Frequently Asked Questions

MEDPAR information was not well known.

MEDPAR information was not easy to request: subpoena duces tecum until it can be purchased.

MEDPAR information costs money: $1,200 until it was changed in 2019 (likely because of the Monmouth/Baystate/Allina case. This was a major deterrent because:

• • The fee does not guarantee favorable realignment;

  • The fee does not guarantee the grant of recalculation in a timely fashion (years);

  • A downward trend could mean years of unrewarding fees;

Realignment is not rewarding enough year by year to dedicate personnel.

The fear factor of incorrectly analyzing MEDPAR information to a salary reimbursement manager.

The reimbursement department has better things to do or is swamped trying to file its cost report correctly and timely.

Risk-averse because of fear of MAC reopening cost report after NPR is revised.

Very difficult to keep up with ever-changing PRRB rules, unpredictable information availability, and HCFA/CMS granting requests.

The later introduction of DUA intimidated many people because it’s lengthy to read & no one wanted to deal with the hassle of returning the data or requesting an extension to continue to keep the data. At KSA Magnet, we personally influenced the CMS's abandonment of the extension requirement.

Nearly the same reasons as above.

Reluctance to burden providers to dig up cost reports: FOIA.

Fees could easily add up to 10s or 100s of thousands.

Not many are database-savvy enough.

Too busy doing other more predictable revenue streams range of services like title XIX days, etc.

Most never bothered to keep every publication and most don’t even know how to get it.

Some firms even gave up after signing a substantial number of clients but quit trying.

Some might even want to sell their contracts.

It was like a myth and the entire industry never critically debated it.

It was treated worse than a step-child in a range of products and services. Only those who truly understood the deep underlying issues, as KSA Magnet did, would continue.

We had vested interest in contesting systemic errors (which prevailed in Baystate) and so we see no reason to not request realignment ever since. Omission, Commission, retroactive entitlement.

It can easily become impressive when enhancing DSH percentage, and at the same time doing title XIX days.

We had developed turnkey processes through projection and were instrumental in encouraging a key person at CMS to develop an app for MEDPAR data request when they were usig salesforce to build the CMS portal when Michael Harty was the Chairman.

We kept up with the rules and have contemporary interactions with the MAC, CMS, and critical litigations moving up the federal circuits. 

Avera McKennan case.

10484 remand led to realignment.

MEDPAR is free now & far more reliable to request.

Many requested earlier may miss out on the favorable outcome of the good Empire & Allina case.

We believe many want to do it but many lack the willpower or resources without needing to dig up ancient cost reports.

A one-time chance to do all the favorable years makes it far more attractive or tempting to a provider than one year at a time.

Peer pressure of other providers doing it or competing providers doing it. (Your competitors are already realigning their SSI today.

This is the Monmouth's unfinished business.

This may be the last lucrative opportunity for DSH reimbursement and significant client base expansion.

Many consulting and law firms have already done the educating part.

At least some of the years will be paid to the provider within six months to a year and will pay for the overhead.

There is simply no audit by the MAC. CMS does the recalculation and the MAC makes the adjustment to the cost report.

At KSA Magnet, we have the unique advantage of overseeing that the right party will dominate the consulting world with this opportunity.