Missouri medical center to pay $60 million to federal government
Healthcare Auditing Weekly, July 29, 2008
A Missouri healthcare system has agreed to pay $60 million in a settlement regarding claims that it violated the False Claims Act, the Anti-kickback Statute and the Stark Statute from 1996 to 2005.
Lester E. Cox Medical Centers, Springfield, MO, agreed to pay the U.S. for the allegations as well as enter into a Corporate Integrity Agreement with the OIG, according to a press release from the DOJ.
Cox allegedly violated the law by entering into financial relationships with referring physicians at a local physician group and engaging in improper Medicare billing practices.
Under the Stark Statute, providers are forbidden to bill federal health care programs for referrals from physicians with whom they have a financial relationship. In Cox’s case, the medical center is alleged to have accepted inducements from physician groups in return for patient referrals, violating the Anti-kickback Statute. Cox is also accused of including non-reimbursable costs on its Medicare cost reports and improperly billing for services provided to dialysis patients.
Comments
0 comments on “Missouri medical center to pay $60 million to federal government ”
Related Products
-
Strategies for Health Care Compliance
News and real-life examples to increase the effectiveness of your compliance program. Strategies for Health Care Compliance...
-
Compliance Monitor
This HTML e-mail newsletter delivers news on Medicare and Medicaid fraud and abuse, as well as recent documents and targets...
-
Medicare Weekly Update
Each issue of Medicare Weekly Update includes the latest CMS proposed and final rules, CMS manual revisions, and...
-
Medicare Update for Physician Services
Medicare Update for Physician Services is a free, monthly e-zine that delivers news and information to help physician...
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Q&A: Acute respiratory failure diagnosis does not require intubation
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- Oxygen Cylinder Storage Requirements
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- Understand the spine to code back procedures correctly
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Searched