OIG Proposes Revisions to Safe Harbors and CMPs
November 26, 2014
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector
General (OIG) recently published a proposed rule that provides new and modified regulatory safe harbors to the Anti-Kickback Statute (AKS), amends regulatory provisions related to enforcement of the Beneficiary Inducement Civil Monetary Penalty (CMP) rules, and adds a gainsharing CMP provision. The proposed rule affects a wide range of health care business arrangements including free transportation services, retailer reward programs, referral services and cost-sharing waivers.
OIG Goals
According to OIG, its goal in proposing these changes “is to protect beneficial arrangements that enhance the efficient and effective delivery of health care and promote the best interests of patients, while also protecting the Federal health care programs and beneficiaries from undue risk of harm associated with referral payments.”
OIG Proposed Changes
Proposed New AKS Safe Harbors: Designed to protect certain payment practices and business arrangements from criminal prosecution or civil sanctions, including:
- Referral services
- Reductions or waivers of cost-sharing amounts owed under federal health care programs
- Financially needy Medicare Part D
- Emergency ambulance services
- Remuneration between Medicare Advantage (MA) organizations and Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs)
- Medicare Coverage Gap Discount Program
- Certain free or discounted local transportation services provided to federal health care program beneficiaries
- Copayment reductions for certain hospital outpatient department services (OPD)
- Certain remuneration that promotes access to care and poses a low risk of harm
- Retailer reward programs that meet certain requirements
- Financial-need-based exception
- Waivers of cost-sharing for the first fill of generic drugs
- Is the interpretation of the prohibition on payments to reduce or limit services as including payments to limit items used in providing services appropriate?
- Should a hospital’s decision to standardize certain items be deemed to constitute reducing or limiting care?
- Should a hospital’s decision to rely on protocols based on objective quality metrics for certain procedures ever be deemed to constitute reducing or limiting care?
- Should a hospital desiring to standardize items or processes as part of a gainsharing program be required to establish certain thresholds based on historical experience or clinical protocols, beyond which participating physicians could not share in cost savings?
- If ‘‘reduce or limit services” is defined, should the regulation include a requirement that the hospital and/or physician participating in a gainsharing program notify potentially affected patients about the program?