OIG posts safe harbor for FQHCs
Compliance Monitor, October 10, 2007
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
The OIG recently posted a safe harbor for federally qualified health centers (FQHC) arrangements under the Anti-Kickback Statute.
The final rule:
- Clarifies the definition of ''remuneration'' for purposes of the safe harbor
- Eliminates the requirement that arrangements that do not comply with the safe harbor be terminated
- Eliminates the requirement that arrangements must comply with all relevant requirements of the health center's section 330 grant funding;
- Consolidates and clarifies the documentation requirements
- Clarifies that health centers do not need to develop set standards for determining whether an arrangement is expected to contribute meaningfully to services for underserved patients
- Simplifies the safe harbor requirement pertaining to disclosures to patients
- Clarifies health centers' freedom to refer patients
- Clarifies the conditions under which individuals and entities furnish separately billable goods, items, or services to health centers
Click here to read the complete final rule.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Compliance Monitor!
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
-
- 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
- HIPAA Q&A: Level of encryption needed for email
- 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
- 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
- CMS has reformulated payments for some bilateral procedures
- New conflicts of interest create new challenges
- Q/A. One injection code or two?
- ED-to-inpatient transfers are flawed with safety gaps
- Searched