Demand letter responsibility shifted from RAC to MAC
Recovery Auditor Report, August 11, 2011
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Recovery Auditor Report!
Recovery audit contractors had previously been responsible for issuing demand letters to providers, but a transmittal released on July 29 will shift this responsibility to Medicare administrative contractors (MACs). This move reflects the program’s desire to increase consistency and efficiency through automation, according to CMS.
The RACs will continue to handle this responsibility until January 3, 2012, when the responsibility officially switches over to the MACs. As a result, when a recovery auditor finds that improper payments have made been, they will submit claim adjustments to the MAC, and the MAC will then establish receivables and issue automated demand letters for any recovery auditor identified overpayment. The MAC will then follow the same process as is used to recover any other payment, according to the accompanying MLN Matters article.
Want to receive articles like this one in your inbox? Subscribe to Recovery Auditor Report!
Related Products
-
2010 RAC Track: Medicare Compliance Forum Audio Recording
On-demand audio recordings of the RAC track of HCPro Revenue Cycle Institute's popular Medicare Compliance Forum, held May...
-
Medicare Compliance Forum: Orlando, FL
Attend the 2012 Medicare Compliance Forum to reduce your organization’s risk and exposure from government auditors...
-
Outpatient, Observation, or Inpatient?
Attend the half-day seminar, Outpatient, Observation or Inpatient? Walking the Tightrope of Regulatory Guidance, September...
-
OPPS and IPPS Reimbursement Fundamentals
Attend OPPS and IPPS Reimbursement Fundamentals, a half-day seminar on September 30 in Orlando. You'll learn to understand...
-
2010 Observation Services Track:
On-demand audio recordings of the Observation Services track of HCPro Revenue Cycle Institute's popular Medicare Compliance...
Most Popular
- Articles
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Topic: CMS, OESS post new security compliance review information, checklist
- HIPAA Q&A: Answering service messages
- Q/A: Volume requirement for reporting hydration services
- News and briefs: Oklahoma Osteopathic Association against residency bill change
- What does case-mix index mean to you?
- QA:Coding multiple initial infusions
- The debate continues: Nurses who reported physician to the Texas Medical Board file federal appeal
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- OB services: Coding inside and outside of the package
- E-mailed
-
- Featured blog post: Nurses face felony charges after reporting physician to the Texas Medical Board
- Are your workforce members texting PHI?
- Don't let these sentinel events trigger falsely
- Arkansas woman convicted for HIPAA violation
- Reasons for inadequate fluid intake in the elderly
- Q&A tackles coding questions about injections and infusions
- Joint Commission Center announces handoff communication solutions
- Inside best practice: Reduce patient falls with a stoplight
- Identify modifiable risk factors to prevent patient falls
- Hospitalist-surgeon comanagement has no effect on outcomes
- Searched