Author Archives: Kelly Grahovac

Who Must Comply with HIPAA Requirements?

Generally, when you hear about HIPAA the discussion is associated with a hospital or a medical group that had a breach or HIPAA violation. What most people don’t know is that HIPAA applies to organizations outside of hospitals and health networks. So who exactly needs to be compliant when it comes to HIPAA?

It can be somewhat vague when you start looking at HIPAA. The US Department of Human Health Services describes those who must be compliant are called “covered entities.” Let’s dig a little deeper and understand what types of organizations are considered to be a covered entity.

Health Plans – Anyone who deals with insurance or medical information for patients.

  • HMOs
  • Medicare
  • Medicaid
  • Human resource employees/employers and schools who handle patient information when the employees are hired and students are enrolled.

Health Care Clearinghouses – These are the organizations that collect any patient information from healthcare entities.

  • Billing/Collection Services
  • Health Management Information Systems

Health Care Providers – These are the entities that come to mind when thinking about HIPAA compliance.

  • Physicians
  • Surgeons
  • Dentists
  • Optometrists
  • Hospitals
  • Clinics
  • Nursing Homes/Care Facilities
  • Pharmacies

Business Associates – This is where most people wouldn’t assume they need to be HIPAA compliant, but if you’re involved in any of the following, you need to ensure you’re in compliance.

  • Data Processors
  • Medical Equipment Companies
  • Consultants
  • Medical Transcription Services
  • External Accountants and Auditors
  • Any third party organization dealing with PHI.

 

At the end of the day, anyone who accesses or deals with Protected Health Information should be complying with HIPAA regulation. PHI includes:

  • Any conversation with medical professionals about a patient’s care or treatments
  • Any patient billing information
  • Any medical insurance information

If you have any questions about covered entities or whether you or your organization should be HIPAA compliant, please contact us! We can help you determine your needs and get started with compliance.

UPDATE: Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) Pilot

UPDATED: October 6, 2017

In October 2017, the TPE Pilot is now open to all four DME MAC Jurisdictions. Suppliers will be chosen based on the following criteria:

  1. Items that pose the greatest financial risk to the Medicare Trust Fund – HCPCS with high national error rates, high dollar equipment, etc.
  2. Individual suppliers with high error rates

HCPCS that were currently under widespread prepayment reviews will likely be the first group included in the TPE selection.

Lastly, the goal of the TPE program is to eventually replace all other DME MAC audits, meaning widespread prepayment and documentation reviews will eventually be phased out entirely.

ORIGINAL PUBLICATION DATE: August 23, 2017

In recent months, the CMS has been touting its new “provider friendly” approach, which is, in part, a way to decrease the ever-mounting appeals backlog. And they have introduced several initiatives to do just that, including limiting the scope of review of Redeterminations and Reconsiderations and adjusting serial claims found favorable in the appeals process. The next item on the list, however, may be positive or negative, depending on what side of the coin you fall on. Let me explain.

The DME MACs have recently began to roll out the Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) Pilot program. Beginning on July 3, 2017, CMS authorized the DME MACs to conduct the Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) Pilot review process. This pilot is currently open to Jurisdictions B and D DME MACs. TPE includes up to three rounds of supplier-specific prepayment probe reviews followed by education to improve identified errors. The goal of TPE is to improve the claims payment error rate and reduce the volume of appeals through claim review and education.

Suppliers chosen for the TPE program can expect the following:

  • DME MACs will utilize data analysis to select the suppliers in the probe. The identified suppliers will receive written notification that will include the topic being reviewed, data reasons for the selection and the process of the review.
  • The first-round prepayment probe review will begin following notification to the supplier. The DME MAC will request 20 – 40 claims for audit.
  • Suppliers with a high error rate on their prepayment probe review will receive an offer for one-on-one education relative to the specific errors identified through the probe review.
  • Following education, suppliers are expected to make necessary adjustments/process changes with sufficient improvement. This will be demonstrated through a second round of claim reviews to occur several months later during a second-round probe review. The probe review will again contain 20 – 40 claims for audit.
  • If improvement in the second-round probe review is not sufficient, suppliers will undergo another round of education followed by another probe review.
  • Following three rounds of probe and education, suppliers that do not demonstrate sufficient improvement in their error rate will be referred to CMS for possible further action.
  • Once a supplier has reached an acceptable error rate, the TPE process will end and the DME MAC will notify the supplier of successful completion.

It’s important to note that if selected for review, suppliers are not excluded from other Medical Review activities, such as, automated reviews, other pilot review programs, prior authorization, etc. as directed by CMS or other contractor reviews.

The DME MACs have indicated that if a high error rate persists following the maximum rounds of review and education, they will refer the supplier to CMS for possible further action. What does that include? Referrals to the ZPIC/UPIC for concerns related to potential fraud/abuse and Recovery Auditor (RA) for collaboration of vulnerability and to ensure there is no duplication of reviews.

One thing that is missing from the published articles and TPE letters: The potential for revocation of your Medicare supplier number. The Final Rule, effective December 3, 2014, states in part that, under authority of the ACA, CMS can and will deny or revoke enrollment of entities and individuals that pose a program integrity risk to Medicare for “… providers and suppliers that have a pattern and practice of billing for services that do not meet Medicare requirements.  This is intended to address providers and suppliers that regularly submit improper claims in such a way that it poses a risk to the Medicare program. “We saw contractors start adding this language into overpayment demand letters over the past year, which leads us to believe they would eventually like to use this as a tool to suppliers they feel pose too much of a risk.

Now more than ever, suppliers must be vigilant in the claims they submit to Medicare. Documentation should be reviewed prior to claim submission to ensure the LCD guidelines have been met. It is also necessary to educate your staff – from intake to billers. If you are selected for the TPE program you will be required to present documentation that supports the medical necessity for the equipment provided. Be sure that you have what you need to be considered “compliant” in your billing practices. TPE allows you three chances to “get it right”. Then you could face extrapolations, RAC audits that go back three years, or worse, revocation.

Data analysis will look for high error rates, high reimbursement dollars, and top billers by area. Don’t wait for the DME MAC to send you a letter advising that you are a chosen participant in the TPE pilot. Taking a proactive approach could save your business. The van Halem Group can help. We offer a variety of proactive services that will identify issues, educate your staff, and help you make the necessary corrections going forward. Don’t wait until you get the TPE notification letter.

Complex Rehab Technology and Manual Wheelchair Accessories:Help HR 3730 Get Passed

By – Kay Koch, OTR/L,ATP, RESNA Fellow

Complex Rehab Technology (CRT) includes specialized wheelchairs, seating systems, and other adaptive equipment such as standing devices and gait trainers.  These individually configured products are used by people with high level disabilities such as ALS, cerebral palsy, multiple sclerosis, muscular dystrophy, spinal cord injury, and traumatic brain injury to meet their unique medical needs, reduce their medical complications and costs, and maximize their function, mobility and independence.

Currently, Congress is considering legislation that would protect access to Complex Rehab Technology.  This will replace the previously introduced broader bill, H.R. 1361, written to prohibit CMS from using Competitive Bid pricing for accessories used with either CRT power or CRT manual wheelchairs.

The CRT “power” wheelchair accessories issue was resolved in late June 2017 when CMS announced a policy clarification stating it would not use Competitive Bid pricing for accessories used with Group 3 CRT power wheelchairs. We thank CMS and Congress for that needed action.

Unfortunately, the clarification did not extend to accessories used with CRT “manual” wheelchairs so this follow up legislation is needed. Passage of this new bill would address and fix the current disparity that prevents people who use a CRT manual wheelchair from having the same access to CRT accessories as those using a CRT power wheelchair.

H.R. 3730 is the newest bill introduced to stop CMS’ inappropriate application of Medicare Competitive Bid pricing to CRT ( Complex Rehab Technology) manual wheelchair accessories, which are critical wheelchair components. This legislation was introduced September 8, 2017 by Representatives Lee Zeldin (R-NY) and John Larson (D-CT) to stop CMS from using Competitive Bid pricing for accessories used with CRT manual wheelchairs.  They were joined in this bipartisan action by 41 original cosponsors (19 Republicans and 22 Democrats) and includes excellent representation from the key Congressional Committees.

This bill is needed to resolve the lingering issue of CMS applying competitive bid pricing to accessories used with CRT manual wheelchairs.  Unfortunately, the June policy change by CMS solved the problem for CRT power wheelchairs but did not extend that same correction to CRT manual wheelchair accessories.  People with disabilities who use a CRT manual wheelchair should have the same access to critical wheelchair components as those who use a CRT power wheelchair.

Please contact you representative to either ask them for support of this legislation or thank them for their support. If you work with people who use CRT as them to get involved with asking their representative for support of this legislation.  A Senate companion bill is expected to be introduced shortly, but for now, the focus remains on securing House of Representatives cosponsors.

 

The following website links provide information on the legislation, and how to contact your representative.

www.acess2CRT.org

www.ncart.us

Audit Alert: CPAPs and Spinal Orthoses

On August 2, 2017, Performant Recovery, the National DMEPOS RAC, added Spinal Orthoses to their approved issues list. According to their website, Performant Recovery will perform complex reviews of these claims to determine if coverage criteria outlined in the Local Coverage Determination (LCD) for Spinal Orthoses was met. Performant will review medical documentation provided to determine that services were reasonable and necessary.

Codes included in the audit are: L0452, L0480, L0482, L0484, L0486, L0629, L0632, L0634, L0636, L0638, L0640, A9270.

Per the LCD, a spinal orthosis (L0450 – L0651) is covered when it is ordered for one of the following indications:

  1. To reduce pain by restricting mobility of the trunk; or
  2. To facilitate healing following an injury to the spine or related soft tissues; or
  3. To facilitate healing following a surgical procedure on the spine or related soft tissue; or
  4. To otherwise support weak spinal muscles and/or a deformed spine.

If a spinal orthosis is provided and the coverage criteria are not met, the item will be denied as not medically necessary.

 

On September 8, 2017, Performant Recovery announced that they added CPAPs billed without a diagnosis of Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) to their approved issues list. According to their website, Performant Recovery will perform automated reviews of these claims to identify improper payments for claims for a CPAP with the missing diagnosis of OSA.

Codes included in the audit are: E0601

Per the LCD, an E0601 device is covered for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) if criteria A – C are met.

A. The beneficiary has a face-to-face clinical evaluation by the treating practitioner prior to the sleep test to assess the beneficiary for obstructive sleep apnea.

B. The beneficiary has a sleep test (as defined below) that meets either of the following criteria (1 or 2):

  1. The apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) or Respiratory Disturbance Index (RDI) is greater than or equal to 15 events per hour with a minimum of 30 events; or,
  2. The AHI or RDI is greater than or equal to 5 and less than or equal to 14 events per hour with a minimum of 10 events and documentation of:
    • Excessive daytime sleepiness, impaired cognition, mood disorders, or insomnia; or,
    • Hypertension, ischemic heart disease, or history of stroke.

C. The beneficiary and/or their caregiver has received instruction from the supplier of the device in the proper use and care of the equipment.

If a claim for an E0601 is submitted and all of the criteria above have not been met, it will be denied as not reasonable and necessary.

 

Understanding your HIPAAwise Resources

As the saying goes, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Here at HIPAAwise, we’re firm believers of learning from history and taking that knowledge and using it to your advantage.

As you work to become HIPAA compliant you may wonder what you could be fined for or how patient health information could be involved in a breach. We understand HIPAA compliance can be confusing at times, and something may be overlooked which could be the difference between being fined and being in compliance.

To better help others understand, we have provided resources to review all HIPAA Fines imposed from 2015 to current. The most recent fines include the mishandling of patient information, the lack of understanding of HIPAA compliance, and no audit controls when employees are terminated or leave the company. To see the full list of the Office of Civil Rights click here. The settlement will take you to the Health Information Privacy for a longer description of the violation.

​In 2016, the number of security breaches increased 40 percent of over 2015. Breaches occur every day including, loss, theft, hacking or IT incidents and unauthorized access to patient information. Employees should be properly trained to help prevent breaches including but not limited to, knowing not to click on links from email addresses they aren’t familiar with, properly disposing of patient records, and working with business associates to ensure all policies and procedures are being followed properly. To view the list of Office of Civil Rights Breach Report, click here. Due to the sheer amount of breaches, you can filter by the type of breach in the top left hand corner.

If you’re looking to avoid situations found within the resources, sign up for a demonstration of HIPAAwise Powered by The van Halem Group. Our system is easy to use, and will take you beyond the four fundamentals of HIPAA, to ensure HIPAA compliance is met. If you have more questions please contact us here. 

ABN instructions – Special Guidance for Non-Participating Suppliers and Providers

CMS recently updated their ABN Form and accompanying instructions. For non-participating suppliers that issue an ABN for unassigned items/services you must do the following two things in order for the ABN to be considered a valid notice.

First, in the Options: Blank (G), you must strike the last sentence in the Option 1 paragraph with a single line so that it appears like this:

If Medicare does pay, you will refund any payments I made to you, less copays or deductibles.

This single line strike can be included on ABNs printed specifically for issuance when unassigned items and services are furnished. Alternatively, the line can be hand-penned on an already printed ABN.

The sentence must be stricken and can’t be entirely concealed or deleted.

Secondly, when the above sentence is stricken in (G), the supplier must include the following CMS-approved unassigned claim statement in the (H) Additional Information section:

“This supplier doesn’t accept payment from Medicare for the item(s) listed in the table above. If I checked Option 1 above, I am responsible for paying the supplier’s charge for the item(s) directly to the supplier. If Medicare does pay, Medicare will pay me the Medicare-approved amount for the item(s), and this payment to me may be less than the supplier’s charge.”

This statement can be included on ABNs printed for unassigned items and services or it can be handwritten in a legible 10 point or larger font.

An ABN with the Option 1 sentence stricken must contain the CMS-approved unassigned claim statement as written above to be considered valid notice. Similarly, when the unassigned claim statement is included in the “Additional Information” section, the last sentence in Option 1 should be stricken.

To review these instructions, and to access the updated ABN form click here.

UPDATE: Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) Pilot

UPDATED: October 6, 2017

In October 2017, the TPE Pilot is now open to all four DME MAC Jurisdictions. Suppliers will be chosen based on the following criteria:

  1. Items that pose the greatest financial risk to the Medicare Trust Fund – HCPCS with high national error rates, high dollar equipment, etc.
  2. Individual suppliers with high error rates

HCPCS that were currently under widespread prepayment reviews will likely be the first group included in the TPE selection.

Lastly, the goal of the TPE program is to eventually replace all other DME MAC audits, meaning widespread prepayment and documentation reviews will eventually be phased out entirely.

ORIGINAL PUBLICATION DATE: August 23, 2017

In recent months, the CMS has been touting its new “provider friendly” approach, which is, in part, a way to decrease the ever-mounting appeals backlog. And they have introduced several initiatives to do just that, including limiting the scope of review of Redeterminations and Reconsiderations and adjusting serial claims found favorable in the appeals process. The next item on the list, however, may be positive or negative, depending on what side of the coin you fall on. Let me explain.

The DME MACs have recently began to roll out the Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) Pilot program. Beginning on July 3, 2017, CMS authorized the DME MACs to conduct the Targeted Probe and Educate (TPE) Pilot review process. This pilot is currently open to Jurisdictions B and D DME MACs. TPE includes up to three rounds of supplier-specific prepayment probe reviews followed by education to improve identified errors. The goal of TPE is to improve the claims payment error rate and reduce the volume of appeals through claim review and education.

Suppliers chosen for the TPE program can expect the following:

  • DME MACs will utilize data analysis to select the suppliers in the probe. The identified suppliers will receive written notification that will include the topic being reviewed, data reasons for the selection and the process of the review.
  • The first-round prepayment probe review will begin following notification to the supplier. The DME MAC will request 20 – 40 claims for audit.
  • Suppliers with a high error rate on their prepayment probe review will receive an offer for one-on-one education relative to the specific errors identified through the probe review.
  • Following education, suppliers are expected to make necessary adjustments/process changes with sufficient improvement. This will be demonstrated through a second round of claim reviews to occur several months later during a second-round probe review. The probe review will again contain 20 – 40 claims for audit.
  • If improvement in the second-round probe review is not sufficient, suppliers will undergo another round of education followed by another probe review.
  • Following three rounds of probe and education, suppliers that do not demonstrate sufficient improvement in their error rate will be referred to CMS for possible further action.
  • Once a supplier has reached an acceptable error rate, the TPE process will end and the DME MAC will notify the supplier of successful completion.

It’s important to note that if selected for review, suppliers are not excluded from other Medical Review activities, such as, automated reviews, other pilot review programs, prior authorization, etc. as directed by CMS or other contractor reviews.

The DME MACs have indicated that if a high error rate persists following the maximum rounds of review and education, they will refer the supplier to CMS for possible further action. What does that include? Referrals to the ZPIC/UPIC for concerns related to potential fraud/abuse and Recovery Auditor (RA) for collaboration of vulnerability and to ensure there is no duplication of reviews.

One thing that is missing from the published articles and TPE letters: The potential for revocation of your Medicare supplier number. The Final Rule, effective December 3, 2014, states in part that, under authority of the ACA, CMS can and will deny or revoke enrollment of entities and individuals that pose a program integrity risk to Medicare for “… providers and suppliers that have a pattern and practice of billing for services that do not meet Medicare requirements.  This is intended to address providers and suppliers that regularly submit improper claims in such a way that it poses a risk to the Medicare program. “We saw contractors start adding this language into overpayment demand letters over the past year, which leads us to believe they would eventually like to use this as a tool to suppliers they feel pose too much of a risk.

Now more than ever, suppliers must be vigilant in the claims they submit to Medicare. Documentation should be reviewed prior to claim submission to ensure the LCD guidelines have been met. It is also necessary to educate your staff – from intake to billers. If you are selected for the TPE program you will be required to present documentation that supports the medical necessity for the equipment provided. Be sure that you have what you need to be considered “compliant” in your billing practices. TPE allows you three chances to “get it right”. Then you could face extrapolations, RAC audits that go back three years, or worse, revocation.

Data analysis will look for high error rates, high reimbursement dollars, and top billers by area. Don’t wait for the DME MAC to send you a letter advising that you are a chosen participant in the TPE pilot. Taking a proactive approach could save your business. The van Halem Group can help. We offer a variety of proactive services that will identify issues, educate your staff, and help you make the necessary corrections going forward. Don’t wait until you get the TPE notification letter.

Audit Alert: AFO & KAFO Orthoses

On July 5, 2017, Performant Recovery, the National DMEPOS RAC, added AFO and KAFO orthoses to their approved issues list. According to their website, Performant Recovery will perform complex reviews of these claims to determine if basic coverage criteria outlined in the Local Coverage Determination (LCD) for AFO/KAFO Orthoses was met. Performant will review medical documentation provided to determine that services were reasonable and necessary.

Codes inlcuded in the audit are: L1900, L1904, L1907, L1920, L1940, L1945, L1950, L1960, L1970, L1980, L1990, L2106, L2108, L4631, L2000, L2005, L2010, L2020, L2030, L2034, L2036, L2037, L2038, L2126, L2128.

Per the LCD, Ankle-foot orthoses (AFO) described by codes L1900, L1902-L1990, L2106-L2116, L4350, L4360, L4361, L4386, L4387 and L4631 are covered for ambulatory beneficiaries with weakness or deformity of the foot and ankle, who:

    1. Require stabilization for medical reasons, and
    2. Have the potential to benefit functionally.

Knee-ankle-foot orthoses (KAFO) described by codes L2000-L2038, L2126-L2136, and L4370 are covered for ambulatory beneficiaries for whom an ankle-foot orthosis is covered and for whom additional knee stability is required.

Remember that for custom fabricated orthoses (L1904, L1907, L1920, L1940-L1950, L1960, L1970, L1980-L2034, L2036-L2038, L2106-L2108, L2126-L2128, L4631), there must be detailed documentation in the treating physician’s records to support the medical necessity of custom fabricated rather than a prefabricated orthosis. This information will be corroborated by the functional evaluation in the orthotist or prosthetist’s records and must be available upon request.

The RAC can look back three years from the claim paid date for claims in this audit.

Who else is watching?

Both Noridian and CGS have had AFOs and KAFOs on prepayment review for some time. Denials for these claims are mostly documentation related, in that the provided documentation does not meet the coverage criteria in the LCD or support that the orthosis provided was custom fit. It is important that you review the documentation prior to claim submission, and when necessary, refer back to the ordering physician if additional notes are required to support the orthosis.

This LCD also requires a KX modifier for certain HCPCS codes. Suppliers must add a KX modifier to the AFO/KAFO base and addition codes only if all of the coverage criteria in
the “Coverage Indications, Limitations and or Medical Necessity” section in the related LCD have been met and evidence of such is retained in the supplier’s files and available to the DME MAC upon request.

By appending the KX modifier to your claim, you are attesting to the fact that you have documentation to support the code billed to Medicare is medically necessary.

The van Halem Group can help! 

The van Halem Group offers proactive and reactive services to assist you. If you receive an audit request from the RAC our clinical team will review the claim file and respond to the audit on your behalf. If denied, we will work with you to obtain addendums and appeal the overpayment.

Even more beneficial to you, is to allow our team to work for you proactively. Our clinical prescreen program provides reassurance that your documentation meets coverage criteria before you bill the claim. Our clinical team will review your claim prior to billing and work with you to obtain essential documentation from the ordering physician. Prescreens are charged on a per file fee.

For more information, contact us today!

 

References: 

AFO/KAFO LCD

AFO/KAFO Policy Article

The Four Fundamentals of HIPAA

In 2015, the Office of Civil Rights issued $6 million in fines related to HIPAA violations. In 2016, that number increased to $23 million, a 283 percent jump. So far in 2017, they have issued $17 million in fines with the projection of upward growth.

If you think those numbers seem like a good reason to get your business on track to be HIPAA compliant, you’re right! Most fines stem from not understanding and implementing the four fundamentals of HIPAA:

  1. Compliance Team: The first step is to assign someone within the office to oversee the HIPAA compliance. When this responsibility is assigned it must be documented so the Office of Civil Rights will be aware if they were to audit your business. The compliance officer will need to receive proper training and evidence will need to be provided this training occurred.
  2. HIPAA Policy and Procedures: Not having policy and procedures in place within your office is a top reason for fines. Your policies and procedures need to be created, shared with employees and documented. At a minimum, the policies will need to be reviewed on an annual basis. You must create the policies structured for your practice or business, and be active in updating, sharing them with employees and documenting this activity.
  3. Workforce Training and Awareness: Training will need to be provided to anyone on staff who handles or is in contact with patient records. Once training and updates are provided to staff, records of training should be tracked. There will need to be regular reviews and retesting to ensure understanding and compliance.
  4. Security and Risk Assessment: You’ll want to take the time to ask questions about security. Are cabinets that store patient information locked? Are computers password protected? Are doors locked so unauthorized personnel can’t get into medical records? The HIPAA compliance officer must make sure security and risk assessments are completed on a regular basis.

Get your business on the right track. The van Halem Group now has an easy to use solution to ensure HIPAA compliance called HIPAAwise.  With HIPAAwise, our goal is to simplify the compliance process with our web-based program. To see The van Halem Group Solution for yourself sign up for our free trial and discover how simple it can be to become HIPAA compliant! For any other questions, please contact us here.

New Brightree Tool Supports HME Industry Efforts to Collect Data on Medicare Audits

The next HME Audit Key data submission period, covering the time period through the 2nd Quarter of 2017, is set to open on July 17.  Even if you haven’t previously participated, you can still take part starting with this round.  HME suppliers of all sizes and specialties are encouraged to join this campaign to build a strong data-set of performance benchmarks and help the HME community make the case on Capitol Hill and at CMS for much-needed audit reform.


New Resources Streamline HME Audit Key Data Collection Process for Brightree Users

A new tool developed by Brightree streamlines the data collection process and makes it easier to participate.  Brightree customers now have the option of printing a report from their My Files folder to answer many of the operational questions on the quarterly survey.

To print the report simply retrieve the report names AAH_Output.csv from the Inbox for the My Files page within Brightree and open the report in a spreadsheet program like Microsoft Excel. Please see comprehensive guidance for using the Brightree report here: PDF versionMS Word version.  You can also see more about the new tool in this press release.


More About the Audit Key:

Suppliers can go to HMEAuditKey.org to complete the survey and find tips/guidance on entering your data.

Individual Audit Data is NOT Required: The Audit Key does not require you to submit data on individual claims, but instead seeks cumulative counts of pre- and post-payment audits and appeal claim outcomes under DME MAC, RAC, and SMRC reviews.

How does my company benefit by participating?  In addition to providing critical data for the campaign for audit reform, individual suppliers will have access to their own quarterly survey results, and will have access to aggregate survey results and key findings. Suppliers can use this information to see how they compare to others in terms of audit volumes and appeal overturn rates.

Data Security Assured:  Your company’s individual information will never be shared, but will be included in the aggregate data. See additional details on how your data is protected in the Audit Key.

Assistance is just a call or click away:

The HME Audit Key is sponsored by the American Association for Homecare.