CVS taps former UPS finance chief as new CFO
CVS Health named a new CFO Tuesday as the healthcare giant continues to shake up its leadership team.
Brian Newman, most recently CFO of shipping and logistics firm UPS, will start at CVS on April 21. Tom Cowhey, who took on the permanent CFO position at CVS early last year, will become a strategic advisor to CEO David Joyner, effective May 12.
In addition to the leadership change, CVS said it expects financial results for 2025 to meet or exceed its previously issued guidance. In February, the company reported expected adjusted earnings for the year between $5.75 and $6 a share.
Newman will receive a base salary of $1 million, and his target annual equity award compensation will be $7 million, CVS said in a securities filing.
Cowhey will step down from the finance chief position about a year and half after he first took on the interim role.
He started at CVS in 2022, and then took on the interim CFO job in October 2023 after previous finance chief Shawn Guertin left due to family health reasons.
Cowhey will serve as strategic advisor and assist with transitioning his work until he leaves the company on a date that hasn't yet been determined, according to a securities filing.
CVS also named Amy Compton-Phillips, previously chief physician executive of survey and patient experience firm Press Ganey, as chief medical officer, beginning May 19. She replaces Sree Chaguturu, who was named president of CVS' healthcare delivery business in November, the company said in the filing.
The latest appointments come as CVS has made a number of recent leadership changes in recent months while it navigates a challenging financial environment.
The company's profits were nearly cut in half last year as CVS' insurance unit, Aetna, weathered heightened medical costs, particularly in government healthcare programs like Medicare Advantage and Medicaid.
Joyner took up the chief executive post in October, replacing Karen Lynch as the firm pulled earnings guidance due to elevated expenses at Aetna. Weeks later, the company named Steve Nelson, previously the CEO of value-based primary care company ChenMed, as president of the insurer.
CVS also tapped Ed DeVaney to serve as permanent president of CVS Caremark, the healthcare giant's pharmacy benefit manager, in February. Joyner had previously led the PBM.
The company will report first-quarter earnings on May 1.
Recommended Reading
CVS slashes profit in 2024 as high medical costs hit Aetna
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indianapolis Star
3 hours ago
- Indianapolis Star
Texas AG sues Eli Lilly for allegedly bribing medical providers to prescribe Lilly drugs
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton is suing Eli Lilly, alleging the Indianapolis pharmaceutical company offered kickbacks to medical providers in exchange for prescribing more than a dozen of the company's drugs, including blockbuster GLP-1 weight loss drugs Mounjaro and Zepbound. Eli Lilly offered illegal incentives to Texas medical providers, including a "free nurse" program and reimbursement support services, to steer providers to provide the company's drugs, Paxton alleges in a lawsuit filed August 11 in a Texas district court. Lilly, one of the world's largest pharmaceutical companies, denied the allegations in an August 12 statement to IndyStar. The Lilly programs mentioned in the suit offered free trainings for nurses and medical providers, which helped Lilly market their drugs when they launched, the suit says. According to Paxton's office, many Texas residents prescribed these drugs were on state Medicaid, so these actions violated the Texas Health Care Program Fraud Prevention Act. 'Big Pharma compromised medical decision-making by engaging in an illegal kickback scheme,' Paxton said in a news release. 'Eli Lilly fraudulently sought to maximize profits at taxpayer expense and put corporate greed over people's health. I will not stand by while corporations unlawfully manipulate our healthcare system to line their own pockets.' A spokesperson for Eli Lilly said the company denies the allegations and plans to defend against them in court. It's not the first time Paxton has taken a stab at Lilly in the courts. In October, Paxton sued insulin manufacturers and pharmacy benefit managers, including Lilly, Express Scripts and CVS, for allegedly concocting a conspiracy to increase insulin prices. Health Choice Alliance LLC, a New Jersey based company, joined Texas as a plaintiff. Health Choice has sued Lilly in the past, alleging the company engages in kickbacks. 'Multiple courts and the federal government have rejected claims by this same corporate relator against Lilly as meritless," a Lilly spokesperson said in a statement. "In fact, the United States government determined that 'the relators' allegations lack sufficient factual and legal support' in a prior case, explaining that 'federal healthcare programs have a strong interest in ensuring that, after a physician has appropriately prescribed a medication, patients have access to basic product support relating to their medication.' We intend to vigorously defend against these allegations.' At the heart of the Texas lawsuit is a class of drugs named GLP-1s prescribed for diabetes and weight loss. Named for the gut hormone receptor the drug targets, injectable GLP-1s have exploded in popularity since Zepbound hit the market in late 2023. Weight loss drugs: Eli Lilly closer to breakthrough weight loss drug; shares tumble as some question results The kickback lawsuit against Lilly is one way Paxton is protecting Texas patients "from corporate schemes that undermine the integrity of the healthcare system," according to his office.
Health Line
4 hours ago
- Health Line
6 Ways Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Could Limit Healthcare Access
The tax and spending bill approved by Congress last month will cut $1 trillion from health-related programs over the next decade. The 'One Big Beautiful Bill' will hit Medicaid hardest with $790 million chopped from its budget. Experts say these reductions will greatly impact health programs across the country, particularly those serving rural communities, children, and lower-income households. The so-called One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), signed by President Donald Trump in early July, will impact virtually every health-related program in the United States. The bill, officially known as House Resolution 1, is expected to reduce federal spending on health-related programs by $1 trillion between now and 2034. It's estimated that those cuts will cause at least 10 million people to lose health insurance coverage during the next nine years. It calls for a reduction in funding for food assistance programs and rural hospitals, as well as reduced funding for Planned Parenthood services, which have been temporarily blocked by a federal judge. Some of these impacts will take years to be felt. Other provisions, however, could directly affect people's lives in the next year or two. 'It is the biggest cut to our social safety net in history,' Liz Fowler, PhD, a distinguished scholar in Health Policy and Management at the Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland, said in a news release from the college. Here's a look at six key areas affected by spending reductions outlined in President Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill.' Medicaid bears the brunt of the cuts Federal funding for Medicaid is expected to be reduced by more than $790 billion over the next decade. More than 70 million people currently receive Medicaid benefits, but various factors could significantly reduce this estimate. Work requirements will mandate that most 'able-bodied' recipients between the ages of 19 and 64 will be required to work, receive work training, volunteer, or be in school for at least 80 hours per month while receiving benefits. The new work requirements take effect on January 1, 2027. As many as 5 million people could lose health insurance due to this requirement, according to the Kaiser Family Foundation (KFF). More frequent eligibility checks will require states to verify beneficiaries' eligibility for Medicaid more often, causing some recipients to be removed from the program. Immigration restrictions will reduce the number of foreign-born residents receiving benefits. The cuts may also affect hospitals, as Medicaid is responsible for 20% of revenue at these medical facilities nationwide. Experts also point out that people who are no longer on Medicaid will not seek preventive care and end up in hospital emergency rooms due to more serious medical issues. 'Cutting Medicaid means millions lose access to basic care, leading to sicker patients, overwhelmed ERs, and rising costs for everyone,' said Kanwar Kelley, MD, a specialist in otolaryngology, head and neck surgery, obesity medicine, and lifestyle medicine as well as the co-founder and chief executive officer of Side Health. 'Lack of access to preventive care leads to a sicker population, which leads to more medical expenses,' Kelley told Healthline. Impacts to Medicare Medicare is a federal program founded in 1965 that provides health insurance coverage to people 65 years and older. About 66 million Americans are enrolled. Trump's bill does not directly mention Medicare cuts, but there are measures that could impact recipients. Under a 2010 budget mechanism law known as PAYGO, the Congressional Budget Office estimates the Trump bill could trigger more than $500 billion in Medicare cuts between 2026 and 2034, KFF reports. The Center for Medicare Advocacy notes the bill will also reduce the number of people eligible for Medicare. They say some non-citizens who meet Medicare eligibility requirements through work history or residency length will no longer be covered. In addition, the bill imposes a nine-year ban on implementing improvements to Medicare Savings Programs that help lower-income Medicare beneficiaries pay for premiums and out-of-pocket costs. Older adults who are enrolled in both Medicaid and Medicare could hit with a double impact. 'The [bill] will affect this [older] age range by reducing access to care,' Kelley said. 'Creating restrictions based on work requirements and new regulations for exemptions will exclude many in this age group from qualifying. Those in this age range will have a harder time re-entering the workforce to continue their coverage.' Fewer people enrolled in Obamacare The bill will make it more difficult for people to join or remain in programs offered by the Affordable Care Act (ACA), also known as Obamacare. This difficulty will be due to several changes. They include: Requiring enrollees to update their information regularly. This may include updating income, immigration status, and other details each year. Requiring individuals to manually reenroll every year during open enrollment. Last year, 10 million people were automatically reenrolled. Shortening the open enrollment period by a month. That period will now end on December 15 rather than January 15. For the current plan year, 40% of people signed up after December 15. Some immigrants will also no longer be eligible for ACA coverage. In addition, financial assistance that helps people afford insurance in ACA marketplaces will be allowed to expire at the end of this year. The Bloomberg School of Public Health at Johns Hopkins University predicts these changes will cause ACA premiums to rise by 75% next year. Kelley agrees that premiums will likely go up, causing a cascade of events. 'Removing or cutting these subsidies will lead to more expensive plans offered on the marketplace. By raising these prices, many will choose to live without health insurance and risk catastrophic medical debt,' he said. 'Making access to healthcare harder for individuals creates gaps in care for patients, which is crucial in screening for life-altering illnesses.' Strains on rural hospitals The bill does provide rural hospitals with $50 billion over the next five years to help reduce the effects from the cuts in Medicaid spending. However, the Center for American Progress reports that funding will not be nearly enough to make up the difference. The organization states that slightly more than 2,000 rural hospitals receive $12 billion per year in net revenue from Medicaid. At some rural hospitals, Medicaid represents 40–50% of their revenue. The organization added that children, non-elderly adults, and people with disabilities would be the people in rural areas most affected. Kelley agreed that the effects could be far-reaching. 'This loss of funding will hit rural hospitals hard, leading to closures and increasing healthcare disparities in marginalized neighborhoods,' he said. The Center for American Progress also notes that rural hospitals have low operating margins. They project that more than 300 rural hospitals could be at risk of closure. 'Rural communities already face challenges with adequate staffing and medically necessary equipment as they usually operate on tight margins with the subsidies,' Kelley said. 'Reducing the number of providers will lead to closures, which forces those in the community to travel farther for their regular and emergency care.' Fewer families will receive food assistance The bill would cut $120 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) over the next decade, according to estimates. About 40 million people currently receive assistance from the SNAP program. The League of Women Voters projects the cuts could impact 22 million families. Kelley said the impact is beyond just food. 'Food insecurity leads to bad health outcomes,' he said. 'Cutting programs directed at addressing hunger will lead to increased rates of obesity, diabetes, and poor nutrition in kids.' 'Hunger in children leads to poor educational outcomes. Cutting SNAP and other food programs will lead to children going to school hungry, seniors skipping meals, and families making decisions between food and other necessities, including health,' Kelley added. Cuts to Planned Parenthood The bill impacts Planned Parenthood operations by banning people from using Medicaid at healthcare non-profit facilities that provide abortion services outside of cases of rape, incest, or when the pregnant person's life is in danger. Planned Parenthood estimates that the new law could close nearly 200 of its facilities. About 60% of those centers are in medically underserved communities. In addition, the organization states that more than 1 million people could lose access to afford healthcare services such as STI testing and birth control. Miller Morris, MA, MPH, is a women's health researcher and founder of Comma, a service focusing on menstrual health. She notes that a court injunction has temporarily blocked the bill's ban on Medicaid use at reproductive health clinics like Planned Parenthood. However, she said if the provisions are eventually upheld, they could have far-ranging effects. 'If the court's injunction were to be lifted, the defunding of Planned Parenthood would mean fewer resources for all the preventative and primary care services they offer, leading to reduced access for millions of women, especially those in low-income and rural communities,' Morris told Healthline. 'This reduction in Medicaid funding will see catastrophic consequences for the millions of women who rely on Planned Parenthood and similar low-cost organizations for vital, life saving care,' she added.
Miami Herald
5 hours ago
- Miami Herald
As Miami-Dade faces budget crunch, fight over healthcare heads for a showdown
Managing healthcare bills for Miami-Dade's roughly 31,000 county employees is big business, and that's prompting a big fight at the County Commission. At issue is a proposal by Mayor Daniella Levine Cava to drop the county's longtime healthcare provider, AvMed, for a national competitor, Aetna — something the mayor claims would save the county about $40 million as it faces a major budget crunch. The fight to win the county's healthcare contract has gotten messy enough that commissioners are holding a special meeting Wednesday dedicated solely to picking a winner. AvMed, based in Doral, argues Levine Cava is rushing the effort ahead of a fall open-enrollment period that's bound to be chaotic if a new provider takes over. AvMed also points to high customer-service rankings as a selling point — particularly with management based in the Miami area. But Levine Cava points to a pair of consultant studies showing that Aetna's national purchasing power would bring Miami-Dade cheaper healthcare costs in a year of budget strains. AvMed, based in Doral, and Aetna, a Connecticut-based subsidiary of the CVS drugstore chain, each want to manage the crucial billing process — including reimbursement rates for healthcare providers. Unions representing county employees are divided. The police union backs keeping AvMed, while the transit union wants to switch to Aetna. In a recent Miami Herald op-ed, Levine Cava said Aetna will bring both savings and expanded options for county employees. 'Partnering with Aetna means not only financial savings for the county but better healthcare access and quality for our workforce,' she wrote. AvMed, which has contracts across Florida, rejects the notion that Aetna will be cheaper for Miami-Dade and points to a recent J.D. Power ranking giving it the top scores for customer service in Florida. AvMed first won the county contract in 2016 and is encouraging Miami-Dade to stick with a healthcare company that has proven itself. 'By continuing its partnership with AvMed, Miami-Dade County can ensure uninterrupted access to the #1 ranked health plan in Florida,' the company said in a statement, referencing the J.D. Power ranking. If the county switches providers, Aetna would earn administrative fees from Miami-Dade worth about $15 million a year. AvMed's fees are lower, at $10 million. But the fight comes over the much larger county expense involved in the agreement: what Miami-Dade pays providers for medical care and supplies, including prescriptions. Like most large governments, Miami-Dade uses its own cash to pay medical expenses, rather than relying on an insurance company to reimburse providers. Under the 'self-insured' model, Miami-Dade can save money if reimbursement rates drop for doctors, pharmacies and other providers used by county employees. Miami-Dade's medical expenses currently hover around $600 million a year, according to county estimates. The county's insurance company negotiates the rates behind those expenses, and Aetna claims it can lower Miami-Dade's healthcare costs over the life of the seven-year contract. Two healthcare consultants hired by Miami-Dade back up that contention, estimating yearly savings of around $40 million when calculating how much the county would pay under each competitor's reimbursement rates. Commissioners have devoted a rare special meeting to deciding the contract award, placing board members in the position of refereeing between competing claims in the complicated realm of healthcare finances and reimbursement rates. 'I'm not for Aetna. I'm not for AvMed,' Commissioner Roberto Gonzalez said during a July 16 discussion of the healthcare contract. 'I'm for whatever is best for the employees of Miami-Dade County.'
