IBJNews

St. Vincent adds Bloomington hospital to its fold

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indianapolis-based St. Vincent Health will manage operations at Monroe Hospital in Bloomington under an agreement announced Tuesday.

Monroe gives St. Vincent control of hospitals stretching from Indianapolis to Bedford and even farther south to Salem and Evansville. St. Vincent owns or operates 22 hospitals around the state.

The only other Indiana hospital with that kind of geographic reach is Indianapolis-based Indiana University Health, which owns Bloomington Hospital.

“The agreement with Monroe Hospital allows us to continue to deliver optimal care throughout the Bloomington region, and enhance our relationships with area physicians, businesses and residents,” said Kevin Speer, St. Vincent’s chief strategy officer, in a prepared statement.

St. Vincent will oversee quality and safety efforts, physician relations, patient experience, finance and other functions to increase efficiency and reduce costs. The 32-bed facility, which opened in 2006, is owned by Alabama-based Medical Properties Trust Inc.

Monroe has routinely lost money, including a loss of $13.2 million in 2011, according to hospital reports to the federal Medicare program, made available by the website AHD.com. Monroe had total patient revenue last year of $102.4 million.

The hospital had been courting potential partners or buyers for at least two years. It entered discussions not only with St. Vincent, but also with Mishawaka-based Franciscan Alliance and Munster-based Community Healthcare System.

Brad Hollinger, chairman of the Monroe Hospital board, said in a prepared statement, “We look forward to working with St. Vincent to offer enhanced services to meet the unique healthcare needs of Monroe Hospital’s primary and secondary markets.”

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. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT