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.


CLIENT ALERT: Construction Law Update: Communication is Key! And Other Lessons Learned From A Recent Public Project Court Decision

In a recent decision, the Ohio Court of Claims entered a $2.2 million judgment in favor of the general trades contractor, and against a public university, in connection with an on-campus renovation project. Mid American Construction, LLC v. Univ. of Akron, Ct. of Cl. No. 2016-00685JD, 2018-Ohio-4513.

CLIENT ALERT: Ohio Incentivizes Cybersecurity Measures

On November 2, 2018, Ohio’s Data Protection Act (“DPA”) went into effect. The DPA incentivizes Ohio businesses to proactively address cybersecurity and data protection by providing an affirmative defense/safe harbor for claims related to data breach. However, the safe harbor is only applicable if the organization can prove “reasonable compliance” to the DPA.

CLIENT ALERT: Update on Discrimination

The “#metoo” presence and the recent Kavanaugh confirmation hearings have brought sexual discrimination issues to the forefront of the American mind. Always an incendiary and confusing topic, it also includes various permutations of issues involving sex, sex stereotyping, sexual orientation, and transgender situations.

CLIENT ALERT: Ohio Supreme Court Rules that a Subcontractor's Construction Defects are Not a Covered "Occurrence" Under a CGL Policy

Although a growing number of states have held that CGL policies provide coverage for damages caused by the defective work of subcontractors, the Ohio Supreme Court has refused to join the national trend. In Ohio N. Univ. v. Charles Constr. Servs., Inc., 2018-Ohio-4057, the Ohio Supreme Court recently ruled that a subcontractor’s faulty workmanship is not a covered “occurrence” under a typical CGL policy.

CLIENT ALERT: Taxpayer Passport Application will be Denied Due to Unpaid Taxes

In late 2015, Congress passed The Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST) into law. This law allows the IRS and State Department to refuse to issue a Passport if the taxpayer has a seriously delinquent tax debt. The law also permits the IRS and State Department to revoke a taxpayer’s Passport for these same delinquent tax debts. To be considered a seriously delinquent tax debt, the tax debt must total more than $51,000.