List date(s) this work was published or aired.
Oct. 23, 2011
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
An exploration of charity care, taxes and the tax-exempt status of non-profit St. Louis area hospitals. This one-day package marked the first in-depth investigation in Missouri of the tax advantages of these multi-billion dollar health systems. It not only probed the tax breaks given to one of St. Louis’ most powerful institutions — BJC Healthcare, which operates Barnes-Jewish Hospital — but also documented the apparent abuses of its nonprofit status by the Mercy healthcare system, which operates hospitals in Missouri and three other states. A sidebar also provided a detailed examination of state and local property taxes foregone on these hospital properties.
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
These stories/sidebars relied on IRS 990 forms on multiple companies and their subsidiaries, consolidated audited financial statements, hospital memoranda and correspondence, bond disclosure reports, court rulings, law journal articles, General Accounting Office studies, SEC filings, Federal Aviation Administration records, Medicare cost reports, company brochures, and information posted on the web by business health advocates and hospital trade associations. Public records requests were not submitted.
Explain types of human sources used.
Interviews with hospital executives including chief executives and chief financial officers of non-profit and for-profit health systems, consumer health advocates, Missouri and Illinois tax officials, independent hospital consultants, law professors, accountants, and hospital association officials in those states.
Results:
This expose provoked discussions among hospital administrators, government officials, and the public at-large about the costs and benefits of affording non-profit status to hospitals — and the public obligations of these entities. It also triggered editorials and op-ed pieces about these issues.
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
No corrections, clarifications or challenges.
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
My first piece of advice is to root out assumptions and triple check your facts. This package relied on a truckload of numbers, including many calculations and mathematical interpretations, which can prove deadly when wrong. It’s highly technical reporting, and it’s essential to seek out experts including accountants, lawyers, and health care consultants, who can help weed through the information you’ve gathered. It’s also volatile subject matter — simply because these are large and powerful institutions with huge financial interests — so it’s important to carefully consider how best to present such material to catalyze a health policy debate.