Category Archives: Fraud Deterrent and Detection

Cleveland Clinic-owned hospital system pays $21M to settle False Claims allegations

Posted on by • Posted in Anti-Kickback, Dept of Justice (DOJ), False Claims Act, Fraud, Fraud and Abuse, Fraud Deterrent and Detection, Health System, Healthcare Industry, Healthcare Providers, Hospital, Hospital Industry, Kickbacks, Leadership, Leadership Culture, Leadership Integrity, Leadership Intent, Management, Medicare, Medicare Fraud, Patient Referrals, Physician, Physician Compensation, Physician Practice Management, Rev Cycle Management, Revenue Cycle, Stark Law • Leave a comment
https://www.healthcaredive.com/news/cleveland-clinic-owned-hospital-system-pays-21m-to-settle-false-claims-all/602858/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Newsletter%20Weekly%20Roundup:%20Healthcare%20Dive:%20Daily%20Dive%2007-10-2021&utm_term=Healthcare%20Dive%20Weekender

Dive Brief:

  • A Cleveland Clinic-owned hospital system in Akron, Ohio, is paying the federal government $21.3 million to settle claims it illegally billed the Medicare program.
  • Akron General Health System allegedly overpaid physicians well above market value for referring physicians to the system, violating the Anti-Kickback Statute and Physician Self-Referral Law, and then billed Medicare for the improperly referred business, violating the False Claims Act, between August 2010 and March 2016.
  • Along with an AGHS whistleblower, the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, which acquired the system at the end of 2015, voluntarily disclosed to the federal government its concerns with the compensation arrangements, which were enacted by AGHS’ prior leadership, the Department of Justice said Friday.

Dive Insight:

The Anti-Kickback Statute forbids providers from paying for or otherwise soliciting other parties to get them to refer patients covered by federal programs like Medicare, while the Physician Self-Referral Law, otherwise known as the Stark Law, prohibits a hospital from billing for those services. Despite the laws and a bevy of other regulations resulting in a barrage of DOJ lawsuits and been a thorn in the side of providers for decades, fraud is still rampant in healthcare.

Of the more than $3 billion recovered by the government in 2019 from fraud and false claims, almost 90% involved the healthcare industry, according to DOJ data.

“Physicians must make referrals and other medical decisions based on what is best for patients, not to serve profit-boosting business arrangements,” HHS Office of Inspector General Special Agent in Charge Lamont Pugh said in a statement on the AGHS settlement.

Cleveland Clinic struck a deal with AGHS in 2014, agreeing to pay $100 million for minority ownership in the system. The agreement gave the clinic the option to fully acquire AGHS after a year, which it exercised as soon as that period expired in August 2015.

The settlement stems from a whistleblower suit brought by AGHS’s former Director of Internal Audit Beverly Brouse, who will receive a portion of the settlement, the DOJ said. The False Claims Act allows whistleblowers to share in the proceeds of a suit.

As fraud has increased in healthcare over the past decade — the DOJ reported 247 new matters for potential investigation in 2000, 427 in 2010 and 505 in 2019 — the federal government has renewed its efforts to crack down on illegal schemes. That’s resulted in the formation of groups like the Medicare Fraud Strike Force in 2007 and the Opioid Fraud and Abuse Detection Unit in 2017, which has in turn resulted in the DOJ recovering huge sums in stings, settlements and guilty verdicts.

Some of the biggest settlements reach into the hundreds of millions, and involve billions in false claims.

In 2018, DOJ charged more than 600 people for falsely billing federal programs more than $2 billion; last year federal agencies charged almost 350 people for submitting more than $6 billion in false claims. That last case led to creation of a rapid response strike force to investigate fraud involving major providers in multiple geographies.

Other large settlements include Walgreens’ $270 million fine in 2019 to settle lawsuits accusing the pharmacy giant of improperly billing Medicare and Medicaid for drug reimbursements; hospital operator UHS’ $122 million settlement last summer finalizing a fraudulent billing case with the DOJ after being accused of fraudulently billing Medicare and Medicaid for services at its behavioral healthcare facilities; and West Virginia’s oldest hospital, nonprofit Wheeling Hospital, agreeing in September to pay $50 million to settle allegations it systematically violated the laws against physician kickbacks, improper referrals and false billing.

EHR vendor eClinicalWorks paid $155 million to settle False Claims Act allegations around misrepresentation of software capabilities in 2017, while Florida-based EHR vendor Greenway Health was hit with a $57.3 million fine in 2019 to to settle allegations the vendor caused users to submit false claims to the EHR Incentives Program.

As fraud rises, CFOs must approach numbers skeptically, report finds

Posted on by • Posted in Asset Impairment, Audit Committee, Auditor External, Auditor Internal, CEO, CFO, Checks and Balances, Financial Reporting Fraud, Financial Reserve Manipulation, Financial Statement Fraud, Financial Stewardship, Financial Transparency, Financially Distressed, Fraud Deterrent and Detection, Fraud Triangle, Improper Revenue Recognition, Internal Audit, Internal Control, Inventory Manipulation, Manipulation of Debt Compliance Covenants, Opportunity, Over/Understating Accounting Estimates, Pandemic, Pressure, Professional Skepticism, Rationalization, Revenue Fabrication, Revenue Manipulation, Understate of Accounts Receivable Reserves, Unrecognized Inventory Impairments • Leave a comment

https://www.cfodive.com/news/Center-Audit-Quality-financial-reporting-fraud/593123/

Executives might be committed to accuracy, but middle managers and others throughout the organization must be on board, too.

The pandemic is increasing financial reporting fraud, putting the onus on CFOs to create an organization-wide system that prevents wrongdoing, a coalition of auditing and other oversight groups said in a report released today.

“Financial statement fraud in public companies is real and that risk has only increased during the Covid-19 pandemic,” said Julie Bell Lindsay, executive director of the Center for Audit Quality, one of four groups to release the report.

To help ensure the integrity of their company’s financial reporting, CFOs can’t rely on external auditors as their bulwark against fraud; they must weave protection into the fabric of the organization and exercise the same skepticism toward numbers auditors are trained to do.

“The strongest fraud deterrent and detection program requires extreme diligence from all participants in the financial reporting system,” Lindsay said. “Certainly, you have internal and external auditors, but you also have regulators, audit committees and, especially, public company management.”

Heightened stress

The report looks at SEC enforcement data from 2014 to 2019, a period of relative calm Linsday said can help set a baseline for assessing how much in pandemic-caused fraud regulators will find when they do their post-crisis analysis.

“The timing of this report is really a great way to … remind all the folks in the financial reporting ecosystem that … the pressures for fraud to happen are strong right now,” she said. 

Improper revenue recognition comprises about 40% of wrongdoing in financial reporting, more than any other type, a finding that tracks an SEC analysis released last August. 

Companies tend to manipulate revenue in four ways:

  1. The timing of recognition
  2. The value applied
  3. The source
  4. The percentage of contract completion claimed

The report singles out revenue-recognition manipulation by OCZ Technology Group, a solid-state drive manufacturer that went bankrupt in 2013, as a typical case.

The company had to restate its revenues by more than $100 million after it was caught mis-characterizing sales discounts as marketing expenses, shipping more goods to a large customer than it could be expected to sell, and withholding information on product returns.

The CEO was charged with fraud and the CFO with accounting, disclosure, and internal accounting controls failures.

The report lists three other common types of fraud: manipulation of financial reserves, manipulation of inventories, and improper calculation of impairment.

Reserve issues involve how, and when, balances are changed, and how expenses are classified; inventory issues involve the amounts that are listed and how much sales cost; and impairment issues involve the timing and accuracy of the calculation. 

Increase expected

More of these kinds of problems will likely be found to be happening because of the pandemic, the report said. 

“This is where all of this comes to a head,” Lindsay said. “You certainly can see pressure, because some companies are struggling right now and there can be pressure to meet numbers, analysts expectations.”

The pressure finance professionals face is part of what the report calls a “fraud triangle,” a convergence of three factors that can lead to fraud: pressure, opportunity and rationalization.

In the context of the pandemic, pressure comes as companies struggle with big drops in revenue; opportunity arises as employees work remotely; and the rationalization for fraud is reinforced by the unprecedented challenges people are facing. 

“It could be anything,” said Lindsay. “‘My wife just lost her job, so I need to make up for it.'”

The report lists fraud types that analysts expect are rising because of the pandemic:

  • Fabrication of revenue to offset losses.
  • Understatement of accounts receivable reserves as customers delay payments. 
  • Manipulation of compliance with debt covenants. 
  • Unrecognized inventory impairments.
  • Over- or understated accounting estimates to meet projection.

About a dozen types in all are listed. 

“Past crises have proven that at any time of large-scale disruption or stress on an economy or industry, companies should be prepared for the possibility of increased fraud.” the report said. 

Lindsay stressed three lessons she’d like to see CFOs take away from the report.

First, the potential for fraud in their companies shouldn’t be an afterthought. Second, protection against it is management’s responsibility but there’s also a role for company’s audit committee, its internal auditors and it’s external auditors. Third, CFOs and the finance executives they work with, including at the middle management level, must bring that same skepticism toward the numbers that auditors are trained to bring.

“Professional skepticism is a core competency of the external auditor and, quite frankly, the internal auditor,” she said. “Management and committee members are not necessarily trained on what it is, but it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be exercising skepticism, [which is] asking questions about the numbers that are being reported. Is this exactly what happened? Do we have weaknesses? Do we have areas of positivity? It’s really about drilling down and having a dialogue and not just taking the numbers at face value.”

In addition to the Center for Audit Quality, Mitigating the Risks of Common Fraud Schemes: Insights From SEC Enforcement Actions was prepared by Financial Executives International, The Institute of Internal Auditors and the National Association of Corporate Directors.