PLS PODIATRY GROUP
NPI 1245216738, organization, Huntington Park, CA, Podiatrist
- Listed on the Medicare revocation list since February 28, 2023.
- Medicaid still paid claims in 1 later month, $2,751 in total.
Public list actions
Paid after the action
Months in which Medicaid paid claims for this provider after a public action that should have triggered a screening check. This is a record of payments, not a determination that they were improper.
| list | identity check | action date | window closed | months paid after | first | last | paid after | 12 months before |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Medicare revocation list 424.535(a)(19) affiliation that poses an undue risk | Exact NPI, name verified | Feb 28, 2023 | Mar 29, 2028 | 1 | Mar 2023 | Mar 2023 | $3K | $67K |
National provider registry
From the CMS NPPES Registry, refreshed daily.
| Name | PLS PODIATRY GROUP |
| Type | Organization |
| Status | Active |
| NPI issued | December 16, 2005, last updated June 14, 2022 |
| Practice location | 2661 E FLORENCE AVE, STE B, Huntington Park, CA 90255, 323-583-4440 |
| Mailing address | 2661 E FLORENCE AVE STE B, Huntington Park, CA 90255-4793 |
| Authorized official | CHRISTOPHER OTIKO (President) |
| Specialties | Podiatrist (213E00000X, primary, license E41591 CA) |
Procedures billed
The specific codes behind the dollars. Medicaid figures come from T-MSIS (2018 to 2024) and are compared with every other provider billing the same code; Medicare figures come from the 2024 physician and supplier file and compare this provider's submitted charge with what Medicare allowed, against the usual ratio for that code.
| code | what it is | paid | share | per patient-month | typical | rank among providers | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 99213 | Established patient office or other outpatient visit with low level od decision making, if using time, 20 minutes or more | $44K | 51% | $32 | $44 (top 5% from $110) | too few months to rank | |
| 99348 | Residence visit for established patient with low level of medical decision making, per day, if using time, at least 30 minutes | $15K | 18% | $43 | $17 (top 5% from $105) | too few months to rank | |
| 99334 | Domiciliary/rest home visit established level 1 (retired 2023) | $6K | 6% | $32 | $11 (top 5% from $47) | 89th percentile | |
| 11721 | Removal of fingernails or toenails, 6 or more nails | $5K | 6% | $2.38 | $9.21 (top 5% from $30) | 5th percentile | |
| 11755 | Biopsy of fingernail or toenail | $4K | 5% | $5.92 | $55 (top 5% from $135) | too few months to rank | |
| 93923 | Complete ultrasound study of arm and leg arteries | $4K | 5% | $22 | $46 (top 5% from $134) | too few months to rank | |
| 11056 | Removal of noncancer thickened skin growth, 2-4 growths | $4K | 4% | $2.52 | $11 (top 5% from $46) | too few months to rank | |
| 87798 | Detection test by nucleic acid for organism, amplified probe technique | $2K | 2% | $165 | $33 (top 5% from $227) | too few months to rank |
In this area
399 providers in Los Angeles County, CA carry an indicator in the public record, with $129.6M at stake between them. The most common is part of a provider network, on 347 of them, followed by paid after a public list action on 36. 52 are tier 1: documented action, then payment.
| tier | provider | at stake | why |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | BURBANK PREFERRED PROVIDER MEDICAL GROUP, INC Burbank, CA, ranked 17 | $67K |
|
| 1 | GOLDEN STAR LABS LLC Los Angeles, CA, ranked 32 | $41.0M |
|
| 1 | MATIAS CLINICAL LABORATORY INC Baldwin Park, CA, ranked 43 | $3.8M |
|
| 1 | HEALTHSMART PACIFIC INC Long Beach, CA, ranked 52 | $1.6M |
|
| 1 | LINDA WARREN-WATSON Lancaster, CA, ranked 71 | $828K |
|
| 1 | SOHRAB MOSHIRI Woodland Hills, CA, ranked 82 | $483K |
|
| 1 | QUALITY FAMILY HOSPICE CARE INC Tarzana, CA, ranked 92 | $375K |
|
| 1 | MARATHON HOSPICE CARE INC. North Hollywood, CA, ranked 95 | $368K |
|
Recent enforcement in CA
All releasesDepartment of Justice and HHS-OIG releases for this state, newest first. Each opens in a new tab.
Referral packet
The packet is a draft for a reviewer. It reads every public record behind this case, states what the records show with a citation for each finding, names the regulation each finding relates to, and lists the ordinary explanations to rule out first. It never asserts intent.