Skip to main content
Sister Publication Links
  • ESG: THE NEW IMPERATIVE
Subscribe
  • My Account
  • Login
  • Subscribe
  • News
    • Current News
    • COVID-19
    • Providers
    • Insurance
    • Government
    • Finance
    • Technology
    • Safety & Quality
    • Transformation
    • People
    • Regional News
    • Digital Edition (Web Version)
    • Patients
    • Operations
    • Care Delivery
    • Payment
    • Midwest
    • Northeast
    • South
    • West
  • Digital Health
  • Insights
    • ACA 10 Years After
    • Best Practices
    • Special Reports
    • Innovations
  • Data/Lists
    • Rankings/Lists
    • Interactive Databases
    • Data Points
  • Op-Ed
    • Bold Moves
    • Breaking Bias
    • Commentaries
    • Letters
    • Vital Signs Blog
    • From the Editor
  • Awards
    • Nominate/Eligibility
    • 100 Most Influential People
    • 50 Most Influential Clinical Executives
    • Best Places to Work in Healthcare
    • Excellence in Governance
    • Health Care Hall of Fame
    • Healthcare Marketing Impact Awards
    • Top 25 Emerging Leaders
    • Top 25 Innovators
    • Diversity in Healthcare
    • Women in Healthcare
    • - Luminaries
    • - Top 25 Diversity Leaders
    • - Leaders to Watch
    • - Luminaries
    • - Top 25 Women Leaders
    • - Women to Watch
  • Events
    • Conferences
    • Galas
    • Virtual Briefings
    • Webinars
    • Custom Media Event: ESG Summit
    • Transformation Summit
    • Women Leaders in Healthcare Conference
    • Social Determinants of Health Symposium
    • Leadership Symposium
    • Health Care Hall of Fame Gala
    • Top 25 Women Leaders Gala
    • Best Places to Work Awards Gala
    • Top 25 Diversity Leaders Gala
    • - Hospital of the Future
    • - Value Based Care
    • - Supply Chain Revenue Cycle
    • - Hospital at Home
    • - Workplace of the Future
    • - Strategic Marketing
    • - Virtual Health
  • Listen
    • Podcast - Next Up
    • Podcast - Beyond the Byline
    • Sponsored Podcast - Healthcare Insider
    • Video Series - The Check Up
    • Sponsored Video Series - One on One
  • MORE +
    • Advertise
    • Media Kit
    • Newsletters
    • Jobs
    • People on the Move
    • Reprints & Licensing
MENU
Breadcrumb
  1. Home
  2. Legal
June 03, 2021 04:17 PM

Judge won't force CMS to use 2021 Medicare Advantage quality ratings data

Nona Tepper
  • Tweet
  • Share
  • Share
  • Email
  • More
    Reprints Print
    A page from the 2019 U.S. Medicare Handbook discussing Medicare Advantage plans
    AP Photo

    Three Medicare Advantage plans lost their fight to require CMS to collect data on patient care and satisfaction during the COVID-19 pandemic, with a federal judge ruling that the agency did not need to ask Congress before deciding to suspend collection.

    The U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday granted HHS' motion for summary judgment. The case stems from an April 2020 interim final rule that said CMS would rely on 2020 information with regard to the Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set, or HEDIS, and the Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems, or CAHPS, when calculating Star ratings for the plans. The rule was made "because data collection was unsafe and would divert resources from patients" during the pandemic, according to the opinion.

    Plans that score at least four out of five stars receive a 5% increase to their CMS benchmark, which is the maximum amount the federal government will pay, plus other advantages. Those extra dollars can be used to fund extra benefits for seniors, though it's not a requirement. According to the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission, the quality bonus payments add about $6 billion to Medicare program expenditures each year.

    By relying on outdated information, three Medicare Advantage plans—AvMed, Prominence HealthFirst and Prominence HealthFirst of Texas—contend that they lost their ability to improve their annual Star score and improve their reimbursement. AvMed and Prominence HealthFirst's ratings declined year-over-year, while Prominence HealthFirst of Texas received a "low performing" rating for the third year in a row. U.S. Senior District Court Judge John Bates conceded HHS' action could have impacted insurers' financial situation.

    "CMS' decision to halt data collection led CMS to use old CAHPS and HEDIS data, which plausibly lowered plaintiffs' Star ratings—causing plaintiffs to lose millions of dollars in future payments," Bates wrote.

    In November 2020, Medicare Advantage plans sued HHS, alleging department officials did not have the authority to suspend collection of patient quality and satisfaction data without first consulting Congress. They proposed that CMS use 2020 Star ratings instead of calculating new ratings, or calculate 2021 scores but not permit any plan's rating to fall. If CMS had done that, it would have caused "grade inflation" among Medicare Advantage plans, "making plans appear higher-performing on average than they really were and forcing CMS to increase total payments to plans," Bates wrote. It also could have inflated perception of plans to prospective enrollees.

    "There is no reason to throw out this new data—it conveys useful information," Bates wrote. "Likewise, there is no reason to hold plans harmless."

    Because the agency did not call for collection of new information, HHS officials did not need to ask Congress permission for suspending collection of old, the opinion said.

    In a statement, Prominence Health Plan said it was disappointed with the ruling and still believed CMS' change was inappropriate. The insurer, which is a subsidiary of Universal Health Services, said it was in the process of determining its next steps.

    "Prominence made significant investments and improvements in its quality metrics based upon CMS's prior guidance," a spokesperson wrote in an email. "The methodology changes precluded these improvements from being taken into account."

    AvMed did not respond to an interview request.

    Letter
    to the
    Editor

    Send us a letter

    Have an opinion about this story? Click here to submit a Letter to the Editor, and we may publish it in print.

    Recommended for You
    supreme-court-healthcare-ok_WEB_i.jpg
    Healthcare groups react to Supreme Court abortion ruling
    blue-gavel-with-money2_i.png
    Supreme Court sides with HHS, not hospitals, in DSH payment case
    Sponsored Content
    Daily Dose Newsletter: Sign up to receive a late afternoon weekday roundup of that day’s breaking news and developments in healthcare.
    Get Newsletters

    Sign up for enewsletters and alerts to receive breaking news and in-depth coverage of healthcare events and trends, as they happen, right to your inbox.

    Subscribe Today
    MH Magazine Cover

    MH magazine offers content that sheds light on healthcare leaders’ complex choices and touch points—from strategy, governance, leadership development and finance to operations, clinical care, and marketing.

    Subscribe
    Connect with Us
    • LinkedIn
    • Twitter
    • Facebook
    • RSS

    Our Mission

    Modern Healthcare empowers industry leaders to succeed by providing unbiased reporting of the news, insights, analysis and data.

    Contact Us

    (877) 812-1581

    Email us

     

    Resources
    • Contact Us
    • Advertise with Us
    • Ad Choices Ad Choices
    • Sitemap
    Editorial Dept
    • Submission Guidelines
    • Code of Ethics
    • Awards
    • About Us
    Legal
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • Privacy Request
    Modern Healthcare
    Copyright © 1996-2022. Crain Communications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
    • News
      • Current News
      • COVID-19
      • Providers
      • Insurance
      • Government
      • Finance
      • Technology
      • Safety & Quality
      • Transformation
        • Patients
        • Operations
        • Care Delivery
        • Payment
      • People
      • Regional News
        • Midwest
        • Northeast
        • South
        • West
      • Digital Edition (Web Version)
    • Digital Health
    • Insights
      • ACA 10 Years After
      • Best Practices
      • Special Reports
      • Innovations
    • Data/Lists
      • Rankings/Lists
      • Interactive Databases
      • Data Points
    • Op-Ed
      • Bold Moves
      • Breaking Bias
      • Commentaries
      • Letters
      • Vital Signs Blog
      • From the Editor
    • Awards
      • Nominate/Eligibility
      • 100 Most Influential People
      • 50 Most Influential Clinical Executives
      • Best Places to Work in Healthcare
      • Excellence in Governance
      • Health Care Hall of Fame
      • Healthcare Marketing Impact Awards
      • Top 25 Emerging Leaders
      • Top 25 Innovators
      • Diversity in Healthcare
        • - Luminaries
        • - Top 25 Diversity Leaders
        • - Leaders to Watch
      • Women in Healthcare
        • - Luminaries
        • - Top 25 Women Leaders
        • - Women to Watch
    • Events
      • Conferences
        • Transformation Summit
        • Women Leaders in Healthcare Conference
        • Social Determinants of Health Symposium
        • Leadership Symposium
      • Galas
        • Health Care Hall of Fame Gala
        • Top 25 Women Leaders Gala
        • Best Places to Work Awards Gala
        • Top 25 Diversity Leaders Gala
      • Virtual Briefings
        • - Hospital of the Future
        • - Value Based Care
        • - Supply Chain Revenue Cycle
        • - Hospital at Home
        • - Workplace of the Future
        • - Strategic Marketing
        • - Virtual Health
      • Webinars
      • Custom Media Event: ESG Summit
    • Listen
      • Podcast - Next Up
      • Podcast - Beyond the Byline
      • Sponsored Podcast - Healthcare Insider
      • Video Series - The Check Up
      • Sponsored Video Series - One on One
    • MORE +
      • Advertise
      • Media Kit
      • Newsletters
      • Jobs
      • People on the Move
      • Reprints & Licensing