HHS Agency Recommends Savannah Hospital Repay $1.3M to Medicare
Memorial Health University Medical Center in Savannah did not comply with Medicare billing requirements for 39 out of 131 inpatient and outpatient claims reviewed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Inspector General, according to an OIG report.
March 07, 2018 at 10:27 AM
2 minute read
|
Memorial Health University Medical Center in Savannah did not comply with Medicare billing requirements for 39 out of 131 inpatient and outpatient claims reviewed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' Office of Inspector General, according to an OIG report.
This noncompliance resulted in a combined overpayment to the hospital of nearly $600,000 in 2015 and 2016, the February report released last month stated. The inspector general looked at claims from Memorial as part of a series of reviews nationwide undertaken after data analytics identified certain claims risked not complying with Medicare billing requirements.
On the basis of the sample results, the inspector general estimated that the hospital received overpayments of at least $1.4 million for the audit period.
The agency recommended that the hospital refund Medicare a little more than $1.3 million—a figure that took into account the $155,072 that the hospital had already repaid. It also recommended that Memorial “exercise reasonable diligence to identify and return any additional similar overpayments received outside of our audit period” and “strengthen controls to ensure full compliance with Medicare requirements,” according to the 17-page report.
Memorial, in written comments on the draft report, did not agree with 17 of the 39 claims errors that the inspector general identified. Those claims were specific to inpatient rehabilitation services, according to the hospital.
In those cases, the hospital said, the records were audited not by the inspector general but by a contractor that did not allow Memorial to submit additional documentation during the audit process.
“Memorial believes the additional documentation for these 17 claims … clearly supports the patients' eligibility for and the medical necessity of the services provided,” according to the hospital's comments. “As a result, Memorial will appeal the findings … and is confident that, with the additional documentation, the services will be found to have been medically necessary.”
After reviewing these comments, the OIG maintained the accuracy of its findings and recommendations.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
'Radical Left Judges'?: Trump Demands GOP Unity Against Biden's Judicial Picks
4 minute readTrump's Lawyers Speak Out: 'The President Had the Confidence to Retain Me'
Trending Stories
- 1Judge Denies Sean Combs Third Bail Bid, Citing Community Safety
- 2Republican FTC Commissioner: 'The Time for Rulemaking by the Biden-Harris FTC Is Over'
- 3NY Appellate Panel Cites Student's Disciplinary History While Sending Negligence Claim Against School District to Trial
- 4A Meta DIG and Its Nvidia Implications
- 5Deception or Coercion? California Supreme Court Grants Review in Jailhouse Confession Case
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250