Healthcare // Policy & Regulation
News
10/29/2013
10:47 AM
Connect Directly
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Obamacare Rollout Hampered By Operating Rules Lag

Backend transmission rules, slated for 2016, may have prevented the rampant errors sending enrollment data from health insurance exchanges to insurance companies.

 7 Portals Powering Patient Engagement
7 Portals Powering Patient Engagement
(click image for larger view and for slideshow)

Government health insurance exchanges -- both the state-run ones and the federally operated Healthcare.gov -- might have much less trouble sending enrollment data to the health plans if government-mandated operating rules for that electronic transaction, called the 834 transaction, were already in place. But, due to an inexplicable oversight, the 834 operating rules are not scheduled to go into effect until Jan. 1, 2016.

The administrative simplification provisions of the Affordable Care Act (ACA) require the development of standard operating rules to help providers and health plans use the latest HIPAA-mandated electronic transaction set, known as the 5010. The government has delegated that responsibility to the CORE committee of the Coalition for Quality Affordable Healthcare(CAQH), a 130-member collaborative that includes providers, health insurers, vendors, government agencies and standards-setting bodies.

The first two CORE-developed operating rules were for insurance eligibility and claims status. Those went into effect Jan. 1, 2013, but the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) delayed enforcement of them until March 31 because the majority of HIPAA-covered entities were not ready to comply with them. CAQH told InformationWeek Healthcarein an e-mail, "Major commercial payers seem to be doing well in adopting the operating rules. The status of regional payers is not as clear."

[ Want to hear a health insurance exchange success story? See Obamacare Health Exchanges: How Oregon Got It Done. ]

The next two ACA-required operating rules, for electronic remittance advice and electronic funds transfer, will go into effect Jan. 1, 2014. Additional operating rules for claims/encounter information, health plan enrollment/disenrollment, health plan premium payments, referral certification and authorization, and claims attachments will take effect two years later.

All of these operating rules, including those for the 834 transaction, must be completed by July 1, 2014, according to CMS.CAQH CORE is expected to have "full drafts" of those operating rules done by next spring.

So why are these operating rules so important? Why can't health plans simply receive the enrollment files in the 834 format, as required by law? The main reason, according to experts, is that the insurance carriers use disparate and often out-of-date legacy systems that cannot easily be upgraded to receive these standardized files. Consequently, each health plan has its own variation on the HIPAA transaction set. Middlemen must modify files sent in these formats so that the disparate health plan systems can accommodate them.

On the provider side, these middlemen are mostly claims clearinghouses that have long dealt with the myriad plans. On the employer side, which is where most enrollment data originates, there are other intermediaries such as Edifecs. But Healthcare.gov and the state-run exchanges are trying to send the 834 enrollment files directly to the plans -- a key source of the difficulties plans have had in receiving and interpreting this data.

The CAQH CORE operating rules specify exactly how the software of HIPAA-covered entities must be configured so that they can exchange data using the 5010 transaction set. It's assumed that had the 834 standard operating rules been in place, the major carriers, at least, should have had no more difficulty accepting the enrollment data from the state insurance exchanges than they have in receiving inquiries about claims status and eligibility.

CAQH CORE is not responsible for facilitating the health insurance exchanges. Nevertheless, the organization said, "The health insurance exchanges will offer many insights for identifying what operating rules can be useful as CAQH CORE works to develop the third set of ACA-mandated operating rules."

Just how important is the ability of plans to receive 834 transactions from Healthcare.gov and the state-run insurance exchanges? Veteran insurance consultant Bob Laszewski, on his Health Care Policy and Marketplace Review blog, points out that the enrollment data coming from the government has "a very high rate of errors -- way beyond anything they can handle manually once the real enrollment volume comes in ...

"If the Obama administration fixes the consumer portal before fixing the 834 problem, the insurance companies could begin receiving thousands of enrollments with high error rates every day. That would bring the insurance company information technology departments to their knees."

Some reports indicate that state-run exchanges have been better able to enroll applicants than the federally operated exchange. In the case of the Kentucky exchange, one reason for that is that the exchange managers sat downwith the state's health plans and figured out what had to be done to send them the enrollment data.

That won't be so easy, however, for Healthcare.gov. It has been estimated that the website, which represents 36 state exchanges, is dealing with about 4,000 different plans. Even if one assumes that only several hundred carriers are involved, it will take quite a while to iron out all the kinks in the 834 process.

In hindsight, much of this might have been avoided if 834 operating rules were in place. But we'll never know.

Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
Ken Terry
50%
50%
Ken Terry,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/10/2013 | 9:48:31 PM
re: Obamacare Rollout Hampered By Operating Rules Lag
Pwanderschied: If insurers can already receive files in the 834 standard, why is CMS requiring health plans to use operating rules for the 834 in 2016? Why is CAQH CORE devising those rules. And why would CMS use a version of 834 different from the standard?
pwanderscheid
50%
50%
pwanderscheid,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/4/2013 | 7:50:51 PM
re: Obamacare Rollout Hampered By Operating Rules Lag
This article is inaccurate in that CMS chose to not even use the 834 in its standard HIPAA approved format. They took the base 834 and then took liberties on some data elements and how some fields are used. No amount of Operating Rules would have helped. Most payers have been able to accept the standard 834 since the HIPAA transactions were mandated since being able to accept them was required, while enrollment submitters were not mandated to use it to submit enrollment electronically. Since the so called 834 that CMS is using does not follow the standard accepting itGÇÖs almost the same as taking in a proprietary CMS format and had to be specifically programmed for.
Ken Terry
50%
50%
Ken Terry,
User Rank: Apprentice
11/1/2013 | 8:26:39 PM
re: Obamacare Rollout Hampered By Operating Rules Lag
I don't think CMS ever wanted to sabotage the insurance exchanges, Andx. That would be self-defeating, since CMS is responsible for making them work--or at least the federally run marketplace and the state exchanges it's partnered in. I think this was just a typical example of bureaucratic shortsightedness.

David--the right things haven't happened yet because CMS planned them in the wrong order.
andyx
50%
50%
andyx,
User Rank: Apprentice
10/31/2013 | 4:07:14 PM
re: Obamacare Rollout Hampered By Operating Rules Lag
this appears to be another symptom caused by the politics of ACA. while the cause appears to be government agency incompetence, it seems to me that the root cause of this problem is the hope by certain decision makers that the ACA would somehow be delayed or repealed. This notion has feed numerous actions on the part of providers and insurance industry ecxecutives delaying their actions in the misplaced desire that implementation of ACA would be delayed. Included in this type of problem is compliance with HIPPA, the failure of industry to implement backend transmission rules, the lackluster acceptance of ICD-10 and the foot-dragging of CMS itself. those actions by CMS to accomodate industry tardiness makes CMS look poorly prepared for ACA. CMS has also a poor understanding of Republican strategy so they also did not execute their efforts to address their tasks to implement ACA. While this article is brilliant in idetifying this abuse of the ACA it is but one more symptom of an industry and agency lingering on a past that cannot be sustained and they are all in various stages of denial over ACA.
The law of the land is and has been clear. Unfortunately both the industry and CMS must accept and act on the law of the land or the law is violated. Both bureaucracies have to accept ACA as real. Today, and likely for some time to come, bureaucracies have wonderful hindsight and very little foresight.
Public Healthcare Policy is flawed because the data supporting objective decisions is so corrupted that it is useless for policy analysis and formulation. Helath Care policy in the U.S. today and for a reasonable future will remain the opinion of a few leaders in the legislative and executive branches of the federal government. In order for this to be corrected CMS must focus on waste, fraud, and abuse of public healthcre programs AND pay the bills on claims on a sound accounting basis.
Congress must take notice:
--CMS does not know how much fraud there is.
--CMS does not have a definition of the concept of abuse.
--CMS has only an understanding of Waste as an exception to policy but no way to discern it in the payment record.
--Congress must listen to the testimoney to them, and read the reports commissioned by them. The IG, OMB, FBI and CMS all have testimoney ON-THE-RECORD that Waste, Fraud and Abuse, by criminals, not only providers, amounts to 40%-60% of the $1.8 Trillion spent by CMS for public healthcare.
David F. Carr
50%
50%
David F. Carr,
User Rank: Author
10/29/2013 | 9:44:54 PM
re: Obamacare Rollout Hampered By Operating Rules Lag
So the right things happened in the wrong order?
Research: Healthcare IT Priorities
Research: Healthcare IT Priorities
Meeting regulatory requirements barely inched out managing digital patient data as the top priority for our 363 healthcare provider IT pros.
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
White Papers
Current Issue
InformationWeek Tech Digest - September 10, 2014
A high-scale relational database? NoSQL database? Hadoop? Event-processing technology? When it comes to big data, one size doesn't fit all. Here's how to decide.
Flash Poll
Video
Slideshows
Twitter Feed
InformationWeek Radio
Sponsored Live Streaming Video
Everything You've Been Told About Mobility Is Wrong
Attend this video symposium with Sean Wisdom, Global Director of Mobility Solutions, and learn about how you can harness powerful new products to mobilize your business potential.