Radar on Medicare Advantage

During a recent hearing held by the House Energy and Commerce (E&C) Committee’s Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, lawmakers heard testimony from three federal watchdog agencies on ways CMS can achieve efficiencies in the Medicare Advantage program and improve oversight of MA organizations. But while CMS’s actions were the subject of intense discussion, the agency itself wasn’t present — a point that several lawmakers felt worth repeating, even though CMS claims it was not properly invited.

E&C Chairman Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-N.J.) on June 28 convened the hearing, “Protecting America’s Seniors: Oversight of Private Sector Medicare Advantage Plans,” to “examine the quality of care that America’s seniors are receiving through Medicare Advantage plans and the fiscal sustainability of the Medicare Advantage program,” according to a June 24 memorandum issued to the subcommittee.

Amid mounting attention to Medicare Advantage organizations’ risk adjustment and prior authorization practices — which were the subjects of intense discussion during a recent House Energy & Commerce Committee hearing — the U.S. Supreme Court last month declined to take up a case brought by UnitedHealthcare (UHC) challenging CMS’s 2014 Overpayment Rule. Industry experts tell AIS Health, a division of MMIT, that this decision means CMS can begin enforcing its rule and may soon finalize its long-awaited extrapolation methodology for conducting Risk Adjustment Data Validation (RADV) audits.

“I think given the makeup of the court, on the one hand it was a bit surprising that they declined to take the case and that the denial of cert was issued without a comment. But on the other hand, given the general political landscape and issues that the court is considering, this is fundamentally an issue of administrative law and they’ve considered some other administrative law cases this term and I can understand why they decided not to take this case,” remarks Lindsey Brown Fetzer, member with Bass Berry & Sims and chair of the firm’s managed care practice.

At a time when the federal government is clamping down on pharmacy benefit managers and seeking ways to bring down prescription drug prices, a recently unsealed whistleblower complaint details how one of the three largest PBMs allegedly drove up costs for Medicare Part D beneficiaries and the federal government. In a lawsuit that CVS Health Corp. intends to fight, the False Claims Act complaint accuses the parent company of colluding with its “supposedly firewalled” entities — the SilverScript Part D subsidiary, PBM CVS Caremark and CVS pharmacies — of striking secret rebate agreements with the drug makers that required SilverScript to block substitution on its formularies of generic drugs in favor of costlier brand-name alternatives.

The U.S. Dept. of Justice chose not to intervene in the second amended complaint, which was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania in March and recently obtained by Stat. The suit was filed by relator Alexandra Miller, who worked for CVS Health for 19 years. According to Miller’s LinkedIn profile, she most recently served as senior director of Medicare Part D operations and is now senior director of member and provider experiences for Oscar Health.