Resources

Client Alerts, News Articles, Blog Posts, & Multimedia

Everything you need to know about BMD and the industry.

The Reasoning Behind Governor DeWine's $775 Million Budget Reduction

Client Alert

This week, Governor DeWine announced $775 million in cuts to the state operating budget due to financial repercussions resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.

The Reductions –The DeWine administration will reduce General Revenue Fund spending by $775 million between now and the end of the state fiscal year (June). The following reductions will be made for the next two months:

  • Medicaid: $210 million
  • K12 Foundation Payment Reduction: $300 million
  • Other Education Budget Line Items: $55 million
  • Higher Education: $110 million
  • All Other Agencies: $100 million

Recent Timeline The state is required by statute to have a balanced budget each biennium. As Ohio enters month 11 of its 24-month budget, the motivation to balance the budget is forcing the cuts. In making his announcement, the Governor chronologically broke down how Ohio arrived at its present condition:

  • February, the state was running $200 million above budget estimates;
  • April, the state was forced to shut down to mitigate COVID-19;
  • As of May 6, 2020, the state is $776.9 million in the red; and
  • He expects the state to continue to experience budgetary concerns for months. 

The ReasoningGovernor DeWine anchored his reasoning to future-facing concerns. He cautioned that, “[w]hile we do not know what the coming months will hold, COVID is here with us and will be here for months to come.” He hedged his possible cautionary actions by pointing to his unwillingness to draw from the Rainy Day Fund for the rest of this fiscal year (two months), but will likely need to tap the budget stabilization fund in the next fiscal year beginning in July. 

On MedicaidThe Governor said that cuts to Medicaid will not come at the cost of essential services, and that he believes they will be able to find savings within the system even as the state responds to the COVID-19 pandemic. Subsequently, the Director of the Office of Budget and Management indicated that much of the Medicaid cuts will be achieved as an adjustment to Medicaid managed care plan rates.

For more, contact Daphne L. Kackloudis 614.246.7508, dlkackloudis@bmdllc.com.


Supreme Court Backs HHS in DSH Payment Battle

DSH payments are statutorily required payments intended to offset hospitals’ uncompensated care costs to improve patient access to Medicare and Medicaid. The payments also serve to help the financial stability of safety-net hospitals that oftentimes treat uninsured or underinsured patients. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ (HHS) specifically makes DSH payments to hospitals that serve a high number of low-income patients. The Medicare DSH adjustment is calculated based on two factors: the hospital’s Medicare patients with low incomes and those with low incomes, but not on Medicare.

Sweeping Changes Proposed for Federal Title IX Legislation

Monica B. Andress and Krista D. Warren

The Latest CMS Guidance: HIPAA Edition

Metaverse in the Workplace: What Do Employers Need to Know?

Emerging technologies are creating a host of new legal issues for employers. The rise of the metaverse has been one of the most anticipated expansions over the last few years. The metaverse is a virtual world that allows users to interact with each other in simulated environments. The metaverse in the workplace has been expanding rapidly as businesses explore the use of virtual reality and augmented reality to improve workflows and communication.

A Win for the Hospitals: An Update on the Latest 340B Lawsuit

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court unanimously rejected massive payment cuts to hospitals under the 340B drug discount program. Now, the Department of Health and Human Services no longer has the discretion to change 340B reimbursement rates without gathering data on what hospitals actually pay for outpatient drugs. This “straightforward” ruling was based on the text and structure of the statute, per the Supreme Court. Simply put, because HHS did not conduct a survey of hospitals’ acquisition costs, HHS acted unlawfully by reducing the reimbursement rates for 340B hospitals.