Improper Payments and Questionable Care Quality Due to EVV Control Failures
Definition
EVV was introduced because Medicaid in‑home services suffered from improper payments and questionable quality of care, including services billed but not actually delivered. When EVV controls are weak or not properly implemented, agencies face rework, corrective action plans, and potential repayments tied to poor documentation and disputes over whether visits occurred or were completed as ordered.
Key Findings
- Financial Impact: Tens of millions per state annually in improper PCS/HHCS payments and related remediation costs (re-audits, corrective action, internal reviews) attributed to weaknesses EVV is designed to prevent
- Frequency: Ongoing (improper payment cycles align with every billing cycle; audits and corrective actions recur annually or bi‑annually)
- Root Cause: Federal oversight bodies cite longstanding fraud, waste, and abuse in PCS, including claims for visits that did not occur, partially completed visits, or services not matching care plans.[1][6] Where EVV data are incomplete, manipulable, or not actively monitored, those historical quality problems persist, creating repeated disputes, chart corrections, and costs to remediate deficient records.[1][6]
Why This Matters
This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Home Health Care Services.
Affected Stakeholders
Clinical supervisors and directors of nursing, Quality and compliance managers, Billing and utilization review staff, State surveyors and Medicaid auditors
Deep Analysis (Premium)
Financial Impact
$30,000-$150,000 annually per hospice organization in claim denials, administrative rework, and Medicaid compliance penalties for improperly documented waiver services • $40,000-$200,000 annually in claim payment delays, rework costs, dispute resolution with home care agencies, and potential fraud-related investigation expenses tied to improper PCS billing • $50,000-$250,000 annually per organization in denied claims, corrective action plan administration, and re-audit costs from Medicaid waiver program funding loss
Current Workarounds
Manual spreadsheets and phone calls to verify visit completion; WhatsApp/text message confirmations from workers; memory-based reconciliation between scheduler records and EVV system; email chains documenting exceptions; hand-written exception logs • Manual verification calls to agencies providing services; spreadsheet-based visit reconciliation; email documentation of visit confirmation; paper-based exception tracking • Separate manual tracking for Medicaid beneficiaries vs. Medicare beneficiaries; WhatsApp confirmations from field staff; spreadsheet reconciliation of visits and billing records; email-based exception management
Get Solutions for This Problem
Full report with actionable solutions
- Solutions for this specific pain
- Solutions for all 15 industry pains
- Where to find first clients
- Pricing & launch costs
Methodology & Sources
Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.
Related Business Risks
Improperly Paid Home Care Claims Due to Missing or Defective EVV
Increased Administrative and Technology Costs to Achieve EVV Compliance
Delayed Reimbursement from EVV‑Related Claim Holds and Denials
Field and Back‑Office Capacity Lost to EVV Documentation and Exception Handling
EVV‑Driven Overpayment Recoveries, FMAP Reductions, and False Claims Exposure
Legacy and Ongoing Fraud Schemes in Home Care Despite EVV
Request Deep Analysis
🇺🇸 Be first to access this market's intelligence