Latest news with #BlueShieldofCalifornia
Yahoo
15-07-2025
- Health
- Yahoo
Blue Shield of California Members Have Network Access to Hoag Hospitals and Providers
Nonprofit health plan and Hoag continue their long-standing network relationship with a new agreement focusing on clinical quality, member experience and affordability OAKLAND, Calif., July 15, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Blue Shield of California and Hoag have reached a new agreement that ensures the nonprofit health plan's Commercial HMO and PPO and Medicare PPO members continue to have in-network access to care from Hoag providers, services and facilities. The renewed collaboration includes the health system's hospitals and facilities across Orange County, including Hoag Hospital Newport Beach, Hoag Hospital Irvine and Hoag Orthopedic Institute. The agreement also includes Hoag Clinic, which supports Hoag Medical Group and Hoag Physician Partners. Hoag continues to be committed to Blue Shield of California's program to support clinical quality and member experience. "Blue Shield of California has an unwavering commitment to creating a healthcare system that provides access to high-quality care at an affordable price for all Californians. Our strong and long-standing partnership with Hoag is an important part of achieving that in Orange County. This agreement is a testament to how mutual commitments to members can be realized, when partners work together toward a shared goal," said Mike Stuart, Blue Shield of California's interim president and CEO. "Hoag's priority is delivering the highest-quality care and ensuring patients have access to the physicians, services and facilities they know and trust. We appreciate the collaboration with Blue Shield in reaching an agreement that supports that mission and maintains uninterrupted access for Hoag patients. This outcome reflects the value of Hoag and Blue Shield's shared goal of preserving local access to world-class care," said Robert T. Braithwaite, Hoag president and chief executive officer. About Hoag HealthHoag is a nonprofit, regional healthcare delivery system in Orange County, California. Delivering world-class, comprehensive, personalized care, Hoag consists of 1,800 top physicians, 18 urgent care facilities, 13 health & wellness centers, and two award-winning hospitals. Hoag offers a comprehensive blend of health care services that includes seven institutes providing specialized services in the following areas: cancer, digestive health, heart and vascular, neurosciences, spine, women's health, and orthopedics through Hoag's affiliate, Hoag Orthopedic Institute, which consists of an orthopedic hospital and five ambulatory surgical centers. Hoag is the highest ranked hospital in Orange County by U.S. News & World Report and the only OC hospital ranked in the Top 10 in California, as well as a designated Magnet® with Distinction hospital by the American Nurses Credentialing Center (ANCC). For more information, visit About Blue Shield of CaliforniaBlue Shield of California strives to create a healthcare system worthy of its family and friends that is sustainably affordable. The health plan is a taxpaying, nonprofit, independent member of the Blue Shield Association with 6 million members, over 7,500 employees and more than $27 billion in annual revenue. Founded in 1939 in San Francisco and now headquartered in Oakland, Blue Shield of California and its affiliates provide health, dental, vision, Medicaid and Medicare healthcare service plans in California. The company has contributed more than $60 million to the Blue Shield of California Foundation in the last three years to have an impact on California communities. For more news about Blue Shield of California, please visit Or follow us on LinkedIn or Facebook. CONTACT: Mark SeeligBlue Shield of California 510-607-2359media@ View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Blue Shield of California Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
10-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Blue Shield of California Recognized as a 2025 U.S. News & World Report Best Company to Work For
OAKLAND, Calif., July 10, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- U.S. News & World Report (U.S. News) has named Blue Shield of California to its 2025 list of Best Companies to Work For in both the Private Company, and Health Care and Research categories. "At Blue Shield, we aim to be a great place to do meaningful work. The high ratings we received for work-life balance, comfort and belongingness are encouraging confirmation of progress," said Haley Mixon, executive vice president and chief human resources officer, Blue Shield of California. "We will continue to listen and learn from our employees so that we can provide a workplace that best serves our talented workforce." U.S. News is a trusted resource on employee well-being and releases an annual list of public and private companies that are setting workplace standards. Companies are evaluated on several metrics including quality of pay and benefits, work-life balance and flexibility, physical and psychological comfort, career opportunities and professional development. To be considered private, companies must be non-publicly traded with more than 5,000 employees, more than $500 million in annual revenue, and have at least 75 U.S.-based Glassdoor reviews between 2021 and 2024. "This recognition reflects the dedicated employees at Blue Shield who uphold our mission every day," said Mike Stuart, interim president and CEO, Blue Shield of California. "Together we are committed to creating a healthcare system that is worthy of our family and friends and sustainably affordable. I am proud to serve alongside them as we pursue meaningful work that betters our community and California." About Blue Shield of CaliforniaBlue Shield of California strives to create a healthcare system worthy of its family and friends that is sustainably affordable. The health plan is a taxpaying, nonprofit, independent member of the Blue Shield Association with 6 million members, over 7,500 employees and more than $27 billion in annual revenue. Founded in 1939 in San Francisco and now headquartered in Oakland, Blue Shield of California and its affiliates provide health, dental, vision, Medicaid and Medicare healthcare service plans in California. The company has contributed more than $60 million to the Blue Shield of California Foundation in the last three years to have an impact on California communities. For more news about Blue Shield of California, please visit Or follow us on LinkedIn or Facebook. CONTACT: Mark SeeligBlue Shield of California510-607-2359media@ View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Blue Shield of California
San Francisco Chronicle
09-07-2025
- Health
- San Francisco Chronicle
UC Health, Blue Shield of California reach new contract, avoiding disruptions to care
After weeks of contract negotiations that threatened to disrupt medical care for tens of thousands of Californians, UC Health and Blue Shield of California on Tuesday reached a new agreement. The deal means patients who get medical care at UCSF and five other UC Health academic medical centers statewide through Blue Shield can continue accessing services at in-network rates. This had been up in the air, with the previous contract slated to expire Aug. 9. If the two sides had not reached an agreement, patients would potentially have had to find a new doctor, new insurer, or pay out-of-network rates. The contract applies to people on CalPERS plans, employer plans, Covered California plans and Medicare plans (including Medicare Advantage) offered or administered by Blue Shield. In the Bay Area, this includes residents insured by Blue Shield who get care at UCSF Medical Center, UCSF Benioff Children's Hospitals, UCSF Medical Group, UCSF Benioff Children's Physicians and the primary care provider One Medical, a UCSF affiliate. UC Health and Blue Shield had been renegotiating contracts to establish how much Blue Shield will reimburse services provided by UC Health hospitals, clinics and other facilities. Such negotiations between providers and insurers are routine, though they have grown more public and contentious in recent years, often with both sides accusing the other of harming patients through higher prices or less accessible care. 'We are dedicated to ensuring members have access to affordable care and are pleased to be able to continue our partnership with UC Health,' Blue Shield of California said in a statement.
Miami Herald
30-06-2025
- Business
- Miami Herald
Insurer Blue Shield of California's new parent company alarms consumer advocates
Last year, regulators approved a request by Blue Shield of California, the state's third-largest health insurer, to restructure and establish a new parent corporation in Delaware. The Oakland-based nonprofit got the go-ahead from the Department of Managed Health Care, or DMHC, to create an entity called Ascendiun Inc., which is now the out-of-state corporate parent of Blue Shield. The insurer said that the restructuring would allow it to better serve its members "with less bureaucracy and faster results, while making health care more affordable." But the transaction has raised alarm among a former high-level Blue Shield executive and consumer advocates, who complain that it was carried out with no public oversight and could allow the insurer to transfer money to a Delaware parent company with few strings attached. The activists claim that some of that money could be used to boost its spending on charitable endeavors. The company has accrued a surplus of more than $4 billion over the decades as it benefited from its former tax-exempt status, according to a regulatory filing. "The move guts the ability of the DHMC to enforce Blue Shield's nonprofit obligations to the California public and gives Blue Shield's directors ... a virtually free hand to make use of Blue Shield's billions of dollars in charitable assets as they please," wrote Michael Johnson, the insurer's former director of public policy, in a recent letter to Mary Watanabe, director of the department, which was reviewed by The Times. Johnson is calling for the department to rescind its approval and unwind the restructuring. The department maintains that the insurer is not subject to charitable trust rules as a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation. In a statement, the department said it "maintains full regulatory authority and enforcement of all Blue Shield of California health plan operations," and reviewed the transaction to ensure that it will not harm the plan's financial viability. Blue Shield's restructuring is reviving a longstanding debate about whether one of the state's largest insurers is reinvesting enough of its profit to lower its rates, better serve low-income residents and provide coverage for underserved areas of the state. Controversy over the company's role as a nonprofit previously aired in 2015 as it sought approval from the department for its $1.2-billion purchase of Care1st, a Medicaid health plan. Blue Shield has disputed Johnson's claims, noting that the state has determined it is not subject to the rules governing charitable nonprofits. In the Jan. 8 announcement of its restructuring, Blue Shield also disclosed that it was forming a for-profit subsidiary called Stellarus that would provide services to other health plans, such as delivering drugs to patients more inexpensively than pharmacy benefit managers. Ascendiun is structured as a nonprofit and Blue Shield and the company's Medi-Cal insurer, Blue Shield of California Promise Health Plan - the former Care1st - also would continue as nonprofits, the insurer said at the time. "This structure is not uncommon among health plans, as many across the country - including other nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield companies - have made similar corporate reorganizations to better serve their membership," the insurer said in its statement to The Times. A scathing audit Blue Shield was established in 1939 by the California Medical Assn. as the nation's first prepaid health plan to cover physician bills. It followed the creation of the first Blue Cross plan, in Texas, to pay for hospital bills. The California insurer did not pay federal taxes until a change in the law in 1986. And it was exempt from state taxes until the Franchise Tax Board revoked that status in August 2014 after a scathing audit that The Times first reported. The audit found that Blue Shield was operating similarly to a for-profit company, with executives instructed to "maximize profitability." The tax board also found that the insurer had stockpiled "extraordinarily high surpluses" even as it failed to offer enough public benefits, such as more affordable coverage. Blue Shield denied the accusations but ultimately relinquished its tax-exempt status, even as it has continued to pursue an appeal of an order requiring it to pay more than $100 million in back taxes. Johnson contends that the new corporate structure will allow Blue Shield to move its assets around in pursuit of its business goals with little oversight beyond maintaining required reserves - especially given its parent company's incorporation in Delaware, a business-friendly state where most Fortune 500 companies are registered. The DMHC strengthened reserve requirements in approving the deal and it now totals about $2.1 billion, according to a regulatory filing, which Johnson says would allow Blue Shield to transfer about $2.4 billion to Ascendiun. Charles Bell, a healthcare advocate who was involved in last decade's debate over Blue Shield's charitable obligations, is troubled by the decision to establish an out-of-state parent. "I think that the changes in corporate structure that were made are highly concerning, and it should have received a much higher level of public scrutiny and a lot more skepticism by the Department of Managed Health Care," said Bell, advocacy programs director for Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports. The department said in its response to The Times that it "may hold public meetings if a transaction meets certain requirements to qualify as a major transaction. Upon due consideration, the Department determined that the specific facts of this restructuring did not meet the criteria set out in law to hold a public meeting." A long history of restructuring Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans have a long history of restructuring, including Blue Cross of California. That insurer broke ground when in 1993 it spun off a recently established for-profit subsidiary, Wellpoint Health Networks. Blue Cross was later required to distribute $3.2 billion to a pair of new nonprofits, the California Endowment and the California Health Care Foundation, which are still operating. Less than a decade later, Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in more than dozen other states had converted to for-profits, typically highly controversial proposals, given questions about what was to become of their billions of dollars of assets. More recently, the nonprofits have converted into mutual insurance holding companies. That allows them to maintain their nonprofit status while funding for-profit ventures, such as in technology, said Brendan Bridgeland, an attorney with the Center for Insurance Research in Cambridge, Mass. What is unusual about Blue Shield of California's restructuring, he said, is that the DMHC allowed it to establish an out-of-state parent company. "Once you reach the point where the subsidiary starts transferring money up to the parent and it gets reallocated, then it's going to be out of their control," Bridgeland said. Johnson's concerns are rooted in efforts last decade by healthcare advocates to have Blue Shield declared a charitable organization and to dig into its assets to improve patient care as a condition of its approval to acquire Care1st. Johnson worked at Blue Shield from 2003 until 2015, when he resigned to mount a public campaign to pressure the insurer over its nonprofit mission. Johnson has been involved in litigation with his former employer, which sued him in 2015 alleging he disclosed confidential information, including Blue Shield's communications with the Franchise Tax Board. In a settlement, he agreed to no longer retain or disseminate such documents. In seeking to retain its state tax-exemption during its audit by the board, which began in 2013, Blue Shield argued that should it dissolve, its assets could be distributed only to another nonprofit. Yet, the insurer told the DMHC, when the agency reviewed the proposed acquisition in 2015, that as a nonprofit mutual-benefit corporation it served only its enrollees and had no such obligations. Ultimately, the department decided that Blue Shield did not have the charitable obligations though it required the insurer, in approving the acquisition that year, to refrain from making "misleading or inconsistent" statements regarding the distribution of its assets if it ever were dissolved. "Through this process there have been inconsistencies in what Blue Shield has said. It was frustrating because we had to spend a lot of time and energy to make sure what was true," the department's then director, Shelley Rouillard, said at the time. A pledge to spend more on patient care The insurer pledged as part of the Care1st acquisition to spend $200 million over the next decade on several initiatives aimed at providing better patient care. Nevertheless, patient advocates criticized the DMHC's finding that Blue Shield did not have charitable obligations, saying the state lost the opportunity to regulate how the insurer spent its billions in assets - and then failed to impose tougher conditions on the insurer, such as limiting its ability to impose rate increases deemed unreasonable. In his March letter, Johnson called on the DMHC to require Blue Shield to spend annually at least 5% of its total assets on community benefits, which might go, for example, to grants to community clinics in underserved areas of the state. Blue Shield defended its charitable spending, noting that it caps its annual profit at 2% and allocates additional revenue to such services as delivering COVID vaccines at no cost to the state, and funding nonprofits that advance mental health. "Blue Shield … has consistently supported its members and California communities throughout the state," the company said. Johnson also contends newly public documents show Blue Shield has continued to argue before state tax authorities that it is a charitable trust. In the opening brief of its back taxes case in 2020, the insurer cites a state Supreme Court case that it said confirms "Blue Shield operates exclusively for the promotion of social welfare," his letter notes. Blue Shield told The Times that it has provided "consistent information to DMHC about its corporate restructuring" and that Johnson's letter provided "no new evidence" regarding Blue Shield's status as a "tax-paying not-for-profit mutual benefit corporation." Johnson and the DMHC traded additional letters last week, with Johnson questioning why the department had not reviewed the new tax appeal documents or why they had not reviewed Ascendiun's articles of incorporation or bylaws prior to approving the restructuring. Janet Rickershauser, a nonprofits lawyer at Hurwit & Associates, said that the bylaws are important to understanding the parent company's operations, including the relationship of the subsidiaries to each other and the holding parent company. In a letter sent June 23 to Johnson, Jonathon Williams, an assistant chief counsel at the DMHC, said the department concluded it was "not necessary or appropriate" to review the tax-appeal documents in its review of Blue Shield's application to restructure nor conduct a "full evaluation of Delaware's corporation statutory scheme." The department told The Times that it conducted a "comprehensive review" of the articles of incorporation of Blue Shield and its Medicaid Promise Health Plan as required by state law. Although it did not review Ascendiun's bylaws or articles of incorporation, the department said it retained its regulatory authority over Blue Shield. Blue Shield said it would not release it bylaws because they are "confidential company documents." However, Rickershauser said that "hiding the ball on the bylaws is preventing transparency into important aspects of how they're operating." Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Los Angeles Times
30-06-2025
- Business
- Los Angeles Times
Insurer Blue Shield of California's new parent company alarms consumer advocates
Last year, regulators approved a request by Blue Shield of California, the state's third-largest health insurer, to restructure and establish a new parent corporation in Delaware. The Oakland-based nonprofit got the go-ahead from the Department of Managed Health Care, or DMHC, to create an entity called Ascendiun Inc., which is now the out-of-state corporate parent of Blue Shield. The insurer said that the restructuring would allow it to better serve its members 'with less bureaucracy and faster results, while making health care more affordable.' But the transaction has raised alarm among a former high-level Blue Shield executive and consumer advocates, who complain that it was carried out with no public oversight and could allow the insurer to transfer money to a Delaware parent company with few strings attached. The activists claim that some of that money could be used to boost its spending on charitable endeavors. The company has accrued a surplus of more than $4 billion over the decades as it benefited from its former tax-exempt status, according to a regulatory filing. 'The move guts the ability of the DHMC to enforce Blue Shield's nonprofit obligations to the California public and gives Blue Shield's directors ... a virtually free hand to make use of Blue Shield's billions of dollars in charitable assets as they please,' wrote Michael Johnson, the insurer's former vice president of public policy, in a recent letter to Mary Watanabe, director of the department, which was reviewed by The Times. Johnson is calling for the department to rescind its approval and unwind the restructuring. The department maintains that the insurer is not subject to charitable trust rules as a nonprofit mutual benefit corporation. In a statement, the department said it 'maintains full regulatory authority and enforcement of all Blue Shield of California health plan operations,' and reviewed the transaction to ensure that it will not harm the plan's financial viability. Blue Shield's restructuring is reviving a longstanding debate about whether one of the state's largest insurers is reinvesting enough of its profit to lower its rates, better serve low-income residents and provide coverage for underserved areas of the state. Controversy over the company's role as a nonprofit previously aired in 2015 as it sought approval from the department for its $1.2-billion purchase of Care1st, a Medicaid health plan. Blue Shield has disputed Johnson's claims, noting that the state has determined it is not subject to the rules governing charitable nonprofits. In the Jan. 8 announcement of its restructuring, Blue Shield also disclosed that it was forming a for-profit subsidiary called Stellarus that would provide services to other health plans, such as delivering drugs to patients more inexpensively than pharmacy benefit managers. Ascendiun is structured as a nonprofit and Blue Shield and the company's Medi-Cal insurer, Blue Shield of California Promise Health Plan — the former Care1st — also would continue as nonprofits, the insurer said at the time. 'This structure is not uncommon among health plans, as many across the country — including other nonprofit Blue Cross and Blue Shield companies — have made similar corporate reorganizations to better serve their membership,' the insurer said in its statement to The Times. Blue Shield was established in 1939 by the California Medical Assn. as the nation's first prepaid health plan to cover physician bills. It followed the creation of the first Blue Cross plan, in Texas, to pay for hospital bills. The California insurer did not pay federal taxes until a change in the law in 1986. And it was exempt from state taxes until the Franchise Tax Board revoked that status in August 2014 after a scathing audit that The Times first reported. The audit found that Blue Shield was operating similarly to a for-profit company, with executives instructed to 'maximize profitability.' The tax board also found that the insurer had stockpiled 'extraordinarily high surpluses' even as it failed to offer enough public benefits, such as more affordable coverage. Blue Shield denied the accusations but ultimately relinquished its tax-exempt status, even as it has continued to pursue an appeal of an order requiring it to pay more than $100 million in back taxes. Johnson contends that the new corporate structure will allow Blue Shield to move its assets around in pursuit of its business goals with little oversight beyond maintaining required reserves — especially given its parent company's incorporation in Delaware, a business-friendly state where most Fortune 500 companies are registered. The DMHC strengthened reserve requirements in approving the deal and it now totals about $2.1 billion, according to a regulatory filing, which Johnson says would allow Blue Shield to transfer about $2.4 billion to Ascendiun. Charles Bell, a healthcare advocate who was involved in last decade's debate over Blue Shield's charitable obligations, is troubled by the decision to establish an out-of-state parent. 'I think that the changes in corporate structure that were made are highly concerning, and it should have received a much higher level of public scrutiny and a lot more skepticism by the Department of Managed Health Care,' said Bell, advocacy programs director for Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports. The department said in its response to The Times that it 'may hold public meetings if a transaction meets certain requirements to qualify as a major transaction. Upon due consideration, the Department determined that the specific facts of this restructuring did not meet the criteria set out in law to hold a public meeting.' Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans have a long history of restructuring, including Blue Cross of California. That insurer broke ground when in 1993 it spun off a recently established for-profit subsidiary, Wellpoint Health Networks. Blue Cross was later required to distribute $3.2 billion to a pair of new nonprofits, the California Endowment and the California Health Care Foundation, which are still operating. Less than a decade later, Blue Cross and Blue Shield plans in more than dozen other states had converted to for-profits, typically highly controversial proposals, given questions about what was to become of their billions of dollars of assets. More recently, the nonprofits have converted into mutual insurance holding companies. That allows them to maintain their nonprofit status while funding for-profit ventures, such as in technology, said Brendan Bridgeland, an attorney with the Center for Insurance Research in Cambridge, Mass. What is unusual about Blue Shield of California's restructuring, he said, is that the DMHC allowed it to establish an out-of-state parent company. 'Once you reach the point where the subsidiary starts transferring money up to the parent and it gets reallocated, then it's going to be out of their control,' Bridgeland said. Johnson's concerns are rooted in efforts last decade by healthcare advocates to have Blue Shield declared a charitable organization and to dig into its assets to improve patient care as a condition of its approval to acquire Care1st. Johnson worked at Blue Shield from 2003 until 2015, when he resigned to mount a public campaign to pressure the insurer over its nonprofit mission. Johnson has been involved in litigation with his former employer, which sued him in 2015 alleging he disclosed confidential information, including Blue Shield's communications with the Franchise Tax Board. In a settlement, he agreed to no longer retain or disseminate such documents. In seeking to retain its state tax-exemption during its audit by the board, which began in 2013, Blue Shield argued that should it dissolve, its assets could be distributed only to another nonprofit. Yet, the insurer told the DMHC, when the agency reviewed the proposed acquisition in 2015, that as a nonprofit mutual-benefit corporation it served only its enrollees and had no such obligations. Ultimately, the department decided that Blue Shield did not have the charitable obligations though it required the insurer, in approving the acquisition that year, to refrain from making 'misleading or inconsistent' statements regarding the distribution of its assets if it ever were dissolved. 'Through this process there have been inconsistencies in what Blue Shield has said. It was frustrating because we had to spend a lot of time and energy to make sure what was true,' the department's then director, Shelley Rouillard, said at the time. The insurer pledged as part of the Care1st acquisition to spend $200 million over the next decade on several initiatives aimed at providing better patient care. Nevertheless, patient advocates criticized the DMHC's finding that Blue Shield did not have charitable obligations, saying the state lost the opportunity to regulate how the insurer spent its billions in assets — and then failed to impose tougher conditions on the insurer, such as limiting its ability to impose rate increases deemed unreasonable. In his March letter, Johnson called on the DMHC to require Blue Shield to spend annually at least 5% of its total assets on community benefits, which might go, for example, to grants to community clinics in underserved areas of the state. Blue Shield defended its charitable spending, noting that it caps its annual profit at 2% and allocates additional revenue to such services as delivering COVID vaccines at no cost to the state, and funding nonprofits that advance mental health. 'Blue Shield … has consistently supported its members and California communities throughout the state,' the company said. Johnson also contends newly public documents show Blue Shield has continued to argue before state tax authorities that it is a charitable trust. In the opening brief of its back taxes case in 2020, the insurer cites a state Supreme Court case that it said confirms 'Blue Shield operates exclusively for the promotion of social welfare,' his letter notes. Blue Shield told The Times that it has provided 'consistent information to DMHC about its corporate restructuring' and that Johnson's letter provided 'no new evidence' regarding Blue Shield's status as a 'tax-paying not-for-profit mutual benefit corporation.' Johnson and the DMHC traded additional letters last week, with Johnson questioning why the department had not reviewed the new tax appeal documents or why they had not reviewed Ascendiun's articles of incorporation or bylaws prior to approving the restructuring. Janet Rickershauser, a nonprofits lawyer at Hurwit & Associates, said that the bylaws are important to understanding the parent company's operations, including the relationship of the subsidiaries to each other and the holding parent company. In a letter sent June 23 to Johnson, Jonathon Williams, an assistant chief counsel at the DMHC, said the department concluded it was 'not necessary or appropriate' to review the tax-appeal documents in its review of Blue Shield's application to restructure nor conduct a 'full evaluation of Delaware's corporation statutory scheme.' The department told The Times that it conducted a 'comprehensive review' of the articles of incorporation of Blue Shield and its Medicaid Promise Health Plan as required by state law. Although it did not review Ascendiun's bylaws or articles of incorporation, the department said it retained its regulatory authority over Blue Shield. Blue Shield said it would not release it bylaws because they are 'confidential company documents.' However, Rickershauser said that 'hiding the ball on the bylaws is preventing transparency into important aspects of how they're operating.'
