NSA’s Final Rules

On August 19th, the long-awaited final rules under the No Surprises Act (NSA) were issued. Titled “Requirements Related to Surprise Billing: Final Rules,” they finalize certain requirements that group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance coverage must meet when reimbursing claims determined to be surprise bills as defined by…

Man reading on a laptop

On August 19th, the long-awaited final rules under the No Surprises Act (NSA) were issued. Titled “Requirements Related to Surprise Billing: Final Rules,” they finalize certain requirements that group health plans and health insurance issuers offering group or individual health insurance coverage must meet when reimbursing claims determined to be surprise bills as defined by the Act. Central to reimbursement is the Qualifying Payment Amount (QPA),  a health plan’s median contracted rate for an item or service in a specific geographic area adjusted for consumer price index in urban areas (CPIU).

In this blog post, we specifically look at what the final rules say about:

  • The role of QPA in the IDR process
  • Disclosure of QPA and other information related to the QPA, and in particular the handling of downcoded claims
  • The applicability of QPA for plans with no network or a partial network
 

 

 

Role of QPA in the IDR Process

The October 2021 Interim Final Rule (IFR) established that the certified IDR entity should look first to the QPA, and then to any additional information submitted by the parties, and required the certified IDR entity to select the offer closest to the QPA unless the additional information provided established that the QPA was materially different from the appropriate out-of-network rate. This interpretation of the NSA was challenged by the Texas Medical Association in Texas Medical Association, et al. v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al., Case No. 6:21-cv-425 (E.D. Tex.) (Texas Medical Association), as well as by LifeNet, Inc., an air ambulance provider, in LifeNet, Inc. v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, et al., Case No. 6:22-cv-162 (E.D. Tex.) (LifeNet). Consistent with the ruling in Texas Medical Association, the final rules specify that certified IDR entities should select the offer that best represents the value of the item or service under dispute after considering the QPA and all permissible information submitted by the parties. Further, the IDR entity must provide a written explanation that summarizes the information used in the decision, including the weight given to the QPA and why other information considered wasn’t already reflected in the QPA (if applicable).

 

Payor Disclosure of QPA

The final rules address challenges introduced in the IDR process resulting from potentially inadequate QPA disclosure by payors. In particular, the final rules require disclosure of QPA for both the originally coded services and for final coding of services after “downcoding,” defined as altering a service code or altering, adding or removing a modifier so that the changed code or modifier is associated with a lower QPA than the service code or modifier billed by the provider.  If a QPA is based on a downcoded service code or modifier, in addition to the information already required to be provided with an initial payment or notice of denial of payment, the following must be also be provided:

  • A statement that the service code or modifier billed by the provider was downcoded
  • An explanation of why the claim was downcoded, including a description of which service codes or modifiers were altered, added, or removed
  • The amount that would have been the QPA had the service code or modifier not been downcoded
 

Role of QPA for Plans with No Network

The Interim Final Rule (IFR) published in July 2021 made clear that health plans that do not use a PPO network, or that use only a partial network, still are subject to the No Surprises Act. The IFR did not provide details on how or if these plans must use the QPA, when the plan lacks sufficient information to calculate a median contracted rate, which is by definition the case when there is no network being accessed by a plan. In an FAQ that accompanied the final rule, the departments clarify that these plans are nonetheless expected to use the QPA as required under the NSA – to determine the member’s cost sharing and as disclosure to the provider with reimbursement. The departments direct these plans to use an eligible database to calculate QPA.

 

Learn how our Surprise Billing Service can help you comply with requirements of the No Surprises Act.

 

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 you

 

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.