Workcompcentral Highlights Tower MSA CEO Rita Wilson’s “Edge” in MSP Compliance Technology

December 20, 2016

Tower MSA Partners CEO, Rita Wilson, is the subject of a recent Workcompcentral article, Focus on Tech Has Guided MSP Compliance Co. CEOs Career, highlighting how Rita’s career in building better pharmaceutical and worker’s compensation technology systems led her to develop a Medicare Secondary Payer (MSP) technology platform which electronically integrates medical and cost-containment information.

In discussing why the MSP compliance technology platform is a difference maker for Tower MSA, Workcompcentral’s Emily Brill quotes Rita:

Tower MSA has differentiated itself by building out a software system that monitors and shares claim information from beginning to end, integrating medical and cost containment information for “continuity” and to avoid “reinventing the wheel” by scrambling to get information from separate sources.

The article further quotes Rita in explaining how the platform assists Tower MSA in providing MSP compliance services to its clients:

Our technology platform is able to track claim information all the way through, through the conditional payment research process, through the intervention process, through the MSA process. What we did was integrate this information and track it with one software application that allows us to measure the progress each month, and determine when the right time to finalize the MSA.

In understanding the benefits of Rita’s focus on technology in MSP compliance, Ms. Brill spoke to Ann Schnure, the former Vice-President of Risk Management for Macy’s, and also a strong proponent of the use of technology in claims handling, who said of Rita:

Wilson’s focus on technology has always given the CEO an edge.

Learn more about Tower MSA Partners Chief Executive Officer Rita Wilson,  connect with her on LinkedIn and view her blog posts on our MSP Compliance Blog.

To learn more about how Tower MSA Partners’ technology platform can give you an “edge” in Medicare Secondary Payer Compliance please contact Rita Wilson at or 888.331.4941.

CMS Technical Alert Confirms $750 Threshold for Liability, WC and No-Fault TPOC Reporting

December 13, 2016

In a 12/12/2016 Technical Alert, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) confirmed their prior policy announcements concerning the implementation of a $750 threshold for the reporting of Total Payment Obligation to the Claimant (TPOC) through the Section 111 Mandatory Insurer Reporting process. The $750 threshold for TPOC reporting in WC and No-Fault claims became effective 10/1/2016 and will become effective for liability claims effective 1/1/2017.

The mandatory reporting threshold requirements are now as follows:

Liability Insurance:
The mandatory reporting threshold for liability insurance (including self-insurance) Total Payment Obligation to the Claimant (TPOC) Amounts dated January 1, 2017 or after is changing from $1000 to $750. If the most recent TPOC Date is on or after January 1, 2017, and the cumulative TPOC Amount is greater than $750, the TPOC(s) must be reported.

Note, the liability threshold only applies to physical trauma-based liability insurance TPOC amounts. It is not applicable to TPOC amounts for alleged ingestion, implantation or exposure.

No-Fault Insurance:
The mandatory reporting threshold for no-fault insurance TPOC Amounts dated October 1, 2016 or after changed from $0 to $750. If the most recent TPOC Date is on or after October 1, 2016, and the cumulative TPOC Amount is greater than $750, the TPOC(s) must be reported.

Workers’ Compensation:
The mandatory reporting threshold for workers’ compensation TPOC Amounts dated October 1, 2016 or after changed from $300 to $750. If the most recent TPOC Date is on or after October 1, 2016, and the cumulative TPOC Amount is greater than $750, the TPOC(s) must be reported

CMS also announced that as of 1/1/2017 reporting of cumulative TPOC Amounts at or below the above defined reporting thresholds will be accepted, but are not required. In other words, submitting a TPOC amount below the mandatory reporting thresholds will no longer generate an error code by CMS.

The entire content of the official Alert from CMS can be found here.

If you have any questions regarding this Alert please contact Tower MSA Partners’ Chief Compliance Officer, Dan Anders, at or (847) 946-2880.

Growing Press Surrounds Tower MSA’s Groundbreaking MSP Automation Suite

January 25, 2016

An article today posted by Yahoo! Finance discusses the new MSP Automation Suite by Tower MSA. The article cited the groundbreaking and sophisticated technology developed by Tower MSA that drives the MSP process.

Describing the MSP Automation Suite:

“The sophisticated technology drives all the processes Tower has perfected to proactively manage Section 111 Mandatory Insurer Reporting, the recently implemented Conditional Payment Notice process, and to stage workers’ compensation claims for Medicare Set-Asides and closure.”

Our CEO Rita Wilson offered many insights about the new MSP Automation Suite:

“Essentially, it automates our best practices for Medicare Secondary Payer compliance, claims optimization and MSA preparation.”

“Our Pre-MSA Triage identifies barriers to settlement and recommends claim-specific interventions, like physician peer review and clinical oversight, to remove those barriers long before preparing an MSA.”

“Clients don’t need to manually diary activities or call to check on things.”

“The system shows exactly when a phone call was made, and follow-up is due.”

“Automation frees claims professionals to address issues that require a human touch.”

The article went on to say:

“The MSP Automation Suite can track a claim from Medicare beneficiary identification through final settlement. It records every claim activity performed by Tower or its network of practicing physicians and pharmacists and provides clients with 24/7, end-to-end visibility into claims. The system prompts for missing data, conditional payment searches, and medical/pharmaceutical interventions and sends electronic updates to clients at appropriate data points.”

If you would like to read the full article, it is available here on Yahoo! Finance.

How Will State Boards of Pharmacy Respond to Senate Committee’s Compounding Inquiry?

December 13, 2012

On November 19th, Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA), Ranking Member Mike Enzi (R-WY) and members of the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee sent letters to all fifty state boards of pharmacy, the entities responsible for maintaining registries of pharmacies operating within their state. The HELP Committee is investigating the New England Compounding Center (NECC) for its production of tainted drugs that caused the recent outbreak of fungal meningitis, which has resulted in 33 deaths and more than 480 illnesses.

The letters were sent as a follow up to a hearing on November 15th in which Senators heard a very troubling account of NECC’s oversight record, which highlighted the gaps and grey areas that complicate the law establishing regulatory authority over such companies. In the course of the investigation, committee staff found that compounding pharmacies like NECC are required to register with their state of residence, and not with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. This inquiry will help lawmakers to assess the scope of these companies nationwide. Today’s letters will also assist the committee as it determines what changes need to be made to ensure that compounded drugs are safe and available for patients and hospitals who need them.

“The outbreak raises serious questions about the level of oversight that a large-scale compounding pharmacy was subject to, both by state and federal regulators, and what if any additional steps need to be taken to prevent such a tragedy in the future. Therefore, as part of our investigation, we write to request information regarding general oversight of compounding pharmacies in your state and what actions you have taken to address this meningitis outbreak,” the Senators wrote.

Key Points Made in the Inquiry
As foundation for its request for information, HELP noted that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDCP) linked the recent meningitis outbreak to three lots of preservative-free methylprednisolone acetate produced by the New England Compounding Center (NECC) — a compounding pharmacy in Massachusetts. According to the CDCP, the three lots consisted of 17,676 products distributed to 23 states, exposing approximately 14,000 patients since May 21, 2012. As of November 16, 2012, at least 480 patients have become ill throughout the country, of which 33 have died as a result of the contamination.
In order to better understand how states address the potential issue of compounding pharmacies distributing large quantities of drugs throughout the country and whether additional federal oversight may be necessary, HELP requested that each state’s board of pharmacy provide information responsive to its requests as noted below:

    1. Does your agency require compounding pharmacies to identify if they produce large volumes of drugs, if they compound sterile injectable products and/or ship their products across state lines? Do your inspection procedures vary based upon the production of sterile drugs, or large quantities of drugs, or drugs shipped across state lines?
    2. Does your state require that pharmacies engaged in sterile compounding comply with USP and if so what is your procedure for ensuring compliance with the standard?Are compounding pharmacies in your state required to have a patient-specific prescription prior to producing a compounded drug or are they able to produce batches of products without a prescription?
    3. Please provide the name and address of all pharmacies in your state that hold licenses or waivers or other exceptions that permit the pharmacy to operate in the absence of providing a full service retail pharmacy and meet all of the following three criteria (to the extent that you have information that allows you to identify pharmacies this way):
      • engage in sterile compounding;
      • hold licenses in other states; and
      • engage in compounding as opposed to dispensing.

Assuming the states responded, information should have been available no later than Friday, December 7, 2012.  Unfortunately, no responses have been published at this point, but it will be interesting to see how each state views its responsibilities to oversee compounding pharmacies at the state level.