1. Provide the title of your story or series and the names of the journalists involved.
"GOP health plan takes small steps"
"Insurers alone can't be blamed for rates, economists say"
"Health care tries to figure out what works best"
"Research key in slowing health care spending"
"Providers of health care in recovery"
"No big increase in health charity"
All by Guy Boulton.
2. List date(s) this work was published or aired.
"GOP health plan takes small steps," March 2, 2010
"Insurers alone can't be blamed for rates, economists say," March 14, 2010
"Health care tries to figure out what works best," May 2, 2010
"Research key in slowing health care spending" Sept. 26, 2010
"Providers of health care in recovery," Aug. 8, 2010
"No big increase in health charity," Aug. 9, 2010
3. Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
"GOP health plan takes small steps,": I told my editor that this story shows why we often just use the sound bite. The story was roughly 40 inches, after taking some cuts yet gave only an overview of the Republican proposal. But I'd like to think it provided context on what the House leadership was proposing, which included what the proposal would not do. An example: The contention was their proposal would lower health insurance premiums by 10 percent. What generally wasn't noted in stories was this was only for a small segment of the market and the reduction would be over nine years. Premiums have more than doubled in the past decade. Being told that they would go up 90 percent instead of 100 percent in coming decade doesn't sound quite as appealing. That's just one example. Much of the perspective in the story also comes from conservative economists and policy analysts.
"Insurers alone can't be blamed for rates, economists say": This story was done because insurers had become the favorite target at this point in the debate on health care reform.
"Health care tries to figure out what works best" and "Research key in slowing health care spending": Two of the three stories that have run so far in an ongoing and occasional series on comparative effectiveness stemming from a Kaiser Media Fellowship.
"Providers of health care in recovery" and "No big increase in health charity": These two stories were prompted by health system executives and the Wisconsin Hospital Association frequently contending that hospitals had seen a sharp increase in bad debt expense and requests for charity care because of the economic downturn. Their audited financial statements didn't support that. Reading five financial statements, preparing and sending off questions and interviewing CFOs was a chore. But the stories did counter some common perceptions. (We didn't have wrong for a graphic that showed charity care as a percent of revenue for the health care systems.)
4. Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
Policy briefs, reports, health affairs, medical journals, audited financial statement, news stories, etc.
5. Explain types of human sources used.
Varied.
6. Results (if any).
N/a.
7. 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.
Not for these entries, but I've run my share of corrections.
8. Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
The stories are too varied to give general advice, though as you know, regional health care reporters should read health systems' audited financial statements, including the footnotes and then find someone who can explain the parts they don't understand. We also often don't provide needed context. How many stories have noted that $1 trillion, the projected cost of the federal health care law, is less than 3 percent of the roughly $40 trillion the U.S. will spend on health care through 2019?