US · guidance
CMS SOM App. L, Tag Q-0080
§416.43 Condition for Coverage: Quality Assessment and Performance
Improvement
The ASC must develop, implement and maintain an ongoing, data-driven quality
assessment and performance improvement (QAPI) program.
Interpretive Guidelines: §416.43
The QAPI CfC requires an ASC to take a proactive, comprehensive and ongoing
approach to improving the quality and safety of the surgical services it delivers. The
QAPI CfC presumes that ASCs employ a systems approach to evaluating their systems
and processes, identifying problems that have occurred or that potentially might result
from the ASC’s practices and getting to root causes of problems rather than just
superficially addressing one problem at a time.
From a survey perspective, the focus of the QAPI condition is not on whether an ASC
has any deficient practices, but rather on whether it has an effective, ongoing system in
place for identifying problematic events, policies, or practices and taking actions to
remedy them, and then following up on these remedial actions to determine if they were
effective in improving performance and quality. QAPI programs work best in an
environment that fixes problems rather than assigning blame.
For surveyors this can sometimes pose difficult challenges, because it requires a
balancing act. ASCs are not relieved of their obligation to comply with all Medicare
CfCs, and surveyors are obligated when they find evidence of violations of a CfC to cite
accordingly. However, surveyors generally should avoid using the ASC’s own QAPI
program data and analyses as evidence of violations of other CfCs. For example, an ASC
that identifies problems with infection control through its QAPI program and takes
effective actions to reduce the potential for transmission of infection would be taking
actions consistent with the QAPI CfC. Absent evidence independently collected by the
surveyors of current noncompliance with the infection control CfC, it would not be
appropriate for surveyors to use the infection control information in the ASC’s QAPI
program as evidence of violations of the infection control CfC. There can be egregious
cases under investigation where it might be appropriate to use QAPI program information
as evidence of a deficiency, but these cases should be the exception rather than the rule.
CMS does not prescribe a particular QAPI program; it provides each ASC with the
flexibility to develop its own program. Each program must, however, satisfy the
regulatory criteria:
• Ongoing – i.e., the program is a continuing one, not just a one-time effort.
Evidence of this would include, but is not limited to, things like collection by the
ASC of quality data at regular intervals; analysis of the updated data at regular
intervals; and updated records of actions taken to address quality problems
identified in the analyses, as well as new data collection to determine if the
corrective actions were effective.
• Data-driven – i.e., the program must identify in a systematic manner what data it
will collect to measure various aspects of quality of care; the frequency of data
collection; how the data will be collected and analyzed; and evidence that the
program uses the data collected to assess quality and stimulate performance
improvement.
Survey Procedures: §416.43
When there is a team surveying the ASC, survey of the QAPI Condition should be
coordinated by one surveyor.
History
Rev. 95, Issued: 12-12-13, Effective: 06-07-13, Implementation: 06-07-13
Provenance
- Source
- cms.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-07-22
- Edition
- som-2026-07-22
- Content hash
243e47ad22e5cdb9d96571b5976ddd9fe080ee6506a4e2eeb53c850e98418a2a
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.