Make room for lawyers at the hospital C-suite table

http://www.fiercehealthcare.com/hospitals/lawyers-increasingly-play-a-role-health-system-c-suites?utm_medium=nl&utm_source=internal&mrkid=959610&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiTVdZNE9UbGtZemxtTXpBMCIsInQiOiJVS01rMXhPNVNhS1c0V2JKaE53TSthTHg0dWFnaXVtcUtXeEZlK0VqQTk3SFBNTG01aEJpVVN0aFhqRDZ5cmFGYitGUmtrZHV0K0JGMHBcL2twN2RBeUpSSk5MaW5vS0NcL25JQTk3T2FFTUhrPSJ9

BoardroomBoardroom

http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/legal-regulatory-issues/lawyers-the-new-player-emerging-in-the-health-system-c-suite.html

As payment models shift and other industry changes shine a spotlight on regulatory concerns, it’s becoming more and more common for hospitals and health systems to use in-house attorneys.

These legal experts are becoming a C-suite mainstay, too, according to an article from Becker’s Hospital Review, as roles like chief legal officer gain importance.

“Gone are the days where CEOs could afford to say, ‘I hate lawyers,’ or, ‘I don’t want to deal with lawyers,'” Werner Boel, principal and practice leader of legal services at executive search firm Witt/Kieffer, told Becker’s.

Though smaller hospitals may not be able to afford an in-house team, many larger systems are investing in a group of attorneys. Having on-site legal advice beyond general counsel, for example, can help hospitals navigate mergers and increased oversight from institutions such as the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services related to privacy and anti-kickback laws, Boel told Becker’s.

Boel emphasized the need for a true team, according to the article, as having a group of lawyers with diverse regulatory knowledge is key to helping hospitals weather any number of storms. Other executives must also be open to the legal team’s advice, and must actively engage with them on legal matters, Boel said.

A knowledge of regulatory matters can also benefit the executive team, according to the article, as roles like compliance officer and even CEO are increasingly filled by people with a legal background. These leaders have the right mix of experience to help guide change in hospitals under the constraints of healthcare reform, Boel said.

Cultural Meltdown: When Values Don’t Match Workers’ Day-to-Day Reality

http://fistfuloftalent.com/2016/09/cultural-meltdown-values-dont-match-workers-day-day-reality.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FistfulOfTalent+%28Fistful+of+Talent%29

Image result for wells fargo scandal

A complete disconnect on values

The problem was that bank employees were pushed to sell products and services to customers whether they wanted them or not, in violation of the company’s stated values, and often this meant opening up accounts and issuing credit cards without customers knowing about it.

And to add insult to injury, even employees who called the company’s ethics hotline that was set up to report issues just like this one were fired for doing so.

Yes, Wells Fargo’s stated company values are 180 degrees opposite of what employees were actually told to do.

If you look at Wells Fargo’s statement of values, it all sounds pretty good:

Our values should guide every conversation, decision, and interaction. Our values should anchor every product and service we provide and every channel we operate. If we can’t link what we do to one of our values, we should ask ourselves why we’re doing it. It’s that simple.

All team members should know our values so well that if our policy manuals didn’t exist, we would still make decisions based on our common understanding of our culture and what we stand for. Corporate America is littered with the debris of companies that crafted lofty values on paper but, when put to the test, failed to live by them. We believe in values lived, not phrases memorized. If we had to choose, we’d rather have a team member who lives by our values than one who just memorizes them.

We have five primary values that are based on our vision and provide the foundation for everything we do:

  • People as a competitive advantage
  • Ethics
  • What’s right for customers
  • Diversity and inclusion
  • Leadership

Those values sound good, but in the case of Wells Fargo, they were total BS.

This is America on drugs: A visual guide

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/23/health/heroin-opioid-drug-overdose-deaths-visual-guide/index.html?utm_campaign=KHN%3A+Daily+Health+Policy+Report&utm_source=hs_email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=34947841&_hsenc=p2ANqtz–YrF401_rgY2Eu0quZOGu9hf5HBQemDWKYHgHZO3RCn4jyYo6VVlHRZJMTNcd5dddYZkCJpItslmEaGArXyBnjA1Y4IA&_hsmi=34947841

Image result for This is America on drugs: A visual guide

In modern history, few things have caused such a sharp spike in US deaths as drug overdoses.

CNN reached out to every state for the latest statistics on drug deaths, with half providing data from 2015. It found that drugs deaths continue to rise rapidly in many states.

Snapshot of Where Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Stand on Seven Health Care Issues

Snapshot of Where Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump Stand on Seven Health Care Issues

Image result for Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on Health Care Issues

While health care has not been central to the 2016 Presidential campaign, the election’s outcome will be a major determining factor in the country’s future health care policy. A number of issues have garnered media attention, including the future of the Affordable Care Act (ACA), rising prescription drug costs, and the opioid epidemic.

Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have laid out different approaches to addressing these and other health care issues. Central among these is their position on the future of the ACA. Hillary Clinton would maintain the ACA, and many of her policy proposals would build on provisions already in place. Donald Trump, in contrast, would fully repeal the ACA, and although his policy proposals and positions do not offer a full replacement plan, they do reflect an approach based on free market principles.

See where the candidates stand on seven key health policy issues.

Hillary Clinton’s Health Care Reform Proposals: Anticipated Effects on Insurance Coverage, Out-of-Pocket Costs, and the Federal Deficit

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Publications/Issue-Briefs/2016/Sep/Clinton-Presidential-Health-Care-Proposal

Image result for Impact of Hillary Clinton Proposed Reforms on the number of people with insurance coverage

Issue: Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has proposed modifications to the Affordable Care Act to limit consumers’ out-of-pocket health spending.

Goal: We analyzed four of these policies—cost-sharing tax credits to offset spending above 5 percent of income; reduced premium contributions for marketplace enrollees; a fix to the ACA’s “family glitch,” which leaves some families with expensive employer coverage; and the introduction of a public option on the marketplaces.

Methods: RAND’s COMPARE microsimulation model.

Key findings and conclusions: These policies would increase the number of insured individuals by 400,000 to 9.6 million, and decrease consumers’ health spending relative to current law. Cost-sharing tax credits have the biggest effect—increasing coverage by 9.6 million and decreasing average spending by up to 33 percent for those with moderately low incomes. However, the policies with the largest coverage gains also increase the federal deficit, with impacts ranging from –$0.7 billion to $90 billion.

Donald Trump’s Health Care Reform Proposals: Anticipated Effects on Insurance Coverage, Out-of-Pocket Costs, and the Federal Deficit

http://www.commonwealthfund.org/Publications/Issue-Briefs/2016/Sep/Trump-Presidential-Health-Care-Proposal

Image result for Donald Trump's Health Care Reform Proposals: Anticipated Effects on Insurance Coverage, Out-of-Pocket Costs, and the Federal Deficit

Issue: Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump has proposed to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA) and replace it with a proposal titled “Healthcare Reform to Make America Great Again.” Proposed reforms include allowing individuals to deduct the full amount of premiums for individual health plans from their federal tax returns, providing block grants to finance state Medicaid programs, and allowing insurers to sell insurance across state lines.

Goal: To assess how each of these reforms, when implemented individually, would affect insurance coverage, consumer out-of-pocket spending on health care, and the federal deficit in 2018.

Methods: RAND’s COMPARE microsimulation model.

Key findings and conclusions: The policies would increase the number of uninsured individuals by 16 million to 25 million relative to the ACA. Coverage losses disproportionately affect low-income individuals and those in poor health. Enrollees with individual market insurance would face higher out-of-pocket spending than under current law. Because the proposed reforms do not replace the ACA’s financing mechanisms, they would increase the federal deficit by $0.5 billion to $41 billion.