logo
    • Magazine
    • Membership
    • Donate
  • Racial Justice
  • Economic Justice
    • Collections
  • Climate Justice
  • Health Justice
  • Leadership
  • CONTENT TYPES
  • Subscribe
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Complimentary Webinars
    • Premium On-Demand Webinars
  • Membership
  • Submissions

Alliance for Patient Access: Not Even Trying Subtlety

Erin Rubin
March 20, 2019
Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
“Medicine Cost.” Credit: TaxRebate.org.uk

March 18, 2019; Associated Press

Yesterday, NPQ wondered whether nonprofit boards can be trusted to police themselves regarding conflicts of interest where financial deals are concerned. If all the proper disclosures are made to the IRS, are their obligations of transparency and good governance discharged? In the case of patient advocacy groups like the Alliance for Patient Access, it seems the answer is “no.”

Richard Lardner of the Associated Press reports that the Alliance for Patient Access (AfPA), a nonprofit “dedicated to ensuring patient access to approved therapies and appropriate clinical care,” is in fact tied so closely to the pharmaceutical industry that their ability to serve their claimed constituents—patients—is deservedly under scrutiny.

As Lardner reports, Brian Kennedy serves as both the executive director of AfPA and the president of Woodberry Associates, a lobbying group; he also used to serve as a top official at the Republican Governors Association. Woodberry and AfPA not only share a leader, they share office space in Washington. Though Kennedy draws no salary as an executive director, AfPA paid nearly $250,000 in 2017 to consultants Gavin Clingham and Amanda Conschafter—names that match those of two consultants who work for Woodberry.

AfPA’s more concerning ties are to the pharmaceutical industry. Their list of supporters includes over a dozen major pharmaceutical companies, including Amgen, Genentech, Sanofi, Pfizer, and Eli Lilly. Lardner reports that the doctors who serve on the board of directors, while they don’t draw salaries, “have earned tens of thousands of dollars in consulting and speaker fees from the health care industry, including companies that back the Alliance.”

As might be expected, AfPA does not view favorably growing scrutiny of the pharmaceutical industry as a way to decrease healthcare costs. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that 80 percent of Americans believe that profits made by pharmaceutical companies are a “major factor” contributing to the price of prescription drugs. Nearly a quarter of those who rely on prescription drugs find it “difficult” to pay for them, and there is bipartisan support for measures such as international reference pricing, transparency in advertising, and allowing the government to negotiate Medicare drug pricing. (Other governments negotiate with drug companies and thereby keep prices lower, so both international indexing and government negotiation would likely have a salubrious effect on the painfully high prices Americans pay for medicines.)

Sign up for our free newsletters

Subscribe to NPQ's newsletters to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

No, says AfPA; this is too close to socialized medicine! We can’t let the government set prices! (In fact, as NPQ pointed out, “Medicare for all,” which is close to socialized health care, would probably work just fine.)

Other patient advocacy groups have been called out for artificially inflating drug prices by using pharma industry money to fund the nonprofits that help patients afford drugs, or to lobby against regulations.

AfPA also gets into politics more directly; Lardner reports that they spent $13.6 million in 2015 and 2016 on press releases and advertisements to “recognize” members of Congress who “have championed patient access in the Medicare program.” One such representative is Senator Lamar Alexander (R-TN). Predictably, the language on his website about lowering healthcare costs blames government bureaucracy and does not mention the absurd prices charged by the pharmaceutical industry.

AfPA responded to Lardner’s article, saying, “The Associated Press article follows a growing media trend of reporting on patient advocacy groups and their funding, while ignoring the substance of the policy issues they raise and the good work they do on behalf of physicians and patients.” That feels a bit like a red herring…

As Susan Hepworth, a spokesperson for both the AfPA and Woodberry Associates, pointed out, AfPA “files all of the appropriate paperwork with the IRS.” Is that enough? NPQ has reported numerous times on the fact that the IRS is underfunded and overburdened with paperwork, unlikely to catch an uncharitable charity without a big push from the outside. But despite coverage from the media and even the pursuit and fining of malefactors by the US Department of Justice, the field continues to represent itself as patient-centered, even while using that constituency of the sick and vulnerable to promote the agenda of big business.—Erin Rubin

Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
About the author
Erin Rubin

Erin Rubin was an assistant editor at the Nonprofit Quarterly, where she was in charge of online editorial coordination and community building. Before joining NPQ, in 2016, Erin worked as an administrator at Harvard Business School and as an editorial project manager at Pearson Education, where she helped develop a digital resource library for remedial learners. Erin has also worked with David R. Godine, Publishers, and the Association of Literary Scholars, Critics, and Writers. As a creative lead with the TEDxBeaconStreet organizing team, she worked to help innovators and changemakers share their groundbreaking ideas and turn them into action.

More about: Big PharmaManagement and LeadershipNonprofit Newspatient advocacy

Become a member

Support independent journalism and knowledge creation for civil society. Become a member of Nonprofit Quarterly.

Members receive unlimited access to our archived and upcoming digital content. NPQ is the leading journal in the nonprofit sector written by social change experts. Gain access to our exclusive library of online courses led by thought leaders and educators providing contextualized information to help nonprofit practitioners make sense of changing conditions and improve infra-structure in their organizations.

Join Today
logo logo logo logo logo
See comments

Spring-2023-sidebar-subscribe
You might also like
Hierarchy and Justice
Cyndi Suarez
Salvadoran Foreign Agent Law Threatens Human Rights Movements
Devon Kearney
Charitable Tax Reform: Why Half Measures Won’t Curb Plutocracy
Alan Davis
Healing-Centered Leadership: A Path to Transformation
Shawn A. Ginwright
Into the Fire: Lessons from Movement Conflicts
Ingrid Benedict, Weyam Ghadbian and Jovida Ross
How Nonprofits Can Truly Advance Change
Hildy Gottlieb

NPQ Webinars

April 27th, 2 pm ET

Liberatory Decision-Making

How to Facilitate and Engage in Healthy Decision-making Processes

Register Now
You might also like
Hierarchy and Justice
Cyndi Suarez
Salvadoran Foreign Agent Law Threatens Human Rights...
Devon Kearney
Charitable Tax Reform: Why Half Measures Won’t Curb...
Alan Davis

Like what you see?

Subscribe to the NPQ newsletter to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

See our newsletters

By signing up, you agree to our privacy policy and terms of use, and to receive messages from NPQ and our partners.

NPQ-Spring-2023-cover

Independent & in your mailbox.

Subscribe today and get a full year of NPQ for just $59.

subscribe
  • About
  • Contact
  • Advertise
  • Copyright
  • Careers

We are using cookies to give you the best experience on our website.

 

Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly
Powered by  GDPR Cookie Compliance
Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies so that we can provide you with the best user experience possible. Cookie information is stored in your browser and performs functions such as recognising you when you return to our website and helping our team to understand which sections of the website you find most interesting and useful.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

Strictly Necessary Cookie should be enabled at all times so that we can save your preferences for cookie settings.

If you disable this cookie, we will not be able to save your preferences. This means that every time you visit this website you will need to enable or disable cookies again.