Just a day after NPR reported that the SF One Medical-based health startup had given COVID vaccines to ineligible patients, employees who did not serve patients and friends and family members of the company’s leadership, public health departments in San Francisco, San Mateo and Alameda counties announced that they are ending their vaccine partnerships with the company.
According to the NPR report via internal emails between doctors and staff, One Medical started receiving a vaccine allocation and distributing it to members in early January. Apparently, One Medical allowed members – who pay an annual fee of $ 199 to receive concierge care – to schedule vaccine appointments for two weeks without certifying their eligibility (although proof of eligibility may have required it personally), and one internal email allegedly discouraged medical staff from “policing” patients’ eligibility. A button was reportedly added to the consultation portal on January 14 for patients to attest to being health workers or otherwise eligible, but NPR has leaked emails that suggested that doctors were warning in the past few weeks about healthy patients In their 20s or 30s receiving vaccines through the company, in disagreement with state and local vaccination priority protocols.
Forbes had released the story two weeks earlier, citing a comment from an anonymous employee who said that when someone dishonestly attests to eligibility and appears for your appointment, “the policy is still not back [patients] a way.”
The San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH) issued a statement to the NPR saying it has allocated 12,000 doses of vaccine to One Medical specifically for distribution to workers performing “home support services … and health professionals”. And he said the department “expects all of its vaccine supply partners to follow state and SF DPH vaccination eligibility guidelines.”
But now, as the NBC Bay Area reports, three Bay Area counties, including San Francisco, have suspended all vaccine allocations for One Medical.
“The problems with One Medical were [a] disappointment but are not representative of the county’s robust and successful vaccination effort, ”San Mateo County officials said in a statement to NBC.
As the Chronicle reported on Wednesday, SFDPH asked One Medical to return 1,600 doses that have not yet been distributed. Kate Larson of ABC 7 obtained a copy of the very cordial letter sent by SFDPH, which does not scold for irregularities and ends with: “We appreciate your continued work in the general response to this pandemic, and we will contact you if we are ready to allocate additional doses to One Medical for administration at a future date. “
This is the letter that the San Francisco Department of Public Health sent to One Medical on Monday, instructing them to RETURN 1,600 doses of the Pfizer vaccine, after media reports emerged, that One Medical may be allowing the people “skip” the vaccine line. pic.twitter.com/N026fBESqP
– Kate Larsen (@ KateABC7) February 25, 2021
One Medical announced on Wednesday that it had fired some employees who were allegedly responsible for the improper distribution of vaccine doses, as reported by ABC 7. But they simultaneously suggested that media reports of inappropriate distribution “challenged the values of our company”.
“All claims that we widely and consciously ignore the eligibility guidelines are in direct contradiction to our real approach to vaccine administration,” a spokesman for One Medical. said in a statement, which goes on to list several methods the company uses to track patients and confirm vaccine eligibility. “Our data currently shows that 96% of individuals vaccinated by One Medical have documentation of eligibility, and 4% have generally been vaccinated according to zero waste protocols.”
One Medical also said that its paying members did not represent the majority of people the company had vaccinated.
“Most of the individuals vaccinated by One Medical in the United States are not our own annual paying members, but have been referred by health departments, including healthcare professionals, nursing home patients, educators and homeless people,” said the spokesman. voice.
Even so, the company laid off “several” employees for disobeying protocols, according to ABC 7, claiming to have a “zero tolerance policy” for such actions.
Issues around equity and distribution protocols are likely to arise much more often in the coming months.
“I think we have to be very vigilant from an ethical point of view, not just looking at what the regulations say, but what are the factors and ways in which structural racism is really embedded in the way the distribution channels are being configured” said David Magnus, the director of the Stanford Center for Biomedical Ethics, speaking for ABC 7. And he suggests that it is everyone’s personal responsibility to wait their turn and not try to cut the line before they are eligible.
Previously: An SF-based physician allegedly allowed ineligible patients and employees who worked at home to receive vaccines
Photo via One Medical