🇺🇸United States

Increased Administrative and Technology Costs to Achieve EVV Compliance

3 verified sources

Definition

Agencies must invest in EVV software, integration, staff training, and ongoing monitoring to comply with the 21st Century Cures Act and state‑specific EVV mandates. These recurring expenses add to operating costs, especially for smaller home health providers, and are incurred simply to avoid claim denials and FMAP‑linked penalties, not to increase revenue.

Key Findings

  • Financial Impact: $10,000–$100,000+ per year per mid‑size agency in licenses, devices, IT/integration, and compliance staff time (industry estimates; specific dollar ranges inferred from multi‑state adoption and mandated system build‑outs)
  • Frequency: Monthly (software subscriptions, IT support, compliance labor) and annually (system upgrades, audits, training refreshers)
  • Root Cause: The Cures Act requires all states to implement EVV for Medicaid PCS and HHCS or face reductions in Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP), forcing both states and providers to fund EVV infrastructure and compliance operations.[4][5][6] States like California implemented central EVV platforms and alternate‑vendor programs that providers must configure and maintain, increasing their technology and administrative burden.[5][8]

Why This Matters

This pain point represents a significant opportunity for B2B solutions targeting Home Health Care Services.

Affected Stakeholders

CFOs and finance leaders at home health agencies, IT directors and systems integrators, Clinical operations managers responsible for field workflows, Compliance and quality assurance teams

Deep Analysis (Premium)

Financial Impact

$10,000–$100,000+ per year in compliance monitoring and training • $10,000–$100,000+ per year in compliance officer time and audit preparation • $10,000–$100,000+ per year in compliance software, devices, and monitoring.

Unlock to reveal

Current Workarounds

Custom Excel dashboards to track EVV completion rates across payers • Custom Excel for commercial claims tracking separate from EVV. • Dual Excel systems for payer vs compliance.

Unlock to reveal

Get Solutions for This Problem

Full report with actionable solutions

$99$39
  • Solutions for this specific pain
  • Solutions for all 15 industry pains
  • Where to find first clients
  • Pricing & launch costs
Get Solutions Report

Methodology & Sources

Data collected via OSINT from regulatory filings, industry audits, and verified case studies.

Evidence Sources:

Related Business Risks

Improperly Paid Home Care Claims Due to Missing or Defective EVV

$14.5 billion in New York Medicaid PCS payments without required EVV verification over 26 months; $31 billion total PCS/HHCS payments in audit scope at risk for claim denials or recoupment

Improper Payments and Questionable Care Quality Due to EVV Control Failures

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

Delayed Reimbursement from EVV‑Related Claim Holds and Denials

Cash flow delays equivalent to 30–90 days of Medicaid receivables for affected claim volumes; for a $10M‑revenue agency with 70% Medicaid, this can mean $1–2M temporarily locked in AR when EVV defects spike

Field and Back‑Office Capacity Lost to EVV Documentation and Exception Handling

Hundreds of non‑billable staff hours per month for a mid‑size agency (equivalent to $5,000–$20,000/month in labor cost and lost productive time, depending on wage levels and scale)

EVV‑Driven Overpayment Recoveries, FMAP Reductions, and False Claims Exposure

Statewide: FMAP reductions of up to 1% of Medicaid PCS/HHCS expenditures; Provider‑level: repayment of improperly paid claims plus potential treble damages and civil penalties under False Claims Acts (often translating into multi‑million‑dollar settlements in analogous Medicaid fraud cases)

Legacy and Ongoing Fraud Schemes in Home Care Despite EVV

Nationally, improper payments and fraud in PCS/HHCS were large enough to justify federal legislation; state audits like New York’s show tens of billions in payments at risk for fraud and abuse scrutiny over just a two‑year window

Request Deep Analysis

🇺🇸 Be first to access this market's intelligence