Health care organizations doing business directly or indirectly with the federal government are urged to maintain effective corporate compliance programs as a way to minimize, if not eliminate, non-compliant behavior and to minimize corporate liability risks should non-compliant behavior occur. Delaware court decisions mention directors’ role in confirming the adequacy of the company’s corporate compliance program. For those health care and life sciences companies with direct or indirect relationships with federal health care programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, the federal DHHS Inspector General is imposing new contractual obligations in certain circumstances where directors are required to confirm that these compliance programs are effective. These new obligations may become the standard in other contexts. The New York State Office of the Medicaid Inspector General (OMIG) also recently published regulations requiring New York Medicaid providers to have compliance programs. In March 2009, OMIG issued the Provider Self-Disclosure Guidance.
At this program, which is being presented by Seton Hall University School of Law, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Hervé Gouraige and Lynn Shapiro Snyder and other distinguished speakers will discuss answers to the following questions:
- What is the benefit to companies and directors for maintaining an effective corporate compliance program?
- Can directors and trustees be held personally liable for misconduct even if the company has a corporate compliance program?
- What role should directors play in voluntary or self-disclosures to government agencies?
- What is involved in an effectiveness review for such programs?
- What are some of the recommended steps for directors to take to manage these risks?
For more information, click here.