Electronic Health Records

Adoption & Implementation News

NC Medicaid payment system subject of class action lawsuit

By Kyle Murphy, PhD

- The North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) is again coming under fire for its handling of the state’s Medicaid program. This time it is the form of a class action lawsuit against the state agency for its implementation and operation of the Medicaid Management Information System (MMIS), NCTracks.

This is the same state agency that last week apologized for health data breach after it had sent the Medicaid cards of 48,752 beneficiaries to the wrong address. DHHS Secretary Aldona Wos revealed that the state agency was experiencing a number of problems as a result of implementing provisions of the Affordable Care Act.

The lawsuit filed in the Superior Court of Wake County alleges that DHHS and its MMIS partners — Computer Sciences Corporation (CSC, the system developer), Maximus Consulting Services (the organization responsible for system validation and verification), and SLI Global Solutions (the organization responsible for testing prior to launch) — are the cause of millions of dollars in damages to North Carolina Medicaid providers since the launch of NCTracks on July 1, 2013.

“In all, NCTracks had over 3,200 software errors in the first few months of operation, and payments to Medicaid providers were delayed, unpaid, or ‘shorted’ by over half a billion dollars in the first 90 days,” states the 48-page lawsuit via NC Policy Watch.

  • Improvements Needed for Hospital Clinical Quality Measures
  • Pathway for SGR Reform Act provides 3-month Medicare fix
  • EMR use leads to higher loyalty, satisfaction among patients
  • Mapping Tool Impacts Analytics during ICD-10 Transition
  • Meaningful use of secure messaging for providers, patients
  • New VA leader targets interoperability, efficiency as goals
  • Poor 2014 Meaningful Use Data Renews Call for 2015 Changes
  • Patient Portal Company Settles with FTC over Deceptive Data
  • 2016 PQRS Payment Adjustments Subject to Medicare Final Rule
  • Republican Doctors Lobby Speaker Ryan for MU Delay
  • Debating Meaningful Use Requirements for Patient Engagement
  • CORHIO Adds Eight Hospitals to Health Information Exchange
  • HIE best practices: Improving technology, efficiency
  • Clearwater’s Chaput to address security of ePHI
  • Advocates Call for Immediate 2015 Meaningful Use Changes
  • Web-based tools, EHRs help physicians identify genetic risks
  • Epic Share Everywhere Enables Worldwide Interoperability
  • HHS seeks commentary on health plan certification rule
  • Many HIM Departments Unprepared for ICD-10 Transition Snags
  • 2017 Federal Health IT Spend Targeted for EHR Modernization
  • ECRI to Talk EHR Copy and Paste, Patient Safety at HIMSS 2016
  • How do best practices become EHR clinical decision support?
  • Why daily reporting means success in Stage 2 Meaningful Use
  • Creating the next generation of health IT professionals
  • Latest HIMSS14 survey shows increased physician mobile use
  • NYDHA inaugural class aims at EHR improvement
  • Kalorama: EMR market exceeds $20 billion in 2012
  • Task-Switching Hazard Revealed in EHR Integration Study
  • Vanderbilt launches challenge to transform patient summaries
  • BCBS of North Dakota Loses $72.9M as Claims Amounts Rise
  • Why don’t first responders have instant access to EHRs?
  • ATA issues telehealth licensing, reimbursement report cards
  • U.S. doctors ahead of international counterparts in EHR adoption; It’s about time
  • Are present patient engagement strategies missing the mark?
  • CIO series: What advice do CIOs have for their peers?
  • CMS Funds to Help Rural Practices in Quality Payment Program
  • Beacon Health Partners, Empire BCBS shift to value-based payment
  • Med School Training Key to Boosting EHR Data, Health IT Use
  • 4.2M gain insurance under ACA, but IT glitches cost big bucks
  • AHIMA applauds the new CMS plan for ICD-10 implementation
  • Are the Proposed MACRA Rule, Implementation Plans Flawed?
  • Why cloud-based EHR services require the trust of providers
  • VA moves forward with plan to replace scheduling system
  • Public Health Reporting Repository Deadline Fast Approaching
  • Tiger Team seeks patient privacy and security input
  • Wisc. hospital quality improvements generate major savings
  • DirectTrust Eclipses Health Information Exchange Milestone
  • Another NC hospital falls to Epic EHR implementation costs
  • What does big data mean for health IT?
  • Why moving beyond the EHR is needed for population health
  • EHR Adoption Challenges Solved through Data Entry Transfer
  • Taking initiative in Stage 2 Meaningful Use preparation
  • ONC announces Health IT Fellows to advance meaningful use
  • Small, Rural, Specialty Ambulatory Practices Lacking in EHR Use
  • WEDI: ICD-10 Implementation Progresses; Doc Practices Lag
  • How important is physician engagement to CPOE adoption?
  • Hospitals Seeing Opportunities to Integrate Workflows
  • Financial Challenges, MU Complexity Stunting EHR Integration
  • Access to PHR makes patients more loyal customers
  • ICD-10 Preparation Lacks Testing, Revenue Impact Analysis
  • How do mandates affect docs, health IT staff differently?
  • Ensuring Patient Concerns Don’t Limit Health Data Exchange
  • AHRQ Report: EHR Integration Assists Lean Production Design
  • EHR best practices: Choosing an EHR rollout strategy
  • Health Data Initiative Forum Day 1: New EHR tools released
  • CORHIO adds HealthONE system to HIE
  • Beginning an Information Governance, EHR Optimization Project
  • Health IT Comparison Tool Task Force Hears from Providers
  • Arkansas invests in rural health IT connectivity
  • VA attempts to clear claims backlog by going electronic
  • HIT Standards Committee still weighing EHR certification recommendations
  • Best practices for meaningful use pre- and post- audits
  • Pediatric telehealth UCLA shows positive results for obesity
  • EHR Use Nearly Universal in Hospital Outpatient Practices
  • How CPOE Adoption Helps Clinicians Treat Stroke Effectively
  • AHA urges CMS to move quickly with meaningful use database
  • How Health IT Standards Enable Patient Access to Health Data
  • Study: EHR performance incentives improve small practices
  • Selling, scaling telehealth services for widespread adoption
  • Doctors Not Meeting Consumer Patient Engagement Expectations
  • EMR aids Regions Hospital, Red Cross blood transfusion work
  • Telehealth roundup: Arkansas, California improve remote care
  • Half of Medical Providers Lack EHR Interoperability Roadmap
  • Manhattan Research reveals expanded iPad use
  • AMA Invests $15M in New Healthcare IT Startup Health2047
  • Cerner Hopes to Boost EHR Interoperability with FHIR Release
  • Understanding the role of nurse informaticists in healthcare
  • DirectTrust, HL7 Collaborate to Streamline Health Data Exchange
  • Will ICD-10 Compliance Deadline Affect Hospital Payments?
  • Surescripts network of EHR vendors expanded over past year
  • How health information exchange helps integrate health IT
  • Health IT Vendors Urge HELP Committee to Pass MEDTECH Act
  • AAFP Requests Simplified Quality Payment Program Requirements
  • ONC Contest Moves API-Enabled Health Data Exchange Forward
  • Regenstrief EHR Clinical Learning Platform Ready for Adoption
  • Most Healthcare Execs Doubt EHR Use Can Support Population Health
  • Clinical quality measures for EHR Incentives
  • CMS Extends Electronic Clinical Quality Measures Deadline
  • OIG confirms EHR wait time wrongdoing in VA system
  • What activities are managed as part of the revenue cycle?
  • DHHS has had a shaky history with implementing an MMIS. According to the allegations in the lawsuit, the state agency’s first attempt ended in a failure in 2006, with the state footing $30 million for a new system that never panned out. The following year, a new request for proposal (RFP) was issued in July and then withdrawn, revised, and reissued in December. A $287-million contract was eventually rewarded to CSC which indicated a completion deadline of Aug. 22, 2011. The deadline was missed by nearly two years and the budget almost doubled as well as $207 was added to the budget.

    If the allegations hold up, DHHS should have known better than to have chosen CSC. All it had to do was review the company’s history in New York where the company failed its contract for the New York MMIS. That two-year, $357-million project was hampered by delays which ultimately led to the project finishing up close to 3 years behind and $166.4 million over budget. As recently as 2010, the New York Comptroller set in motion the abandoning the CSC-developed MMIS and the pursuit of a replacement.

    According to the lawsuit, CSC intended to reuse 90 percent of the Common Business-Oriented Language (COBOL) code from the New York MMIS to create NCTracks. Ultimately, the MMIS developer decided to reuse only 32 percent of the code and opted to write new code, leading to delays and opening the system up to new flaws.

    “As with any implementation of an IT system of this size and complexity, the transition has not been without challenges,” DHHS CIO Joseph Cooper, Jr., told the Charlotte Observer. “To date, the new system has processed more than 104 million claims and paid more than $5.5 billion to North Carolina healthcare providers, out-performing the 35-year old system it replaced. DHHS continues to address provider issues as they arise.”

    CSC has deemed the lawsuit without merit, but findings from the state’s own auditing of the system appears to show otherwise when it revealed that 600 of the known 3,200 defects in existence since July 1 had not be remediated by November 5.

    The lawsuit has received backing from the likes of the North Carolina Medical Society.

    Read the full lawsuit here.