[Code of Federal Regulations]

[Title 42, Volume 4]

[Revised as of October 1, 2006]

From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access

[CITE: 42CFR1003.106]



[Page 1181-1185]

 

                         TITLE 42--PUBLIC HEALTH

 

      GENERAL--HEALTH CARE, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

 

PART 1003_CIVIL MONEY PENALTIES, ASSESSMENTS AND EXCLUSIONS--Table 

 

Sec.  1003.106  Determinations regarding the amount of the penalty and 



assessment.



    (a) Amount of penalty. (1) In determining the amount of any penalty 

or assessment in accordance with Sec.  1003.102(a), (b)(1), (b)(4), and 

(b)(9) through (b)(16) of this part, the Department will take into 

account--

    (i) The nature of the claim, referral arrangement or other 

wrongdoing;

    (ii) The degree of culpability of the person against whom a civil 

money penalty is proposed;

    (iii) The history of prior offenses of the person against whom a 

civil money penalty is proposed;

    (iv) The financial condition of the person against whom a civil 

money penalty is proposed;

    (v) The completeness and timeliness of the refund with respect to 

Sec.  1003.102(b)(9);

    (vi) The amount of financial interest involved with respect to Sec.  

1003.102(b)(12);

    (vii) The amount of remuneration offered or transferred with respect 

to Sec.  1003.102(b)(13); and

    (viii) Such other matters as justice may require.



[[Page 1182]]



    (2) In determining the amount of any penalty in accordance with 

Sec. Sec.  1003.102 (b)(5) and (b)(6), the Department will take into 

account--

    (i) The nature and circumstances of the failure to properly report 

information, or the improper disclosure of information, as required;

    (ii) The degree of culpability of the person in failing to provide 

timely and complete data or in improperly disclosing, using or 

permitting access to information, as appropriate;

    (iii) The materiality, or significance of omission, of the 

information to be reported, or the materiality of the improper 

disclosure of, or use of, or access to information, as appropriate;

    (iv) Any prior history of the person with respect to violations of 

these provisions; and

    (v) Such other matters as justice may require.

    (3)(i) In determining the amount of any penalty in accordance with 

Sec.  1003.102(b)(7), the OIG will take into account--

    (A) The nature and objective of the advertisement, solicitation or 

other communication, and the degree to which it has the capacity to 

deceive members of the public;

    (B) The degree of culpability of the individual, organization or 

entity in the use of the prohibited words, letters, symbols or emblems;

    (C) The frequency and scope of the violation, and whether a specific 

segment of the population was targeted;

    (D) The prior history of the individual, organization or entity in 

its willingness or refusal to comply with informal requests to correct 

violations;

    (E) The history of prior offenses of the individual, organization or 

entity in its misuse of Departmental and program words, letters, symbols 

and emblems;

    (F) The financial condition of the individual, organization or 

entity involved with the violation; and

    (G) Such other matters as justice may require.

    (ii) The use of a disclaimer of affiliation with the United States 

Government, the Department or its programs will not be considered as a 

mitigating factor in determining the amount of penalty in accordance 

with Sec.  1003.102(b)(7).

    (4) In determining the amount of any penalty in accordance with 

Sec.  1003.102(c), the OIG takes into account--

    (i) The degree of culpability of the respondent;

    (ii) The seriousness of the condition of the individual seeking 

emergency medical treatment;

    (iii) Any other instances where the respondent failed to provide 

appropriate emergency medical screening, stabilization and treatment of 

individuals coming to a hospital's emergency department or to effect an 

appropriate transfer;

    (iv) The respondent's financial condition;

    (v) The nature and circumstances of the violation; and

    (vi) Such other matters as justice may require.

    (5) In determining the appropriate amount of any penalty in 

accordance with Sec.  1003.103(f), the OIG will consider as 

appropriate--

    (i) The nature and scope of the required medically necessary item or 

service not provided and the circumstances under which it was not 

provided;

    (ii) The degree of culpability of the contracting organization;

    (iii) The seriousness of the adverse effect that resulted or could 

have resulted from the failure to provide required medically necessary 

care;

    (iv) The harm which resulted or could have resulted from the 

provision of care by a person that the contracting organization is 

expressly prohibited, under section 1876(i)(6) or section 1903(p)(2) of 

the Act, from contracting with or employing;

    (v) The harm which resulted or could have resulted from the 

contracting organization's expulsion or refusal to re-enroll a Medicare 

beneficiary or Medicaid recipient;

    (vi) The nature of the misrepresentation or fallacious information 

furnished by the contracting organization to the Secretary, State, 

enrollee or other entity under section 1876 or section 1903(m) of the 

Act;

    (vii) The extent to which the failure to provide medically necessary 

services



[[Page 1183]]



could be attributed to a prohibited inducement to reduce or limit 

services under a physician incentive plan and the harm to the enrollee 

which resulted or could have resulted from such failure. It would be 

considered an aggravating factor if the contracting organization 

knowingly or routinely engaged in any prohibited practice which acted as 

an inducement to reduce or limit medically necessary services provided 

with respect to a specific enrollee in the organization;

    (viii) The history of prior offenses by the contracting organization 

or principals of the contracting organization, including whether, at any 

time prior to determination of the current violation or violations, the 

contracting organization or any of its principals were convicted of a 

criminal charge or were held liable for civil or administrative 

sanctions in connection with a program covered by this part or any other 

public or private program of payment for medical services; and

    (ix) Such other matters as justice may require.

    (b) Determining the amount of the penalty or assessment. As 

guidelines for taking into account the factors listed in paragraph 

(a)(1) of this section, the following circumstances are to be 

considered--

    (1) Nature and circumstances of the incident. It should be 

considered a mitigating circumstance if all the items or services or 

incidents subject to a determination under Sec.  1003.102 included in 

the action brought under this part were of the same type and occurred 

within a short period of time, there were few such items or services or 

incidents, and the total amount claimed or requested for such items or 

services was less than $1,000. It should be considered an aggravating 

circumstance if--

    (i) Such items or services or incidents were of several types, 

occurred over a lengthy period of time;

    (ii) There were many such items or services or incidents (or the 

nature and circumstances indicate a pattern of claims or requests for 

payment for such items or services or a pattern of incidents);

    (iii) The amount claimed or requested for such items or services was 

substantial; or

    (iv) The false or misleading information given resulted in harm to 

the patient, a premature discharge or a need for additional services or 

subsequent hospital admission.

    (2) Degree of culpability. It should be considered a mitigating 

circumstance if corrective steps were taken promptly after the error was 

discovered. It should be considered an aggravating circumstance if--

    (i) The respondent knew the item or service was not provided as 

claimed or if the respondent knew that the claim was false or 

fraudulent;

    (ii) The respondent knew that the items or services were furnished 

during a period that he or she had been excluded from participation and 

that no payment could be made as specified in Sec. Sec.  1003.102(a)(3) 

and 1003.102(b)(12), or because payment would violate the terms of an 

assignment or an agreement with a State agency or other agreement or 

limitation on payment under Sec.  1003.102(b);

    (iii) The respondent knew that the information could reasonably be 

expected to influence the decision of when to discharge a patient from a 

hospital; or

    (iv) The respondent knew that the offer or transfer of remuneration 

described in Sec.  1003.102(b)(13) of this part would influence a 

beneficiary to order or receive from a particular provider, practitioner 

or supplier items or services reimbursable under Medicare or a State 

health care program.

    (3) Prior offenses. It should be considered an aggravating 

circumstance if at any time prior to the incident or presentation of any 

claim or request for payment which included an item or service subject 

to a determination under Sec.  1003.102, the respondent was held liable 

for criminal, civil or administrative sanctions in connection with a 

program covered by this part or any other public or private program of 

reimbursement for medical services.

    (4) Other wrongful conduct. It should be considered an aggravating 

circumstance if there is proof that a respondent engaged in wrongful 

conduct, other than the specific conduct upon



[[Page 1184]]



which liability is based, relating to government programs or in 

connection with the delivery of a health care item or service. The 

statute of limitations governing civil money penalty proceedings will 

not apply to proof of other wrongful conduct as an aggravating 

circumstance.

    (5) Financial condition. In all cases, the resources available to 

the respondent will be considered when determining the amount of the 

penalty and assessment.

    (6) Other matters as justice may require. Other circumstances of an 

aggravating or mitigating nature should be taken into account if, in the 

interests of justice, they require either a reduction of the penalty or 

assessment or an increase in order to assure the achievement of the 

purposes of this part.

    (c) In determining the amount of the penalty and assessment to be 

imposed for every item or service or incident subject to a determination 

under Sec. Sec.  1003.102(a), (b)(1) and (b)(4)--

    (1) If there are substantial or several mitigating circumstances, 

the aggregate amount of the penalty and assessment should be set at an 

amount sufficiently below the maximium permitted by Sec. Sec.  

1003.103(a) and 1003.104, to reflect that fact.

    (2) If there are substantial or several aggravating circumstances, 

the aggregate amount of the penalty and assessment should be set at an 

amount sufficiently close or at the maximum permitted by Sec. Sec.  

1003.103(a) and 1003.104, to reflect that fact.

    (3) Unless there are extraordinary mitigating circumstances, the 

aggregate amount of the penalty and assessment should never be less than 

double the approximate amount of damages and costs (as defined in 

paragraph (f) of this section) sustained by the United States, or any 

State, as a result of claims or incidents subject to a determination 

under Sec. Sec.  1003.102(a), (b)(1) and (b)(4).

    (d) In considering the factors listed in paragraph (a)(4) of this 

section for violations subject to a determination under Sec.  

1003.103(e), the following circumstances are to be considered, as 

appropriate, in determining the amount of any penalty--

    (1) Degree of culpability. It would be a mitigating circumstance if 

the respondent hospital had appropriate policies and procedures in 

place, and had effectively trained all of its personnel in the 

requirements of section 1867 of the Act and Sec.  489.24 of this title, 

but an employee or responsible physician acted contrary to the 

respondent hospital's policies and procedures.

    (2) Seriousness of individual's condition. It would be an 

aggravating circumstance if the respondent's violation(s) occurred with 

regard to an individual who presented to the hospital a request for 

treatment of a medical condition that was clearly an emergency, as 

defined by Sec.  489.24(b) of this title.

    (3) Prior offenses. It would be an aggravating circumstance if there 

is evidence that at any time prior to the current violation(s) the 

respondent was found to have violated any provision of section 1867 of 

the Act or Sec.  489.24 of this title.

    (4) Financial condition. In all cases, the resources available to 

the respondent would be considered when determining the amount of the 

penalty. A respondent's audited financial statements, tax returns or 

financial disclosure statements, as appropriate, will be reviewed by OIG 

in making a determination with respect to the respondent's financial 

condition.

    (5) Nature and circumstances of the incident. It would be considered 

a mitigating circumstance if an individual presented a request for 

treatment, but subsequently exhibited conduct that demonstrated a clear 

intent to leave the respondent hospital voluntarily. In reviewing such 

circumstances, the OIG would evaluate the respondent's efforts to--

    (i) Provide the services required by section 1867 of the Act and 

Sec.  489.24 of this title, despite the individual's withdrawal of the 

request for examination or treatment; and

    (ii) Document any attempts to inform the individual (or his or her 

representative) of the risks of leaving the respondent hospital without 

receiving an appropriate medical screening examination or treatment, and 

obtain written acknowledgment from the individual (or his or her 

representative) prior to the individual's departure from



[[Page 1185]]



the respondent hospital that he or she is leaving contrary to medical 

advice.

    (6) Other matters as justice may require. (i) It would be considered 

a mitigating circumstance if the respondent hospital--

    (A) Developed and implemented a corrective action plan;

    (B) Took immediate appropriate action against any hospital personnel 

or responsible physician who violated section 1867 of the Act or Sec.  

489.24 of this title prior to any investigation of the respondent 

hospital by CMS; or

    (C) Is a rural or publicly-owned facility that is faced with severe 

physician staffing and financial deficiencies.

    (ii) It would be considered an aggravating circumstance if an 

individual was severely harmed or died as a result, directly or 

indirectly, of the respondent's violation of section 1867 of the Act or 

Sec.  489.24 of this title.

    (iii) Other circumstances of an aggravating or mitigating nature 

will be taken into account if, in the interests of justice, they require 

either a reduction of the penalty or an increase in order to assure the 

achievement of the purposes of this part.

    (e) In considering the factors listed in paragraph (a)(5) of this 

section for violations subject to a determination under Sec.  

1003.103(f), the following circumstances are to be considered, as 

appropriate, in determining the amount of any penalty--

    (f)(1) The standards set forth in this section are binding, except 

to the extent that their application would result in imposition of an 

amount that would exceed limits imposed by the United States 

Constitution.

    (2) The amount imposed will not be less than the approximate amount 

required to fully compensate the United States, or any State, for its 

damages and costs, tangible and intangible, including but not limited to 

the costs attributable to the investigation, prosecution and 

administrative review of the case.

    (3) Nothing in this section will limit the authority of the 

Department to settle any issue or case as provided by Sec.  1003.126, or 

to compromise any penalty and assessment as provided by Sec.  1003.128.



[57 FR 3347, Jan. 29, 1992, as amended at 59 FR 32125, June 22, 1994; 59 

FR 36086, July 15, 1994; 59 FR 48567, Sept. 22, 1994; 60 FR 16584, Mar. 

31, 1995; 60 FR 58241, Nov. 27, 1995; 61 FR 13449, Mar. 27, 1996; 64 FR 

39429, July 22, 1999; 65 FR 24416, Apr. 26, 2000; 67 FR 11935, Mar. 18, 

2002; 70 FR 13325, Mar. 18, 2005]