WCHServiceBureau

WCHServiceBureau Global service provider and a leader in the tri-state area that offers an array of billing and health

Our May 2026 issue of WCH Insights is here. This month, we're covering the terrain where a single administrative lapse c...
05/05/2026

Our May 2026 issue of WCH Insights is here.
This month, we're covering the terrain where a single administrative lapse can become a significant financial consequence — and why that distance is shorter than most providers realize.
What's inside:
Security Briefing — How the Change Healthcare breach exposed 192 million patient records and what every independent practice needs to understand about third-party vendor risk right now.
The billing contract clause that exposes providers to license suspension in more than 34 states — and why most physicians have already signed it.
The compliance infrastructure problem hiding in plain sight: why fax-dependent workflows are generating real audit exposure in 2026.
Leading Light — A conversation with Dr. Guzel Musaeva on clinical judgment, AI in medicine, and why doubt is a professional skill, not a weakness.
EduRx by Specialty — Cardiology, GI, podiatry, primary care, orthopedics, behavioral health, and interventional radiology: specialty-specific billing and compliance guidance for 2026.
This issue has been approved by AAPC for 1 Continuing Education Unit (CEU).

Read the full issue: https://insights.wchsb.com/subscribe/

One Name on the OIG Exclusion List Can Cost Your Organization Millions. Is Yours Clean?The OIG's List of Excluded Indivi...
05/01/2026

One Name on the OIG Exclusion List Can Cost Your Organization Millions. Is Yours Clean?
The OIG's List of Excluded Individuals and Entities — the LEIE — is a publicly searchable federal database of providers and entities barred from participation in any federally funded healthcare program. It is updated monthly. It contains thousands of active exclusions. And most organizations are not checking it frequently enough.
Those that are excluded can receive no payment from Federal health care programs for any items or services they furnish, order, or prescribe. Anyone who hires an individual or entity on the LEIE may be subject to civil monetary penalties.
Here is the part that surprises most administrators: the penalty exposure for employing an excluded individual isn't limited to that person's direct patient care activities. If a participating healthcare provider employs an excluded individual in an administrative or environmental role — or subcontracts an excluded individual via an agency — this also qualifies as a violation. Pleading ignorance of an individual's exclusion is no defense against a penalty. The standard is what you knew or should have known.
Penalty calculations for exclusion violations are devastating: civil monetary penalties of up to $21,000 per claim, plus three times the amount claimed, plus potential program exclusion. A single excluded employee can generate millions in penalties.
Who ends up on the exclusion list? The OIG has discretion to exclude individuals for misdemeanor convictions related to healthcare fraud, fraud in any government-funded program, suspension or revocation of a healthcare license for reasons related to professional competence or financial integrity, and defaulting on federal medical school loans. This is a broader population than most compliance teams account for in their screening protocols.
Best practice requires screening at onboarding and monthly monitoring — for every employee, contractor, and vendor. Not annually. Monthly. Because the LEIE is updated monthly.
At WCH, we help organizations implement systematic LEIE monitoring protocols and assess the credentialing and billing compliance gaps that create exclusion risk upstream.
Request an exclusion monitoring compliance review.
The exclusion list is public, searchable, and updated every month. There is no legitimate reason to be caught by surprise.

A Credentialing Suspension Stops Revenue. It Also Starts a Clock You May Not Know Is Running.For any physician or provid...
05/01/2026

A Credentialing Suspension Stops Revenue. It Also Starts a Clock You May Not Know Is Running.
For any physician or provider organization dependent on in-network status to generate revenue, a credentialing suspension is one of the most immediate and damaging compliance consequences possible. And unlike most enforcement actions, it can happen before a legal process concludes — sometimes before formal charges are even filed.
Trinity Health Plan's provider manual gives the health plan authority to automatically and immediately suspend a provider's participation for any of the following: any suspension, exclusion, or sanction from a state or federally funded healthcare program; loss of Medicare participation status; loss of a medical license; any indictment, arrest, or conviction for a felony or any criminal charge related to the provider's practice.
The critical word is "automatically." No hearing. No cure period. The suspension triggers the moment the underlying event occurs.
CMS's imposition of enrollment sanctions has increased in recent years, likely due to increased enforcement oversight following the end of the COVID-19 Public Health Emergency. Effective January 1, 2024, Congress significantly broadened CMS's authority to revoke billing privileges and increased the maximum re-enrollment bar to up to ten years.
A credentialing suspension at one institution or payer also generates reporting obligations. Adverse actions taken against a provider's clinical privileges must be reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank under the Health Care Quality Improvement Act — creating a discoverable record that follows the provider to every subsequent credentialing application. This is why a billing compliance issue that triggers a CMS revocation can ultimately affect a provider's ability to credential anywhere.
The preventive logic here is straightforward: the billing compliance failure that triggers CMS revocation happens before the credentialing suspension. Address the first, and the second rarely follows.
At WCH, our compliance reviews specifically assess the billing and documentation risk factors that most commonly precede CMS revocation and credentialing adverse actions.
Request a credentialing and billing risk consultation. Subscribe to our newsletter for updates on CMS enrollment standards and credentialing compliance. Join our webinars — we cover the billing-to-credentialing risk chain and the specific practices that interrupt it.
A credentialing suspension doesn't begin with a credentialing problem. It begins with a compliance problem that went unaddressed.

Today we're celebrating a big milestone!Alexander Buzov is marking 5 years with WCH Company — and we couldn't be more gr...
04/30/2026

Today we're celebrating a big milestone!
Alexander Buzov is marking 5 years with WCH Company — and we couldn't be more grateful to have him on the team.
As a biller, Alexander works behind the scenes to keep everything running smoothly. It's the kind of work that holds things together — and it takes dedication, precision, and care to do it well.
Thank you, Alexander. Five years down, and we're proud to have you with us. Here's to what's ahead!

Terminated From a Payer Network "For Cause." Here's What Actually Happens Next.A termination for cause from a single maj...
04/30/2026

Terminated From a Payer Network "For Cause." Here's What Actually Happens Next.
A termination for cause from a single major payer is not a contained event. For most provider organizations, it is the beginning of a cascade — and understanding that cascade before it starts is essential.
The immediate financial impact is visible: loss of patients covered by that payer, disruption to the revenue cycle, and transition costs. But the downstream compliance and credentialing consequences are what create lasting damage.
UnitedHealthcare's Credentialing Plan 2025–2027 explicitly states that applicants must not be terminated for cause from Medicare or any state's Medicaid or CHIP program, and must be without any sanctions levied by OIG, the CMS Preclusion List, or other disciplinary action by any federal or state entities identified by CMS. A termination for cause from a federal program can disqualify a provider from every commercial network that checks these criteria — which is most of them.
Most private insurance contracts contain provisions that allow the insurance company to terminate the provider contract if the provider's license is restricted by a state or federal agency. In many cases, after a healthcare professional's license is placed on probation or suspension, the insurance companies will send notice of an intent to terminate the contract.
For serious enough breaches — such as license suspension or revocation, or conviction of a crime — contract termination can be automatic and immediate, with no right to cure period.
The triggers that most commonly initiate cause-based terminations: billing fraud identified through SIU or payment integrity audit, OIG exclusion, CMS billing revocation, state medical board disciplinary action, and criminal charges. Each of these is also independently reported to the National Practitioner Data Bank — creating a permanent, discoverable record accessible to every credentialing committee in the country.
At WCH, we work with providers on the billing compliance and credentialing risk factors that precede payer termination — identifying the patterns and documentation gaps that typically trigger payment integrity reviews before they escalate.
Request a credentialing risk review. Subscribe to our newsletter for payer contracting and network compliance updates.
Network termination is rarely the cause of the problem. It is almost always the consequence of a compliance problem that was already there.

Finding an Overpayment in Your Own Data Is Not a Problem. Sitting on It Is.The 60-day rule is one of the most misunderst...
04/30/2026

Finding an Overpayment in Your Own Data Is Not a Problem. Sitting on It Is.
The 60-day rule is one of the most misunderstood — and most consequential — provisions in Medicare compliance.
Under the Affordable Care Act (42 U.S.C. § 1320a-7k(d)), providers who identify an overpayment are legally required to report and return it within 60 days of identification. Failure to comply transforms what was an overpayment into a false claim — making the provider liable under the FCA for each dollar retained after that window closes, plus treble damages and per-claim civil penalties.
The rule doesn't require the government to find the overpayment first. It doesn't apply only to large amounts. It applies to any overpayment — a duplicate claim, a payment for a non-covered service, a claim supported by documentation that was later found to be insufficient — once you've identified it.
Employees who observe potential violations are more likely to report concerns internally when robust compliance programs exist, allowing organizations to address problems before they become qui tam lawsuits. The 60-day rule is the mechanism that converts internal identification into legal protection — but only if the timeline is met and the disclosure is documented properly.
What constitutes "identification" under the rule is itself a compliance question. Courts have found that a provider doesn't need certainty — when a practice has enough information to determine the nature of a potential overpayment, the clock may already be running.
This is why proactive internal auditing matters at a level beyond revenue cycle efficiency. When your internal audit finds an overpayment, it also starts a legal clock. Knowing that in advance — and having a documented process for what to do next — is the difference between a corrective disclosure and an FCA exposure.
At WCH, we help practices build the internal audit and overpayment response processes that ensure identified overpayments are addressed within the regulatory timeframe — with complete documentation at every step.
Request an overpayment response process review.
Finding an overpayment is not a compliance failure. What you do — and when — determines whether it becomes one.

Recoupment Is Not the End of the Process. For Many Practices, It's Just the Beginning.A Medicare recoupment demand lands...
04/29/2026

Recoupment Is Not the End of the Process. For Many Practices, It's Just the Beginning.
A Medicare recoupment demand lands in your billing department. It identifies an overpayment amount. It specifies a deadline. Your next payment from Medicare arrives — and the offset has already been applied.
What happened in the window between the demand letter and the next remittance advice is one of the most consequential — and most mismanaged — sequences in healthcare compliance.
UPIC contractors can recommend Medicare payment suspensions that freeze reimbursements indefinitely during investigations. When a UPIC audit reveals overpayment without an indication of fraud, the case may be referred to the Medicare Administrative Contractor to recoup the overpayment directly from the provider, with the recoupment amount potentially in the hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars.
The appeal window is tight. Interest begins accruing 31 days from the demand letter date. To prevent recoupment from being offset against future payments, a valid appeal must be filed within 30 days. After that, recoupment may begin regardless of whether an appeal is pending, and amounts already recouped may not be refunded even if the appeal ultimately succeeds.
The five-level appeals process — redetermination, reconsideration, ALJ hearing, Medicare Appeals Council, federal district court — can take years. Historical data shows that the majority of appealed determinations are overturned in the provider's favor at one level or another. But winning at the third or fourth level doesn't undo months of cash flow disruption.
Recent enforcement actions include numerous small practices, with single-physician offices facing million-dollar penalties. Small size provides no immunity. And for a practice operating on margins of 5–10%, a six-figure recoupment offset can trigger a liquidity crisis before the appeal is even scheduled.
At WCH, we help practices respond to recoupment demands strategically — from initial appeal filing through documentation package preparation at each subsequent level.
If you've received a recoupment demand, contact us immediately. Subscribe to our newsletter. Join our webinars — we walk through the appeals process step by step with real-case examples.
The 30-day window is short. The financial consequences of missing it are long-term.

Post-Payment Doesn't Mean After the Fact. It Means the Clock Has Been Running — Silently.One of the most dangerous misco...
04/29/2026

Post-Payment Doesn't Mean After the Fact. It Means the Clock Has Been Running — Silently.
One of the most dangerous misconceptions in healthcare billing: that once a claim is paid, it is resolved.
Post-payment audits are exactly what the name implies — a systematic review of claims that have already been reimbursed, conducted months or years after the original payment, to determine whether those payments were accurate, supported by documentation, and compliant with coverage requirements.
The lookback window for most post-payment audits is three years. For fraud allegations, there is no practical limit. UPICs have broad authority to conduct both pre-payment and post-payment audits, meaning they can stop payments on pending claims while their investigation is ongoing — and their findings in post-payment review frequently initiate the more serious phase of investigation.
Penalty calculations for post-payment findings where excluded individuals were involved — or where systematic billing errors are identified — can be devastating: civil monetary penalties of up to $21,000 per claim plus three times the amount claimed. When those findings are extrapolated across three years of claims history, the exposure compounds rapidly.
What do post-payment auditors look for? Claims where documentation doesn't support medical necessity. Coding patterns that deviate from specialty norms. Modifier use that appears designed to bypass automated edits. Services billed by providers who weren't present or who lacked proper supervision. Template-based documentation that reads identically across patient encounters.
None of these generate an audit notice at the time of payment. They generate one 18 months later, after the auditor has reviewed enough claims to identify a pattern.
At WCH, our post-payment risk assessments review your historical billing data against the same criteria used by audit contractors — identifying what's already in your claims history before a contractor does.
Request a post-payment risk assessment. Subscribe to our newsletter for ongoing guidance on audit lookback standards.
The statute of limitations runs from when the false claim was submitted — not when you found out about it.

Address

3047 Avenue U, Brooklyn, NY, United States
New York, NY

Telephone

+18889243973

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when WCHServiceBureau posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Practice

Send a message to WCHServiceBureau:

Shortcuts

Featured

Share

Category