Skip to main content

UPDATED: What to Do for Round 2 of HHS Provider Relief

UPDATED: HHS Opens Portal for Healthcare Providers and Suppliers to Apply for Second Tranche of CARES Act Provider Relief Funding

Updated April 24, 2020 at 9:40 pm | Register for AAA’s  4/27 webinar on this topic►

View a short video on this update from AAA Payment Reform Chair Asbel Montes at https://ems.zone/2004asbel2

At 5 p.m. on Friday, April 24, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services opened the online portal that health care providers and suppliers must use to submit their revenue information. This is a requirement to access the second $20 billion tranche of general allocation funding. Access the online portal►

In order to provide the required information, you will need the following information/documentation:

  1. Your Tax Identification Number (TIN)
  2. The bank account to which the first tranche of provider relief funding
  3. You will need access to the email account that you are using to apply for funds (to accept and provide back a security verification code)
  4. A PDF copy of your most recent tax return

The portal will ask a series of questions to verify your identity and the identity of your organization. These include providing your TIN and the last six digits of the bank account to which the original tranche of relief funding was provided.

After completing the verification process, you will be asked to complete an attestation that you received the initial tranche of relief funding.

You will then be prompted to complete a short questionnaire that is used to apply for additional funding. The steps for completing that questionnaire are as follows:

  • Step 1: You will be asked to provide basic information about your organization. This information is similar to the information that you would use to complete a federal W-9 form.
  • Step 2: You will be asked to provide your gross receipts or sales as reported on your most recent tax filing.
  • Step 3: You will be asked to provide an estimate of your lost revenue for March 2020 and April 2020. Note: HHS provided little guidance on how you should go about estimating your lost revenues. The AAA believes that there are several possible approaches that you can use to provide these estimates. To help members answer this question, the AAA anticipates that it will be issuing a Financial Impact Calculator on Monday, April 27, 2020.
  • Step 4: The final step will be for you to upload a copy of your latest tax return.
Attention Governmental Providers

AAA is aware of an issue that may affect governmental EMS organizations. Specifically, those governmental agencies that do not file federal tax returns may not be able to complete the final stage of the application, which asks you to upload a copy of your most recent tax return. The AAA has reached out to HHS to request guidance on how governmental organizations should complete the form. We will update our members as soon as we know anything different.  Register for our May 4 COVID-19 Financial Resources for Governmental Providers webinar►

Targeted Allocation for Treatment of the Uninsured

HHS indicated that it will allocate an undisclosed portion of the $29.6 billion in otherwise unallocated relief funding to reimburse healthcare providers and suppliers for COVID-related treatment of the uninsured. Please note that this allocation is only available for the reimbursement of emergency and non-emergency ground ambulance transports. Reimbursement will be available for COVID-related care furnished with dates of service on or after February 4, 2020. Payments will be made at the Medicare rates, subject to available funding. As a condition to receipt of funding, you must agree to accept HHS’ payment as payment-in-full, i.e., you may not balance bill the uninsured patient.

Is there anything my organization needs to do to claim reimbursement for treatment of uninsured COVID patients?

Yes.  In order to be eligible for payments for the treatment of uninsured COVID patients, must enroll as a participant in the program.  Enrollment must be done through an online portal that will open starting on April 27, 2020.  Once open, the portal can be accessed at http://www.coviduninsuredclaim.hrsa.gov.

Once my organization enrolls, when can we start submitting claims for reimbursement for the treatment of uninsured COVID patients?

HHS has indicated that it will begin to accept claims for reimbursement for the treatment of the uninsured at some point in early May 2020.

FUNDING FOR TREATMENT OF UNINSURED COVID PATIENTS IS SUBJECTED TO AVAILABLE FUNDING, AND IS THEREFORE ON A FIRST-COME, FIRST-SERVED BASIS.  IT IS EXPECTED THAT THESE FUNDS WILL BE EXHAUSTED IN FAIRLY SHORT ORDER.

The AAA strongly recommends that all members complete their enrollment form as soon as reasonably practicable, so that you are in a position to submit claims as soon as the claim submission window opens.

HHS Announces Plans for Distribution of Remaining CARES Act Provider Relief Funding

HHS Announces Plans for Distribution of Remaining CARES Act Provider Relief Funding
By Brian S. Werfel, Esq.

March 27, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act).  As part of that Act, Congress allocated $100 billion to the creation of a “CARES Act Provider Relief Fund,” which will be used to support hospitals and other healthcare providers on the front lines of the nation’s coronavirus response.  These funds will be used to fund healthcare-related expenses or to offset lost revenue attributable to COVID-10.  These funds will also be used to ensure that uninsured Americans have access to testing a treatment for COVID-19.  Collectively, this funding is referred to as the “CARES Act Provider Relief Fund.”

The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) began the disbursement of the first $30 billion tranche of the CARES Act Provider Relief Funding on April 10, 2020, with full disbursement of this tranche being completed by April 17, 2020.  The American Ambulance Association has issued a Frequently Asked Question that provides additional details on how the payments under this first tranche were calculated, as well as the terms and conditions that are applicable to this disbursement.

On April 22, 2020, HHS announced its plans for the disbursement of the remaining $70 billion in CARES Act Provider Relief Funding.  These monies will be distributed using four broad categories:

  1. General Allocation. HHS indicated that it will be supplementing the initial $30 billion tranche with an additional $20 billion.  Ultimately, HHS’ intent is to distribute this $50 billion to all eligible healthcare providers and suppliers (including ambulance providers and suppliers) based on the provider’s or supplier’s 2018 net patient revenue.  “Net patient revenue” is a term of art in the Medicare world, and is used to describe all patient revenues (from whatever source) minus: (i) provision for bad debts, (ii) contractual adjustments, (iii) charity discounts, (iv) teaching allowances, (v) policy discounts, (vi) administrative adjustments, and (vii) other deductions from revenue.  HHS indicated that it would calculate every provider’s and supplier’s proportionate share of the entire $50 billion would be using their 2018 net patient revenue.  HHS would then subtract the amounts that the provider or supplier received during the first tranche, and pay the unpaid balance over the next few weeks.  For institutional providers that have already submitted 2018 cost reports, these payments will go out on April 24, 2020.  Providers or suppliers that do not have adequate cost report data on file will need to submit their revenue information using an online portal that will become available this week, with payments to follow on a rolling basis once a provider’s or supplier’s information has been validated.  As with the first tranche, recipients of relief funding will be required to sign an attestation confirming receipt of the funds, and agreeing to the terms and conditions, including the restrictions on surprise medical billing.
  2. Targeted Allocations. HHS indicated that it would be setting aside an additional $20.4 billion for certain targeted segments of the health care industry.  This includes: (i) $10 billion being allocated to hospitals in areas that have been particularly hard-hit by the COVID-19 outbreak, (ii) $10 billion for rural health clinics and hospitals, and (iii) $400 for the Indian Health Service.
  3. Reimbursement for Uninsured Patients. HHS indicated that it will allocate an undisclosed portion of the remaining $29.6 billion to reimburse healthcare providers and suppliers for COVID-related treatment of the uninsured.  This allocation is available for the reimbursement of emergency and non-emergency ground ambulance transportation furnished to uninsured COVID-19 patients; however, air and water ambulance providers are not eligible to participate.  Reimbursement will be available for COVID-related care furnished with dates of service on or after February 4, 2020.  Payments will be made at the Medicare rates, subject to available funding.  To be eligible for reimbursement for care furnished to uninsured COVID-19 patients, ambulance providers and suppliers will need to enroll as a provider participant, which can be done starting on April 27, 2020.  Claims will be accepted starting in early May 2020.  As a condition to receiving reimbursement for the care of uninsured COVID-19 patients, you will be required to accept HHS’ payment as payment-in-full, i.e., you will not be permitted to balance bill the patient.  Additional information on HHS’ reimbursement for uninsured COVID-19 patients can be found at: http://www.coviduninsuredclaim.hrsa.gov.
  4. Reimbursement for Certain Medicaid-Only Providers. HHS indicated that it will allocate an undisclosed portion of the remaining $29.6 billion to reimburse skilled nursing facilities, dentist, and provides that only participate in State Medicaid Programs.

Upcoming Important Dates

 To participate in these future funding tranches, AAA Members will need to keep the following dates in mind:

  1. On or after April 23/24 – You will need to access the online portal to submit your revenue information in order to receive the second tranche of the $50 billion general allocation of provider relief funds.
  2. April 27, 2020 – You will need to register for the COVID-19 Uninsured Reimbursement Allocation. Once open, the online portal can be accessed from the following webpage: http://www.coviduninsuredclaim.hrsa.gov.
  3. Early May 2020 – You will be able to start submitting claims to the COVID-19 Uninsured Reimbursement Allocation.

 

FAQs – HHS CARES Act Provider Relief Funding

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) related to HHS CARES Act Provider Relief Funding

By Brian S. Werfel, Esq.

In March 27, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act).  As part of that Act, Congress allocated $100 billion to the creation of a “CARES Act Provider Relief Fund,” which will be used to support hospitals and other healthcare providers on the front lines of the nation’s coronavirus response.  These funds will be used to fund healthcare-related expenses or to offset lost revenue attributable to COVID-10.  These funds will also be used to ensure that uninsured Americans have access to testing a treatment for COVID-19.  Collectively, this funding is referred to as the “CARES Act Provider Relief Fund.”

On April 9, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) began the disbursement of the first $30 billion of this provider relief funding.  This disbursement was made to all healthcare providers and suppliers that were enrolled in the Medicare Program, and who received Medicare Fee-for-Service reimbursements during Calendar Year 2019.  For most ambulance providers and suppliers, these relief funds were automatically deposited into their bank accounts.

In this Frequently Asked Question (FAQ), the AAA will address some of the more common questions that have arisen with respect to the Cares Act Provider Relief Funds.

Question #1: My organization received relief funds through an ACH Transfer.  Is there anything our organization needs to do?

Answer #1: Yes.  Within thirty (30) days of receiving the payment, you must sign an attestation confirming your receipt of the provider relief funds.  As part of that attestation, you must also agree to accept certain Terms and Conditions.  The attestation can be signed electronically by clicking here.

Question #2: Am I required to accept these funds?  What happens if I am not willing to accept the Terms and Conditions imposed on the receipt of these funds?

 Answer #2: You are not obligated to accept the provider relief funds.  The purpose of these funds was to provide healthcare providers and suppliers with an immediate cash infusion in order to assist them in paying for COVID-related expenses and/or to offset lost revenues attributable to the COVID-19 pandemic.

If you are not willing to abide by the Terms and Conditions associated with these funds, you must contact HHS within thirty (30) days of receipt of payment, and then return the full amount of the funds to HHS as instructed.  The CARES Act Provider Relief Fund Payment Attestation Portal provides instructions on the steps involved in rejecting the funds.  Please note that your failure to contact HHS within 30 days to arrange for the return of these funds will be deemed to be an acceptance of the Terms and Conditions. 

 Question #3: Our organization has elected to retain the provider relief funds.  Are there any major restrictions on how we can use these funds?

 Answer #3: Yes.  In the Terms and Conditions, HHS has indicated that you must certify that the funds will only be used to prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.  You are also required to certify that the funding will only be used for health-care related expenses and/or to offset lost revenues that are attributable to coronavirus.

You are specifically required to certify that you will not use the relief funding to reimburse expenses or losses that have been reimbursed from other sources or that other sources are obligated to reimburse.

While the language in the Terms and Conditions are somewhat ambiguous, the AAA interprets this to mean that you must certify that your organization’s operations have been impacted, in some way, by the national response to the coronavirus.  The AAA further interprets this language as requiring that, on net, the coronavirus pandemic has had an adverse impact on either your operations (in terms of added costs) or your revenues (in terms of decreased revenues).  At the present time, the AAA believes that most, if not all, of our members that are currently providing services in response to the coronavirus pandemic will meet this standard.

Note: one situation where a provider may not be eligible for provider relief funding would be a situation where the provider ceased operations prior to January 31, 2020.  For example, a provider that ceased operations on December 31, 2019.  Because the ambulance provider was paid for Medicare FFS services furnished in 2019, it may receive provider relief funding.  However, if the organization’s operations ceased prior to the onset of the current state of emergency, it would not be able to meet the requirement that it provided diagnoses, testing, or care for individuals with possible or actual cases of COVID-19.  In this situation, the ambulance provider would likely be obligated to reject the provider relief funding.

 Question #4: Are there any other restrictions on our use of provider relief funding?

 Answer #4: Yes.  In addition to the restrictions discussed in Answer #3 above, you are also restricted from using the provider relief funding for any of the following purposes:

  1. The provider relief funds may not be used to pay the salary of an individual at a rate in excess of Executive Level II (approximately $189,600);
  2. The provider relief funds may not be used, in whole or in part, to advocate or promote gun control;
  3. The provider relief funds may not be used, in whole or in part, for lobbying activities;
  4. The provider relief funds may not be used to fund abortions (subject to certain exceptions);
  5. The provider relief funds may not be used for embryo research;
  6. The provider relief funds may not be used for the promotion of the legalization of controlled substances;
  7. The provider relief funds may not be used to maintain or establish a computer network, unless such network blocks the viewing, downloading, and exchanging of pornography;
  8. The provider relief funds may not be provided to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), or any of its affiliates, subsidiaries, allied organizations, or successors;
  9. The provider relief funds may not be used to purchase sterile needles or syringes for hypodermic injections of illegal drugs.

Question #5: How will HHS verify that the provider relief funding is being used for an appropriate purpose?

 Answer #5: HHS will require all recipients of provider relief funding to submit reports “as the Secretary determines are needed to ensure compliance with the conditions imposed.”  HHS indicated that it will provide future program instructions to recipients that specifies the form and content of these reports.  Recipients will also be required to maintain appropriate records and cost documentation to substantiate how provider relief funds were spent, and to provide copies of such records to HHS upon request.

In addition, ambulance providers and suppliers that receive, in the aggregate, more than $150,000 in funds under the CARES Act, the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act, the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, and any other legislation that makes appropriations for coronavirus response and related activities will be required to submit a report within 10 days of the end of each calendar quarter.  These reports must specify: (1) the total amount of funds received from HHS under each of these pieces of legislation, (2) the amount of funds received that was spent or obligated to be spend, and (3) a detailed list of all projects or activities for which large covered funds were expended or obligated.

Question #6: We understand that one of the conditions associated with the provider relief funding is that we agree not to balance bill patients.  Is our understanding correct?

 Answer #6:  The Terms and Conditions do contain provisions that would likely place restrictions on your ability to balance-bill patients.

In order to understand these restrictions, it is probably helpful to understand the underlying purpose of the restriction.  The actual language from the Terms and Conditions reads as follows:

The Secretary has concluded that the COVID-19 public health emergency has caused many healthcare providers to have capacity constraints. As a result, patients that would ordinarily be able to choose to receive all care from in-network healthcare providers may no longer be able to receive such care in-network. Accordingly, for all care for a presumptive or actual case of COVID-19, Recipient certifies that it will not seek to collect from the patient out-of-pocket expenses in an amount greater than what the patient would have otherwise been required to pay if the care had been provided by an in-network Recipient.”

 As the language makes clear, HHS was not focused primarily on the practice of balance-billing.  Rather, HHS’ concern was that many healthcare providers would have capacity restraints.  As a result, patients may be restricted in their ability to receive care from their normal providers (who are presumably in-network with the patient’s insurer).   HHS’ intent was to ensure that the patient does not suffer any adverse financial consequences as a result of seeking care for presumptive or actual cases of COVID-19.  It accomplishes this goal by requiring the recipient of provider relief funds to agree not to collect from the patient out-of-pocket expenses that are greater than what the patient would have incurred has the care been provided by an in-network provider.

This is being interpreted as a ban on “balance-billing” because most commercial insurers require their contracted providers to accept the plan’s allowed amount as payment-in-full, i.e., to agree to only bill the patient for applicable copayments and deductibles.

Ambulance providers and suppliers should keep in mind that this will not impact the payment of claims from: (1) Medicare, Medicaid or other state and federal health care programs that already require you to accept the program’s allowed amount as payment-in-full, (2) commercial insurers with which the organization currently contracts, and (3) the uninsured.  In other words, this requirement only impacts payments from commercial insurers with which the organization currently does not contract.

At this point in time, it is expected that non-contracted commercial insurers will process your claim and make a determination as to whether the claim is related to the treatment and care of a presumptive or actual case of COVID-19.  If the plan determines that the services you furnished were COVID-related, they will likely pay you the in-network rate they have established with contracted providers in your services area.  The plan will likely then issue a remittance notice that indicates that you may not bill the patient for any balance over the insurer’s payment.  Note: many of the larger commercial insurers have indicated that they will waive the copayments and deductibles due from patients for COVID-related claims.  If the plan waives the copayment and deductibles, they will pay these amounts to you as part of their payment of the claim.  If they do not waive the copayment and deductible, you will be permitted to seek to collect these amounts from the patient.  If the plan determines that the services you furnished were not COVID-related, they will continue to pay your claims using their normal claims processing, and you would be permitted to balance bill the patient to the extent otherwise permitted under state and local law.

There is still a good deal of confusion related to this aspect of the CARES Act Provider Relief Funding.  It is expected that HHS will be issuing further clarification in the days to come.  The AAA will update this FAQ to reflect any updated guidance from HHS.

Grants and Tax Credits Toolkit

Grants and Tax Credits Toolkit

Download materials from Akin Gump including aid summaries and how-to guides on qualifying for tax credits and deferments and applying for financial assistance.

 

 

CMS: Medical Necessity & Patient Signature Requirements During COVID-19

CMS Clarifies Medicare Requirements Related to Medical Necessity and the Patient Signature Requirement during Current National State of Emergency

By Brian S. Werfel, Esq.

On April 9, 2020, CMS updated its Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) for billing Medicare Fee-For-Service Claims during the current national state of emergency.  This document includes guidance for numerous industry types, including ambulance services.  The ambulance-specific questions start on page 11.

Two of the more common questions that A.A.A. members have asked during the current crisis are:

  1. Whether the transportation of a patient known or suspected to be infected with the COVID-19 virus would automatically justify medical necessity for the ambulance? And,
  2. Whether CMS will be waiving the requirement that ambulance providers and suppliers obtain the patient’s signature (or an acceptable alternative signature) to consent to the submission of a claim?

CMS did provide some guidance on both of these issues.

CMS addressed the issue of medical necessity in its answer to Question #9 on page 13.  The question posed to CMS was whether an ambulance provider/supplier could consider any COVID-19 positive patient to meet the medical necessity requirements for an ambulance.  CMS responded as follows:

“Answer: The medical necessity requirements for coverage of ambulance services have not been changed. For both emergency and non-emergency ambulance transportation, Medicare pays for ground (land and water) and air ambulance transport services only if they are furnished to a Medicare beneficiary whose medical condition is such that other forms of transportation are contraindicated. The beneficiary’s condition must require both the ambulance transportation itself and the level of service provided for the billed services to be considered medically necessary.”

Basically, CMS declined to offer a blanket waiver of the medical necessity requirements for COVID-19 patients.  In doing so, CMS seems to be suggesting that COVID-19 status, in and of itself, is not sufficient to establish Medicare coverage for an ambulance transport.

Fortunately, CMS did offer specific relief on the Medicare patient signature requirement.  The question posed to CMS on page 16 (Question #14) was whether an ambulance provider/supplier could sign on the patient’s behalf to the extent the patient was known or suspected to be infected with COVID-19, and, as a result, asking the patient (or an authorized representative) to sign the Tablet would risk contaminating the device for future patients and/or ambulance personnel.  CMS responded as follows:

Answer: Yes, but only under specific, limited circumstances. CMS will accept the signature of the ambulance provider’s or supplier’s transport staff if that beneficiary or an authorized representative gives verbal consent. CMS has determined that there is good cause to accept transport staff signatures under these circumstances. See 42 CFR 424.36(e). CMS recommends that ambulance providers and suppliers follow the Centers for Disease Control’s Interim Guidance for Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Systems and 911 Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) for COVID-19 in the United States, which can be found at the following link: https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/guidance-for-ems.html. This guidance includes general guidelines for cleaning or maintaining EMS transport vehicles and equipment after transporting a patient with known or suspected COVID-19. However, in cases where it would not be possible or practical (such as a difficult to clean surface) to disinfect the electronic device after being touched by a beneficiary with known or suspected COVID-19, documentation should note the verbal consent.”

Essentially, CMS is indicating that you can accept a patient’s verbal consent to the submission of a claim in lieu of a written signature.  In these instances, CMS is indicating that the crew must clearly document that they have obtained the patient’s (or the authorized representative’s) verbal consent.

HHS Announces Release of Initial Tranche of CARES Act Provider Relief Funding

On March 27, 2020, President Trump signed into law the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act).  As part of that Act, Congress allocated $100 billion to the creation of a “CARES Act Provider Relief Fund,” which will be used to support hospitals and other healthcare providers on the front lines of the nation’s coronavirus response.  These funds will be used to fund healthcare-related expenses or to offset lost revenue attributable to COVID-10.  These funds will also be used to ensure that uninsured Americans have access to testing a treatment for COVID-19.  Collectively, this funding is referred to as the “CARES Act Provider Relief Fund.”

On April 9, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) indicated that it would be disbursing the first $30 billion of relief funding to eligible providers and suppliers starting on April 10, 2020.  This money will be disbursed via direct deposit into eligible providers and supplier bank accounts.  Please note that these are outright payments, i.e., these are not loans that will need to be repaid. 

Who is Eligible to Receive Relief Fund Payments?

HHS indicated that any healthcare provider or supplier that received Medicare Fee-For-Service reimbursements in 2019 will be eligible for the initial allocation.  Payments to practices that are part of larger medical groups will be sent to the group’s central billing office (based on Medicare enrollment information).  HHS indicated that billing organizations will be identified by their Taxpayer Identification Numbers (TINs).

Are There Any Conditions to Receipt of this Funding?

Yes.  As a condition to receiving relief funding, a healthcare provider or supplier must agree not to seek to collection out-of-pocket payments from COVID-19 patients that are greater than what the patient would have otherwise been required to pay if the care had been provided by an in-network provider.

How is the Amount of Relief Funding an Entity will Receive Determined?

HHS indicated that the amounts healthcare providers and suppliers will receive will be based on their pro-rata share of total Medicare FFS expenditures in 2019.  HHS indicated that Medicare FFS payments totaled $484 billion in 2019.

Providers and suppliers can estimate their initial relief payment amount by dividing their 2019 Medicare FFS reimbursement by $484 billion, and then multiplying that “ratio” by $30 billion.  Note: payments from Medicare Advantage plans are not included in the calculation of a provider’s/supplier’s total 2019 Medicare payments.

As an example, HHS cited a community hospital that received $121 million in Medicare payments in 2019.  HHS indicated that this hospital’s ratio would be 0.00025.  That amount is then multiplied by $30 billion to come up with its initial relief fund payment of $7.5 million.

The AAA has created a CARES Act Provider Relief Calculator
that you can use to estimate your initial relief payment.  |
USE DOWNLOADABLE EXCEL CALCULATOR►

Do I Need to do Anything to Receive Relief Funds?

No.  You do not need to do anything to receive your relief funding.  HHS has partnered with UnitedHealth Group (UHG) to disburse these monies using the Automated Clearing House (ACH) system.  Payments will be made automatically to the ACH account information on file with UHG or CMS.

Providers and suppliers that are normally paid by CMS through paper checks will receive a check from CMS within the next few weeks.

How Will I Know if I Received My Relief Funds?

The ACH deposit will come to you via Optum Bank.  The payment description will read “HHSPayment.”

Do I Need to do Anything Once I Receive My Relief Funds?

Yes.  You will need to sign an attestation statement confirming relief of the funds within 30 days.  These attestations will be made through a webportal that HHS anticipates opening the week of April 13, 2020.  The portal will need to be accessed through the CARES Act Provider Relief Fund webpage, which can be accessed by clicking here.

You will also be required to accept the Terms and Conditions within 30 days.  Providers and suppliers that do not wish to accept these terms and conditions are required to notify HHS within 30 days, and then remit full repayment of the relief funds.  The Terms and Conditions can be reviewed by clicking here.

How will HHS Distribute the Remaining $70 Billion in Relief Funds?

HHS has indicated that it intends to use the remaining relief funds to make targeted distributions to providers in areas particularly impacted by the COVID-19 outbreak, rural providers, providers of services with lower shares of Medicare reimbursement or who predominantly serve Medicaid populations, and providers requesting reimbursement for the treatment of uninsured Americans.

CMS Announces Delay to ET3 Start Date

On April 8, 2020, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) announced that it will be delaying the start of the Emergency Triage, Treat and Transport (ET3) Model until Fall 2020.  The ET3 Model was previously set to start on May 1, 2020.  CMS cited the national response to the COVID-19 pandemic as the reason for this delay.

In its delay notice, CMS also reminded the EMS industry that it has issued a number of temporary regulatory waivers and new rules that are designed to give health care providers and suppliers maximum flexibility to respond to the current national emergency.  This includes a number of flexibilities offered specifically to the ambulance industry.

Accelerated Payment Program Highlights

CMS announced at the end of last week that it is expanding its Accelerated Payment Program.  The goal of the program is to address cash flow problems arising from the public health emergency.  The program functions as a short-term loan with no interest.

To qualify for advance/accelerated payments the provider/supplier must: (1) Have billed Medicare for claims within 180 days immediately prior to the date of signature on the provider’s/supplier’s request form; (2) Not be in bankruptcy; (3) Not be under active medical review or program integrity investigation; and (4) Not have any outstanding delinquent Medicare overpayments.

Qualified providers/suppliers will be asked to request a specific amount using an Accelerated or Advance Payment Request form provided on each MAC’s website. Most providers and suppliers will be able to request up to 100% of the Medicare payment amount for a three-month period. All non-hospital Part A providers and Part B suppliers will have 210 days from the date of the accelerated or advance payment was made to repay the balance.

The provider/supplier can continue to submit claims as usual after the issuance of the accelerated or advance payment; however, recoupment will not begin for 120 days. Providers/ suppliers will receive full payments for their claims during the 120-day delay period. At the end of the 120-day period, the recoupment process will begin and every claim submitted by the provider/supplier will be offset from the new claims to repay the accelerated/advanced payment. Thus, instead of receiving payment for newly submitted claims, the provider’s/supplier’s outstanding accelerated/advance payment balance is reduced by the claim payment amount. This process is automatic.

CMS Releases Update Guidance on Hospital EMTALA Obligations Related to COVID-19

On March 9, 2020, CMS published a memorandum to State Survey Agency Directors that provides updated guidance on the obligations of hospitals and critical access hospitals (CAHs) under the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA).  This guidance was issued in response to numerous inquiries regarding the EMTALA obligations of these facilities as they struggle to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Under EMTALA, hospitals and CAHs with emergency departments have an obligation to provide an appropriate medical screening examination to any individual that comes into the emergency department seeking examination or treatment of an emergency medical condition.  Hospitals and CAHs are further required to make a determination as to whether the patient actually has an emergency medical condition, and, if so, to provide stabilizing treatment within the hospital’s capabilities, or make appropriate arrangements to transfer the patient to a facility that does have the necessary capabilities.

The hospitals and CAHs had requested guidance on how they can fulfill their basic EMTALA obligations while minimizing the risks of exposure from COVID-19 infected individuals to their staff and other patients in their emergency departments.

Note: in summarizing the CMS guidance document, references to a “hospital” will include both hospitals and CAHs.

Acceptance of Patients Suspected or Confirmed to be Infected with COVID-19

 CMS indicated that hospitals with the capacity and the specialized capabilities needed to provide stabilizing treatments are required to accept transfers from hospitals without the necessary capabilities. CMS indicated that it would take into account the recommendations of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in assessing a hospital’s capabilities and capacity.  CMS further indicated that the presence or absence of negative pressure rooms (Airborne Infection Isolation Room (AIIR)) would not be the sole determining factor related to determining when an EMTALA transfer is required.  CMS is advising hospitals to coordinate with their state and local public health officials regarding the appropriate placement of individuals who meet specific COVID-19 assessment criteria, as well as the most current standards for treating patients confirmed to be infected with COVID-19.

CMS is further confirming that hospitals have the ability to set up alternative screening sites on the hospital campus, i.e., the initial medical screening exam does not need to take place in the emergency department.  CMS is confirming that individuals may be redirected to an alternative screening site after being logged into the emergency department.  This redirection can even take place outside the entrance to the emergency department.  Medical screening exams conducted in alternative screening sites must still be conducted by qualifying personnel (i.e., physicians, NPs, Pas, or RNs).

CMS is also indicating that hospitals may set up screening sites at “off-campus, hospital-controlled” sites.  Hospitals and community officials may encourage the public to go to these sites instead of the hospital for screening for influenza-like illnesses.  However, a hospital cannot tell an individual that has already presented at their emergency department to go to an off-site location for their medical screening exam.  Unless the off-campus site is already considered to be a dedicated ED (e.g., a free-standing ED) under EMTALA regulations, the EMTALA regulations would not apply to these off-site screening areas; however, the hospital would be required under its Medicare Conditions of Participation to arrange a referral/transfer to an appropriate hospital if the patient has a need for emergency medical attention. 

 Finally, communities may set up screening clinics at sites not under the control of a hospital.  These sites would not be subject to EMTALA.

EMTALA Obligations when a Screening Suggests Possible COVID-19 Infection

 To the extent a hospital determines, following a medical screening exam that a patient may be a possible COVID-19 case, the hospital is expected to isolate the patient immediately.  CMS indicated that it expects that all hospitals will be able to provide medical screening exams and initiate stabilizing treatment while maintaining isolation requirements.

Once an individual is admitted to the hospital or the emergency medical condition ends, the hospital has no further obligations under EMTALA.

CMS is further reminding hospitals that the latest screening guidance from the CDC calls for hospitals to contact their State or local public health officials when they have a case of suspected COVID-19.

CMS Grants State of Florida’s 1135 Waiver Request for Coronavirus Response

On March 16, 2020, CMS approved an 1135 Waiver request submitted by the State of Florida. The State had requested the flexibility to waive prior authorization requirements, streamline its Medicaid enrollment process, and allow care to be provided in alternative settings to the extent an existing health care facility needs to be evacuated. The key provisions of the waiver are summarized below:

1. Payments to Out-of-State Providers: Under current CMS coverage guidelines, the Florida Medicaid Program had the authority to reimburse out-of-state providers that were not enrolled in the Florida Medicaid Program provided certain criteria were met. However, this authority was limited to situations involving: (a) a single instance of care furnished over a 180-day period or (b) multiple instances of care furnished to a single Florida Medicaid beneficiary over a 180-day period. Under the waiver, CMS is removing the 180-day restriction for the duration of the emergency.

2. Expedited Enrollments: With respect to providers that are not currently enrolled in the Medicare Program or with another State Medicaid Agency, CMS is waiving the following screening requirements: (a) the payment of the application fee, (b) the fingerprint-based criminal background checks, (c) the required site visits, and (d) the in-state/territorial licensing requirements. Under the waiver, the state would still be required to check enrolling providers against the OIG exclusion list, and confirm that the out-of-state provider is properly licensed in their home state.

3. Cessation of Revalidation Efforts: CMS granted Florida the authority to temporarily cease the revalidation of enrolled in-state Medicaid providers and suppliers who are directly impacted by the emergency.

4. Waiver of Prior Authorization Requirements: CMS has granted Florida the right to waive any prior authorization requirements that are currently part of the State Medicaid Plan. This waiver applies to services provided on or after March 1, 2020, and will continue through the termination of the emergency declaration.

5. Waiver Allowing Evacuating Facilities to Provide Services in Alternative Settings: CMS will allow facilities, including nursing facilities, intermediate care facilities for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities, psychiatric residential treatment facilities, and hospitals to be reimbursed for services rendered during an emergency evacuation to an otherwise unlicensed facility. This waiver will extend for the duration of the declared emergency; however, CMS will require the unlicensed facility to seek licensure with the state after 30 days.

Understanding Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Coverage of Ambulance Services under a Declared National State of Emergency

On March 13, 2020, President Donald J. Trump announced a national state of emergency in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Previously, HHS Secretary Alex Azar had declared a public health emergency under Section 319 of the Public Health Service Act in response to COVID-19.

This has prompted many AAA members to ask what impact, if any, these declarations have on the coverage of ambulance services under federal health care programs?

The short answer is that these declarations give CMS the authority under Section 1135 of the Social Security Act to waive certain Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Program requirements. This waiver authority includes, but is not necessarily limited to:

• Waiving certain conditions of participation and/or certification requirements;
• Waiving certain pre-approval requirements;
• Waiving the requirements that a provider or supplier be licensed in the state in which they are providing services;
• Waiving EMTALA requirements related to medical screening examinations and transfers; and
• Waiving certain limitations on payments for services provided to Medicare Advantage enrollees by out-of-network providers.

One situation where an 1135 waiver may be of use to an ambulance provider or supplier would be where the ambulance provider or supplier is sending vehicles and crews to a state that is outside its normal service area. The ambulance provider or supplier is unlikely to be licensed by the state in which it is responding. As a result, under normal circumstances, it would be ineligible for payment under federal health care program rules. The 1135 waiver would permit it to submit claims for the services it furnishes in the other state.

Of more immediate significance to the current national emergency, an 1135 waiver may permit hospitals and other institutional health care providers to establish an off-site treatment center for initial screenings of patients. For example, hospitals may establish triage sites in parking lots and other open spaces for the initial intake of patients suspected of being infected with the COVID-19 virus. In theory, this waiver could also extend to drive-thru testing sites to the extent they are operated by the hospital or another health care provider. When a hospital has obtained an 1135 waiver to operate an off-site treatment center, the off-site area becomes a part of the hospital for Medicare payment purposes. Therefore, ambulance transports to an approved off-site treatment area should be submitted to Medicare using the “H” modifier for the destination.

CMS Posts 2020 Public Use File

On December 2, 2019, CMS posted the 2020 Ambulance Fee Schedule Public Use Files. These files contain the amounts that will be allowed by Medicare in calendar year 2020 for the various levels of ambulance service and mileage. These allowables reflect a 0.9% inflation adjustment over the 2018 rates.

The 2020 Ambulance Fee Schedule Public Use File can be downloaded from the CMS website by clicking here.

Unfortunately, CMS has elected in recent years to release its Public Use Files without state and payment locality headings. As a result, in order to look up the rates in your service area, you would need to know the CMS contract number assigned to your state. This is not something the typical ambulance service would necessarily have on hand. For this reason, the AAA has created a reformatted version of the CMS Medicare Ambulance Fee Schedule, which includes the state and payment locality headings. AAA members can access this reformatted fee schedule at the link below.

2020 Ambulance Fee Schedule▶

 

2018 National and State-Specific Medicare Data

The American Ambulance Association is pleased to announce the publication of its 2018 Medicare Payment Data Report. This report is based on the “Early Edition” of the 2018 Part B National Summary Data File (previously known as the Bess Report). The report consists of an overview of total Medicare spending nationwide, and then a separate breakdown of Medicare spending in each of the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the various other U.S. Territories.

For each jurisdiction, the report contains two charts: the first reflects data for all ambulance services, with the second limited to dialysis transports. Each chart is further broken down by HCPCS code. The charts provide information on the total number of allows services and the total Medicare payments for CYs 2017 and 2018. Percentage changes will allow members to view payment trends over the past year.

2018 National & State-Specific Medicare Data

Questions? Contact Brian Werfel at bwerfel@aol.com.

 

CMS Announces 2020 Ambulance Inflation Factor

On October 4, 2019, CMS issued Transmittal 4407 (Change Request 11497), which announced the Medicare Ambulance Inflation Factor (AIF) for calendar year 2020.

The AIF is calculated by measuring the increase in the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) for the 12-month period ending with June of the previous year. Starting in calendar year 2011, the change in the CPI-U is now reduced by a so-called “productivity adjustment”, which is equal to the 10-year moving average of changes in the economy-wide private nonfarm business multi-factor productivity index (MFP). The MFP reduction may result in a negative AIF for any calendar year. The resulting AIF is then added to the conversion factor used to calculate Medicare payments under the Ambulance Fee Schedule.

For the 12-month period ending in June 2018, the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has calculated that the CPI-U has increased 1.6%. CMS further indicated that the CY 2020 MFP will be 0.7%. Accordingly, CMS indicated that the Ambulance Inflation Factor for calendar year 2019 will be 0.9%.

CMS Announces Comment Period for National Expansion of Prior Authorization Process

On October 29, 2019, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) posted a notice in the Federal Register announcing an opportunity for the public to provide comments on the proposed national expansion of the prior authorization process for repetitive, scheduled non-emergent ground ambulance transportation.  CMS refers to this process as its “RSNAT Prior Authorization Model.”  The CMS Notice can be viewed in its entirety at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2019-10-29/pdf/2019-23584.pdf.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, federal agencies are required to publish a notice in the Federal Register concerning each proposed collection of information, and to allow 60 days for the public to comment on the proposed action.  Interested parties are encouraged to provide comments regarding the agency’s burden estimates and other aspects of the proposed collection of information, including the necessity and utility of the proposed information for the proper performance of the agency’s functions, and ways in which the collection of such information can be enhanced.

In this instance, CMS is indicating that it is pursuing approval to potentially expand the existing RSNAT Prior Authorization Model nationwide.  Currently, the RSNAT Prior Authorization Model is in place in 8 states (DE, MD, NJ, NC, PA, SC, VA, and WV) and the District of Columbia.  National expansion is contingent upon CMS’ determination that certain expansion criteria have been met.  CMS is indicating that if the decision is made to expand the program, such expansion may occur in multiple phases.  CMS intends to use the information collected pursuant to this notice to determine the proper payment for repetitive scheduled non-emergent ambulance transportation.

In plain English, CMS is soliciting comments from stakeholders as to the efficacy of the current process, including whether the existing paperwork requirements are sufficient to ensure that approved patients meet the medical necessity requirements for an ambulance.  CMS is also seeking suggestions for how to best expand the program nationally, e.g., whether it makes sense to expand the program in phases, etc.

The AAA Medicare Regulatory Committee has been monitoring the current model for several years.  As a result, the AAA is in a good position to provide constructive feedback to CMS regarding the potential national expansion of the RSNAT Prior Authorization Model.  These suggestions will be included in the AAA’s comment letter.  The AAA also encourages members to offer their own comments.  The AAA anticipates providing members with a sample comment letter in early December that members can use to submit their own comments.

To be considered, comments must be submitted no later than 5 p.m. on December 30, 2019.  Comments may be submitted electronically by going to: http://www.regulations.gov.  Commenters would then need to click the link for “Comment or Submission,” and follow the instructions from there.  Comments may also be submitted by regular mail to the following address: CMS, Office of Strategic Operations and Regulatory Affairs, Division of Regulations Development, Attention: Document Identifier: CMS-10708, Room C4-26-05, 7500 Security Boulevard, Baltimore, Maryland 21244-1850.

CMS Announces Extension of Prior Authorization Program

On September 16, 2019, CMS published a notice in the Federal Register that it would be extending the prior authorization demonstration project for another year. The extension is limited to those states where prior authorization was in effect for calendar year 2019. The affected states are Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Virginia and West Virginia, as well as the District of Columbia. The extension will run through December 1, 2020. 

In its notice, CMS indicated that the prior authorization demonstration project is being extended “while we continue to work towards nationwide expansion.”  This strongly suggests that CMS believes the program has met the statutory requirements for nationwide expansion under the Medicare Access and CHIP Reauthorization Act of 2015.  However, CMS indicated that it would use the additional year to continue to test whether prior authorization helps reduce expenditures, while maintaining or improving the quality of care offered to Medicare beneficiaries.

CMS has also updated its CMS Ambulance Prior Authorization webpage to reflect the expansion of prior authorization in the existing states through December 1, 2020.

Preliminary Calculation of 2020 Ambulance Inflation Update

Section 1834(l)(3)(B) of the Social Security Act mandates that the Medicare Ambulance Fee Schedule be updated each year to reflect inflation. This update is referred to as the “Ambulance Inflation Factor” or “AIF”.

The AIF is calculated by measuring the increase in the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) for the 12-month period ending with June of the previous year. Starting in calendar year 2011, the change in the CPI-U is now reduced by a so-called “productivity adjustment”, which is equal to the 10-year moving average of changes in the economy-wide private nonfarm business multi-factor productivity index (MFP). The MFP reduction may result in a negative AIF for any calendar year. The resulting AIF is then added to the conversion factor used to calculate Medicare payments under the Ambulance Fee Schedule.

For the 12-month period ending in June 2019, the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) has calculated that the CPI-U has increased by 1.65%.

CMS has yet to release its estimate for the MFP in calendar year 2020. However, assuming CMS’ projections for the MFP are similar to last year’s projections, the number is likely to be in the 0.6% range.

Accordingly, the AAA is currently projecting that the 2020 Ambulance Inflation Factor will be approximately 1.1%. 

Cautionary Note Regarding these Estimates

Members should be advised that the BLS’ calculations of the CPI-U are preliminary, and may be subject to later adjustment. The AAA further cautions members that CMS has not officially announced the MFP for CY 2020. Therefore, it is possible that these numbers may change. The AAA will notify members once CMS issues a transmittal setting forth the official 2020 Ambulance Inflation Factor.

New SNF PPS Edits Highlight the Importance of Facility Agreements

On April 1, 2019, CMS implemented a new series of Common Working File (CWF) edits that are intended to better identify ground ambulance transports that are furnished in connection with an outpatient hospital service that is properly bundled to the skilled nursing facility (SNF) under the SNF Consolidated Billing regime.

These edits work by comparing the ambulance claim to the associated outpatient hospital claim.  Hospital claims were already subject to CWF edits designed to identify outpatient hospital services that should be bundled to the SNF.  These hospital edits operate by referencing a list of Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System (HCPCS) or Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes that correspond to outpatient hospital services that are expressly excluded from SNF Consolidated Billing.  Hospital claims for outpatient services that are submitted with one of these excluded codes bypass the existing CWF edits, and are then sent to the appropriate Medicare Administrative Contractor for further editing and payment.  Hospital claims submitted without one of these codes are denied for SNF Consolidated Billing.

The new ambulance edits will extend these process one step further.  The ambulance claim will be associated with the outpatient hospital claim on the same date.  To the extent that hospital claim is bundled under SNF Consolidated Billing, the associated ambulance claim will also be bundled.  To the extent the hospital claim is unbundled, the associated ambulance claim will be unbundled.

In order for these new edits to work properly, there must be an outpatient hospital in Medicare’s claim history. If the ambulance claim beats the hospital claim into the system, the ambulance claim will be rejected. If and when an outpatient hospital claim with the same date of service enters Medicare’s system, the initial rejection of the ambulance claim will be overturned, and the ambulance claim will be reprocessed using the same edits.

It is important to note that the new edits were designed to reject the ambulance claim as a bundled service unless the hospital claim indicates that it should not be bundled.  In other words, these edits are designed to be “over inclusive.”  This over-inclusiveness creates the potential for ambulance denials in situations that, on their face, would not appear to be bundled.

A few examples will help illustrate this point. Imagine a situation where the patient elects, for whatever reason, to pay out-of-pocket for their hospital care (in a situation where that care would not be bundled to the SNF), and, as a result, the hospital does not submit a bill to Medicare for its services.  Based on how the new edits are designed, your ambulance claim for the transport to that excluded service will be rejected based on the lack of a hospital claim. Or maybe the patient has both Medicare and the V.A., and has elected to have the V.A. be the primary payer for their required hospital care.  Again, there would likely be no outpatient hospital claim submitted to Medicare on that date of service, resulting in the rejection of your ambulance claim.

I can see your point, but those examples are pretty far-fetched.  How big an issue is this really?

I agree those examples are pretty far-fetched.  However, there are other situations that create the same problem.  For example, what about an emergent response to transport an SNF patient to the hospital for necessary emergency services?  Imagine if you are called to respond late at night (e.g., 11:30 p.m.) tonight.  Now imagine that, by the time you get to the patient, load them into the vehicle, and transport them to the ED, it has crossed over midnight into the next day.

What date of service is going to be on the hospital’s claim?  Almost certainly, the hospital will use tomorrow’s date.  As a result, when your claim hits Medicare’s system, there will not be an associated hospital claim, which will result in your claim being rejected as the responsibility of the SNF.  In this situation, Medicare’s edit has worked as intended, but the result is the denial of a claim that should be separately payable by Medicare Part B.

Okay, I can see how this might be annoying,
but I can appeal the claim and likely win on appeal, right? 

Yes and no.  The problem is that you are not likely to win on either of the first two levels of appeal, as they are likely going to rely upon the information in the CWF.  I can see you possibly winning your appeal at the ALJ level…5 to 7 years from now.

In other words, the appeals process is unlikely to provide an acceptable resolution.  Instead, I think the majority of ambulance providers are going to look to the SNFs to make good in these situations.  Of course, the SNFs are likely going to disclaim liability, arguing (correctly) that ambulance transportation to an ED is an excluded service.

This is where the agreement with the SNF comes into play.  One key purpose of contracts is to allocate known risks between the parties.  In this instance, the “risk” that needs to be addressed is the possibility that Medicare might incorrectly reject your claim thinking it is bundled to the SNF.  I would argue that this risk should be absorbed by the SNF.  The transport to the ED should have suspended the patient’s SNF stay, which would have allowed you to receive a separate payment from Medicare.  However, the fact that your claim was rejected is proof positive that the CWF does not reflect the suspension of the patient’s SNF stay.  Indirectly, it also serves as proof that the SNF received a per diem payment for the patient on that date.  To me, the fact that they accepted the per diem payment means they accepted the risk of a bundled ambulance service on that date.  I would also argue that it was their failure to properly suspend the patient’s SNF stay that set in motion your denial.  Either way, I would be looking to the SNF for payment.

Based on my experience, the typical agreement with an SNF does not address this situation.  Frequently, these agreements do not even address the specifics of SNF Consolidated Billing.  Instead, I tend to see general language indicating that the ambulance provider will bill the SNF when payment responsibility lies with the SNF under an applicable federal or state health care program.  I doubt that language is going to convince an SNF to take financial responsibility for the situation discussed above.

The good news is that your existing agreements can easily be revised to address this situation.  The language I would recommend is something along the lines of:

“The parties acknowledge and agree that a denial from Medicare for SNF consolidated billing shall constitute conclusive evidence that a transportation service is the financial responsibility of the facility.” 

In sum, the new SNF Consolidated Billing edits are going to increase the frequency with which we are forced to look to the SNFs for payment.  In most instances, it will be a situation where the SNF is legally responsible under SNF Consolidated Billing.  However, there will also be situations where the over-inclusive nature of the edits results in the claim being incorrectly denied as the SNF’s responsibility.  The question becomes how you want to handle these incorrect denials.  Do you want to appeal and hope CMS reverses its decision?  Or do you want to hold the SNF responsible?  If you want to hold the SNF responsible, you will likely need to revise your agreements with the SNFs.

Have an issue you would like to see discussed in a future Talking Medicare blog?
Please write to me at bwerfel@aol.com.

Summary of March 28, 2019 Ambulance ODF

The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) held its latest Open Door Forum on Wednesday, March 28, 2019.  As with past Open Door Forums, CMS started the call with the following announcements:

  1. Ambulance Cost Data Collection – CMS reminded the industry that the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, enacted on February 9, 2018, requires CMS to create a new cost data collection system by December 31, 2019.
  2. Emergency Triage, Treat, and Transport Model – A representative from the Innovation Center within CMS provided an overview of the “Emergency Triage, Treat, and Transport Model” or “ET3.” This is a 5-year pilot program intended to provide ambulance providers with greater flexibility to handle low-acuity 911 calls, by providing Medicare payment for: (a) ambulance transportation to alternative treatment destinations and (b) treatment at the scene. The CMS representative indicated that CMS is in possession of data that suggests that 16% of emergency ambulance transports to a hospital emergency department could have been resolved by transporting the patient to an alternative treatment site, e.g., an urgent care center. CMS estimates that had all of these patients elected to receive care in the lower-acuity setting, it would have saved the Medicare Program approximately $560 million each year. With respect to the operation of the model itself, CMS essentially repeated the information that had been previously provided on its webinars. You can view the AAA Member Advisory on the ET3 Model by clicking here.
  3. Ambulance Inflation Factor – CMS reiterated that the 2019 Ambulance Inflation Factor is 2.3%.

Following the announcements, CMS moved into a Question & Answer period. The majority of the questions related to the ET3 pilot program. As is typical, many questions were not answered on the call; instead, CMS asked the individual to submit their question in writing. However, the following questions were answered on the call:

  1. Payment Rates under ET3 – CMS was asked whether the BLS base rate payment would be the BLS emergency base rate. It was not clear that the CMS representative fully understood the question, although she indicated that it would.
  2. Eligibility for Government Agencies – CMS was asked whether governmental agencies that operate 911 centers would submit applications to participate as part of the RFA process in the Summer of 2019. CMS responded that governmental agencies that operate 911 centers would not submit RFAs, but would rather wait for the Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO), which will be issued after the ambulance providers and suppliers are selected for participation (expected to be the late Fall/Winter of 2019). CMS further confirmed that if the governmental agency also operated its own ambulance service that it would be eligible to apply for both aspects of the ET3 Model.
  3. Limit on Ambulance Providers – CMS was asked whether it would cap the number of ambulance providers and suppliers selected to participate in the program. CMS responded that, at the present time, it has no intent to cap the number of participating ambulance providers and suppliers at any specific number.
  4. Return Transports from Alternative Treatment Destinations – CMS was asked whether the model would provide for ambulance payment for the return transport after a patient was transported to an alternative treatment site. CMS indicated that the model does not provide for payment for the return transport.
  5. Definition of “Telehealth” – CMS confirmed that the model will use the same definition of “telehealth” used in other areas of the Medicare Program. CMS further confirmed that telehealth encounters require both audio and video connections.
  6. Approval of Alternative Treatment Sites – CMS confirmed that state and local regulatory agencies would have final approval over acceptable alternative treatment sites.
  7. Qualified Health Care Practitioner – CMS confirmed that a “qualified health care practitioner” would be an individually enrolled Medicare practitioner, which includes physicians and nurse practitioners. In some instances, it can also include physician’s assistants. CMS confirmed that the definition would not include registered nurses or advance scope paramedics.
  8. NOFO Funding – CMS indicated that, at the present time, it is not prepared to release additional details on the nature or size of the funding opportunities available to governmental agencies and their designees that operate or have authority over 911 centers.
  9. Medicare Advantage and Other Payers – CMS confirmed that the ET3 Model applies only to Medicare beneficiaries enrolled in FFS Medicare. It does not apply to Medicare Advantage enrollees, Medicaid recipients, etc.

Questions? Email Brian at bwerfel@aol.com

Stay In Touch!

By signing up, you agree to the AAA Privacy Policy & Terms of Use