Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

Recent HIPAA Breach Settlements - Lessons Learned

Client Alert

As a healthcare provider, you are likely familiar with the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). But, do you know how serious the consequences could be for a breach of HIPAA? According to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) Office for Civil Rights (OCR), the consequences for providers may include settlements of $30,000 to $240,000. OCR recently released two settlements for improper breaches of protected health information (PHI) that are good examples of the major monetary penalties that can result from common HIPAA mistakes.

Disclosing PHI in Responses to Negative Reviews

In April 2020, a health care provider in New Jersey impermissibly disclosed the PHI (including information on diagnoses and treatment) of its patients in response to negative online reviews. OCR investigated following a complaint from the patient and found that the provider impermissibly disclosed patient PHI and failed to implement policies and procedures with respect to protected information. On June 5, 2023, the provider agreed to pay $30,000 to OCR to settle the complaint. Additionally, the provider agreed to implement a corrective action plan to resolve potential violations. The plan included a few of the following steps:

  • Train all members on the organization’s policies and procedures to comply with HIPAA Privacy;
  • Issue breach notices to all whose PHI was disclosed on any internet platform without valid authorization; and
  • Submit a breach report to HHS on individuals whose PHI was disclosed on any internet platform without valid authorization.

In response to the complaints, OCR Director Melanie Fontes Rainer stated, “OCR continues to receive complaints about health care providers disclosing their patients’ protected health information on social media or on the internet in response to negative reviews.” They added, “[s]imply put, this is not allowed.”

Snooping by Security Guards

On June 15, 2023, a Washington hospital paid $240,000 to settle its HIPAA breach affecting 419 individuals. Following a breach notification report filed by the hospital, OCR investigated and found that 23 of the hospital’s security guards impermissibly accessed the medical records of hundreds of patients without a job-related purpose. The guards accessed information including names, dates of birth, medical record numbers, addresses, certain notes related to the treatment, and insurance information.

In addition to a $240,000 settlement, the hospital was required to implement a plan to update its policies and procedures to safeguard PHI and prevent its workforce members from snooping in the future. Further, the hospital was to be monitored for two years by the OCR to ensure its compliance with the HIPAA Security Rule. The hospital agreed to take the following steps, among others, to bring it into HIPAA compliance:

  • Conduct a risk analysis to determine risks and vulnerabilities to electronic PHI;
  • Develop and implement a risk management plan to address and mitigate identified security risks and vulnerabilities identified in the risk analysis; and
  • Enhance its existing HIPAA and Security Training Program to provide workforce training on updated HIPAA policies and procedures.

“Data breaches caused by current and former workforce members impermissibly accessing patient records are a recurring issue across the healthcare industry. Healthcare organizations must ensure that workforce members can only access the patient information needed to do their jobs,” Fontes Rainer stated. “HIPAA covered entities must have robust policies and procedures in place to ensure patient health information is protected from identity theft and fraud.”

HIPAA breaches are to be taken very seriously. It is imperative for health care providers to have current HIPAA compliance plans, trainings, and breach protocols. For questions, or to update your HIPAA compliance plan, please reach out to attorney Ashley Watson at abwatson@bmdllc.com or any members of the BMD Healthcare Team.


The New Rule 1.510 - Radical Change for Summary Judgement Procedure in Florida

In civil litigation, where both sides participate actively, trial is usually required at the end of a long, expensive case to determine a winner and a loser. In federal and most state courts, however, there are a few procedural shortcuts by which parties can seek to prevail in advance of trial, saving time, money and annoyance. The most common of these is the “motion for summary judgment”: a request to the court by one side for judgment before trial, generally on the basis that the evidence available reflects that a win for that party is legally inevitable and thus required. Effective May 1, 2021, summary judgment procedure in Florida has radically changed.

Vacating, Modifying or Correcting an Arbitration Award Under R.C. 2711.13: Three-Month Limitation Maximum; Not Guaranteed Amount of Time

In a recent decision, the Supreme Court of Ohio held that neither R.C. 2711.09 nor R.C. 2711.13 requires a court to wait three months after an arbitration award is issued before confirming the award. R.C. 2711.13 provides that “after an award in an arbitration proceeding is made, any party to the arbitration may file a motion in the court of common pleas for an order vacating, modifying, or correcting the award.” Any such motion to vacate, modify, or correct an award “must be served upon the adverse party or his attorney within three months after the award is delivered to the parties in interest.” In BST Ohio Corporation et al. v. Wolgang, the Court held the three-month period set forth in R.C. 2711.13 is not a guaranteed time period in which to file a motion to vacate, modify, or correct an arbitration award. 2021-Ohio-1785.

EEOC Provides Updated Guidance Regarding Employer COVID-19 Vaccine Policies

On May 28, 2021, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission updated its guidance regarding employer COVID-19 vaccination policies. The new guidance provides much-needed clarification of expectations for employers seeking to promote workplace safety and prevent the spread of COVID-19, including discussion of mandatory vaccination policies, voluntary vaccination incentives, and accommodation of employees based on disability or sincerely held religious beliefs. The full text of the update is found in Section K of the EEOC’s COVID Q&A document. You can also learn more about these and other developments from BMD's Bryan Meek and Monica Andress through the Employment Law After Hours YouTube channel, available here.

What Telemedical Barriers Practices Face and How They Can Manage Them

The onset of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to many businesses and industries having to rapidly adapt new practices in order to stay profitable, and the healthcare industry is no exception. Although telehealth tools and practices have existed and been used since the Vietnam War, the pandemic has caused many individual healthcare practices to heavily rely on telehealth as a large portion of their service mix in order to continue to provide care for patients. Because of this rapid adoption of telehealth practices in order to combat the restrictions of COVID-19, the telemedicine industry’s revenue has exploded in the last year. Experts predict that telehealth will continue to grow in use beyond the current pandemic, estimating the industry’s worth to be $25 billion by 2025. However, this rapid adoption of telehealth was prompted out of need and has not been without its own barriers that practices now face.

Which Entity Should I Form When Starting a New Business?

As a tax law attorney, friends and acquaintances ask me this question all the time: what type of entity should I form when starting a new business? With many business options available it can be confusing determining which business structure would be appropriate. Below is a general overview of each business structure and the tax responsibilities of each.