Not for Profit??

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-18-2006
Not for Profit??
1
Tue, 10-07-2008 - 6:36pm

http://www.wherethemoneygoes.com/newSearch.php?SearchString=Obama&Submit=Search+WTMG


My son was born in Michael Reese hospital in Chicago 29 years ago.


My father recommended it, and since he had served as a pharmacists mate 2nd class in WWII, my wife and I took his recommendation on its face.

At one time, Michael Reese was considered one of the finest hospitals in Chicago, but my dad was living in the past.

It was not a very good hospital at the time.

It was eventually sold to a for profit company, who couldn't make a go of it.

They shut their doors recently.

Don't know if they were pressured to do so because Chicago Mayor Richard Daley coveted the location for his dream of landing the 2016 Olympics, or they just couldn't make it with all the Medicaid patients they had to handle.

Here's part of what I wrote in March of this year.

The hospital assessment program in Illinois generates big money for Medicaid payments to hospitals.

And as with any program that raises money and distributes money, some win, some lose.

Currently big wealthy hospitals with a lot of volume are disproportionally rewarded under this system even though the percentage of Medicaid patients may be very small.

I reported in January that one hospital executive (yes some talk to me) said "having a psychiatric unit in your hospital is like having a gold mine under this system".

Poorer small inner city and rural hospitals where Medicaid patients percentage wise make up a much larger proportion of total patients are screwed under the current system.

According to figures provided to me, in 2006 this assessment program provided a payout of $17,338,250 to not-for-profit Northwestern Memorial Hospital.

According to their financial records for that year Northwestern Memorial made a profit of $181,703,000 and was sitting on cash and investments of $1,697,348,000.

You tell me whether they either needed or deserved that $17 million.

So today's question is, could inner city for profit Michael Reese which had an incredibly large Medicaid population have stayed open if they got that $17 million instead of incredibly wealthy not-for-profit Northwestern Memorial.

The answer would be yes, unless of course Chicago's Mayor wanted the property no matter what.

Incredibly profitable not-for-profit healthcare systems like Catholic Health Initiatives and not-for-profit Ascension close inner city hospitals arguing that they are not financially viable, while true inner city hospitals, hospitals who don't have the resources to seek out wealthy white patients go under.

So where are we at when it comes to serving America's poor who live in the inner city?

So how do we define charity care in terms of earning a tax-exemption?

A hospital like Michael Reese could have remained opened if my plan, now the plan of the Illinois Attorney General was law, which would (according to my definition) place a luxury tax on those very profitable not-for-profit hospitals like Northwestern Memorial and Barack Obama's hospital, not-for-profit The University of Chicago Hospitals, using that money to keep real iner city hospitals open.

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 01-18-2006
In reply to: snoopyme
Tue, 10-07-2008 - 6:37pm
And it isn’t aimed at making healthcare more affordable, it’s aimed at making hospitals more profitable.

This blog, the Chicago Tribune and the Washington Post among have all written about what not-for-profit The University of Chicago Hospitals have been up to.

I have repeatedly framed it this way.

They are looking for more wealthy white people with insurance.

Michelle Obama's job was to steer poor Blacks without insurance away from the main hospital.

In early June I wrote in part about a piece of information in a story written by Bruce Japsen that appeared in the Chicago Tribune.

He wrote in part that not-for-profit The University of Chicago Hospitals was making "another attempt to compete with Northwestern Memorial Hospital on its home turf" by opening an office on the Magnificent Mile.

He reported that "A source close to the move said cardiology services will be part of the leased space, believed to be at least one floor. The services will include some University of Chicago heart doctors in order to attract by referral a more affluent patient base of people who live and work downtown". (Emphasis added.)

Later that month, Japsen reported that "Northwestern University is terminating its academic affiliation with Evanston Northwestern Healthcare, which is in talks with the University of Chicago about a possible academic affiliation".

"Such a relationship could allow University of Chicago to tap into the wealthy base of patients the north suburban hospital operator is known to treat. University of Chicago has been reaching into areas for more affluent patients, recently confirming a lease of office space for U. of C. doctors in Chicago's Streeterville neighborhood near Michigan Avenue." (Emphasis added.)

You see the problem with The University of Chicago hospitals is that it is landlocked by poor minority neighborhoods with many uninsured.

Poor location can hurt financial success.

Don't take my word for it, read what Navigant Consulting has to say.

"We have long believed that the two best predictors of health system financial success are:

"1. Location-which is generally correlated with payer mix and market growth; and

"2. Market position-which translates into a strong negotiating position with non-governmental payers.

"Organizations with undistinguished positions in declining markets are increasingly finding themselves unable to deliver the margins necessary to successfully compete in the long run, particularly if they face competitors that do. A number of these encumbered organizations have sought affiliation partners or are acquiring firms and more are following suit."

So if you have a poor location you might want to acquire some firms that have what Bruce Japsen has described that have locations where there is a "wealthy base of patients".

This is exactly the plan being followed by The University of Chicago Hospitals.

What's make this so important is where this is coming from.

Crain's Chicago Business now lists Navigant Consulting as the 6th largest healthcare management consulting firm in the entire country, with provider revenue of $73.7 million in 2007.

Sitting on the Board of Directors of Navigant is Valerie Jarrett, who has been described as Barack's closest advisor and the closest friend to him and Michelle.

She also sits on the Board of The University of Chicago Hospitals, where she helped get Michelle her job, her promotion and a big fat contract for Barack's media advisor.

All this tells me that the real Obama blueprint for healthcare reform can already be found in the pages of what Navigant sells to hospitals (if someone could get them) in order to improve their financial success.

This is an important story that someone with more resources, aka, the main stream media should investigate.

To see one example that I did uncover about how Navigant operates, Click Here

Not very comforting.

Change we can believe in.