- http://www.thelundreport.org/resource/regence_seeks_rate_hikes_in_washington_and_oregon_in_the_individual_market
- http://www.thelundreport.org/resource/regence_reduces_payments_to_healthcare_professionals
- http://www.thelundreport.org/resource/regence_refuses_to_publicly_share_information_on_rate_hike
- http://www.thelundreport.org/resource/regence_bluecross_blueshield_provided_incorrect_information_on_rate_filing
List date(s) this work was published or aired.
9/13/2012 8/30/2012 8/24/2012 8/3/2012 7/26/2012 7/6/2012
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
This series focused on financial dealings at Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield, which has begun to operate like a for-profit insurer (rate hikes, decreased reimbursements for providers and investments in for-profit entities) despite continued nonprofit status.
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
I used public data on rate increases and public comments on same.
Explain types of human sources used.
I worked with anonymous sources within the company, sources from the state’s public interest research group and stakeholders who spoke up about reimbursement issues.
Results:
Regence Blue Cross Blue Shield is still the number one insurer in the state.
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.
We have not been asked for a correction on any of these stories, and continue to cover Regence’s business practices.
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
Cultivate sources inside and outside the company, and go over public financials with a fine-toothed comb.