Documents show Medicare's AI care-approval pilot launched before it was ready
FOIA records reveal a vendor warned CMS its AI tool for approving or denying certain Medicare procedures wouldn't be ready in time — the agency launched anyway.
What happened: Documents obtained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show that a Medicare pilot using AI to approve or deny certain care was rolled out in a hurry, with more than a thousand pages revealing problems along the way. The program, called WISeR (Wasteful and Inappropriate Service Reduction), launched in January and requires providers to get pre-approval before performing procedures like skin substitute treatments and epidural pain injections. It runs in New Jersey, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Arizona, and Washington, and is set to continue until 2031.
Why it matters: This isn't a private insurer experimenting with AI — it's the federal Medicare program, which covers tens of millions of older and disabled Americans, using an algorithm to help decide whether specific treatments get paid for. Prior authorization already frustrates patients and doctors when done by humans; adding AI to that gatekeeping role raises the stakes if the system wasn't actually ready when it went live, since a denial or delay can mean a patient waits longer for pain relief or wound care.
How it works, plainly: Under WISeR, providers in the pilot states must submit a request before delivering certain outpatient services CMS has flagged as prone to waste or misuse. An AI-assisted review process then helps determine whether the request looks appropriate, feeding into a decision to approve or deny coverage. It's designed as a targeted test — not a nationwide rule — covering a narrow list of procedures rather than all Medicare care, with the stated goal of catching services that don't meet medical necessity standards.
The rollout: The FOIA documents show at least one company building tools for WISeR told CMS directly that expecting a working product by the agency's launch date was unrealistic. CMS pushed forward anyway. The records, released after EFF sued for access, paint a picture of a program assembled on a tight timeline with unresolved technical issues, though the specific downstream effects on individual patient decisions aren't fully detailed in what's been made public so far.
