* Note: To see PDF Documents cited in this post simply click on the underlined segment
I guess it is time for a new post. In certain respects, this is really an extension, or perhaps in part an explanation, for the horrible Press-Ganey survey results discussed in the previous post. The comment at the end of this post, from “Nothing to hide”, references the most recent Herald Leader article on the happenings in the hospital. To quote Nothing to hide:
"UK and its foundation sue former student in open-records appeal.
http://www.kentucky.com/news/local/education/article87736192.html "
To me, this is absolutely ludicrous, the “public” University of Kentucky suing someone for requesting open records. It is even more ridiculous that they are claiming KMSF, a subdivision of the hospital created by the University Hospital to manage their money, is not a part of the University of Kentucky. This is sort of like saying that the Grants Management division of the University is not a part of the university and therefore these grant funds can be spent in any way Grants Management should so choose, and definitely would not be subject to open records requests. I say that because the university and KMSF lawyers then add to their claims the supposition that because KMSF is not a part of the University of Kentucky, the money and financial matters that they handle for the "public" University Hospital are also not a part of the "public" University of Kentucky and not subject to open records laws, in spite of the fact that these monies were generated by faculty, physicians, residents, fellows, students and staff employed by this “public” University of Kentucky. Add to that the fact that the head of KMSF (Dr. Marc Randall) and its managing board are made up of primarily University of Kentucky College of Medicine Department chairs and Division heads, you have to question what is really going on here?
Well maybe the signed affidavit submitted by the former head of KMSF, Darrell Griffith, offers some insight into why KMSF and the hospital administration are so avarice in their fight to keep KMSF records out of the public eye. That affidavit can be found here:
https://pageonekentucky.com/2016/02/23/juicy-affidavit-hits-in-uk-kmsf-case/
Some of the highlights from this document include:
“During my tenure as Executive Director of Kentucky Medical Services Foundation the Foundation operated as a private non-stock, nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky. As a non-stock, nonprofit, private corporation Kentucky Medical Services Foundation was not subject to Open Records Requests.
The purpose of the Kentucky Medical Services Foundation is to bill and collect for services of medical faculty members, manage their practices, and arrange for improved salaries and benefits. Kentucky Medical Services Foundation acted as a management services organization on behalf of the University of Kentucky College of Medicine.
During my tenure, the Kentucky Medical Services Foundation engaged in business activities that included, but were not limited to the following:
- A. The financing of the Child Development Center’s new building and the annual operating expenses in excess of $l 00,000.00. In connection with the Child Development Center, KMSF loaned the Child Development Center a sum in excess of $5 million; only $2.5 million had been paid back as of my departure.
- B. KMSF loaned a pharmaceutical company in excess of $400,000.
- C. KMSF hired a management/consulting firm to do a “turn around” on the pharmaceutical company.
- D. KMSF leased an airplane together with a separate agreement for the pilot.
- E. KMSF purchased buildings on Alumni Drive.
- F. KMSF provided matching funds to the University of Kentucky for the “Bucks for Brains” program.
- G. KMSF paid for consultants and management staff for Eastern State Hospital.
As the former Executive Director of the Kentucky Medical Services Foundation, it is my opinion that KMSF exceeded its scope. KMSF business activities were outside the purview of the UK Board of Trustees by design and, by design, outside the Commonwealth of Kentucky Model Procurement Laws.”
The KMSF Board of Directors had a fiduciary duty to inform the UK Clinical Faculty who were members of the Faculty Practice Plan, of these business activities of KMSF. To my information and belief, the Practice Plan Committee, set up under AR 3.14, was never convened or met as a separate independent committee during my tenure. Based on my understanding of AR 3.14, the failure of the Practice Plan Committee to meet or convene would be a violation of AR 3.14.
So now why are the lawyers for both the University of Kentucky and KMSF really suing this individual? For that matter, what was the real reason the University of Kentucky lawyers took away Dr. Paul Kearney’s patient privileges, teaching privileges and have continued to harass him in any way, shape and form that they can devise.