Connecticut 2015 Regular Session

Connecticut House Bill HB06550

Introduced
1/26/15  
Refer
1/26/15  
Refer
3/23/15  
Refer
3/23/15  
Report Pass
3/24/15  
Report Pass
3/24/15  
Refer
4/1/15  
Refer
4/1/15  
Report Pass
4/8/15  
Report Pass
4/8/15  

Caption

An Act Concerning Medicaid Provider Audits.

Impact

The legislation seeks to clarify the audit process within Medicaid, particularly addressing concerns over potential overreach in how audits might penalize providers for clerical errors. By defining terms related to audit procedures—including 'audit look-back period' and 'extrapolation'—the bill aims to provide transparency into how payment discrepancies are assessed. This change could result in a more equitable approach to audits, thus fostering better compliance and reducing financial burdens on providers who make genuine clerical errors.

Summary

House Bill 06550, concerning Medicaid provider audits, aims to amend existing regulations governing how audits are conducted on service providers participating in Medicaid programs. The bill introduces provisions to ensure a more standardized audit process, emphasizing written notifications to providers at least thirty days before audits commence. It also delineates acceptable methodologies for determining payment discrepancies, focusing on statistical sampling methods that yield a high confidence level. The intent is to protect providers from unreasonable overpayment claims resulting from clerical errors while maintaining program integrity.

Sentiment

The sentiment around HB 06550 appears largely supportive, especially from healthcare providers who have historically faced challenges related to audits. Many see the bill as a positive development that could lead to fairer treatment during the auditing process. However, there are concerns among some legislators regarding the need to balance these protections with the necessity of preventing Medicaid fraud, ensuring that the auditing process doesn't become too lenient and undercut the integrity of the Medicaid program.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding the bill include the debate over what constitutes a 'clerical error' versus fraud, and how leniency for minor errors might be construed in practice. Some opponents worry that the new definitions could inadvertently allow for abuse by unscrupulous providers, while proponents argue that it promotes accountability and fairness. Additionally, there is a concern regarding the training initiatives mentioned in the bill that aim to assist providers in enhancing their compliance with the Medicaid program, as the effectiveness of such training remains to be fully evaluated.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CT HB07190

An Act Concerning Medicaid Provider Audits And Electronic Visit Verification.

CT HB07009

An Act Revising Medicaid Audit Requirements And Establishing Temporary Waivers For Providers Implementing Electronic Visit Verification.

CT HB05500

An Act Concerning Provider Audits Under The Medicaid Program.

CT SB00283

An Act Concerning Audits By The Department Of Social Services.

CT SB00243

An Act Concerning Audits Of Medical Assistance Providers.

TX SB207

Relating to the authority and duties of the office of inspector general of the Health and Human Services Commission.

CT HB05281

An Act Concerning Fraud Detection In Social Services Programs.

TX HB1036

Relating to the regulation of pharmacy benefit managers; imposing penalties; imposing and authorizing fees.