42 C.F.R. § 405.2430

Basic requirements

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Filing procedures. (1) In response to a request from an entity that wishes to participate in the Medicare program, CMS enters into an agreement with an entity when all of the following occur:

(i) HRSA approves the entity as meeting the requirements of section 330 of the PHS Act.

(ii) The entity assures CMS that it meets the requirements specified in this subpart and part 491 of this chapter, as described in § 405.2434(a).

(iii) The FQHC terminates other provider agreements, unless the FQHC assures CMS that it is not using the same space, staff and resources simultaneously as a physician's office or another type of provider or supplier. A corporate entity may own other provider types as long as the provider types are distinct from the FQHC.

(2) CMS sends the entity a written notice of the disposition of the request.

(3) When the requirement of paragraph (a)(1) of this section is satisfied, CMS sends the entity two copies of the agreement. The entity must sign and return both copies of the agreement to CMS.

(4) If CMS accepts the agreement filed by the FQHC, CMS returns to the center one copy of the agreement with the notice of acceptance specifying the effective date (see § 489.11), as determined under § 405.2434.

(b) Prior HRSA FQHC determination. An entity applying to become a FQHC must do the following:

(1) Be determined by HRSA as meeting the applicable requirements of the PHS Act, as specified in § 405.2401(b).

(2) Receive approval by HRSA as a FQHC under section 330 of the PHS Act (42 U.S.C. 254b).

(c) Appeals. An entity is entitled to a hearing in accordance with part 498 of this chapter when CMS fails to enter into an agreement with the entity.

[57 FR 24978, June 12, 1992, as amended at 61 FR 14657, Apr. 3, 1996; 79 FR 25476, May 2, 2014]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 2015–2015 · leading case: Genesis Health Care, Inc. v. Soura, 165 F. Supp. 3d 443 (D.S.C. 2015).
Genesis Health Care, Inc. v. Soura, 165 F. Supp. 3d 443 (D.S.C. 2015). “32-1 at 5-8 (relying on *453 CMS Bulletins and 42 C.F.R. §§ 405.2430 , 405.2434). This is, in essence, an argument that generally applicable third-party liability provisions and provisions from other statutes (and regulations) trump Section 1396a(bb)’s specific requirement that…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.