Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver, A Professional Corporation  
Ober|Kaler Health Law Alert - Spring 2006




In this Issue

From the Chair

Guide to Terms

Ober|Kaler in Print

Legislation
New Law Creates National Patient Safety Database

OIG Activity
OIG Focus: Part D, Nursing Homes and CMS

Safe Harbor Proposed for Federally Qualified Health Centers

OIG Advisory Opinions

OIG Cites Antikickback Risks with PAPs Under Part D

Long Term Care
Nursing Staff Data-posting Requirement for Nursing Facilities

Hospitals
Providers Score a Victory in DSH Litigation

PHARMA
CMS Relaxes Marketing Rules to Promote Part D Enrollment

Reimbursement
Hospitals Face Increased Risks for Improper Discharge Coding

Self-Referral
CMS Issues First Stark Advisory Opinion in 7 Years

FCA
More Courts Support FCA Actions Based on Kickbacks

First-to-file Bar Held Inapplicable to Qui Tam Suits

Landmark Clausen Decision Reaffirmed

Enforcement
Proposed Rule Allows Waiver of Exclusion

Litigation/ADR
Erlanger Resolves Scrutiny of its Physician Relationships

Michigan Hospital Settles Voluntary Disclosure of Physician Relationships

Federal Government Settles Investigation of AdvancePCS

Tax
When is a Home Health Agency Not a Home Health Agency?

Antitrust
Full-system Contracting: Business as Usual or Antitrust Time Bomb?

Technology
Stark, Antikickback Protection for E-prescribing, EHR

Physician Focus
More Specificity in Informed Consent

 



Health Law Group

Sanford V. Teplitzky, Chair

Melinda B. Antalek

William E. Berlin

Christi J. Braun

Marc K. Cohen

Thomas W. Coons

John J. Eller

Joshua J. Freemire

Leslie Demaree Goldsmith

Lindsay E. Greenwood

Carel T. Hedlund

S. Craig Holden

Leonard C. Homer

Thomas K. Hyatt

Julie E. Kass

Paul W. Kim

John F. Lessner

William T. Mathias

Robert E. Mazer

Carol M. McCarthy, Ph.D.

John J. Miles

Christine M. Morse

Patrick K. O'Hare

Leon Rodriguez

Martha Purcell Rogers

Laurence B. Russell

Donna J. Senft

Ray M. Shepard

Steven R. Smith

Howard L. Sollins

E. John Steren

Chiarra-May Stratton

Emily H. Wein

James B. Wieland

Editorial Assistant:
Michele Vicente, Paralegal

 

CMS Relaxes Marketing Rules to Promote Part D Enrollment

Paul W. Kim
410-347-7344
pwkim@ober.com

In an effort to promote beneficiary enrollment into Medicare Part D (the new prescription drug benefit), CMS published final regulations on September 1, 2005, and revised the marketing rules for endorsed prescription drug discount card sponsors effective October 1, 2005. 70 Fed. Reg. 52,019 (modifying 42 C.F.R. §§ 403.802, 403.806, and 403.813). Established by section 101, subpart 4 of the MMA (adding new SSA section 1860D-31), the Medicare Prescription Drug Discount Card and Transitional Assistance Program (the Program) was implemented by CMS in a recordbreaking timeframe through an interim final rule released only seven days after the enactment of the MMA. Basically, this voluntary Program charged an annual fee of up to $30 to provide discounts on certain drugs to the enrollees until the implementation of Part D.

However, the interim final rule prohibited the Program sponsors and their affiliated organizations from using an enrollee's individually identifiable information to market to enrollees products and services that were outside the scope of the Program. Thus, only products and services that were directly related to the covered discount prescription or OTC drugs offered without an additional fee could be marketed to the enrollees pursuant to the requirements of HIPAA. As its policy rationale, CMS explained that this restriction would foster beneficiary access to the Program, limit the total fees charged to $30, and prevent confusion between the Program and Part D.

Fortunately, because of eight public comments timely received and subsequently analyzed by CMS, the revised requirements facilitate the intent of Congress as expressed in its MMA Conference Report to encourage outreach and education about Part D, ensure enrollment and participation in Part D, and reduce barriers to marketing Part D. Calling the consequences of the prior interim rule unintentional yet contradictory to the intent of Congress, CMS relaxed the marketing limitations to provide a seamless transition from the Program to Part D by utilizing the existing relationships between the Program sponsors and the enrolled beneficiaries.

Therefore, labeled as "a component of the Secretary's strategy," the revised rules now permit endorsed sponsors of Medicare discount drug cards and their affiliated organizations to market to their enrollees the Part D plans that they offer to Medicare beneficiaries in accordance with the requirements of HIPAA. CMS made this possible by redefining such Part D plans as products or services of the Program, available for marketing. However, these marketing and promotional materials and activities must comply with the conditions imposed on all such materials and activities of other Part D plans.

Furthermore, CMS defined the term "affiliated organization" in three different ways to prevent third parties from acquiring sponsors solely to access their enrollees pursuant to this rule and take advantage of this new marketing opportunity. Specifically, to be considered an "affiliated organization," the organization and the endorsed drug card sponsor must be under common control. Alternatively, the organization must be under the control of the sponsor or vice-versa. Or, the organization must possess an ownership or equity interest of at least 5 percent in the sponsor on both the date the sponsor markets the organization's Part D plan and the date the sponsor signed its endorsement contract with CMS.

Overall, despite this recent relaxation of the marketing rules, the effectiveness of such marketing of Part D plans remains to be seen, especially given that the Program itself was voluntary for Medicare beneficiaries.

Copyright© 2006, Ober, Kaler, Grimes & Shriver