Course | Advanced | Healthcare Legal
This course explains the qui tam provisions under the False Claims Act, and the different ways in which a qui tam action may proceed. The course also explains the potential awards available to relators in qui tam actions.<div><br></div><div...
Course | Overview | Healthcare Legal
This course discusses the regulation and accreditation of the healthcare field. It provides overviews of various legislation, such as the HMO Act of 1973, the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), state regulations, and t...
Course | Intermediate | Healthcare Legal
This course provides an overview and introduction to the primary requirements of the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act, commonly referred to as EMTALA. It also provides information regarding various EMTALA definitions.<div><b...
Course | Intermediate | Healthcare Legal
This course provides an overview of the False Claims Act and its applicability to healthcare providers. It also explains different types of false claims and discusses False Claims Act definitions. The course discusses the civil investigativ...
News | Healthcare Legal

Provider alignment to get a boost under anti-kickback, Stark proposals: attorney

News | Healthcare Legal

Provider alignment to get a boost under anti-kickback, Stark proposals: attorney

  • Under proposed changes, hospitals no longer would be barred from entering into money-losing contracts with other providers for needed services.
  • Hospitals in rural areas that provide transportation could get legal protection under the changes.
  • The reduced legal risk could lead more providers to try value-based payment models.

Among the potential benefits to providers under proposed changes to Stark and anti-kickback regulations is a boost for hospitals’ post-discharge transportation assistance programs, according to an attorney.

This week, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a proposed rule to change enforcement of the Stark Law, while a separate proposed rule from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS’s) Office of Inspector General would change enforcement of the anti-kickback statute.

Alyssa James, JD, an attorney for Hall, Render, Killian, Heath & Lyman, provided some early insights on the complex proposals to change enforcement of the federal healthcare anti-fraud laws. The changes aim to encourage more provider participation in value-based payment models.

The following Q&A was edited for clarity.

HFMA: What seems most important among the changes proposed?

James: OIG and CMS have proposed a number of safe harbors and exceptions targeted at the recent trends in value-based payment models. This is significant as it is important for providers to be aligned when transitioning from volume-based to value-based payment methodologies.

On the Stark Law side, significant is the proposed change to the definition of commercially reasonable, which provides that an arrangement may be commercially reasonable even if it does not result in profit for one or more of the parties [CMS now limits such arrangements to those that financially benefit the parties].

This is important because hospitals often have to contract for needed community services (psychiatric services, burn units, etc.) that may not necessarily result in a profit for the hospital.

On the anti-kickback statute side, the proposed expansion of the local transportation safe harbor may be particularly beneficial to hospitals and other healthcare providers in rural communities as well as hospitals serving patient populations that struggle to obtain transportation from the hospital following discharge.

HFMA: Could such changes increase participation in value-based models?

James: We do believe that these proposed changes could encourage more participation in these payment models. If providers believe that the legal risk of engaging in value-based enterprises has been reduced to an acceptable level, they may be more inclined to take on financial risk.

HFMA: Is this just the latest recently proposed change to these laws? Didn't the Medicare physician payment proposed rule include changes, for example?

James: It is clear that HHS continues to be focused on incentivizing care coordination and participation in value-based models. These proposed changes are very targeted in nature and go beyond the scope of prior proposals.

HFMA: Any potential downsides to consider?

James: We are reviewing the proposed regulations further to analyze all of the nuances for providers as it relates to potential opportunities and risks. 

About the Author

Rich Daly, HFMA senior writer/editor,

is based in the Washington, D.C., office. Follow Rich on Twitter: @rdalyhealthcare


Related Articles | Healthcare Legal

News | Coronavirus

CMS's latest guidance for healthcare organizations on the new coronavirus

The HFMA editorial team will continuously post the latest announcements from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) related to the COVID-19 outbreak.

Blog | Healthcare Reform

House bill may provide insight into coverage priorities if White House and Senate flip in November's election

The best-case scenario for Democrats is to come out of election night with a 50-50 split of the Senate, which would allow them to pass a package of tweaks to the ACA, with the Vice-President (assuming Biden wins) casting the deciding vote.

Blog | Coronavirus

Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic could cause more hospitals to breach debt covenants

If Congress does not take action to prevent financial penalties for already financially distressed hospitals, another financial hit could be the final blow for many healthcare organizations already feeling the financial impact of the pandemic.

News | Coronavirus

Hospitals shed 135,000 jobs in April while losing an estimated $51 billion

Hospitals shed 3% of their workforce in April as the coronavirus and related government policies led to an estimated $51 billion revenue loss.