Diederik Schrijvershof and Leah Peeters are representing a long-term mental healthcare provider in objection proceedings before the NZa (Dutch Healthcare Authority). The aim of the proceedings is to arrive at cost-effective funding for long-term mental healthcare.
Since the Wet langdurige zorg (Long-Term Care Act) has been opened up to persons with mental disorder, at least some 12,500 clients will come under that Act in 2021 who previously (primarily) came under the Wet maatschappelijke ondersteuning (Social Support Act). Healthcare administration offices procure that long-term care from mental healthcare providers. The long-term mental healthcare provider involved in the objection proceedings will be faced with a large influx of new long-term mental healthcare clients in 2021 who previously came under the Social Support Act. The healthcare administration office involved will apply the same inadequate rates to this provider in 2021 as it did in 2020. In 2020, only a few long-term healthcare clients were in that provider’s care. Now that the provider is suddenly expected to treat many more clients at the inadequate rate, its financial loss is rapidly increasing. At the same time it follows from a court ruling of 1 October 2020 that long-term healthcare rates must be realistic. More information on the case, in which we successfully represented the Dutch Mental Healthcare Association and 19 of its members, can be found here. The fact that the healthcare administration office in question is refusing to take into account the increased influx at the provider in question of clients who previously came under the Long-Term Healthcare Act is unreasonable, since the provider is expected to provide a great deal of long-term mental healthcare at an unrealistic rate. NZa must take these circumstances into account in the production agreement between the provider and the healthcare administration office in the NZa decision. Its failure to do so is the subject of the objection proceedings.
Maverick Advocaten has previously successfully conducted (preliminary relief) proceedings on behalf of healthcare providers regarding the procurement of youth care, forensic care, acute mental healthcare, SGLVG (Serious Behavioural Problems and Mild Intellectual Disability) care and care under the Long-Term Care Act. It has also already successfully challenged abuse of purchasing power of healthcare insurers. More information on the rights of healthcare providers in healthcare contracting and the ways in which their trade associations can support them can be found at www.zorgcontractering.com.
