Category Archives: Treatment Industry

SHOOT, READY, AIM: Palm Beach County’s Blind Shot at the Addiction Treatment Industry

Posted on by

addiction treatment industryBy: Jeff Cohen

We should all be afraid when there is a “war” declared on anything in our culture because it usually means the complex will be simplified, the innocent will be presumed guilty, details will be ignored and the baby will be thrown out with the bathwater.  Nowhere is that more apparent than the current War on Sober Homes in Palm Beach County.

When we read the stories published by the Palm Beach Post, we learn things like–

  • It is illegal for a sober home to receive payment from an addiction treatment facility for providing so called “case management” services;
  • Addiction treatment providers unethically bill thousands of dollars for urine tests that could be provided for pennies via a cup for sale at Walgreens; and
  • The Patient Brokering Act, a state criminal law, is being broken left and right by sober homes and addiction treatment providers.

Hooey!  It’s completely misleading.  Here’s why:

Case Management Issue.  The arrangement reported In the Post and described in charging documents describes a business arrangement where sober homes are paid by state licensed addiction treatment providers for helping addicts along their path of recovery.  Addiction treatment sees these patients maybe 20 hours a week.  Where are they the rest of the time?  What are they doing?  Addicts seeking treatment often have soft life skills from being off the grid, are often receiving assistance from supportive staff at sober homes who help them get on their feet.  They often come into treatment with no clothes, no money, no food, no job skills and a whole host of medical and psycho social needs.  And addiction treatment facilities want (and sometimes pay for) sober home staff to serve a function in the continuum of care, sometimes want to give them food cards, clothing, cigarettes and whatever they need to accept treatment.  And our sole focus is to do what, focus our regulatory attention on a business relationship that may exist in the treatment industry?  Continue reading →

Cigna Loses Texas Case Against Humble Surgical Hospital, Hit with $16 Mil Judgment

Posted on by

anti kickbackBy: Karina Gonzalez

Cigna recently sued a Texas hospital, Humble Surgical for overpayments.  Humble Surgical is an out-of-network (OON) provider.  Cigna alleged fraudulent billing practices and that the hospital engaged  in a scheme to defraud payors by waiving members’ financial responsibility.

While the suit involved many other  allegations  our article focuses on the arguments Cigna made on failure to collect co-payments, deductibles, and co-insurance and fee-forgiving practices by the hospital.   There were several other issues raised that are important to various practices that Cigna has engaged in with out-of-network providers.  Cigna has consistently audited South Florida providers alleging failure to collect patient financial responsibility or fee-forgiveness, then informing the provider that it was not entitled to any reimbursement because these practices fell within the exclusionary language of the member’s plan.

The suit brought under federal law, ERISA and also Texas common law seeking reimbursement for all overpayments. Cigna was seeking equitable relief including imposing a lien or constructive trust on  fees paid to the hospital.

Humble Surgical counter sued against Cigna for  nonpayment of patients’ claims, underpayment of certain claims and delayed payment of all claims in violation of ERISA, including other causes of action. Here’s what happened:  Continue reading →

Out of Network VOB Process Hits a Speedbump

Posted on by

VOBBy: Urgent Medical Billing, Guest Contributor

The verification process is an important step in the billing cycle. When done correctly the patient’s “VOB” will allow a healthcare provider to quickly determine if they can accept the patient for treatment or not. A good verification will tell a provider the general information about a patient’s insurance policy such as the deductible, the co-insurance and the out of pocket maximum. A very good verification will also include accreditation requirements, information on who would receive the payment for services, correct claims addresses for professional and facility charges and more. The quicker a verification is done, the sooner a patient can be brought into treatment. Speed and accuracy is the name of the game when it comes to insurance verification and United Healthcare, until very recently, was one of the quickest policies for an Insurance Verification Specialist to work with.  Continue reading →

Addiction Treatment Attack by Payers Grows

Posted on by

money viseBy: Jeff Cohen

Addiction treatment providers continue to react to an assault by payers to run them “out of town.”  The first round of attacks (in the Fall of 2014) focused on the practice of copay and deductible write offs.  The phrase cooked up by lawyers for Cigna, “fee forgiveness,” wound its way into the courts system in Texas in a case (Cigna v. Humble Surgical Hospital, Civ. Action No. 4:13-CV-3291, U.S. Dist. Ct., S.D. Tex., Houston Division) against a surgery center, where Cigna argued that the practice of a physician owned hospital in waiving “patient responsibility” relieved the insurer from paying ANYTHING for services needed by patients and provided to them.  Though the case did not involve addiction treatment providers, it gave addiction treatment lawyers a look into what was going to come.  The same argument made in the Texas case was the initial attack by Cigna in a broad attack of the addiction treatment industry, especially in Florida.

As addiction treatment providers fielded Cigna’s “fee forgiveness” attack in the context of “audits,” providers held firm to the belief that justice would prevail and that they would soon restore a growing need for cash flow.  “If we just show them that we’re doing the right thing,” providers thought, “surely they will loosen up the purse strings.”  After all, this was a patient population in terrific need of help, with certain [untested] protection by federal law (the Mental Health Parity Act). Continue reading →

Recovery Residence Law Set to Take Effect in 2016

Posted on by

florida health care attorneyBy: Jacqueline Bain

Several clients have inquired in the past few weeks about the new Florida law regarding recovery residences, or sober living facilities. Implementation of the new law has been slow, leaving a lot of questions unanswered and room for opinions to be taken as facts.

Many have asked us if recovery residences are required by law to obtain certification. It is not mandatory for all sober homes to become certified prior to July 1, 2016. However, as of that date, a DCF-licensed substance abuse treatment facility may not refer a current or discharged patient to a recovery residence unless any of the following applies:

  • the recovery residence holds a valid certificate of compliance or
  • the recovery residence is owned and operated by a licensed service provider or
  • the recovery residence is a licensed service provider’s wholly owned subsidiary.

The term “refer” means to inform a patient by any means about the name, address, or other details of the recovery residence. The effect of the law is to squeeze sober homes into obtaining certification if they are not owned and operated by a DCF-licensed treatment provider. Continue reading →

Act or React? Rehab Industry Transformation

Posted on by

florida healthcare lawyerBy: Jeff Cohen

By now, it’s not news in Florida that drug and alcohol recovery providers are staring devastation in the face as payers continue to mount non-payment offensives.  As payers one by one march on the industry and starve providers of cash flow for operations, many providers can be expected to shut down.  To make matters worse, as the popular media continues to act as a conduit for gross misrepresentations of industry providers, the public’s affection for the industry can’t be expected to improve.  This makes the future look especially bleak for the industry, and yet the silence and stillness of providers is baffling.

Given the breadth of the payer problem (many simply aren’t paying providers), why are we not seeing a slew of lawsuits filed by providers?  In nearly 30 years as a Florida healthcare lawyer, I’ve never seen a healthcare sector so hammered by insurance companies.  And I’ve never seen it unanswered in court. Continue reading →

Cigna Points to Tox Costs and Fraud in Quitting Florida Obamacare

Posted on by

gavelBy: Jeff Cohen 

Cigna just announced it is withdrawing from Florida’s Health Insurance Marketplace.  As reported by Carol Gentry in Health News Florida, Cigna blamed its decision to withdraw on fraud and abuse and on “out of network substance abuse clinics and labs.”  Interestingly, Cigna spokesman, Joseph Mondy, pointed to a recent article in the Palm Beach Post (“Addiction Treatment Bonanza:  How urine tests rake in millions”) in support of Cigna’s announcement.

Media reports regarding the treatment industry and Cigna’s announcement go unquestioned by reporters.  For instance, the Palm Beach Post article claims “the sky-high charges have exploited addicts and alcoholics seeking help, gouged insurers and spurred law enforcement interest….”  It pictures a young, tattooed man as a recovery business owner, but does not mention any wrongdoing or charges against him.  It restates claims in a lawsuit against a toxicology lab without any counterbalancing input from the lab that is the subject of the lawsuit.  It expresses certainty that insurers are being gouged, but does not mention that the rates actually paid by insurers for out of network services are determined entirely by the insurers, not the treatment providers.  It’s an article full of allegations and innuendos, but no meaningful coverage of any of the issues.      Continue reading →

Addiction Treatment is a Story in Search of a Villain

Posted on by

healthcare business

Hastiness and superficiality are the psychic diseases of the twentieth century, and more than anywhere else this disease is reflected in the press— Alexander Solzhenitsyn

By: Jeff Cohen

I read an article in a local paper the other day.  It was about (a) a guy who owned a treatment center (who has not been charged with committing a crime), (b) a lawsuit filed by a large insurance company against a toxicology lab that the insurer owes millions, and (c) the fact that insurance companies pay a lot for toxicology lab testing.  I scratched my head, wondering how there was anything newsworthy there.  The “story” being sold by the paper, however, created a story with a villain (the providers of services to people in recovery from drug and alcohol addiction) and a “victim” (people receiving care for addiction).  I can’t resist responding.

There’s a difference between something that’s interesting and worthy of comment vs. a journalistic attempt to concoct controversy and intrigue that people might buy.  There’s not much of the former, but a lot of the latter.  People in recovery being victimized by horrible, greedy people is an interesting story.  Unfortunately, it’s off the mark and really not helpful to anyone.

There are three pretty safe assumptions we can almost all agree on:  first, there are a lot of people who want to live life without active addiction.  Second, many of them think they need help to create a better life.  Third, some providers of help to people in recovery make a bunch of money providing that service. Continue reading →

Florida Recovery Residences on the Chopping Block

Posted on by

gavelTwo separate legislative proposals are aimed to tighten up the sober home industry.  The Bills follow on the heels of legislation proposed last year, which did not become law.  We have a couple weeks left till the Legislative session ends (May 1st), after which time we will see what regulation made its way through the process.  Until then, it’s important to have an idea of what is on the horizon.

Committee Substitute for House Bill 21 and Committee Substitute for Senate Bill 326 contain the following interesting features—

Creates “voluntary” certification for recovery residences;

A. Specifies the requirement of a “recovery residence administrator;”

B. Specifies that the credentialing entity of both the recovery residence and the recovery residence administrator will be a nonprofit organization (not necessarily one that is tax exempt) that “develops, administers professional, facility, or organization certification programs according to applicable nationally recognized certification or psychometric standards,” and requires the credentialing entity to:

  • Establish the recovery residence certification requirements. Interestingly, the Legislature, which states that those in recovery are vulnerable and need to be protected, is offloading to an unspecified nonprofit organization (which anyone can form in five minutes) the responsibility for developing certification requirements;
  • Establish procedures to, among other things, to monitor, inspect and insure compliance with the certification requirements established by this unspecified nonprofit organization entrusted by the state of Florida with this responsibility;
  • Require recovery residences (who are volunteering to be regulated) to submit documents such as job descriptions, drug testing procedures and requirements, to be managed by a “certified recovery residence administrator.”

The Bill also states that a recovery residence cannot be certified if an owner, director or CFO plead guilty, no contest or was found guilty of certain offenses.  Moreover, the non-governmental, not for profit certifying body has authority to suspend or revoke a certification if the entity determines the residence isn’t complying with the law.  No due process is required.  Oh, and finally, as of July 1, 2016, a provider licensed under Chapter 397 may not refer a patient (current or discharged) to a recovery residence unless the residence, which is not required to be certified, actually becomes certified, making the voluntary certification requirement, ummm….mandatory! Continue reading →