Under the Microscope: Your Business Associates Are Now the OCR’s Top Priority

August 4, 2025

 

Let’s talk paperwork. While that might not seem like the most interesting or important thing to focus on when running your practice, having the right documentation is key to its success. 

A Business Associate Agreement (BAA) is one of the many documents you need to be HIPAA compliant when running a practice. 

When working with Business Associates (BAs), or the third-party vendors who can access your practice’s Protected Health Information (PHI), you must have a signed agreement in place. These BAs can include anyone from your IT company to the company that handles your shredding. In short, if a business has any access to PHI, it’s required. 

The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has put Business Associates (BAs) in the hot seat, with proposed new legislation strengthening their requirements and millions of dollars in fines imposed this year alone. It’s time to take a fresh look at your partnerships, and the best place to start is by having a solid BAA. 

 

What does a BAA do? 

First things first, what does a BAA even do for your practice? What does it include? 

Well, this required agreement outlines all responsibilities your practice and business partner must follow when handling PHI. The document includes the definition of PHI, when the BA can use the data, and how each party must secure data. This legally binding agreement ensures each party understands the serious nature of handling PHI. 

Overall, it’s another layer of protection to clearly define your relationship with a BA. 

A BAA is essential, especially when a Business Associate experiences a data breach. Business Associates are frequent targets for malicious actors. 

One of the first fines in 2025 was a $90,000 penalty for a ransomware breach that targeted a data hosting company. This breach exposed the PHI of patients from 12 different healthcare practices. These 12 healthcare practices would also need a BAA with the hacked party. If not, the Covered Entity could also be liable for the BA’s missteps. 

The OCR has also fined Covered Entities for missing a BAA.

Here’s a prime example: A healthcare provider was in a nasty dispute with their BA. They even reported the BA to the OCR, claiming the BA was holding PHI hostage for a $50,000 payment.

But here’s where it took a turn: The OCR didn’t just investigate the BA; they also focused on the healthcare provider.

The result? The OCR slapped the provider with a $100,000 fine for missing crucial documentation, including, you guessed it, a BAA.

 

Keeping BA Partnerships Secure

While ensuring documentation is in order is no one’s idea of fun, protecting your practice and keeping patients’ data safe is imperative. 

With the right solution, your practice can make documentation a piece of cake. While a BAA may not be as appealing as chocolate fudge, software can streamline the process, creating a legally sound and complete document that is just as satisfying.

Meet with an expert today to learn more about ensuring compliant vendor relationships. 

RECENT POSTS

Related posts

Ambry Phishing Settlement
Abyde News, Fines, HIPAA

$700K HIPAA Settlement: What the Ambry Genetics Phishing Breach Teaches Every Practice

September 21, 2026 No comments yet

September 21, 2026   The HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has announced its biggest HIPAA settlement of the year, reaching nearly a million dollars.  Ambry, a genetic testing and clinical genomics provider based in Aliso Viejo, California is at the center of this enforcement. A settlement was reached over a 2020 phishing attack that exposed the Protected Health Information (PHI) of more than 225,000 individuals. This settlement is a clear reminder that even large organizations trip up on HIPAA requirements.    What happened In January 2020, an employee email account at Ambry was compromised through a phishing attack.  The breach potentially exposed a wide range of PHI, including names, addresses, dates of birth, Social Security Numbers, financial details, and more. Ambry reported the breach to OCR in March 2020, which kicked off the investigation.    Where OCR found gaps OCR’s investigation identified several HIPAA Security Rule gaps, including: No accurate, thorough risk analysis of risks and vulnerabilities to ePHI No process for cutting off access to ePHI when an employee left or no longer needed access No unique user IDs for tracking who was accessing ePHI systems These are baseline HIPAA requirements that every Covered Entity and Business Associate is expected to have in place.   The settlement terms Ambry paid $700,000 and agreed to a two-year corrective action plan, under which it must: Complete a thorough risk analysis of ePHI confidentiality, integrity, and availability Build and execute a risk management plan addressing what that analysis turns up Review and update Security Rule policies and procedures as needed Implement unique user identification across all ePHI systems Train the whole workforce on those updated policies The takeaway for practices When 90% of healthcare hacks start with a successful phishing attempt, it’s key your team is aware of the role they play to keep data safe. Every practice should ask; Do we know exactly where our ePHI lives and how it moves through our systems? Do we have a current, documented risk analysis? Would we catch it fast if a former employee’s access wasn’t revoked? Looking for the first step of addressing these gaps? Meet with one of our compliance experts to see where you currently stand. 

Azul Vision Right of Access
Abyde News, Fines, HIPAA

Right of Access Enforcement Hits Eye Care: Inside the Azul Vision Settlement

September 1, 2026 No comments yet

September 1, 2026   The Office for Civil Rights (OCR) announced its 55th settlement under the HIPAA Right of Access Initiative, and this one is a good reminder that “we’ll get to it” is an easy shortcut to a massive financial penalty.   What happened Azul Vision, Inc., a California optometry enterprise healthcare provider, took nearly two years to provide a patient her healthcare records failed to give a patient timely access to her health records. She requested her records in January 2023. She didn’t actually receive them until January 2025, or two years later, and only after OCR opened an investigation following her complaint in April 2023.   The importance of Right of Access The HIPAA Privacy Rule’s Right of Access is straightforward: patients are entitled to their healthcare records within 30 days of a request, with one possible 30-day extension if needed.    The cost Azul Vision agreed to a two-year, OCR-monitored corrective action plan and paid $50,000. The corrective action plan requires the practice to: Review and revise its written policies and procedures for Privacy Rule compliance.  Regularly report to HHS a log of every PHI access request it receives, including when it came in and when it was resolved, Train all workforce members on right of access requirements and the practice’s own procedures.   Practical takeaways Have a documented, assigned process for access requests: not an informal “someone will handle it” arrangement. Track every request against the 30-day (or extended 60-day) clock: If nothing is timestamping requests, nothing is catching the ones that slip. Train staff specifically on right of access: this is a distinct Privacy Rule obligation from general HIPAA awareness, and it’s clearly one OCR is actively enforcing.   The bottom line A single records request that went unanswered turned into a $50,000 penalty, two years of federal monitoring, and a detrimental hit to the organization’s reputation. That’s a steep price for what really comes down to a missing process. If your team can’t answer “what happens the moment a patient asks for their records?” right now, that’s the gap to close before your practice ends up as OCR’s next enforcement case. Want a streamlined way to close your compliance gaps? Meet with an Abyde expert today!

OSF Healthcare HIPAA Settlement
Abyde News, Fines, HIPAA

What OSF Healthcare’s Ransomware Fine Teaches Every Practice About SRAs

August 5, 2026 No comments yet

August 5, 2026 The latest HIPAA fine is another clear reminder that ransomware attacks are, unfortunately, here to stay in the healthcare industry. A settlement involving the OSF Healthcare System was recently announced by the Office for Civil Rights (OCR). As an enterprise healthcare provider in the midwest, the organization serves 174 locations, including 16 hospitals – a prime target for a ransomware attack.    So, what happened?  In April 2021, OSF discovered that they joined the unlucky club of ransomware victims when a malicious actor deployed Nephilim, a ransomware strain made to target larger organizations. Once the ransomware infected OSF systems, the hacker demanded payment or patient Protected Health Information (PHI) would be leaked online. In this attack, sensitive information like financial account information, driver’s license numbers, medical record numbers, and more, were all exposed. Over 53,000 patient records were exposed in this attack.  When ransomware attacks in healthcare have soared 278% in recent years, it’s more of a when then an if your organization doesn’t have the right safeguards in place.  While the breach was discovered in April, OSF healthcare reported the breach to the OCR in October. The OCR took it from there, digging into what precautions (or lack thereof) let this happen.  What did the OCR discover? If you’ve read any of our other fine breakdowns, you already know where this is going: another missing Security Risk Analysis (SRA).  The SRA is a required document every HIPAA-regulated entity (ie: every practice and their Business Associates that handle patient information) needs to complete. The SRA is a thorough review of the physical, technical, and administrative safeguards in place to prevent PHI ending up in the wrong hands. While the OCR didn’t specify exactly how the ransomware got into OSF’s system, a technical safeguard vulnerability was very likely the entry point. A proactive SRA could have flagged that gap before it turned into a major breach. In addition to missing this required documentation, OSF also took too long to report the breach to the OCR and notify affected patients. This is a direct violation of the Breach Notification Rule, which requires organizations to notify patients within 60 days of a discovered breach. Moreover, since the breach impacted more than 500 patients, OSF was also required to report this breach to the OCR within 2 months as well. Time is of the essence in every component of a breach, from securing systems to ensuring affected parties are aware to protect themselves and an over five month delay was unacceptable in the eyes of the OCR.    What was the result?  OSF’s settlement tops the list as the largest fine of the year, coming in at $552,250, plus government monitoring for the next two years.  It’s very important to note that this breach occurred in 2021, meaning that over five years were spent from the initial breach, to investigations, to the public press releases. Also, the average cost of a healthcare breach is over 7 million dollars –  from implementing secure systems, notifying patients, legal fees, and more. The Takeaway While the settlement payment and Corrective Action Plan (CAP) are just the cherries on top, this experience was a tremendous cost of time, money, and resources, highlighting the importance of making sure everything is secure before a situation occurs.  So, when was the last time you looked at your SRA? It’s time to seriously analyze your current compliance posture. Ransomware groups don’t check whether you’re a small dental office or a 16-hospital health system before they attack, they check whether the door was left open. Time and again, OCR’s findings come back to the same root cause: organizations can’t secure what they haven’t even identified as a problem. Looking to review your current compliance standings? Meet with our team of experts for a complimentary educational consultation.