For decades, behavioral health care was burdened by stigma, making access to quality services both difficult and expensive. However, recent shifts in societal attitudes, improved funding models, and advancements in technology have made mental health and substance abuse treatment more accessible than ever before. While this progress is largely beneficial, it has also opened the door to unethical providers seeking to exploit insurance reimbursements rather than genuinely help patients.
Although these unethical operators represent a minority, their actions have significantly influenced the behavioral health industry. In response, both federal and state governments have increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly targeting substance abuse treatment facilities to prevent fraudulent practices.
The Role of EKRA in Regulating Behavioral Health Providers
In 2018, the federal government passed the Eliminating Kickback in Recovery Act (EKRA) as part of a broader effort to curb fraudulent practices in the behavioral health space. This legislation was designed to close loopholes in existing laws, such as the federal anti-kickback statute, which traditionally applied only to federally funded programs like Medicare and Medicaid. Many addiction treatment services, however, are paid for out-of-pocket or through private insurance, leaving them outside the reach of previous regulations. EKRA aims to address this gap by imposing criminal penalties on unethical providers who engage in patient brokering or other forms of financial exploitation.
Under EKRA, recovery homes, clinical treatment facilities, and laboratories are prohibited from offering or receiving remuneration in exchange for patient referrals. Violations carry severe penalties, including fines of up to $200,000 per incident and potential prison sentences of up to 10 years.
Concerns About Unintended Consequences
While EKRA was established to combat fraudulent practices, some legal experts worry that its vague language and broad enforcement could inadvertently penalize ethical providers. During a recent webinar on behavioral health compliance, attorneys from Polsinelli, a national law firm, discussed the challenges posed by EKRA’s ambiguous regulations.
“There was a perception that existing laws didn’t reach that type of conduct—didn’t reach patient brokering [or] travel issues,” said Rick Rifenbark, a shareholder at Polsinelli. This loophole allowed unethical providers to operate within legal gray areas while exploiting patients and insurance programs.
One of the primary concerns surrounding EKRA is its potential impact on legitimate marketing practices. Many treatment facilities rely on call centers and referral agreements to connect with those in need, but EKRA’s restrictions could make these common practices legally questionable.
“So what’s unclear?” asked Paul Gomez, another Polsinelli shareholder. “A lot.”
Legal and Legislative Uncertainty
Some legislators have also expressed concerns about EKRA’s wording and potential unintended consequences. Congressman Frank Pallone of New Jersey criticized the law’s rushed implementation, stating that it “did not go through regular order and was not properly vetted.” He further noted that various stakeholders have raised concerns that the legislation’s language does not function as intended.
A particularly contentious issue is the interpretation of EKRA’s relationship to the federal anti-kickback statute. Some experts speculate that a critical typo may exist in the legislation’s text. The law states that EKRA should not apply to conduct that is “prohibited” under the anti-kickback statute, but some believe the intent was to exempt conduct that is “not” prohibited or is explicitly “permitted” under existing laws. This confusion leaves ethical providers in a precarious position, uncertain whether their standard business practices could result in legal action.
The Future of EKRA Enforcement
As EKRA enforcement gains momentum, behavioral health providers must navigate an evolving regulatory landscape with caution. Compliance efforts will need to be thorough, ensuring that marketing strategies, referral partnerships, and payment arrangements align with the law’s provisions.
Industry professionals and legal experts continue to call for greater clarity and potential amendments to EKRA to protect ethical providers while maintaining safeguards against fraud. Until then, treatment facilities must stay informed, consult legal counsel, and adopt compliance measures to mitigate risk.
Get Help Today
The behavioral health industry has made tremendous strides in accessibility and acceptance, but increased coverage has also led to heightened scrutiny. While EKRA was designed to curb unethical practices, its vague language presents challenges for legitimate providers trying to operate within the law.
As the industry adapts, collaboration between lawmakers, legal professionals, and treatment providers will be essential to refining regulations and ensuring that those who genuinely seek to help others can continue doing so without unnecessary legal obstacles. In the meantime, behavioral health providers must remain vigilant, prioritize compliance, and advocate for clearer legislative guidelines to support both ethical care and regulatory integrity.
