Davita Corporate Integrity Agreement

DaVita Kidney Care is subject to an independent monitor to monitor certain future joint ventures. The agreement also provides for reimbursement to the government and a provision requiring the executive to certify quarterly and annual compliance reports. SBM Offshore has confirmed that it has secured the end of its three-year agreement on deferred prosecutions with the Ministry of Justice for FCPA violations, but the oil and gas services company now faces a new corruption investigation by Swiss law enforcement authorities. Finally, DaVita has ensured future patient transfers through a series of secondary agreements with its medical partners. These include the remuneration of physicians as medical directors of joint venture clinics and the conclusion of agreements in which physicians have agreed not to compete with the clinic. The competition prohibitions were structured in such a way that they had linked all the doctors in a group of practitioners, even though some doctors were not part of the joint venture agreements. These agreements also contained provisions prohibiting medical partners from inciting or advising a patient to seek treatment at a competing dialysis clinic. These agreements were of such importance to DaVita that it would not enter into a joint venture transaction without it. The DOJ press release and the government`s unsealed complaint provide some guidance on joint venture activities and contractual agreements that the DOJ found problematic during its investigation. In order to ensure future transfers of patients to the centres, doctors` investors had to sign non-competition agreements prohibiting them from encouraging or advising a patient to seek treatment at a competing centre.

In addition, the competition prohibitions have been designed in such a way that all doctors in a group of practitioners are linked, whether or not the doctor is part of the joint venture. The agreement also provides for the appointment of an independent compliance monitor to prospectively verify compliance with the anti-kickback status of DaVita`s agreements with healthcare providers. “Healthcare providers should do business by providing their patients with quality services or more comfortable options, not by entering into contractual agreements to incentivize doctors to make transfers,” Jonathan F. said by the Justice Department`s Deputy Attorney General for Civil Service. . . .