Learn about the benefits and challenges of integrating artificial intelligence into healthcare education and training, as well as strategic recommendations for responsibly adopting AI.

Learn how the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is seeking public input through a Request for Information (RFI) to accelerate AI adoption in clinical care and gather feedback on initiatives and policies that could enhance innovation in the US healthcare system. 

Read our healthcare team’s alert for implementation guidance to prepare before the Illinois Medical Aid in Dying Act takes effect on September 12, 2026.

Learn about the requirements for healthcare businesses to comply with Florida’s new mandate on timely refunds for patient overpayments, effective January 1, 2026.

Read our latest alert on California’s SB 41 for a practical compliance roadmap—implementation timeline, immediate next steps, a 30-day action checklist, and ongoing planning guidance to align PBM practices by January 1, 2026.

Read about the key revisions to Illinois’ amended Mental Health and Developmental Disabilities Confidentiality Act (MHDDCA), which removes the longstanding requirement for a witness signature on consent and revocation forms.

Read our alert examining a federal action challenging Illinois’ nonprofit demographic reporting law and its implications for organizations required to disclose leadership data.

Learn how the HHS reclassification of the Health Center Program as a "Federal public benefit" impacts access, compliance, and funding for health centers, and read our urgent guide on the critical steps your organization should take now.

Learn how OIG Advisory Opinion 25-03 safeguards and compliance best practices can help providers expand their telehealth services while minimizing regulatory risk.

Discover how OIG Advisory Opinion 25-02 empowers community health centers to integrate social services with primary care.

Discover the key compliance challenges and legal risks in the rapidly growing medical spa industry, with a focus on California regulations and practical guidance for ensuring patient safety and business success.

Read our latest legal update about why healthcare professionals need to "Stop, Look, and Listen" before they enter into Medicare Advantage Plan Marketing arrangements.

Pharmacies, wholesalers, third-party logistics providers, outsourcing facilities, clinics, and pharmacists must obtain the California State Board of Pharmacy’s (the “Board”) approval or otherwise notify the Board about changes in ownership, corporate structure, staffing, and the scope of services provided. Reportable changes can be grouped into the following three areas:

The 340B Drug Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers participating in the Medicaid program to provide covered outpatient drugs at significantly reduced prices to certain health care organizations and programs, referred to as "Covered Entities" [42 United States Code (USC) §256b]. 

Pharmacy employees at some CVS and Walgreens stores, including pharmacists, technicians, and support staff, recently walked off of their jobs to protest insufficient staffing and dangerous workloads that they claim jeopardize patient safety.

Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs) are required to provide all required primary, preventive, and enabling health services as well as additional health services as appropriate and necessary – either directly or through established written arrangements and referrals.[1]FQHCs may provide services "either through the staff and supporting resources of the center or through contracts or cooperative arrangements." All required and applicable additional Health Center services must be provided through one or more service delivery methods: directly, or through written contracts and/or cooperative arrangements (which may include formal referrals).[2]

In OIG Advisory Opinion 22-17, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (H.H.S.) Office of Inspector General (OIG) analyzed a proposal whereby a regional non-profit health system would forgive debt owed by a federally qualified health center look-alike clinic (FQHC Look-Alike) with regard to the restructuring of a loan credit line, medical office lease, and master services agreement (collectively referred to as the Collaborative  Arrangement) between the parties. The OIG concluded that a proposed restructuring of the Collaboration Arrangement would not be subject to an enforcement action under the Anti-Kickback Statute (A.K.S.). 

On July 20, 2022, the United States Department of Justice (the DOJ) announced charges against multiple defendants alleging fraudulent schemes (including telemedicine arrangements) totaling more than $1.2 billion. That same day, the OIG issued a Special Fraud Alert describing suspect characteristics (Suspect Characteristics) of fraudulent telemedicine arrangements between telemedicine companies (Telemedicine Companies) with practitioners (Practitioners) and providers (Providers). The continuing focus on telemedicine health care fraud schemes signals heightened enforcement scrutiny of such arrangements.

Telehealth—the provision and coordination of healthcare remotely by means of telecommunications technology—is now an essential tool in the delivery of health care services. The COVID-19 pandemic created an incentive for federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) to quickly adopt telemedicine, eVisits, Virtual Check-Ins, remote patient monitoring, and other forms of virtual care. Medicare Advantage Plans and State Medicaid Managed Care Plans have recently added benefits that address social isolation//loneliness to combat feelings of isolation that can create emotional distress that exacerbates health conditions and may result in early mortality.

On January 13, 2021, the United States Supreme Court (the court), in a 5-4 per curiam decision, issued stays on injunctions issued by the Western District of Louisiana and the Eastern District of Missouri against enforcement of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services’ (CMS) interim final rule (the Rule) requiring that providers participating in the Medicare and Medicaid programs ensure that their covered staff are vaccinated against COVID-19. The court reasoned that Congress has authorized the Secretary of Health and Human Services (the Secretary), in the interest of the health and safety of patients, to impose conditions on participation in the Medicaid and Medicare programs and receipt of funds for services rendered in the programs. The court held that the Secretary’s finding that the Rule’s vaccine mandate is “necessary to promote and protect patient health and safety” because the COVID-19 vaccination “substantially reduce[s] the likelihood that healthcare workers will contract the virus and transmit it to their patients,” fit well within CMS’ purpose and authorization.