Recommendations that the University of California manage state prison health care services prompted criticism from union members at today’s UC Board of Regents meeting.
Under the proposal, the UC would be responsible for reforming the state prison system, including centralizing the prison medical programs and hiring physicians and other professionals. The greater use of telemedicine, or virtual doctor visits, would extend care to underserved communities, according to the UC.
“It’s an untested culture, it’s a sales pitch,” said Stuart Bussey, president of the Union of American Physicians and Dentists. “We need an independent study, not by a company that stands to profit.”
The recommendations, compiled by health care company NuPhysicia, stated that California could save $4.3 billion in the first five years after adopting the change and $12 billion within the next decade.
However, Bussey maintained that the telemedicine company would benefit if the plan were approved and likened the report to that of a pharmaceutical company.
Currently, the UC includes five academic medical centers and 16 professional schools and provides some telemedicine services to state prisoners. Managing the prison health care system would be another opportunity for the UC to help the state on an important public service issue, according to a statement from the UC.
“Rather than being process-driven, the focus is on outcomes,” said John Stobo, UC senior vice president for health sciences.
The report stated that the state could see higher quality and lower costs with the new policy. While California currently spends $41.25 on health care for each inmate, this amount would be reduced to $19.34, according to the proposed model.
This state-university model has been tested in Texas, Georgia and New Jersey with noticeable success: Health care in Texas and New Jersey costs about $10 per inmate each day.
Additionally, while California currently pays $2.4 billion for annual health care costs, Texas pays just $423 million, the NuPhysicia report estimates.
“Based on my experience in Texas, there’s room for improvement,” Stobo said.
Stobo was previously the president of the University of Texas Medical Branch, a medical center that worked to improve the delivery of prison health care and was responsible for providing care to the majority of inmates in Texas. He was also the nonexecutive founding chair of the NuPhysicia board but separated completely from the company when he left Texas in 2007, according to a UC Office of the President statement.
Aside from concerns about conflict of interest, other participants at the regents’ meeting brought up the risk of legal consequences.
Andrew Kahn, an attorney from Davis, Cowell & Bowe, LLP and who is representing the Union of American Physicians and Dentists, brought up the possibility of state law violations and the likelihood that the UC would assume responsibility for the countless lawsuits from inmates dissatisfied with their previous care.
“The last thing the UC needs is to be dragged into the prison litigation,” Kahn said.
Regent Sherry Lansing and Stobo both emphasized that the proposal is in the earliest stages, and research to explore potential consequences as well as other options will be conducted.
The Board of Regents postponed any discussion about the report until the next meeting, citing time constraints and the need to have a careful discussion about what Lansing called a “very crucial and important” topic.
A special committee will be established to analyze the issue, Board of Regents Chairman Russell Gould said.
“We need to look at the range of options as to how the UC can assist the state and understand the implications of those options,” Gould said.