Home
Solutions
Products
Pricing
Resources
Request Demo
Start Free
Menu Search Account

LegiStorm

Get LegiStorm App Visit Product Demo Website
» Get LegiStorm App
» Get LegiStorm Pro Free Demo
StateStorm

Weekly Updates

LegiStorm is constantly adding new information on the people, places and reports in our database. In the past week, LegiStorm added:

  • 376 new people
  • 171 new organizations
  • 408 new photos
  • 1234 job history records for people in our database
  • 653 education records for people in our database
  • 1467 contact addresses, emails and URLs (LinkedIn, Facebook, etc.)
  • 3 new people through the revolving door
  • 109 new policy reports
  • 43 new trips to our privately funded travel database
  • 629 new personal financial disclosures
  • 15148 new press releases
  • 11 new town halls
  • 25 new hearings

Caught Our Eye Rss

» More from Caught Our Eye
» More from our DevBlog

Medicare Claims: HCFA Proposal To Establish an Administrative Law Judge Unit

  Premium   Download PDF Now (46 pages)
Report Type Reports and Testimonies
Report Date April 20, 1988
Report No. HRD-88-84BR
Subject
Summary:

Pursuant to a legislative requirement, GAO reviewed the Health Care Financing Administration's (HCFA) proposed plan to establish its own hearings and appeals unit to handle Medicare hearings, at an estimated cost of $15 million.

GAO found that, under the proposed plan, HCFA: (1) would use 42 administrative law judges (ALJ) compared to the 666 the Social Security Administration (SSA) currently uses; (2) would hear an estimated 24,000 Medicare cases each year; (3) believes it can provide faster and less expensive hearings and estimates that it will complete each case within 60 days at an average cost of about $420; (4) anticipates paying ALJ at a GS-14 level; (5) would centralize its operations to improve case-load management and promote consistency in the application of federal laws and regulations; and (6) hopes to use telephone hearings in 50 percent of the cases. GAO also found that HCFA has: (1) not tested its approach and lacks empirical evidence to support its key assumptions; (2) little documentation for its proposal; and (3) no experience to ensure that the program will work as planned.

« Return to search Government Accountability Office reports

HomeAbout Us Contact UsPrivacy PolicyTerms of UseJoin Us
© LegiStorm
LegiStorm
2101 L St. NW, Suite 300
Washington, DC 20037
(202) 360-4172 / congress@legistorm.com