Meaningful Use (MU) audits will increase in 2015 and a growing area of concern for eligible hospitals and professionals is just now surfacing after 4 years of the MU program. The intersection of attestations, audits, and incentive assignments is causing problems today based on decisions made by providers years ago.
Consider these three scenarios:
Scenario 1: The hospital bought a large specialty practice that had been achieving MU and receiving incentives for several years. All incentives were assigned to the practice. After the buyout, the hospital installed a new EHR and during the transition most attestation records were discarded. Now one of the EPs has failed an audit for a year prior to the hospital acquisition. Since the incentive was assigned to an entity that no longer exists, who is responsible for the incentive recoupment?
Scenario 2: A hospital hires a physician from a private practice who has completed the first portion of their MU reporting period but will complete that period as an EP at the hospital. What are the issues involved with obtaining the MU data from the prior entity? What if the prior practice will not provide the MU data needed for attestation? How could this have been prevented?
Scenario 3: An EP works for a hospital and the hospital staff handles the attestation by proxy and the incentive is assigned to the hospital. The EP retires and several years later the hospital receives an audit engagement letter for the EP. Does the hospital have any responsibility? If meaningful use incentives are recouped do they come from the EP or to the assignee who received the incentive?
Join HITECH Answers, meaningful use expert Jim Tate and healthcare attorney Matt Fisher as we review the challenges associated with assignment of MU incentives and look at potential solutions of this troublesome issue.
Webinar: Meaningful Use: Attestation, Assignments and Appeals – A Legal Perspective
Date: Thursday, Jan 15, 2015 2 pm ET; 1 pm Central
What this webinar will cover:
- MU and the Attorney/Client Privilege
- Assignment of Incentives – the Language
- Audits and Appeals: The Process
- Importance of the Mock Audit and Findings
- Fraud and MU
About Our Presenters
[content_box type=”with-header” title=”Jim Tate” text_color=”dark” color=”default”]
Jim is a nationally recognized expert on the CMS EHR incentives and the “meaningful use of certified technology”. He has worked with over 200 EHR vendors on their certification projects, authored the first manual on meaningful use, and became a Subject Matter Expert to the federally funded Regional Extension Centers for the adoption and implementation of electronic health records. His unique combination of skills has brought successful outcomes to hospitals at risk of having their CMS EHR incentives recouped. He led the first appeal challenge in the nation for a client hospital that had received a negative audit determination. That appeal was decided in favor of the hospital. He has also been successful in leading the effort to reverse a failed appeal, even after the hospital had received notification of the failure with the statement, “This decision is final and not subject to further appeal”. That “final” decision was reversed in less than a week. He is the founder of EMR Advocate and Meaningful Use Audits. Contact him at: Inquiry@MeaningfulUseAudits.com
[content_box type=”with-header” title=”Matt R. Fisher, Esq.” text_color=”dark” color=”default”]
Matt is an associate with Mirick O’Connell. He is the chair of the firm’s Health Law Group and a member of the firm’s Business Group. Matt focuses his practice on health law and all areas of corporate transactions. Matt’s health law practice includes advising clients with regulatory, fraud, abuse, and compliance issues. With regard to regulatory matters, Matt advises clients to ensure that contracts, affiliations and coordination agreements and other business arrangements meet both federal and state statutory and regulatory requirements. Matt’s regulatory advice focuses on complying with requirements of the Stark Law, Anti-Kickback Statute, fraud and abuse regulations, licensing requirements and HIPAA. Matt also advises clients on compliance policies to develop appropriate monitoring and oversight of operations. Matt is the chair of the American Bar Association’s Health Law Section’s Web and Technology Committee is vice-chair of the Business and Transactions Interest Group and a vice-chair of the Publications Committee, and a Social Media Editor for the section. Matt is a Lead Coordinator for the American Health Lawyers Association Fraud & Abuse Practice Group’s and an author of e-mail alerts for the Enforcement Committee in the same Practice Group.
This webinar is sponsored by:
SA Ignite is the leading source for healthcare provider pay-for-performance automation. The company’s proven EHR-agnostic, cloud-based solutions and services simplify and automate the processes associated with pay-for-performance programs. SA Ignite’s flagship offering is MU ASSISTANT®, the leading enterprise platform for automating meaningful use processes for eligible providers. Visit online at: www.saignite.com