BENESCH FRIEDIANDER & ARONOFF ATTORNEYS AT LAW P.L.L. Gregory G. Binford Writer's Direct Dial Number VIA UPS (216) 363-4617.



Similar documents
Additional Information About Accountable Care Organizations

Accountable Care Organizations Multiple Comment Periods

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION / DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Master of Health Administration

Re: Proposed Statement of Antitrust Enforcement Policy Regarding ACOs Participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program, Matter V100017

CPI Antitrust Chronicle May 2011 (1)

Statements of Antitrust. in Health Care

PATIENT TRANSFER AGREEMENT

RECITALS. WHEREAS, VENDOR is a company and a provider of technology services for business, government and education;

IU Health Quality Partners

October 23, MyWire, Inc. Request for Business Review (Global News Service)

Proposed Statement of Antitrust Enforcement Policy Regarding Accountable Care Organizations Participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program

Chapter 14: Patient Dental Benefits

Title 19, Part 3, Chapter 14: Managed Care Plan Network Adequacy. Requirements for Health Carriers and Participating Providers

ARTER & HADDEN Pennsylvania Avenue, NW. Washington, D.C / Telecopier 202/ Telex MCI.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION. Presented by David P. Wales Deputy Director Bureau of Competition Federal Trade Commission

for Private Purchasers Engaged in Value Purchasing of Health Care

BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AND DATA USE AGREEMENT NAME OF COVERED ENTITY: COVERED ENTITY FEIN/TAX ID: COVERED ENTITY ADDRESS:

A Closer Look at the Final ACO Rule

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

2015 PA Super 169. Appeal from the Order Entered August 8, 2014 In the Court of Common Pleas of Lackawanna County Civil Division at No(s): 11 CV 3058

Entities eligible for ACO participation

s TE p T O E & J O H N s 0 N LLP

North American Electric Reliability Corporation. Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Program. December 19, 2008

STATEMENT J. BRUCE MCDONALD DEPUTY ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL ANTITRUST DIVISION BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY UNITED STATES SENATE CONCERNING

Provider Beware The Collateral Consequences of a Guilty Plea

RFP12915 ELECTRONIC CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT AND MANAGEMENT TOOL CONTACT PLEASE READ CAREFULLY!

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the Parties hereby agree as follows:

II. SHARED SAVINGS PROGRAM AND COST-REDUCTION INCENTIVES

PROPOSED MEDICARE SHARED SAVINGS (ACO) PROGRAM RULES

I S t r e e t, N.W. WASHINGTON, D. C WRITER S DIRECT NUM BER: (202) R e q u e s t for Business Review

INTEGRATION STRATEGIES FOR A NEW HEALTH CARE ECONOMY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION. Pamela Jones Harbour Jon Leibowitz J. Thomas Rosch

BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT

Center for Disability and Aging Policy Administration for Community Living Webinar Series March 11, 2014

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION

CLIENT AUTHORIZATIONS, DISCLOSURES, RELEASES & PRIVACY STATEMENT 1

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. This Settlement Agreement (hereafter Agreement ) is entered into by

BAKER DONELSON BAKER S DOZEN

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Washington, DC Washington, DC September 20, 1996

NORTHERN ARIZONA QUALITY HEALTHCARE COLLABORATIVE, LLC OPERATING AGREEMENT COLUMBUS/

Medical Staff Structure Information Paper

Smart TV Alliance Antitrust Policy

Guidance Released on Accountable Care Organizations Participating in the Medicare Shared Savings Program

CLINICALLY INTEGRATED NETWORKS: BUSINESS AND LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

Peer Review and the Hospital Employed Physician

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION. 11 CFR Parts 8 and 111. [Notice XX]

Model Business Associate Agreement

Notice of Formation Meeting for Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors

Opinion #177. Advancing Litigation Costs Through Lines of Credit

Notice of Formation Solicitation for Official Committee of Student Creditors

Accountable Care Organization. Medicare Shared Savings Program. Compliance Plan

Amy K. Fehn. I. Overview of Accountable Care Organizations and the Medicare Shared Savings Program

NACHC ANALYSIS: Establishing and Collecting Fees for Health Center Services. July, 2009

CMS-1345-NC2: Waiver Designs in Connection With the Medicare Shared Savings Program and the Innovation Center

Health & Life Sciences

INTERAGENCY BANK MERGER ACT APPLICATION. General Information and Instructions

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Interest Rate Restrictions on Insured Depository Institutions. AGENCY: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).

SALES REPRESENTATIVE AGREEMENT

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE

D. UPDATE ON HEALTH CARE JOINT VENTURE ARRANGEMENTS by Mary Jo Salins and Marvin Friedlander

CREDENTIALING POLICY AND PROCEDURES MANUAL OF THE MEDICAL STAFF OF ADVENTIST HINSDALE HOSPITAL AND ADVENTIST LA GRANGE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL

WellDyneRxWEST Customer (TPA, Broker, Consultant, Group Health Plan, and other).

Adopted as of February _18_, 2014

BREVIUM HIPAA BUSINESS ASSOCIATE TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Tulane University. Tulane University Business Associates Agreement SCOPE OF POLICY STATEMENT OF POLICY IMPLEMENTATION OF POLICY

CMS Releases Proposed Rule Governing Accountable Care Organizations

The New Healthcare Marketplace: Hospital Physician Business Models and Healthcare Reform Legislation

REGULATORY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT. THIS REGULATORY SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT (the Regulatory Settlement

CORPORATE COMPLIANCE PROGRAM

EHR Buyer Beware: Issues to Consider When Contracting with EHR Vendors

BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT

RESPONDING TO SUBPOENAS AND REQUESTS FOR EXPERT WITNESS SERVICES. I. Purpose 1. II. Scope

BUSINESS ASSOCIATE AGREEMENT

By and Courier. April 18, 2016

PRIVACY POLICY The type of web browser and operating system you have used:

ACMPE Paper, October By: Lisa Conner, FACMPE

STATE OF NEW YORK DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

NEW WAVE PRIVACY NOTICE

M E M O R A N D U M. CMS Proposed Rule & Related Agency Notices on Accountable Care Organizations

How To Write A Nursing Care Plan

The Canadian Public Venture Exchange S and E

AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWELVE OAKS INDEPENDENT PHYSICIANS ASSOCIATION, INC. AND PHYSICIAN


Collaboration Agreement

COMMON INTEREST AGREEMENT BETWEEN PARTICIPATING AGENCIES OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND THE STATE OF CONNECTICUT, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

K&LIGATES VIA HAND DELIVERY. August 28, 2008

March 24, Re: Ameriprise Financial Services, Inc. Dear Mr. Scheidt:

NOTICE OF PROPOSED CLASS ACTION SETTLEMENT

AFLAC LEVEL 2 DENTAL INSURANCE POLICY NETWORK PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT

BROKER SALESPERSON INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR AGREEMENT. THIS AGREEMENT is entered into this day of, 20, between ( Broker ) and ( Salesperson ).

Health Care. ACO Payment Arrangements

An organization which employs, or is about to employ, any of the above, has a financial or other interest in the firm selected for award.

Dr. Marek Skoskiewicz - Case of an Accident in Ohio

How To Use A Health Care Program At Upmc

KERN HEALTH SYSTEMS REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSION CHECKLIST

Corporate Decision # January 11, 2012 April 2012

ORANGE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION. Formal Opinion (Collaborative Family Law)

Occupational Health Services

Transcription:

BENESCH FRIEDIANDER COPLAN & ARONOFF ATTORNEYS AT LAW P.L.L. 2300 BP America Building 200 Public Square Cleveland, Ohio 44114-2378 (216) 363-4500 Fax (216) 363-4588 Gregory G. Binford Writer's Direct Dial Number (216) 363-4617 VIA UPS Assistant Attorney General United States Department of Justice Antitrust Division Main Justice Building 10th and Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20530 Re: Request for Business Review Letter Concerning an Independent Practice Association: Cincinnati Regional Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Associates, Inc. Dear Assistant Attorney General Bingaman: This firm represents Cincinnati Regional Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Associates, Inc. ("CROSMA"), which is an independent practice association ("IPA"). On its behalf, we respectfully request that the Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice ("Department"), pursuant to the provisions of 28 C.F.R. 50.6, review and state its present enforcement intentions with respect to the proposed activities of CROSMA. We hope that the information that follows is sufficiently detailed to enable you to determine whether the Department has any substantial concerns about CROSMA and its proposed activities as a "physician network joint venture." If you need additional information or clarification of any kind, please feel free to contact me. I. BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT CROSMA CROSMA is an Ohio professional corporation, the shareholders of which are orthopaedic surgery groups and individual physicians (the "Providers") in the Cincinnati, Ohio metropolitan local market area (the "Area"). 1 At present, there are fifty six (56) individual surgeons within 1 We believe the local market area has been defined appropriately by the Greater Cincinnati Hospital Council ("GCHC"), which is a voluntary association of hospitals in the region. GCHC has defined the relevant geographic marketplace as comprising 35 hospitals in the greater Cincinnati metropolitan area which comprises 28 counties in Ohio, Kentucky Cleveland Columbus Cincinnati

BENESCH, FRIEDIANDER,COPLAN & ARONOFF Page 2 CROSMA, who are organized into ten (10) separate physician groups. These physicians are licensed by the State of Ohio, are either board-eligible or board-certified orthopaedic specialists, and, as a group, hold medical staff membership and clinical privileges at all of the major hospitals and ambulatory surgery centers in the Area. These physicians, who provide a full range of orthopaedic surgery services, have elected to form an IP A for the purpose of negotiating payor contracts on a collective basis. CROSMA presently intends to enter into capitated contracts only. It is possible that, in the future, CROSMA might enter into fee-for-service contracts, provided such contracts require a withhold of at least twenty percent (20% ), whereby the managed care organization or third-party payor withholds fees earned pending the achievement of articulated cost effectiveness goals. The primary function of CROSMA is to serve as a single negotiating and contracting entity on behalf of the Providers affiliated with it. CROSMA has been formed in response to a perceived market demand for more efficient methods for managed care organizations and other third-party payors to negotiate, on a capitated basis, for the clinical services offered by the Providers. See enclosed letter from Humana Health Care Plan of Ohio, Inc., expressing a desire to work with entities like CROSMA. Under current Ohio law, CROSMA is not subject to additional review by any regulatory agency. CROSMA has contracted with 56 of the approximately 158 orthopaedic surgeons in the Area (either directly or through their respective professional corporations/group practices). CROSMA is not an exclusive physician network joint venture, since no physician will be precluded contractually by CROSMA from joining competitive networks or contracting directly with payors, 2 and the payors remain free to contract with other providers. CROSMA will establish utilization standards and develop and implement other methods that will help to contain health care costs and improve quality. CROSMA will perform traditional IP A functions, including utilization review and management, quality management, peer review, credentialing, medical education, as well as financial and administrative functions such as billing and collection. and Indiana. The GCHC definition of the local market area is significantly larger than the Cincinnati Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area ("SMSA"), but the SMSA is essentially the core of the larger market area. 2 The standard CROSMA Independent Contractor Agreement states in pertinent part (Section 5(D)): "[n]othing contained in this Agreement is intended to limit the Provider's ability to participate in any contracts or arrangements with other parties to provide services to patients."

BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER COPLAN & ARONOFF Page 3 II. "SAFETY ZONE" AND "RULE OF REASON" ANALYSIS FOR A PHYSICIAN NE'IWORK JOINT VENTURE A. CROSMA Physicians Comprise Approximately Thirty Five Percent (35%) of the Orthopaedic Specialists in the Area. Enclosed herewith is an "Analysis of Local Market Share for Cincinnati Regional Orthopaedic and Sports Medicine Associates, Inc.," which was prepared by an independent consultant. It sets forth data demonstrating that CROSMA physicians comprise approximately thirty five percent (35%) of the orthopaedic specialists in the Area. The market analysis applied several methodologies in an effort to reasonably approximate CROSMA's market position. The analysis focused on four measures of market power; (1) the percentage of orthopaedic surgeons within CROSMA as compared to the market total; (2) the percentage of total office visits to CROSMA physicians versus the market total; (3) the percentage of orthopaedic surgical hospital cases performed by CROSMA physicians versus the market total; and (4) the percentage of joint replacement procedures performed by CROSMA physicians versus the market total. Significantly, the results ranged from a low of 34.6% to a high of 37.9%, which suggests a high degree of reliability. While we recognize that CROSMA's present composition exceeds slightly the thirty percent (30%) threshold for "safety zone" treatment where only capitated contracts are sought, we believe that the non-exclusive nature of CROSMA, and the procompetitive effects of the venture, should permit the Department to signal its approval of CROSMA under a "rule of reason" analysis. B. The Competitive Effects of CROSMA For several reasons, we do not believe that the operations of CROSMA would raise the prices charged to health plans for orthopaedic services in the Area above competitive levels. First, CROSMA physicians comprise only thirty five percent (35%) of the relevant geographic market, and therefore lack the market power that would enable CROSMA to artificially inflate prices. Second, because CROSMA is a non-exclusive joint venture, even physicians within it will be able to compete for payor contracts. Third, there are a significant number of competing payors in the Area -- each of which is striving to contract with lower cost providers. Thus, if CROSMA is unwilling to contract with payors at prices consistent with the market, we believe that CROSMA will lose existing business opportunities to more competitive providers. Fourth, CROSMA lacks the power to prevent the formation of other orthopaedic surgery joint ventures that would compete with it.

BENESGI, FRIEDIANDER,CDPlAN & ARONOFF Anne K Bingaman, Esq. Page 4 Clearly, as a non-exclusive physician network joint venture, the anticompetitive risks that CROSMA poses are substantially less than if CROSMA was exclusive. Indeed, the physicians specifically rejected the possibility of forming as an exclusive network to ensure, among other things, each physician's freedom to pursue alternative ventures in the future. A significant number of the physicians already participate in physician hospital organizations ("PHOs") and other preferred provider organizations ("PPOs"), which will compete directly with CROSMA. C. Procompetitive Efficiencies Will Be Achieved, Principally Because Physicians Share Substantial Financial Risk Within CROSMA. As noted above, CROSMA currently intends to enter into only capitated payment contracts, thereby shifting risk from the payor to CROSMA, and ultimately the participating physicians. This is a classic method by which the activities of an IP A can reduce health care costs. In the event that discount fee-for-service contracts are sought, CROSMA will be subject to withhold mechanisms used by other similar joint ventures, which the Department has previously approved and which result in substantial risk sharing by the joint venture participants. In addition, CROSMA will enhance the quality of health care services, and assist the physicians in achieving greater efficiency, cost containment and quality, through utilization review and management, quality management, peer review, credentialing, medical education, and centralized business and administrative functions. CROSMA's goal is to eliminate the need for third-party payors to negotiate payment terms individually with each physician group, and to relieve the physicians of that same burden. Further, by centralizing within CROSMA the practice review functions noted above, additional efficiencies and cost savings will be achieved for the physician practices. Overall, it is intended that CROSMA will lower physician administrative costs and overhead, improve patient care management and quality, increase patient satisfaction, and reduce health care costs. D. There Are No Collateral Agreements or Conditions That Will Unreasonably Restrict Competition. Further, CROSMA Has Developed Safeguards that will Avoid the Potential for Collusion Among Physicians. Enclosed herewith are the following salient legal documents that govern the activities of CROSMA and its physician members. They are: (1) Articles of Organization; (2) Close Corporation Agreement; and (3) Standard Independent Contractor Agreement (Provider Agreement). There are no other written agreements or oral understandings that will unreasonably restrict competition.

BENESGI, FRIEDIANDER,CDPLAN & ARONOFF Anne K Bingaman, Esq. Page 5 CROSMA also has developed safeguards to ensure that the Providers cannot act collusively to artificially affect fees and charges. For example, no Provider will have access to any other Provider's fee and charge information. In the event fee or charge information must be analyzed, CROSMA physicians will submit that information to a consultant bound by an appropriate confidentiality agreement. This commonly used approach will ensure that no physician has access to fee or charge information of any other competing physician. Further, payor contract terms will be developed through the "messenger model," whereby an intermediary /negotiator, again bound by an appropriate confidentiality agreement, will discuss fee and charge information with each Provider in confidence during the contract negotiation process. Overall, CROSMA has erected meaningful barriers against impermissible collusive action concerning fees and charges. In no event will CROSMA, on behalf of its members, threaten to engage in a boycott to coerce third-party payors to accept its collectively-determined fees. III. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, we believe that CROSMA's existence and operation in the Area will be of benefit to the purchasers of health care services, and therefore, respectfully request that the Department of Justice issue a business review letter indicating that it has no intention of challenging CROSMA. On CROSMA's behalf, we thank you for your consideration. Very truly yours, BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER, COPLAN & ARONOFF P.L.L. GGB:db Enclosure Gregory G. Binford - 10:58am - MRJ CLEl - 195734.lA - 41745\1