Medicaid Provider Compliance Programs Now Mandatory
Beth Essig, a partner at Epstein Becker & Green, and Alicia H. Sable, an associate with the firm, write: In light of the new compliance program requirements under §521 of the Social Services regulations, the enforcement environment generated by the Office of the Medicaid Inspector General, and the significant penalties that can result from the failure to have an "effective" compliance program, it is critical that New York providers understand whether they are covered by §521, and if so, that they take the necessary steps to make certain that their compliance program meets the §521 requirements.
The New Security Breach Notification Requirements
Linn Foster Freedman and Michele A. Masucci, partners at Nixon Peabody, write that recently enacted federal regulations add new reporting responsibilities in the event of a breach of health information and add protection of genetic information under HIPAA, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act.
Free With Registration: The Rise of Patient Safety Organizations
David S. Ivill, a partner with McDermott Will & Emery, and Amy Hooper Kearbey, an associate at the firm, write: The Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Act of 2005 created a mechanism for the reporting and sharing of patient safety information amongst providers without the fear of liability. The act confers broad federal privilege and confidentiality protections to this information, referred to as "patient safety work product," with significant penalties for breaches. Regardless of the precise approach taken, establishing some type of framework around a patient safety evaluation system is key to ensuring information will be treated as patient safety work product, and thus entitled to the privileged and confidential treatment afforded by the Patient Safety Act.
Andrew L. Zwerling, a member of Garfunkel, Wild & Travis, discusses Labor Law ©741, New York's answer to the perceived need for a whistleblower statute dedicated to health care employees. Decisions involving the statute have highlighted the need for the whistleblower to be an employee who provides health care services, which has allowed the dismissal of claims by a technician whose job did not require him to make judgments regarding the quality of patient care and a podiatrist who never received any remuneration or other benefit from the residential health care facility in the case.
