Browse Advisory Opinions

Concerning an arrangement between a hospital and an ambulance company providing emergency air ambulance services to trauma victims in a rural setting, and whether the provision of free helipad and crew resting quarters would violate the anti-kickback statute.

Concerning whether a joint venture ownership of a freestanding magnetic resonance imaging center in a rural area could potentially violate the anti-kickback statute.

Concerning a proposed joint venture between a medical center and a radiology group to own and operate an outpatient open magnetic resonance imaging facility.

Concerning an ambulance company's proposed arrangement to collect a fixed annual subscription fee in lieu of Medicare Part B cost-sharing amounts from its members.

Concerning a proposed arrangement by which a Medigap plan would indirectly contract with hospitals for discounts on the otherwise applicable Medicare inpatient deductibles for its policyholders and would also, at the time of the next policy renewal, reduce the premium for policyholders utilizing a network hospital for an inpatient stay.

Concerning a proposed arrangement by which a municipal corporation that owns and operates an ambulance service would treat revenue received from local real estate taxes as payment as applicable copayments/deductibles due from residents.

Concerning a proposed arrangement that would involve a company developing and managing distinct part inpatient rehabilitation units located within general acute care hospitals in exchange for a management fee calculated on a per patient per day basis.

Concerning a proposed arrangement under which a renal dialysis facility would provide acute hemodialysis services to a hospital district's inpatients, provide outpatient chronic hemodialysis services to some of the hospital district's indigent patients, and purchase certain hemodialysis equipment from the hospital district.

Concerning an arrangement involving a medical center providing physician services to a county-owned women's health clinic for an annual below fair-market value fee, along with inpatient hospital services for the county clinic's primarily indigent and low-income, self-paying patients at no charge.

Concerning a proposed ambulatory surgical center (ASC) arrangement that would be jointly owned by a hospital and a multi-specialty group practice with a substantial number of physician members who would not personally use the ASC.

Concerning a proposed program by a provider of home health care services to provide free medical-alert pagers and pager monitoring service to homebound patients during the period such patients are receiving the company's home health services.

Concerning a proposed modification to a drug company's patient assistance program to pay Medicare Part B cost-sharing amounts for financially needy beneficiaries following surgery.

Concerning a medical center's proposed acquisition of an ownership interest in an established single-specialty [orthopedic] ambulatory surgery center, together with the execution of a series of related ancillary contracts.

Concerning the potential for the imposition of sanctions against a company which has made a good faith offer of employment to an excluded individual.

Concerning the waiver of Part B cost-sharing obligations for equipment and supplies used by Medicare beneficiaries to monitor blood glucose levels in a clinical trial sponsored by the National Institutes of Health.

Concerning a proposal by a municipal corporation that owns and operates an ambulance service to treat revenue received from local real estate taxes received from its residents as payment of otherwise applicable copayments and deductibles due from these residents for emergency ambulance services.

Concerning whether a proposed program to provide free safety equipment to hemophilia patients, as well as free electronic pagers to the parents of pediatric hemophilia patients, would violate section 1128A(a)(5) of the Social Security Act.

Concerning whether a proposed arrangement involving financial assistance by a non-profit foundation, which a pharmaceutical company proposes to establish and fund in order to subsidize cost-sharing amounts incurred by financially needy patients using its drug, would violate the administrative authorities related to the anti-kickback statute.

Concerning a proposed arrangement involving an internet-based chronic disease management business that would (1) contract with managed care organizations and employer-based health plans to enroll their members in an on-line clinical compliance program that includes awarding points redeemable for goods and services to members and their physicians for undertaking compliance activities, and (2) sell advertising on its web site to advertisers, including pharmacies and pharmaceutical companies.

Concerning whether a State-chartered hospital authority, which owns and operates a large teaching hospital, can make substantial charitable contributions to an endowment fund affiliated with the university in order to support and promote education and research at the university's school of medicine through developing a clinical cardiology services program, and whether this grant would violate the administrative authorities related to the anti-kickback statute.