.
Feedback

Long Wait Times, Incomplete Intake Evaluations Norm at Kaiser Mental Health, New Study Finds

Company posting record profits while patients being denied the care they need, study concludes.

Patients who seek mental health services at Kaiser Permanente have to wait for weeks for appointments, are routed into group therapy even when they need individual attention and are not given proper initial evaluations, according to a new report by the National Union of Healthcare Workers, that represents some 2,500 mental health clinicians.

The study is based on a survey of over 300 Kaiser mental health professionals practicing at 57 Kaiser facilities in Northern and Southern California, along with dozens of open-ended interviews with clinicians and patients.

Among its findings: 

  • Kaiser mental health clinics are insufficiently staffed, with patients often forced to wait four weeks or longer for return appointments. That’s despite the fact that California state regulations require that patients be seen within ten business days,
  • Staff conduct accelerated initial patient evaluations that fall short of recommended clinical standards, which are then miscoded incorrectly in order to avoid penalties,
  • Patients that are funneled into group therapy even when their diagnoses call for individual therapy,
  • Falsified patient scheduling records that conceal appointment delays from state regulators, through practices such as "shadow" paper records and deliberately canceling and rescheduling patients' appointments while falsely attributing the cancellation to the patient.

Clinicians interviewed for the study describe a pattern of “deceptive practices by Kaiser administrators that routinely compromise the health and safety of thousands of patients suffering from emotional pain and distress in order to save the company money,” according to the report, titled “Care Delayed, Care Denied.”

Kaiser has more than 6.6 million members and is California's largest HMO. Since 2009, it has reported profits of $5.7 million and last year paid its Chief Executive Officer George Halvorson $6.7 million.

“It’s clear to us that decisions are being made from an accounting standpoint, that Kaiser’s approach to treatment is about making money for Kaiser and basically denying patients the treatment they deserve,” said Jim Clifford, a therapist for Kaiser in San Diego. 

Click here to listen to interviews with Kaiser mental healthcare providers and patients

In an issued statement, Kaiser said the findings of the study were inconsistent with its patient and provider survey data and that the HMO regularly performs better than the standards set by the state of California.

“We are disappointed that the NUHW is going to such effort to attempt to discredit the great work performed every day by our clinicians and mental health therapists,” the company said. “They (therapists) provide timely, high-quality mental health care services to our patients, day in and day out, and whenever emergencies arise.”

The company went on to say that it offers Urgent Services where patients in crisis can get same-day or next-day appointments along with consultations for patients who have been admitted to a hospital or those who arrive in the emergency room. In addition, Kaiser says it offers a mix of individual and group therapy and defends the latter as a proven and effective method for mental health treatment.

Now, NUHW is demanding an investigation by the California Department of Managed Health Care, that regulates Kaiser's HMO plans and the Department of Insurance, which regulates the company's fee-for-service offerings. 

They also want the Attorney General's office to look into potential unfair business practices at Kaiser mental health. 

To receive news feeds about Half Moon Bay and the unincorporated Coastside between Montara and Pescadero, visit Half Moon Bay Patch on Facebook and "like" us here. Follow us on Twitter here.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Half Moon Bay Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Cid May 17, 2013 at 06:14 pm
I enjoy an occasional Taco Bell, but in the same shopping center as Happy Taco with far better,Read More authentic LOCAL Mexican food! Nah! I do enjoy the Combo locations that have KFC & TACO BELL. (Face it, Americans like to have choices!). With no drive-through, perhaps it will be better than the average suburban stores along the El Camino. As for another chain restaurant in Half Moon Bay...What did you expect? Demographics will continue to dictate that we can still expect to keep our "Fast-Food-Free-Zone" between Linda Mar and HMB while "City Councils or Planning Departments in the Cities will attract them....for their tax base.
Dee May 15, 2013 at 08:07 pm
Seriously? Taco Bell? Next to New Leaf? How did this happen? Not happy about this addition and notRead More looking forward to seeing Taco Bell trash all over the place. Not sure about KFC ... we already have a fast food chicken place at Popeyes so we certainly don't need another. The high school students will probably frequent Taco Bell the most and keep it in business but I will not be going there that's for sure.
George Muteff May 15, 2013 at 06:52 pm
I'm not particularly thrilled with yet another big corporate fast food store in HMB. I'm not a realRead More Taco Bell fan either, but I have noticed that Taco Bell and KFC are one in the same at many locations. I'm wondering if that will be the case here. Will this store include KFC? Anyone know?
Misha Flores May 17, 2013 at 09:35 am
To be honest I would probably just let my dog run around without a leash anyway, except there's soRead More much darned poison oak around these hills. I don't want her to get contaminated and then I hug her and trouble ensues.
Anne Martin May 16, 2013 at 04:29 pm
I don't own a dog now but empathize with the dog owners who have been deprived of the right toRead More allow their dogs to run free in the national recreation area that we as taxpayers own. As a taxpayer, I want to know the rationale for this policy. If it is to protect horses from being frightened by dogs what is the basis for that? How many horses use the open space? It appears that dozens of people who have been able to enjoy walking with their dogs in the open space adjoining their neighborhood are now being grossly inconvenienced because some faceless bureaucrats are creating rules that may have no basis in reality.
pae May 13, 2013 at 03:00 pm
Most dogs and horses can get along fine, if they have the opportunity to be socialized to eachRead More other. If dogs never get to see horses, or vice versa, then there is a startle/fear response, and each will respond according to its temperament. Remove all opportunities for this socialization, as GGNRA wants to do, and there will be more problems. Apparently GGNRA has even ordered stable owners not to allow equestrians to bring their dogs to the stable any more, which is grossly unfair to all concerned. GGNRA just hates dogs, and their policies have been written accordingly. It is unfathomable that here on the Coastside, surrounded by miles of open space, there is no legal area except one small dog park, for dog owners to walk with their companions off leash. Horses, bicycles and people have full access, but dog owners very limited access, and no access for off leash exercising. Rancho territory is 6 1/2 square miles. Surely there is enough room for all recreation! It's our tax money, too, but we're being denied use of the space we own.