Category Archives: Hospital Bankruptcy

Nonprofit Provider Pensions Remain Solidly Funded

Posted on by • Posted in Defined Benefit Pension Plans, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Bankruptcy, Hospital Industry • Leave a comment

https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/finance/nonprofit-provider-pensions-remain-solidly-funded

Nonprofit healthcare organizations benefited from an increase in pension funding last year, according to S&P.

Despite a volatile investment market, the median funded status of defined benefit pension plans for nonprofit healthcare organizations in 2018 was 85%, increasing nearly 5% due to a higher bond rate, according to an S&P Global Ratings report released Thursday afternoon.

Among nonprofit providers, Ponoma Valley Hospital Medical Center in California led the way with a 144.5% funding status, followed by Jackson County Schneck Memorial Hospital in Indiana and Northwestern Memorial Hospital in Illinois.

The lowest funded pension plans were at Northern Inyo County Hospital District in California, with a 44.6% funding status, followed by Kaiser Foundation Health Plan in California and Catholic Health System in New York.

The report found that most pension costs for Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issuers are still low while Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) issuers have dealt with cost as a credit pressure on the organization.

The ratings agency also noted that overall funded ratios have improved, crediting the absence of defined benefit plans as a positive factor, but indicated that such a trend is unlikely to continue going forward.

“In our view, most hospitals and health systems have managed their pension burdens well, with no credit implications,” the report stated. “However, we believe that even without a direct negative credit impact, in some circumstances, a high funding burden has inhibited improvement in credit quality.” 

The report continued: “Furthermore, not all hospitals’ pension funding improved in 2018, and for providers already struggling with thin income statements and balance sheets, underfunded pension plans could contribute to credit
stress.”

Looking at the short-term, nonprofit providers are slated to experience a boost to their respective financial profiles due to a higher funded status resulting in “lower statutory minimum contributions” to defined benefit plans.  

Conversely, the S&P report indicated that underfunded or soon-to-be underfunded defined benefit plans posed a credit risk for nonprofit providers.

As with other lingering financial challenges that health systems face, the looming pension crisis poses a substantial risk to long-term solvency  and the ability to attract clinical talent.  

According to the S&P report, the majority of issuers have closed plan offerings to new employees or eliminated plans to lower risk, while some have used debt funding to prop up plans despite an increased market risk.

 

 

Judge halts Philadelphia hospital closure

Posted on by • Posted in Bankruptcy, Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Bankruptcy, Injunction • Leave a comment

https://www.beckershospitalreview.com/finance/judge-halts-philadelphia-hospital-closure.html

Image result for hahnemann university hospital

A Philadelphia Common Pleas judge granted part of a preliminary injunction request sought by the city to stop Hahnemann University Hospital from closing, but the Philadelphia hospital plans to continue scaling back services this week.

Judge Nina Padilla granted the injunction, which stops Hahnemann’s owners from shutting down the hospital without a closure plan authorized by the Philadelphia health commissioner. The injunction specifically prohibits Hahnemann’s owners “from closing, ceasing operations, or in any way further reducing or disrupting services” at the hospital’s emergency room until the health commissioner signs off on the closure plan, according to KYW Newsradio.

Hahnemann is diverting high-level trauma cases, but the hospital’s ER will remain open to treat patients with minor health issues, Marcel Pratt, city solicitor of Philadelphia, told KYW Newsradio.

Although the ER will remain open, Hahnemann plans to scale back other services this week. The hospital said it will stop all nonemergency surgeries and procedures, including child deliveries, on July 12, according to CBS Philly.

Philadelphia Academic Health System, which entered Chapter 11 bankruptcy June 30, plans to close Hahnemann University Hospital by Sept. 6.

 

Here’s What’s Missing From the Health-Care Debate

Posted on by • Posted in 2020 Election Issues, Health Insurance Industry, Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Bankruptcy, Hospital Industry, Leadership, Medicare for All, Single Payer Health System, Single Payer Healthcare System, Universal Healthcare System • Leave a comment

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-06-28/democratic-2020-debate-medicare-for-all-and-health-care

Raise your hand if you want to debate health care.

There needs to be more frank talk and better explanations about the costs and trade-offs of plans like Medicare for All.

Health care took up a decent portion of the Democratic presidential debates this week. For all of the verbiage, we didn’t learn much new. Everybody wants universal coverage, but they have different ideas about how to get there. One group, led Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, want a single-payer system like “Medicare for All”; others, including former Vice President Joe Biden, prefer various flavors of a public option that co-exists with elements of the status quo.

Nonetheless, there were a few moments that drew attention to important issues that could (or should) shape the health-care discussion going forward: 

 

THE BIG TRADE-OFF: “People who have health under Medicare for All will have no premiums, no deductibles, no co-payments, no out-of-pocket expenses,” Sanders said during Wednesday’s debate. “Yes, they will pay more in taxes, but less in health care for what they get.” Sanders was responding to a question about whether his policies would mean higher taxes for middle-class Americans; his answer elucidated an essential truth that’s still lost on many voters.

Medicare for All is at its core a shift in how America finances health care. Right now, people pay big chunks of their health costs themselves – especially when they’re sick. Sanders’s plan would replace that out-of-pocket spending with taxes. There’s an appeal to that. It’s more equitable and would eliminate situations where health crises result in bankruptcy, or costs dissuades people from seeking care. Whether this shift will result in savings for individuals will depend on tax details as well as income and health status. If such a plan can lower costs by cutting prices and eliminating insurer profits, there’s a real possibility that many Americans come out ahead. Right now, polls suggest that broad support for Medicare for All drops when people hear about tax increases. Getting voters to understand what they get in return will be critical. 

 

RAISE YOUR HAND: On both nights, the debate moderators chose to boil the health-care debate down to one yes-or-no question. Candidates who support eliminating private health insurance in favor of a single-payer system were asked to raise their hands. This is a defining divide in the field, so it was notable that Elizabeth Warren raised hers on Wednesday. She places third in most polls behind Joe Biden and Sanders, and has been vague on health care in the past. If she’s a dogmatic supporter of Sanders’s specific plan, that tilts the race in the direction of Medicare for All. I’m not sure that’s the case, though. She could end up diverging on specifics of how the U.S. should transition to a single-payer system and structure it. As the field shrinks, it will probably benefit her to stake out a place between Sanders and Biden, who supports a milder public option. A lot of candidates want to be in that space, though none have defined it well or made it their own yet. Given ambivalent polling about the details of Medicare for All and the idea of killing private insurance, this feels like an opportunity for the person who seizes it. 

 

WHAT PRICE IS RIGHT?  America spends far more than other countries on services without getting better results. That might not change without price controls for providers. Former Maryland representative John Delaney claimed on Wednesday that these types of controls would have consequences, saying that many hospitals would be forced to close if they had to accept the rates currently paid by Medicare for all services. While the truth of that statement is a matter of some debate, what isn’t in doubt is that lower reimbursement would be necessary even for milder plans, and that this could put pressure on hospital systems.

Reform-minded candidates don’t like to talk about that, which is why Delaney’s point stood out. Instead, they preferred to focus their ire on insurers and drugmakers. Drug prices and insurer overhead are important issues too, but services eat up a far more significant portion of spending. The field won’t be able to ignore that issue and the potentially disruptive consequences of dealing with it. 

These first debates got the discussion going. The devil will be in the details.

 

 

 

Medical monopoly: An unusual hospital merger in rural Appalachia leaves residents with few options

Posted on by • Posted in Antitrust, Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Health Policy, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Bankruptcy, Monopoly, Monopoly Behavior, Rural Health, Rural Hospital, Safety Net Hospitals, Safety-Net Providers • Leave a comment

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/health/2019/06/23/ballad-health-merger-rural-hospital-closures/1342608001/

Protest organizer Dani Cook of Kingsport, Tennessee, conducts a Facebook Live outside Holston Valley Medical Center in Kingsport on May 7. The merger of Mountain State Health Alliance and Wellmont has led to the downgrading of the area's NICU and trauma center.

KINGSPORT, Tenn. – Molly Worley is an angry grandma.

For weeks she has stubbornly occupied a folding lawn chair on a grassy median outside Holston Valley Medical Center, sheltered from sweltering Appalachian summer sun by a thin tarp and flanked by a rotating crew staging a round-the-clock protest since May 1.

Behind them is the state-of-the-art neonatal intensive care unit where Worley’s newborn grandson spent his first weeks of life treated for opioid exposure.

In the same building is a Level I trauma center to respond to the most critical emergencies.

Both facilities will downgraded in the coming months, diverting the sickest babies and adults elsewhere.

The cuts are the latest fallout from an unusual and controversial merger between two former rival hospital systems headquartered in northeast Tennessee.

The newly formed company, Ballad Health, is now the sole hospital provider for a region the size of New Jersey. For nearly 1.2 million people people living in a largely rural stretch of 29 counties in northeast Tennessee and nearby parts of Virginia, North Carolina and Kentucky, Ballad hospitals are the only inpatient option.

Mergers involving hospitals that compete for same patients face opposition from the Federal Trade Commission, which can block mergers on the grounds the combined company can limit patient choices, cut services, raise prices and diminish quality.

Ballad officials found a way to bypass FTC rules. They turned to Tennessee state Sen. Rusty Crowe, R-Johnson City, who successfully carried legislation making the merger possible. Crowe is a longtime paid consultant with Ballad hospitals. 

Only a handful of other states have exempted similar hospital mergers from FTC anti-monopoly rules. Ballad’s is the largest.

CEO Alan Levine said the merger lets the hospital system save money and keep rural hospitals afloat in a state that is already No. 2 in the nation for closures.

Eliminating overlapping staff and services, including the trauma center and NICU, will free funds to invest in other public health initiatives. Ballad pledged to keep open all of its rural hospitals for five years and to invest $308 million in public health, medical education and other initiatives.

“Every decision we make starts and ends with how can we best serve the community and what does the evidence show will lead to the best possible outcome,” Levine said.

“You don’t want a trauma center on every corner and you don’t want a NICU on every corner because it dilutes volume and hurts quality,” he said.

No rural hospitals owned by Ballad have been closed. 

Some residents, doctors, nurses, EMS workers and public officials say the changes by Ballad expose the dangers of a single system imposing decisions on health care services on a captive audience that has no other options. More than 23,000 people have signed a petition opposing Ballad’s proposed changes.

“Never ever have I been this outspoken about anything,” said Worley, 60. “This NICU saved my grandson’s life. With Ballad we have no other choice. They have a monopoly at every level of health care.”

As hospital systems across the country struggle to stay afloat, particularly in rural areas, Ballad’s plan is being closely watched by other states weighing whether to allow other hospitals to take a similar approach.

 

 

 

Has Community Health Systems Finally Bottomed Out?

Posted on by • Posted in Bankruptcy, Community Health Systems (CHS), Community Hospital, Competition, Divestitures, Executive Team Turnover, Fee for Service Reimbursement, Health System, Hospital, Hospital Bankruptcy, Market Consolidation, Market Power, Mergers & Acquisitions, Operational Competence, Rural Health, Rural Hospital • Leave a comment

https://www.healthleadersmedia.com/strategy/has-community-health-systems-finally-bottomed-out

After selling more than 80 hospitals in three years, leaders of the large for-profit hospital operator are suggesting the worst may be behind them.

KEY TAKEAWAYS

The troubled operator of rural hospitals is focusing now on growth-oriented markets.

The latest round of questions and accusations adds to the tumultuous past five years.

Some analysts say CHS isn’t poised for where the market is headed: outpatient services and value-based care.

Times have been tough for Community Health Systems Chairman and CEO Wayne T. Smith, who is voicing an optimistic message this year as the hospital operator continues to navigate choppy waters.

Smith and fellow CHS senior executives told investors this month that the company expects to complete its massive and long-running divestiture plan by the end of 2019, having already shed 81 hospitals from its portfolio in the three preceding years. The company, based in Franklin, Tennessee, operated 106 hospitals across 18 states as of the end of the first quarter.

While the divestitures give CHS cash to pay down its debt, they are also part of a strategic effort to align CHS operations with the geographic areas where the company sees the greatest growth potential, Smith said.

“This has allowed the company to shift more of our resources to more sustainable markets, ones with better population growth, better economic growth, and lower unemployment, which provides us an opportunity for sustainable growth,” Smith said during the first-quarter earnings call this month.

“As we complete additional divestitures, we expect our same-store metrics to further improve,” he added. “This will lead to not only additional debt reduction but also better cash flow performance and lower leverage ratios.”

Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Thomas J. Aaron echoed that message at the Goldman Sachs Leveraged Finance Conference this month. While CHS was truly a rural hospital company 15 years ago, Aaron said the post-selloff organization is investing strategically in markets where it anticipates growth.

“We’d rather compete in a growing pie than have more market share in a pie that’s shrinking,” Aaron said.

“We feel like we’re well-positioned,” he said.

But the positive forecast is a bit of a tough sell, especially when you consider how bad the past five years have been:

  • Questionable HMA Acquisition: In 2014, CHS completed its $7.6 billion acquisition of Florida-based hospital operator Health Management Associates, Inc. (HMA), in what is widely viewed in hindsight as a bad move. In addition to a $260 million settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice, a subsidiary of HMA pleaded guilty to criminal fraud last year for alleged misconduct that predated the acquisition by CHS—allegations that Smith knew about before the deal was final. “We were aware of the issues they had,” Aaron said this month. “We went ahead and closed on the transaction, confident that we could get the cost synergy, and we felt like they had some great assets.”
  • Major Stock Market Woes: In 2015, the price of CHS shares peaked at nearly $53 apiece, according to New York Stock Exchange data. But by the end of that year, shares had lost more than half of that value. Share prices continued to slide the following year and haven’t made a meaningful recovery since. They have been trading below $5 so far this year.
  • Lackluster Quorum Spin-off: In 2016, CHS spun off 38 hospitals to form Quorum Health Corporation. The spin-off severely underperformed expectations, and investors began asking questions. Quorum formally responded to those investors with a letter that acknowledged several reasons to question the “operational competence” of CHS leaders who backed the spin-off. A related dispute between Quorum and CHS ended in arbitration earlier this year.
  • Ongoing Hospital Divestitures: In 2017, CHS sold 30 hospitals, followed by another 13 hospitals in 2018, Aaron said. So far this year, CHS has announced the sale of at least seven more: one in Tennessee, two in Florida, and four in South Carolina. A spokesperson for CHS did not respond to HealthLeaders‘ request for additional information and comment.
  • Recurring Bankruptcy Questions: Industry analysts have wondered for years whether bankruptcy may be on the horizon for CHS. Those questions were renewed again this month when Ryan Heslop, a portfolio manager for Firefly Value Partners LP, took a short position against the company and said a CHS bankruptcy is likely in the next few years, as Reuters reported. About that same time, Smith invested more than $3 million in CHS stock, according to two Securities and Exchange Commission filings. (Smith, 73, who has been CEO for 22 years, now directly and indirectly controls about 2.8% of the company, as the Nashville Post reported.)
  • Call for CEO’s Ouster: With the release of a report this month titled “Other People’s Money,” the National Nurses United (NNU) group accused Smith of squandering CHS’ assets and called for him to be removed. “The fact that Smith remains at CHS’ helm, given a series of fatal calculations that set the company on a downward spiral, is a real wonder,” the NNU report states. Shareholders, however, voted overwhelmingly in favor of keeping Smith as a director and significantly increasing his incentive plan compensation, according to SEC filings.

Despite the light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel rhetoric coming from CHS executives, there’s still real concern the company could come undone. That’s because CHS’ problems run deeper than its balance sheets, says Mark Cherry, MFA, a principal analyst at Market Access Insights for Decision Resources Group.

“Given the national trend toward provider consolidation, CHS might not remain intact even if it were financially healthy,” Cherry tells HealthLeaders in an email, adding that CHS seems to be unsuited for the industry’s ongoing shifts toward value-based payments and outpatient care delivery.

“There are only a few markets, like Scranton, Knoxville, and Northwest Arkansas, where CHS has enough presence to act as a stand-alone health system that can influence physician and patient behaviors,” Cherry says.

The structural problem is rooted in a bad strategic bet a decade ago, Cherry says.

“As markets and regions were coalescing around large integrated delivery networks focused on value-based care, CHS continued to invest in suburban facilities and demand high fee-for-service reimbursement,” Cherry says.

“Whereas operating a couple of suburban hospitals within a larger market once gave CHS access to better insured patients and leverage against payers who wanted to offer broad provider networks, the post-ACA landscape does not have as wide a uninsured discrepancy between urban and suburban areas,” he adds, “and payers are shifting to high-performance narrow networks, allowing them to cut CHS facilities out entirely if they are unwilling to compromise.”