Recommendation: Congress should consider requiring VA to establish an overall wait-time performance measure for veterans to receive care under the VCCP that will permit VA to measure and monitor the timeliness of VCCP appointments and compare timeliness to that of VA medical facilities. (Matter for Consideration 1)

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: When we determine what steps the Congress has taken, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Health should align its monitoring metrics with the time frames established in the VCCP scheduling process. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Health should conduct a review of community provider enrollment and use of the HSRM to include identifying and taking steps to remove any challenges to community provider enrollment and use; and, if determined appropriate, establish a requirement for community providers to use the HSRM; and (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary of Health should direct VAMC leadership to assess their community care staffing and resource needs, and develop a plan to address any identified risks to their ability to schedule appointments in a timely manner, including strategies to adjust staff levels and address recruitment and retention challenges as needed. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: When we confirm what actions the agency has taken in response to this recommendation, we will provide updated information.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should eliminate impediments to collaborative audits in managed care conducted by audit contractors and states, by ensuring that managed care audits are conducted regardless of which entity--the state or the managed care organization--recoups any identified overpayments. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: CMS agreed with and has taken some steps to address this action, as recommended by GAO in July 2018. In September 2019, CMS reported that in July 2019 CMS held a meeting with states and collaborative audit contractors to discuss coordination of managed care audits, including a wide range of challenges with managed care audits. As result of the feedback and recommendations received, CMS is evaluating several process improvements and reiterated that audit contractors will continue to work with states to provide support and assistance in Medicaid managed care, and that Medicaid managed care audits should not be limited by MCO contract language. Although CMS has communicated to states the need to increase audits in managed care and address identified issues, it is unclear if these actions will remove known impediments to managed care audits or result in an increase in the number of collaborative audits. Implementing GAO's July 2018 recommendation is needed because few audits of Medicaid managed care have been conducted and overpayments can be significant based on the findings from federal and state audits and investigations that have been completed. .

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should establish an achievable wait-time goal for the consolidated community care program that VA plans to implement that will permit VHA to monitor whether veterans are receiving VA community care within time frames that are comparable to the amount of time they would otherwise wait to receive care at VHA medical facilities. (Recommendation 1)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Under Secretary for Health
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) agreed with our recommendation and stated in March 2020 that it is taking steps to establish a wait-time goal for the new consolidated community care program-the Veterans Community Care Program. Actions include updating VHA's current directives and the implementation of the HealthShare Referral Manager, a software system that will provide VHA the capability to monitor wait times.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should design an appointment scheduling process for the consolidated community care program that VA plans to implement that sets forth time frames within which (1) veterans' referrals must be processed, (2) veterans' appointments must be scheduled, and (3) veterans' appointments must occur, which are consistent with the wait-time goal VHA has established for the program. (Recommendation 2)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Under Secretary for Health
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) agreed with our recommendation and stated in March 2020 that it is taking steps to design an appointment scheduling process for the new consolidated community care program-the Veterans Community Care Program. This includes actions to develop a wait-time goal, and the development and review of VHA's new community care directive.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should establish a mechanism that will allow VHA to systematically monitor the average number of days it takes for VAMCs to prepare referrals, for VAMCs or TPAs to schedule veterans' appointments, and for veterans' appointments to occur, under the consolidated community care program that VA plans to implement. (Recommendation 3)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Under Secretary for Health
Status: Open

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) agreed with our recommendation and stated in March 2020 that it is taking steps to establish a mechanism to monitor appointment timeliness for the new consolidated community care program-the Veterans Community Care Program. This includes the implementation of the HealthShare Referral Manager, a software system that will allow VHA to measure timeliness of appointment scheduling actions, development of a wait-time goal, review of current VHA directives, and the development of reports that can be used by VA medical centers to monitor appointment scheduling timeliness.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should implement a mechanism to prevent veterans' clinically indicated dates from being modified by individuals other than VHA clinicians when veterans are referred to the consolidated community care program that VA plans to implement. (Recommendation 4)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Under Secretary for Health
Status: Open

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) agreed with our recommendation and stated that it is taking steps to implement a mechanism to prevent veterans' clinically indicated dates (CID) from being modified by VHA staff other than VHA providers for the new consolidated community care program-the Veterans Community Care Program. Specifically, VHA developed the HealthShare Referral Manager (HSRM), a software system for VA medical center (VAMC) staff to use to manage VCCP referrals, including creating authorizations and scheduling veteran appointments with community providers. VHA deployed the HSRM at all VAMCs as of June 24, 2019, and according to VHA officials, the system was fully implemented as of December 31, 2019. In March 2020, VHA provided documentation that shows (1) the VHA clinician populates the CID field when they create the referral in VA's electronic medical record system, (2) when the referral is forwarded to HSRM for referral management and appointment scheduling by VAMC staff, the CID field in HSRM is auto-populated based on the CID in VA's electronic medical record system, and (3) the auto-populated CID field in HSRM cannot be edited. However, under VA's current scheduling process, some VHA staff can still edit the referral after the VHA provider enters the CID and before it is sent to the HSRM for scheduling. VHA will need to take action to ensure this part of the process has protections to ensure veterans' CIDs aren't modified after being entered by the VHA provider.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should implement a mechanism to separate clinically urgent referrals and authorizations from those for which the VAMC or the TPA has decided to expedite appointment scheduling for administrative reasons. (Recommendation 5)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Under Secretary for Health
Status: Open

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) did not concur with this recommendation, and states a mechanism is no longer needed as VA medical center staff are responsible for appointment scheduling under the new consolidated community care program, the Veterans Community Care Program (VCCP), not staff from third-party administrators. However, we believe this recommendation is still relevant, and in July 2020 we asked VHA for evidence to show that VA medical center staff, when scheduling VCCP appointments, are not changing routine referrals to an urgent status to expedite appointment scheduling in cases of delays.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should (1) establish oversight mechanisms to ensure that VHA is collecting reliable data on the reasons that VAMC or TPA staff are unsuccessful in scheduling veterans' appointments through the consolidated community care program VA plans to implement, and (2) demonstrate that it has corrected any identified deficiencies. (Recommendation 6)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Under Secretary for Health
Status: Open

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration (VHA) agreed with our recommendation and stated in March 2020 that it is taking steps to establish an oversight mechanism to ensure VHA is collecting reliable data in cases where staff are unsuccessful in scheduling veterans' appointments for the new consolidated community care program-the Veterans Community Care Program. This includes actions to implement the HealthShare Referral Manager, a software system that will allow VHA to produce reports on reasons for unsuccessful scheduling attempts, development of a community care directive, and an analysis of the reasons behind unsuccessful scheduling.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should ensure that the contracts for the consolidated community care program VA plans to implement include performance metrics that will allow VHA to monitor average driving times between veterans' homes and the practice locations of community providers that participate in the TPAs' networks. (Recommendation 7)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration agreed with this recommendation, and as of March 2020, reported that it included performance metrics related to drive times in its contracts for the new third-party administrators in Regions 1-4 of the new Community Care Network under the Veterans Community Care Program. The contracts for Regions 5 and 6 have not been awarded yet.

Recommendation: The Under Secretary for Health should issue a comprehensive policy directive and operations manual for the consolidated community care program VA plans to implement and ensure that these documents are reviewed and updated in a timely manner after any significant changes to the program occur. (Recommendation 10)

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs: Office of the Under Secretary for Health
Status: Open

Comments: The Veterans Health Administration agreed in principle with this recommendation, and stated that it has taken action to develop a new community care directive, which was under technical review as of March 2020.

Recommendation: To improve CMS's oversight of states' MLTSS programs, the Administrator of CMS should take steps to identify and obtain key information needed to oversee states' efforts to monitor beneficiary access to quality services, including, at a minimum, obtaining information specific to network adequacy, critical incidents, and appeals and grievances.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) agreed with this recommendation. In December 2017, HHS communicated its intent to review regulations and enhance its capacity to measure, monitor, and improve care and quality across a number of domains, including MLTSS. As of February 2020, HHS stated that it is developing guidance related to reporting on key information needed to oversee beneficiary access to care. GAO will continue to monitor the department's actions and any steps taken to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should evaluate the possible costs and savings of using disposable devices that could potentially substitute for DME, including options for benefit categories and payment methodologies that could be used to cover these substitutes, and, if appropriate, seek legislative authority to cover these devices.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In March 2019, HHS included in its fiscal year 2020 budget a legislative proposal to extend Medicare coverage to disposable devices that could potentially substitute for DME in treating and managing diabetes. As of March 2020, CMS has not provided documentation of the evaluation of possible costs and savings that we recommended and that we believe underpins the legislative proposal. We will review this documentation once provided.

Recommendation: To achieve a better understanding of the effect of certain Personal care services (PCS) services on beneficiaries and a more consistent administration of policies and procedures across PCS programs, the Acting Administrator of CMS should collect and analyze states' required information on the impact of the Participant-Directed Option and Community First Choice programs on the health and welfare of beneficiaries as well as the state quality measures for the Participant-Directed Option and Community First Choice programs.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) concurred with GAO's recommendation. On December 30, 2016, the agency issued guidance on the Community First Choice program to assist states in submitting information to CMS on the health and welfare of beneficiaries. In March 2019, CMS officials stated that the agency is currently developing the process for states to report this information to CMS. Agency officials also stated they are exploring the value of collecting this information for the Participant-Directed Option program given the limited number of states currently operating under this authority. In February 2020, CMS officials stated that the agency continues to develop policy related to this recommendation.

Recommendation: To make it more likely that HHS will achieve its goals to reduce quality measure misalignment and associated provider burden, the Secretary of HHS should direct CMS and the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology to prioritize their development of electronic quality measures and associated standardized data elements on the specific quality measures needed for the core measure sets that CMS and private payers have agreed to use.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2019, HHS told us that CMS completed an analysis to determine which measures-from the core measure sets that CMS and private payers have agreed to use-are feasible to develop as electronic clinical quality measures. Further, in April 2019, CMS officials told us they will consider developing new electronic clinical quality measures where appropriate and feasible to fill future measure needs or gaps identified by the Core Quality Measures Collaborative (CQMC). However, we determined that the actions did not fully address the recommendation because they do not include efforts to work with ONC to prioritize their development of electronic clinical quality measures for the CQMC core measure sets. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To make it more likely that HHS will achieve its goals to reduce quality measure misalignment and associated provider burden, the Secretary of HHS should direct CMS to comprehensively plan, including setting timelines, for how to target its development of new, more meaningful quality measures on those that will promote greater alignment, especially measures to strengthen the core measure sets that CMS and private payers have agreed to use.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In April 2019, HHS told us that CMS had conducted an assessment of the impact of selected measures used in its quality programs and has linked key component of that assessment to some meaningful measure areas that CMS has identified as priorities. However, this document did not include elements of a comprehensive plan--such as setting timelines-for how to target its development of new, more meaningful quality measures that will promote greater alignment. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To determine the suitability of Medicare's Part B drug payment rate methodology for drugs with coupon programs, Congress should consider (1) granting CMS the authority to collect data from drug manufacturers on coupon discounts for Part B drugs paid based on ASP, and (2) requiring the agency to periodically collect these data and report on the implications that coupon programs may have for this methodology.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of August 2020, Congress had not passed legislation to address this Matter for Congressional Consideration. We will update the status of this Matter if such action occurs.

Recommendation: To increase oversight of the Army's Warrior Transition Unit program, the Secretary of the Army should direct the Army Surgeon General to assess the Triad of Care model's effectiveness in light of the changes in WTU diagnoses and take the appropriate action.

Agency: Department of Defense: Department of the Army
Status: Open

Comments: The Army concurred with this recommendation. As of August 2020, an Army Medical Command official stated that the Warrior Transition Unit manpower model is under review by the U.S. Army Manpower Analysis Agency and that the scheduled date for the release of the review is unknown.

Recommendation: To reduce the number of Medicare appeals and to strengthen oversight of the Medicare FFS appeals process, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct CMS, Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA), or Departmental Appeals Board (DAB) to modify the various Medicare appeals data systems to collect information on the reasons for appeal decisions at Level 3.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: According to HHS as of August 2016, OMHA and DAB were considering the cost and technical feasibility of collecting this information within their appeals data systems. As of August 2018, OMHA has begun to take action on this recommendation. Specifically, in the July 2017 interim release of the Electronic Case Adjudication and Processing Environment (ECAPE) system, OMHA added a "Reason for Disposition" data field. However, the "Reason for Disposition" data field is currently limited in the number of reasons that can be selected, and ECAPE has not yet been rolled out to all OMHA offices. In May 2019, HHS reported that OMHA had modified the "Reason for Disposition" data field to capture more categories, and that DAB had modified its case management system to capture the reasons for appeal decisions at Level 3 and was working to develop system interoperability with ECAPE. In August 2019, OMHA officials noted that ECAPE had been implemented in 6 of OMHA's 10 field offices and was on track to implement ECAPE in all 10 field offices and its satellite office by the end of 2019. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information regarding DAB's efforts to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: To reduce the number of Medicare appeals and to strengthen oversight of the Medicare FFS appeals process, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct CMS, OMHA, or DAB to modify the various Medicare appeals data systems to capture the amount, or an estimate, of Medicare allowed charges at stake in appeals in Medicare Appeals System (MAS) and Medicare Operations Division Automated Case Tracking System (MODACTS).

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: According to HHS as of August 2016, this information was not captured in any CMS system, including MAS. HHS reported that if MAS is modified to capture the amount of Medicare allowed charges at stake, OMHA will consider modifying its Electronic Case Adjudication and Processing Environment (ECAPE) to include this information as well, and DAB can capture it in a new case management system currently being developed by the agency. As of August 2019, HHS officials stated that developing a methodology to estimate the amount that CMS would have paid providers is complex and would not be appropriate for use in determining whether the appeal meets the amount in controversy requirements for a Level 3 appeal. The basis for our recommendation was also so that HHS could better monitor important appeal trends. Additionally, without this information, HHS does not know the actual amount of Medicare reimbursement at issue in the appeals process. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information regarding HHS's efforts to implement it.

Recommendation: To reduce the number of Medicare appeals and to strengthen oversight of the Medicare FFS appeals process, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct CMS, OMHA, or DAB to modify the various Medicare appeals data systems to collect consistent data across systems, including appeal categories and appeal decisions across MAS and MODACTS.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: According to HHS as of August 2016, HHS reported taking several initial steps to standardize data across Medicare appeals systems. As of August 2018, HHS was continuing to take steps to implement GAO's recommendation to standardize data collection on appeals across its multiple data systems. Specifically, HHS stated that, in November 2016, CMS and OMHA modified the MAS system to standardize appeal categories between Levels 1 through 3, which will help to facilitate more accurate trending analyses across appeal levels. Further, as of April 2017, all Part A Medicare Administrative Contractors (MAC), who are responsible for Part A Level 1 appeals, were successfully processing appeals in MAS, according to HHS. In August 2019, OMHA officials noted that the ECAPE system, which will interact with MAS for reporting purposes, had been implemented in 6 of OMHA's 10 field offices and would be implemented in all 10 field offices and its satellite office by the end of 2019. However, Part B and DME MACs, which are responsible for Part B and DME Level 1 appeals, have not been fully transitioned to MAS. Therefore, appeals categories are still inconsistent for these claims. According to HHS, CMS has not received funding to transition the remaining Level 1 appeals contractors to MAS. Additionally, HHS reported that DAB continues to explore ways to develop interoperability between MODACTS and OMHA's ECAPE system. Therefore, we will continue to monitor progress on the implementation of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To promote further transparency in measuring the federal government's progress against deficit reduction targets required under current law, the Director of the Office of Management of Budget should identify and publicly report the total amount of actual reductions in budget authority government-wide each year as a result of sequestration or the reduction of discretionary spending limits under BBEDCA.

Agency: Executive Office of the President: Office of Management and Budget
Status: Open

Comments: In September 2018, OMB staff maintained their position of disagreement with this recommendation as summarized in our April 2016 report. As of January 2020, OMB has not provided any plans to implement this recommendation.

Recommendation: In order to better ensure proper Medicare payments and protect Medicare funds, CMS should seek legislative authority to allow the RAs to conduct prepayment claim reviews.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In April 2016, we recommended that the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) should seek legislative authority to allow the Recovery Auditors (RAs) to conduct prepayment claim reviews. The Department of Health and Human Services did not concur with this recommendation, and the President's fiscal year 2021 budget did not include a proposal for such authority. We continue to believe CMS should seek legislative authority to allow RAs to conduct these reviews. Until CMS seeks and implements this authority, it will be missing an opportunity to help identify improper payments before they are made.

Recommendation: As CMS continues to implement and refine the contract-level RADV audit process to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of reducing and recovering improper payments and to improve the accuracy of CMS's calculation of coding intensity, the Administrator should modify that calculation by taking actions such as the following: (1) including only the three most recent pair-years of risk score data for all contracts; (2) standardizing the changes in disease risk scores to account for the expected increase in risk scores for all MA contracts; (3) developing a method of accounting for diagnostic errors not coded by providers, such as requiring that diagnoses added by MA organizations be flagged as supplemental diagnoses in the agency's Encounter Data System to separately calculate coding intensity scores related only to diagnoses that were added through MA organizations' supplemental record review (that is, were not coded by providers); and (4) including MA beneficiaries enrolled in contracts that were renewed from a different contract under the same MA organization during the pair-year period.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: CMS is working to improve the accuracy of its calculation of coding intensity, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the agency is reevaluating the design of the risk adjustment data validation audits to ensure their rigor in the context of all the payment error data acquired since the original design of the audits. As part of this work, CMS officials told GAO that the agency will examine whether coding intensity is the best criterion to use to select contracts for audit. As a result, in October 2018, CMS told GAO that rather than coding intensity, it plans to implement a new methodology using payment error as the key sampling driver beginning with audits for payment year 2014. Additionally, CMS was taking steps to modernize its audit system to improve reliability. For example, it initiated a project to explore how to directly receive electronic medical record documentation. As of January 2020, the agency is continuing to reevaluate the design of these audits. Unless CMS takes this and other actions to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Recommendation: As CMS continues to implement and refine the contract-level RADV audit process to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of reducing and recovering improper payments. The Administrator should modify CMS's selection of contracts for contract-level RADV audits to focus on those contracts most likely to have high rates of improper payments by taking actions such as the following: (1) selecting more contracts with the highest coding intensity scores; (2) excluding contracts with low coding intensity scores; (3) selecting contracts with high rates of unsupported diagnoses in prior contract-level RADV audits; (4) if a contract with a high rate of unsupported diagnoses is no longer in operation, selecting a contract under the same MA organization that includes the service area of the prior contract; and (5) selecting some contracts with high enrollment that also have either high rates of unsupported diagnoses in prior contract-level RADV audits or high coding intensity scores.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: CMS is working to modify the selection of MA contracts for audit, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the initial RADV audit design was based on a limited set of payment error data available at the time. As part of efforts to improve the audits, CMS officials told GAO that the agency will examine whether coding intensity is the best criterion to select contracts for audit. In October 2018, CMS told GAO that it plans to implement a new methodology using payment error as the key sampling driver-rather than coding intensity-beginning with audits for payment year 2014. As of January 2020, the agency is using the revised methodology on the 2014 and 2015 payment year audits. They expect to conclude this process in late fiscal year 2020 and 2021, respectively. Unless CMS completes actions to improve the RADV contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Recommendation: As CMS continues to implement and refine the contract-level RADV audit process to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of reducing and recovering improper payments. The Administrator should enhance the timeliness of CMS's contract-level RADV process by taking actions such as the following: (1) closely aligning the time frames in CMS's contract-level RADV audits with those of the national RADV audits the agency uses to estimate the MA improper payment rate; (2) reducing the time between notifying MA organizations of contract audit selection and notifying them about the beneficiaries and diagnoses that will be audited; (3) improving the reliability and performance of the agency's process for transferring medical records from MA organizations, including assessing the feasibility of updating Electronic Submission of Medical Documentation for use in transferring medical records in contract-level RADV audits; and (4) requiring that CMS contract-level RADV auditors complete their medical record reviews within a specific number of days comparable to other medical record review time frames in the Medicare program.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation in its fiscal year 2021 budget justification. HHS reaffirmed its commitment to identifying and correcting improper payments in the MA program. It has begun taking steps to improve the timeliness of the contract-level RADV audit process, such as aligning the time frames in CMS's contract-level RADV audits with those of the national RADV audits. Once completed, CMS needs to provide evidence that the actions taken by the agency have enhanced the timeliness of CMS's contract-level RADV process.

Recommendation: As CMS continues to implement and refine the contract-level RADV audit process to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of reducing and recovering improper payments. The Administrator should improve the timeliness of CMS's contract-level RADV appeal process by requiring that reconsideration decisions be rendered within a specified number of days comparable to other medical record review and first-level appeal time frames in the Medicare program.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: CMS is working to improve the timeliness of the agency's contract-level risk adjustment data validation appeals process, as GAO recommended in April 2016. In October 2017, CMS officials told GAO that the agency is actively considering options for expediting the appeals process. For example, CMS is considering the appropriate number of days for rendering reconsideration decisions while allowing for a complete and thorough adjudication. In December 2019, CMS officials told GAO they expect to issue a final rule in January 2021 that will establish uniform timelines to expedite the appeals process. Specifically, they plan to require that a findings determination be made within 60-90 days of an arbiter's receipt of each party's arguments at each stage of an appeal. Unless CMS takes such actions to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process, it will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Recommendation: As CMS continues to implement and refine the contract-level RADV audit process to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of reducing and recovering improper payments. The Administrator should ensure that CMS develops specific plans and a timetable for incorporating a RAC in the MA program as mandated by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: CMS has attempted to incorporate a recovery audit contractor in the Medicare Advantage program, as GAO recommended in April 2016. After failing to receive any proposals when CMS first issued a request for proposals (RFP) in 2014, CMS issued a request for information to industry in December 2015, which included a draft Statement of Work to solicit feedback, gauge interest, and conduct market research regarding CMS entering into a contract with a recovery audit contractor to identify underpayments and overpayments associated with diagnosis data submitted to CMS by Medicare Advantage Organizations. CMS reported that it subsequently issued another RFP in 2016 and did not receive any proposals for a second time. In December 2019, CMS officials told GAO that the functions of the Part C recovery Audit programs are being performed through other program integrity mechanisms. CMS subsequently reported in its fiscal year 2021 budget justification that CMS believes the proposed scope of the Part C RAC has been subsumed by RADV and CMS will demonstrate that the RADV program satisfies this recommendation. Until CMS completes efforts to improve the risk adjustment data validation contract-level audit process and demonstrates that it has satisfied the requirement to incorporate a recovery audit contractor in the MA program, CMS will fail to recover improper payments of hundreds of millions of dollars annually.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Veterans Affairs should direct the Under Secretary for Health to monitor the full amount of time newly enrolled veterans wait to be seen by primary care providers, starting with the date veterans request they be contacted to schedule appointments. This could be accomplished, for example, by building on the data collection efforts currently being implemented under the "Welcome to VA" program.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: In March 2016, GAO recommended that VA monitor the full amount of time newly enrolled veterans wait to be seen by primary care providers, starting with the date veterans request they be contacted to schedule appointments. VA concurred with this recommendation, and in June 2017, reported to GAO that it had taken actions to address it. Specifically, VA indicated that it revised an internal report to help identify and document all newly enrolled veterans and monitor their appointment request status. The report is intended to enable VHA and its medical centers to oversee the enrollment and appointment process by tracking the following timeframes: (1) application to enrollment, (2) enrollment to initial contact, (3) initial contact to primary care appointment, and (4) total time from application to primary care appointment. However, VA also indicated in its response that it did not have data that captures application dates for all newly enrolled veterans. As such, the report could not be used to consistently monitor the full amount of time these veterans wait to be seen by primary care providers. In January 2018, VA reported developing and implementing technical enhancements to its electronic systems that will enable it to capture the application date for all newly enrolled veterans. In April 2018 and December 2018, VA reported making continued efforts to implement technical enhancements to its electronic system. In its February 2020 update, VA identified several steps that the agency was completing to fully implement the revised internal report and noted that following a successful piloting of the report, the agency would implement it system-wide. VA reported that it expects to fully address this recommendation by October 2020.

Recommendation: To promote consistency in the distribution of supplemental payments among states and with CMS policy, the Administrator of CMS should issue written guidance clarifying its policy that requires a link between the distribution of supplemental payments and the provision of Medicaid-covered services.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: CMS issued a proposed rule in November 2019 that may address this issue. According to the agency, the rule will promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen the fiscal integrity of Medicaid. Specifically, the agency said the rule would require states to report to CMS a comprehensive description of the methodology used to calculate the amount and distribution of supplemental payments and the provider metrics used to calculate payment amounts, such as Medicaid utilization or costs. We will assess the extent to which the final rule addresses our recommendation when it is issued.

Recommendation: To promote consistency in the distribution of supplemental payments among states and with CMS policy, the Administrator of CMS should issue written guidance clarifying its policy that payments should not be made contingent on the availability of local funding.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: CMS issued a proposed rule in November 2019 that may address this issue. According to the agency, the rule will promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen the fiscal integrity of Medicaid. Specifically, the proposed rule clarifies the agency policy that Medicaid payments may not be contingent on the availability of local funding, according to agency officials. We will assess the extent to which the final rule addresses our recommendation when it is issued.

Recommendation: To ensure states have appropriate and current guidance to assist them in designing and administering Medicaid NEMT, the Secretary of HHS should direct CMS to assess current Medicaid NEMT guidance and update that guidance as needed.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of July 2019, HHS officials reported that they are waiting for a policy decision from leadership concerning non-emergency medical transportation. GAO will continue to monitor and update the status of this recommendation.

Recommendation: The Secretary of Defense should direct the Secretary of the Army to implement processes to review and monitor the Army military treatment facility prescribing practices for medications discouraged under the PTSD guideline and address identified deviations.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation and stated that any policy that it may issue related to the monitoring of prescribing practices would be directed toward all of the military services. In May 2018 DOD stated that it planned to (1) conduct a comprehensive review of existing prescribing practices for the treatment of PTSD; (2) develop policy guidance for addressing prescribing practices for the management of PTSD that deviate from the clinical practice guideline; and (3) implement an automated dashboard that will flag medications that the PTSD guideline discourages from use. In its February 26, 2020 response, DOD stated that July 30, 2020 is the estimated completion date for these planned actions. To close this recommendation, DOD needs to implement its planned actions and provide documentation showing that the Department is monitoring medications discouraged from use under the PTSD guideline and addressing identified deviations.

Recommendation: To ensure that HHS workforce efforts meet national needs, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should develop a comprehensive and coordinated planning approach to guide HHS's health care workforce development programs--including education, training, and payment programs--that (1) includes performance measures to more clearly determine the extent to which these programs are meeting the department's strategic goal of strengthening health care; (2) identifies and communicates to stakeholders any gaps between existing programs and future health care workforce needs identified in the Health Resources and Services Administration's workforce projection reports; (3) identifies actions needed to address identified gaps; and (4) identifies and communicates to Congress the legislative authority, if any, the Department needs to implement the identified actions.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In December 2016, HHS indicated that the agency had not yet taken steps to implement a comprehensive workforce planning effort. Officials said that for the FY2018 cycle, HHS had planned to expand its group developing legislative proposals to include budget issues and gaps that warrant attention. While it did not do so during that cycle, officials indicated that they would recommend this broader approach to workforce planning for future budget and legislative cycles. In an update presented in HHS's FY2021 budget justification, HHS did not address efforts to develop a comprehensive and coordinated planning approach to guide HHS's health care workforce development programs. Instead, it described its current legislative and budget development effort and proposal to restructure CMS Graduate Medical Education (GME) programs into a discretionary grant program. It noted that such a restructuring would allow the Department to set expectations for program performance in CMS GME and allow the kind of tracking HRSA has been able to implement in the Children's Hospital GME program and its Teaching Hospital GME program. It noted that Congress had not responded to this request. However, this recommendation stands on its own and is separate from any legislative efforts to modify how federal GME funds are distributed. Whether or not legislation is enacted to implement a consolidated federal GME grant program, HHS should take action to develop a comprehensive and coordinated planning approach. Such action is important for HHS to assure that federal programs fully meet workforce needs. Further, the CARES Act of 2020 requires HHS to develop a comprehensive and coordinated strategic plan for HHS health workforce programs. We will be monitoring HHS's implementation of this requirement to determine if it satisfies the intent of this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve the effectiveness of its oversight of eligibility determinations, the Administrator of CMS should conduct reviews of federal Medicaid eligibility determinations to ascertain the accuracy of these determinations and institute corrective action plans where necessary.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has taken some steps to improve the accuracy of Medicaid eligibility determinations, as GAO recommended in October 2015, but has not yet conducted a systematic review of federal eligibility determinations. In July 2017, HHS issued its final rule on the Payment Error Rate Measurement (PERM) program, and stated that it would include reviews of federal eligibility determinations in states that have delegated that authority. In December 2017, HHS provided information noting that the first cycle of the revised PERM includes two states where there were federal eligibility determinations. However, as HHS confirmed in December 2019, the random sample of eligibility determinations reviewed in the first cycle of the revised PERM did not include any federal eligibility determinations. As such, the PERM has not systematically reviewed federal determinations, and we maintain that further reviews are needed to help ensure that only individuals eligible for Medicaid are receiving benefits. We will continue to monitor HHS to determine if HHS is ascertaining the accuracy of federal eligibility determinations and taking corrective action where necessary.

Recommendation: To improve its oversight of network adequacy in MA, the Administrator of CMS should augment MA network adequacy criteria to address provider availability.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation, and noted in a February 2018 update that CMS requires MAOs to identify provider availability in certain circumstances, such as in granting exceptions to the agency's network adequacy criteria. CMS also stated that it would consider augmenting MA network adequacy criteria to address provider availability in future years. However, CMS's 2018 MA network adequacy guidance stated that the agency does not currently consider provider availability when reviewing an organization's network adequacy, and this guidance was not updated in 2019. As a result, as of September 2019, agency officials have not implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve its oversight of network adequacy in MA, the Administrator of CMS should verify provider information submitted by MAOs to ensure validity of the Health Services Delivery data.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation, and noted in a February 2018 update that the agency has standardized existing protocols to ensure the validity of the Health Services Delivery data submitted by MAOs with regards to exceptions requests and partial county justifications. However, CMS's 2018 MA network adequacy guidance stated that MAOs remain responsible for conducting validation of Health Services Delivery data. Unless CMS verifies provider information submitted by MAOs, the agency cannot be confident that MAOs are meeting network adequacy criteria. As of September 2019, agency officials have not implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: To improve its oversight of network adequacy in MA, the Administrator of CMS should set minimum requirements for MAO letters notifying enrollees of provider terminations and require MAOs to submit sample letters to CMS for review.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with this recommendation. In a September 2017 update, the agency stated that it had met the spirit of our recommendation by adding its best practice suggestions of what should be included in the written termination notice to the Medicare Managed Care Manual. However, as we noted in our report, those practices are not required, nor are the letters regularly reviewed. As of September 2019, agency officials have not yet implemented this recommendation.

Recommendation: To help ensure the financial sustainability of the Medicare program, protect beneficiaries from unwarranted financial burden, and address potential concerns about the appropriateness of the health care provided to Part B beneficiaries, Congress should consider eliminating the incentive to prescribe more drugs or more expensive drugs than necessary to treat Medicare Part B beneficiaries at 340B hospitals.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of June 2020, Congress had not acted on this Matter for Congressional Consideration.

Recommendation: To better assess and address the full extent of improper payments in the TRICARE program, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to implement a more comprehensive TRICARE improper payment measurement methodology that includes medical record reviews, as done in other parts of its existing postpayment claims review programs.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, the DOD's Defense Health Agency (DHA) has taken some action to incorporate medical record reviews in its improper payment estimate, as GAO recommended in February 2015. In June 2017, DHA awarded a contract for TRICARE claims review services which, according to DHA officials, will allow the agency to implement a more comprehensive improper payment measurement methodology using retrospective medical records reviews. As of November 2019, the agency reported to Congress that its managed care support contracts now included medical record reviews. It also expected to include payment error results from medical record reviews in its improper payment calculation for fiscal year 2020. DOD also planned to report the effect of medical record reviews on its improper payment rate in a report to Congress in March 2020. Once DHA incorporates medical record reviews in its improper payment rate calculation methodology, GAO will be able to close this recommendation.

Recommendation: To better assess and address the full extent of improper payments in the TRICARE program, and once a more comprehensive improper payment methodology is implemented, the Secretary of Defense should direct the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs) to develop more robust corrective action plans that address underlying causes of improper payments, as determined by the medical record reviews.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: The Department of Defense concurred with our recommendation. As of November 2019, the Department of Defense's Defense Health Agency (DHA) has taken steps to implement a more comprehensive TRICARE improper payment measurement methodology. Until the department fully implements the new methodology and identifies the underlying causes of improper payments, the full extent of improper payments in the TRICARE program will likely not be identified and addressed. As of November 2019, the DHA has not yet fully implemented a more comprehensive measurement methodology, and has, therefore, not developed more robust corrective action plans.

Recommendation: To help determine if programs are effective at supporting those individuals with serious mental illness, the Secretaries of Defense, Health and Human Services, Veterans Affairs, and the Attorney General--which oversee programs targeting individuals with serious mental illness--should document which of their programs targeted for individuals with serious mental illness should be evaluated and how often such evaluations should be completed.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS did not concur with this recommendation. The Helping Families in Mental Health Crisis Reform Act of 2016 enacted in December 2016 included a requirement for HHS to develop a strategy for conducting ongoing evaluations of programs related to mental illness--including serious mental illness--and substance use disorders. HHS has said that it is in the process of preparing a report that identifies key programs and activities across the department, as well as summarizes data on those programs and develops criteria for use in prioritizing programs for evaluation. However, as of June 2019, HHS has not indicated that this report is complete or provided a copy to GAO. We will continue to monitor HHS's efforts in this regard and look for documentation of HHS plans for future evaluations of programs for individuals with serious mental illness.

Recommendation: Depending on the outcome of the litigation, the Secretary of Labor should take steps to ensure the agency will be positioned to conduct a meaningful retrospective review consistent with the Executive Order at an appropriate time. These steps should be taken in consultation with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, and could include, for example, identifying metrics that could be used to evaluate the rule, and implementing a plan to gather and analyze the necessary data.

Agency: Department of Labor
Status: Open

Comments: The Department of Labor's Wage and Hour Division (WHD) agreed with this recommendation and reported that it is working to develop data collection plans and explore a potential evaluation that is focused on the Home Care Rule. As part of this effort, WHD noted that it will continue to work with HHS and other federal partners. In FY16, WHD reported that such an evaluation of how stakeholders and affected industries have responded to the rule would be beneficial. However, litigation has delayed implementation and enforcement of the rule significantly, and WHD believes an evaluation at this stage would be premature and would be unlikely to fully and accurately capture stakeholders' responses to the rule and the resulting impacts. Delaying the evaluation would allow WHD to monitor the results of its own investigations and the effects of ongoing compliance assistance, both of which would be extremely difficult to measure at this early stage. In 2017, WHD reported that it will continue to monitor early implementation to determine the appropriate start for any evaluation and lay the groundwork for future assessment, including a plan for how to identify data that would inform such as an assessment. In 2018, WHD reported that it is too early in the implementation phase of the rule to conduct an evaluation of the rule's impact. The Department and WHD continue to engage with HHS to understand stakeholders' responses to the rule. WHD also continues to lay the groundwork for any future assessment by working to identify data sources that would inform such as an assessment.

Recommendation: To promote and enhance federal, state, and local NEMT coordination activities, the Secretary of Transportation, as the chair of the Coordinating Council, should convene a meeting of the member agencies of the Coordinating Council and complete and publish a new or updated strategic plan that, among other things, clearly outlines a strategy for addressing NEMT and how it can be coordinated across federal agencies that fund NEMT service.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) concurred with this recommendation. The Department of Transportation (DOT), which chairs the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (Coordinating Council) and provides administrative support and staff, has made some progress to enhance coordination of NEMT programs through the development of a new or updated strategic plan, as GAO recommended in December 2014, but coordination at the federal level remains limited. In October 2019, the Coordinating Council adopted a new strategic plan as recommended by GAO. However, DOT indicated that strategies for coordinating NEMT across federal agencies would not be fully articulated until November 2020 when it plans to issue a report to the President and Congress. Until the report is finalized, the Coordinating Council may be missing an opportunity to identify and align goals and strategies for increased NEMT coordination with the benefits of coordination, such as increased program efficiency or reduced costs.

Recommendation: To promote and enhance federal, state, and local NEMT coordination activities, the Secretary of Transportation, as the chair of the Coordinating Council, should convene a meeting of the member agencies of the Coordinating Council and finalize and issue a cost-sharing policy and clearly identify how it can be applied to programs under the purview of member agencies of the Coordinating Council that provide funding for NEMT.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: FTA concurred with this recommendation. The Department of Transportation (DOT), which chairs the Coordinating Council and provides administrative support and staff, has made minimal progress to develop and issue a cost-sharing policy, as GAO recommended in December 2014, which would allow agencies to identify and allocate costs among programs. In October 2019, the Coordinating Council adopted a new strategic plan. DOT plans to include a cost sharing policy as part of a report to the President and Congress in September 2020. According to DOT officials, they have begun the process of soliciting and including input from Coordinating Council agencies to develop the elements of the report, including the cost sharing policy, as of December 2019. The development of a cost sharing policy would provide federal guidance on how to address cost sharing issues across agencies and help facilitate ride and vehicle sharing. Until the Coordinating Council develops federal cost allocation principles for transportation providers, federal agencies may be unable to address cost-sharing issues across agencies such as ride and vehicle sharing.

Recommendation: To promote and enhance federal, state, and local NEMT coordination activities, the Secretary of Transportation, as the chair of the Coordinating Council, should convene a meeting of the member agencies of the Coordinating Council and using the on-going work of the Health, Wellness, and Transportation working group and other appropriate resources, (1) identify the challenges associated with coordinating Medicaid and VA NEMT programs with other federal programs that fund NEMT, (2) develop recommendations for how these challenges can be addressed while still maintaining program integrity and fraud prevention, and (3) report these recommendations to appropriate committees of Congress. To the extent feasible, the Coordinating Council should implement those recommendations that are within its legal authority.

Agency: Department of Transportation
Status: Open

Comments: FTA said they concurred in part with this recommendation. The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act requires the Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility (Coordinating Council) to develop and publish a strategic plan. The Department of Transportation (DOT), which chairs the Coordinating Council and provides administrative support and staff, has made some but minimal progress to address the challenges associated with coordinating Medicaid and VA NEMT programs and other federal programs, as GAO recommended in December 2014. In October 2019, the Coordinating Council adopted a new strategic plan. According to DOT, it has made progress identifying challenges associated with coordinating Medicaid and VA NEMT programs, in part through the use of focus groups and a survey conducted by the National Center for Mobility Management. DOT expects it will include recommendations for addressing the challenges identified in a November 2020 report to the President and Congress. As of December 2019, DOT had begun the process of soliciting input from Coordinating Council agencies into these recommendations. Until DOT's assessment to identify and address coordination challenges is completed, agencies will be limited in coordinating Medicaid and VA NEMT programs with other federal programs that fund NEMT.

Recommendation: To ensure that the Family Caregiver Program is able to meet caregivers' demand for its services, the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs should expedite the process for identifying and implementing an IT system that fully supports the program and will enable VHA program officials to comprehensively monitor the program's workload, including data on the status of applications, appeals, home visits, and the use of other support services, such as respite care.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: VA concurred with our recommendation and the Veterans Health Administration (VHA) and the Office of Information and Technology (OIT) have been working jointly on projects since 2015 to improve and replace the IT system for the Family Caregiver Program. However, two of these projects were terminated without delivering viable software improvements or a replacement system. According to two independent assessments, these prior efforts lacked both effective leadership and implementation of the processes needed for requirements management. In March 2019, VA began a third project, the Caregiver Record Management Application (CARMA), in which OIT and VHA began to acquire and implement a commercial product to replace the program's existing IT system. In February 2020, VA reported that to support the administrative needs of the Family Caregiver Program it had transitioned from its previous IT system to CARMA, its new IT system, in two stages: 1) In October 2019, VA deployed an initial release of CARMA for data entry of veterans and caregivers newly participating in the program, and 2) On December 2, 2019 the transition of existing veterans and caregivers to CARMA occurred. VA also reported in February 2020 that further enhancements and improvements to CARMA would be released over the coming months. However, the department has not yet fully committed to a date by which it will certify that CARMA fully supports the program. As of July 2020, this recommendation remains open pending further updates.

Recommendation: The Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs should direct the Undersecretary for Health to use data from the IT system, once implemented, as well as other relevant data to formally reassess how key aspects of the program are structured and to identify and implement modifications as needed to ensure that the program is functioning as envisioned so that caregivers can receive the services they need in a timely manner.

Agency: Department of Veterans Affairs
Status: Open

Comments: VA concurred with this recommendation. VA transitioned in late 2019 to a new IT system, the Caregiver Record Management Application (CARMA). However, the Department has not yet certified the readiness of CARMA to fully support the needs of the Program of Comprehensive Assistance for Family Caregivers (Family Caregiver Program). Prior to the transition to CARMA, VA had developed manual processes to obtain and monitor key data points, allowing it to reassess policies and procedures for the Family Caregiver Program. In its September 2019 update, VA reported that it anticipates being able to certify the IT system when proposed regulatory changes to enable the expansion of the Family Caregiver Program are finalized and the necessary changes which have an impact on IT are implemented. VA also reported that following certification, IT development will continue on IT requirements that do not directly impact VA's ability to expand the program, such as improving the program's ability to track and report on clinical appeals. As of July 2020, this recommendation remains open pending further updates on how VA plans to use data from the IT system to monitor and assess the program's performance.

Recommendation: To help ensure that DOD has the necessary information to determine the extent to which cost savings result from any future consolidation of training within METC or the Education and Training Directorate, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs should direct the Director of the DHA to develop baseline cost information as part of its metrics to assess achievement of cost savings.

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs)
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of November 2019, DOD is engaged in actions to help address this recommendation. Specifically, METC is developing a strategic plan concerning its objectives and goals and is assessing further consolidation efforts, such as in its medical and dental labs programs. However, DOD has not yet addressed our concerns regarding the DHA's Education and Training Directorate. In its most recent report on DHA shared services, the Education and Training Directorate listed the same 2 product lines noted in our report. Therefore, DOD savings that continue to be attributed to this Directorate are not specifically the result of any consolidation of training within METC or the directorate overall as we had recommended. Until this is done, we suggest this recommendation remain open.

Recommendation: To help realize the reform effort's goal of achieving cost savings, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs should direct the Director of the DHA to conduct a fully developed business case analysis for the Education and Training Directorate's reform effort. In this analysis the Director should (1) identify the cost-related problem that it seeks to address by establishing the Education and Training Directorate, (2) explain how the processes it has identified will address the costrelated problem, and (3) conduct and document an analysis of benefits, costs, and risks.

Agency: Department of Defense: Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Health Affairs)
Status: Open

Comments: DOD concurred with this recommendation. As of November 2019, DOD has not taken steps to address this recommendation. In its most recent report on DHA shared services, the Education and Training Directorate listed the same 2 product lines noted in our report, which as we reported in 2014, overlap with the DHA's Contracting and Procurement and Information Technology shared services. For example, while cost savings for Modeling and Simulation are allocated to the Medical Education and Training Directorate, implementation costs are to be incurred by the Contracting and Procurement shared service. This recommendation will remain open until DOD either identifies common functions to consolidate within Medical Education and Training to achieve cost savings or develops a justification for the transfer of these functions from the military services to the DHA that is not premised on cost savings.

Recommendation: To ensure that MA encounter data are of sufficient quality for their intended purposes, the Administrator of CMS should establish specific plans and time frames for using the data for all intended purposes in addition to risk adjusting payments to MAOs.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: HHS generally agreed with this recommendation. Although CMS reports using MA encounter data for purposes other than risk adjustment, as of February 2020, it has not fully developed specific plans and time frames with dates for all uses. CMS reports that it has begun testing the use of MA encounter data for public health purposes, such as identifying beneficiaries with a history of opioid-related overdose and with other conditions, such as cancer and sickle cell. Further, CMS uses MA encounter data to help identify beneficiaries at risk in areas affected by public health emergencies. CMS reports that its Office of the Actuary (OACT) has used MA encounter data to analyze MA beneficiary utilization of certain Part B drugs. Further, OACT reports that it intends to assess other areas where it could use MA encounter data, such as analyses comparing Medicare fee-for-service and MA. As of February 2020, the agency has not developed specific plans and time frames for this and other intended purposes. For example, although CMS intends to use MA encounter data for program integrity purposes, it has not yet developed specific plans and time frames to do so. We will continue to monitor CMS's progress in developing specific plans and time frames with dates for all intended purposes of MA encounter data.

Recommendation: To ensure that MA encounter data are of sufficient quality for their intended purposes, the Administrator of CMS should complete all the steps necessary to validate the data, including performing statistical analyses, reviewing medical records, and providing MAOs with summary reports on CMS's findings, before using the data to risk adjust payments or for other intended purposes.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: HHS generally agreed with this recommendation, however, HHS did not commit to completing data validation before using MA encounter data for risk adjustment. As of February 2020, CMS has continued to make progress in examining the completeness and accuracy of MA encounter data, but more work remains to fully validate these data. CMS has developed and is implementing an MA Encounter Data Integrity and Monitoring plan, which includes data analysis, guidance, and monitoring. As part of this plan, CMS has established preliminary performance metrics for MA encounter data completeness and accuracy. CMS is also conducting analyses related to accuracy and completeness, but has not established performance benchmarks for these analyses. While the agency plans to communicate findings from the analyses to Medicare Advantage organizations, it has not yet done so. Finally, CMS has not verified MA Encounter data by reviewing medical records. While these steps are encouraging, without fully validating the completeness and accuracy of MA encounter data, CMS would be unable to confidently use these data for risk adjustment or other program management or policy purposes.

Recommendation: To eliminate unnecessary program duplication and to achieve increased efficiencies and potential savings within the integrated MHS, Congress should terminate the Secretary of Defense's authority to contract with the USFHP designated providers in a manner consistent with a reasonable transition of affected USFHP enrollees into TRICARE's regional managed care program or other health care programs, as appropriate.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2017, no actions have been taken.

Recommendation: The Administrator of CMS should develop a data collection strategy that ensures that states report accurate and complete data on all sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments. There are short- and long-term possibilities for pursuing the data collection strategy, including (1) in the short-term, as part of its ongoing initiative to annually collect data on Medicaid payments made to hospitals, nursing facilities, and other institutional providers, CMS could collect accurate and complete facility-specific data on the sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of the Medicaid payments, and (2) in the long-term, as part of its ongoing initiative to develop an enhanced Medicaid claims data system (T-MSIS), CMS could ensure that T-MSIS will be capable of capturing information on all sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments, and, once the system becomes operational, ensure that states report this information for supplemental Medicaid payments and other highrisk Medicaid payments.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) acknowledged that it lacks adequate data on state financing methods for overseeing compliance with a certain federal requirement related to the nonfederal share and that it will examine efforts to improve data collection toward this end. In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen fiscal integrity of the Medicaid program. The proposed rule would establish new policies and codify existing policies related to reporting the sources of funds used to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments. For example, the proposed rule would require states to report, at the aggregate and provider level, contributions to the state or local governments used as a source of the nonfederal share for Medicaid supplemental payments. GAO will continue to monitor the status of the proposed rule, as well as review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent to which it addresses the recommendation. GAO maintains it is important that CMS and federal policymakers have more complete information about how increasing federal costs are impacting the Medicaid program, including beneficiaries and the providers who serve them and plans to continue to monitor CMS's actions to help ensure that states report accurate and complete data on all sources of the nonfederal share.

Recommendation: To assist states that rely on or are planning to contract with an MCO to administer Medicaid prescription benefits, and to help provide effective oversight of psychotropic medications prescribed to children in foster care, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should issue guidance to state Medicaid, child-welfare, and mental-health officials regarding prescription-drug monitoring and oversight for children in foster care receiving psychotropic medications through MCOs.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In an October 2018 written response, Health and Human Services (HHS) noted that they released 2017-2018 Drug Utilization Review Summaries for Prescription Drug Fee-For-Service Programs as it relates to national statistics on state oversight of psychotropic medications, as well as new state requirements to report on their Medicaid managed care organizations. However, as of August 2019, HHS confirmed they have not issued any guidance to state Medicaid, child-welfare, and mental-health officials regarding prescription-drug monitoring and oversight for children in foster care receiving psychotropic medications through MCOs, as we recommended. We continue to believe that additional HHS guidance that helps states implement oversight strategies within the context of a managed-care environment is needed to help ensure appropriate monitoring of psychotropic medications prescribed to children in foster care.

Recommendation: To help ensure that qualified CDRs promote improved quality and efficiency of physician care for Medicare beneficiaries, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct CMS to establish a requirement for qualified CDRs to demonstrate improvement on key measures of quality and efficiency for their target populations.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2019, HHS officials reported that they were implementing new requirements for qualified CDRs, but these requirements were not related to demonstrating improvement on the measures of quality and efficiency, as GAO recommended. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To help ensure that qualified CDRs promote improved quality and efficiency of physician care for Medicare beneficiaries, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should direct CMS to establish a process for monitoring compliance with requirements for qualified CDRs that draws on relevant expert judgment. This process should assess CDR performance on each requirement in a way that takes into account the varying circumstances of CDRs and their available opportunities to promote quality and efficiency improvement for their target populations.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of any actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To help ensure that qualified CDRs promote improved quality and efficiency of physician care for Medicare beneficiaries, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should determine and implement actions to reduce barriers to the development of qualified CDRs, such as (1) developing guidance that clarifies Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act requirements to promote participation in qualified CDRs; (2) working with private sector entities to make relevant multipayer cost data available to qualified CDRs; (3) testing one or more models of shared savings between Medicare and qualified CDRs that achieve reduced Medicare expenditures with improved quality of care, and (4) providing technical assistance to qualified CDRs.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of any actions taken to implement this recommendation beyond providing limited technical assistance to qualified CDRs through monthly support calls and an annual kick-off meeting. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To help ensure that qualified CDRs promote improved quality and efficiency of physician care for Medicare beneficiaries, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should determine key data elements needed by qualified CDRs--such as those relevant for a required core set of measures--and direct Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology and CMS to include these data elements, if feasible, in the requirements for certification of EHRs under the EHR incentive programs.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of April 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of any actions taken to implement this recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation when we receive additional information.

Recommendation: To improve the transparency of the process for reviewing and approving spending limits for comprehensive section 1115 demonstrations, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should reconsider adjustments and costs used in setting the spending limits for the Arizona and Texas demonstrations, and make appropriate adjustments to spending limits for the remaining years of each demonstration.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) has taken steps to address GAO's 2013 recommendation, but more actions are needed for GAO to consider this recommendation implemented. Beginning in May 2016, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) began implementing a new budget neutrality policy. The new policy was outlined in a Letter to State Medicaid Directors in 2018, and it addressed certain problems GAO identified regarding states' allowed methods for determining budget neutrality of their demonstrations. CMS has begun phasing in the methods established under this new policy for all states, including the two states (Arizona and Texas) for which GAO recommended adjustments. One portion of the policy--under which spending limits will be updated to reflect more recent spending data--will be implemented beginning in 2021 and will address concerns GAO identified in Arizona's spending limit once its demonstration is renewed. In January 2019, CMS officials told GAO that the agency continues to allow states to include hypothetical costs when determining demonstration spending limits, an action GAO identified as a concern in Texas' demonstration. While CMS officials provided documentation on changes the agency made in the spending limit approved for Texas' new demonstration period beginning in January 2018, GAO reviewed these changes and found that further adjustments are needed to remove additional hypothetical costs from the Texas' spending limit.

Recommendation: In order to improve CMS's ability to identify self-referred anatomic pathology services and help CMS avoid unnecessary increases in these services, the Administrator of CMS should insert a self-referral flag on Medicare Part B claim forms and require providers to indicate whether the anatomic pathology services for which the provider bills Medicare are self-referred or not.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2013, we recommended that the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) insert a self-referral flag on Medicare Part B claim forms and require providers to indicate whether the anatomic pathology services for which the provider bills Medicare are self-referred or not. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) did not concur with this recommendation, noting that CMS does not believe that this recommendation will address overutilization that occurs as a result of self-referral. Although CMS has taken initial steps relevant to self-referral, the steps do not require a provider to indicate whether anatomic pathology services billed to Medicare are self-referred or not. Specifically, CMS has noted that Section 6409(a) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act required the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, in cooperation with the Inspector General of the Department of Health and Human Services, to establish a Medicare self-referral disclosure protocol that sets forth a process to enable providers of services and suppliers to self-disclose actual or potential violations of the physician self-referral statute. However, the protocol is voluntary and specific to actual or potential violations regarding self-referral, which is not relevant to our recommendation. As of January 2020, CMS has not provided any additional information about actions it has taken to address our recommendation. We continue to believe that inserting a flag on Part B claims to indicate whether an anatomic pathology service is self-referred would improve CMS's ability to monitor self-referred services, which in turn may help them take action to avoid unnecessary increases in these services.

Recommendation: In order to improve CMS's ability to identify self-referred anatomic pathology services and help CMS avoid unnecessary increases in these services, the Administrator of CMS should determine and implement an approach to ensure the appropriateness of biopsy procedures performed by self-referring providers.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2013, we recommended that the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) implement an approach to ensure the appropriateness of biopsy procedures performed by self-referring providers. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) did not concur with this recommendation and does not believe it would address overutilization that occurs as a result of self-referral. In November 2017, CMS officials noted that the agency does not have the ability to identify self-referred anatomic pathology services during medical reviews. As of January 2020, CMS has not provided any additional information about actions it has taken to address the recommendation. We continue to believe that it is important for CMS to monitor the self-referral of anatomic pathology services on an ongoing basis and determine if those services are inappropriate or unnecessary.

Recommendation: In order to improve CMS's ability to identify self-referred anatomic pathology services and help CMS avoid unnecessary increases in these services, the Administrator of CMS should develop and implement a payment approach for anatomic pathology services that would limit the financial incentives associated with referring a higher number of specimens--or anatomic pathology services--per biopsy procedure.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In June 2013, we recommended that the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) develop and implement a payment approach for anatomic pathology services under the Physician Fee Schedule that would limit the financial incentives associated with referring a higher number of specimens--anatomic pathology services--per biopsy procedure. Although health care providers have discretion in determining the number of tissue samples from biopsy procedures that become specimens (anatomic pathology services), CMS's current payment system under the Physician Fee Schedule provides a financial incentive for providers to refer more specimens per biopsy procedure. Specifically, CMS pays for each specimen that a provider submits to be analyzed. HHS indicated that it concurred with our recommendation and that it had addressed this recommendation by reducing payment for the most commonly furnished anatomic pathology service (Current Procedural Terminology [CPT] code 88305) by approximately 30 percent in calendar year 2013. However, CMS's payment reduction did not change the financial incentive providers have to refer more specimens per biopsy procedure because they will still be paid separately for each specimen submitted. As of January 2020, CMS has not provided any additional information about actions it has taken to limit the financial incentives associated with referring a higher number of specimens. We continue to believe that CMS should develop a payment approach that addresses this incentive.

Recommendation: To ensure that federal funding efficiently and effectively responds to the countercyclical nature of the Medicaid program, Congress may wish to consider enacting an FMAP formula that is targeted for variable state Medicaid needs and provides automatic, timely, and temporary increased FMAP assistance in response to national economic downturns.

Agency: Congress
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, no legislation had been enacted. GAO has testified on at least one bill that had been introduced in the Congress that would implement this Matter for Congressional Consideration. On February 10, 2016, GAO testified on considerations related to the Medicaid funding formula. See Medicaid: Changes to Funding Formula Could Improve Allocation of Funds to States GAO-16-377T January 26, 2016. We also cited this report in our discussion on Medicaid funding during economic downturns in Medicaid: Key Policy and Data Considerations for Designing a Per Capita Cap on Federal Funding (GAO-16-726). We cited this Matter in Opportunities to Improve the Federal Recovery and Response Efforts (GAO-20-625) and in COVID-19: Brief Update on Initial Federal Response to the Pandemic (GAO-20-708).

Recommendation: PPACA contained several important program integrity provisions for the 340B program, and additional steps can also ensure appropriate use of the program. Therefore, the Secretary of HHS should instruct the administrator of HRSA to finalize new, more specific guidance on the definition of a 340B patient.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2017, HRSA withdrew proposed guidance that included further specificity on the definition of 340B patient in response to the new administration's January 20 memorandum directing agencies to withdraw regulations that were pending before the Office of Management and Budget but had not yet been published in the Federal Register. In March 2018, HRSA told GAO that it continues to assess next steps with the Administration on the proposed omnibus guidance, which included the patient definition. In June 2019, HRSA reported that it is still working with the Department to determine next steps for this recommendation. In July 2020, HRSA reported that it conducted an evaluation of its audit process and other program integrity efforts and determined that guidance does not provide the agency with appropriate enforcement capability. Therefore, HRSA is not pursing new guidance under the Program at this time. The FY 2021 President's Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA comprehensive regulatory authority.

Recommendation: PPACA contained several important program integrity provisions for the 340B program, and additional steps can also ensure appropriate use of the program. Therefore, the Secretary of HHS should instruct the administrator of HRSA to issue guidance to further specify the criteria that hospitals that are not publicly owned or operated must meet to be eligible for the 340B program.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: In January 2017, HRSA withdrew proposed guidance that included additional specificity regarding hospital eligibility in response to the new administration's January 20 memorandum directing agencies to withdraw regulations that were pending before the Office of Management and Budget but had not yet been published in the Federal Register. In March 2018, HRSA reported that it believes it is unable to implement this recommendation without additional legislative authority because the statute does not speak to the issue raised in the recommendation. HRSA also noted that the FY19 President's Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA comprehensive regulatory authority, and that if this proposal is enacted, it could regulate on hospital eligibility. In June 2019, HRSA reported that it is still unable to implement this recommendation without additional legislative authority, though the President's FY 2020 Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA with such authority. In July 2020, HRSA reported that it conducted an evaluation of its audit process and other program integrity efforts and determined that guidance does not provide the agency with appropriate enforcement capability. Therefore, HRSA is not pursing new guidance under the Program at this time. The FY 2021 President's Budget includes a proposal to provide HRSA comprehensive regulatory authority.

Recommendation: In light of the need for accurate and complete information on children's access to health services under Medicaid and CHIP, the requirement that states report information to CMS on certain aspects of their Medicaid and CHIP programs, and problems with accuracy and completeness in this state reporting, the Administrator of CMS should work with states to identify additional improvements that could be made to the CMS 416 and CHIP annual reports, including options for reporting on the receipt of services separately for children in managed care and fee-for-service delivery models, while minimizing reporting burden, and for capturing information on the CMS 416 relating to children's receipt of treatment services for which they are referred.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: In August 2019, CMS stated that the agency's long-term plan is to use the Transformed Medicaid Statistical Information System (T-MSIS) to analyze information on children's receipt of Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnostic and Treatment (EPSDT) services. As of June 2020, CMS had developed a new CMS-416 reporting form that gives states the option of having CMS calculate the measures for the report using T-MSIS. CMS stated that it intends to implement this option for states for fiscal year 2020 CMS-416 reports, which are due in April 2021. As of August 2020, the new CMS-416 form was undergoing Paperwork Reduction Act review. CMS is also exploring using T-MSIS to generate the Core Set of Children's Health Care Quality Measures for Medicaid and CHIP, some of which are included in the CHIP annual report. As of June 2020, CMS had begun a pilot test to generate five of the Core Set measures using 2018 T-MSIS data. GAO considers this recommendation open and will continue to monitor CMS's progress towards its long-term goal of using T-MSIS to monitor children's receipt of EPSDT services.

Recommendation: To help ensure that Medicare beneficiaries have access to high-quality dialysis care, the Administrator of CMS should assess the extent to which the bundled payment for dialysis care will be sufficient to cover an efficient dialysis organization's costs to provide such care when the bundled payment expands to cover oral-only ESRD drugs. The Administrator should conduct this assessment before implementing this expanded bundled payment.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: CMS, as required by the Protecting Access to Medicare Act of 2014 (PAMA), delayed until 2024 when the bundled payment for dialysis care is expanded to cover oral-only ESRD drugs. Because PAMA requires CMS to use the most recent year of data available to implement this payment change, CMS has been unable to implement our recommendation. We will update the status of this recommendation upon receipt of additional information from CMS.

Recommendation: To enhance the provision of dental care to children covered by Medicaid and CHIP, and to help ensure that HHS's Insure Kids Now Web site is a useful tool to help connect children covered by Medicaid and CHIP with participating dentists who will treat them, the Secretary of HHS should require states to verify that dentists listed on the Insure Kids Now Web site have not been excluded from Medicaid and CHIP by the HHS-OIG, and periodically verify that excluded providers are not included on the lists posted by the states.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: As of September 2020, CMS has not indicated taking steps to require states to ensure excluded providers are not listed on the Insure Kids Now website, nor has it indicated taking steps to periodically verify that providers excluded from Medicaid and CHIP are not on the list. CMS has said that it relies on states to provide accurate lists of eligible dentists and that data issues prevent the agency from independently verifying that excluded providers are not included on the Insure Kids Now website. We continue to believe that CMS should require states to ensure that excluded providers are not listed on the website and periodically verify that excluded providers are not included on the lists posted by the states, so that the website does not present inaccurate information about providers available to serve Medicaid-covered children.

Recommendation: To help DOD obtain reasonable assurance that all active and Reserve component servicemembers to whom the PDHRA requirement applies are provided the opportunity to have their health concerns identified, the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health Affairs and the military services should take steps to ensure that PDHRA questionnaires are included in DOD's central repository for each of these servicemembers.

Agency: Department of Defense
Status: Open

Comments: In its comments to this report, the Department of Defense (DOD) concurred with this recommendation. On October 2009, DOD's Force Health Protection and Response Office sent a memo to each of the military service Surgeons General emphasizing the need for the post-deployment health reassessment (PDHRA) to be offered to all service members who are eligible to complete the assessment. In 2010, DOD's noted that the services would work with the Armed Forces Health Surveillance Center (AFHSC) repository to ensure PDHRAs are submitted correctly, without transmission errors. DOD's 2011 case records showed that the Air Force and Army had developed data verification processes to ensure that AFHSC received PDHRAs. Further, the Defense Medical Data Center (DMDC) had planed to create a file consisting of the date of deployment for deployed personnel, and that the file would be available to the services in order to match DMDC with data from each of the service-specific systems, in accordance to requirements. In September 2011, although DMDC and the services had agreed to match rosters of deployed service members, there were still inconsistencies in deployment dates. In March 2012, DOD was still verifying data inconsistencies which, until resolved, leads to inaccurate reporting based on errors in the deployment dates. As of September 2019, DOD has not provided information or documentation to address this recommendation.

Recommendation: To enhance the transparency of CMS oversight and clarify and communicate the types of allowable state financing arrangements, the Administrator of CMS should provide each state CMS reviews under its initiative with specific and written explanations regarding agency determinations on the allowability of various arrangements for financing the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments and make these determinations available to all states and interested parties.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services: Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services
Status: Open

Comments: CMS has taken steps to provide states with specific and written explanations regarding agency determinations on whether various arrangements for financing the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments are allowable and making those determinations available to states and interested parties. In November 2019, CMS issued a proposed rule that the agency said would promote state accountability, improve federal oversight, and strengthen fiscal integrity of the Medicaid program. The proposed rule would establish new policies and codify existing policies related to the sources of funds that states use to finance the nonfederal share of Medicaid payments. For example, the rule is intended to provide CMS and states with better information and guidance to identify existing and emerging state financing issues, provide more clarity on allowable financing arrangements and promote state accountability. GAO will continue to monitor the status of the proposed rule, as well as review a final rule, if one is issued, to determine the extent to which it addresses the recommendation.

Recommendation: To better account for physicians practicing in underserved areas through the use of J-1 visa waivers, the Secretary of Health and Human Services should collect and maintain data on waiver physicians--including information on their numbers, practice locations, and practice specialties--and use this information when identifying areas experiencing physician shortages and placing physicians in these areas.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open

Comments: HHS concurred with our recommendation, commenting that the department's goal was to assure that the limited resources of the J-1 visa waiver program and other programs addressing areas and populations with limited access to health care professionals are targeted most effectively. In 2013, HHS indicated that it was considering the best approach to collect information to identify J-1 visa physicians practicing in underserved areas. As of February 2018, however, HHS reported that it does not have the capacity to track physicians practicing in underserved areas through the use of J-1 visa waivers, citing reasons such as the number of federal entities and states involved in the process. While we recognize that collecting and maintaining these data requires coordination with other agencies, we continue to believe that without data on waiver physicians, HHS--the federal agency with primary responsibility for addressing physician shortages--will lack the information needed to consider waiver physicians working in underserved areas when placing providers in these areas under other programs. As of August 2019, HHS officials have not informed us of actions taken to implement this recommendation. We are leaving this recommendation open until the department collects and maintains data on waiver physicians and considers those physicians in its efforts to address physician shortages.

Recommendation: To meet its fiduciary responsibility of ensuring that section 1115 waivers are budget neutral, the Secretary of Health and Human services should better ensure that valid methods are used to demonstrate budget neutrality, by developing and implementing consistent criteria for consideration of section 1115 demonstration waiver proposals.

Agency: Department of Health and Human Services
Status: Open
Priority recommendation

Comments: As of January 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) had taken some action to address GAO's 2002 recommendation. In August 2018, HHS issued written guidance through a State Medicaid Directors Letter documenting four key changes it made in 2016 to its budget neutrality policy. These changes addressed some, but not all of the questionable methods GAO identified in its reports. To fully address this recommendation, HHS should also address these other questionable methods, such as setting demonstration spending limits based on hypothetical costs-what the state could have paid-rather than payments actually made by the state. GAO has found that the use of hypothetical costs has the potential to inflate spending limits and thus threatens budget neutrality of demonstrations