Skip to Main Content
National Association for Home Care & Hospice
Twitter Facebook Pintrest


In the various roles he has undertaken through the years, Val J. Halamandaris has been a singular driving force behind the policy and program initiatives resulting in the recognition of home health care as a viable alternative to institutionalization. His dedication to consumer advocacy, which enhances the quality of life and dignity of those receiving home health care, merits VNA HealthCare Group’s highest recognition and deepest respect. 

VNA HealthCare Group

I have the highest respect for them, especially for the nurses, aides and therapists, who devote their lives to caring for people with disabilities, the infirm and dying Americans.  There are few more noble professions.

President Barack Obama

Home health care agencies do such a wonderful job in this country helping people to be able to remain at home and allowing them to receive services

U.S. Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) Chair, Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee

Home care is a combination of compassion and efficiency.  It is less expensive than institutional care...but at the same time it is a more caring, human, intimate experience, and therefore it has a greater human’s a big mistake not to try to maximize it and find ways to give people the home care option over either nursing homes, hospitals or other institutions

Former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Newt Gingrich (R-GA)

Medicaid covers long-term care, but only for low-income families.  And Medicare only pays for care that is connected to a hospital discharge....our health care system must cover these vital services...[and] we should promote home-based care, which most people prefer, instead of the institutional care that we emphasize now.

Former U.S. Senator Majority Leader Tom Daschle (D-CD)

We need incentives to...keep people in home health care settings...It’s dramatically less expensive than long term care.

U.S. Senator John McCain (R-AZ)


Home care is clearly the wave of the future. It’s clearly where patients want to be cared for. I come from an ethnic family and when a member of our family is severely ill, we would never consider taking them to get institutional care. That’s true of many families for both cultural and financial reasons. If patients have a choice of where they want to be cared for, where it’s done the right way, they choose home.

Donna Shalala, former Secretary of Health and Human Services

A couple of years ago, I spent a little bit of time with the National Association for Home Care & Hospice and its president, Val J. Halamandaris, and I was just blown away. What impressed me so much was that they talked about what they do as opposed to just the strategies of how to deal with Washington or Sacramento or Albany or whatever the case may be. Val is a fanatic about care, and it comes through in every way known to mankind. It comes through in the speakers he invites to their events; it comes through in all the stuff he shares.

Tom Peters, author of In Search of Excellence

Val’s home care organization brings thousands of caregivers together into a dynamic organization that provides them with valuable resources and tools to be even better in their important work. He helps them build self-esteem, which leads to self-motivation.

Mike Vance, former Dean of Disney and author of Think Out of the Box

Val is one of the greatest advocates for seniors in America. He goes beyond the call of duty every time.

Arthur S. Flemming, former Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare

Val has brought the problems, the challenges, and the opportunities out in the open for everyone to look at. He is a visionary pointing the direction for us. 

Margaret (Peg) Cushman, Professor of Nursing and former President of the Visiting Nurses Association

Although Val has chosen to stay in the background, he deserves much of the credit for what was accomplished both at the U.S. Senate Special Committee on Aging, where he was closely associated with me and at the House Select Committee on Aging, where he was Congressman Claude Pepper’s senior counsel and closest advisor. He put together more hearings on the subject of aging, wrote more reports, drafted more bills, and had more influence on the direction of events than anyone before him or since.

Frank E. Moss, former U.S. Senator

Val’s most important contribution is pulling together all elements of home health care and being able to organize and energize the people involved in the industry.

Frank E. Moss, former U.S. Senator

Anyone working on health care issues in Congress knows the name Val J. Halamandaris.

Kathleen Gardner Cravedi, former Staff Director of the House Select Committee on Aging

Without your untiring support and active participation, the voices of people advocating meaningful and compassionate health care reform may not have been heard by national leaders.

Michael Sullivan, Former Executive Director, Indiana Association for Home Care

All of us have been members of many organizations and NAHC is simply the best there is. NAHC aspires to excellence in every respect; its staff has been repeatedly honored as the best in Washington; the organization lives by the highest values and has demonstrated a passionate interest in the well-being of patients and providers.

Elaine Stephens, Director of Home Care of Steward Home Care/Steward Health Systems and former NAHC C

Home care increasingly is one of the basic building blocks in the developing system of long-term care.  On both economic and recuperative bases, home health care will continue to grow as an essential service for individuals, for families and for the community as a whole.

Former U.S. Senator Olympia Snowe (R-ME)

NCOA is excited to be part of this great event and honored to have such influential award winners in the field of aging.

National Council of Aging

Health care at home…is something we need more of, not less of.  Let us make a commitment to preventive and long-term care.  Let us encourage home care as an alternative to nursing homes and give folks a little help to have their parents there.

Former President Bill Clinton

CMS Does Not Have Statutory Authority to Impose HHGM, Must Withdraw It

September 14, 2017 12:22 PM

As NAHC Report readers know, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) proposed on July 28, 2017, an entirely new payment system for Medicare home health services, scheduled to begin in CY2019. This proposal, the Home Health Groupings Model (HHGM), completely replaces the patient classification system with a new and untested model that classifies patients for purposes of determining payment amounts based on patient diagnosis, clinical condition, functional status, pre-home health care setting, and the time point when care is rendered in relation to the start of home health services.

In addition, the proposed model also institutes a 30-day unit of payment to replace the current 60-day unit of payment. Finally, this new model is not implemented in a budget neutral manner. NAHC is convinced the statutory language does not permit this wholesale revision of the law without Congressional action.

As NAHC points out in a letter to CMS Administrator Seema Verma, the HHGM proposal to establish a wholly new, non-budget neutral payment amount without authorization by Congress violates the Social Security Act and the proposal to replace the 60-day “episode” unit of payment with a 30-day payment “period” violates Section 1895(b)(2) of the Social Security Act. Threfore, this proposal must be withdrawn.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services lacks the authority to implement these changes because the statutory framework establishes a clear limit on the Secretary’s discretion to makes changes in the Medicare home health payment system without direct authorization and/or a mandate from Congress. The language of Section 1895(b)(3) and 1895(b)(2) unambiguously indicates that any modifications by CMS to the prospective payment system for home health must be budget neutral unless Congress indicates otherwise. Similarly, there is no authority to alter the 60-day episode unit of payment once it was established.

The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 mandated the development and implementation effective October 1, 2000 of a prospective payment system (“PPS”) for home health services. Under Section 1895(b)(1), the Secretary is empowered to establish “a prospective payment amount.” The authorization for the Medicare prospective payment amount, as originally enacted, required that it be done in a budget neutral manner.

The budget neutral implementation is reinforced in further amendments to the Social Security Act § 1895 and by Section 3131(d) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”). Moreover, and quite significantly, Congress clearly and unequivocally instructed that the “Secretary shall not reduce the standard prospective payment amount (or amounts) under section 1895 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395fff) applicable to home health services…”

While CMS is permitted to alter the payment model in a demonstration program, it is only authorized to do so if the alteration is budget neutral.

Furthermore, by proposing to change the unit of payment from a 60-day episode to a 30-day payment period, the Secretary ignores the statutory directive under Section 1895 that the standard payment amount be based upon the continued use of the episode of payment subject to the 4-year phase-in of the standard payment rate reduction. Accordingly, the Secretary would directly violate the statutory mandate to alter the unit of payment that is in effect.

Beyond the legal arguments, which are powerful, maintaining budget neutrality and the 60-day episodic payment model is simply better policy. The proposed system is untested, with a high risk of adverse unintended consequences given the radical changes proposed. Further, home health agencies are navigating through multiple consecutive years of payment rate reductions including a 4-year rate rebasing, productivity adjustments, case mix weight adjustments, market basket index limitations, and sequestration that have, in combination, reduced rates by over 20% in the past five years. Stabilization of the delivery system has yet to occur. As such, a non-budget neutral policy, such as HHGM, poses serious risks to Medicare patients, home health agencies, and Medicare itself. Those consequences are not merely speculative. Instead, the transition to the Interim Payment System and HH PPS between 1998 and 2000 is a historical lesson that should not be ignored. Over 4,000 home health agencies closed during that period with nearly 1.5 million fewer Medicare beneficiaries finding access to care in 2001 than in 1997.

Smart policy would dictate recognition that Medicare home health services remain a 60-day model. The patient plan of care will remain a 60-day plan. Physician certifications of eligibility will stay at 60 days. Patient assessments using OASIS will continue on a 60 day schedule. A payment period that is inconsistent with the rest of Medicare home health services architecture will only create unnecessary administrative burdens and confusion among caregivers. Doubling the number of billings is just one big part of that increased administrative burden and is inconsistent with the Secretary’s priority goal of reducing administrative burden on providers so that more time and resources can be devoted to providing high quality care.

Therefore, the Secretary must withdraw in its entirety, the Home Health Groupings Model included in the CY 2018 Proposed Rule.

NAHC urges CMS to withdraw the HHGM policy and instead work with stakeholders to develop a fully budget-neutral policy that does not limit access to beneficiaries or diminish provider resources.

This issue is NAHC’s top priority and will remain so until the policy is improved. Please stay tuned for further analysis and news about NAHC advocacy on behalf of our members and the millions of aged and disabled Americans they serve.

However, to defeat this payment rule before it brings havoc to the industry, we need home health leaders, employees and patients to make their voices heard by policymakers in Washington, D.C. Without your support and advocacy, this rule cannot be stopped. Please go to the NAHC Legislative Action Center and ask Congress to tell CMS to withdraw the payment rule.

See previous NAHC Report articles on the proposed HHGM:

CMS Must Withdraw the Proposed Home Health Groupings Model

Home Health Care Has Endured a Series of Rate Cuts Since 2009

NAHC Letter to CMS – Withdraw the Home Health Group Model

CMS’ Proposal Home Health Groupings Model Puts Entire Home Health System at Risk




©  National Association for Home Care & Hospice. All Rights Reserved.