The text, verbatim
Everything above is derived from the text reproduced here. Read it
before relying on any summary.
§ 489.24(f) What a hospital with specialised capabilities may not refuse
Effective 1986-07-17
(f) Recipient hospital responsibilities. A participating hospital that has specialized capabilities or facilities (including, but not limited to, facilities such as burn units, shock-trauma units, neonatal intensive case units, or, with respect to rural areas, regional referral centers (which, for purposes of this subpart, mean hospitals meeting the requirements of referral centers found at § 412.96 of this chapter)) may not refuse to accept from a referring hospital within the boundaries of the United States an appropriate transfer of an individual who requires such specialized capabilities or facilities if the receiving hospital has the capacity to treat the individual.
Official text
The prohibition has four limits built into its own sentence. The referring hospital has to be within the boundaries of the United States. What is offered has to be an appropriate transfer, which is defined at (e)(2) and printed on the transfer page in this matrix. The individual has to require the specialised capabilities themselves. And the receiving hospital has to have the capacity to treat that individual. The list of specialised capabilities is open — 'including, but not limited to' — so burn units, shock-trauma units, neonatal intensive care units and regional referral centers are examples, not a closed set. The paragraph does not say who decides whether a capability a hospital holds is the one the individual requires.
§ 489.24(f)(1) It applies whether or not the hospital has an emergency department
Effective 1986-07-17
(1) The provisions of this paragraph (f) apply to any participating hospital with specialized capabilities, regardless of whether the hospital has a dedicated emergency department.
Official text
This answers in advance the question the screening page in this matrix spends its time on. Whether a hospital has a dedicated emergency department decides a great deal about paragraph (a). Under (f) it decides nothing: the paragraph applies either way. A hospital with a burn unit and no emergency department is inside (f).
§ 489.24(f)(2) The one class of individual the paragraph does not reach
Effective 1986-07-17
(2) The provisions of this paragraph (f) do not apply to an individual who has been admitted to a referring hospital under the provisions of paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section.
Official text
The exception is narrow and it points at one subparagraph: (d)(2)(i), the good-faith inpatient admission to stabilise an emergency medical condition. It does not name (d)(2)(ii), which covers inpatients admitted for elective diagnosis or treatment — that paragraph says the section is not applicable to them at all, so nothing needed saying here. The asymmetry is in the text and is reproduced rather than smoothed. Note the direction: admitting the individual as an inpatient in good faith is what takes the transfer outside (f).
§ 489.24(b)-capacity Capacity — the word the whole paragraph turns on
Effective 1986-07-17
Capacity means the ability of the hospital to accommodate the individual requesting examination or treatment of the transferred individual. Capacity encompasses such things as numbers and availability of qualified staff, beds and equipment and the hospital's past practices of accommodating additional patients in excess of its occupancy limits.
Official text
This is the definition (f) uses when it says 'has the capacity to treat the individual', and it is worth reading twice. It is written to cover the transferred individual as well as the one who walks in. And the first thing it names is staff — 'numbers and availability of qualified staff' — ahead of beds and equipment. The third item is the hospital's own past practice of taking patients beyond its occupancy limits, which makes what the hospital has done before part of what it can do now. Nothing here or in (f) says who measures any of this, at what hour, or what the measurement leaves behind.
§ 489.24(b)-hospital Hospital — the definition that brings small facilities inside the rule
Effective 1986-07-17
Hospital includes a critical access hospital as defined in section 1861(mm)(1) of the Act and a rural emergency hospital as defined in section 1861(kkk)(2).
Official text
Printed because the word 'hospital' in (f) carries this definition with it. A critical access hospital and a rural emergency hospital are inside it. Whether a particular facility holds specialised capabilities within the meaning of (f) is a different question, and this paragraph does not answer it.
§ 489.24(d)(2)(i) The admission that takes an individual out of (f)
Effective 1986-07-17
(i) If a hospital has screened an individual under paragraph (a) of this section and found the individual to have an emergency medical condition, and admits that individual as an inpatient in good faith in order to stabilize the emergency medical condition, the hospital has satisfied its special responsibilities under this section with respect to that individual.
Official text
This is the paragraph (f)(2) points at, and it is the reason the exception reads the way it does. Where a hospital has screened, found an emergency medical condition, and admitted the individual in good faith to stabilise it, the hospital has satisfied its special responsibilities under the section for that individual. There is then nothing left for (f) to attach to at the receiving end. The text does not say how long the good faith has to last, or what happens if the individual is admitted and then transferred the same night.
§ 489.24(e)(2) What 'appropriate' means — the class (f) is talking about
Effective 1986-07-17
(2) A transfer to another medical facility will be appropriate only in those cases in which—
Official text
Reproduced here for one reason: (f) prohibits refusing an appropriate transfer and does not define the word. The definition is this paragraph and its four subparagraphs. 'Only' means the four are conditions. If a transfer does not meet them, it is not the kind of transfer (f) is about — which is what makes the two paragraphs cut against each other in the way set out on the page.
§ 489.24(e)(2)(ii)(B) The receiving facility has to have agreed — the other half of the lock
Effective 1986-07-17
(B) Has agreed to accept transfer of the individual and to provide appropriate medical treatment;
Official text
Set this beside (f) and the two paragraphs point in opposite directions. An appropriate transfer requires the receiving facility to have agreed to accept. (f) says a hospital with specialised capabilities may not refuse to accept one. Where a hospital refuses, the transfer at that moment lacks the agreement (e)(2)(ii)(B) requires — and a transfer without it is not an appropriate transfer, which is the only class (f) speaks to. Both texts are printed here and the tension between them is described as a tension. This page does not resolve it, and it does not tell a hospital which paragraph to follow.
§ 489.24(g) Where (f) is enforced — and that it is discretionary
Effective 1986-07-17
(g) Termination of provider agreement. If a hospital fails to meet the requirements of paragraph (a) through (f) of this section, CMS may terminate the provider agreement in accordance with § 489.53.
Official text
(f) sits inside the range this paragraph names: failure to meet paragraph (a) through (f) is what opens the door to termination of the provider agreement. Two things about the wording are worth carrying. It is 'may terminate', not a duty — the paragraph commits CMS to nothing. And the route is Sec. 489.53, printed on the cell 10 page in this matrix. Nothing here or in (f) attaches a consequence to a single refusal.
§ 489.20(l) The sentence that makes Sec. 489.24 a term of the agreement
Effective 1994-06-22
(l) In the case of a hospital as defined in § 489.24(b) to comply with § 489.24.
Official text
This is the hinge. Sec. 489.24 is a condition of participation in its own right, but this is the paragraph that writes it into the provider agreement as something the hospital undertakes to do — the whole section, (f) included. It is also the reason the range in Sec. 489.24(g) matters: termination of the agreement is the sanction that sits behind an undertaking made here.
§ 489.20(m) The receiving hospital's own duty — and what it is aimed at
Effective 1994-06-22
(m) In the case of a hospital as defined in § 489.24(b), to report to CMS or the State survey agency any time it has reason to believe it may have received an individual who has been transferred in an unstable emergency medical condition from another hospital in violation of the requirements of § 489.24(e).
Official text
Read this next to (f) and the two duties point at different hospitals. (f) is about the receiver's own conduct. This paragraph is about the sender's: what has to be reported is an individual received in an unstable emergency medical condition in violation of (e). The threshold is doubly qualified — 'has reason to believe' and 'may have received' — and the hospital is not asked to reach a conclusion before it reports. The recipient may be CMS or the State survey agency; the paragraph does not say which one to choose, in what form, or by when. It gives no deadline.
§ 412.96(a) Who classifies a referral center — a payment provision (f) borrows
Effective 1985-03-29
(a) Criteria for classification as a referral center: Basic rule. CMS classifies a hospital as a referral center only if the hospital is a Medicare participating acute care hospital and meets the applicable criteria of paragraph (b) or (c) of this section.
Official text
Sec. 489.24(f) defines 'regional referral centers' by pointing here — a provision in part 412, which is about payment. Note the verbs. This paragraph says CMS classifies a hospital as a referral center; (f) says 'hospitals meeting the requirements of referral centers found at Sec. 412.96'. One is an act of classification, the other is a description of a state. A hospital can meet criteria without having been classified, and this page does not say whether (f) reaches it. What the two paragraphs do to each other is not stated in either.
§ 412.96(e) The payment the classification was built for — and its end date
Effective 1985-03-29
(e) Payment to rural referral centers. Effective for discharges occurring on or after April 1, 1988, and before October 1, 1994, a hospital that is located in a rural area and meets the criteria of paragraphs (b)(1), (b)(2) or (c) of this section is paid prospective payments for inpatient operating costs per discharge based on the applicable other urban payment rates as determined in accordance with § 412.63, as adjusted by the hospital's area wage index.
Official text
Printed for the date. The payment treatment this section was written to deliver runs to discharges before October 1, 1994. The classification criteria in (b) and (c) carry no such end date, and Sec. 489.24(f) points at those criteria with no time limit of its own. This page draws no conclusion from that. It reports that a paragraph whose payment effect has a closing date is used, without one, to mark out the scope of a duty that is still in force.
§ 412.96(g)(1)-(3) A hospital may cancel the classification (f) borrows
Effective 1985-03-29
(g) Hospital cancellation of referral center status.
(1) A hospital may at any time request cancellation of its status as a referral center and be paid prospective payments per discharge based on the applicable rural rate, as determined in accordance with subpart D of this part.
(2) The cancellation becomes effective no later than 30 days after the date the hospital submits its request.
(3) If a hospital requests that its referral center status be canceled, it may not be reclassified as a referral center unless it meets the qualifying criteria set forth in paragraph (a) of this section in effect at the time it reapplies.
Official text
The classification (f) uses can be given up: at any time on request, effective no later than 30 days after the request is submitted, and not recoverable without meeting the criteria again. Whether that changes anything about (f) is not stated in either provision, and (f) is written in terms of meeting requirements rather than holding a classification. This page prints both texts and says that the relationship between them is not written down anywhere in them.