There are times when the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) doesn’t agree with itself. I am dealing with a situation in which one team at CMS is saying the No Surprises Act (NSA) applies, and another is saying it doesn’t.
One of my clients in Florida received an inquiry from CMS. Like many Sun Belt facilities, this organization frequently gets northern patients who are visiting, and consequently, out of network. This particular patient had come from New York.
My client contacted the health insurer to ask what the Qualifying Payment Amount (QPA) should be – that is, what the patient would have been responsible for if the patient had gone to an in-network facility. It is a very straightforward inquiry, and exactly what my client should have done.
The insurer effectively shrugged. “We don’t have a contract with you, so we don’t know what the patient responsibility should be” was the gist of their response. That is a blatant disregard of the insurer’s obligations under the NSA. Health insurers need to figure out what the patient would have owed in-network and communicate that to the healthcare entity. Then the healthcare entity is not permitted to bill the patient more than that amount. If the healthcare organization feels like the insurer is underpaying them, they may challenge the insurer’s payment, but the patient’s responsibility is effectively fixed by the insurer’s determination.
Here, the insurer refused to make that determination – not just for this patient, but for dozens of patients. My client was left with an interesting dilemma. What should they charge the patient? Their instruction to staff was to write off all of the patient’s responsibility. That was not legally required, but it is what they chose to do. Unfortunately, one employee goofed and sent a few claims to patients with the billed charges showing as patient responsibility. While that shouldn’t have happened, it is actually a bit unclear what the hospital should have done, given the information vacuum.
When the patient complained to CMS, CMS sent a letter of inquiry. The hospital wrote off the patient balance, and I talked with the folks at CMS, who were responsive, helpful, and understanding. I was truly appreciative after the call. Their suggestion was that we file a complaint with the folks who oversee the insurance side of things, because the insurer was violating the NSA.
That seemed totally reasonable to me. So, we did it. I figured this would solve the problem.
My optimism was misplaced. Our complaint was dismissed.
The folks overseeing the insurers asserted that the NSA didn’t apply. So, one part of CMS was citing my client for violating the NSA, while another part was asserting that the insurer was not violating the NSA because it did not apply. Oy. Just oy. To be clear, I think the NSA does apply, and the team overseeing insurers is the one in the wrong.
I will be reaching out to the folks overseeing the insurers to see if we can get the two parts of CMS to see the same facts the same way. But I think this is a good time to emphasize that I am seeing a lot of activity on NSA enforcement.
If you fail to give patients a good-faith estimate for visits scheduled three or more days out or bill them more than the QPA for emergency services – including services after admission, but before the patient can practically travel to an in-network facility – expect to hear from CMS. Many of my clients respond to the inquires by simply writing off the patient liability. But I would encourage you to take the time to figure out whether you were right or wrong. If you were wrong, admit it and fix the problem.
If you were right, stick to your guns. Writing off the patient responsibility without making the point that you didn’t violate the law may come back to bite you.
In the words of Supertramp’s Rick Davies, who died last week, when you screw up, you can and should say “right, you’re bloody well right.” But if you haven’t erred, “write your problems down in detail and take them to a higher place.”
That is what we will be doing here!
EDITOR’S NOTE:
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views or opinions of MedLearn Media. We provide a platform for diverse perspectives, but the content and opinions expressed herein are the author’s own. MedLearn Media does not endorse or guarantee the accuracy of the information presented. Readers are encouraged to critically evaluate the content and conduct their own research. Any actions taken based on this article are at the reader’s own discretion.
In the Medicare fee-for-service world, “prepayment review” (also sometimes called “prepayment medical review” or “pre-claim review,” depending on the context) means that a claim is
Back in June, I was on the Monitor Mondays broadcast discussing the initial momentum within the Trump Administration for a single, national provider directory. Now,
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
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.
Only ICD10monitor delivers what you need: updates on must-know changes associated with the FY26 IPPS, including new ICD-10-CM/PCS codes, CCs/MCCs, and MS-DRGs, plus insights, analysis and answers to your questions from two of the country’s most respected subject matter experts.
This third session in our 2026 IPPS Masterclass will feature a review of FY26 changes to the MS-DRG methodology and new technology add-on payments (NTAPs), presented by nationally recognized ICD-10 coding expert Christine Geiger, MA, RHIA, CCS, CRC, with bonus insights and analysis from Dr. James Kennedy.
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.
During this essential RACmonitor webcast Michael Calahan, PA, MBA Certified Compliance Officer, will clarify the rules, dispel common misconceptions, and equip you with practical strategies to code, document, and bill high-risk split/shared, incident-to & critical care E/M services with confidence. Don’t let audit risks or revenue losses catch your organization off guard — learn exactly what federal auditors are looking for and how to ensure your documentation and reporting stand up to scrutiny.
Learn how to navigate the proposed elimination of the Inpatient-Only list. Gain strategies to assess admission status, avoid denials, protect compliance, and address impacts across Medicare and non-Medicare payors. Essential insights for hospitals.
RACmonitor is proud to welcome back Dr. Ronald Hirsch, one of his most requested webcasts. In this highly anticipated session, Dr. Hirsch will break down the complex Two Midnight Rule Medicare regulations, translating them into clear, actionable guidance. He’ll walk you through the basics of the rule, offer expert interpretation, and apply the rule to real-world clinical scenarios—so you leave with greater clarity, confidence, and the tools to ensure compliance.
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. 2 with code CYBER24
