Skip to content

340B Report’s Ted Slafsky riffs on what Congress, U.S. states have in store for 340B reporting

Changes related to 340B reporting requirements are afoot in Congress and several U.S. states. To explore what that means for 340B program managers, Sectyr recently invited Ted Slafsky, publisher of the 340B Report, to join Sectyr’s Craig Frost for the first in a series of live webinars discussing how to improve 340B program accountability and give policymakers and industry stakeholders greater confidence in its oversight. Slafsky, one of America’s leading experts on health care policy, regularly reports on the forces affecting the 340B program through his independent news coverage and analysis.

A catalyst for stricter reporting

To kick off the webinar, Slafsky noted that articles from last fall in The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal are still having an impact on Congress’ view of the 340B program. Slafsky believes these pieces have spurred Congressional leaders to take a much closer look than ever before at expanding 340B reporting requirements. The stories, say Slafsky, seem to have influenced policy well beyond Washington as evidenced by Maine and Minnesota passing new laws imposing 340B reporting requirements.

Slafsky also drew on his experience covering Congress to opine on what covered entities may see in this legislative session and beyond. For example, Slafsky is tracking a bill (H.R. 3290) sponsored by Rep. Larry Bucshon (R-Ind.). Buchson’s bill will allow the Department of Health and Human Services to impose new reporting requirements and audit healthcare provider records to determine how they use their 340B drug purchases and income. In contrast to Rep. Buchson’s bill, Slafsky said Democrats in Congress are arguing that lawmakers need to tackle drug manufacturer contract pharmacy restrictions and should address this along with the reporting proposed by H.R 3290.

“Ted’s passion for 340B and his journalistic instincts are a great mix because he can sum up these complicated Congressional actions in a concise, cogent way for everyone to understand,” said Frost.

Another bill Slafsky discussed, and one with broad bipartisan support, is H.R. 3561, which would require more reporting when it comes to how 340B providers are bringing in revenue from Medicaid managed care plans. Slafsky also commented on 340B provider-friendly bills working their way through Congress and backed by Rep. Abigail Spanberger (D-Va.) and Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.). For his part, Frost offered that 340B program managers could use compliance management software to shoulder the burden of reporting, while maintaining continuous compliance in anticipation of whatever new requirements lie over the horizon. To hear a recording with the rest of Slafsky’s take on where Congress is headed with 340B requirements, what it means for covered entities, and more about the webinar series, “Strengthening 340B Program Integrity to Improve Accountability and Confidence,” click here now.