trends in aggregate spend and disclosure reporting and … · 2011. 3. 10. · nd . annual...
TRANSCRIPT
Preliminary Results 2nd Annual Industry-wide Survey
Trends in Aggregate Spend and Disclosure Reporting and Compliance – 2011 *Preliminary Results
March 2011
2|
Agenda
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 2011
OverviewReporting Practices and InvestmentData Identification and HandlingPhysician Payments Sunshine ProvisionGlobal ConsiderationsConfidence in Compliance
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 20113|
Increase in Aggregate Spend and Disclosure Laws
Transparency is becoming the ruleMany states and federal government have enacted legislation regarding disclosure of promotional spendEach law has different required information and report formatState and Federal Disclosure of Samples
New federal law adds layer of complexity
Companies will be scrutinized moreSpending information will now be available to public on the web
As a result, Life Sciences companies are required to track and report on more detailed information than ever before.
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 20114|
Other Considerations
Global transparency trendsPhRMA Code on Interactions with HCPsAdvaMed Code of Ethics
Anti Bribery regulations (i.e., US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, UK Bribery Act)
OECD Convention (36 countries)
International anti-corruption instrument focused on the ‘supply side’ of the bribery transaction
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 20105|
Goals of the Survey
Cegedim surveyed the industry to identify current practices and expected trends around aggregate spend and disclosure reporting and compliance.Comparison to 2010 Results
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 20116|
OVERVIEW
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 20107|
Overview of Respondents
60 respondents from Pharma/Biotech/MedDevice Companies involved in ensuring their company complies with state and federal mandated aggregate spend and disclosure requirements
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 20108|
Departments in which respondents work
Respondents work across a number of departments with compliance making up over a third.
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 20109|
Company size
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201110|
REPORTING PRACTICES AND INVESTMENT
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201011|
How respondents currently satisfy aggregate spend and disclosure requirements
While lower than in 2010, almost a third of respondents still report using spreadsheets to comply in 2011Some respondents indicated either not satisfying requirements or avoiding promotional spend where disclosure is required
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201012|
Expected plan to satisfy requirements as more laws are implemented
Most people expect to comply with either an internal or third party solution as more requirements are implementedWhile over 30% of respondents currently report manually or with spreadsheets, less than 10% say that will continue as more laws are enacted
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201013|
Costs incurred from third party system implementation
Close to have half of respondents have spent between $500K and $1M on third party system implementation for aggregate spend and disclosure reporting
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201014|
Employee support for aggregate spend and disclosure compliance
While the majority of respondents have 1-5 dedicated full time employees (FTEs) to support aggregate spend and disclosure compliance, there was a large increase in the number of people who reported having 6-10 FTE’s – indicating an increase in investment from 2010
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201015|
Investment in aggregate spend and disclosure compliance
The majority of people expect investment in aggregate spend and disclosure compliance to increase over the next year – even more so than in 2010The most notable reason for the expected increase and investment was dealing with more requirements, including the Physician Payments Sunshine Provision
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201016|
Managing resources
Based on resources, how do respondents currently manage their aggregate spend and disclosure compliance solution vs how they would prefer to?
How currently manage solution
How would prefer to manage solution
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201117|
DATA IDENTIFICATION AND HANDLING
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201018|
Data Identification
Compared to 2010, respondents are progressing in the process of establishing which data sources and data locations will be used in their aggregate spend and disclosure reporting
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201019|
Customer master within aggregate spend solution
More companies are realizing the importance of having a customer master with only 10% reporting that they don’t have one, compared to 17% in 2010.A third of respondents have built a custom customer master solution within their aggregate spend and disclosure solution, up from 23% last year.
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201020|
Associating HCPs to a state
Similar to 2010, a combination of Address and SLN is the most popular method to associate a Health Care Practitioner (HCP) to a state for reporting
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201021|
Reporting of US physicians that travel abroad on your behalf
When traveling abroad on their behalf, most respondents pay physicians in the US and in US dollars
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201022|
Obtaining event and spend data from vendors
About a third of respondents still obtain vendor spend data solely from spreadsheetsHowever, there is a significant increase of respondents using a combination of methods indicating that companies are becoming more flexible.
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201023|
Number of HCP data sources
Overall, respondents report having more data sources related to capture HCP and Organization spend with 41% indicating having more than 10 in 2011 versus only 27% in 2010.
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201024|
Challenges in consolidating spend data from multiple sources
Significant challenges remain with establishing unique Identification of an HCP and Organizations and with disparate data formats and standards
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201125|
PHYSICIAN PAYMENTS SUNSHINE PROVISION
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201026|
Physician Payments Sunshine Provision
More people are aware of the Physician Payments Sunshine Provision than last year
?
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201027|
Level of concern with the Physician Payments Sunshine Provision
Respondents level of concern with the Physician Payments Sunshine Provision is about the same as last year
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201028|
Moving from a manual solution in response to the Physician Payments Sunshine Provision
77% of respondents who currently use a manual solution to satisfy aggregate spend and disclosure requirements plan to move to an automated solution in response to the federal law (up from 64% in 2010)
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201129|
GLOBAL CONSIDERATIONS
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201030|
Importance of implementing a global solution
Over a third of respondents indicate that it’s a necessity to implement an aggregate spend and transparency solution that can be used in other countries across the world
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201031|
Geographical priorities in a global solution
Europe and Asia Pacific are reported as priorities in respondents’ consideration of implementing a global aggregate spend and transparency solution(Please check all the apply.)
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201032|
Decisions on global aggregate spend and transparency initiatives
Over half of respondents indicate that global aggregate spend and transparency initiatives originate in US offices, while 25% originate from local or regional offices
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201033|
FCPA responsibilities
Only a third of respondents indicate having some responsibility for their company's compliance with FCPA (Foreign Corrupt Practices Act)
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201034|
UK bribery law
About half of respondents indicate that the UK bribery law will change how they comply with current anti-bribery laws (i.e. FCPA)
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201035|
Timeframe for implementing a global aggregate spend and transparency solution
The majority of respondents have not defined when they will move forward with a global solution for aggregate spend and transparency reporting
*New question for 2011
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201136|
CONFIDENCE IN COMPLIANCE
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201037|
Confidence in customer master to define recipient records across all data sources
Overall, respondents are only slightly more confident in the ability of their internal customer master management system to define the unique recipient records across all spend sources
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201038|
Confidence in reporting process to collect all reportable recipient spend data
Respondents’ confidence in the ability of their reporting process to collect all spend data for recipients that are defined as reportable has increased over the past year
ConfidenceConfidence
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201039|
Overall confidence in compliance
Respondents are slightly more confident that their company is compliant with current disclosure requirements
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201040|
Causes of lack of compliance to promotional spend regulations
System/process shortcomings and poor record keeping and/or data entry continue to be the top causes of compliance issues
This document should not be distributed without Cegedim authorization – Copyright 201141|
Email: [email protected]/compliance
Thank you…
Survey is open until March 18th.
http://surveys.cegedim.com/aggregatespend2011.aspx