IBJNews

SynCare files anticipated bankruptcy

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

As expected, SynCare LLC has filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy protection.

The once fast-growing, Indianapolis-based disease-management company listed in court papers on Tuesday liabilities of nearly $5.7 million and assets of just $125,864.

The company’s decline pushed CEO Stephanie DeKemper into personal bankruptcy in late December, with the company itself expected to follow.

SynCare’s largest secured creditors include Fifth Third Bank, which provided two loans totaling $850,000 to the company. The bank filed liens against SynCare in March and May of 2011 in an attempt to recoup a portion of the loans from customer receivables and the value of business equipment, according to court documents.

Unsecured creditors include Bank of America, with a claim totaling $676,964, and Centene Corp. in St. Louis, which provided SynCare a loan totaling nearly $1.5 million.

SynCare effectively ceased operation in September after the Missouri Medicaid program revoked a major contract it had signed with SynCare and after Centene—which was both a client  and a lender to SynCare—stopped funding the company’s operations.

SynCare used nurses and social workers to call and visit Medicaid patients to evaluate their needs and teach them how to handle their health issues, in order to avoid expensive hospitalizations.

DeKemper started at SynCare in 2008 as a consultant and purchased the company in early 2010.

She quintupled the staff over the next year as SynCare took on a $5.5 million contract in Missouri to determine whether Medicaid patients were eligible for home-based care.
 

ADVERTISEMENT

  • From the insurance company's point of view
    Terry, it actually is a good and profitable business model given the medicare insurers are 3rd party insurance companies contracted by the state to manage the plan. They are in search of profits and anyway they can keep disbursements down, they can come out ahead. Here's how: If a health care consultant can help a patient manage care to prevent an incident that needs to be treated at the hospital then the insurance company wins since they pay the managed care provider a fraction of what the hospitalization would have cost. The managed care provider is hired by the state or the 3rd party insurance provider to reduce the number of hospitalizations, not by the insured.
  • Poor Business Model
    This business may have sounded good to some, but the idea of managing a Medicare Patient at home by teaching the person "How to manage their health issues" should have been a red flag for the banks. Medicare pays by episode, not by prediction of need, or a Home Based Health Management Consultant. If the patient needs a visiting nurse for a specific reason, there is a Charge Code. I think the banks made a big mistake on this one. If I am missing something on this one, please post how this business model benefits the patient and Medicare.

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. Those of you yelling to deport them all should at least understand that the law allows minors (if not from a bordering country) to argue for asylum. If you don't like the law, you can petition Congress to change it. But you can't blindly scream that they all need to be deported now, unless you want your government to just decide which laws to follow and which to ignore.

  2. 52,000 children in a country with a population of nearly 300 million is decimal dust or a nano-amount of people that can be easily absorbed. In addition, the flow of children from central American countries is decreasing. BL - the country can easily absorb these children while at the same time trying to discourage more children from coming. There is tension between economic concerns and the values of Judeo-Christian believers. But, I cannot see how the economic argument can stand up against the values of the believers, which most people in this country espouse (but perhaps don't practice). The Governor, who is an alleged religious man and a family man, seems to favor the economic argument; I do not see how his position is tenable under the circumstances. Yes, this is a complicated situation made worse by politics but....these are helpless children without parents and many want to simply "ship" them back to who knows where. Where are our Hoosier hearts? I thought the term Hoosier was synonymous with hospitable.

  3. Illegal aliens. Not undocumented workers (too young anyway). I note that this article never uses the word illegal and calls them immigrants. Being married to a naturalized citizen, these people are criminals and need to be deported as soon as humanly possible. The border needs to be closed NOW.

  4. Send them back NOW.

  5. deport now

ADVERTISEMENT