PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Health.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jul 13, 2015
Hospice Care Access Improvement Act of 2015
This bill directs the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to select one Medicare administrative contractor to conduct a one-year demonstration program during FY2016 in all hospice programs under the contractor's jurisdiction to test revisions to the methodology for determining hospice payment rates under title XVIII (Medicare) of the Social Security Act contained in the "Fiscal Year 2016 Hospice Wage Index and Payment Rate Update and Hospice Quality Reporting Requirements," published on May 5, 2015, by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services.
No revisions to the hospice payment methodology may be made for FY2016-FY2017, except for demonstration program purposes. HHS shall implement the proposed hospice payment methodology revisions beginning with FY2018 after:
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
taking into account an evaluation of the demonstration program, and
making any necessary changes to the revisions.
HHS shall implement a process for the medical review of hospice care furnished by a hospice program identified according to certain multiple factors, such as the percentage of patients discharged after receiving hospice care for between 120 and 180 days and who were alive upon discharge.
HHS shall also develop and publish guidance for hospice programs to develop interventions to reduce hospital admissions and visits to hospital emergency departments by hospice patients.
Medicare shall cover pre-hospice evaluation and counseling services performed by a registered nurse employed by a hospice program.
A skilled nursing facility (SNF) shall make a good faith effort to contract with more than one hospice program participating in the Medicare program that provides services in the area served by the SNF, if more than one hospice program is available to serve SNF residents.
SNF residents shall have the right to be fully informed of any financial interest the SNF has in any hospice program to which a resident is referred.
Any hospital discharge planning evaluation must evaluate, for an individual likely to need hospice care, the availability of such care through hospice programs that:
participate in the Medicare program and serve the area in which the patient resides, and
request to be listed by the hospital as available.
People & committees
Rep. Reed, Tom [R-NY-23] · R–NY
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 House Committee on Ways and Means.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 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.3037 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.3037 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.3037 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.3037 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.