Home Health & Hospice Week

Reimbursement:

No-Pay RAPs Are Living Up To Bad Rep

From losing pay to pouring in more resources, the cons far outweigh the pros.

Home health agencies have hated the idea of no-pay requests for anticipated payment since the CMS proposed them in 2018, and 2021 has shown they have good reason.

Background: In its 2019 final payment rule issued in late 2018, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services finalized no-pay RAPs for newly enrolled providers effective 2020. In its 2020 final rule issued in late 2019, CMS reduced RAP payments to 20 percent of the full episode amount in 2020 and switched all agencies to no-pay RAPs in 2021.

The change was met with vociferous protest from the industry, but CMS overruled its concerns. The agency insisted that 30-day billing periods made upfront cash payments unnecessary and that widespread RAP fraud was costing Medicare big (see HCW by AAPC, Vol. XXVIII, No. 39-40).

As expected by the home health industry, “the transition from RAPs to no-pay RAPs has been a disaster,” emphasizes Nick Seabrook with BlackTree Healthcare Consulting in King of Prussia, Pennsylvania. It’s the opposite of the relatively smooth transition to the Patient-Driven Groupings Model this year, Seabrook observes.

“CMS really did not do providers any favors with this transition plan,” judges reimbursement expert M. Aaron Little with BKD in Springfield, Missouri.

Here are some of the top problems HHAs have seen since no-pay RAPs began Jan. 1:

  • The five-day deadline and financial penalties. HHAs now have five days from the start of care to submit a RAP. If they don’t, they incur a 1/30 financial penalty for every day they are late with a billing period’s RAP.

Agencies that have failed to fully adapt to the new, lesser requirements for RAPs are having a tough time hitting the five-day deadline, relates consultant J’non Griffin with Home Health Solutions in Carbon Hill, Alabama. For example, HHAs may now submit RAPs based on verbal orders and can use a “dummy” placeholder HIPPS code instead of the real thing.

Even under the new requirements, “the challenge of getting admission documents processed to generate the RAP poses some operational challenges,” notes Joe Osentoski with Gateway Home Health Coding & Consulting in Michigan.

The shift to the five-day deadline was a major operational change for some providers. They “were used to sending the billing weeks or months later,” relates Tim Olson with billing company Astrid Medical Services in Corpus Christi, Texas. “Even some of those who are usually more timely have had to rethink and rearrange their processes to get the RAP information completed as quickly as possible,” and that has been a challenge, Olson says.

When LUPAs get triggered, the problem can be even worse (see box, p. 83).

“The financial penalty is the clearest downside since it has a concrete effect,” Osentoski judges. “The deadline is causing the most angst.”

  • Cash flow slowdown. Even when no-pay RAPs work as intended, they are still resulting in significantly reduced cash flow, says Lynn Labarta, CEO of Imark Billing in Miami. “The RAPs are now paying zero,” Labarta highlights. “Agencies, especially smaller agencies, counted on the 20 percent upfront payment to help cover their payrolls.”

The result: “They are down 20 percent of upfront cash,” Labarta tells AAPC. “This is a strain.”

  • Medicare claims system errors. Every week seems to bring a new RAP payment error coming to light (see story, p. 84). “There have been numerous problems with claims processing, as evidenced by the claims processing issue logs published by all three MACs,” Little stresses. Every error, even if the HHH Medicare Administrative Contractors go back and correct it, is “yet another hit to providers’ cash flow and claims processing headaches,” he says.
  • HHA software errors. The processing glitches aren’t all on Medicare’s side. “Some of the software [programs] were having challenges in generating the second RAPs,” Labarta offers.

Another example: “Some softwares have not adapted their processes either, so the OASIS has to be completely reviewed before the RAP will drop,” Griffin recounts. That “costs the agency time and money, because likely it won’t be accurate and complete, submitted, and accepted within the 5 days.”

The problems aren’t always directly related to RAP submission. “We’re … seeing numerous complications in the [electronic medical records] vendors resulting in misstated revenues and analytic data, all pointing back to logic changes the vendors had to make to accommodate the no-pay RAPs,” Little reports. “Accommodating the no-pay RAPs required a significant amount of logic changes for the EMR vendors. It impacted workflows, revenue recognition, claim coding, etc.”

Bottom line: “It was not a simple change for the EMR vendors to make, so it’s no wonder we’re beginning to see unforeseen issues,” Little says.

  • Procedural changes. The deadline and payment aren’t the only things that shifted with no-pay RAPs. CMS hasn't done much to communicate major changes such as requiring only a written or verbal physician order and a furnished visit for RAP submission; and encouraging use of a dummy HIPPS code on a RAP and matching final claims, meaning the OASIS data for the patient doesn’t have to be locked and transmitted before submission.

Another change: Formerly the 0023 line on the claim had to be the first billable visit. Now, for the second 30-day billing period in a 60-day certification period, the 0023 line can be the first day of that period. “That is completely different and has not been communicated” adequately by CMS, Seabrook criticizes.

To make it even more confusing, there’s yet a third 0023 option for subsequent RAPs. HHAs can “report the date of the first visit, regardless of whether the visit is a covered or noncovered visit,” MAC CGS says on its no-pay RAP submission page.

  • Increased resource requirements. In order to make sure RAPs get submitted timely, are identified quickly if rejected or returned, and are resubmitted when needed on time, HHAs are having to sink a lot more time, money, and manpower into the task.

Billing staff have “to monitor constantly” and resolve issues timely, even if problems are the MAC’s fault, blasts Melinda Gaboury with Healthcare Provider Solutions in Nashville, Tennessee.

It’s especially galling for agencies to have to identify and appeal returned and rejected RAPs that are the Medicare system’s fault. “Appeals are not free,” Seabrook points out.

Inaccurate revenue projection. Between dummy HIPPS codes, what the agencies believe they should get paid, and what Medicare actually pays them, many HHAs are experiencing challenges keeping their financials straight. “The softwares may not be accurately capturing the anticipated revenue, so agencies are flying in the dark with knowing their revenue,” Griffin laments.

Overall, the one-year transition of no-pay RAPs seems “like a colossal waste of money,” Seabrook criticizes. Both HHAs and Medicare have poured time and funds into making programming logic updates that will be obsolete after one year.

“Between the 5-day deadline and the RAPs not paying anyway, many providers think that it would have been easier for everybody if Medicare had just skipped the no-pay RAP system and gone straight to the Notice of Admission system instead,” Olson says.

Note: See CGS’ “Submitting a Request for Anticipated Payment (RAP) under the Home Health Patient-Driven Groupings Model” webpage at https://cgsmedicare.com/hhh/education/materials/anticipated_payment.html.

Other Articles in this issue of

Home Health & Hospice Week

View All