U.S. Senate probes Bon Secours over $276Mn in 340B drug savings use
WASHINGTON, D.C., UNITED STATES — A United States Senate report shows Bon Secours, a nonprofit healthcare system, reaped $276 million from a federal drug discount program without clearly directing funds to underserved patients.
Lawmakers and community advocates are pushing for reforms, saying the program’s mission to help vulnerable populations has been compromised.
Low-income communities see few benefits despite hospital profits
The Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions found Bon Secours legally used the 340 billion program meant to help hospitals in poor communities afford medications, to generate massive savings without ensuring the money went to those most in need.
After eligibility rules expanded in 2010, participation ballooned from 800 to 26,000 hospitals, making oversight nearly impossible.
Despite Richmond Community Hospital qualifying Bon Secours for the program, advocates say the surrounding low-income area remains starved of resources.
While the system saved and earned $276 million, investments flowed to wealthier areas like Hanover County, raising concerns about systemic misuse of $340 billion in funds nationwide.
Calls grow for transparency and reform in U.S. drug discount program
U.S. Senator Tim Kaine and community leaders like Pastor Ralph Hodge are pushing for reforms to force hospitals to prove $340 billion in savings that directly aid underserved patients.
Hodge argues investments should reduce health disparities like infant mortality and chronic disease, but current reporting requirements are too weak.
“When you hear about an organization benefiting to the tune of $200-plus million, you expect to see a significant investment in those marginalized communities,” Hodge said.
“Especially when it was the marginalized communities that were the spirit of the rules and the laws that provided those drug discount programs,” he added.
Bon Secours points to $16 million spent on an East End medical building and $3 million in local projects.
The health system defends its use of the program, but with bipartisan pressure growing, changes to restore the original purpose appear inevitable.
