University of Virginia Library

B. Medical Center-Wide Improvements

• 1)Compliance Officer Position: The Compliance Officer position recently authorized for the Medical Center has yet to be filled. An initial advertisement and round of interviews produced no acceptable candidates; a second round is now planned. The Compliance Officer will be responsible for assisting healthcare professionals in complying with federal and state regulations applicable to medical centers, including the vast array of Medicare and Medicaid billing rules.
• Recommendation: The committee feels quite strongly that the Compliance Officer position should be re-advertised and filled promptly with a qualified candidate. This individual should be responsible for helping healthcare providers conduct their billing and other activities in accordance with regulatory requirements. This position will help to ensure that the Medical Center is accountable to outside agencies and programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, as well as to the taxpayers. The committee supports the proposal that the Compliance Officer report directly to the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer.

• 2)BOV Oversight: As a final step in its review, the committee considered the relationship between the Medical Center and the body responsible for its oversight, the Board of Visitors. Currently this responsibility is exercised primarily through the Health

  ---

  6

  
  
  Affairs Committee of the Board. That committee's meetings are relatively brief and infrequent, considering the complexity of the institution it is monitoring. Moreover, its current structure does not give the committee easy access to independent, specialized expertise in healthcare matters, which it could use to do its job most effectively. At present there is only one member of the committee (and of the entire Board) with significant experience in the healthcare industry.
• Recommendation: The committee recommends that the Rector restructure the Health Affairs Committee to include, in an advisory capacity, professionals from relevant sectors of the business community, including the healthcare industry. The Health Affairs Committee should be comprised of five board members: three appointed at large, the Health Affairs Committee Chair, and the Finance Committee Chair. In addition, at least three outside experts should be appointed by the Rector and act in an advisory capacity as nonvoting members. Persons with experience and expertise in relevant business sectors, particularly in fields such as managed care and medical insurance, should be the types of individuals who would serve as advisors to the Health Affairs Committee.
• The committee also recommends that there be a direct link to the Healthcare Partners Board of Trustees from the Board of Visitors. Two voting Board members of the Health Affairs Committee should serve on the Healthcare Partners board to ensure a cross-fertilization of deliberations and plans. We further recommend that the three outside experts appointed by the Rector to advise the Health Affairs Committee should also be members of the Healthcare Partners Board. To round out that membership, the Health Services Foundation should have one representative. Our proposed structure would ensure that the Board of Visitors, which is the ultimate decision maker about, for example, acquisition of outlying businesses, is informed of proposed ventures in a more timely manner and can have a more immediate impact on Medical Center operations.
• It is our hope that the Health Affairs Committee, restructured as described above, would assist the Medical Center in a more direct way. This also would require the Health Affairs Committee to meet frequently enough to address issues on a timely basis. The meetings should be long enough to give the members a deeper understanding of Medical Center operations.