Those in post-acute care should frequently check for any new reports on this subject.
The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) sponsored an FAQ call on June 21 concerning IMPACT (Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation), which is directed by the legislation of the same name enacted in 2014.
This was a one-hour call, about half of which was devoted to presenting background and update information, and then the remainder was devoted to questions from listeners. The information provided by CMS was wide-ranging in specificity, while the questioners tended to have more detailed questions, because they were coming from a specific post-acute setting.
For the purposes of IMPACT, there are four settings:
Hospice was also mentioned during the discussions and will probably be included at some point in the future.
Areas of questions and discussion included:
CMS is using outside contractors, including RAND and RTI (Research Triangle Institute). Thus there is ongoing activity in these areas, including special studies and associated reports. This is a multi-year project, and anyone involved in post-acute care, which includes acute-care hospitals along with the identified post-acute providers, should frequently check to see what has developed and/or whether there are any new reports that are available.
One of the main concerns is the collection of standardized patient assessment data. There are separate payment systems for each of these four areas. Each of the payment systems already uses some sort of standardized patient assessment instrument (PAI). One of the overarching issues is whether there will be a single, unified patient assessment form, or whether the current forms will be modified and extended to meet the IMPACT needs. CMS is indicating that the current forms will be modified and extended. These different forms were developed for payment purposes, and the payment systems involved are quite different, so making changes for collecting some sort of uniform patent assessment data is a challenge.
Two areas in which questions were raised were the reporting of functional status and medication reconciliation. For HHAs, questions relating to ambulatory tests (e.g., walking and turning) are particularly pertinent because there may be little room in a beneficiary’s home to administer such tests. The measurement of medication reconciliation is one of redundancy. Section GG of MDS 3.0, LTCH CARE Data, and the 2019 release of OASIS were discussed through both the presentation and then the questions raised by participants. The main issue is that of consistency, and then also who will be performing and documenting the assessment. CMS seems to believe that this will be done by a multi-disciplinary team.
The use and meaning of the statistic for “Medicare spending per beneficiary” also raises questions. Exactly how this relates to quality measures is an interesting question.
Another area of concern is how the IMPACT data collection dovetails into the “meaningful measures Framework.” In theory, the alignment and provision of proper post-acute care should assist in meeting meaningful measures.
Although not discussed extensively, CMS also did indicate that there would be a SNF QRT Compare Website launched by Oct. 1, 2018.
CMS encourages all interested parties to access and study the Data Element Library. This is a centralized resource for CMS assessment instrument data elements and their associated mapping to nationally accepted health information technology standards (go online to https://del.coms.gov).
There is much activity going on with the implementation of IMPACT. This is a multi-year process, and there are other quality data gathering efforts with which IMPACT must be coordinated. Without a doubt, compliance issues will be recognized in connection with the implementation. Compliance personnel, along with quality assurance personnel, should monitor circumstances as IMPACT is implemented in the coming years.
Picture this: You are driving through an area you don’t know well. It is a cold day. You stop to get gas. You fill the
Federal health officials have announced the launch of the Comprehensive Regulations to Uncover Suspicious Healthcare (CRUSH) initiative. The announcement was framed as a decisive step
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Sepsis sequencing continues to challenge even experienced coding and CDI professionals, with evolving guidelines, documentation gaps, and payer scrutiny driving denials and data inconsistencies. In this webcast, Payal Sinha, MBA, RHIA, CCDS, CDIP, CCS, CCS-P, CCDS-O, CRC, CRCR, provides clear guideline-based strategies to accurately code sepsis, severe sepsis, and septic shock, assign POA indicators, clarify the relationship between infection and organ dysfunction, and align documentation across teams. Attendees will gain practical tools to strengthen audit defensibility, improve first-pass accuracy, support appeal success, reduce denials, and ensure accurate quality reporting, empowering organizations to achieve consistent, compliant sepsis coding outcomes.
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.
In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.
Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.
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.
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
