The 340B Drug Pricing Program, designed to help low-income patients access healthcare services, has grown to $66 billion in size but continues to be associated with significant medical debt burdens for Americans according to new infographics from ADAP Advocacy. The organization's "340B Too Big to Fail" advocacy campaign reveals troubling disparities between the program's original intent and its current impact on patient finances, with most medical debt owed to hospitals that qualify for 340B program participation.
The first infographic, "340B Too Big to Fail – Medical Debt – Part 1," demonstrates that despite the program's expansion primarily benefiting hospitals, medical debt remains a persistent problem. The second infographic, "340B Too Big to Fail – Medical Debt – Part 2," documents how many 340B-participating hospitals employ aggressive, predatory debt collection practices that often damage consumer credit reports. These hospitals are choosing not to set reasonable prices or offer robust financial assistance programs, instead opting to sue patients rather than provide free charity care as required by law.
The infographic series is available for download at https://www.adapadvocacy.org/publications.html#i and serves as part of ADAP Advocacy's ongoing national campaign questioning whether the 340B Drug Pricing Program has become "too big to fail." The organization's findings suggest that while the program has expanded significantly, its benefits are not adequately reaching the patients it was designed to serve, resulting in continued financial hardship for vulnerable populations.
This publication comes at a critical time when medical debt remains a leading cause of bankruptcy in the United States, raising important questions about the accountability and oversight of federal healthcare programs. The infographics provide visual evidence of systemic issues within the 340B program that warrant further examination by policymakers and healthcare advocates. The revelations about hospital practices and the disconnect between program growth and patient benefit highlight significant policy concerns regarding how federal healthcare initiatives are implemented and monitored.
