Vanderbilt University Medical Center announces up to 650 layoffs
The big picture: The Trump administration is pursuing massive cuts to National Institutes of Health research grants and to the Department of Health and Human Services. The budget bill pending in Congress proposes deep cuts to Medicaid, which provides health insurance to 83 million low-income adults and their children.
Aggressive cuts have put research hospitals across the country on their heels.
VUMC president and CEO Jeff Balser previously warned that the federal cuts would lead to layoffs and hobbled research projects.
Flashback: In March, VUMC announced plans to slash its budget by $250 million because of the Trump administration's spending cuts. At the time, Balser said more cuts and layoffs could be needed as the scope of the funding fallout became clear.
The latest: In a new statement Friday, VUMC said operating costs would be cut by $300 million due to "budgetary actions in Washington, DC related to government-sponsored research and patient care."
Layoffs will hit up to 650 employees "primarily in research, administrative and other support areas." That total includes employees who were already laid off earlier this year as well as a new round of reductions that began Friday.
VUMC announced staffing reductions in a video message to employees.
What they're saying:"While this is extremely difficult, the staffing loss represents less than 2% of VUMC's total workforce," the VUMC statement read. Laid off employees will get severance and "other assistance."
"VUMC sees more than 3.5 million patient visits each year and remains committed to meeting the needs of all who depend on us for health care."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
Key decisions that will shape rural health fund
States next year will begin tapping the $50 billion rural health fund in the GOP's tax and spending law, but questions have already arisen about how the funds will be allocated — and how much they will benefit rural providers. Why it matters: The fund aims at helping rural hospitals and providers adjust to sweeping changes in how Medicaid is financed, including limits on provider taxes and state-directed payments. But important details have to be fleshed out. What they're saying: Sen. Josh Hawley, who pushed for the fund, in part to get his vote for the megabill, said CMS will need to make sure the money "flows to hospitals that need it" and are not simply "going to states in general to do whatever they want with it." "So far, so good. I liked how it was written up," Hawley said. "But we'll want to monitor closely how the agency puts it into effect." Sen. Thom Tillis, who was one of the three GOP "no" votes on the reconciliation bill, told Axios that CMS needs to "make sure it's a fair formula for rural hospitals." "I think that that pot of money looks big, but it's not really when you consider some of the economic impacts, mainly from the state-directed payments," Tillis said. "We'll be interested to see how they interpret the law." How it works: The new law allocates $10 billion annually for the next five years, starting in 2026. The law says $25 billion is to be distributed equally among all states that submit a "detailed rural health transformation plan," which could include details on how they would use the funds. Between the lines: States can apply for the aid only once, by the end of this year. If they estimate wrong, or run into unforeseen problems, they don't get another shot at it. CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz must approve each state's application by Dec. 31. CMS has discretion to distribute the other $25 billion, based on factors such as how much of the state's population is rural and the number of rural health facilities. The CMS administrator can also consider other factors deemed appropriate. Friction point: Some of that flexibility raises questions about how CMS will proceed, said Zach Levinson, director of the KFF Project on Hospital Costs. "States will also have discretion on how they distribute funds among hospitals and other providers," Levinson said. "And they maybe will steer some dollars to non-rural areas, pending CMS approval." The concern is that some states could be favored over others, or that funding will not go to providers with the greatest needs. "There are risks of this becoming a slush fund if it's not carefully attended to and if it's not focused" on actual rural hospitals, said Jackson Hammond, a senior policy analyst at Paragon Health Institute. All the money has to be distributed by 2030 and spent by 2032. That also means much of the assistance will have already been spent before the provider tax and state-directed payment provisions take effect in 2028. The $50 billion sum also is about one-third of the $155 billion in estimated cuts to federal Medicaid spending in rural areas, per a KFF analysis.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
What will Trump's new homelessness executive order mean for California?
An executive action taken by President Donald Trump on Thursday, aiming to push cities and states to remove homeless people from the streets, could make California governments' ability to secure Federal funding contingent on taking such steps and changing the state's current approach to homelessness. Trump signed an order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek to reverse federal and state judicial precedents and end consent decrees that limit local and state governments' ability to move homeless people from streets and encampments into treatment centers. The move, first reported by USA TODAY, also redirects federal funds to ensure the homeless people impacted are transferred to rehabilitation, treatment, and other facilities, though it was unclear how much money would be allocated. Here's what to know about Trump's executive order on removing homeless people from the streets. More: In major decision, Supreme Court allows cities to ban homeless camps What did Trump's executive order say? Under the order ‒ which the White House has titled "Ending Crime and Disorder on America's Streets" ‒ Bondi is also required to work with the secretaries of Health and Human Services, Housing and Urban Development and Transportation to prioritize federal grants to states and cities that "enforce prohibitions on open illicit drug use, urban camping and loitering, and urban squatting, and track the location of sex offenders." White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, in a statement to USA TODAY, said Trump is "delivering on his commitment to Make America Safe Again and end homelessness across America." "By removing vagrant criminals from our streets and redirecting resources toward substance abuse programs, the Trump Administration will ensure that Americans feel safe in their own communities and that individuals suffering from addiction or mental health struggles are able to get the help they need," Leavitt said. More: The average American is closer to being homeless than being Elon Musk What order may mean for California In recent years, California has become a national poster child for the issue of homelessness, the challenges it poses and the difficulty governments can have with meaningfully addressing it. The US Senate Housing Committee reported earlier this year that a recent homeless count found that just over 187,000 people were homeless in California. That represented a 3% increase from the year before, less than the 18% increase observed nationwide. But it was still the highest homeless population of any state and accounted for 28% of the homeless people in America, while the state makes up just 11.7% of the population. The report also said that 66% of homeless people were "unsheltered," the highest percentage in the nation. In recent years, California Gov. Gavin Newsom has made several efforts to help — and, increasingly, push — cities in the state to address issues with homelessness and people living without shelter. In 2023, the state made $1 billion in funding available through grants to communities to address homelessness. A year later, urged cities to take action to make homeless encampments illegal in their cities and take action to move people off their streets and provide them with shelter and services. Earlier this year, he released a "model ordinance" that he encouraged cities to use as a template for passing their own laws banning camping in their cities. "There's nothing compassionate about letting people die on the streets," Newsom said in a statement he issued at the time he released the model ordinance. "Local leaders asked for resources — we delivered the largest state investment in history. They asked for legal clarity — the courts delivered. Now, we're giving them a model they can put to work immediately, with urgency and with humanity, to resolve encampments and connect people to shelter, housing, and care." Trump's order pushes for many of the same approaches and aims Newsom has advocated for, while making the government's eligibility for Federal grant money contingent on communities taking steps to get people off the street and into treatment and showing success in doing so. The order says that eligibility for grants will be based on cities and states' ending "housing first" policies. Such policies emphasize an approach to addressing homelessness focused on getting unhoused people into permanent housing as a first step to successfully transitioning them out of homelessness. All California housing programs have been required to adopt a "housing-first" model since 2016, with a bill that would've ended that requirement failing to advance out of committee earlier this year. On Thursday, a spokesperson for Newsom criticized the order to KQED, saying it was based on "harmful stereotypes and ineffective policy" in comparison to Newsom's executive order on encampments that she said had been based on the law and facts. But she also said that Trump's imitation of Newsom (even poorly executed) is the highest form of flattery. Trump's action follows major Supreme Court decision on homeless camps Trump's action comes after the Supreme Court ruled in June 2024 that that people without homes can be arrested and fined for sleeping in public spaces, overturning a lower court's ruling that enforcing camping bans when shelter is lacking is cruel and unusual punishment. The 6-3 decision, split among ideological lines in the conservative-majority court, upheld a ban in Grant Pass, Oregon, prohibiting homeless residents from sleeping outdoors. Homeless residents of the southern Oregon city of 38,000 face fines starting at $250 and jail time for repeat offenses. More: Homelessness rates jumped by double digits in 2024 as Americans battled to afford housing In a statement, the National Homelessness Law Center condemned Trump's order, characterizing it as misguided at best, and counterproductive and dangerous at worst. "The safest communities are those with the most housing and resources, not those that make it a crime to be poor or sick," said Jesse Rabinowitz of the National Homelessness Law Center. 'As a licensed mental health professional, I know that forced treatment is unethical, ineffective, and illegal." "People need stable housing and access to healthcare," Rabinowitz said. Rather, Trump's actions will force more people into homelessness, divert taxpayer money away from people in need, and make it harder for local communities to solve homelessness." Across the U.S., more than 771,800 people lived without housing in 2024, according to a HUD count taken annually on a single night in January. It was the highest tally ever recorded, a 18.1% jump than in 2023, when officials counted about 650,000 people living in homeless shelters or in parks and on streets. Many cities have struggled to build more affordable housing in recent years, while some communities have pushed for harsher laws banning tents and sleeping in public spaces. More: The homeless population is increasing. Will Trump's second term make it worse? Trump has often expressed his distaste of homeless camps, singling out the removal of encampments on parks and federal land in Washington as a priority. Trump, in a 2023 campaign video, said: "We will use every tool, lever, and authority to get the homeless off our streets. We want to take care of them, but they have to be off our streets.' Other items in Trump's order include language that seeks to ensure that grants intended for substance use disorder prevention and recovery don't fund drug injection sites or illicit drug use. The order also prohibits convicted sex offenders who receive homelessness assistance from being housed with children and supports new homeless programs to exclusively house women and children. Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison. Paul Albani-Burgio covers growth, development and business in the Coachella Valley. Email him at This article originally appeared on Palm Springs Desert Sun: How Trump homelessness order could impact California Solve the daily Crossword
Los Angeles Times
2 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump voters wanted relief from Medical bills. For millions, the bills are about to get bigger
President Trump rode to reelection last fall on voter concerns about prices. But as his administration pares back federal rules and programs designed to protect patients from the high cost of health care, Trump risks pushing more Americans into debt, further straining family budgets already stressed by medical bills. Millions of people are expected to lose health insurance in the coming years as a result of the tax cut legislation Trump signed this month, leaving them with fewer protections from large bills if they get sick or suffer an accident. At the same time, significant increases in health plan premiums on state insurance marketplaces next year will likely push more Americans to either drop coverage or switch to higher-deductible plans that will require them to pay more out-of-pocket before their insurance kicks in. Smaller changes to federal rules are poised to bump up patients' bills, as well. New federal guidelines for COVID -19 vaccines, for example, will allow health insurers to stop covering the shots for millions, so if patients want the protection, some may have to pay out-of-pocket. The new tax cut legislation will also raise the cost of certain doctor visits, requiring copays of up to $35 for some Medicaid enrollees. And for those who do end up in debt, there will be fewer protections. This month, the Trump administration secured permission from a federal court to roll back regulations that would have removed medical debt from consumer credit reports. That puts Americans who cannot pay their medical bills at risk of lower credit scores, hindering their ability to get a loan or forcing them to pay higher interest rates. 'For tens of millions of Americans, balancing the budget is like walking a tightrope,' said Chi Chi Wu, a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center. 'The Trump administration is just throwing them off.' White House spokesperson Kush Desai did not respond to questions about how the administration's health care policies will affect Americans' medical bills. The president and his Republican congressional allies have brushed off the health care cuts, including hundreds of billions of dollars in Medicaid retrenchment in the mammoth tax law. 'You won't even notice it,' Trump said at the White House after the bill signing July 4. 'Just waste, fraud, and abuse.' But consumer and patient advocates around the country warn that the erosion of federal health care protections since Trump took office in January threatens to significantly undermine Americans' financial security. 'These changes will hit our communities hard,' said Arika Sánchez, who oversees health care policy at the nonprofit New Mexico Center on Law and Poverty. Sánchez predicted many more people the center works with will end up with medical debt. 'When families get stuck with medical debt, it hurts their credit scores, makes it harder to get a car, a home, or even a job,' she said. 'Medical debt wrecks people's lives.' For Americans with serious illnesses such as cancer, weakened federal protections from medical debt pose yet one more risk, said Elizabeth Darnall, senior director of federal advocacy at the American Cancer Society's Cancer Action Network. 'People will not seek out the treatment they need,' she said. Trump promised a rosier future while campaigning last year, pledging to 'make America affordable again' and 'expand access to new Affordable Healthcare.' Polls suggest voters were looking for relief. About 6 in 10 adults — Democrats and Republicans — say they are worried about being able to afford health care, according to one recent survey, outpacing concerns about the cost of food or housing. And medical debt remains a widespread problem: As many as 100 million adults in the U.S. are burdened by some kind of health care debt. Despite this, key tools that have helped prevent even more Americans from sinking into debt are now on the chopping block. Medicaid and other government health insurance programs, in particular, have proved to be a powerful economic backstop for low-income patients and their families, said Kyle Caswell, an economist at the Urban Institute, a think tank in Washington, D.C. Caswell and other researchers found, for example, that Medicaid expansion made possible by the 2010 Affordable Care Act led to measurable declines in medical debt and improvements in consumers' credit scores in states that implemented the expansion. 'We've seen that these programs have a meaningful impact on people's financial well-being,' Caswell said. Trump's tax law — which will slash more than $1 trillion in federal health spending over the next decade, mostly through Medicaid cuts — is expected to leave 10 million more people without health coverage by 2034, according to the latest estimates from the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office. The tax cuts, which primarily benefit wealthy Americans, will add $3.4 trillion to U.S. deficits over a decade, the office calculated. The number of uninsured could spike further if Trump and his congressional allies don't renew additional federal subsidies for low- and moderate-income Americans who buy health coverage on state insurance marketplaces. This aid — enacted under former President Joe Biden — lowers insurance premiums and reduces medical bills enrollees face when they go to the doctor or the hospital. But unless congressional Republicans act, those subsidies will expire later this year, leaving many with bigger bills. Federal debt regulations developed by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau under the Biden administration would have protected these people and others if they couldn't pay their medical bills. The agency issued rules in January that would have removed medical debts from consumer credit reports. That would have helped an estimated 15 million people. But the Trump administration chose not to defend the new regulations when they were challenged in court by debt collectors and the credit bureaus, who argued the federal agency had exceeded its authority in issuing the rules. A federal judge in Texas appointed by Trump ruled that the regulation should be scrapped. Levey writes for KFF Health News, a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF—an independent source of health policy research, polling, and journalism.
