The pair of Bay State hospitals Steward Health Care is moving to close by the end of the month are “essential services,” the Department of Public Health has determined, but that designation won’t stand in the way of their closure.

Even if the hospitals aren’t going to abide by state rules dictating a 120-day notice ahead of closure, they still must provide an adequate plan to the state on where they will move patients, how they will be transported, and a “protocol” that explains continuity of care for transferred patients.

That’s according to a letter authored by DPH Division of Health Care Facility Licensure and Certification Director Stephen Davis and sent to Steward North Region President and System Chief Medical Officer Octavio Diaz.

“The Department has made a finding that the Hospital is in fact an essential service necessary for preserving access and health status within the Hospital’s service area. This determination does not give the Department the power to mandate that the Hospital remain open, but rather, mandates the Hospital to submit a plan for assuring access to such necessary service(s) following the closure,” Davis wrote.

The company, according to the letter, has failed to completely comply with requests from DPH, and is unable to say “the location and specifically the service capacity of alternative delivery sites for the full complement of the Hospital’s services during this transition period and following the Hospital’s closure.”

Steward also, in the closure plan they submitted to DPH on Aug. 12, “failed to include an assessment of transportation needs post Hospital closure,” while DPH expects Steward will provide them “a detailed assessment of the travel needs of its current patients and the community post discontinuance and solutions to meet those needs.”

DPH also expressed concern that Steward’s plan for continuity of patient care was sparse enough they are “concerned that the plan lacks detail as to what, how, and when current patients will receive information about options for care available to them, what resources are and will be available to patients to ensure the patients are able to navigate the change and answer any care continuity questions.”

Additionally, the health care company has not, according to the letter, provided DPH with information on positions made available to employees at other Steward properties. Steward, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protections in May, is also in the midst of trying to sell half-a-dozen other Bay State properties.

“In its memo dated August 5, 2024, the Department requested data on Hospital employees that have been offered employment with other Steward facilities to date. In your response dated August 12, 2024, you provided information on positions available and the hospital workforce shortage. The Department requests specific data on Hospital employees that have been offered employment with other Steward facilities to date,” they wrote.

Related Articles

Petrella: Carney closure a blow to community it served

Steward Health Care’s landlords fire back at hospital operator over sale delays

Steward files suit against landlord for interfering with hospital sales, court filings show

Rogers: Steward Health Care board failed millions

‘Major step forward:’ Advocates, elected officials cheer Healey’s hospital rescue plan

Massachusetts Nurses Association President Katie Murphy said in a statement her organization is “pleased to see that the DPH agreed with the hundreds of residents, former patients, first responders, caregivers and policy makers who attended jam-packed public hearings last week to demonstrate that both Carney Hospital and Nashoba Valley Medical Center are indeed essential services for preserving the public health of hundreds of thousands of residents who stand to be harmed by these closures.”

However, Murphy said the nursing group does not agree that DPH is powerless to stand in the way of Carney and Nashoba’s closure.

“We believe, as do so many policy makers and advocates, that the state has great power to act to protect these communities, which includes the power to declare a public health emergency to enforce state law demanding 120 day’s notice before the closure of an essential service,” Murphy said.