Whenever there is an extrapolated audit, we tend to attack it on two fronts. We hire an expert statistician to debunk the extrapolation, and a clinical expert will testify to the compliance clinically.
This two-fold attack has been successful throughout the years, mostly, I believe, because on the government side, their work is – how can I say it? Sloppy. I remember back in 2013, when I had one of many New Mexico clients. One of the clients was accused of owing over $12 million. The amount was extrapolated. On the stand during cross-examination, on behalf of the State of New Mexico, the assistant attorney general testified that he had conducted the extrapolation and that he was qualified, in his opinion, because he took a statistics course in college. We won.
Most extrapolations use the RAT-STATs model. I am no statistician. But I do know that most of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) provider extrapolations use RAT-STATs, which is a computer simulation that determines extrapolations. I actually assumed that RAT-STATs was a legally required simulation. I mean, if you are going to implement financial penalties against providers, shouldn’t the method be identical in all cases? These extrapolations declare a 90 or 95-percent confidence level, not 100 percent.
Two new extrapolation cases came in earlier this year. Both extrapolations used the Monte Carlo simulation, which I had not encountered previously. Obviously, I did some digging. A simple Google search will offer you a free two-week trial.
I turned to the regulations. It appears that no particular model is required for calculating overpayment extrapolations, but RAT-STATS is recommended by OIG.
Through my research, I discovered that our friend and frequent guest panelist of Monitor Mondays, Frank Cohen, had discussed the Monte Carlo simulation on RACmonitor back in 2021. He said that a small subset of Medicare Administrative Contractors (MACs) and Qualified Independent Contractors (QICs) were using the Monte Carlo simulation. But he also reported that $41.5 million of the $42 million involved in the Monte Carlo simulations were reversed due to its use. That tells me that the Monte Carlo method may not have a 90-percent confidence rate.
I phoned a friend – Sean Weiss, an expert in Medicare and Medicaid audit and extrapolations. He informed me that the Monte Carlo simulation method is basically a joke. Any auditor worth its salt would use RAT-STATs. So, why did these two recent audits of mine use Monte Carlo? I do not know yet, but will find out and report back.
As I said, OIG recommends RAT-STATs. If you visit OIG’s website, it says this of RAT-STATs:
“RAT-STATS is a free statistical software package that providers can download to assist in a claims review. The package created by OIG, in the late 1970s, is also the primary statistical tool for OIG’s Office of Audit Services.” (Did you know RAT-STATs was created by OIG? News to me!)
It goes on to note that among other tasks, the software “assists the user in selecting random samples and estimating improper payments. We have attempted to make RAT-STATS as user-friendly as possible, keeping in mind the program uses technical statistical terms. OIG does not provide technical support for RAT-STATS.”
Then, most importantly, it notes that although OIG does not require the use of RAT-STATS, many providers download the software in their efforts to fulfill the claims review requirements for corporate integrity agreements or provider self-disclosure protocols.
RAT-STATs versus Monte Carlo. I do not know the winner yet.
Programming note: Listen to healthcare attorney Knicole Emanuel’s “RAC Report” segment every Monday on Monitor Mondays with Chuck Buck.
Last week I read a research letter dealing with family physician burnout published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Internal Medicine. It
I am not a proponent of measuring the impact of clinical documentation integrity (CDI) departments by case mix index (CMI) or complication/comorbidity capture rates (CCs/MCCs).
Please log in to your account to comment on this article.
Gain clarity and confidence in OB‑GYN coding with this expert‑led webcast featuring Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS‑P, CPEDC, COPC. You’ll learn how to apply global maternity package rules accurately, select the right CPT codes for procedures and visits, and identify documentation gaps that lead to denials. With practical guidance and real examples, this session helps you strengthen compliance, reduce audit risk, and ensure accurate reimbursement for women’s health services.
Uncover essential coding insights with nationally recognized coding authority Kay Piper, RHIA, CDIP, CCS. Through ICD10monitor’s interactive, on‑demand webcast series, Kay walks you through the AHA’s 2026 ICD‑10‑CM/PCS Quarterly Coding Clinics, translating each update into practical, easy‑to‑apply guidance designed to sharpen precision, ensure compliance, and strengthen day‑to‑day decision‑making. Available shortly after each official release.
Uncover critical guidance on the ICD-10-CM/PCS code updates. Kay Piper reviews and explains ICD-10-CM/PCS coding guidelines in the AHA’s fourth quarter 2026 ICD-10-CM/PCS Coding Clinic in an easy to access on-demand webcast.
Uncover critical guidance on the ICD-10-CM/PCS code updates. Kay Piper reviews and explains ICD-10-CM/PCS coding guidelines in the AHA’s third quarter 2026 ICD-10-CM/PCS Coding Clinic in an easy to access on-demand webcast.
Federal auditors are intensifying their focus on inpatient psychiatric facilities, using advanced data analytics to spotlight outliers and pursue high‑dollar repayments. In this high‑impact webcast, Michael Calahan, PA, MBA, Compliance Officer and V.P., Hospital & Physician Compliance, breaks down what regulators are really targeting in IPF-PPS admissions, documentation, treatment and discharge planning. Attendees will learn practical steps to tighten processes, avoid common audit triggers and protect reimbursement and reduce the risk of multimillion-dollar repayment demands.
In this timely session, Stacey Shillito, CDIP, CPMA, CCS, CCS-P, CPEDC, COPC, breaks down the complexities of Medical Decision Making (MDM) documentation so providers can confidently capture the true complexity of their care. Attendees will learn practical, efficient strategies to ensure documentation aligns with current E/M guidelines, supports accurate coding, and reduces audit risk, all without adding to charting time.
Join Ronald Hirsch, MD, FACP, CHCQM for The PEPPER Returns – Risk and Opportunity at Your Fingertips, a practical webcast that demystifies the PEPPER and shows you how to turn complex claims data into actionable insights. Dr. Hirsch will explain how to interpret key measures, identify compliance risks, uncover missed revenue opportunities, and understand new updates in the PEPPER, all to help your organization stay ahead of audits and use this powerful data proactively.
Stay ahead of the 2026-2027 audit surge with “Top 10 Audit Targets for 2026-2027 for Hospitals & Physicians: Protect Your Revenue,” a high-impact webcast led by Michael Calahan, PA, MBA. This concise session gives hospitals and physicians clear insight into the most likely federal audit targets, such as E/M services, split/shared and critical care, observation and admissions, device credits, and Two-Midnight Rule changes, and shows how to tighten documentation, coding, and internal processes to reduce denials, recoupments, and penalties. Attendees walk away with practical best practices to protect revenue, strengthen compliance, and better prepare their teams for inevitable audits.
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 →
BLOOM INTO SAVINGS! Get 25% OFF during our spring sale through March 27. Use code SPRING26 at checkout to claim this offer.
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
