Close X

Attorney Spotlight

How does Eli Richardson's past work with the federal government inform his client interactions? Find out more>

Search

Close X

Experience

Search our Experience

Experience Spotlight

In June 2016, AmSurg Corp. and Envision Healthcare Holdings, Inc. (Envision) announced they have signed a definitive merger agreement pursuant to which the companies will combine in an all-stock transaction. Upon completion of the merger, which is expected to be tax-free to the shareholders of both organizations, the combined company will be named Envision Healthcare Corporation and co-headquartered in Nashville, Tennessee and Greenwood Village, Colorado. The company's common stock is expected to trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker symbol: EVHC. Bass, Berry & Sims served as lead counsel on the transaction, led by Jim Jenkins. Read more.

AmSurg logo


Close X

Thought Leadership

Enter your search terms in the relevant box(es) below to search for specific Thought Leadership.
To see a recent listing of Thought Leadership, click the blue Search button below.

Thought Leadership Spotlight

Inside the FCA blogInside the FCA blog features ongoing updates related to the False Claims Act (FCA), including insight on the latest legal decisions, regulatory developments and FCA settlements. The blog provides timely updates for corporate boards, directors, compliance managers, general counsel and other parties interested in the organizational impact and legal developments stemming from issues potentially giving rise to FCA liability.

Read More >

New OIG Guidance: Great Expectations for Healthcare Boards

Publications

May 1, 2015

For the first time in almost ten years, the Office of Inspector General ("OIG") at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services issued new compliance guidance for healthcare-governing boards ("boards"). This guidance, Practical Guidance for Health Care Governing Boards on Compliance Oversight (the "Guidance"), provides timely advice for boards on how to exercise appropriate oversight of compliance programs at a time when healthcare companies and individuals are facing increasing fraud enforcement.

The Guidance is the product of a collaboration among the OIG, American Health Lawyers Association ("AHLA"), Association of Healthcare Internal Auditors, and Health Care Compliance Association. It echoes the three-part compliance series issued by the OIG and AHLA in the early 2000s,1 while also reflecting new industry trends and health reform efforts. The Guidance makes clear that compliance programs are not "one size fits all" but should be adapted to an organization's size and complexity.

Expectations for Board Oversight of Compliance Program Functions.

Board members must understand pertinent compliance risks and issues so that they can ask appropriate questions of management and make informed strategic decisions. Further, boards must have formal plans to stay abreast of the "ever-changing regulatory landscape and operating environment." Plans may involve periodic updates from informed staff, review of regulatory resources, or the creation of a formal education calendar that ensures that board members are periodically educated on the organization's highest risks. The Guidance suggests that boards raise their level of substantive expertise by adding to the board, or at least periodically consulting with, an experienced compliance professional. Doing so "sends a strong message about the organization's commitment to compliance."

In addition, the Guidance points to available public resources that boards can use as baseline assessment tools to develop an effective compliance program: the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, OIG's voluntary compliance program guidance documents, and OIG Corporate Integrity Agreements ("CIAs"). The inclusion of CIAs sets a high bar for compliance, as the OIG has required some settling healthcare entities to agree to board-level restrictions or standards—for example, inclusion of independent, non-executive board members; required quarterly submissions to the OIG describing compliance materials reviewed by the board; and standards for training of board members.2 Notably, CIAs often go beyond minimum legal requirements.

Roles and Relationships in the Organization.

The Guidance emphasizes the importance of independence among an organization's legal, compliance, and internal audit functions. While an organization's legal counsel and compliance officer should work together, the Guidance encourages an organization's compliance officer to be separate from, and not subordinate to, legal counsel. Similarly, the internal audit function also should be separate and independent. When organizations cannot completely separate these functions, the board should provide for independent reporting opportunities to the board to mitigate potential risks associated with individuals serving in multiple roles.

Reporting to the Board.

The board should receive regular reports on the organization's compliance efforts from the organization's key personnel overseeing these efforts. The board should consider establishing clear reporting expectations, such as the development of scorecards and reports of hotline activity and fraud allegations, and hold responsible personnel accountable for these expectations. This corporate reporting system is key to the organization's compliance program.

Identifying and Auditing Potential Risk Areas.

The OIG singles out areas of particular interest—referral relationships and arrangements, billing problems, privacy breaches, and quality-related events—which overlap with new compliance challenges brought about by evolving payment models and increasing transparency. Newer forms of reimbursement, such as bundling services for a single payment, may create new incentives, compliance risks, and fraud liability. New payment models also have incentivized consolidation among healthcare providers, spurring employment and contractual relationships. Boards are advised to scrutinize referral and compensation arrangements among providers for self-referral and kickback issues. The trend toward increased transparency presents opportunities, such as availability of data to use as benchmarks, but also presents risks, such as increased scrutiny by various stakeholders, including patients, employees, government officials, donors, the media, and whistleblowers.

Encouraging Accountability and Compliance.

The entire organization bears responsibility to execute the compliance program. The Guidance suggests that the board seek out ways to promote and incentivize compliance efforts and ensure the availability of effective communication avenues. For example, the board should ensure that the organization has mechanisms to voluntarily disclose identified overpayments to the Government as required by law. Boards should ensure that employees feel confident that compliance concerns can be raised without fear of retaliation.

The Guidance serves as a valuable reminder to boards of their obligation to oversee a healthcare organization's compliance. While the Guidance provides very little new information, it does serve as a framework for boards to examine their compliance programs from a fresh perspective and determine where improvements can be made. A board that continually focuses on its organization's compliance efforts ensures that the organization can proactively address issues as they arise and reduces the risk of potential enforcement actions.

The Guidance can be found on the OIG's website.


1 See Corporate Responsibility and Corporate Compliance: A Resource for Health Care Boards of Directors (April 2, 2003); An Integrated Approach to Corporate Compliance: A Resource for Health Care Boards of Directors (July 1, 2004); Corporate Responsibility and Health Care Quality – A Resource for Health Care Boards of Directors (September 13, 2007); each available at http://oig.hhs.gov/compliance/compliance-guidance/compliance-resource-material.asp.

2 See http://oig.hhs.gov/compliance/corporate-integrity-agreements/cia-documents.asp.


Related Professionals

Related Services

Notice

Visiting, or interacting with, this website does not constitute an attorney-client relationship. Although we are always interested in hearing from visitors to our website, we cannot accept representation on a new matter from either existing clients or new clients until we know that we do not have a conflict of interest that would prevent us from doing so. Therefore, please do not send us any information about any new matter that may involve a potential legal representation until we have confirmed that a conflict of interest does not exist and we have expressly agreed in writing to the representation. Until there is such an agreement, we will not be deemed to have given you any advice, any information you send may not be deemed privileged and confidential, and we may be able to represent adverse parties.