CVS Wins $3 Billion Government Benefits Contract From Medco

CVS Wins $3 Billion Government Benefits Contract From Medco

 

By Matt Townsend and Pat Wechsler

(Updates shares in fifth paragraph.)

May 27 (Bloomberg) -- CVS Caremark Corp. won a $3 billion contract to provide pharmacy benefits to federal employees, easing concern that the largest U.S. buyer and seller of prescription drugs is losing business to rivals.

Medco Health Solutions Inc., which had held the contract, disclosed today that Blue Cross Blue Shield Association planned to switch to another provider by 2012. Medco shares sank 9 percent for the biggest loss since October 2008. CVS said the new agreement, which starts Jan. 1, 2012, will run through 2014.

CVS, based in Woonsocket, Rhode Island, has sought to recapture business after losing $4.8 billion in 2010 contracts to rivals because of pricing and service. The contract may increase investors’ confidence in the company’s strategy since the 2007 merger that united Caremark’s drug benefits manager with the pharmacy chain, said Robert Summers, an analyst for Susquehanna Financial Group in New York.

“It’s a very good step in the right direction in a business that has been challenging to them,” said Summers, who has a “positive” rating on CVS. “Maybe this is foreshadowing easier times ahead in terms of them winning share.”

CVS rose 65 cents, or 1.7 percent, to $38.80 at 4 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange composite trading. Medco, based in Franklin Lakes, New Jersey, fell $5.78 to $58.66.

Earnings Benefit

The contract may be worth $80 million in operating income, or about 4 cents a share, to CVS, Meredith Adler, an analyst for Barclays Capital Inc. in New York, wrote in a note to clients. CVS generated net income of $3.43 billion, or $2.49 a share, on revenue of $96.4 billion last year.

The Blue Cross Blue Shield contract accounted for almost 5 percent of Medco’s $66 billion in revenue last year, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. It includes 9.8 million annual prescriptions and expires Dec. 31, said Medco, the largest U.S. pharmacy-benefits manager by revenue.

“We are disappointed that BCBSA has chosen a different direction for its PBM services,” Jennifer Luddy, a Medco spokeswoman, said today in an e-mail. “We look forward to the opportunity to serve BCBSA in the future.”

Medco lost the federal-employees contract primarily because CVS undercut the company on price, said Art Henderson, an analyst at Jefferies & Co. in Nashville, Tennessee.

“CVS needed a win of this magnitude and competed hard on price,” Henderson said in a telephone interview.

The decision was also probably shaped by the scandal surrounding a contract with the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, Henderson said. Medco lost a $500 million contract covering 340,000 Calpers members in March after the pension fund revealed that Calpers’ board members may have been influenced with favors to award the original contract in 2005.

“The Calpers scandal left a bad taste in people’s mouth,” said Henderson, who has a “buy” rating on Medco.

Source "http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-05-27/cvs-wins-3-billion-government-benefits-contract-from-medco.html"

 

27. May 2011 03:11 by WebMaster | Comments (0) | Permalink

State Settles With CVS Over Alleged Fraud

April 21, 2011

News Release

CVS Pharmacy Inc. has agreed to pay the state $858,000 to settle a lawsuit over alleged Medicaid fraud. The retail pharmacy is paying out $17.5 million to 10 states and the federal government for allegedly overbilling Medicaid programs for prescriptions drugs. The payment will primarily be used for Medicaid restitution.

Indianapolis, Ind. -- The State of Indiana will receive more than $858,000 from CVS Pharmacy Inc. in the settlement of a whistleblower lawsuit that alleged CVS had overbilled the Medicaid program for prescription drugs, Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller announced today.

The settlement is Indiana’s share of a larger $17.5 million settlement CVS reached last week with 10 states and the federal government involving inflated prescription drug claims submitted to the Medicaid program for reimbursement. Under the whistleblower provisions of the False Claims Act in both state and federal law, a pharmacist in Minnesota who first raised the allegations in a private lawsuit will receive 16 percent of the CVS settlement.

“My office has sought to raise public awareness that the False Claims Act is a powerful tool to thwart fraud committed against government programs. It allows a company insider with knowledge of illegal billing practices to file a private lawsuit, into which the state or federal governments can intervene. If a company engaging in fraud later settles or pays a judgment, then the original whistleblower is entitled to a percentage of the recovery, in acknowledgement of the huge risk they took and courage they showed in exposing fraud by their employer against taxpayers,” Zoeller said.

CVS Pharmacy Inc. operates more than 7,000 retail pharmacies in the U.S. The settlement reached last week resolves allegations that CVS Pharmacy billed the wrong amounts to the Medicaid program for dual-eligible beneficiaries – that is, Medicaid beneficiaries who also have third-party prescription coverage. Pharmacies are supposed to bill the other insurer first and then submit a claim to Medicaid only for the amount of the remaining liability, usually the co-pay.

But an investigation by the states, the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services - Office of Inspector General found that CVS billed more than was allowed for certain dual-eligible claims, resulting in CVS being paid a larger reimbursement than it was entitled to. The investigation of the case by the states and federal government involved a complex analysis of billing and payment information, cross-referenced to private insurance payments.

Under the settlement of the civil suit, CVS will pay the federal government nearly $8 million and the 10 states more than $9.5 million combined, plus interest. The total state settlement paid to the Indiana Medicaid program will be $858,176.16, including $572,117.44 for the state’s share of Medicaid restitution and $286,058.72 for additional recoveries. CVS also agreed to sign an amended corporate integrity agreement requiring it to train employees and implement correct billing procedures concerning dual-eligible beneficiaries.

Whistleblowers can file qui tam lawsuits (pronounced “key tam”) under the False Claims Act against companies for fraud against government contracts, including defense contractors, highway contractors and pharmaceutical or health care companies. Such a case would remain sealed while the states and federal governments investigate the plaintiff’s allegations; and the court unseals it if and when the governments intervene. The whistleblower then is eligible for a percentage of any damages or settlement, usually between 15 and 30 percent of the recovery.

Since Zoeller took office in January 2009, the Indiana Attorney General's Office has participated in 14 settlements of whistleblower lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies over their illegal off-label marketing practices. In those 14 cases, Indiana has reached settlements of nearly $24 million in Medicaid restitution and additional state recoveries.

To encourage whistleblowers to file suit and in turn expose health care fraud, Zoeller’s office has raised public awareness about the False Claims Act through informational meetings, outreach to health care workers and attorneys, and a promotional handout, “Blow the Whistle on Fraud.” The effort is overseen by Deputy Attorney General Allen K. Pope, director of the Indiana Medicaid Fraud Control Unit (MFCU). Zoeller, Pope and Supervising Deputy Attorney General Steve Hunt have made several presentations about filing whistleblower lawsuits to meetings of health care employee associations, nursing students and attorneys.

Any health care or pharmaceutical workers who know about fraud and are interested in filing a whistleblower action against a company should first contact a private attorney who specializes in bringing lawsuits under the False Claims Act. There is no guarantee of the individual recovering damages; but filing a private lawsuit is a necessary step in order for states or the federal government to investigate a fraud case and intervene in court. Zoeller urges anyone interested in bringing a whistleblower action to learn more about the process by visiting his web site, www.in.gov/attorneygeneral/2807.htm

Source: Office of Indiana Attorney General Greg Zoeller

21. April 2011 03:28 by WebMaster | Comments (0) | Permalink

CalPERS

CalPERS is negotiating pharmacy contract with firm being sued for defrauding it

A whistle-blower lawsuit filed against Caremark by private attorneys accuses the firm of defrauding CalPERS of tens of millions of dollars.

April 16, 2011|By Marc Lifsher, Los Angeles Times

Reporting from Sacramento — The California Public Employees' Retirement System is negotiating a lucrative pharmacy benefits management contract with Caremark Rx Inc., a company being sued for defrauding the pension fund of tens of millions of dollars.

It's the second embarrassing misstep by CalPERS in the last month as the scandal-plagued agency seeks a contractor to manage the delivery of mail-order prescription drugs for about 300,000 state and local government workers, retirees and their families.

CalPERS is the largest buyer of healthcare benefits after the U.S. government.

In March, the CalPERS board canceled negotiations with Medco Health Solutions Inc., which had been the front-runner for the contract, after an internal investigation revealed that Medco allegedly had paid more than $4 million in bribes to win a similar three-year, $26-million contract in 2006. With Medco under investigation by law enforcement, the CalPERS board in March directed its staff to start talking with the runner-up, Caremark, a unit of CVS Caremark of Woonsocket, R.I., which bills itself as the "largest pharmacy health care provider in the United States."

The Caremark lawsuit, a whistle-blower case filed by private attorneys in the name of the state of California, is based partially on evidence from former Caremark employees. A trial is slated to begin May 10 in Los Angeles County Superior Court and is scheduled to last for at least a month, a time when CalPERS staff is expected to be negotiating the pharmacy contract with Caremark. A number of CalPERS members and staff have been subpoenaed to testify.

Caremark is accused of endangering CalPERS members by making unauthorized and illegal changes to prescriptions submitted between 2003 and 2006, often by switching patients to cheaper drugs or canceling prescriptions outright. Caremark representatives would contact physicians' offices by telephone and "obtain authorization from virtually anyone in the doctor's office, including receptionists and others with no authorization or competence to make medical decisions," the lawsuit said.

Caremark also falsified dates in transaction records to improve its required "turn-around-time" performance as required by CalPERS, according to the complaint.

"For-profit Caremark intentionally changed CalPERS plan members' prescriptions, illegally, without authorization from their doctors; and then, manipulated … prescriptions by canceling them or changing the date of receipt to avoid paying substantial penalties," plaintiff's lawyer Michael Leonard said.

Caremark spokeswoman Christine K. Cramer said the lawsuit had no merit and that the company was defending itself against the allegations.

"We are confident that our prior services to CalPERS were conducted in accordance with both our CalPERS contract and applicable law," she said. "We do not believe this lawsuit should have any impact on the current CalPERS contracting process."

The allegations against Medco and Caremark "point to the larger issue of how dysfunctional our healthcare system is that the two top bidders are engaged in alleged acts of bribery and fraud," said Kathay Feng, executive director of California Common Cause. "It's a real concern that CalPERS' bidding system does not allow for a more nuanced consideration of the quality of service and the safety and transparency of the bidding company."

Caremark's alleged mishandling of the CalPERS contract, if proven in court, would indicate that the company "is putting people's lives at stake," Feng said. "Trying to cancel people's prescriptions is a game that entails the health of individuals, who are reliant on these prescription drugs."

CalPERS spokesman Brad Pacheco said the agency "has been following this [Caremark] lawsuit since Day One."

Pacheco declined to comment on what, if anything, CalPERS has done to investigate or correct the alleged wrongdoing. He stressed that CalPERS has not yet signed a contract with any pharmacy benefits manager, and "as part of the negotiations on a potential contract, we will evaluate and take into account claims in the … case."

However, a spokesman for state Treasurer Bill Lockyer, a member of the CalPERS board, said board members were not aware of the Caremark lawsuit and allegations that the company committed fraud against CalPERS at the time the board directed staff to negotiate with Caremark to replace Medco.

Lockyer is concerned that despite the serious allegations raised by the lawsuit, CalPERS may be forced to do business with Caremark because it and the now-disgraced Medco are among the few companies capable of handling such big pharmacy benefits management accounts, spokesman Tom Dresslar said.

"This case involves allegations of reckless disregard for the health and safety of PERS members and a multi-pronged rip-off of PERS," he said. "Unfortunately, all this is likely to be a moot point because PERS may be forced by legal and procedural requirements to do business with Caremark. That doesn't make it any less distasteful."

In October, the CalPERS board selected Medco as the top finalist and directed staff to open negotiations. At the same time, it told staff to do likewise with the next highest bidder, Caremark, in the event that the Medco talks failed, Pacheco said.

Those negotiations were quickly halted last month after the CalPERS board received the findings of an internal legal review that said Medco allegedly paid a secret "consulting" fee to Alfred J.R. Villalobos, a former CalPERS board member turned deal maker. The suggestion that Medco pay the money to Villalobos came during a meeting that was also attended by Federico Buenrostro Jr., who was then the pension fund's chief executive.

Both state and federal law enforcement agencies are investigating the alleged payments, according to CalPERS and disclosures made by Medco in documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Shum Preston, a spokesman for California Atty. Gen. Kamala Harris, declined to comment on the whistle-blower lawsuit against Caremark. He said Harris' predecessor, then-Atty. Gen. Lockyer, in 2005 declined to intervene as part of the plaintiff's litigation team. Preston acknowledged, however, that the state would receive a share of any award if the plaintiffs prevailed.

An attorney general's decision not to get involved in a whistle-blower case "isn't necessarily a comment on the merits of the legal arguments, said Dresslar, Lockyer's spokesman.

"A variety of factors, among them allocation of resources, go into making those decisions," he said.

Source: http://articles.latimes.com/2011/apr/16/business/la-fi-calpers-fraud-20110416

16. April 2011 03:50 by WebMaster | Comments (0) | Permalink

CVS Pharmacy Fined $75 Million - October 14th, 2010

CVS Pharmacy Fined $75 Million for Allowing Large Quantities of Pseudoephedrine Sales
in Violation of Combat Methamphetamine Epidemic Act.

CVS Pharmacy Inc. has agreed to pay $75-million in fines for allowing repeated purchases of a key ingredient in the making of methamphetamine in at least five states that also led to a spike in Southern California drug trafficking, authorities said Thursday.

The largest U.S. operator of retail pharmacies will pay what federal prosecutors said is the largest civil penalty under the Controlled Substances Act.

The company also will forfeit about $2.6-million in profits earned from the sales of pseudoephedrine, which can often be found in cold medicine and is used to make meth.

Authorities said CVS didn’t provide enough safeguards to monitor how much pseudoephedrine someone was buying, and the company violated federal drug regulations Arizona, Georgia, California, Nevada, and South Carolina and possibly 20 other states.

“This case shows what happens when companies fail to follow their ethical and legal responsibilities,” said U.S. Attorney Andre Birotte Jr. “CVS knew it had a duty to prevent methamphetamine trafficking, but it failed to take steps to control the sale of a regulated drug used by methamphetamine cooks as an essential ingredient for their poisonous stew.”

The company was expected to pay the $75-million fine by Friday. The remaining forfeiture is due within 30 days.

          Some executive at CVS should be prosecuted criminally for this gross megligence and maybe this will wise up the industry to
          obey the law

http://flapsblog.com/2010/10/14/cvs-pharmacy-fined-75-million-for-allowing-large-quantities-of-pseudoephedrine-sales- in-violation-of-combat-methamphetamine-epidemic-act/

 

 

12. March 2011 08:03 by WebMaster | Comments (1) | Permalink

Another Mail Order Close: 4/8/2011

I have heard from several employees that CVS/Caremark intends to close its facility in Richardson, TX on April 8, 2011.  I cannot find any information online or any business articles.

Has anyone else heard something similar?

 

Thanks!!!

CVS Pharmacist

21. February 2011 16:48 by cvs.pharmacist | Comments (2) | Permalink

Donation