Indian Health Service – Page 12

New General Accounting Office Report on IHS

September 27, 2011September 27, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The Indian Health Service (IHS), an agency in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), provides health care to American Indians and Alaska Natives. When care at an IHS-funded facility is unavailable, IHS’s contract health services (CHS) program pays for care from external providers if the patient meets certain requirements and funding is available. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires GAO to study the adequacy of federal funding for IHS’s CHS program. To examine program funding needs, IHS collects data on unfunded services–services for which funding was not available–from the federal and tribal CHS programs. GAO examined (1) the extent to which IHS ensures the data it collects on unfunded services are accurate to determine a reliable estimate of CHS program need, (2) the extent to which federal and tribal CHS programs report having funds available to pay for contract health services, and (3) the experiences of external providers in obtaining payment from the CHS program. GAO surveyed 66 federal and 177 tribal CHS programs and spoke to IHS officials and 23 providers.

Continue reading →

Tenth Circuit Sides with Southern Ute in Contract Support Costs Dispute with IHS

September 19, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion in Southern Ute Tribe v. Sebelius.

The briefs:

Southern Ute Opening Brief

USA Opening Brief

Southern Ute Reply

USA Reply Brief

Quechan Tribe Claim re: Indian Hospital Services Fails

April 8, 2011Matthew L.M. Fletcher1 Comment

Here is the opinion: Quechan v US — IHS Claim

An excerpt:

This is an action brought by the Quechan Indian Tribe against the United States seeking a declaration that the United States has a duty to operate its medical facilities and practices at a level that meets or exceeds a minimum generally accepted standard of care, and that the United States has breached that duty. Plaintiff also seeks equitable relief requiring defendants to ensure its medical services at the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation do not fall below the minimum standard of care.

Quechan Tribe v. United States — Demand for Reservation Health Care

November 13, 2010Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the complaint: Quechan Complaint.

An excerpt:

Plaintiff Quechan Indian Tribe (“Tribe”), in its own capacity and as parens patriae on behalf of its members, seeks a declaratory judgment that the United States of America, acting through the Department of Health and Human Services, Indian Health Service (“IHS“), and the IHS Fort Yuma Service Unit (“United States”) is in breach of its statutory obligation and special trust responsibility to provide the Tribe and its members within the Fort Yuma Indian Reservation (“Reservation”) with health care facilities and services that meet generally accepted, appropriate, and best available standards of care.

Menominee Tribe Wins Contract Support Costs Case against Indian Health Service

August 2, 2010Matthew L.M. Fletcher2 Comments

Here is the D.C. Circuit’s opinion in Menominee Tribe v. United States.

Interesting case, since the Tribe brought suit for indirect costs under the Contract Disputes Act.

Sarah Palin’s Family and the IHS

February 22, 2010Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Federal Court Dismisses Tort Claim against US and Remands to State Court

September 14, 2009Matthew L.M. Fletcher

The opinion in this matter is here: Loza v Native American Air Ambulance An excerpt:

On January 29, 2009, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in the Maricopa County Superior Court alleging medical malpractice against certain named defendants, including Dr. Jesus Carpio. On February 2, 2009, Plaintiffs filed an administrative tort clam with allegations pertaining to Dr. Carpio similar to those contained in Plaintiffs’ January 29 complaint. At the time of the alleged acts of malpractice, Dr. Carpio was an employee of Parker Indian Hospital-a hospital operated by the Indian Health Service, an agency of the United States Department of Health and Human Services.

On May 11, 2009, the United States, on behalf of Dr. Carpio, removed Plaintiffs’ action to this Court and substituted the United States for Defendant Dr. Carpio under 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(2). Shortly thereafter, Defendant United States filed its Motion to Dismiss.

Emotionally Potent Oversimplification of the Day: Terry Anderson on the Indian Health Service

August 31, 2009August 31, 2009Matthew L.M. Fletcher4 Comments

Thanks to Rick Collins for sending this around — Terry Anderson WSJ Op-Ed on Indian Health Service

I’m not surprised that the WSJ carries the material that Terry Anderson writes. The NYTs does, too. I know that Terry is a really nice guy, despite my reservations about his free market/property rights approach to Indian affairs. We had him speak at Fed Bar a few years ago, and he expressed a great deal of support for tribal sovereignty. I had hoped he would engage tribal advocates on the positions they take on the federal trust relationship with the United States, and vice versa, but nothing really happened. I wanted this because I find his brand of editorial commentary (as opposed to his scholarly work) very troubling.

It’s usually a syllogism, repeating oversimplifications about Indian affairs again and again. For example, the one about Indian trust lands that gets noticed in the NYTs:

1. The United States owns all Indian lands.
2. Indians are poor.
2a. Quote/story from Indians angry at government.
3. Therefore, get rid of U.S. trust responsibility.

And the WSJ editorial (above), an obvious attack on the Obama health plan, unsurprising from a free market advocate:

1. IHS handles Indian health.
2. Indians are unhealthy.
3. Get rid of IHS.

Terry gets published in very respectful journals (Journal of Law & Econ., for example), but the work (despite the regression analyses) seems a little superficial to someone with roots in Indian Country. He wrote on tribal courts a few years back, attempting to refute the Cornell/Kalt theory that tribal courts help to develop tribal economies.

Here is the abstract to that paper, which advocates for PL280 to be expanded to all of Indian Country:

Continue reading →

United Keetoowah Claim against IHS Dismissed on Rule 19 Grounds

June 2, 2009Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials over this dispute where the IHS transferred an Indian health facility to the Cherokee Nation, over United Keetoowah’s objections. The case is United Keetoowah Band v. Kempthorne (E.D. Okla.).

United States Motion to Dismiss

UKB Response Brief

United States Reply Brief

United Keetoowah v Kempthorne DCT Order