Since January 2021, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Office of Inspector General (OIG) have accepted anonymous and confidential whistleblower disclosures.
Can you imagine your competitor accusing you of fraud, in order to get your consumers? It happens. I recently promised a story of two specialized dental practices in Minnesota, and how one practice purposefully and nefariously accused the other of fraud.
One practice was comprised of a father and three sons. They had three locations and were highly profitable. They had one main competitor because apparently, they specialized in a certain dental procedure that only one other office performed in their state. The competitor dentist just happened to be on the ethics committee for the State Dental Board. The competitor submitted a complaint alleging that the family dentistry was committing fraud to the Dental Board and the State Medicaid Fraud Division. Accusations of upcoding, even if there is no proof, are easily alleged.
Accusations of alleged healthcare fraud invokes 42 CFR 455.23, which states “the State Medicaid agency must suspend all Medicaid payments to a provider after the agency determines there is a credible allegation of fraud for which an investigation is pending under the Medicaid program against an individual or entity unless the agency has good cause to not suspend payments or to suspend payment only in part.”
The word “must” was changed in 2011 with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Prior to 2011, the regulation read “may.” “Must” is much more binding. The “credible allegation of fraud” is defined as an “indicia of reliability.”
Going back to the regulation, subsection two states that “the State Medicaid agency may suspend payments without first notifying the provider of its intention to suspend such payments.”
The third subsection notes that “a provider may request, and must be granted, administrative review where State law so requires.”
One by one, the dentists accused of fraud by their competitor had their dental licenses temporarily suspended by the dental board. Then, investigations ensued. Before finding any fraud, based on the allegation of a competitor who happened to be on the ethics committee for the Dental Board, the State invoked 42 CFR 455.23 and suspended the dentists’ Medicaid reimbursements.
That accusation resulted in a two-year reimbursement suspension for the accused practice, which resulted in the business closing. The accuser facility is thriving, and opened up three new offices. Is this really what are fraud laws are intended to do? The laws are being used to put competitors out of business, not finding fraud.
Two years later, we are filing suit, stating that a) two years is not “temporary;” b) the allegation was nefarious in nature; and (c) there is no fraud.
I wish that the dental practice had retained me two years ago. I hate that they suffered for two years for no reason. If your reimbursements are suspended for any reason, especially because of a malicious competitor’s accusation, immediately push back. The more time passes, the less likely you are to obtain a federal injunction ordering the State to rescind the suspension. The State can continue its investigation; paying providers for services rendered does not inhibit an investigation. Instead, suspending reimbursements while investigating alleged fraud is assessing penalties before determining whether the penalties are warranted. What happened to due process?
Remember, the regulation also states that a State must grant administrative review where State law so requires. Do you know whether your State requires administrative review upon an accusation of fraud? Many States do not have administrative remedies. In the famous words of Sir Francis Bacon, “knowledge is power.”
For nearly a decade after the late-2000s Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) policy changes, work Relative Value Units (RVUs) felt like a stable
There is a lot of talk lately about the need to follow orders given by a member of law enforcement. I would like to explore
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Expert presenters Kathy Pride, RHIT, CPC, CCS-P, CPMA, and Brandi Russell, RHIA, CCS, COC, CPMA, break down complex fracture care coding rules, walk through correct modifier application (-25, -57, 54, 55), and clarify sequencing for initial and subsequent encounters. Attendees will gain the practical knowledge needed to submit clean claims, ensure compliance, and stay one step ahead of payer audits in 2026.
Accurately determining the principal diagnosis is critical for compliant billing, appropriate reimbursement, and valid quality reporting — yet it remains one of the most subjective and error-prone areas in inpatient coding. In this expert-led session, Cheryl Ericson, RN, MS, CCDS, CDIP, demystifies the complexities of principal diagnosis assignment, bridging the gap between coding rules and clinical reality. Learn how to strengthen your organization’s coding accuracy, reduce denials, and ensure your documentation supports true medical necessity.
Denials continue to delay reimbursement, increase administrative burden, and threaten financial stability across healthcare organizations. This essential webcast tackles the root causes—rising payer scrutiny, fragmented workflows, inconsistent documentation, and underused analytics—and offers proven, data-driven strategies to prevent and overturn denials. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen documentation and coding accuracy, engage clinicians effectively, and leverage predictive analytics and AI to identify risks before they impact revenue. Through real-world case examples and actionable guidance, this session empowers coding, CDI, and revenue cycle professionals to shift from reactive appeals to proactive denial prevention and revenue protection.
Sepsis remains one of the most frequently denied and contested diagnoses, creating costly revenue loss and compliance risks. In this webcast, Angela Comfort, DBA, MBA, RHIA, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, provides practical, real-world strategies to align documentation with coding guidelines, reconcile Sepsis-2 and Sepsis-3 definitions, and apply compliant queries. You’ll learn how to identify and address documentation gaps, strengthen provider engagement, and defend diagnoses against payer scrutiny—equipping you to protect reimbursement, improve SOI/ROM capture, and reduce audit vulnerability in this high-risk area.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
As AI reshapes healthcare compliance, the risk of biased outputs and opaque decision-making grows. This webcast, led by Frank Cohen, delivers a practical Four-Pillar Governance Framework—Transparency, Accountability, Fairness, and Explainability—to help you govern AI-driven claim auditing with confidence. Learn how to identify and mitigate bias, implement robust human oversight, and document defensible AI review processes that regulators and auditors will accept. Discover concrete remedies, from rotation protocols to uncertainty scoring, and actionable steps to evaluate vendors before contracts are signed. In a regulatory landscape that moves faster than ever, gain the tools to stay compliant, defend your processes, and reduce liability while maintaining operational effectiveness.
Get clear, practical answers to Medicare’s most confusing regulations. Join Dr. Ronald Hirsch as he breaks down real-world compliance challenges and shares guidance your team can apply right away.
Federal auditors are zeroing in on Inpatient Rehabilitation Facility (IRF) and hospital rehab unit services, with OIG and CERT audits leading to millions in penalties—often due to documentation and administrative errors, not quality of care. Join compliance expert Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, to learn the five clinical “pillars” of IRF-PPS admissions, key documentation requirements, and real-life case lessons to help protect your revenue.
Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25
CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24
