• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Donate Now
  • Sign up for CMA’s weekly newsletter!

Center for Medicare Advocacy

Advancing Access to Medicare and Healthcare

  • Eligibility/Enrollment
  • Coverage/Appeals
    • Medicare Costs
    • Self Help Materials – Toolkits & More
  • Topics
    • Basic Introduction to Medicare
    • Medicare Costs
    • Home Health Care
    • Improvement Standard and Jimmo News
    • Nursing Home / Skilled Nursing Facility Care
    • Outpatient Observation Status
    • Part B
    • Part D / Prescription Drug Benefits
    • Medicare for People Under 65
    • Medicare “Reform”
    • All Other Topics
    • Resources
      • Infographics
  • Publications
    • CMA Alerts
    • Fact Sheets & Issue Briefs
    • Infographics
    • The Medicare Handbook
    • SNF Enforcement Newsletter
    • Elder Justice Newsletter
    • Medicare Facts & Fiction
    • Articles by Topic
  • Litigation
    • Litigation News
    • Cases
    • Litigation Archive
    • Amicus Curiae Activities
  • Newsroom
    • Press Releases
    • Editorials & Letters to the Editor
    • CMA Comments, Responses, and Letters
    • CMA in the News
  • About Us
    • National Voices of Medicare Summit
    • Mission Statement
    • CMA FAQs
    • CMA Annual Impact Report
    • Personnel & Boards
    • The Center for Medicare Advocacy Founder’s Circle
    • Connecticut Dually Eligible Appeals Project
    • Community Outreach and Education Project (COEP)
    • National Medicare Advocates Alliance
    • CMA Webinars
    • Products & Services
    • Testimonials
    • Career, Fellowship & Internship Opportunities
    • Contact Us
  • Support Our Work
    • Donate Now
    • Build a Legacy with CMA
    • Join the Center for Medicare Advocacy Founder’s Circle
    • Take Action
    • Share Your Health Care Story
    • Tell Congress to Protect Our Care
    • Listen to Medicare & Health Care Stories
    • Sign up for CMA’s weekly newsletter!

CMS Issues Proposed Rules Impacting Medicare Advantage – Part C & D Rule for 2024, and Separate Prior Authorization Rule

December 15, 2022

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

As the Center for Medicare Advocacy has long noted, the Medicare Advantage (MA) program is in significant need of heighted regulation and oversight, not just for the sake of the Medicare program’s financial footing, but for the sake of the beneficiaries enrolled in MA plans. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) has recently issued proposed rules that would address some of the harmful barriers to care currently facing MA enrollees. While we are still reviewing the rules, we note that there are provisions – particularly with respect to marketing and plan prior authorization – that address many of the concerns that we and others have raised. We welcome this movement towards increased oversight and thank CMS for being responsive to many such concerns. We also look forward to continuing to work with CMS and other stakeholder to address issues that are not reflected in the proposed rules.

Proposed Part C & D Rule for 2024

On December 14, 2022, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) released a proposed rule for Medicare Advantage and Part D for 2024 (the rule will be published in the Federal Register on December 27, 2022). CMS also published a press release and accompanying fact sheet addressing the proposed rule. The Center for Medicare Advocacy is reviewing the rule and will submit comments. Comments are due February 13, 2023.

Provisions of the proposed rule include (but are not limited to) the following:

  • Marketing
    • Prohibition of ads that don’t mention a specific plan by name;
    • Prohibition of ads that market MA plans with confusing words, imagery, logos;
    • Requirement that agents explain the effect of an enrollee’s enrollment choice on their current coverage whenever the enrollee makes an enrollment decision;
    • Requirement that agents ask a standardized list of questions that address a beneficiary’s health care needs, current providers, and prescriptions, prior to enrolling a beneficiary into a plan;
    • Prohibition on sales presentations that immediately follow an educational event;
    • Requirement that agents inform beneficiaries that they can obtain complete Medicare options/information from 1-800-MEDICARE, SHIPs, or Medicare.gov;
    • Modification of certain disclaimers by third party marketing organizations (TPMOs) to add SHIPs as an option for beneficiaries to obtain additional help;
    • Requirement that plans notify individuals of the ability to opt out of phone calls regarding MA and Part D plan business; and
    • Requirement that agents disclose to beneficiaries all the plans the agent sells.
  • Prior Authorization
    • Prohibition on MA plans denying coverage of a Medicare covered item or service based on internal, proprietary, or external clinical criteria not found in traditional Medicare coverage policies;
    • In situations when no applicable Medicare statute, regulation, National Coverage Determinations (NCD), or Local Coverage Determinations (LCD) establishes when an item or service must be covered, requirement that MA organizations include current evidence in widely used treatment guidelines or clinical literature made publicly available to CMS, enrollees, and providers when creating internal clinical coverage criteria;
    • Requirement that the physician or other health care professional used by the MA plan have expertise in the field of medicine that is appropriate for the service be involved before the MA plan can deny coverage;
    • Requirement that an approval granted through prior authorization processes must be valid for the duration of the approved course of treatment and that plans provide a minimum 90-day transition period when an enrollee who is currently undergoing treatment switches to a new MA plan; and
    • Requirement that MA plans comply with national coverage determinations (NCD), local coverage determinations (LCD), and general coverage and benefit conditions included in Traditional Medicare statutes and regulations as interpreted by CMS.
  • Access to Behavioral Health Services
    • Addition of Clinical Psychologists, Licensed Clinical Social Workers, and Prescribers of Medication for Opioid Use Disorder as specialty types for which CMS sets specific minimum standards and on which the agency evaluates MA networks;
    • Amendment of general access to services standards to explicitly include behavioral health services;
    • Codification of standards for appointment wait times for both primary care and behavioral health services;
    • Clarification that emergency medical services that must not be subject to prior authorization include behavioral health services to evaluate and stabilize an emergency medical condition; and
    • Requirement that MA organizations notify enrollees when the enrollee’s behavioral health or primary care provider(s) are dropped midyear from networks.  

Prior Authorization

In addition to the prior authorization provisions in the proposed Part C & D rule outlined above, both Congress and CMS have taken additional steps recently to address MA prior authorization problems. 

On September 14, 2022, the U.S. House of Representatives unanimously passed the “Improving Seniors’ Timely Access to Care Act” (H.R. 3173) which would streamline certain aspects of the Medicare Advantage prior authorization process. Among other things, the bill would establish an electronic “real-time” approval process for prior authorization requests concerning routinely approved items and services. In addition, the bill would accelerate MA organization determination deadlines (up to 24 hours for expedited appeals, 7 days for standard appeals), boost MA plan’s data collection requirements, and in turn require the Medicare program to publish much of this data.

Around the time that the bill passed the House, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released an estimate that the bill would cost more than $16 billion over 10 years. As noted by Inside Health Policy (Sept. 14, 2022), “CBO says it expects Medicare Advantage plans would increase their bids to include the cost of additional services, which would result in higher payments to plans.” The Senate has not yet taken up the bill, in large part due to the projected cost.

This month, CMS published a proposed rule (87 Fed Reg 76238, December 13, 2022) that, among other things, would streamline prior authorization in Medicare Advantage, exchange, Medicaid and CHIP managed care plans. CMS also issued a press release and a fact sheet relating to the proposed rule. Comments are due March 13, 2023.

According to Inside Health Policy (Dec. 6, 2022), CMS says the proposed rule would save $15 billion over 10 years across all providers, and by some estimates “could significantly decrease the projected cost of the bipartisan MA prior authorization reform bill” (Improving Seniors’ Timely Access to Care Act”) – according to certain lobbyists, the rule could cut down the projected $16 billion cost of the bill by as much as half. The article notes that “[s]everal components of the related legislation – including implementation dates and certain timing requirements – align closely with CMS’ proposed rule, which one lobbyist said is part of a two-pronged approach to ensure the process of revamping prior authorization is thorough.” “Other aspects, however, are complementary.”

As noted in the CMS press release and fact sheet announcing the proposed rule, most of the provisions would be effective in 2026, and include:

  • Requirement that MA plans issue “decisions within 72 hours for expedited (i.e., urgent) requests and seven calendar days for standard (i.e., non-urgent) requests, which is twice as fast as the existing Medicare Advantage response time limit.” CMS notes that they are “also seeking comment on alternative time frames with shorter turnaround times, for example, 48 hours for expedited requests and five calendar days for standard requests”;
  • Requirement that plans “include [a] specific reason when they deny a prior authorization request, regardless of the method used to send the prior authorization decision, to both facilitate better communication and understanding between the provider and payer and, if necessary, a successful resubmission of the prior authorization request”; and 
  • Requirement to “automate the process for providers to determine whether a prior authorization is required, identify prior authorization information and documentation requirements, as well as facilitate the exchange of prior authorization requests and decisions from their electronic health records (EHRs) or practice management system.”

Filed Under: Article Tagged With: Medicare Advantage, Medicare Part D / Prescription Drugs, Weekly Alert

Primary Sidebar

Easy Access to Understanding Medicare

The Center for Medicare Advocacy produces a range of informative materials on Medicare-related topics.
Sign Up for CMA's Free Newsletter
Register for CMA's Free Webinars

  • Medicare Basics
  • Medicare Reform
  • CMA Alerts
  • Fact Sheets & Issue Briefs
  • CMA Webinars
  • Connecticut Info & Projects
  • Health Care Stories
  • Se habla Español

Jimmo v. Sebelius

Medicare covers skilled care to maintain or slow decline as well as to improve.

Improvement Isn’t Required. It’s the law!

Read more.

National Voices of Medicare Summit

With the many threats currently facing the Medicare program, now is the time to come together as allies and explore ways to advocate for comprehensive Medicare coverage, health equity, and quality health care. Drawing inspiration from real-life experiences and stories of beneficiaries and caregivers, we hope to share impactful discussions with you.

Learn more.

Center for Medicare Advocacy Follow 10,543 5,330

A national nonpartisan, nonprofit law organization working to advance access to comprehensive #Medicare coverage and quality #healthcare.

CMAorg
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
13 Feb 2022350854955864486

Medicare’s 3-day hospital rule is supposed to control costs. It actually increases them.

Longer hospital stays. Higher spending. More risk for patients.

Why are we still doing this?

To read more & sign-up for our free, weekly newsletter:⬇️

Image for twitter card

3-Day Inpatient Hospital Requirement Increases Total Medicare Costs - Center for Medicare Advocacy

Study finds that the 3-day inpatient requirement increases Medicare costs and does not improve patients’ health outcomes.

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2022350854955864486 Retweet on Twitter 2022350854955864486 0 Like on Twitter 2022350854955864486 1 X 2022350854955864486
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
12 Feb 2021999425598763065

AI in Medicare: Innovation — or a new barrier?

Medicare’s pilot uses AI to review claims in traditional Medicare to reduce wasteful spending. But could it also delay or deny care? What do you think?👇

For our free newsletter:

https://www.ctinsider.com/news/article/medicare-is-experimenting-with-having-ai-review-21333053.php

Image for twitter card

Medicare is experimenting with having AI review claims – a cost-saving measure that could risk...

(The Conversation is an independent and nonprofit source of news, analysis and commentary from academic experts.)

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2021999425598763065 Retweet on Twitter 2021999425598763065 0 Like on Twitter 2021999425598763065 0 X 2021999425598763065
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
10 Feb 2021236007962603840

Home health care doesn’t end just because a condition is chronic or stable.

In 2013, CMA won Jimmo v. Sebelius, making it clear:
Coverage depends on the need for skilled care — not on improvement.

Know Jimmo. Know your rights 👇
🔗

Image for twitter card

Know Jimmo | Home Health Care is Available for Medicare Beneficiaries with Long Term, Chronic, and...

The key to coverage is whether the individual requires skilled nursing or therapy and whether care would be safe ...

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2021236007962603840 Retweet on Twitter 2021236007962603840 2 Like on Twitter 2021236007962603840 1 X 2021236007962603840
CMAorg avatar Center for Medicare Advocacy @CMAorg ·
9 Feb 2020978920435151256

Short staffing. Burnout. Residents left waiting.

What caregivers describe in Connecticut is a microcosm of a national nursing home crisis — and the human cost is real. Full story 👇

Our weekly alert:

https://www.newstimes.com/connecticut/article/trump-repeal-nursing-home-staffing-ct-21337753.php

Image for twitter card

Connecticut lawmakers, caregivers decry Trump-era repeal of nursing home staffing rules

Around 90% of nursing home beds are currently occupied in Connecticut. Advocates say by 2035 there could be a 3,000-bed shortage. 

medicareadvocacy.org

Reply on Twitter 2020978920435151256 Retweet on Twitter 2020978920435151256 1 Like on Twitter 2020978920435151256 0 X 2020978920435151256
Load More

Footer

Stay Connected:

  • Contact Us
  • Sitemap
  • Products & Services
  • Copyright/Privacy

© 2026 · Center for Medicare Advocacy