The Pitfalls of Billing Incident-To Services Provided by Therapists Without Credentials

A recent False Claims Act case highlighted a range of perils.

Scripps Hospital recently paid $1.5 million to resolve a False Claims Act (FCA) case. There are several lessons to be learned from the complaint and settlement.  

First, when an FCA case is first announced or settled, people typically turn to the complaint, which is the first document filed by the relator or whistleblower in court and contains the allegations of wrongdoing. It is easy to assume that when the case settles, the information in the complaint must have been at least a little bit true. That is a bad assumption. 

First, parties to a lawsuit sometimes settle for convenience, even when the allegations are false. But there is a second, less obvious point. If the government identifies another problem through its investigation, a settlement might involve the new problem while the issues identified in the complaint are found to be baseless. The closest you can come to finding out what really prompted a settlement is to find the settlement agreement and look for the paragraph describing the “covered conduct.” The money paid to the government is for the covered conduct, and only those actions will be released from any further claims. While the complaint in this case lists a wide range of topics, the settlement focuses on services provided by uncredentialed therapists.

Medicare allows you to use uncredentialed therapists when the services are provided “incident to” a physician, but apparently this did not occur in this case. There are a number of conditions you must meet to bill “incident to.” Among them, there must be a physician in the office suite able to provide direct supervision; the physician also must perform an initial service to the patient and periodic ongoing services to demonstrate involvement in the course of treatment.

Scripps apparently concluded that one or more of the incident-to requirements was not satisfied, and it had self-disclosed the situation and given a refund to the contractor, but a whistleblower had already filed a lawsuit. The publicly available documents do not make it clear how much of the settlement was a refund of the overpayment and how much of it was penalties. 

Scripps issued a statement indicating that a physician was always on-site, strongly suggesting that the issue was that physical therapists who were not credentialed were seeing new patients without physician involvement. Personally, I am not a big fan of billing physical therapy “incident to.” There is very little upside. The only benefit I see is that under Stark, a group practice may credit physicians in the compensation formula for “incident to” services. 

In my mind, that small benefit isn’t worth the risk. Given that the reimbursement is identical for therapy supervised by physicians or provided directly by therapists, billing under the therapists’ number is generally the way to go. 

A final point: while Medicare allows you to bill for uncredentialed therapists “incident to,” that does not mean that it is always permissible. Don’t forget your state licensure rules and Medicaid and private insurance billing rules. They may also vary from Medicare, and from one another.

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

David M. Glaser, Esq.

David M. Glaser is a shareholder in Fredrikson & Byron's Health Law Group. David assists clinics, hospitals, and other health care entities negotiate the maze of healthcare regulations, providing advice about risk management, reimbursement, and business planning issues. He has considerable experience in healthcare regulation and litigation, including compliance, criminal and civil fraud investigations, and reimbursement disputes. David's goal is to explain the government's enforcement position, and to analyze whether this position is supported by the law or represents government overreaching. David is a member of the RACmonitor editorial board and is a popular guest on Monitor Mondays.

Related Stories

Leave a Reply

Please log in to your account to comment on this article.

Featured Webcasts

Inpatient Ulcers and Gangrene: Avoid FY 2027 ICD-10-CM Coding, Sequencing, and Documentation Errors

Avoid costly inpatient coding errors involving ulcers and gangrene. This practical FY 2027 ICD-10-CM webcast clarifies pressure injury staging, non-pressure ulcer severity, diagnosis sequencing, documentation requirements, and POA reporting. Through real-world cases, gain the confidence to make defensible coding decisions, reduce denials, strengthen compliance, and support accurate reimbursement.

November 4, 2026

One Chart, Five Truths: How CDI Prevents the Same Diagnosis from Becoming Five Different Outcomes

What happens when everyone reviews the same chart, but reaches a different conclusion? In this case-based clinical documentation integrity (CDI) webcast, Penny Jefferson examines how documentation involving clinical support, timing, causation, linkage, and terminology can produce very different outcomes for ICD-10 coding, reimbursement, quality, risk adjustment, medical necessity, denials, and compliance. Using cases involving postoperative respiratory failure, severe malnutrition, and encephalopathy, you’ll learn the practical CLEAR framework to help attendees learn to evaluate whether a diagnosis is codeable, consistent, specific, reportable, and ultimately defensible across the different teams and systems that rely on the medical record.

September 30, 2026

Mastering Spinal Fusion Coding for Inpatient Facilities: ICD-10-PCS Precision, Documentation, and MS-DRG Impact

Spinal fusion cases are among the most complex inpatient procedures to code, where even minor ICD-10-PCS errors can affect MS-DRG assignment, reimbursement, compliance, and audit outcomes. This practical webcast provides a step-by-step framework for interpreting operative reports, assigning accurate ICD-10-PCS codes, recognizing documentation gaps, and confidently coding complex fusion procedures. You’ll leave with practical tools that improve coding accuracy, reduce denials and audit risk, and strengthen documentation-driven reimbursement decisions.

July 29, 2026

AI, Audits, and the Future of the Revenue Cycle

Artificial intelligence is rapidly transforming healthcare revenue cycle operations, from coding and auditing to compliance and denials. Join industry leaders Pam Warren (MaineHealth) and Raemarie Jimenez (AAPC) for a live fireside chat exploring how AI is changing workflows, workforce roles, payer-provider dynamics, and compliance risk—and what organizations should be doing now to prepare.

Webcast Only Available On ICD10monitor Subscription – Subscribe Below

June 17, 2026

Trending News

Featured Webcasts

Radiation Oncology Fundamentals: Coding, Billing & Compliance for Hospital Outpatient & Professional Services

Join Michael Calahan, PA, MBA for this radiation oncology coding and compliance webcast as he explains the fundamentals of coding, billing, reporting, and documentation for hospital outpatient and professional services. Learn how the 2026 radiation therapy coding changes affect current practices, how to distinguish technical and professional services, and how to address bundling, units, frequency, modifiers, and documentation requirements. Michael will also help you identify radiation oncology coding and billing vulnerabilities that could lead to denials, overpayments, repayment demands, or federal audit exposure.

October 20, 2026

Preparing for 2027: Inpatient & Outpatient Policy Changes for Case Management and Utilization Review

The 2027 CMS policy changes will impact case management, utilization review, reimbursement, and patient status decision-making long before they officially take effect. Join nationally recognized physician advisor Dr. Ronald Hirsch as he explains the finalized and proposed inpatient and outpatient rule changes, expanding bundled payment initiatives, payment updates, and evolving payer expectations. Gain practical guidance to help your organization prepare early, strengthen compliance, reduce reimbursement risk, and confidently navigate the transition to 2027.

September 17, 2026

The Two-Midnight Rule: Strengthening Compliance Through the Fundamentals, 2026 Updates, & 2027 Proposed Changes.

The Two-Midnight Rule continues to be one of Medicare’s most closely monitored compliance areas and now the rules are changing again. Join compliance expert Michael Calahan for a practical review of the latest 2026 policy updates, the proposed 2027 OPPS changes affecting inpatient-only procedures, and the best practices hospitals need to reduce audit risk, strengthen admission decisions, and protect reimbursement. Leave with actionable strategies you can immediately apply to improve compliance and confidently prepare for increased federal and Medicare Advantage scrutiny.

August 11, 2026

Trending News

Celebrate Lab Week with MedLearn! Sign up to win one year of our Laboratory All Access Pass! Click here to learn more →

Have a Medicare regulation question you’d love Dr. Hirsch to answer? Now is your chance! CLICK HERE to learn more→

Happy National Doctor’s Day! Learn how to get a complimentary webcast on ‘Decoding Social Admissions’ as a token of our heartfelt appreciation! Click here to learn more →

This Memorial Day, we honor those who gave all for our freedom. Take 20% off sitewide through May 29 with code MEMORIAL26 at checkout

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 1 with code CYBER25

CYBER WEEK IS HERE! Don’t miss your chance to get 20% off now until Dec. 2 with code CYBER24