IBJNews

Regenstrief taps Deloitte to pick up more health care industry clients

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

With federal health research funding in decline, Indianapolis-based Regenstrief Institute Inc. wants to make up the difference by serving private health care customers.

The not-for-profit thinks a new partnership with consulting firm Deloitte should bring in more contracts from pharmaceutical companies, medical device makers, health insurers and hospital systems.

Regenstrief has joined a health care and life sciences analytics consortium run by Deloitte called ConvergeHEALTH. Because Deloitte talks to health care and life sciences companies every day, the relationship could bring in more contracts from those companies.

Deloitte also offers data visualization tools that could help Regenstrief and its clients sift through mountains of medical data faster to get to answers they need. Regenstrief maintains massive databases of patient medical records from hospitals and doctors around Indiana and then pays professors at the Indiana University School of Medicine to conduct research projects using those records.

“The quicker you can kind of drill down into the questions that are central to patients and providers and health care systems, the better,” said Mick Murray, a pharmacist who is executive director of the Regenstrief Center for Healthcare Effectiveness Research. “It’s just like in the newspaper; you want to look at the picture and it helps you grasp what’s going on in the text a little bit better.”

Dr. Bill Tierney, Regenstrief’s CEO, expects about two-thirds of the work that comes through the Deloitte partnership to be from drug companies, with the rest split among medical device makers, insurers and health systems.

Such private-sector funding currently makes up about 10 percent to 15 percent of the $30 million in outside funding Regenstrief brings in each year. That percentage could rise to 25 percent to 30 percent if the Deloitte relationship is successful, Tierney said.

But he expects that work to mostly offset declining federal funding.

So far in fiscal year 2014, the National Institutes of Health has handed out $13.2 billion in awards to researchers around the country, which lags far behind the $22.5 billion it gave out in 2013. Congressional funding for the NIH has not kept pace with inflation over the past decade.

Tierney noted that Regenstrief's success rate has held steady in recent years—about 50 percent of its NIH funding requests are granted, compared with a national average of less than 10 percent.

But Tierney wants to avoid having the more than 50 primary researchers and numerous other scientists who work for Regenstrief sit idle. Since drug, device and insurance companies all want to know how various treatments play out among patients once they’re on the market—yet none of those entities have access to actual medical records of patients or the doctors treating the patients—Tierney thinks Regenstrief can help them get the information.

“I know that there is a lot of untapped need out there to be able to do the things we could do,” he said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. If I were a developer I would be looking at the Fountain Square and Fletcher Place neighborhoods instead of Broad Ripple. I would avoid the dysfunctional BRVA with all of their headaches. It's like deciding between a Blackberry or an iPhone 5s smartphone. BR is greatly in need of updates. It has become stale and outdated. Whereas Fountain Square, Fletcher Place and Mass Ave have become the "new" Broad Ripples. Every time I see people on the strip in BR on the weekend I want to ask them, "How is it you are not familiar with Fountain Square or Mass Ave? You have choices and you choose BR?" Long vacant storefronts like the old Scholar's Inn Bake House and ZA, both on prominent corners, hurt the village's image. Many business on the strip could use updated facades. Cigarette butt covered sidewalks and graffiti covered walls don't help either. The whole strip just looks like it needs to be power washed. I know there is more to the BRV than the 700-1100 blocks of Broad Ripple Ave, but that is what people see when they think of BR. It will always be a nice place live, but is quickly becoming a not-so-nice place to visit.

  2. I sure hope so and would gladly join a law suit against them. They flat out rob people and their little punk scam artist telephone losers actually enjoy it. I would love to run into one of them some day!!

  3. Biggest scam ever!! Took 307 out of my bank ac count. Never received a single call! They prey on new small business and flat out rob them! Do not sign up with these thieves. I filed a complaint with the ftc. I suggest doing the same ic they robbed you too.

  4. Woohoo! We're #200!!! Absolutely disgusting. Bring on the congestion. Indianapolis NEEDS it.

  5. So Westfield invested about $30M in developing Grand Park and attendance to date is good enough that local hotel can't meet the demand. Carmel invested $180M in the Palladium - which generates zero hotel demand for its casino acts. Which Mayor made the better decision?

ADVERTISEMENT