By Talesha Reynolds and Lisa Myers
It’s just over 5 years since HHS-OIG and DOJ began an investigation of Small Smiles Dental Centers.
It’s 3 years after the company was put under a Corporate Integrity Agreement.
Small Smiles abuse continues. In the new investigation - HHS-OIG sound more like the company's PR firm than protectors of public health; Senator Grassley calls for the company to be closed down and says it’s all about the dollars.
Click here for the full report.
Transcript of the video
____________________________
Visits to the dentist can be upsetting for little children, but when
Autum Archuleta took her son Nathan to a Small Smiles dental clinic in
February 2010, it was beyond anything she could have imagined. The
dentist gave Nathan, then almost 3, three crowns, two baby root canals
and six silver fillings in 25 minutes.
While in the waiting room,
Archuleta says she heard her son screaming and burst into the treatment
room. She says Nathan was crying and struggling to move while being held
down by three clinic employees and wrapped from his head to his feet in a stabilization device called a papoose board. She thinks he wasn't properly numbed.
"He
wasn't the same for a long time after we brought him home," Archuleta
said. "He cried a lot...He wasn't my little boy. He didn't smile...The
night terrors were the worst. I mean it was a lot of sleepless nights."
A
dentist who later reviewed Nathan's records said the work was shoddy
and many procedures unnecessary. A dentist who saw Nathan the following
year wrote that he had "severe situational trauma."
"To me I think
they did it for the money," Archuleta said of Small Smiles. "Flat-out
did it for the money. Because it was Medicaid and Medicaid would pay
them."
An NBC News investigation of the performance of Small
Smiles' 63 dental clinics over the last three years found repeated
allegations of substandard work and unnecessary procedures which drove
up the cost to taxpayers. The allegations came from anguished parents,
government investigators and former employees around the country.
Such
practices violate a settlement the company reached with the Justice
Department in January 2010, following allegations that it was bilking
taxpayers by doing unnecessary and substandard procedures on low-income children.
At
the time, Tony West, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Division
of the Department of Justice said, "We have zero tolerance for those who
break the law to exploit children in need."
The company that
managed Small Smiles and affiliated clinics agreed to significantly
alter its practices and subject itself to independent monitoring. It
also agreed to pay $24 million, without admitting wrongdoing.
But three years later, records show the company has not cleaned up its act.
"This company sees dollar signs in the eyes of every child
they bring in," Senator Chuck Grassley told NBC News. Grassley has been
investigating dental organizations whose primary source of revenue is
Medicaid. He says Small Smiles practices assembly-line treatment,
focused more on quantity than quality.
"This whole investigation
kind of leads us to two things. To a conclusion that the tax payers are
being fleeced, and children are being abused." Grassley said.
Small
Smiles clinics are managed by a private corporation called CSHM, LLC,
which was until June called Church Street Health Management.
The
Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Inspector General
(HHS OIG) is responsible for monitoring the clinics and rendering
penalties when appropriate.
Lisa Re, a branch chief who heads an
HHS OIG team of attorneys, says CSHM is improving since it emerged from
bankruptcy in June 2012 with a new CEO and leadership.
"Recently, under new management, I would say that it is getting much better."
But according to letters from HHS OIG to Church Street, the compliance has been inconsistent and sometimes alarming.
In
May, the office required CSHM to temporarily close a facility in Oxon
Hill, Maryland to train staff on "the appropriate use of mouth props,
patient stabilization practices, appropriate use and administration of
anesthesia," among other things. Nine of 30 records the independent
monitor reviewed "did not provide any documentation or radiographic
evidence to support the medical necessity for the treatment provided.
Six of those nine records showed baby root canals were performed
"without medical necessity."
The OIG required the company to
divest from a location in Manassas, VA in March because of "flagrant
violations." A 2011 audit at that clinic found 104 of 244 baby root
canals performed by the lead dentist to be medically unnecessary. In a
sample of 34 records, 20 patients were restrained and given baby root
canals with insufficient anesthesia. The monitor expressed concern that
the children "were resisting treatment because they were being hurt."
In
June the office fined CSHM 100,000 dollars after an audit found
multiple breaches at an Ohio clinic, including treatments performed
without medical necessity, incomplete or poorly done root canals, crowns
places on "non-restorable" teeth and "poor techniques of administering
local anesthesia." Six of seven dentists performed root canals on
children that were not needed.
Last year, the agency issued a
230,000 dollar penalty, the largest it has ever levied, for multiple
failures to comply with provisions of the government agreement. Among
the breaches, the company failed to meet training and education
requirements.
Still, Small Smiles continues to rake in millions in
Medicaid dollars. Despite multiple threats to exclude the company from
receiving federal funds, it made 150 million dollars in revenue from
Medicaid in 2011.
The HHS OIG has given Church Street multiple
chances to keep the clinics in business, levying penalties against the
company and threatening to exclude them from receiving federal dollars.
But the threats generally come with an out — a way to repair the
breaches and avoid being exclusion.
Senator Grassley believes that cycle should come to an end.
"The
inspector general has given this group a lot of second chances. Every
time they get their hand in the cookie jar. All sorts of excuses. So you
get back to how long can this go on — the fleecing of the tax payers,
the abuse of children? And you get back to the point that maybe it's
about time for the inspector general to disqualify this company from
Medicaid."
DENTAL CARE VACUUMS CREATE LIMITED OPTIONS IN LOW-INCOME NEIGHBORHOODS
Small Smiles treats about 500,000 children a year. Jamier Brown, 4, was one of them. His mother Jasmine brought him to Small Smiles in Dayton, Ohio at the end of 2011 because she couldn't afford her other options.
"I
knew that his mouth needed attention. And he was complaining that his
teeth were hurting, so I just couldn't wait around to see when I could
get the money. I had to go as soon as I could," she said.
Jamier received caps and fillings in most of his mouth in January. Months later, he is still in pain. The gum line is discolored where his front teeth we capped and Jamier says, "It hurts all the time."
Two
dentists who reviewed Jamier's records said he should have been treated
by a pediatric dentist, most likely in the hospital under general
anesthesia. One called the treatment on his front teeth "inadequate."
At
the time Jamier was treated, Jasmine was in Job Corps and living with
her mother. She blames herself for what happened to her son.
"It's
kinda my fault," she said as tears rolled down her face, "Because if I
would have had the money, he probably wouldn't have felt any of that
pain that he had to go through."
The guilt Brown feels is common
among parents who spoke with NBC News and claimed their children were
hurt at Small Smiles. They all said they didn’t know where else to go.
According
to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, 31.5 million
children were eligible for dental coverage through Medicaid in fiscal
year 2011, but only 14.7 million children utilized a dental or oral
health service.
Four out of five dentists don't take Medicaid,
some because they just don't treat children but others complain of low
reimbursement rates. Dr. Warren Brill is the president elect of the
American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD). He has his own practice
in Baltimore, MD and 85 percent of his patients are on Medicaid.
"Reimbursement
rates are a large factor in terms of dentists not accepting children on
Medicaid, because the fees that they get are often times lower than the
cost of providing the care," he said.
According to AAPD 70
percent of its members accept Medicaid. But only 3.5 percent of all
professionally active dentists practice that specialty.
Nevertheless, Dr. Brill says parents of children on public insurance can find quality care.
"It's
a question of learning how to make the appointment, getting referrals
from state health departments, from dental associations, from friends
and relatives. Parents that find those avenues should be able to find a
dentist for their children."
DOES PROFIT MODEL PUT CHILDREN AT RISK?
Because
Medicaid reimbursement rates are lower than what dentists charge other
patients, critics say to make a profit, the clinics rely on volume.
Dr.
Kianor Shah worked for Small Smiles briefly in 2011. He says he left
after witnessing disturbing practices. The dentist showed NBC News notes
he took about treatments he observed during his time there. Scattered
across several pages were words like "restraint brutal," "unnecessary"
and "no way."
"I observed excessive use of the papoose board and
excessive use of force to restrain children as well as overtreatment for
procedures that could have been done with much less invasive approach."
Shah
claims dentists were coerced into abusing children and overcharging
Medicaid by the promise of bonuses and pressure from management.
"I
was advised, quote unquote, 'The dentists eat what they kill.' That
means that they're gonna get paid for as much work as they do on those
Medicaid kids. And that was about the last straw for me."
Senator
Grassley's investigation involves dental management companies that are
controlled by corporate investors. Many states require dentists to own
the clinics but the management companies, like CSHM, effectively control
the operations.
"Our investigation has found a lot of private
equity money being invested in companies that are doing everything they
can in the most sophisticated way to take as much money out of Medicaid
as they can. And in the process of just milking the Medicaid program,
we're finding a lot of abuse of children."
PROGRESSIVE IMPROVEMENT AT SMALL SMILES
The
Inspector General's office says the Small Smiles clinics have
progressively improved, and while that improvement has been "uneven,"
the company is providing essential care to a vulnerable population. The
agency maintains that it is better to aggressively monitor the company
than to shutter it.
"If we had closed down Small Smiles last
year, there would have been an uncontrolled shut down of this company
leaving half a million kids scrambling for dental care," said Lisa Re.
The
issue is further complicated by the states, which are responsible for
administering Medicaid. The OIG surveyed states about the impact of
closing the clinics and got a strong reaction.
"Some of the states
were alarmed that we were even considering closing any of the clinics
because they simply didn't have enough dentists to provide any care to
these kids," said Re.
The attorney said in the last couple of years the office found five clinics to have the most significant problems.
"It's important to understand that not every clinic is providing bad care. If that were the case, this is an easy decision."
According
to an affidavit in the Church Street bankruptcy filing earlier this
year, "more than 1.5 million patients have been served during the past
five years, improving overall dental health and access to care in many
low-income areas in the 22 states in which the Company has had
a presence."
Chris and Loretta Trujillo are grateful for the care
the Small Smiles in Denver provides their children. They say it is very
difficult to find dentists who take Medicaid and their children, Jordan,
Jazmin and Faith, have never had a bad experience.
"My kids have never been scared coming here," said mom Loretta. "They're excited to come."
The
Inspector General's office is taking on Small Smiles on a
clinic-by-clinic basis, vigorously monitoring them and assessing
penalties when appropriate.
"We have taken targeted and aggressive
action against the clinics that provided bad care while allowing the
company to provide good necessary care at the other clinics," she said,
adding that the clinics are showing marked improvements since a new CEO,
David Wilson, came on in June.
"The company as it operates today
is simply not the same as the company that was repeatedly violating the
agreement," Re insists.
In a statement to NBC News, CSHM's Wilson
wrote, "Patients are at the center of everything we do at CSHM. CSHM LLC
supports our affiliated dental centers so that they can continue to
provide access to quality dental care. Our dental centers serve
approximately one million patient visits per year, primarily to children
in communities with under-served access to dental care."
Following
an alarming audit of the Small Smiles clinic in Youngstown, Ohio that
found substandard and unnecessary care, the new management company,
which had just been formed, fired nine dentists there. The Inspector
General's office called that action encouraging.
CSHM stressed its
commitment to quality care. "Under the new management team, more than
50 new dentists have joined CSHM affiliated centers and the company
continues to support their ongoing efforts to recruit qualified
dentists."
That is simply not enough for Jasmine Brown. "I don't
want anybody else's child to have to go through what my son went
through, especially being that young. That's traumatic. That's something
that could follow him the rest of his life."
Jasmine is now
holding down two jobs — one as a pharmacy tech at CVS, the other as a
security guard at a men and women's shelter. She says she can now afford
to get Jamier the care he needs.
Tuesday, December 11, 2012
Monday, December 10, 2012
S & P down grade of Smiles Brands put it a step closer to bankruptcy, hopefully
S & P
cuts Smile Brand Group rating, revises outlook
Overview
-- U.S. dental practice management services provider Smile Brands Group Inc. had negative free operating cash flow after elevated capital spending for the past four quarters, resulting in depleted liquidity.
-- U.S. dental practice management services provider Smile Brands Group Inc. had negative free operating cash flow after elevated capital spending for the past four quarters, resulting in depleted liquidity.
-- Early in 2013, we expect Smile
Brands to bring capital expenditures, mainly for new dental offices, into line
with internally generated cash flow.
-- We are lowering our corporate
credit rating on Smile Brands to 'B-' from 'B' and revising our rating outlook
to negative. At the same time, we are lowering our rating on the company's
senior secured debt to 'B-' from 'B'.
-- The negative rating outlook
reflects the possibility that Smile Brands will exhaust the $13.5 million of
funds available from its revolving credit facility as of Sept. 30, 2012, or
breach a loan agreement covenant.
Rating Action
On Nov. 21, 2012, Standard
& Poor's Ratings Services lowered its corporate credit rating on
Irvine, Calif.-based Smile Brands Group Inc. to 'B-'from 'B'. At the same time,
we revised the outlook on the rating to negative
In addition, we lowered our
rating on Smile Brands' senior secured debt to 'B-', in conjunction with the
downgrade, from 'B'. Our recovery rating on this debt remains unchanged at '3',
indicating our expectation for meaningful (50% to 70%) recovery of principal in
the event of payment default.
Rationale
The rating on dental practice
management (DPM) services provider Smile Brands Group Inc. continues to reflect
its "vulnerable" business risk profile (according to Standard
& Poor's Ratings Services' criteria), characterized by its narrow scope
of operations in intensely competitive markets with low barriers to entry.
Smile Brands had negative free
operating cash flow (FOCF) after elevated capital spending for the past four
quarters and we expect this to continue in the fourth quarter of 2012. Our
downgrade is based on the expectation that early in 2013, Smile Brands will stem
the trend of negative FOCF by reducing spending for new dental offices or
taking other actions, such as paying interest on its holding company debt in
kind, rather than in cash.
We also expect adjusted debt to
EBITDA will rise to about 8x by the end of 2012, significantly higher than our
prior expectations, but still consistent with a "highly leveraged"
financial risk profile. As of Sept. 30, 2012, debt to EBITDA was 7.7x, adjusted
to capitalize operating leases and including holding company debt. We have
lowered our expectations for Smile Brands' revenue growth, EBITDA generation,
and cash flow over the next one to two years.
We expect revenues will grow at a mid-single-digit annual rate, somewhat faster than the total U.S. dental services industry over the next few years, primarily fueled by Smile Brands' geographic expansion and a slowly strengthening economic climate. Our prior growth expectations were mid- to high-single-digit annual growth.
Although Smile Brands' revenue
growth slowed in the second and third quarter of 2012, revenues increased 4.2%
for the 12 months ended Sept. 30, 2012.
We believe an unsuccessful
marketing strategy, which was subsequently abandoned, contributed to the growth
slowdown. Still, we believe underlying industry fundamentals remain sound and
relatively resistant to downturns. During the 2008 to 2010 recession, when
revenue for the total U.S. industry was nearly flat (according to data from the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services), Smile Brands grew modestly,
supporting our expectation for continued, albeit modest, growth.
As newer offices mature, we
expect the lease-adjusted EBITDA margin (11.7% in the third quarter of 2012,
compared with 12.8% in the third quarter of 2011) to gradually recover to the
12% to 14% range, with some quarter-to-quarter variation.
Smile Brands' profitability is
supported by its infrastructure, economies of scale, and supplier discounts.
More rapid office expansion in recent quarters contributed to lower
profitability. Smile Brands' EBITDA margin (adjusted for leases, stock
compensation and nonrecurring items) began to dip in the fourth quarter of
2011, after rising substantially and steadily from 8.9% in 2005 to 14.8% for
the 12 months ended Sept. 30, 2011. Our lowered expectations for 2012 and 2013
EBITDA also affect cash flow generation Smile Brands' affiliated dental
practices operate a network of approximately 350 dental offices that offer
general and specialty dental services.
The $110 billion U.S. dental
practice industry is extremely fragmented and highly competitive, contributing
to our vulnerable business risk assessment.
Treatment volume, especially for
more discretionary services such as orthodontics, and patient financial capacity
exhibit some sensitivity to economic conditions. The availability of financing
for patients influences demand.
We also see vulnerabilities in the nature of
the DPM structure. While we believe potential changes in state or federal laws,
regulations, or accounting rules could hurt the DPM industry, we do not
currently incorporate any adverse developments in our base-case scenario.
The DPM business model has many retail
industry attributes, and so carries risks associated with advertising and
promotion, branding, and real estate selection, among others. Smile Brands
markets its brands, selects high-traffic office locations, and offers customers
convenient hours, comprehensive treatment, financing, and prices typically 15%
to 25% below those of traditional dentists. It targets middle-income patients
in growing metropolitan areas. Affiliated offices operate in 18 states, but
there are material concentrations in Texas and California.
The company provides
administrative, financial, and operating services to affiliated professional
corporations (PCs). Although the company does not own the affiliated PCs, its
financial statements consolidate them. Smile Brands generally owns the dental
office assets, but dentists and hygienists generally are not employees of the company,
in accordance with state laws.
We analyze the consolidated
financial statements on the basis presented (adjusted for the capitalization of
operating leases and other standard adjustments) because we believe they best
reflect the economic substance of the company's business model.
Liquidity
We revised our assessment of
Smile Brands' liquidity to "less than adequate" (according to our
criteria), reflecting its diminished liquid resources.
As of
Sept. 30, 2012, Smile Brands reported a negative cash balance of $0.5 million,
and $13.5 million was available from its $35 million revolving credit facility.
We believe Smile Brands may borrow an additional $1 million to $5 million in
the fourth quarter of 2012.
We
estimate Smile Brands will generate about $20 million of funds from operations
(FFO) in 2012 and $25 million in 2013. We expect small, if any,annual increases
in working capital. We project about $32 million of capital expenditures in
2012 (actual spending for the first nine months was $27.5 million), including
the recently completed roll out of digital x-rays. In 2013, we expect Smile
Brands to bring capital expenditures, mainly for new dental offices, into line
with internally generated cash flow. We believe annual maintenance capital
spending is less than $10 million.
Our
assessment of Smile Brands' liquidity profile incorporates the following
assumptions and expectations:
-- Over
the next 12 months, we expect sources of liquidity, including potential
borrowing under the revolver, to exceed uses by 1.2x. Even if EBITDA is 15%
below our projections, we estimate liquidity sources would cover cash needs,
although in that scenario the revolver could be fully drawn.
-- Debt
amortization is only $2.4 million annually through 2014.
-- Our
analysis of Smile Brands includes unrated holding company notes with a face
value of $100 million ($87 million after the original issue discount). Smile
Brands has been paying the 10% coupon in cash. To conserve cash, we believe it
may begin to pay interest in kind at 13%.
-- We
expect Smile Brands to remain in compliance with its loan agreement covenants,
notwithstanding requirement tightening. As of Sept. 30, 2012, there was a 17%
cushion under the tightest covenant.
-- We
assume Smile Brands will not make any acquisitions over the next two years.
Recovery
analysis
For our
complete recovery analysis, see our recovery report on Smile Brands, to be
published following this report on RatingsDirect.
Outlook
Our
negative rating outlook on Smile Brands reflects the possibility that it will
exhaust the $13.5 million of funds available from its revolving credit facility
as of Sept. 30, 2012, or breach a loan agreement covenant. We would consider
lowering the rating if negative FOCF persists in the first quarter of 2013 or
we expect the covenant cushion to approach 5%.
We would
consider revising the outlook to stable if Smile Brands generates discretionary
cash flow (through a combination of improved EBITDA and lower capital
spending), restores availability of its revolver, and we expect the covenant
cushion to stay above 15%.
Labels/Tags:
Castle Dental,
Monarch Dental Illegal,
Smile Brands Group Inc