Susan Collins (R-ME)
Medicare Home Health Payment Integrity and Protection Act of 2026
A Republican bill with 1 Republican cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S4477-4478)
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The Medicare Home Health Payment Integrity and Protection Act of 2026 aims to reduce fraud within Medicare home health agencies. It introduces stricter enrollment screening, including fingerprinting and insurance requirements for high-risk agencies, and increases the frequency of surveys for new or suspicious providers. The bill resets payment amounts for 2027 and subsequent years and excludes "suspect claims" from payment benchmarks. Additionally, it provides funding for program integrity, law enforcement investigations, and state survey agencies.
Yes· 3 of 12
- Scored +7
Would people over 65 be better off under this?
Seniors are the primary users of Medicare home health and benefit from reduced fraud and better provider quality.
- Scored +7
Would retired people be better off under this?
Directly benefits retirees who rely on Medicare for home health care.
- Scored +6
Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see?
Requires reports on suspect claims and implements stricter fraud detection mechanisms.
The opposite
- Scored -3
Would business owners be better off under this?
Imposes stricter regulations and potential financial penalties on home health agency owners.
- Scored -2
Does this make it easier to run a small business?
Increases administrative and compliance burdens for home health agencies.
- Scored -2
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
Increases federal oversight and requirements for state-level survey agencies.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Reduced Medicare Fraud: By implementing enhanced enrollment screening for agencies at extreme risk of fraud, such as requiring fingerprinting for administrators and proof of liability insurance, the bill seeks to decrease fraudulent activity (Section 101).
-
Increased Oversight of Care Providers: The bill requires more frequent standard surveys (every 12 months for 36 months) for newly enrolled agencies or those with ownership changes, and more frequent surveys for those with aberrant admission rates or missing quality data (Section 102).
-
Better Quality Standards for Accreditation: National accreditation bodies must now meet or exceed state and local survey standards and require surveyors to complete basic training from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (Section 103).
-
Protection for Legitimate Providers: The Secretary will exclude "suspect claims" (data from providers suspected of fraud, waste, or abuse) when calculating payment benchmarks and value-based adjustments, ensuring honest providers are not negatively impacted by fraudulent data (Section 203).
-
Increased Enforcement Funding: The bill appropriates $150 million for the Department of Justice and the Office of Inspector General to investigate organized fraud schemes and prosecute Medicare fraud (Section 304).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Financial Penalties for Agencies: Home health agencies that fail to submit quality data face a payment adjustment increase of 15 percentage points starting in 2029 (Section 102).
-
Increased Burden on Providers: Agencies at extreme risk of fraud must undergo additional screening, including fingerprinting and providing evidence of comprehensive liability insurance (Section 101).
-
Stricter Accreditation Requirements: Accreditation bodies may face termination of their approval if the Secretary finds their performance is deficient following a new periodic assessment mechanism (Section 103).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would retired people be better off under this? — Directly benefits retirees who rely on Medicare for home health care. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors are the primary users of Medicare home health and benefit from reduced fraud and better provider quality. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — Many people with disabilities utilize home health services and benefit from improved provider integrity. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low income seniors rely more on Medicare and benefit from a more secure and honest payment system. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Protects the integrity of Medicare funds for all beneficiaries. Would business owners be better off under this? — Imposes stricter regulations and potential financial penalties on home health agency owners.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — Increases oversight of home health providers ensures better quality and safety for patients. Does this make the government pay for what it commits to? — Increases oversight and funding to prevent wasteful spending due to fraud. Does this reduce what the federal government owes? — Reducing Medicare fraud saves government funds, potentially reducing the deficit. Does this make it easier to run a small business? — Increases administrative and compliance burdens for home health agencies.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Requires reports on suspect claims and implements stricter fraud detection mechanisms. Does this give the federal government more power? — Expands the Secretary of HHS's authority over enrollment and accreditation of home health agencies. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — Increases federal oversight and requirements for state-level survey agencies.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this strengthen Social Security? — Protects the financial integrity of Medicare, which is tied to Social Security.
- Healthcare
- Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Reducing fraud ensures resources are available for legitimate care delivery.
- 9/14/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 8/5/2026
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S4477-4478)
- Introduced in Senate
Marsha BlackburnRepublican · Tennessee