Determining Whether a Dispute Is Eligible for IDR Is Complicating the Process

More than a year after the No Surprises Act (NSA) took effect, parts of the law are still creating challenges, including the independent dispute resolution (IDR) process.

Wooden letter tiles spelling INELIGIBLE on an orange background

The Departments issued an updated chart to help determine IDR eligibility

More than a year after the No Surprises Act (NSA) took effect, parts of the law are still creating challenges, including the independent dispute resolution (IDR) process. As you know, healthcare payors and providers can both ask that disputes be resolved through the IDR process if they cannot agree upon a payment amount after thirty days of negotiations.

Almost 70% of closed disputes were determined to be ineligible

From the time the Federal IDR portal opened on April 15 until September 30, 2022, 90,078 disputes were initiated. During the same time, 23,107 of those disputes were closed. However, a payment determination was made in only 3,576 disputes (15% of closed disputes) while the majority (15,895 disputes, or 69% of closed disputes) were determined to be ineligible for the Federal IDR process.

Why determining eligibility is complicated

In a recent report, the Departments of Health and Human Services (HHS), Labor, and the Treasury (the Departments) said the process for determining eligibility is much more complicated and time consuming than initially thought.

IDR entities must consider several factors when determining eligibility, including:

  • Determining state versus federal jurisdiction
  • Batching and bundling claims correctly
  • Complying with applicable time periods
  • Completing open negotiations

 

Determining jurisdiction is complicated because:

  • Twenty-two states have specified state laws or All-Payer Model Agreements that protect consumers from surprise billing and provide a method for determining the OON rate.
  • For fully insured plans, 4 states have specified state laws that apply to all surprise bills, while 18 states have a bifurcated process, where some surprise bill items or services are subject to the Federal process while the rest are subject to state law. CMS has published guidance to help clarify.
  • All surprise bills in the remaining 28 states are subject to the NSA.

The Departments issue a chart to help determine eligibility

To help determine eligibility, the Departments issued a chart on August 23, 2022 and recently updated it. Highlights from the chart follow.

The Federal IDR process does not apply:

  • To items/services payable by Medicare, Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program or TRICARE
  • In cases where a specified state law (SSL) or All-Payer Model Agreement (APMA) provides a method for determining the amount payable under a group health plan or group or individual health insurance coverage with respect to the OON items and services provided.

 

The IDR process does apply to:

  • Self-insured plans sponsored by private employers, private employee organizations, or both (i.e., self-insured plans governed by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)) in all states, except in cases in which:
    • A self-insured plan has opted into an SSL in a state that permits these plans to opt in
    • An APMA applies with respect to the plan, the nonparticipating provider or nonparticipating emergency facility, and the item or service
  • To Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) plans in all states, except in cases where an Office of Personnel Management (OPM) contract with an FEHB Carrier includes terms that adopt the state process

 

The chart also includes a high-level summary to assist in determining whether the Federal IDR process or a state law or All-Payer Model Agreement applies for determining the out-of-network rate. You can find the complete chart here.

 

The information provided on this website does not, and is not intended to, constitute legal advice; instead, all information, content, and materials available on this site are for general informational purposes. If you have questions about how the No Surprises Act applies to your organization, please consult your legal counsel.

Engaging insights.

New ideas, proven best practices, and fresh perspectives for the healthcare ecosystem.

  • Your team is great at building trust. I have had nothing but a positive and efficient experience.

    Manager

    Large Midwest health plan

  • These are really important things that we wouldn’t be able to do without a partner like Claritev because, again, we want to look at this stuff holistically across carriers. It would take me four times as long to go into every health plan and do this kind of analysis.

    Executive Vice President

    Large, regional consulting firm/insurance brokerage

  • They (Claritev) are continuously refining and developing the platform to meet my needs.

    A Major Healthcare Provider

  • The Technology Leadership Program has brought my department tremendous value. The well-structured program offers the talented hardworking associates options for their career paths, yet exposes them to high visibility initiatives. Every associate has brought a unique perspective and strong professional skills to the organization.

    Bobby Vincent

    Senior Information Technology Director

  • The Technology Leadership Program associates have a tremendous opportunity before them. To have three years to rotate through various departments within Information Technology before deciding which role/area suits them best.  Depending on their choice and interest, they become a unique blend of technologist, business expert and, eventually, corporate leader.

    Andrew George

    Senior Vice President, Information Technology

  • One of the great successes of the program has been our ability to identify and develop emerging leaders whom contribute in every facet of our business. It hasn’t been just about growing IT leaders, it’s about maturing business leaders for Claritev.

    Ed Ververs

    Senior Director, Telecom & Data Center Management

  • I had the privilege to mentor some of the Technology Leadership Program participants and was fortunate to absorb a member into my team, where he has helped tremendously with new automation techniques. Participants bring in fresh perspectives and extreme enthusiasm to IT here at Claritev. I’m looking forward to adding more.

    Vasu Raghunathan

    Senior Director of Data & Service Delivery

  • You have been a great partner from day one. You collaborate with us until we find a resolution. We look forward to a long-standing partnership.

    Payment Integrity and Performance Manager

  • The things we value most about our partnership with Claritev are not just the reliable, efficient delivery of savings through their MSP and ESRD services, but the fact that they are always willing to come to the table to discuss and collaborate on new and innovative solutions that nobody else in the industry has yet to try.

    Drew Satriano, VP of Payment Integrity

    Highmark, Inc.

  • In our experience, Claritev has been very responsive with great turnaround times and the findings they’ve presented to SIHO have been accurate and reasonable.

    Claims Department

    SIHO Insurance Services, Inc.

Pattern

Learn how Claritev delivers the objective, market-driven insight you need to make the most complex decisions.