Answers, in Part, to Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories

     [||0015741e-cc6d-46b3-b04e-41201bba0557||] “ ® 

  

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA 

HAMMOND DIVISION 

  

RICHARD GORDON HATCHER, 
WILLIE LEE PAGE, 
METRO CORPS OF GARY, INC., A 
Not-For-Profit Corporation 

and others similarly situated, 

Plaintiffs 

-VS- CIVIL ACTION NO. H77-154 

METHODIST HOSPITAL OF GARY, 
INC., An Indiana Not-For- 

Profit Corporation and DENIS 

E. RIBORDY, As President Of 

The Board Of Directors, 

JOSEPH CALIFANO, As United 
States Secretary of Health, 
Education and Welfare, 

WILLIAM T. PAYNTER, M.D., as 

State Health Commissioner for 

the Indiana State Board of 

Health, 

JAMES WHITE, As Director of 

The Division of Hospital And 

Institutional Services of 

the Indiana State Borad of Health, 

DAVID J. EDWARDS, M.D., as 

Director of the Health 

Facilities, Services and 

Review Development Board 

of Health, and 

KIPTON KAPLAN, as Executive 

Director of the Northern 
Indiana Comprehensive Health 

Systems Agency, Inc., 

N
a
?
 

Nu
 

S
o
 

N
f
 

No
’ 

Na
 

Na
 

a
 

S
e
 

a
 

Na
f 

No
 

Nu
 

N
u
 

N
u
 

Na
n 

No
 

No
 

N
a
 

Nu
t 

Nu
 

N
t
 

Na
nd
 

Na
t 

N
a
 

N
l
 

a
l
 

Na
f 

Na
? 

N
d
 

No
id

 
N
u
 

N
o
 

Na
d 

Na
t 

Na
 

Ne
f 

Ne
d 

No
o 

N
t
 

No
e 

Defendants 

DEFENDANT, KIPTON KAPLAN'S, ANSWERS, 

IN PART, TO PLAINTIFF'S INTERROGATORIES 
  

  

Comes now plaintiff, KIPTON KAPLAN, by counsel, and for answer to 

plaintiff's Interrogatories, numbered 25 through 36, states: 

25. Identify all proposals, submissions, amendments, letters, 

studies, communications reports, minutes of meetings and notes from 

which minutes were prepared for the HSA or any task force, subcommittee 

or staff concerning the projects submitted by Methodist Hospital of 

Gary, Inc., involving the construction and/or expansion of Broadway 

 



  

Methodist Hospital, and any alternative proposals filed with the HSA 

or its predecessor Methodist Hospital of Gary, Inc., since 1970 

until the time these interrogatories are answered. 

ANSWER: 1. Proposal to Northwest Indiana Comprehensive 

Health Planning Council, Inc. (NICHPC) by 
Methodist Hospital of Gary for construction 
of health services building (Gary and Broadway) 
and laundry (Broadway), Project #74-24, 1974. 

NICHPC staff comments for project, #74-24, 

1974. 

Minutes of the following meetings at which 
the #74-24 project was reviewed: 

(a) Lake County Comprehensive Health Planning 
Council Executive Committee, June 18, 1974. 

(b) Regional Health Facilities and Services 

Task Force - NICHPC, June 19, 1974. 

(c) Regional Executive Committee ~- NICHPC, 
July 10, 1974. 

Revised proposal and summary thereof to Northern 

Indiana Health Systems Agency, Inc. (NIHSA) by 
Methodist Hospital of Gary for construction of 
health services buildings (Gary and Broadway) 

and laundry (Broadway), #76-W-02, 1976. 

NIHSA staff analysis for project #76-W-02, 
1976. 

Minutes of the following NIHSA meetings at 
which project #76-W-02 was reviewed: 

(a) Northwest Subarea Advisory Council, 
August 12, 1976. 

(b) Executive Committee, August 25, 1976. 

26. List all members, employees, staff, consultants, or other 

persons working for or on behalf of the HSA who were involved with, 

were consulted, worked on, or otherwise dealt with proposals, 

applications and projects of Methodist Hospital of Gary, Inc., con- 

cerning the construction and/or expansion of Broadway Methodist 

Hospital and describe the job, function and responsibility of each 

 



  

concerning such proposals. 

ANSWER: 1. Kipton Kaplan, Executive Director, NICHPC 

(1974 project). 
Executive director, NIHSA (1976 project) 

Reviewed and approved staff comments and 

staff analysis for both projects. 

2. Peter W. Teitelman, Health Facilities Planner, 

NICHPC (1974 project). 
Senior Planner, Health Facilities and Services, 

NIHSA (1976 project). 

Participated in pre-application meetings 

with Methodist Hospital regarding both pro- 
jects; Prepared and presented staff comments 

and staff analysis on both projects. 

3. Fran Jaeger, Project Review Officer, NICHPC 

(1974 project) 

Participated in pre-application meetings 
with Methodist Hospital regarding 1974 pro- 
ject. Prepared all notifications regarding 
review scheduling and review action on 1974 
project. 

4. Anthony DeBonis, Jr., Assistant Director, 

Northwest, NIHSA (1976 project). 

Participated in pre-application meetings with 

Methodist Hospital regarding 1976 project. 

27. State whether the HSA, its employees, staff and/or 

consultants made pre-approval recommendations to any agency or person, 

including the Indiana State Board of Health, the Health Planning 

Agency and Development Division, the Health Facilities and Service 

Review Division, Methodist Hospital of Gary, Inc., and/or HEW, concern- 

ing the construction and/or expansion of Broadway Methodist Hospital. 

If the answer is affirmative, state whether there was any member or 

staff or consultant of the HSA who disagreed with the recommendation 

and identify the dates of all such recommendations and minority reports. 

ANSWER: The staff comments and staff analysis of the 1974 
and 1976 projects were mailed to the State Board 
of Health and Methodist Hospital approximately 

ten days in advance of the first review meeting, in 

accordance with agency policy. There was no staff 
member in disagreement with the NICHPC or NIHSA 

recommendations. Consultants to NICHPC or NIHSA 

were not involved in either review. 

 



  

28. Separately doserite the nature and contents of all 

studies, reports and recommendations made for the HSA in connection 

with the proposals for the construction and/or expansion of 

Broadway Methodist Hospital. 

ANSWER: No studies, reports or recommendations were made 

for the HSA in connection with the Methodist 
proposals. 

29. State whether the HSA requested any reports or asked any 

questions of anyone connected with or working on behalf of Methodist 

Hospital of Gary, Inc., concerning the construction and/or expansion of 

Broadway Methodist Hospital. If the answer is affirmative, specifically 

describe all such questions and the contents of all reports, and the 

contents of all reports of the HSA, its staff, consultants and/or 

anyone working in its behalf analyzing, supporting or refuting any 

of the answers or reports. 

ANSWER: 1. All items referred to in response to Interroga- 
tory B{(25). 

2. Draft application by Methodist Hospital, 

May, 1974. 

3. Request by NICHPC for additional information, 
May, 1974. 

4. Progress report on 1974 project - letter 
from R. B. Glesne to Kipton Kaplan, February 12, 
1975, 

5. Letter to Hazel Witte of Methodist Hospital 
from Anthony DeBonis, Jr., of NICHPC regarding 

re-review of 1974 proposal, September 8, 1975. 

6. Letter from Reed Reynolds of Methodist Hospital 
to Anthony DeBonis, Jr. of NICHPC regarding re-review 
of 1974 application, February 23, 1976. 

7. Reply to February 23 letter, March 9, 1976. 

8. Reply to March 9 letter, March 18, 1976 
(attachments are included in 1976 application, 

76-W-02). 

9. Reply to March 18 letter, April 1, 1976. 

10. Reply to April 1 letter, May 4, 1976. 

11. Reply to May 4 letter, May 12, 1976. 

12. Letter from Anthony DeBonis, Jr., NIHSA to 
James White of State Board of Health, May 12, 

1976. 

13. Mr. White's reply, May 19, 1976. 

 



  

14. Response of Methodist Hospital to Mr. 
DeBonis' letter of May 12, June 4, 1976. 

15. Letter to Methodist Hospital from Medical 

Center of Gary, June 11, 1976. Hs 

16. Letter from James White, Indiana State Board 

of Health to Anthony DeBonis, Jr., NIHSA, 

June 29, 1976. 

17. Reply to Mr. White's letter of June 29, 
July 23, 1976. 

18. Letter to Methodist Hospital from Office of 

Civil Rights, DHEW Region V, August 13, 1976. 

19. Reply to Office of Civil Rights' August 13 
letter, August 18, 1976. 

20. Public Statement by Barbara Wesson regarding 

1976 application, August 27, 1976 (presented 
at NIHSA Executive Committee, August 25, 1976). 

21. Medical Center of Gary report on Methodist 
Hospital 1976 application, November 12, 1976. 

30. Describe in detail the factors considered and basis upon 

which proposals for the construction and/or expansion of Broadway 

Methodist Hospital-were recommended and/or approved by the HSA and 

its predecessor. Specifically include: 

(a) the conclusion as to each criterion required under 

the Section 1122 regulation and the 1122 agreement between the 

Health Facilities and Service Review Division of the Indiana State 

Board of Health and HEW; 

(b) the basis upon which the conclusions set forth in the 

answer to Interrogatory 30(a) were made ; 

(c) the role of and weight given to any information 

submitted by Methodist Hospital of Gary, Inc., to the HSA; 

(d) the vote of each member of the HSA on each proposal; 

(e) the projections concerning population growth, community 

development, and need for health facilities in the immediate vicinity 

of the Merrillville, Indiana site of Broadway Methodist Hospital; 

 



  

(f) any conclusions required under the Hill-Burton 

regulations and state or local plans for comprehensive and coordinated 

health facilities under Section 314(b) of the Public Health Services 

Act. 

ANSWER: (a) Refer to staff comments and staff analysis 
in 1974 and 1976 applications, respectively. 

(b) Based on the relationships between the 

applications and the review criteria. 

(c) The information submitted by Methodist 
Hospital of Gary (e.g., the applications) 
was the major source of information on which 

review was based. 

(d) This information is contained in the minutes 

referred to in the response to Interrogatory 25. 

(e) Population projections were not relevant to 
the review of the proposals. See staff 
comments (1974 application) referred to in 
response to Interrogatory 25. 

(f). Not applicable. Both proposals were reviewed 
in accordance with review criteria established 
under Section 1122 of the Social Security Act. 

31. Separately state whether HSA made, or considered had made, 

any studies, plans, or reports to determine: 

(a) the race, age, economic status, and location of 

the patients who were served by Gary Methodist Hospital prior to the 

opening of Broadway Methodist Hospital; 

(b) the race, age, ecnomic status and location of the 

patients served by Broadway Methodist Hospital; 

(c) the health needs of the various racial and economic 

groups served by Methodist Hospital of Gary, Inc.; and 

(d) the impact of the construction and/or expansion 

of Broadway Methodist Hospital on those various racial and economic 

population groups. 

ANSWER: Several plans, studies, and reports were prepared 

for or by NICHPC which addressed many of the issues 
raised in these interrogatories. They are as follows: 

  

Date Author Title Brief Description 

1971 NICHPC (Consult- Hospital Study: Community Analysis, Issue 
ants) : Arthur D. Lake County, Analysis, Bed Projections, 
Little, Inc., Indiana Bed Need, Lake County 

Cambridge, Mass.) Hospital Plan, Alternatives 

For Future Development. 

 



  

  

- 

Date Author Title Brief Description 

1973 NICHPC (Consult- Gary Model Demographic and socio- 
ants: Richard Needs Study economic characteristics 
Kurtz, University with relationship to need, 
of Notre Dame and health resources for model 

Paul Chalfant, cities, comparison of 

Valparaiso health programs, health 

University) needs and problems: per- 
ception of health task : 

force members and professionals, 

future health planning = 
Model Cities and Gary. 

1974 A. T. Kearney, Final Report of Hospital Waiting Lists, 
Inc. Task Activities Physician Survey, 

Specialized Services Profiles, 

Review of Hospital Plan 
Revision and Ongoing 

Program of Studies. 

32. If the answer to Interrogatory 31 is affirmative in whole or 

in part, describe in detail all such studies, plans, and reports, including 

the person or groups who prepared them, their contents, recommendations, if 

any, and the weight given them by the HSA. 

ANSWER: See answer to Interrogatory Number 31. 

33. State sHether the HSA made, had made, or considered any 

plans, studies or reports to determine the accessibility by the lower 

income, racial minority, and/or hanicapped residents of Gary to Broadway 

Methodist Hospital, by public transportation or otherwise. If the answer 

is affirmative, describe in detail all such studies, plans and reports, 

including the person or groups who prepared them, their contents, 

recommendations, if any, and the weight given them by the HSA. 

ANSWER: See answer to Interrogatory Number 31. 

34. State whether the HSA made, had made, or considered any 

plans, studies or reports: 

(a) to determine the race, location and national origin 

of the employees at Broadway Methodist Hospital; and 

(b) to compare the staff and employees of Gary Methodist 

Hospital and Broadway Methodist Hospital. 

If the answer is affirmative, describe in detail all such studies, plans 

and reports, including the person or groups who prepared them, their 

contents, recommendations, if any, and the weight give them by the HSA. 

 



  

ANSWER: No. 

35. State whether and how the HSA considered the financial 

cost or impact of the construction and/or expansion of Broadway 

Methodist Hospital. Include whether, and, to what extent, the HSA 

considered: 

(a) the cost represented by the Capital Construction; 

(b) the cost of the alternative of modernizing Gary 

Methodist Hospital; 

(c) the cost of producing adequate public transporta- 

tion to employees, to patients and to visitors who are residents 

of Gary, and who would bear the cost; 

(d) the cost to the City of Gary of potential and/or 

actual movement of doctors and doctors’ offices and business relocation. 

ANSWER: (a) See applications and staff comments/analysis 

referred to in Interrogatory Number 30. 

(b) See applications and staff comments/analysis 
© referred to in Interrogatory Number 30. 

{c) Not considered. 

(d) Not considered. 

36. State whether, how and to what extent the HSA considered 

the effect the construction and/or expansion of Broadway Hospital, 

with all private rooms, would have on the number of lower income 

patients at that facility. 

ANSWER: Not considered. 

’ 8 F/ 
Hist ¥ I: i { 

; i 
KIPTON KAPLAN 
  

  

/ c / . ; a 7 / : 

/ "+ SUBSCRIBED and SWORN to before me this [5 day of Liss ] 
[4 

1977. 
) 

My Commission Expires: a Vi ; 

Sept. 29, [780 bbrCasn Lond $s daeh     
NOTARY PUBLIC [||0015741e-cc6d-46b3-b04e-41201bba0557||]