HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.sag/sagga0009 and id is 1 raw text is: flpnrtnzent of inv
.$ tate of t&irria
flJRSEfRTh. 9AkttI 40 CAPHTOL SQ10Aki MN
AT RkEV QNERkI TLtA. QA 04;U Ia
UNOFFICIAL OPINION 2010-1
To: Representative, District 83 August 23, 2010
Re: The Open Meetings Act, O.C.G.A. § 50 14 1, applies to the Drug Utilization Review Board created by the
Georgia Department of Community Health.
You have requested my opinion whether the Drug Utilization Review Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board)
created by the Georgia Department of Community Health (DCH) is subject to the Open Meetings Act (the Act),
O.C.G.A. H§ 50-14-1 through 50-14-6. It is my opinion that the Open Meetings Act does indeed apply to the Drug
Utilization Review Board and it should act in accordance with the requirements of this law in conducting its meetings.
The purpose of the Drug Utilization Review Board
The Board is authorized by the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. § 1396r-8(g). Its purpose is to review drug studies and
drug therapies and make recommendations to DCH concerning the list of drugs to be approved for use through the
Medicaid and PeachCare programs. The Board meets quarterly and consists of 20 members, all of whom are
appointed by the Commissioner of DCH. The members include physicians, pharmacists, members of the academic
community, and a consumer advocate.
The Board's members do not include any members of DCH's governing body. The Board also is not a committee of
DCH's members created by its governing body. The Board generally makes recommendations, but not decisions, on
which drugs will be granted preferred status. Additionally, the Board may review and discuss the release of recent
clinical evidence and treatment guidelines, discuss retrospective drug review results, and provide recommendations
as it relates to clinical and educational drug interventions for providers. In these matters, the Board is acting in more
than an advisory capacity.
At least sixty days prior to each Board meeting, DCH posts on its website the medications and drug therapies which
are under review and will be discussed at the upcoming Board meeting. Drug manufacturers may provide comments
and input to SXC Health Solutions (SXC), DCH's pharmacy benefits manager, through its vendor NorthStar
HealthCare Consulting (NHC). SXC, in conjunction with NHC, hosts a manufacturer's forum at least thirty days
prior to the Board meeting, during which manufacturers are allowed to present to NHC a thirty-minute presentation
regarding their respective drug(s) under review. Manufacturers also may present written comments to NHC in lieu of
attending the manufacturer's forum. Comments and inquiries submitted to NHC are communicated to the Board via
oral communications and written materials at its regularly scheduled meeting. Materials submitted electronically to
NHC are forwarded electronically to the Board. Concurrent with the clinical drug information submitted to SXC, drug
manufacturers submit financial information regarding drug pricing to Goold Health Systems (GHS), the state's
rebate service administrator which, like SXC, is a DCH contractor.
At the Board meeting, Medicaid Fee-For-Service (FFS) patients, advocates, healthcare providers, and speakers for
organized coalitions or special interest groups on behalf of Medicaid FFS patients are allowed to speak during a
consumer comment session. In addition to the consumer comment session, clinical information and information
presented at the manufacturer's forum is presented to the Board during the open session. As part of the Board
meeting, an executive session may also be conducted. During the executive session providerand Jpatient specific
information may be presented to the Board for discussion. Also during the executive session GHS presents financial
information related to the drugs currently under review. The Board reviews and discusses the financial information
and formulates its recommendations to DCH. Once recommendations are formulated by the Board, the executive
session is concluded and the open session reconvenes. The Board's recommendations are verbally communicated to
the participants attending the meeting. The Board's recommendations also are included in the written minutes of the
Board meeting and are posted to the DCH website. Manufacturers may request an appeal of the recommendations to
DCH within ten business days following the Board meeting. DCH, through its Pharmacy Unit, makes an independent
determination on the approval of drugs and which will receive preferred status. In doing so, DCH may either accept
or reject the Board's recommendations. DCH then posts its decisions on its website.
The Open Meetings Act
The Georgia Open Meetings Act provides that in most circumstances a meeting of a governmental agency or entity
will be open to the public. O.C.G.A. § 50-14-1(b). A meeting of a covered body may only be closed under certain
statutory circumstances and only by following a prescribed statutory procedure. O.C.G.A. H§ 50-14-3, 50-14-4.
The Georgia Open Meetings Act ... intends to prohibit closed meetings which engender in the people a distrust of its
officials who are clothed with the power to act in their name. McLarty v. Board ofRegents, 231 Ga. 22, 23 (1973).
The Act requires that any meeting of a governing body of an agency or any committee thereof... at which official
business or policy of the agency is to be discussed or at which official action is to be taken be made open to the
public. Crosland v. Butts County Bd. ofZoning Appeals, 214 Ga. App. 295, 296 (1994). It is to be broadly construed
to effect its purposes of protecting the public and individuals from closed-door meetings. Kilgore v. R.W. Page
Corp., 261 Ga. 410, 411 (1991). The limited exceptions to its requirements are enumerated at O.C.G.A. [§] 50-14-3.](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.sag/sagga0009&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)