CHI's Acquisition of St. Luke's Episcopal Health Detailed

John Commins, for HealthLeaders Media , April 24, 2013

"Since they were not able to reach agreement with Peace Health, this acquisition is not a big surprise," Kong said in an email exchange. "The cultural values fit and the opportunity to expand into Houston makes this deal very attractive for CHI and St Luke's."

"I like the fact that CHI is funding $1 billion to create a new Episcopal Health Foundation that will be focusing on providing care and health education needs of the underserved population," Kong says. "This demonstrates a fit of common values and the commitment of another $1 billion demonstrates CHI's commitment to support St Luke's growth and quality patient care."

"It will be interesting to see if they will receive regulatory approval for this transaction. Since CHI is already the second-largest non-profit hospital system in the US regulators are taking a closer look to make sure there's still fair competition and competitive pricing if they approve the merger."

The Right Reverend C. Andrew Doyle, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Texas, said in prepared remarks that while the deal means that the Episcopal Diocese of Texas will no longer provide acute care, "this new foundation will address a widening gap in healthcare throughout our 57-county area. There is a care vacuum that must be addressed, including access to healthcare, prevention, community and environmental health, poverty, education and health disparities."

John Commins is a senior editor with HealthLeaders Media.

Comments are moderated. Please be patient.

1 comments on "CHI's Acquisition of St. Luke's Episcopal Health Detailed"

Bruce E. Woych (4/24/2013 at 11:31 AM)
Across the country, and indeed around the developed world, private equity and for-profit medical marketing has become an insidious concentration forcing out traditional not for profit institutions that have served over many years. Privatized medicine has yet to prove it can get through a decade without price bubbles and capital flight, and the issue of cost reduction is a profit driven expediency rather than a patient based concern over financial security during and after health crisis. Trumped up arguments appear against religious controls that divide and conquer from internal factions that play directly into the transfer of assets to secularized "neutral" civil-legal categories...which turn out to be simply narrow market interests in the end and far from medical delivery as the ideal covenant it once was. It is interesting to see the distinction made here to actually widen the base of delivery to those "underserved" populations. This is not the focus for the revenue seeking concerns of privatization and outsourcing. It is very encouraging to see this non-profit competing against the market profit trend. it is curious that the "regulators" are interested in fair play, however, I never heard any interest in this concern in mergers and consolidations of the past few years. It should be interesting further to see what criteria they use to judge this fairness!




FREE e-Newsletters Join the Council Subscribe to HL magazine


100 Winners Circle Suite 300
Brentwood, TN 37027


About | Advertise | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Reprints/Permissions | Contact
© HealthLeaders Media 2016 a division of BLR All rights reserved.