<\/p>\n
Due to the increasing number of regulations and need for operational transparency, organizations are increasingly adopting the use of consolidated and harmonized sets of compliance controls. This view has been supported by economic theory, which has framed punishment in terms of costs and has explained compliance in terms of a cost-benefit equilibrium (Becker 1968). Compliance has traditionally been explained by reference to deterrence theory, according to which punishing a behavior will decrease the violations both by the wrongdoer (specific deterrence) and by others (general deterrence).<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
The fix is real-time dashboards and early warning indicators \u2014 metrics that show where the program is under pressure before a failure occurs. Compliance reports to the board that describe what happened last quarter are informative but not actionable. Most compliance programs are reasonably good at managing known obligations. This is the three lines of defense model that most mature compliance programs operate under. Regular reporting to senior leadership and the board on the state of the compliance program, key risk indicators, open issues, and remediation status. This includes a safe and accessible reporting channel \u2014 often a whistleblower hotline or case management system \u2014 that allows employees to raise concerns without fear of retaliation.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
To complicate the challenge of healthcare regulatory compliance, some regulations conflict with each other, while others duplicate standards from other regulations. The regulations can cover subjects as diverse as building safety, data security, codes of conduct, the regulation of controlled substances, and the provision of medical assistance in emergency circumstances. Most healthcare organizations are required to comply with dozens of federal, state, local, and industry regulations.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n