Michael Peregrine wrote this bylined article about a series of corporate controversies over the past year involving director attentiveness, providing important lessons to health system boards on the scope of their oversight responsibilities, and on their ability to spot warning signs of corporate concern. These controversies go to the essence of the director’s oversight obligation; the expectation that the board will have in place an information reporting system that will provide information that requires its attention (e.g., “things that cause management to wake up in the middle of the night”). Such a system is intended to position the board to make reasonable inquiry when “suspicions are aroused or should be aroused.”
