Vermont Banned Concurrent ABA Billing. Revenue at Affected Clinics Dropped 17%. Your State Could Be Next. \| StreamABA [ ![StreamABA](https://streamaba.com/build/assets/logo-dark-Bta4omRy.svg) ](/) [Home](https://streamaba.com) [Blog](https://streamaba.com/blog) [ Log in ](https://streamaba.com/login) [ Goto the Live Demo ](#get-started) [Home](https://streamaba.com) [Blog](https://streamaba.com/blog) [Log in](https://streamaba.com/login) [ Goto the Live Demo ](#get-started) 1. [Blog](https://streamaba.com/blog) 2. / 3. Vermont Banned Concurrent ABA Billing. Revenue at Affected Clinics Dropped 17%. Your State Could Be Next. billing Vermont Banned Concurrent ABA Billing. Revenue at Affected Clinics Dropped 17%. Your State Could Be Next. =========================================================================================================== Vermont banned concurrent ABA billing of 97153+97155 citing OIG's Wisconsin audit. Clinics lost 16-17% revenue. Most states are silent on concurrent billing policy — that silence is an OIG audit target. What to do now. 8 min read April 21, 2026 StreamABA Team Share [ ](https://x.com/intent/tweet?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstreamaba.com%2Fblog%2F2026%2F04%2Fvermont-concurrent-billing-ban-aba-medicaid&text=Vermont+Banned+Concurrent+ABA+Billing.+Revenue+at+Affected+Clinics+Dropped+17%25.+Your+State+Could+Be+Next.) [ ](https://www.linkedin.com/sharing/share-offsite/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstreamaba.com%2Fblog%2F2026%2F04%2Fvermont-concurrent-billing-ban-aba-medicaid) [ ](https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A%2F%2Fstreamaba.com%2Fblog%2F2026%2F04%2Fvermont-concurrent-billing-ban-aba-medicaid) billing compliance medicaid state-policy ![](/images/blog/2026/04/vermont-concurrent-billing-ban-aba-medicaid.jpg) Revenue Dropped 17% and Nobody Changed a Rate --------------------------------------------- In November 2025, Vermont’s Department of Vermont Health Access (DVHA) issued an ABA coding update. Effective January 1, 2026, Vermont Medicaid would no longer reimburse for CPT codes 97153 and 97155 billed simultaneously for the same patient. That’s the concurrent billing ban. It took effect with about six weeks of runway. Revenue at Keene Perspectives, an ABA clinic in Hartford, Vermont, dropped **16% in January and February** — the first two full months under the new policy. Other Vermont providers reported per-client payment reductions of **15% to 50%**. The clinics losing the most were those with heavier BCBA supervision time per session — precisely the ones doing high-quality work. Vermont didn’t cut its reimbursement rate. It changed a billing rule. And the financial impact hit as hard as any rate cut we’ve covered this year. Children are being discharged early. One family lost six planned months of services when their clinic’s economics could no longer support the caseload. This is not a Vermont story. Vermont is the outcome. The story is the OIG audit that triggered it — and that audit applies to every state where you currently bill both codes on the same claim. --- What Concurrent Billing of 97153 and 97155 Actually Means --------------------------------------------------------- In the standard ABA session model: - A **behavior technician (BT or RBT)** runs the session directly with the child - A **BCBA** supervises — directing the technician in real time, adjusting protocols, analyzing data The CPT codes for this: - **97153** (Adaptive Behavior Treatment by Protocol, Technician Administered): billed for the tech’s face-to-face time with the child - **97155** (Adaptive Behavior Treatment with Protocol Modification, by Physician or Other QHP): billed when the BCBA is actively directing and modifying the session When both happen at the same time — the tech is delivering treatment while the BCBA is directing — billing both 97153 and 97155 for the same time period is called concurrent billing. The AMA’s coding framework has historically supported this. The ABA Coding Coalition, CASP, and ABAI have all stated that concurrent billing of 97153 and 97155 is an “expected component of the AMA CPT codes” — because the two providers are genuinely delivering different, simultaneous services. The BCBA isn’t doing what the tech is doing. They’re doing different things at the same time. Most state Medicaid programs and commercial payers allow it, at least implicitly, by not prohibiting it. Vermont just prohibited it. --- The Wisconsin OIG Audit That Triggered Vermont’s Decision --------------------------------------------------------- In 2025, the HHS Office of Inspector General published its audit of Wisconsin’s fee-for-service Medicaid ABA payments. OIG found that Wisconsin had made at least **$18.5 million in improper payments** — and embedded in the findings was a specific flag: Wisconsin had no clear concurrent billing policy, and the absence of that policy had enabled billing patterns the OIG characterized as improper. The OIG report noted that Wisconsin’s own guidance had muddied the waters — the state told providers that 97155 could be billed when a BCBA merely *observed* a technician, even without any protocol modification. That interpretation inflated 97155 billing. And without a clear concurrent billing rule, overlapping 97153 and 97155 claims contributed to the improper payment tally. Vermont read that audit and drew a direct line. The DVHA coding update published in November 2025 stated its rationale explicitly: Wisconsin OIG identified concurrent billing as a contributing factor. Without a clear Vermont policy, the state faced potential “multimillion-dollar liabilities for the state and providers.” Banning the practice was cleaner than trying to define acceptable and unacceptable concurrent billing within a policy that auditors could second-guess. Vermont’s Medicaid policy director characterized concurrent billing as “essentially duplicating payments” — billing twice for one child’s time, once for the tech and once for the BCBA supervising that tech. --- CASP Says Vermont Is Wrong. Oregon Took the Opposite Approach. -------------------------------------------------------------- Vermont’s interpretation is contested — directly and by name. CASP — the Council of Autism Service Providers — launched an advocacy campaign challenging Vermont’s policy change. CASP’s position: billing 97153 and 97155 concurrently is consistent with AMA CPT guidance because the services are genuinely distinct. The BCBA and the tech are doing different work at the same time. This is not double-billing for the same service; it is billing for two different services happening simultaneously. The AMA CPT supplemental guidance is on CASP’s side in principle: it explicitly states that 97153 and 97155 may be reported concurrently when the qualified health professional (BCBA) is directing a technician who is simultaneously running a session with the client present. Oregon landed on a different policy than Vermont. In January 2024, the Oregon Health Authority issued an explicit concurrent billing announcement: **97153 and 97155 can be billed at the same time**, provided: 1. Both services are medically necessary and clinically appropriate 2. The technician’s activities are within the scope of the supervision 3. The concurrent units do not exceed **four units (one hour)** for both codes combined 4. Documentation meets Oregon Administrative Rule 410-172-0620 requirements Oregon allowed concurrent billing with documentation guardrails. Vermont banned it outright. The AMA says it’s supported by coding standards. The OIG found it contributed to improper payments in Wisconsin. Every ABA practice in a state that hasn’t explicitly addressed concurrent billing is sitting in the middle of this disagreement — and the OIG is the one with subpoena power. --- Why “My State Hasn’t Said Anything” Is Not Safe ----------------------------------------------- The OIG’s multi-state ABA audit series launched in 2022, targeting seven states. Four audits are complete: StatePublishedImproper Payments100% Deficiency RateIndianaDec 2024$56MYesWisconsinJul 2025$18.5MYesMaineJan 2026$45.6MYesColoradoFeb 2026$77.8MYes Three more state audits are in progress. The OIG hasn’t published which states they are — but it has confirmed the series continues. Every state audited has had concurrent billing as one dimension of the improper payment findings. Every state has found a 100% deficiency rate across sampled claims. The pattern is not a regional fluke. It’s an industry-wide compliance failure that the OIG is systematically documenting. When an OIG audit finds improper payments in a state, the state Medicaid program faces federal pressure to refund the federal share. To prevent future findings, states have two options: define a policy that limits concurrent billing to documented, medically justified scenarios, or ban it. Vermont chose option 2. It’s faster and easier to audit. Other states that get audited will face the same choice. States without explicit concurrent billing policies are not in a better position than Vermont was before January 1. They’re in the same position Wisconsin was in when it was audited: no clear policy, OIG exposure, and the audit result now public record. --- Modeling the Financial Impact on Your Practice ---------------------------------------------- The 16–17% overall revenue drop at Vermont clinics reflects how much of their Medicaid billing involved concurrent 97153 + 97155. Practices with heavier BCBA supervision time per session — more hours of 97155 per week — took bigger hits. The 50% per-client reduction figure reflects clients where a BCBA was supervising through most of the session. For a concrete model: A practice billing **$80,000/month** in Medicaid, where 20% of total units are 97155 billed concurrently with 97153, would lose approximately $16,000/month if those concurrent 97155 claims were eliminated — a **20% revenue reduction without any change in services delivered**. That is not a hypothetical. That’s Vermont, with real clinics and real client discharges. The practices most exposed are those with: - Heavy BCBA supervision models (BCBAs present in session frequently) - Many clients requiring intensive, real-time protocol adjustments - Billing 97155 for a significant share of total service hours If that describes your practice, you should know your concurrent billing exposure number before you hear about a bulletin from your state Medicaid program. --- Action Steps for This Week -------------------------- **1. Pull your concurrent billing data.** Run a report for the past 90 days showing every claim where 97153 and 97155 were billed for the same patient on the same day in overlapping time windows. Calculate the dollar volume of 97155 billed concurrently with 97153. That number is your maximum exposure if your state adopts Vermont’s policy. **2. Check your state Medicaid provider manual.** Search for “concurrent billing,” “97153 97155,” and “overlapping codes.” If your state has an explicit policy allowing concurrent billing with conditions (like Oregon), confirm you’re meeting those conditions. If your state has no policy, you’re in the same position Vermont was — and you’re in a state the OIG may audit. **3. Audit your 97155 documentation.** OIG findings in Wisconsin included a specific finding: 97155 was being billed for mere BCBA presence, without documented protocol modification. Your 97155 session notes need to show that the BCBA was actively directing and adjusting the session — not just that they were in the room. Documentation that reads “supervisor observed session” is not sufficient for 97155. Documentation needs to describe the specific clinical decision, protocol change, or real-time guidance provided. **4. Understand your state’s concurrent billing exposure relative to Oregon’s benchmark.** Even if your state hasn’t addressed concurrent billing, Oregon’s four-unit limit is a reasonable practical ceiling for concurrent 97155 billing per session. Practices billing more 97155 than 97153 for the same session are outliers by any reasonable clinical model. **5. Brief your billing team on this issue.** If your RCM vendor or billing staff hasn’t flagged Vermont’s policy change and the Wisconsin OIG finding as relevant to your billing practices, that’s a gap. This is actively being used as a basis for state Medicaid policy changes. --- The Pattern Continues --------------------- Vermont’s concurrent billing ban is one piece of the same pressure system we’ve been tracking: - The [Colorado OIG audit](/blog/colorado-oig-audit-285-million-improper-aba-payments) — the fourth in the [OIG’s multi-state ABA audit series](https://oig.hhs.gov/reports/work-plan/browse-work-plan-projects/srs-a-25-029/) — has found improper payments in 100% of sampled claims across every state audited, and Wisconsin’s concurrent billing finding is now driving state policy changes - [Documentation failures by CPT code](/blog/oig-audit-trail-documentation-failures-by-cpt-code) are the primary mechanism for those findings — and concurrent billing without adequate 97155 documentation is exactly that kind of failure - [Georgia’s CareSource rate cut](/blog/georgia-caresource-aba-rate-cut) and [New York’s 25% reduction](/blog/new-york-aba-rate-cut-autism-learning-partners-exits) reflect states and payers pressing ABA costs from every angle simultaneously Billing rule changes can hit revenue faster than rate cuts. A rate cut requires a rulemaking process, a public notice period, and sometimes a state plan amendment. A billing policy change requires a bulletin and an effective date. Vermont gave six weeks of notice. It cost some providers 17% of their revenue. The action items above don’t require waiting for your state to act. Pull the data now. The number you find is the risk you’re carrying today. --- *StreamABA helps ABA practices stay audit-ready and compliant as payer and regulatory requirements change. Questions about your concurrent billing exposure or documentation practices? Reach out at **hello@streamaba.com** — we’ll walk through it with you.* *Follow us on [LinkedIn](https://www.linkedin.com/company/stream-aba) and [X](https://x.com/streamaba) for more industry updates.* [ All posts ](https://streamaba.com/blog) ![]() Related posts ------------- [Browse all posts](https://streamaba.com/blog) - [ ![](/images/blog/2026/03/oig-audit-trail-documentation-failures-by-cpt-code.jpg) compliance ### The OIG Audit Trail: What 4 State Audits Mean for Your ABA Practice's Documentation The Wall Street Journal just put ABA billing under a national spotlight. Four HHS OIG audits have now found documentation failures in 100% of sampled claims across four states. Here's exactly what the auditors flagged, mapped to specific CPT codes, and what your software should be catching before claims go out the door. Mar 11, 2026 9 min read ](https://streamaba.com/blog/2026/03/oig-audit-trail-documentation-failures-by-cpt-code) - [ ![](/images/blog/2026/03/colorado-oig-audit-285-million-improper-aba-payments.jpg) compliance ### Colorado OIG Audit: $285 Million in Improper ABA Payments — The Largest Yet The fourth HHS OIG audit just dropped. Colorado's Medicaid program made at least $285.2 million in improper and potentially improper ABA payments in 2022–2023. Every single sampled record had problems. Three more states are still coming. Mar 2, 2026 5 min read ](https://streamaba.com/blog/2026/03/colorado-oig-audit-285-million-improper-aba-payments) - [ ![](/images/blog/2026/04/georgia-caresource-aba-rate-cut.jpg) payers ### CareSource Georgia Just Cut ABA Rates 20%. Accept the Cut or Lose Your Contract. CareSource Georgia notified ABA providers they'll be reimbursed at 80% of the state Medicaid fee schedule starting early May — take the cut or lose the contract. With Georgia's entire CMO landscape reshuffling in July and no rate guidance from three incoming payers, Georgia practices face a financial one-two punch with no easy moves. Apr 13, 2026 8 min read ](https://streamaba.com/blog/2026/04/georgia-caresource-aba-rate-cut) - [ ![](/images/blog/2026/04/new-york-aba-rate-cut-autism-learning-partners-exits.jpg) compliance ### New York's 25% ABA Rate Cut Is Complete. Autism Learning Partners Just Closed Its Medicaid Panels. On April 1, 2026, the second of two 12.5% Medicaid rate cuts landed for New York ABA providers — completing a 25% reduction mandated in the state budget. Sixteen days later, Autism Learning Partners announced it is closing all New York Medicaid panels to new patients. New York now pays less for ABA than Texas. Apr 20, 2026 7 min read ](https://streamaba.com/blog/2026/04/new-york-aba-rate-cut-autism-learning-partners-exits) Live demo · No sales call Ready to Streamline your practice? ------------------------------------ Get instant access to a live demo of the all-in-one ABA platform built by clinicians, for clinicians. No sales call. HIPAA compliant · Signed BAA · Built for ABA Website Work email Goto the Live Demo ![](https://streamaba.com/build/assets/icon-BglRoXWC.svg) [ ![StreamABA](https://streamaba.com/build/assets/logo-dark-Bta4omRy.svg) ](/) The all-in-one practice management platform built specifically for ABA therapy providers. Website Work email Get Demo [ ](https://x.com/streamaba) [ ](https://www.linkedin.com/company/stream-aba) [ ](https://instagram.com/streamaba) [ 👍 ](https://www.facebook.com/people/Stream-ABA/61587347484176/) #### Product - [Intake](https://streamaba.com/features/intake) - [Communication](https://streamaba.com/features/communication) - [Pipeline Boards](https://streamaba.com/features/pipeline-boards) - [Tasks & Automation](https://streamaba.com/features/tasks-automation) - [Integrations](https://streamaba.com/features/integrations) - [Analyst Scorecard](https://streamaba.com/features/analyst-scorecard) - [Practice Marketing](https://streamaba.com/aba-practice-marketing) #### Resources - [Free ABA resources](https://streamaba.com/resources) - [ABA Medicaid rates](https://streamaba.com/tools/aba-medicaid-rates) - [Revenue Calculator](https://streamaba.com/tools/aba-revenue-calculator) #### Company - [Blog](https://streamaba.com/blog) #### Contact - [ Contact Support ](https://streamaba.com/support) © 2026 STREAM ABA LLC. All rights reserved. [Privacy Policy](https://streamaba.com/legal/privacy-policy) [Terms of Service](https://streamaba.com/legal/terms-of-service)