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

Inspector General Bans Nonprofit from Subsidizing Copays Due to Pharma Ties

Ruth McCambridge
November 30, 2017
Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
Photo credit: Procsilas Moscas

November 29, 2017; Bloomberg

As many know, pharmaceutical companies have gotten into the habit of increasing prices dramatically on drugs even as they provide charitable contributions to patient assistance charities to allay the private copay costs of drugs. This could imply, if one were a skeptic, the systematic collusion between drug companies and charities that would hurt both consumers and taxpayers, so there are strict federal requirements regarding favoritism in what drugs get subsidized and access to data by drug companies. Still, active investigations have been going on for years that clearly indicate that in some of these organizations, any firewalls that exist are pretty darn porous and that their business models and those of the drug companies are codependent.

On Tuesday, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) at the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) rescinded its authorization of a patient assistance charity for being in too close a relationship with its donors. “It’s the first time the OIG has rescinded a favorable advisory opinion for a patient assistance charity,” according to Tesia Williams, an OIG spokeswoman.

The letter to the Caring Voice Coalition, a redacted version of which was posted on the HHS website, reads in part that the nonprofit served as a conduit for…

financial assistance from a pharmaceutical manufacturer donor to a patient, and thus increased the risk that the patients who sought assistance from Requestor would be steered to federally reimbursable drugs that the manufacturer donor sold. This type of steering can harm patients and the Federal health care programs, because, for example, patients may be urged to seek, and physicians may be more likely to prescribe, a more expensive drug if copayment assistance is available for that drug but not for less expensive but therapeutically equivalent alternatives. In these circumstances, manufacturers may have greater ability to raise the prices of their drugs while insulating patients from the immediate out-of-pocket effects of price increases, leaving Federal health care programs like Medicare (and the taxpayers who fund those programs) to bear the cost.

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.

The OIG authorizes organizations to act as charitable entities in independence from drug companies in distributing patient assistance funds and services. In this case, the OIG is saying that a boundary has been breached and is moving to rescind its authorization of the charity—which likely means that the drug companies will cease using the body.

OIG cannot agree to Requestor’s proposal to further modify 06-04, because Requestor allowed donors to directly or indirectly influence the identification or delineation of its disease categories. This practice directly contravened the specific safeguards Requestor promised to follow and upon which OIG relied in issuing the advisory opinion.

Apparently, OIG found that Caring Voice allowed their pharmaceutical donors access to data that informed the companies “greater ability to raise the prices of their drugs while insulating patients from the immediate out-of-pocket effects,” in the end forcing Medicare to pay for the cost increases.

Pharmaceutical companies increased their donations to copay charities in recent years, often in tandem with large increases of the price of drugs. Under federal law, drug companies can’t give direct copay help to patients covered by Medicare—which would be considered an illegal kickback because it could steer patients to one drug or another. Instead, they’re permitted to donate to independent charities that help Medicare patients, provided the companies don’t exert sway over how the nonprofits operate.

—Ruth McCambridge

Share
Tweet
Share
Email
Print
About the author
Ruth McCambridge

Ruth is Editor Emerita of the Nonprofit Quarterly. Her background includes forty-five years of experience in nonprofits, primarily in organizations that mix grassroots community work with policy change. Beginning in the mid-1980s, Ruth spent a decade at the Boston Foundation, developing and implementing capacity building programs and advocating for grantmaking attention to constituent involvement.

More about: Big PharmaGovernmentManagement and LeadershipNonprofit NewsPolicy

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
The Nonprofit Sector and Social Change: A Conversation between Cyndi Suarez and Claire Dunning
Claire Dunning and Cyndi Suarez
Nonprofits as Battlegrounds for Democracy
Cyndi Suarez
Building Public Support for Employee Ownership: Lessons from Colorado
Yessica Holguin and Jason Wiener
Meet the New Global Tax Haven, the United States
Steve Dubb
Cancelling Student Debt Is Necessary for Racial Justice
Kitana Ananda
To Save Legal Aid, Expand Public Service Loan Forgiveness
Zoë Polk

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
The book "Nonprofit Neighborhoods" leaning against a wall
The Nonprofit Sector and Social Change: A Conversation...
Claire Dunning and Cyndi Suarez
Nonprofits as Battlegrounds for Democracy
Cyndi Suarez
Building Public Support for Employee Ownership: Lessons from...
Yessica Holguin and Jason Wiener

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.