PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 24, 2011
Medicare Orthotics and Prosthetics Improvement Act of 2011 - Amends title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act, for application of quality standards for certain accredited suppliers of prosthetic devices, orthotics, and certain prosthetics, to require the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to designate and approve an independent accreditation organization with respect to such suppliers only if that organization is the American Board for Certification in Orthotics and Prosthetics, Inc. or the Board for Orthotist/ Prosthetist Certification (or a program with essentially equivalent accreditation and approval standards). Exempts from such standards any suppliers who: (1) are physicians, occupational therapists, or physical therapists licensed or otherwise regulated by the state in which they practice; and (2) receive Medicare payments. Applies to custom-fitted orthotics the special payment rules for certain prosthetics and custom–fabricated orthotics.
Modifies the Medicare payment rules for orthotics and prosthetics to account for practitioner qualifications and complexity of care.
Directs the Secretary to report to Congress on: (1) HHS steps taken to ensure that the state licensure and accreditation requirements are enforced, and (2) the effects of requirements of this Act on the occurrence of Medicare fraud and abuse with respect to orthotics and prosthetics.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the Chief Actuary of the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services to submit to Congress a projection of the effect on cumulative federal spending under Medicare part B (Supplementary Medical Insurance) for 2012-2016 that will result from implementation of this Act. Requires the Secretary, if the Chief Actuary projects that implementation of this Act will not result in a cumulative spending reduction of at least $250 million for 2012-2016, to issue an interim final regulation to strengthen the licensure, accreditation, and quality standards applicable to orthotics and prosthetics suppliers in order to produce such a cumulative reduction by the end of 2016. Exempts from such regulation any qualified physical therapist or qualified occupational therapist.
People & committees
Rep. Berkley, Shelley [D-NV-1] · D–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1958 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1958 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1958 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1958 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.