On-Demand   On-Demand Web Programs

Health Care Law Institute 2017: The New Challenges Facing Providers -- Reimbursement, Enforcement, Compliance, and Other Hot Topics

Released on: Dec. 28, 2017
Running Time: 06:16:48
Our expert faculty of health care practitioners, in-house counsel, government regulators, and prosecutors examine the current state of health care law and what the future might hold for affected parties. This program will cover a broad range of issues confronting the health care industry: payment reforms; structuring of compliant financial and other relationships; recent developments in scientific discourse and promotional guidelines affecting regulated companies; and federal and state enforcement of health care fraud and abuse laws, including the federal False Claims Act, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the Stark law, and similar state laws.  The experts will also discuss what impact the new administration will have on health care.

Lecture Topics [Total time 00:06:45]
Segments with an asterisk (*) are available only with the purchase of the entire program.
  • Opening Remarks and Introduction* [00:10:03]
    David J. Farber, Esther Scherb
  • Hospitals – Old Challenges, New Opportunities [00:58:42]
    Christopher Kenny, Rujul Desai
  • Physicians – New Payment Systems, New Business Challenges [01:02:21]
    Kathleen Blake, Thomas Gustafson
  • Enforcement Trends in Health Care Law [01:02:23]
    Jacob T Elberg, Laura F. Laemmle-Weidenfeld
  • Developments in Electronic Medical Records [01:02:36]
    Jodi Daniel, Paul L Uhrig
  • Compliance Programs and Internal Investigations in Health Care Organizations [01:00:57]
    Donald A Romano, Laurence J. Freedman
  • Legislative Initiatives: Hot Topics in Health Care [00:59:46]
    David J. Farber, Gary A. Heimberg

The purchase price of this Web Program includes the following articles from the Course Handbook available online:


  • COMPLETE COURSE HANDBOOK
  • Fiscal Year (FY) 2018 Medicare Hospital Inpatient Prospective Payment System (IPPS) and Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTCH) Prospective Payment System Final Rule (CMS-1677-F)
  • Administration’s Decision to End Cost-Sharing Reduction Payments Will Lead to Substantial 2017 Losses for Health Plans (October 17, 2017)
    Chris Sloan, Caroline F. Pearson, Rujul Desai
  • CMS Proposal for New Medicare Payment System Could Lead to Large Payment Variability for Specialists (October 5, 2017)
    John Feore, Richard Kane, Rujul Desai
  • CMS Finalizes Policies on Off-Campus Provider-Based Status (November 2, 2016)
    Christopher P. Kenny
  • 2018 Proposed Rules: Hospital Outpatient Prospective Payment System and Ambulatory Surgical Center Payment System (July 17, 2017)
    Christopher P. Kenny
  • AMA Statement on New Rules for Medicare Shared Saving Program (June 5, 2015)
    Kathleen Blake
  • AMA Vision for Health System Reform
    Kathleen Blake
  • Key AMA Policies Related to Health Reform (September 2017)
    Kathleen Blake
  • AMA Vision on Health Reform (November 15, 2016)
    Kathleen Blake
  • Proposed Policy, Payment, and Quality Provisions Changes to the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule for Calendar Year 2018 (July 13, 2017)
  • Former U.S. Department of Justice Officials as Amici Curiae Supporting Appellants and Reversal, U.S. v. Trinity Industries, Inc., Case No. 15-41172 (5th Cir. 2016)
    Laurence J. Freedman
  • Recent OIG Publications Address AKS Safe Harbors, CMP Regulations, and “Nominal Value” Policy (December 2016)
    Laura F. Laemmle-Weidenfeld
  • Supreme Court Decides Validity of Implied False Certification Theory in Universal Health Services v. Escobar (June 2016)
    Laura F. Laemmle-Weidenfeld
  • Universal Health Services, Inc. v. United States et al. ex rel. Escobar et al., 579 US__(2016)
  • Improving Care: Priorities to Improve Electronic Health Record Usability
    Kathleen Blake
  • Health Care Enforcement Review & 2017 Outlook: Important Case Law Developments (January 5, 2017)
    Karen S. Lovitch, Laurence J. Freedman, Samantha P. Kingsbury
  • Recently Unsealed Whistleblower Cases (September 2017)
    Hope Foster, Kevin McGinty, Laurence J. Freedman, Richard Maidman, Mackenzie Queenin
  • A Review of Recent Whistleblower Developments (October 19, 2017)
    Donald A. Romano
  • FDA Reauthorization Act of 2017, H.R. 2430, 115th Congress (2017–2018)
  • Health Headlines—October 2, 2017
    David J. Farber
  • FDARA: Making a Difference for Industry and Patients, FDA Voice (August 21, 2017)
  • CHMP Adopts Guideline on Genomic Sampling and Management of Genomic Data (October 13, 2017)
    Gary Heimberg
  • FDA Seeks Public Input on How to Rollback/Streamline Regulations (September 8, 2017)
    Gary Heimberg
  • Our Insights Into Healthcare Industry Trends
    David J. Farber

Presentation Material


  • Hospitals - Old Challenges, New Opportunities
    Rujul Desai, Christopher Kenny
  • Physicians - New Payment Systems, New Business Challenges
    Kathleen Blake
  • Physicians - New Payment Systems, New Business Challenges
    Thomas Gustafson
  • Enforcement Trends in Health Care Law
    Jacob T Elberg, Laura F. Laemmle-Weidenfeld
  • Developments in Electronic Medical Records
    Jodi Daniel, Paul L Uhrig
  • Compliance Programs and Internal Investigations in Health Care Organizations
    Laurence J. Freedman
  • Compliance Programs and Internal Investigations in Health Care Organizations
    Donald A Romano
  • Supplemental Materials
    Laurence J. Freedman
  • Legislative Initiatives: Hot Topics in Health Care
    David J. Farber
Co-Chair(s)
David J. Farber ~ King & Spalding LLP
Esther Scherb ~ Covington & Burling LLP
Speaker(s)
Kathleen Blake ~ American Medical Association
Jodi Daniel ~ Crowell & Moring LLP
Rujul Desai ~ Avalere Health LLC
Jacob T Elberg ~ Assistant U.S. Attorney, United States Attorney's Office, District of New Jersey
Laurence J. Freedman ~ Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
Thomas Gustafson ~ Senior Policy Advisor, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer
Gary A. Heimberg ~ Covington & Burling LLP
Christopher Kenny ~ King & Spalding
Donald A Romano ~ Foley & Lardner LLP
Paul L Uhrig ~ Chief Administrative, Legal & Privacy Officer, Surescripts
General credit information about this format appears below. For credit information specific to this program, please choose your jurisdiction(s) in the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page.

PLI’s live and on-demand webcasts are single-user license products intended for an individual registrant only. Credit will be issued only to the individual registered.


U.S. MCLE States

Alabama:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

Alaska:  All PLI products can fulfill Alaska’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Arizona:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “interactive CLE” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via interactive CLE programs.

Arkansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for Arkansas CLE credit.

California:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “participatory” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via participatory programs.

Colorado:  All PLI products can fulfill Colorado’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Connecticut: Effective January 1, 2017, all PLI products can fulfill Connecticut’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Delaware:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “eCLE” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of eCLE per reporting period, no more than 6 of which may be audio-only.

Florida:  All PLI products can fulfill Florida’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Georgia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “in-house” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 in-house credits per reporting period.

Hawaii:  All PLI products can fulfill Hawaii’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Idaho:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Illinois:  All PLI products can fulfill Illinois' CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Indiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance education” credit. Attorneys are limited to 9 credits of distance education per reporting period.

Iowa:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “unmoderated” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of unmoderated programs per reporting period.

Kansas:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “prerecorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of prerecorded programs per reporting period.

Kentucky:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “non-live” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 non-live credits per reporting period.

Louisiana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Maine:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5.5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Minnesota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 on-demand credits per reporting period.

Mississippi:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Missouri:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Montana:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Nebraska:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “computer-based learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 5 credits of computer-based learning per reporting period.

Nevada:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via self-study programs.

New Hampshire:  All PLI products can fulfill New Hampshire’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

New Jersey:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternative verifiable learning formats” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of alternative verifiable learning formats per reporting period.

New Mexico:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 4 credits of self-study per reporting period.

New York

Experienced Attorneys:  All PLI products can fulfill New York’s CLE requirements for experienced attorneys. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Newly Admitted Attorneys:  PLI’s transitional on-demand web programs can be used to fulfill the requirements for New York newly admitted attorneys. Only professional practice and law practice management credits may be earned via transitional on-demand web programs. Ethics and skills credits may not be earned via on-demand web programs.

North Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online programs per reporting period.

North Dakota:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Ohio:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Oklahoma:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of online, on-demand programs per reporting period.

Oregon:  All PLI products can fulfill Oregon’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Pennsylvania:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Puerto Rico:  All PLI products can fulfill Puerto Rico’s CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Rhode Island:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “video replay” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 video replay credits per reporting period.

South Carolina:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “alternatively delivered” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of alternatively delivered programs per reporting period.

Tennessee:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “distance learning” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of distance learning per reporting period.

Texas:  All PLI products can fulfill Texas’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Utah:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Vermont:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 10 credits of self-study per reporting period.

Virgin Islands:  All PLI products can fulfill the Virgin Islands’ CLE requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “pre-recorded” credit. Attorneys are limited to 8 credits of pre-recorded programs per reporting period.

Washington:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “A/V” credit. Attorneys are limited to 22.5 credits of A/V programs per reporting period.

West Virginia:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “online” credit. Attorneys are limited to 12 credits of online instruction per reporting period.

Wisconsin:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “repeated, on-demand” credit. Attorneys are limited to 15 credits of repeated, on-demand programs per reporting period. No ethics credits can be earned via on-demand web programs.

Wyoming:  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Attorneys are limited to 6 credits of self-study per reporting period.


CPD Jurisdictions

British Columbia (CPD-BC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not eligible for CPD-BC credit unless viewed with at least one other attorney or an articled student. In this case, the credit must be recorded as a “study group.”

Ontario (CPD-ON):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “recorded” credit. If viewed without a colleague, attorneys are limited to 6 credits of recorded programs per year. If viewed with at least one colleague, there is no limit to the number of credits that can be earned via recorded programs.

Quebec (CPD-QC):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill Quebec’s CPD requirements.

Hong Kong (CPD-HK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CPD-HK credit.

United Kingdom (CPD-UK):  PLI’s on-demand web programs can fulfill the United Kingdom’s CPD requirements.

Australia (CPD-AUS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Australia’s CPD requirements. Credit limits for on-demand web programs vary according to jurisdiction. Please refer to your jurisdiction’s CPD information page for specifics.

Alberta (CPD-ALBERTA):  All PLI products can fulfill Alberta’s CPD requirements. There is no limit to the number of credits an attorney can earn via PLI products.

Dubai (CLPD-DUBAI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill CLPD credit requirements.


Other Credit Types

CPE Credit (NASBA):  Select on-demand web programs qualify as the “QAS Self-Study” delivery method. Please check the Credit Information box on the right-hand side of this page to verify CPE credit availability.

IRS Continuing Education (IRS-CE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill IRS-CE requirements. To request IRS-CE credit, please notify PLI at plicredits@pli.edu of your request and include your Preparer Tax Identification Number (PTIN).

Certified Fraud Examiner CPE:  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Certified Fraud Examiner CPE requirements. To request CPE credit or find out which programs offer CPE, please contact PLI at plicredits@pli.edu.

IAPP Continuing Privacy Credit (CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill Privacy CPE credit requirements.

HR Recertification (HRCI):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill HR credit requirements.

SHRM Recertification (SHRM):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as "self-paced" credit. SHRM professionals are limited to 30 credits of self-paced programs per recertification period.

Compliance Certification Board (CCB):  PLI’s on-demand web programs qualify as “self-study” credit. Candidates are limited to 10 self-study credits per 12-month period, and certification holders are limited to 20 self-study credits per 2-year renewal period.

Certified Anti-Money Laundering Specialists Certification (CAMS):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CAMS credit.

New York State Social Worker Continuing Education (SW CPE):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for SW CPE credit.

American Bankers Association Professional Certification (ABA):  PLI’s on-demand web programs may fulfill ABA credit requirements.

Certified Financial Planners (CFP):  PLI’s on-demand web programs are not approved for CFP credit.

 

Related Items

Live Programs  Live Programs

Hot Topics in Health Care Law 2018 (New York, NY) Dec. 19, 2018

Handbook  Course Handbook Archive

Hot Topics in Health Care Law 2018  
Health Care Law Institute 2017 David J Farber, King & Spalding LLP
Esther Scherb, Covington & Burling LLP
 
Share
Email
“Excellent diversified content!” - Prior Attendee

“This was better than many health law CLE's I have attended or to which I have listened.  The speakers were excellent.”  - Prior Attendee


  • FOLLOW PLI:
  • twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • YouTube
  • RSS

All Contents Copyright © 1996-2018 Practising Law Institute. Continuing Legal Education since 1933.

© 2018 PLI PRACTISING LAW INSTITUTE. All rights reserved. The PLI logo is a service mark of PLI.