• No results found

Mega Guidance Is Here!

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2021

Share "Mega Guidance Is Here!"

Copied!
31
0
0

Loading.... (view fulltext now)

Full text

(1)
(2)

David Pointer has no actual or potential conflict of

(3)

Introduction

Where are we today?

Brief Overview of HRSA Audit Findings

Where are we going?

(4)

340B Program is administered by Health Resources and

Service Administration (HRSA)

Drug manufacturers who participate in Medicaid/Medicare are

required to supply covered outpatient drugs to covered

entities at discounted prices

◦ Program funded by manufacturers, not Medicare or taxpayers 

The intent of the 340B program is to stretch scarce federal

resources to reach a greater number of eligible patients and

provide comprehensive services.

(5)

340B Program began in 1992, contract pharmacies became

eligible in 1996, DSH expansion occurred in 2003, children’s

hospitals were added in 2006 and critical access hospitals

were included in 2010.

340B Volume by Type** Pre 2004 DSH 31% Post 2004 DSH 50% HIV 5% SCH 2% CAH 2% Other 10%

340B Purchase Volume (Billion)*

2005 $2.4

2010 $5.3

2013 $7.1

Projected 2019 $16

(6)
(7)

2012 2013 2014 2015 No findings 42% 21% 19% 26% Findings 58% 79% 81% 74% Repayment 45% 63% 65% 57% State repaid 3% 1% Per 340B Health

(8)

2012 2013 2014 2015

Diversion 33% 58% 60% 42%

Duplicate discount 30% 21% 21% 20%

Inaccurate database 24% 49% 47% 44%

Contract pharmacy oversight 4% 5% 3%

GPO 1% 11% 6%

Inauditable records 1%

Non-reimbursable site 1% 1%

DSH % 1%

Inaccurate Medicaid Exclusion File 2%

Orphan drug violation 5%

(9)
(10)

May 6, 2015

HRSA submits Mega-Guidance to the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB)

August 28, 2015

Proposed Mega-Guidance is released in Federal Register

October 27, 2015

Deadline to submit comments on proposed guidance ends

(60 days)

Unknown

(11)

Mega-Guidance Purpose

Provide increased clarity for stakeholders and strengthen

HRSA’s ability to administer the program effectively

Guidance vs. Rulemaking

Proposed vs. Finalized

(12)

No scripts/orders written outside hospital or child sites

◦ Infusion orders

◦ Referrals, follow-up care, affiliated clinics, non-reimbursable hospital clinics, providers treating patients outside the hospital 

No 340B for scripts/orders written by providers who are not

employees or independent contractors where hospital bills for

professional fees

New focus on payer status of patient

◦ No discharge scripts

◦ No drugs given to outpatients later billed as part of inpatient stay 

No 340B for Medicaid bundled drugs

(13)

Patient eligibility

Covered entity eligibility

Covered outpatient drug definition/eligibility

Covered entity responsibility

Contract pharmacy

Internal and external audits

GPO Prohibition

(14)

Existing requirements for hospitals

◦ The covered entity has established a relationship with the

individual, such that the covered entity maintains records of the individual’s health care; and

◦ The individual receives health care services from a health care professional who is either employed by the covered entity or provides health care under contractual or other arrangements

(e.g., referral for consultation) such that responsibility for the care provided remains with the covered entity

◦ An individual will not be considered a “patient” of the covered

entity for purposes of 340B if the only health care service received by the individual from the covered entity is the dispensing of a drug or drugs for subsequent self-administration or

administration in the home setting.

◦ (61 Fed. Reg. 55156 (October 24, 1996))

(15)

1. The individual receives a health care service at a facility or clinic site

which is registered for the 340B Program and listed on the public 340B database

2. The individual receives a health care service provided by a covered

entity provider who is either employed by the covered entity or who is an independent contractor for the covered entity such that the covered entity may bill for services on behalf of the provider

3. An individual receives a drug that is ordered or prescribed by the

covered entity provider as a result of the service described in (2)

4. The individual’s health care is consistent with the scope of the

Federal grant, project, designation or contract

5. The individual’s drug is ordered or prescribed pursuant to a health

care service that is classified as outpatient

6. The individual’s patient records are accessible to the covered entity

(16)

Proposed guidance:

◦ For 340B to be used, script/order must be written as a result of a healthcare service billed as outpatient

Observations:

◦ Negates discharge scripts

◦ No 340B for drugs billed as an inpatient service, even though the patient was an outpatient at the time the drug was

dispensed/administered (e.g., Medicare 72-hour rule)

(17)

Proposed guidance would prohibit use of 340B to fill

scripts/orders written outside the hospital

Patient eligible for 340B on a script-by-script basis instead of

a patient-by-patient basis

(18)

Proposed guidance:

◦ Order must be written as a result of services provided in the hospital or a child site to be filled with 340B drugs

◦ “Mere” infusion of drug not enough 

Observations:

◦ Hospitals have overturned audit findings by showing that even though an order was written outside the hospital, administration of the order at the hospital or a registered clinic qualified as an actual health care service for 340B purposes

(19)

Proposed guidance:

◦ No 340B for referrals, follow-up care or care in unregistered “affiliated clinics”

Observations:

◦ HRSA audits have allowed in limited situations

◦ Difficult to document

(20)

Proposed guidance:

◦ No 340B for scripts/orders written outside registered hospital and child sites

Observations:

◦ May impact treatment at:  Nursing homes

 Correctional facilities  Indigent clinics

(21)

The legal argument:

◦ Hospitals using a self-insured plan are responsible for care given to employees covered by plan

◦ HRSA audits have said this relationship is not sufficient for 340B use; not recommended currently

(22)

Current: Employed, contracted or under other arrangement

Proposed:

◦ Either employed by, or an independent contractor for, the hospital

◦ Such that the covered entity may bill for services on behalf of the provider

Note:

◦ “Simply having privileges or credentials is not sufficient”

◦ Is more required than provider being on premises of hospital?  Creates operational burdens to track and distinguish

◦ Interpreting “may bill for services on behalf of the provider”  Hospital does bill or could bill?

(23)

Current: A drug is eligible for 340B if it is a “covered

outpatient drug,” as defined in section 1927(k) of the Social

Security Act

Proposed guidance: For the 340B program, a drug will not be

considered a covered outpatient drug if the drug:

◦ (1) is “provided as part of, or as incident to and in the same setting as” the following services: inpatient hospital services; hospice services; dental services, except that drugs for which the State plan authorizes direct reimbursement to the dispensing

dentist are covered outpatient drugs; physicians’ services;

outpatient hospital services; nursing facility services and services provided by an intermediate care facility for the mental retarded; other laboratory and x-ray services; and renal dialysis; and

◦ (2) receives a bundled payment by Medicaid and does not receive direct reimbursement for the drug.

(24)

Not entirely clear what is intended:

Different than current bundled drug policy

(25)

Proposed guidance:

◦ A hospital must notify HRSA if it is no longer eligible or has violated a 340B program requirement

Implications:

◦ No materiality standard

 Current statement used in recertification: Entities must contact HRSA if

there is any “material” change in 340B eligibility and/or “material breach” of key program requirements

◦ Most hospitals currently correct minor errors without notifying HRSA

(26)

GPO prohibition only applies to DSH and free-standing

children’s and cancer hospitals

Does not apply to CAH, RRC or SCH

Proposed guidance lists three exceptions:

1. GPO could be used in clinics that:  Have a different physical address  Are not registered in 340B

 Ensure GPO drugs are never provided to outpatients at hospital or child

sites

 Purchase drugs through a wholesale account separate from parent entity

2. GPO could be used for drugs given to an inpatient when insurer subsequently classifies as an outpatient

3. GPO could be used when 340B and WAC pricing are unavailable 

Hospitals may use remaining GPO drugs after start date in

(27)

Proposed guidance continues to prohibit GPO use for

ineligible outpatients

Would also prohibit GPO use for drugs that are difficult to

track (e.g., IV solutions, contrast media, anesthesia) unless

paid in bundled manner by Medicaid

FAQ allowed hospitals to interpret the definition of covered

outpatient to decide if “bundled drugs” meet this definition,

and if not, “a GPO may be used for drugs that are not covered

outpatient drugs.”

Some hospitals have identified certain drugs they believe are

outside of 340B based on this FAQ

Would need to use WAC for such drugs if hospital can’t track

340B and GPO use

(28)

Proposed guidance:

◦ All child sites must be listed in the contract

◦ Only covered entities may register contract pharmacies

◦ Makes clear that CEs are responsible for contract pharmacy oversight and preventing diversion and duplicate discounts

◦ CEs must conduct annual independent audits

◦ CE must conduct a quarterly review of each contract pharmacy location (e.g., comparing CE’s prescribing records with

pharmacy’s dispensing records)

◦ CE must notify HRSA of any noncompliance found during a quarterly review or annual independent audit

(29)

Proposed guidance:

CE cannot use contract pharmacy to dispense 340B drugs

to Medicaid FFS or MCO patients without HRSA-approved

written agreement with state or MCO

(30)

Seeking alternatives to filed cost report test

◦ Could greatly shorten timeline for new child sites 

GPO Prohibition

◦ Confirms ability to exclude some off-site locations from 340B (and GPO prohibition)

◦ Confirms ability to use existing GPO inventory

Allows different carve-in and carve-out decisions for Medicaid

fee-for-service and Medicaid managed care

Consideration of permitting CEs to use 340B only if

appropriate for service delivery (e.g., could use non-340B

account if more appropriate for a specific service, instead of

carving-in or carving-out by Medicaid billing number)

Does clarify some existing rules

Tightened audit standards

(31)

David Pointer, President

SolutionsRx P.O. Box 212 Gainesville, Missouri 65655 (417) 679-0141 [email protected]

References

Related documents