‘This is organized crime’: Pharmacy board blasted for alleged…

The Alabama State Board of Pharmacy (ABOP) Faces Scrutiny Over Significant Issues

The Alabama State Board of Pharmacy (ABOP) was subjected to a nearly two-hour grilling by lawmakers on Thursday after a recent report that found multiple “significant problems” with the board’s operations and perceived retaliatory practices against licensees.

The Alabama Examiners of Public Accounts report was compiled before Thursday’s Sunset Committee meeting. At this meeting, lawmakers scrutinize licensing boards that require legislative approval for their continued existence.

Significant Issues Found in ABOP Operations

At Thursday’s meeting, multiple lawmakers, advocates, and lawyers noted that the report did not paint a flattering picture of ABOP.

ABOP Report by Craig Monger on Scribd

Initially, ABOP executive secretary Donna Yeatman addressed the committee, giving what seemed like a preemptive exculpation of the board’s reputation, offering a commendatory description of the board and its practices, especially through the COVID-19 pandemic.

“The board takes seriously its responsibility to ensure the safety of Alabama patients,” Yeatman said. “We are confident that every citizen in Alabama can rely on this board, as every action this board takes, every rule they write or amend, and every disciplinary action is driven by the board’s mandate to protect the citizens of Alabama.”

The report from the state examiners found several instances of “significant issues” with ABOP, including:

1. Incorrect reporting of income
2. Over-fining
3. Levying non-specified fees
4. Charging non-licensed entities
5. Inconsistent meeting minutes
6. Violations of Alabama’s Open Meetings Act
7. Failure to file oaths of office
8. Delayed receipt deposits
9. Violations of open-bidding rules
10. Inaccurate invoicing
11. Overpaying vendors
12. Unlawfully procuring supplies and services

Yeatman briefly addressed the issues in her prelude, agreeing with the examiners’ findings on some of the more minor issues and disagreeing with the examiners on more significant ones.

Regarding the anonymous pharmacists, Yeatman stated that since the questionnaire respondents were only a small portion of the state’s pharmacists, she believed “the overwhelming majority” were happy with the board and its actions.

Several members of the public also spoke. Some praised the board and its mission and policies, while others criticized ABOP with charges ranging from fleecing taxpayers to excessive and punitive fines meant to line board members’ pockets.

Billy East Lawsuit. by Craig Monger on Scribd

Attorney Joseph Kreps, who boasted of representing people before the board for nearly 20 years, gave the most impassioned and fierce condemnation of ABOP, accusing it of lining its pockets through punitive and arbitrary fees and fines levied against pharmacists.

“The pharmacy board’s funds are hidden from view,” Kreps said. “in 2023, licensing fees collected by this agency hit $4.4 million, with nearly $4 million of that spent on administrative salaries and benefits alone. These board members are paid. They are making a fortune being on this board. It’s wrong. They pocketed a combined $325,000 in salary and per diem payments, and travel expenses were more than $210,000. They extort $1 million annually from these licensees through unlawful fines and junk fees. Late fees surged almost 1,500% from 2013 to 2022.”

He continued, “They don’t care anything about the licensees. The only thing they care about is collecting money and funneling it into their own pockets.”

Lawmakers Express Concerns and Call for Remedial Action

Lawmakers on the committee asked Yeatman extensive questions regarding the examiners’ report, seeking clarification on the serious issues found. Their questions were answered. However, multiple lawmakers expressed serious concerns about the report and ABOP’s actions while acknowledging the importance of the board’s regulatory role.

“This is one of the worst reports, and I haven’t been on the Sunset Committee very long, but it’s one of the worst reports, if not the worst one I’ve seen,” said State Sen. Sam Givhan (R-Huntsville). “I would recommend that the board start working post haste to remedy these issues.”

State Rep. Kerry Underwood (R-Tuscumbia) said the optics of the board’s actions give the appearance of “pay-to-play.”

“I know that this is the Sunset Committee, but there is a lack of sunlight in your program, in your department, and in your board,” said State Rep. Matt Simpson (R-Daphne.). “I’m not saying you’re sweeping things under the rug. There is an appearance of; if you were sweeping things under the rug, there is nothing that we would be able to see these things.”

State Sen. Keith Kelley (R-Anniston) emphatically stated that if this report had come against a less significant board, it would have been “lights out,” meaning the legislature would likely vote not to renew that agency.

“Whenever I look at this, to say I’m concerned is an extreme understatement,” Kelley stated.

To connect with the author of this story or to comment, email craig.monger@1819news.com.

Don’t miss out! Subscribe to our newsletter and get our top stories every weekday morning.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

The article discusses issues related to the Alabama State Board of Pharmacy’s operations and practices, which directly impact the health and well-being of Alabama patients. It also highlights concerns about the board’s governance and potential violations of justice and strong institutional practices.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential healthcare services, and access to safe, effective, quality, and affordable essential medicines and vaccines.
• SDG 16.6: Develop effective, accountable, and transparent institutions at all levels.

The article raises concerns about the Alabama State Board of Pharmacy’s practices, including over-fining, levying non-specified fees, and charging non-licensed entities. These issues can hinder universal health coverage and access to safe and affordable essential medicines. Additionally, the article highlights potential violations of transparency and accountability within the board’s governance.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Number of fines imposed by the Alabama State Board of Pharmacy
• Number of non-specified fees charged by the board
• Number of instances where non-licensed entities were charged by the board
• Accuracy of meeting minutes with board actions
• Compliance with Alabama’s Open Meetings Act
• Timeliness of filing oaths of office with the secretary of state’s office
• Timeliness of depositing receipts
• Compliance with state’s open-bidding rules
• Accuracy of invoicing
• Extent of overpayment to vendors
• Extent of unlawful procurement of supplies and services

The article mentions various issues related to the Alabama State Board of Pharmacy’s operations, which can serve as indicators to measure progress towards the identified targets. These indicators can be used to assess the board’s adherence to transparency, accountability, and the provision of affordable and accessible healthcare services.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

Source: 1819news.com