Whistleblowers: United Healthcare Hid Complaints About Medicare Advantage
By Fred Schulte
Kaiser Health News
July 28, 2017
United Healthcare Services Inc., which runs the nation’s largest private Medicare Advantage insurance plan, concealed hundreds of complaints of enrollment fraud and other misconduct from federal officials as part of a scheme to collect bonus payments it didn’t deserve, a newly unsealed whistleblower lawsuit alleges.
The suit, filed by United Healthcare sales agents in Wisconsin, accuses the giant insurer of keeping a “dual set of books” to hide serious complaints about its services and of being “intentionally ineffective” at investigating misconduct by its sales staff. A federal judge unsealed the lawsuit, first filed in October 2016, on Tuesday.
The company knew of accusations that at least one sales agent forged signatures on enrollment forms and had been the subject of dozens of other misconduct complaints, according to the suit. In another case, a sales agent allegedly engaged in a “brazen kickback scheme” in which she promised iPads to people who agreed to sign up and stay with the health plan for six months, according to the suit.
Though it fired the female sales agent, United Healthcare concluded the kickback allegations against her were “inconclusive” and did not report the incident to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, according to the suit.
Asked for comment on the allegations in the suit, United Healthcare spokesman Matt Burns said: “We reject them.”...
Use Our Content
This KHN story can be republished for free (details).
Friday, July 28, 2017
Tuesday, July 25, 2017
Obamacare Isn’t The Problem…It’s The Insurance Companies
Primary Care Doctor Explains: “Obamacare Isn’t The Problem…It’s The Insurance Companies”
Posts by cpowell
Blue Dot Daily
July 15, 2017
With premiums increasing for those with coverage through the ACA marketplace, a lot of people are criticizing Obamacare. But many doctors and healthcare professionals are saying that isn’t really the problem. Cathleen London is a primary care physician in Milbridge, a rural town in Maine. She claims the problem isn’t Obamacare itself, but rather, the entire health insurance system and insurance companies are to blame.
Writing for the Portland Press Herald, London explains she is a a primary care physician who is on the front lines every single day, as her town is very remote, which means it takes 30 to 40 minutes to get to the emergency room, which is why her office operates as an urgent care facility as well as a family medical practice.
It’s takes an ambulance about 20 minutes to get to her clinic and specialist care about 2 hours away, so Dr. London is trained to handle about 90 percent of medical problems.
Dr. London explains the following, which will show you exactly what’s wrong with health care:
Posts by cpowell
Blue Dot Daily
July 15, 2017
With premiums increasing for those with coverage through the ACA marketplace, a lot of people are criticizing Obamacare. But many doctors and healthcare professionals are saying that isn’t really the problem. Cathleen London is a primary care physician in Milbridge, a rural town in Maine. She claims the problem isn’t Obamacare itself, but rather, the entire health insurance system and insurance companies are to blame.
Writing for the Portland Press Herald, London explains she is a a primary care physician who is on the front lines every single day, as her town is very remote, which means it takes 30 to 40 minutes to get to the emergency room, which is why her office operates as an urgent care facility as well as a family medical practice.
It’s takes an ambulance about 20 minutes to get to her clinic and specialist care about 2 hours away, so Dr. London is trained to handle about 90 percent of medical problems.
Dr. London explains the following, which will show you exactly what’s wrong with health care:
One evening I was almost home after a full day’s work. Around
7:30, I got a call on the emergency line regarding an 82-year-old man
who had fallen and split his head open. His wife wanted to know if I
could see him, even though he was not a patient of mine.
Instead of sending them to the ER, I went back to the office. I
spent 90 minutes evaluating him, suturing his wound and making sure that
nothing more sinister had occurred than a loss of footing by a man who
has mild dementia. When I was sure that the man would be safe, I let
them go.
I billed a total of $789 for the visit, repair, after-hours and
emergency care costs. Stating that the after-hours and emergency
services had been billed incorrectly, Martin’s Point Health Care threw
out the claims and reimbursed me $105, which does not even cover the
suture and other materials I used.
I called them about their decision, said that it was not right
and let them know they’d lose me if they reimbursed this as a routine
patient visit. They replied, “Go ahead and send your termination letter”
– which I did.
The same day, Anthem Blue Cross kept me on the phone for 45
minutes regarding a breast MRI recommended by radiologists on a woman
whose mother and sister had died of breast cancer. She’d had five months
of breast discharge that wasn’t traceable to anything benign (and it
turns out the MRI is highly suspicious for cancer).
Anthem did not want to
approve the MRI unless it was to localize a lesion for biopsy, even
though the mammogram had been inconclusive! This should have been a
slam-dunk fast track to approval; instead, dealing with Anthem wasted a
good part of my day.
Then Aetna told me there is no way to negotiate fees in Maine. I
was somewhat flabbergasted. I do more here than I did in either
Brookline, Massachusetts, or New York. The rates should be higher given
the level of care I am providing. I have chosen not to participate with
them. This only hurts patients; however, I cannot keep losing money on
visits.
I do lose money on MaineCare – their reimbursement is below what
it costs me to see a patient. For now, that is a decision that I am
living with.
I had thought those losses would be offset by private insurance
companies, but their cost shifting to patients is obscene. I pay half of
my employees’ health insurance, though I’m not required to by law – I
just think it is the right thing to do.
My personal policy costs close to $900 a month for me and my sons
(all healthy), and each of us has a $6,000 deductible. This means I am
paying rack rate for a policy that provides only bare-bones coverage.
Something is wrong with the system. In one day, I encountered
everything wrong with insurance. I am not trying to scam the system. I
am literally trying to survive. I am trying to give care in an
underserved area.
This is not the fault of Obamacare, which stopped the
most egregious problems with insurance companies. Remember lifetime
caps? Remember denials for pre-existing conditions? Remember the
retroactive cancellation of insurance policies? Returning to that is not
an option.
Indeed it is not an option, Dr. London. If Republicans get their way
eventually by repealing Obamacare, it may be where we end up again. If
Republicans really get their way, it’ll be even worse than it was
before.
Sunday, May 28, 2017
What your doctor won’t disclose
What happened when Dr. Leana Wen started a website where doctors could reveal their conflicts of interest? Dr. Wen tells us in a TED Talk.
What your doctor won’t disclose
Leana Wen
TED Talk
Nov 2014
They told me that I'm a traitor to my own profession, that I should be fired, have my medical license taken away, that I should go back to my own country. My email got hacked. In a discussion forum for other doctors, someone took credit for "Twitter-bombing" my account. Now, I didn't know if this was a good or bad thing, but then came the response: "Too bad it wasn't a real bomb."...
Read more (or watch video): What your doctor won’t disclose
What your doctor won’t disclose
Leana Wen
TED Talk
Nov 2014
They told me that I'm a traitor to my own profession, that I should be fired, have my medical license taken away, that I should go back to my own country. My email got hacked. In a discussion forum for other doctors, someone took credit for "Twitter-bombing" my account. Now, I didn't know if this was a good or bad thing, but then came the response: "Too bad it wasn't a real bomb."...
Read more (or watch video): What your doctor won’t disclose
Thursday, April 27, 2017
Partners, Brigham pay $10M to settle research fraud probe
Partners, Brigham pay $10M to settle research fraud probe
Partners
Healthcare and Brigham and Women’s have agreed to pay $10 million to
settle allegations by the federal government that a group of former stem
cell researchers at the hospital falsified data to win grant funding
from the NIH.
The
U.S. Attorney’s Office in Boston announced the settlement, which stems
from grant applications submitted by a stem cell research lab run by
former Harvard Medical School professor Piero Anversa.
According to the government, Anversa and two other researchers, Annarosa Leri
and Jan Kajstura, used “manipulated and falsified information” to
obtain funding to study whether stem cells can repair cardiovascular
damage. The data was published in a 2012 issue of the journal
Circulation, but the study was later withdrawn amid allegations that it
had been partially fabricated.
Anversa
and Leri sued Brigham in 2014, saying the hospital's investigation into
their alleged conduct was flawed and marred by conflicts of interest. A
judge dismissed that case in 2015.
On
Thursday, prosecutors credited Brigham with voluntarily disclosing the
possible fraud to the government, and noted that the scientists are no
longer affiliated with the hospital.
“Individuals
and institutions that receive research funding from NIH have an
obligation to conduct their research honestly and not to alter results
to conform with unproven hypotheses,” Acting U.S. Attorney William Weinreb
said in a statement. “Medical research fraud not only wastes scarce
government resources but also undermines the scientific process and the
search for better treatments for serious diseases.”
In
a statement, a Brigham spokesperson said the hospital ceased drawing
funds implicated in the alleged fraud when the claims came to light, and
also closed the lab.
Friday, October 14, 2016
Why does the Health Care Industry give so much money to Brian Maienschein?
Sacramento Report: Maienschein’s Mammoth Campaign Cash Haul
By Sara Libby
VOSD
Oct 14, 2016
Assemblyman Brian Maienschein has more campaign cash for his re-election bid than almost any other state lawmaker in California. He’s racked up 441 donations adding up to $692,002, according to recent filings, and has a whopping $1.22 million cash on hand – second only to the speaker of the Assembly.
Todd Gloria, for comparison, is running to represent the Assembly district next door and reported $277,617 on hand.
Maienschein’s robust fundraising is made all the more unusual because the district he represents, which encompasses Poway, Rancho Santa Fe and the northeastern communities of San Diego, is not considered especially competitive.
Mainschein has defeated his challenger in the last two general elections by over 40 points. He finished first in the June primary by 15 points over Democrat Melinda Vasquez.
It’s possible that Maienschien is stockpiling funds for a run at higher office that requires a bigger spend. Candidates can roll over any excess money that they have at the end of the campaign into the next cycle, and 2020 will be a big year for down-ticket Republicans who usually see electoral gains in presidential election off-years. Perhaps most importantly, in 2020, Republican Sen. Joel Anderson has said he plans to vacate his seat to run for the County Board of Supervisors. Anderson’s district overlaps considerably with Maienschein’s, which would make it a natural target.
Many of the campaign donations Maienschein’s received come from the health care industry. Of the companies that donated, $228,024.50 came from the health care industry (broadly defined to include insurance companies, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and occupational political action committees.) In his time in the Assembly, Maienschein has championed legislation amenable to this cluster of industries, putting forward a number of measures related to health care and mental health facilities in the 2015-2016 legislative session. Health care and life sciences comprise a major portion of the regional economy, bringing more than $38 billion into the region 2014 in wages alone...
By Sara Libby
VOSD
Oct 14, 2016
Assemblyman Brian Maienschein has more campaign cash for his re-election bid than almost any other state lawmaker in California. He’s racked up 441 donations adding up to $692,002, according to recent filings, and has a whopping $1.22 million cash on hand – second only to the speaker of the Assembly.
Todd Gloria, for comparison, is running to represent the Assembly district next door and reported $277,617 on hand.
Maienschein’s robust fundraising is made all the more unusual because the district he represents, which encompasses Poway, Rancho Santa Fe and the northeastern communities of San Diego, is not considered especially competitive.
Mainschein has defeated his challenger in the last two general elections by over 40 points. He finished first in the June primary by 15 points over Democrat Melinda Vasquez.
It’s possible that Maienschien is stockpiling funds for a run at higher office that requires a bigger spend. Candidates can roll over any excess money that they have at the end of the campaign into the next cycle, and 2020 will be a big year for down-ticket Republicans who usually see electoral gains in presidential election off-years. Perhaps most importantly, in 2020, Republican Sen. Joel Anderson has said he plans to vacate his seat to run for the County Board of Supervisors. Anderson’s district overlaps considerably with Maienschein’s, which would make it a natural target.
Many of the campaign donations Maienschein’s received come from the health care industry. Of the companies that donated, $228,024.50 came from the health care industry (broadly defined to include insurance companies, pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers, and occupational political action committees.) In his time in the Assembly, Maienschein has championed legislation amenable to this cluster of industries, putting forward a number of measures related to health care and mental health facilities in the 2015-2016 legislative session. Health care and life sciences comprise a major portion of the regional economy, bringing more than $38 billion into the region 2014 in wages alone...
Monday, July 11, 2016
Will Kaiser Foundation Health Plan lawsuit against its own investigator reveal more than Kaiser would like?
I'm guessing Quinn told Kaiser what they wanted to hear so they didn't ask questions. I wonder how many Kaiser members were denied health care on the basis of this man's information? How much money did he save Kaiser? I imagine that what Quinn charged Kaiser was a small fraction of the large amount of money he helped Kaiser avoid paying. Will Kaiser reopen those cases and give back to members all such amounts?
Kaiser Foundation Health Plan is not a subsidiary. It's the heart and soul of Kaiser Permanente. It makes about 8 billion tax-free dollars a year. Denying care is a major part of its business plan.
The suit by Kaiser Foundation Health Plan accuses Michael Albert Quinn of submitting invoices for investigative services that were not performed or were not justified over a 16-year span after he joined the company in 1998, the San Francisco Chronicle reported (http://bit.ly/29K2QoA) on Sunday.
Quinn, 45, was responsible for hiring investigators to conduct surveillance on people who were suspected of filing fraudulent claims, He was authorized to approve charges up to $50,000.
The newspaper said Quinn was fired in 2014. Kaiser filed the lawsuit last year...
See more HERE.
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
No lateral moves allowed between health systems: an illegal conspiracy in North Carolina--or the future of medicine that UCSD is aggressively seeking in California?
Is this the future in California if UCSD wins its poaching lawsuit
against Dr. Paul Aisen regarding Aisen's decision to transfer his
Alzheimer's study to USC? Is it unlawful restraint of trade? Science
magazine reports on what happens when health systems collude to stop
their employees from moving to other institutions.
An academic 'poaching' lawsuit from a scientist who didn’t move
By Beryl Lieff Benderly
Science
September 10, 2015
In August, we reported on the lawsuit brought by the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), against the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, in an effort to stop USC’s alleged attempt to bring a multimillion-dollar Alzheimer’s disease research project along with its new recruit, neuroscientist Paul Aisen, from UCSD to USC. We noted that though some observers view universities’ efforts to bring major researchers to their campuses from elsewhere as effective recruiting, others see it as harmful poaching.
In North Carolina, meanwhile, another scientist’s effort to move from Duke University in Durham to the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, has also resulted in a lawsuit, but for an entirely different reason. Danielle Seaman, an assistant professor of radiology at Duke, claims that “an illegal conspiracy” among Duke, UNC, and the two universities’ health systems not to raid each other’s talent barred her from consideration for an advertised opening at UNC, according to the complaint filed with the court.
Allegedly, the institutions’ goal was to “suppress the compensation of their employees,” according to the complaint. “Without the knowledge or consent of their employees, [Duke’s] senior administrators and deans entered into express agreements [with UNC] to eliminate or reduce competition … for skilled medical labor” by not “hir[ing] or attempt[ing] to hire” from each other. This deal, the complaint argues, constitutes an unlawful restraint of trade...
Read more here.
“[L]ateral moves of faculty between Duke and UNC are not permitted.”
–UNC's chief of cardiothoracic imaging
An academic 'poaching' lawsuit from a scientist who didn’t move
By Beryl Lieff Benderly
Science
September 10, 2015
In August, we reported on the lawsuit brought by the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), against the University of Southern California (USC) in Los Angeles, in an effort to stop USC’s alleged attempt to bring a multimillion-dollar Alzheimer’s disease research project along with its new recruit, neuroscientist Paul Aisen, from UCSD to USC. We noted that though some observers view universities’ efforts to bring major researchers to their campuses from elsewhere as effective recruiting, others see it as harmful poaching.
In North Carolina, meanwhile, another scientist’s effort to move from Duke University in Durham to the University of North Carolina (UNC), Chapel Hill, has also resulted in a lawsuit, but for an entirely different reason. Danielle Seaman, an assistant professor of radiology at Duke, claims that “an illegal conspiracy” among Duke, UNC, and the two universities’ health systems not to raid each other’s talent barred her from consideration for an advertised opening at UNC, according to the complaint filed with the court.
Allegedly, the institutions’ goal was to “suppress the compensation of their employees,” according to the complaint. “Without the knowledge or consent of their employees, [Duke’s] senior administrators and deans entered into express agreements [with UNC] to eliminate or reduce competition … for skilled medical labor” by not “hir[ing] or attempt[ing] to hire” from each other. This deal, the complaint argues, constitutes an unlawful restraint of trade...
Read more here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)