Blog | Pricing

HHS delays implementation of rule requiring FQHCs to provide insulin, epinephrine at 340B prices

Blog | Pricing

HHS delays implementation of rule requiring FQHCs to provide insulin, epinephrine at 340B prices

The Biden administration has further postponed a regulation that would require federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) to make certain drugs more affordable for low-income patients and will consider whether to withdraw the rule altogether.

Implementation of the “Executive Order on Access to Affordable Life-Saving Medications” has been postponed to July 20. The rule initially was set to take effect on Jan. 20 and then was postponed until March 22.

The order, signed last year by former President Donald Trump, would apply to FQHCs that participate in the 340B Drug Pricing Program and make insulin and injectable epinephrine available to patients. Those drugs must be provided to low-income and uninsured patients at or below 340B prices.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) plans to use the delay period to review the rule and “consider further questions of fact, law and policy [that] the rule may raise, including whether revision or withdrawal of the rule may be warranted.”

The postponement also is intended “to ensure that implementation of the rule does not impede HHS’s and health centers’ immediate priority work, on a nationwide basis, of responding to and mitigating the spread of COVID-19 … and maintaining the delivery of comprehensive primary health services to medically underserved populations,” according to the new final rule implementing the delay.

Commenters strongly support tabling the rule

HHS stated that it received 198 comments from healthcare stakeholders on its proposal to table the rule until July. Of them, 187 supported the delay and 175 said the rule should be rescinded.

According to HHS, numerous commenters noted that “since the rule was initially delayed in January, health centers have been requested to perform a critical role in the national efforts to vaccinate hard-to-reach populations.”

HHS added, “Commenters stated that, in taking on this responsibility, health centers’ staff and resources are being stretched to unprecedented levels, making the administrative and financial burden of implementing the rule even more challenging.”

About the Author

Nick Hut

is a senior editor with HFMA, Westchester, Ill. (

Sign up for a free guest account and get access to five free articles every month.


Related Articles | Pricing

News | Price Transparency

Healthcare price transparency initiatives may fall flat due to systemic factors, expert says

Niall Brennan, a leading expert on healthcare cost drivers, is among the skeptics who doubt the ongoing price transparency push can result in a more efficient system.

Blog | Medicare Payment and Reimbursement

Research examines whether financial challenges facing hospitals with large Medicare populations lead indirectly to cost shifting

Harvard researchers found evidence to suggest that hospitals with large shares of Medicare patients are at greater risk of being acquired, which can skew the market structure and lead to higher commercial prices.

Blog | Contracting

Study: In price negotiations with hospitals, self-insured employers lack leverage

The vast difference in market power between hospitals and employers leaves the latter group with little recourse in negotiations, according to a new study.

How To | Cost Effectiveness of Health

Moving a 340B covered entity’s pharmacy enterprise to an LLC may prove beneficial, but it requires a feasibility study

University of Utah Hospitals and Clinics (UUHC) in Salt Lake City performed research to assess the feasibility of moving its 340B covered-entity pharmacy enterprise to a Limited Liability Corporation (LLC), with a focus on risks that should be factored into the decision. Other organizations that are considering such a move could benefit from adopting UUHC’s assessment approach.