Hi Keith
This doesn't help your case, but I will throw it out there...
If both groups applied for and received Phase 3 money, then the net amount received for all 3 phases should have been based on revenues less expenses during Q2 and Q3 2020 vs. the same period in 2019.
Assuming the imaging center reported payments to the rads as an expense, and the rads reported those payments as revenue on their Phase 3 applications, it seems to me that the imaging center would not have received PRF dollars related to the rads work, and the rads would have received dollars related to lost professional fees from the imaging center.
If I were on the imaging center side, I wouldn't feel obligated to share PRF dollars, unless for some reason I didn't report those payments as an expense.
Dave
------------------------------
David Smith FACMPE
Executive Director
United Imaging Consultants
Mission KS
(785) 393-8387
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: 03-15-2021 18:59
From: Keith Chew
Subject: HHS Provider Relief Funds Question
One of my client has asked the following question and I was wondering what others have experienced
Our rad group reads for an imaging center and gets paid a % of the global net collections (which of course is very common). Unlike all the other imaging centers with whom our groups work with whereby these ICs paid our groups the reading fee percentage (e.g., 25%) for any HHS Provider Relief Funds received by the IC, there is one IC in the Midwest that is refusing to do so since they are claiming that any payments above and beyond the monies due the group pursuant to the agreement between the group and the IC would be considered a violation of the Stark and Federal Anti-kickback law which in my opinion is ridiculous.
The main arguments we can make are a) of course these payments are not part of the contract since the HHS funds are unique and b) if the IC only billed for the -TC, then they would have never received the HHS funds related to the -PC.
Just checking to see if any other groups have experienced this push back and, if so, what arguments were used to eventually prevail.
Keith E. Chew, MHA, CMPE, FRBMA
Principal
Consutling with Integrity
18 Hawks Nest
Chatham, IL 62629
217-971-5293