TEP report may signal what will be in forthcoming proposed rule. The home health proposed rule for 2024 likely won’t be out for another six to eight weeks, but you can look at a recent report for clues on a critical hospice provision. Background: The Consolidated Appropriations Act enacted in December 2020 required the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services to implement a Special Focus Program to single out poor-performing hospices for additional survey scrutiny (see HHHW by AAPC, Vol. XXX, No. 1). CMS proposed an SFP in its 2022 home health rulemaking cycle, but pushed it back after receiving a plethora of negative comments on the topic. Last year, CMS indicated it would conduct a Technical Expert Panel discussion and then propose the program in this year’s 2024 rulemaking cycle. CMS conducted the TEP meetings as planned, as well as four additional “listening sessions,” SFP contractor Abt Associates indicates in a new report summarizing those events. Hospices thought the agency might include the SFP proposal in the 2024 hospice proposed rule, but CMS will once again include the provision in its home health rule. That rule is usually out in late June or early July. In the meantime, hospices can get some hints at the policy’s final configuration from the TEP summary.
For example: How CMS will choose hospices for inclusion in the SFP has been of utmost concern to the industry. In the report, Abt indicates that the selection process should use “a variety of hospice data sources, including hospice survey data (condition-level deficiencies [CLDs] and substantiated complaints), the Hospice Care Index (HCI) (which uses Medicare claims data), and consumer evaluations from the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Hospice Survey Star Rating.” A point of controversy, however, has been whether CMS should have quotas based on size, CMS geographic locations, or states, among other characteristics. The National Association for Home Care & Hospice “had recommended a no stratification approach in its proposed rule comments on the SFP,” the trade group notes in its report analysis. The Panel seemed to agree. “The TEP did not support stratifying by state, as they wanted to ensure the poorest performing hospices were included on the candidate list regardless of their geographic location,” Abt notes in the report. However, “the TEP supported stratifying by hospice size or CMS Location, and even supported not stratifying at all,” the report highlights. “Although the no stratification method selects the hospices with the worst scores, it also concentrates most candidate hospices in a few states,” the report cautions. Stay tuned to the home health proposed rule to see which methodology CMS chooses. One thing is clear — CMS is determined to move ahead with the program as part of its wider fraud and abuse-fighting stance. “The SFP is only one of the many efforts directed at hospice program integrity,” points out consulting and accounting firm The Health Group in Morgantown, West Va. “Hospices need to remain aware of developments regarding SFP as well as other current and planned hospice integrity initiatives of CMS,” The Health Group cautions in its newsletter. The SFP “aims to address issues that place hospice beneficiaries at risk,” notes LeadingAge’s Katy Barnett. That’s why CMS will prioritize the initiative, despite the “challenges of developing and implementing an SFP,” Barnett indicates in report analysis. Note: A link to the 74-page report is at www.cms.gov/medicare/quality-safety-oversight-certification-compliance/ hospice-special-focus-program in the “Downloads” section.