Examples of FEDERAL HMO ACT in a sentence
Under the Federal HMO Act, the federal government approved loans and grants to entrepreneurs interested in creating HMOs that met federal requirements.
Nixon’s endorsement of HMOs as a way of controlling health care costs in a message to Congress on February 18, 1971, led to the Federal HMO Act of 1973.
With the passage of the Federal HMO Act in 1973, managed care plans are responsible for a set of quality standards through the process of Qualification or Certification in order to contract with the Federal Government to enroll people covered by Medicaid and Medicare.
Exceptions include “1) professional medical corporations, partnerships, and group practices owned and operated by licensed professionals; 2) HMOs; 3) non-profit corporations such as medical foundations; and 4) fraternal, religious, hospital, labor, educational, and similar organizations.” Id. Most significant is the Federal HMO Act, which “incorporates many of the characteristics that the corporate practice of medicine doctrine was designed to protect against.” Id. at 371.
An entity that provides, offers or arranges for coverage of designated health services needed by plan members for a fixed, prepaid premium Under the Federal HMO Act, an entity must havethree characteristics to call itself an HMO: • An organized system for providing health care or otherwise assuring health care delivery in a geographic area• An agreed upon set of basic and supplemental health maintenance and treatment services• A voluntary enrolled group of people (United HealthCare Corporation, p.
Analysis of the Federal HMO Act including its 1973, 1976, 1978, and 1988 amendments and legislative history shows there is no support for the proposition that Congress meant to encourage the adoption of physician-oriented financial incentives by HMOs, especially those tied to treatment decisions by the physician.
Support the ethnic route for peace During the 5th year of the program, support to the Truth Commission will continue to promote strategies for the installation of the capacities and promotion of the production of contents of ethnic people.
Further, the Federal HMO Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300e et seq., enacted just a year before ERISA and during the same congressional term, shows that Congress intended the states to regulate HMO quality and never contemplated that HMOs would be able to commandeer the practice of medicine through a statute (ERISA) requiring almost unquestioning deference to a (putative) plan administrator’s “benefit” decision.
Defendant Richard Wolfson would have testified that Criterion 25, as it was known in Pennsylvania, was motivated and inspired by the Federal HMO Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300(e), et seq., which expresses a congressional policy that employers with 25 or more employees “shall include in any health benefits plan * * * offered to their employees * * * the option of membership in qualified [HMOs].” Id. § 300(e)(9); see also JA 801-803.
Conversely, the Federal HMO Act of 1973 was expressly designed to encourage new types of business structures (in the name of cost containment).