Medicare Advantage Plans Under Scrutiny

Published in Government Relations on June 27, 2024

Medicare Advantage Panel

Medicare Advantage Plans Under Scrutiny for HME Denials

(This post was originally featured in HME News)

The coverage of HME by Medicare Advantage plans has recently come under fire. At the VGM Heartland Conference on June 11, stakeholders highlighted a critical issue; Medicare Advantage plans are allegedly denying coverage unjustly, and there’s a pressing need for data to support these claims.

Dan Fedor, Director of Reimbursement and Education for U.S. Rehab (a division of VGM), advises providers to submit claims through the prior authorization process for traditional Medicare (even for Medicare Advantage patients). This strategy provides ‘ammunition’ if Medicare approves the claim but Medicare Advantage denies it.

A VGM member received a telling response from a Medicare Advantage plan which essentially stated that their independent policies and procedures take precedence over CMS’s determinations. This stance contradicts the expectation that Medicare Advantage plans should follow Medicare coverage guidelines.

VGM Vice President of Payer & Member Relations, Craig Douglas, emphasized that Medicare Advantage organizations are required to cover all Part A and Part B benefits under the same conditions as traditional Medicare (excluding certain services). This CMS language is at the heart of the current dispute. 

The panel urged providers to submit data on these types of denials to help build a case.  Kim Cuce’, Director of Business Optimization for VGM, suggests setting up software processes to flag denials, making data collection more manageable.

Lastly, the presenters also encouraged providers to involve local media outlets and be transparent with patients about the source of the denials, thereby shifting the blame away from themselves and onto the insurance providers.

Check out the full article here: 

MEDICARE ADVANTAGE: INDUSTRY FIGHTS BACK

From Our Experts

Proposed Rule Suggests Significant Change To Accreditation Process thumbnail Proposed Rule Suggests Significant Change To Accreditation Process The recently released proposed rule CMS-1828-P contains a significant change that could reshape how suppliers navigate accreditation. The rule proposes a major change that would require suppliers to be surveyed and reaccredited annually instead of the current three (3) year cadence. This proposal raises substantial questions about both operational feasibility and cost implications. August Of Action: Your Chance To Connect With Congress thumbnail August Of Action: Your Chance To Connect With Congress It's time to take advantage of August Of Action—a perfect opportunity to make your voice heard. Every summer, federal legislators return to their home states during the Congressional recess. While it gives them a break from Washington D.C., it's primarily a time for them to connect with constituents like you. HR1 Passes House, Advances to President Trump's Desk for Signature thumbnail HR1 Passes House, Advances to President Trump's Desk for Signature After extensive negotiations and partisan debate, the House has officially passed HR1, clearing the path for the bill to be signed into law by President Donald Trump. The legislation, which aims to reduce federal healthcare expenditures, contains several provisions that may impact the durable medical equipment, prosthetics, orthotics, and supplies (DMEPOS) industry. CMS files the Proposed Rule that sheds light on the next round of the Competitive Bidding Program thumbnail CMS files the Proposed Rule that sheds light on the next round of the Competitive Bidding Program On June 30, 2025, CMS filed the anticipated Proposed Rule that includes updates to the Competitive Bidding Program (CBP). Public comments are due 60 days from June 30, 2025. Below is a high-level summary of the rule. It is critical to note that, according to the Proposed Rule Fact Sheet dated June 30, 2025, CMS has stated that they have not announced the specific product categories they are bidding or the specific timeframe for the next competition. Those specifics will be forthcoming in a fu Senate Narrowly Passes HR1, Sending It Back to House for Final Approval thumbnail Senate Narrowly Passes HR1, Sending It Back to House for Final Approval President Donald Trump's sweeping legislative package, formally titled the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act, now referred to as HR1., cleared the Senate today in a dramatic 51–50 vote, with Vice President JD Vance casting the tie-breaking vote. The bill now returns to the House, where lawmakers must decide whether to adopt the Senate's revised version or negotiate further changes before it can reach the president's desk. Several Prominent Medicaid Provisions in Senate's Budget Bill Deemed in Violation of Byrd Rule thumbnail Several Prominent Medicaid Provisions in Senate's Budget Bill Deemed in Violation of Byrd Rule Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough advised this week that multiple Medicaid provisions in the Senate's reconciliation bill would violate Senate procedure by violating the Byrd Rule. The Byrd Rule is a Senate-specific procedural process that allows Senators to prevent or block inclusion of extraneous provisions in reconciliation bills. Other provisions are still under review. Evaluating the Value of a Payer Contract thumbnail Evaluating the Value of a Payer Contract In our last article, Key Payers Denied Your Application Citing Their Network Is Closed – Now What?, we discussed strategies for addressing payer contracting denials due to a closed network. As indicated, this process can be an extremely time-consuming exercise with no guarantees and mixed results. Below are a few things to consider as you evaluate whether a contract is worth the extra effort. Webinar: Webinar: "Navigating The New CMS Landscape: RADs, HMVs, and Supplier Survival" on June 25 at 1 p.m. CT. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has released its final National Coverage Determination (NCD) for RADs and HMVs used in treating chronic respiratory failure due to COPD. While the rule potentially expands access to bilevel ST therapy (RADs), it also introduces complex compliance requirements, tighter usage criteria, and increased documentation burdens—without additional reimbursement.