When the list of documentation required by AdvanceMed for UPIC audits included a complete Medicare census, we were confused; or rather, we thought they were confused. Surely they can get their own lists based on any number of databases.
A report by the Office of the Inspector General reveals they are not confused. The OIG has noted that 9 of 28 agencies reviewed had discrepancies between Medicare data derived from claims and Casper and the list provided to surveyors at the time of state survey. It is this list that surveyors use to choose patient’s and they were not inclusive of all patients Medicare has on their lists.
Occasionally a difference of one or two patients can be explained. Many times a ‘missing’ patient is a typo -sloppy but not fraud. Changing out computer systems can be messy. Yet, when an agency presents a list to surveyors that is 150 patients light, equal to 90 percent of their patients, a very bad outcome is lurking on the horizon. Active patient lists that are incomplete ensure that absent patients are not visited by surveyors. In some cases, patients were omitted from the unduplicated census resulting in surveyors being unaware that the patient existed.
The OIG has arrived at the conclusion that while there are many possible reasons for these omissions, some agencies might be deliberately trying to avoid scrutiny for the omitted patients. Honestly, do you feel just a sorry for the OIG because they are only just now arriving at this conclusion?
The OIG also noted that patients were discharged from one agency on the day that the roster was requested by surveyors eliminating them from the ‘active patient’ list. These same patients were readmitted later in the year with no intervening events or claims from other providers such as hospitals, rehab facilities or other home health agencies. There are references a prior report that found frequent discharges and readmissions were often characteristic of fraudulent agencies.
The OIG suggests a couple of possible solutions to ensure that the list given surveyors has not been manipulated by the agency.
- Instead of using an agency provided list, arm surveyors with a claims list provided by CMS
- Spot check by asking an aide or a nurse about their patients and determine if all of those patients are on the agency provided lists.
- Monitor the person in the agency who is running the list from the computer. Doesn’t this sound like fun for both the surveyor and the agency?
- Conduct a retrospective review post survey using Medicare claims or Casper data.
Obviously you are not going to manipulate patient lists but it will instill confidence in surveyors if you are able to provide accurate information in a short period of time. Because surveys are unscheduled, multiple people should be trained to:
- Run an active patient list
- Run an unduplicated census (list of all patients regardless of the number of times they have been admitted. Each patient will be listed only once).
- Run a duplicated census (the name of every admission regardless of whether the patient has been admitted more than once. This list is longer than the unduplicated census list.)
- Speak intelligently about any potential flaws in your data and offer a work around. (Your biller should be able to provide a list of RAPs dropped or a referral log from the computer)
I know that agencies have rushed to ‘archive’ records of patients that who don’t have anything good to say about the agency and records that might be train wrecks due to documentation errors or poor care. Surveyors are very much aware that these patients exist. All agencies have at least one or two.
Unless care is egregious, state surveyors will allow the agency to provide a corrective action plan. If the deficiency is a repeat or widespread throughout the agency, you may be subject to financial sanctions and a hold on admissions until corrections are implemented and verified by the state agency. It’s embarrassing to be certain but rarely fatal.
If you provide false information to the surveyors, you have crossed a line into a whole new level of non-compliance. Your Provider Agreement has been violated and you are at risk for losing your agency’s license or worse. And yes, there are consequences worse than being shut down because you have no license to operate.
Most agencies want to do the right thing. Knowing that the agency down the street with patients who do not need care or are not homebound and yet has a perfect survey while your agency has five or six deficiencies has been known to boil the blood of nurses but at least they know where to focus attention.
The agency that hides patients from surveyors now has a very real chance of being caught. Depending on how patient lists are compared, it may take a while, too, contributing to insomnia. If you have archived patients to avoid scrutiny, consider keeping a current passport handy. This could be fun.
OASIS and Coding Review 