More on Surety Bonds
Jim DeWees
Description
Collection
Title:
More on Surety Bonds
Creator:
Jim DeWees
Date:
1/16/2009
Text:
I think this is an important time for every one of us to be politically active and do all we can to contact the people in charge of this decision right now.
Does anyone have any contact information for us to go to and add our view to how we are actually trained, specialized professionals and not just some bedside comode salesman? We also might want to have some of our patients also send letters about how the work we do and how adding more requirements to us, only takes away the time and resources to continue to provide these patients with quality care, and the time that is necessary to provide services.
If anyone has any email addresses or phone numbers, please either send to me privately or post them to everyone to take action.
And, to start another discussion here, the O&P Edge just came out today online (by email), and the top article is about these surety bonds. One thing that is mentioned is that as it stands, they are requiring a surety bond for every NPI for any facility or company. They talk about a business that has 10 satellite offices and 10 NPI's. This would end up making it required to have a $550,000, which is indeed burdensome.
But, coming from a small business, single office practice point of view, how could it be even remotely fair for a company that has 10 satellites, or even 600 offices across the country, to only have a $50,000 bond to carry, and make these small offices like mine have to pay the same as these multi-million dollar businesses or corporations? If they are going to require this bond, as painful as it sounds, it only sounds fair to have the same amount required by EVERY practitioner and every fitter, or anyone that bills medicare for any services. After all, it takes a human being (practitioner, fitter, or whatever title is held) to bill for something and commit fraud, and this surety bond is intended to protect medicare from these fraudulent claims. So, it only makes sense to require every practitioner to have this surety bond. Actually, that burden seems to be easier for the big businesses than it is for a small business. The fixed overhead like rent, utilities, and all that is actually shared by several practitioners when they are in a group, versus having ONE person doing the work and paying all the rent and utilities....doesn't that kind of make sense???
If this is the case, and it gets passed that only ONE surety bond is required for ONE business, regardless of the size or number of practitioners, facilities, etc., is there anyone out there that wants to buddy up and make a new business on paper, and join with me in a new business, and then we'll just have to share that $50,000, divide it up by as many people as join in with me??? It's like the grocery stores a long time ago that joined together to compete with the grocery giants, and called it IGA (independent grocers association). We need something called IOPA, Independent O&P Association. I think that was the original intent of OPGA I think, but this new association needs to be a free to join kind of group...of course I am just joking here.
The bottom line is hopefully we, as a profession, can lobby and show CMS that we are specialized professionals that must be exempt from this requirement. It will be interesting if the big businesses lobby just for themselves and get the rules changed that protect them (like the big businesses only being required to pay the same price as the single practitioner small businesses). Or, will the organizations that represent us actually lobby on behalf of ALL of us, and not cater to the big businesses as has happened in the past.
If you have a moment this afternoon, you should go and read what the O&P Edge has printed about this issue.
On one other note, I renewed my insurance yesterday and asked her about this surety bond deal, and what their views on this are. She told me that they are keeping a close eye on this issue, and will have something in place if necessary to offer to the O&P businesses that they already insure. The company I use for insurance is AON, Afffinity Insurance Group in Chicago, and insured with New Hampshire Insurance. I searched a while for insurance, and checked the rates with every company I could find, and this was by far the most reasonably priced insurance I could find, and is respectable and all. I am sure their surety bond rates will be also priced fairly if it comes down to that. (AND, for clarification before getting any attacks here, I am NOT affiliated with this company in any way, and have nothing to gain for making any comments like this, and saying anything good about them.)
Have a great weekend
Jim DeWees, CP
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
<URL Redacted>
Does anyone have any contact information for us to go to and add our view to how we are actually trained, specialized professionals and not just some bedside comode salesman? We also might want to have some of our patients also send letters about how the work we do and how adding more requirements to us, only takes away the time and resources to continue to provide these patients with quality care, and the time that is necessary to provide services.
If anyone has any email addresses or phone numbers, please either send to me privately or post them to everyone to take action.
And, to start another discussion here, the O&P Edge just came out today online (by email), and the top article is about these surety bonds. One thing that is mentioned is that as it stands, they are requiring a surety bond for every NPI for any facility or company. They talk about a business that has 10 satellite offices and 10 NPI's. This would end up making it required to have a $550,000, which is indeed burdensome.
But, coming from a small business, single office practice point of view, how could it be even remotely fair for a company that has 10 satellites, or even 600 offices across the country, to only have a $50,000 bond to carry, and make these small offices like mine have to pay the same as these multi-million dollar businesses or corporations? If they are going to require this bond, as painful as it sounds, it only sounds fair to have the same amount required by EVERY practitioner and every fitter, or anyone that bills medicare for any services. After all, it takes a human being (practitioner, fitter, or whatever title is held) to bill for something and commit fraud, and this surety bond is intended to protect medicare from these fraudulent claims. So, it only makes sense to require every practitioner to have this surety bond. Actually, that burden seems to be easier for the big businesses than it is for a small business. The fixed overhead like rent, utilities, and all that is actually shared by several practitioners when they are in a group, versus having ONE person doing the work and paying all the rent and utilities....doesn't that kind of make sense???
If this is the case, and it gets passed that only ONE surety bond is required for ONE business, regardless of the size or number of practitioners, facilities, etc., is there anyone out there that wants to buddy up and make a new business on paper, and join with me in a new business, and then we'll just have to share that $50,000, divide it up by as many people as join in with me??? It's like the grocery stores a long time ago that joined together to compete with the grocery giants, and called it IGA (independent grocers association). We need something called IOPA, Independent O&P Association. I think that was the original intent of OPGA I think, but this new association needs to be a free to join kind of group...of course I am just joking here.
The bottom line is hopefully we, as a profession, can lobby and show CMS that we are specialized professionals that must be exempt from this requirement. It will be interesting if the big businesses lobby just for themselves and get the rules changed that protect them (like the big businesses only being required to pay the same price as the single practitioner small businesses). Or, will the organizations that represent us actually lobby on behalf of ALL of us, and not cater to the big businesses as has happened in the past.
If you have a moment this afternoon, you should go and read what the O&P Edge has printed about this issue.
On one other note, I renewed my insurance yesterday and asked her about this surety bond deal, and what their views on this are. She told me that they are keeping a close eye on this issue, and will have something in place if necessary to offer to the O&P businesses that they already insure. The company I use for insurance is AON, Afffinity Insurance Group in Chicago, and insured with New Hampshire Insurance. I searched a while for insurance, and checked the rates with every company I could find, and this was by far the most reasonably priced insurance I could find, and is respectable and all. I am sure their surety bond rates will be also priced fairly if it comes down to that. (AND, for clarification before getting any attacks here, I am NOT affiliated with this company in any way, and have nothing to gain for making any comments like this, and saying anything good about them.)
Have a great weekend
Jim DeWees, CP
_________________________________________________________________
Windows Live™: Keep your life in sync.
<URL Redacted>
Citation
Jim DeWees, “More on Surety Bonds,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 23, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/229980.
