As private equity firms, health systems and entrepreneurs in the medical delivery space seek to gain a level of control over physician practices, many choose to operate under the “Friendly PC” model, especially as many states place restrictions on the corporate practice of medicine. Under this model, the professional corporation employs the physicians and the non-clinical assets are owned by the health system or private equity firm or related management company, which also employs the non-clinical employees. That management company then has an agreement with the Friendly PC to manage the day-to-day business operations of the medical practice. The physician owners of the Friendly PC may become paid directors or officers of the Friendly PC, which they still own.
While day-to-day operations are left to the management company, physician owners of the Friendly PC need to consider their ongoing responsibilities to the professional corporations they own and direct. While benefits of having a sophisticated third party management company manage their medical practices are many, the physician owners, directors and officers of the professional corporation still need to meet their ongoing fiduciary obligations and continue to operate their professional corporation in compliance with the corporate formalities.
To determine the control level of the management company over the business operations of the practice, the parties draft a Management Agreement. To restrict ownership and transfer of shares only to physicians approved by the management company, the physician shareholders often sign Share Transfer Restriction Agreements[1]. These two agreements give the management company a level of control over the physicians in the Friendly PC. Done properly, this control is over only the non-clinical aspects of the practice.
The risk to the physician owners, officers and directors of Friendly PC practices are many. These may include risks to their respective medical licenses if they violate corporate practice of medicine rules. These also may include risk of criminal fines and penalties for failure to properly oversee management company activity resulting in alleged Friendly PC violations of state or federal law. These risks increase if the friendly physician owner is perceived to be a rubber stamp to actions of the management company or effectively an absentee owner of the professional corporation.
Meeting fiduciary obligations and maintaining corporate formalities are a key aspect of the protections afforded owners and officers under the applicable state’s Corporations Code. Failure to meet these obligations can result in personal liability to the physician directors and owners. The management company may provide contractual assurances to the physician owners, officers and directors of the aligned Friendly PC, through insurance coverage and indemnification. These assurances, however, cannot restore a physician’s medical license should the Medical Board determine that the physician is violating the corporate practice of medicine prohibition in that state. In addition, these assurances are unlikely to be adequate in the event of a federal law enforcement indictment should the management company engage in criminal billing fraud where the Friendly PC’s officers and directors breached their fiduciary oversight obligations.
A physician owner and director of a third-party managed medical practice should consider whether they have proper policies and procedures in place to avoid several worst case scenarios. These include:
The physician shareholders, directors and officers of the Friendly PC must keep in mind that, despite assurances by the management company that all is well, it is their responsibility to run the professional corporation in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations. Physician owners, directors, and officers can reduce much of the risk inherent in the Friendly PC model by maintaining proper corporate formalities. These include:
A properly functioning professional corporation can significantly reduce risk for the owners, directors and officers of the Friendly PC.
1] I recently wrote about California Senate Bill 642 that, if enacted, would have required that the ultimate direction and management of the medical practice be determined by the physician owners, shareholders and directors, and not by the hospital system or private equity firm that manages the medical practice. Subsequent to my article, that bill died in the Legislature.
See more »
DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.
© Nossaman LLP | Attorney Advertising
Refine your interests »
This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.
Back to Top
Explore 2021 Readers’ Choice Awards
Copyright © JD Supra, LLC
