OIG audit finds Indiana overstated available UPL payments
Compliance Monitor, November 2, 2005
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
The OIG has recommended that Indiana refund $3.2 million, after investigators determined that the state overstated amounts available for the upper payment limit (UPL) payments to non-state government hospitals and nursing homes.
The OIG determined that the state overstated available UPL payments by about $2.2 million in fiscal year 2001 and by about $4.3 million in fiscal year 2002. The calculations were contrary to state plan provisions because they included unpaid claims rather than Medicaid payments, according to the OIG.
The state disagreed with the OIG's position and did not address its use of an incorrect cost-to-charge ratio or the overstatement of graduate medical education expenses, according to the OIG.
The OIG continues to believe that the state's Medicaid UPL calculations should not include Medicaid unpaid claims.
To conduct the audit, the OIG reviewed Indiana's UPL calculations, UPL payments, and supporting documentation. The OIG also reviewed facility-specific documentation for 10 hospitals and five nursing homes.
Click here to read the audit report, "Review of Indiana's Medicaid Upper Payment Limits for State Fiscal Years 2001 and 2002," (A-05-03-00068) issued Sept. 30, 2005.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
Related Products
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- Catch up on what's new with injections and infusions
- Identify potential Medicaid RAC target areas
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- Capturing all necessary codes for IUD insertion and removal can be challenging
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- E-mailed
-
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- Q&A: Follow CMS' coding guidelines when using modifier -25
- 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
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- Cohesive History and Physical Requirements
- Searched
