Massachusetts nursing homes, RegalCare, allegedly billed patients for unnecessary care
BOSTON (WWLP) – The United States Attorney's Office and the Massachusetts Attorney General's Office have filed a joint complaint against 19 skilled nursing facilities (SNF) in Massachusetts and Connecticut for alleged fraudulent billing.
The complaint was filed on Tuesday under the federal and Massachusetts False Claims Act against these SNFs and their present and former management companies, RegalCare Management Group, LLC, and RegalCare Management 2.0.
SNFs serve as inpatient facilities providing transitional care to patients following a hospital stay. Federal healthcare programs like Medicare or Medicaid reimburse providers for medically necessary services provided to patients.
Mass. man charged in connection with $30 million healthcare fraud scheme
This joint complaint alleged that between 2017 and 2023, RegalCare fraudulently submitted claims to Medicare and Medicaid under the direction of owner Eliyahu Mirlis and executive Hector Caraballo. The claims were allegedly submitted for medically unnecessary and unreasonable services to RegalCare's SNF patients.
The documents also state that Stern Therapy Consultants, who works for RegalCare, allegedly aided the company as a co-conspirator.
usa_v._regalcare_et_al_-_complaint_and_exhibits-1Download
The scheme allegedly resulted in millions of dollars of damages to the Medicaid and Medicare programs as a result.
RegalCare, at Mirlis' direction, was alleged to have caused Medicare to be billed for the highest level of skilled rehabilitation therapy services at these SNFs in Massachusetts and Connecticut, despite the patients not needing those services. Caraballo allegedly altered and amended records to ensure that patient records matched the billing.
The United States further stated that Stern Therapy Consultants scheduled therapists to provide unnecessary services for RegalCare patients and that Stern managers would threaten therapists if they refused to comply with the scheme.
'I am proud of our team's partnership with the USAO in this case, which advances elder justice and safeguards crucial nursing home funds,' said Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell. 'My office will continue to work aggressively to protect our elders and hold companies accountable that seek to harm them or violate our false claim laws.'
The U.S. and Massachusetts governments filed the complaint in a lawsuit originally filed by a whistleblower under the qui am provisions of the False Claims Act, which allows a private citizen to sue on behalf of the United States or Mass. and share in any recovery.
In Massachusetts, RegalCare has facilities in Amesbury, Danvers, Greenfield, Harwich, Holyoke, Lowell, Quincy, Saugus, Taunton and Worcester.
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Simplify your finances with fewer credit cards
Dear Liz: I have too many credit cards that I opened to get frequent flier points. I understand that closing a credit card lowers your credit scores. How long does the ding last? How long should I wait before closing another card? Do you have any other advice on this subject? You probably have discussed this in previous columns but might be worth repeating. Answer: If you have a lot of cards, closing a few is unlikely to significantly hurt your credit scores as long as you do so strategically. A big chunk of your credit scores is determined by how much of your available credit you're using. You want a large gap between the amounts you charge and your credit limits. Try to keep open the cards with the highest credit limits. If you have multiple cards with the same issuer, ask if the credit limit from a card you're closing can be transferred to one you're keeping. Even if your scores do dip because of a closure, the impact is likely to be short-lived if you continue using credit responsibly. Ideally, you would review your portfolio of credit cards every year or so to determine which cards to keep and which to close. Travel rewards cards typically have annual fees, sometimes significant ones, so you'll want to make sure every card you have is at least paying for itself in annual rewards and benefits. Also consider the mental load involved. As you age, you may find it more difficult to monitor multiple accounts and keep track of all the details. You may want to simplify your finances by winnowing your cards down to just one or two. At that point, keeping your finances manageable will be more important than maintaining the highest possible credit scores. Dear Liz: If someone inherits my retirement account, is there any way they can avoid having their Medicare premiums increased for 1 year? Answer: A large-enough retirement account could affect their Medicare premiums for up to 10 years, not just one. Normally inheritances aren't taxable, but retirement accounts are the exception. Withdrawals from inherited retirement accounts are usually taxable as income, and most non-spouse inheritors must drain a retirement account within 10 years. Withdrawals from inherited Roth accounts aren't taxable, but the accounts still must be drained by the inheritor within a decade. If the inheritor is on Medicare, taxable withdrawals could boost income enough to increase their Medicare premiums, thanks to the income-related monthly adjustment amounts (IRMAA). This surcharge starts once modified adjusted gross income exceeds certain amounts, which in 2025 is $106,000 for single filers and $212,000 for married couples filing jointly. Anyone who inherits a retirement plan should get advice from a tax pro, but that's particularly important when withdrawals might affect tax brackets and Medicare premiums. The pro can help determine how quickly or slowly the money should be withdrawn to maximize how much the inheritor gets to keep. Dear Liz: I waited until age 70 to start collecting Social Security. My wife turns 65 this year so her full retirement age is 67. Can she start collecting Social Security benefits now based on my benefit or should we wait until her full retirement age? Answer: If she applies for Social Security now, she would be 'deemed' to be applying for both her own benefit and her spousal benefit and given the larger of the two. She would not be allowed to switch to the other benefit later. Most people are better off waiting at least until their full retirement age to apply, and many will maximize their lifetime benefits by delaying until age 70. Her mileage may vary, of course, so it's worth using a Social Security claiming calculator and consider getting advice from an objective source, such as a fee-only financial advisor. Liz Weston, Certified Financial Planner®, is a personal finance columnist. Questions may be sent to her at 3940 Laurel Canyon, No. 238, Studio City, CA 91604, or by using the 'Contact' form at
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
An Open Letter to the President: Addressing our Debt
Donald J. TrumpThe Mar-a-Lago Club1100 South Ocean BoulevardPalm Beach, Florida Dear President Trump: I voted for you in all three of your presidential campaigns. The first time, I cast my vote with cautious optimism. The third time, with enthusiasm. And I contributed financially to your campaign. You have achieved what few thought possible - a triumphant return, driven by a deep-seated belief among millions of Americans that only you can effectively challenge the entrenched political establishment. Your first 100 days were extraordinary, but if your presidency is to be remembered not just as bold but also historic, one challenge must rise above all others: - the national debt. The national debt, currently $37 trillion, is the result of pervasive fiscal irresponsibility, accumulated over many decades. Our annual interest payments now exceed $1trillion - more than we spend on our national defense. This is not just a financial burden. It is a threat to the survival of our country as a democratic republic. Without immediate, decisive action, the consequences are predictable: more credit downgrades, more increases in interest rates, and crippling obligations to service the debt. What would happen to our great country if annual interest payments exceeded not just our defense budget but also Social Security, Medicaid, and Medicare? Mr. President, if we are to remain a vibrant nation, this exploding national debt has to be attacked immediately and significantly. That will not happen without your leadership. Sadly, the Republican Party has shown that it is not a reliable ally. Even before Republicans regained control of the House, they held a secret vote. By a margin of 158 to 2 they brought back earmarks - the very same pork barrel spending practices that Speaker John Boehner put to bed. Since then, the Democratic Congress never dared to bring back earmarks. House Republicans did. The results were predictable, and immediate: $16 billion in earmarks. More than 7,500 pet projects. In the Senate, eight of the 12 largest earmarkers are Republicans. In the House, 48 of the top earmarkers are Republicans. Here are the largest earmarkers: Sen. Susan Collins of Maine (population 1.4 million) secured $870 million in earmarks. Sen. Lisa Murkowski grabbed $851.1 million in earmarks. Sen. Mitch McConnell took nearly $500 million in earmarks. My own congressman, Brian Mast, walked away with $437 million in earmarks. Obviously, eliminating pork barrel spending wont, by itself, address the structural problems in Washingtons budget process - or make the "big, beautiful bill" currently being debated in Congress deficit-neutral. But if members of Congress cant even control themselves, what kind of example do they set for the American people? How can politicians ask their fellow Americans to sacrifice when they wont do it themselves? Actions speak louder than words. Fiscal irresponsibility dominates the culture within Congress, within our government. That culture, obviously, will not change on its own. It can be changed. But only with your leadership. Mr. President, fortunately, today you have a tool to attack waste, fraud, duplication, and incompetence. Because of the cloud, Big Data, and the Freedom of Information Act, you can deliver every government expenditure to every citizens cell phone, iPad, and computer. You can bring a new era to government, i.e., transparency. Mr. President, you can be the launch pad for transparency. Imagine a government where every single taxpayer dollar that government spends is tracked and reported to the public. Imagine the cultural shift from secret votes, from wasteful spending to one where every government official knows their budgets will be scrutinized in detail. Mr. President, here are several all-encompassing, culture-changing, deficit-attacking actions you can announce tomorrow: Lead by example: Cut White House expenses by a defined percentage. Report the savings to the public every quarter. Challenge Congress: Ask every member to cut their office and committee budgets. Suggest at least 10%. Publish a quarterly report on every senator and representative. Eliminate pork-barrel projects: Call on Congress to abolish earmarks. Shine a light on every remaining earmarker until they fall in line. Mobilize the bureaucracy: Instruct all agencies to focus on rooting out waste, fraud, duplication, and incompetence, and report the progress quarterly. Say explicitly that you will monitor progress and report the bold and expose the complacent. Bringing transparency to government can do more than clean up wasted taxpayer dollars. It can rebuild trust. It can remind the American people that the government can still work for them. It will solidify your legacy as the chief executive who did not just talk about draining the swamp, you did it. Imagine our country if we did not have to spend $1 trillion each year on interest payments. That is the future Americans deserve. Mr. President, you have been given a historic mandate. You can leave office with a legacy as the president who did not just promise to "Make America Great Again," but who actually did it. America cannot be made great again without addressing the greatest threat to our countrys survival as a democratic republic - the exploding national debt. Respectfully, Thomas W. Smith Thomas W. Smith is the founder of Prescott Investors, Inc.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Twin federal proposals threaten provider taxes, key source of Medicaid funding for states
Republican efforts to restrict taxes on hospitals, health plans, and other providers that states use to help fund their Medicaid programs could strip them of tens of billions of dollars. The move could shrink access to health care for some of the nation's poorest and most vulnerable people, warn analysts, patient advocates, and Democratic political leaders. No state has more to lose than California, whose Medicaid program, called Medi-Cal, covers nearly 15 million residents with low incomes and disabilities. That's twice as many as New York and three times as many as Texas. A proposed rule by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, echoed in the Republicans' House reconciliation bill, could significantly curtail the federal dollars many states draw in matching funds from what are known as provider taxes. Although it's unclear how much states could lose, the revenue up for grabs is big. For instance, California has netted an estimated $8.8 billion this fiscal year from its tax on managed care plans and took in about $5.9 billion last year from hospitals. California Democrats are already facing a $12 billion deficit, and they have drawn political fire for scaling back some key health care policies, including full Medi-Cal coverage for immigrants without permanent legal status. And a loss of provider tax revenue could add billions to the current deficit, forcing state lawmakers to make even more unpopular cuts to Medi-Cal benefits. 'If Republicans move this extreme MAGA proposal forward, millions will lose coverage, hospitals will close, and safety nets could collapse under the weight,' Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said in a statement, referring to President Donald Trump's 'Make America Great Again' movement. The proposals are also a threat to Proposition 35, a ballot initiative California voters approved last November to make permanent the tax on managed care organizations, or MCOs, and dedicate some of its proceeds to raise the pay of doctors and other providers who treat Medi-Cal patients. All states except Alaska have at least one provider tax on managed care plans, hospitals, nursing homes, emergency ground transportation, or other types of health care businesses. The federal government spends billions of dollars a year matching these taxes, which generally lead to more money for providers, helping them balance lower Medicaid reimbursement rates while allowing states to protect against economic downturns and budget constraints. New York, Massachusetts, and Michigan would also be among the states hit hard by Republicans' drive to scale back provider taxes, which allow states to boost their share of Medicaid spending to receive increased federal Medicaid funds. In a May 12 statement announcing its proposed rule, CMS described a 'loophole' as 'money laundering,' and said California had financed coverage for over 1.6 million 'illegal immigrants' with the proceeds from its MCO tax. CMS said its proposal would save more than $30 billion over five years. 'This proposed rule stops the shell game and ensures federal Medicaid dollars go where they're needed most — to pay for health care for vulnerable Americans who rely on this program, not to plug state budget holes or bankroll benefits for noncitizens,' Mehmet Oz, the CMS administrator, said in the statement. Medicaid allows coverage for noncitizens who are legally present and have been in the country for at least five years. And California uses state money to pay for almost all of the Medi-Cal coverage for immigrants who are not in the country legally. California, New York, Michigan, and Massachusetts together account for more than 95% of the 'federal taxpayer losses' from the loophole in provider taxes, CMS said. But nearly every state would feel some impact, especially under the provisions in the reconciliation bill, which are more restrictive than the CMS proposal. None of it is a done deal. The CMS proposal, published May 15, has not been adopted yet, and the reconciliation bill is likely to be altered significantly in the Senate. But the restrictions being contemplated would be far-reaching. A report by Michigan's Department of Health and Human Services, ordered by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, found that a reduction of revenue from the state's hospital tax could 'destabilize hospital finances, particularly in rural and safety-net facilities, and increase the risk of service cuts or closures.' Losing revenue from the state's MCO tax 'would likely require substantial cuts, tax increases, or reductions in coverage and access to care,' it said. CMS declined to respond to questions about its proposed rule. The Republicans' House-passed reconciliation bill, though not the CMS proposal, also prohibits any new provider taxes or increases to existing ones. The American Hospital Association, which represents nearly 5,000 hospitals and health systems nationwide, said the proposed moratorium on new or increased provider taxes could force states 'to make significant cuts to Medicaid to balance their budgets, including reducing eligibility, eliminating or limiting benefits, and reducing already low payment rates for providers.' Because provider taxes draw matching federal dollars, Washington has a say in how they are implemented. And the Republicans who run the federal government are looking to spend far fewer of those dollars. In California, the insurers that pay the MCO tax are reimbursed for the portion levied on their Medi-Cal enrollment. That helps explain why the tax rate on Medi-Cal enrollment is sharply higher than on commercial enrollment. Over 99% of the tax money the insurers pay comes from their Medi-Cal business, which means most of the state's insurers get back almost all the tax they pay. That imbalance, which CMS describes as a loophole, is one of the main things Republicans are trying to change. If either the CMS rule or the corresponding provisions in the House reconciliation bill were enacted, states would be required to levy provider taxes equally on Medicaid and commercial business to draw federal dollars. California would likely be unable to raise the commercial rates to the level of the Medi-Cal ones, because state law constrains the legislature's ability to do so. The only way to comply with the rule would be to lower the tax rate on Medi-Cal enrollment, which would sharply reduce revenue. CMS has warned California and other states for years, including under the Biden administration, that it was considering significant changes to MCO and other provider taxes. Those warnings were never realized. But the risk may be greater this time, some observers say, because the proposed changes are echoed in the House-passed reconciliation bill and intertwined with a broader Republican strategy — and set of proposals — to cut Medicaid spending by close to $800 billion. 'All of these proposals move in the same direction: fewer people enrolled, less generous Medicaid programs over time,' said Edwin Park, a research professor at Georgetown University's McCourt School of Public Policy. California's MCO tax is expected to net California $13.9 billion over the next two fiscal years, according to January estimates. The state's hospital tax is expected to bring in an estimated $9 billion this year, up sharply from last year, according to the Department of Health Care Services, which runs Medi-Cal. Losing a significant slice of that revenue on top of other Medicaid cuts in the House reconciliation bill 'all adds up to be potentially a super serious impact on Medi-Cal and the California state budget overall,' said Kayla Kitson, a senior policy fellow at the California Budget & Policy Center. And it's not only California that will feel the pain. 'All states are going to be hurt by this," Park said. Wolfson writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. Sign up for our Wide Shot newsletter to get the latest entertainment business news, analysis and insights. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
