed to pay $51,444.03 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that Mercy Clinic employed an individual that it knew or should have known was excluded from participation in Federal health care programs.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, Expeditive, LLC (Expeditive), New Jersey, agreed to pay $2,883.53 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that Expeditive employed an individual that it knew or should have known was excluded from participation in Federal health care programs.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, SpecialtyCare Surgical Assist, LLC (SCSA), Florida, agreed to pay $247,024.19 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that SCSA knowingly presented to Medicare, Medicaid, and TRICARE claims for items or services that SCSA knew or should have known were not provided as claimed and were false or fraudulent. Specifically, the OIG contends that SCSA billed the above programs for assistant-at-surgery services provided by certified surgical assistants and registered nurse first assistants, when these programs reimburse such services only if provided by physicians and/or physician assistants.
Trustees of Tufts College and Tufts University School of Dental Medicine (TUSDM), Massachusetts, agreed to pay $841,120.88 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that TUSDM submitted claims to Medicare for various services from four of their clinics. The OIG contends that these claims were improper because the services were provided by dentists who were not credentialed by Medicare and/or the services or the code level billed were not supported by sufficient medical record documentation.
Carolyn Murray-Burton, M.D. (Murray), New Jersey, agreed to pay $136,777.59 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG contends that Murray caused her employer to submit claims for reimbursement to Medicaid and Medicaid HMOs for items and services furnished by her while she did not possess a valid medical license.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, St. Peter’s Hospital of the City of Albany (St. Peter’s), New York, agreed to pay $16,538.70 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that St. Peter’s employed an individual that it knew or should have known was excluded from participation in Federal health care programs.
After it self-disclosed conduct to the OIG, Shahid Mansoor, M.D. doing business as Mansoor Pediatrics (Mansoor), Louisiana, agreed to pay $51,315.90 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that Mansoor employed an individual that it knew or should have known was excluded from participation in Federal health care programs.
Baypointe Nursing Home, Inc. d/b/a Baypointe Rehabilitation & Skilled Care Center (Baypointe), Massachusetts, agreed to pay $351,255.44 for allegedly violating the Civil Monetary Penalties Law. The OIG alleged that Baypointe employed an individual that it knew or should have known was excluded from participation in Federal Health care programs.
The OIG Exclusion Statute states that anyone convicted of crimes relating to Medicare or Medicaid fraud cannot be employed by a healthcare provider. The language in the OIG claims places the burden of verification on the health care facility, with the phrase ‘should have known’ being a major cause for concern with the overriding question being: how can we be sure?
According to sources, “It would take hours upon hours for healthcare facilities to scan available data to find out if any of their employees are excluded, and they’d have to repeat the process every month. It’s a serious cost and labor issue. this ensures total compliance by automatically scanning OIG exclusions, searching their employee roster and finding any exclusions each and every month. Our software does what they simply can’t do.”
The application of an OIG exempt individual is that the excluded person shall not be employed,in any capacity, with a doctor that receives payment, indirectly or immediately, from any national medical care program. Simply said if you certainly are a healthcare provider that accepts national bucks, and you have any employees or companies who are on the excluded list, you might face some significant charges — large fees, and perhaps getting on the excluded list yourself.
By law, the healthcare industry has an obligation to verify program exclusion list status of each and every person or entity that they use or with whom they contract.You can find out whether any of your present workers or contractors are on the OIG exclusion lit by planning to the exceptions site of the .gov OIG website. The website has directions on how to check the OIG list.You are likely to ‘periodically’ examine the status of everybody whom you employ or with whom you contract. You also have to check the OIG exclusion status of new workers or companies ahead of bringing them on board.
FYI, it is technically feasible to have a worker who is on the excluded record, nonetheless it would be a hassle from a economic accounting and payment understanding, and legally risky. If you go to the website and discover that one of your employees is on there, it is time to call counsel fast!
The terms Medicare and Medicaid could be difficult to most people, including those that receive support from their store. While both support low income individuals and families with health care they serve different needs. Medicaid was created to meet the health care needs connected with kids and pregnancies of low income families that require support. The OIG exclusion list is for individuals who have committed fraud.
Medicare however was developed to help meet the healthcare requirements of the disabled and elderly, but isn’t connected with income.Of the two, Medicaid has got the strictest recommendations and does not allow benefits to be extended to those beyond the definitions of poverty. That protection provides expectant mothers as well as followup care and kids within the age limits. protection doesn’t be extended by Medicaid to some other family members regardless of health issues or financial status. This plan only covers those who fall within the expressed guidelines.Low and middle income families which have children, can receive either free or surprisingly low cost health care bills. These extra benefits were included with Medicare, but may be called something different in your home state.
Even when your income is on the large side of the size, the small premium cost you might be required to pay, makes this health care still very affordable.Until you know, you don’t know and the simplest way to discover if and what you qualify for, is to first apply for Medicaid. If you income disqualifies you from Medicaid benefits, they’ll send you software onto another company that you might be eligible for, despite a higher income. While the great things about Medicaid are outstanding, with no out of pocket up front expense, it is not without problems. It is not always simple to find healthcare providers to treat new Medicaid patients. Should you ever have a problem with finding a provider you should contact the Medicaid office for a second look if you are on the OIG exclusion list.Medicaid is a real help for pregnancy problems. Medicaid, unlike other medical insurance organizations, do not consider pregnancy a per-existing situation. If you have no insurance and are pregnant, Medicaid can make available quality health care coverage free of charge, irrespective of you conditions. Using the first step is as simple and simply as filling in the proper applications once you contact a Medicaid office. There is typically help for any pregnant woman.