Do the HIPAA Rules allow a covered entity or business associate to use a CSP that stores ePHI on servers outside of the United States? Do the HIPAA Rules allow a covered entity or business associate to use a CSP that stores ePHI on servers outside of the United States?
Issued by: Office for Civil Rights (OCR)
Do the HIPAA Rules
allow a covered entity or business associate to use a CSP that stores
ePHI on servers outside of the United States?
Answer:
Yes, provided the covered entity (or business associate) enters into a
business associate agreement (BAA) with the CSP and otherwise complies
with the applicable requirements of the HIPAA Rules. However, while the
HIPAA Rules do not include requirements specific to protection of
electronic protected health information (ePHI) processed or stored by a
CSP or any other business associate outside of the United States, OCR
notes that the risks to such ePHI may vary greatly depending on its
geographic location. In particular, outsourcing storage or other
services for ePHI overseas may increase the risks and vulnerabilities to
the information or present special considerations with respect to
enforceability of privacy and security protections over the data.
Covered entities (and business associates, including the CSP) should
take these risks into account when conducting the risk analysis and risk
management required by the Security Rule. See 45 CFR §§
164.308(a)(1)(ii)(A) and (a)(1)(ii)(B). For example, if ePHI is
maintained in a country where there are documented increased attempts at
hacking or other malware attacks, such risks should be considered, and
entities must implement reasonable and appropriate technical safeguards
to address such threats.
| Private Practice Revises Process to Provide Access to Records Covered Entity: Private Practices Issue: Access A private practice failed to honor an individual's request for a complete copy of her minor son's medical record. OCR's investigation determined that the private practice had relied on state regulations that permit a covered entity to provide a summary of the record. OCR provided technical assistance to the covered entity, explaining that the Privacy Rule permits a covered entity to provide a summary of patient records rather than the full record only if the requesting individual agrees in advance to such a summary ...read more |
| Private Practice Implements Safeguards for Waiting Rooms Covered Entity: Private Practice Issue: Safeguards; Impermissible Uses and Disclosures A staff member of a medical practice discussed HIV testing procedures with a patient in the waiting room, thereby disclosing PHI to several other individuals. Also, computer screens displaying patient information were easily visible to patients. Among other corrective actions to resolve the specific issues in the case, OCR required the provider to develop and implement policies and procedures regarding appropriate administrative and physical safeguards related to the communication of PHI. The practice trained all staff on the newly developed policies and ...read more |
| SCOPE OF CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1320d-6 Covered entities and those persons rendered accountable by general principles of corporate criminal liability may be prosecuted directly under 42 U.S.C. § 1320d-6, and the knowingly element of the offense set forth in that provision requires only proof of knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense. MEMORANDUM OPINION FOR THE GENERAL COUNSEL DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES AND THE SENIOR COUNSEL TO THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL You have asked jointly for our opinion concerning the scope of 42 U.S.C. § 1320d-6 (2000), the criminal enforcement provision of the ...read more |
| Clinic Sanctions Supervisor for Accessing Employee Medical Record Covered Entity: Outpatient Facility Issue: Impermissible Use and Disclosure A hospital employee's supervisor accessed, examined, and disclosed an employee's medical record. OCR's investigation confirmed that the use and disclosure of protected health information by the supervisor was not authorized by the employee and was not otherwise permitted by the Privacy Rule. An employee's medical record is protected by the Privacy Rule, even though employment records held by a covered entity in its role as employer are not. Among other corrective actions to resolve the specific issues in the case, a letter ...read more |
|
August 2025
| Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | Sa |
| | | | | 1 | 2 |
| 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 |
| 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 |
| 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 |
| 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
| 31 |
Blog Home
Newest Blog Entries
1/21/25 Understanding Business Associate Agreements
11/12/22 Modernizing Medicine Agrees to Pay $45 Million to Resolve Allegations of Accepting and Paying Illegal Kickbacks and Causing False Claims
11/12/22 Indian National Charged in $8 Million COVID-19 Relief Fraud Scheme
11/12/22 Former Hospital Employee Pleads Guilty To Criminal HIPPA Charges
11/12/22 Covered entities and those persons rendered accountable by general principles of corporate criminal liability may be prosecuted directly under 42 U.S.C. § 1320d-6
11/12/22 The Delaware Division of Developmental Disabilities Services Data Breach
11/12/22 OCR Settles Three Cases with Dental Practices for Patient Right of Access under HIPAA
11/12/22 HHS Issues Guidance on HIPAA and Audio-Only Telehealth
11/12/22 Five Former Methodist Hospital Employees Charged with HIPAA Violations
11/12/22 May a covered entity use or disclose protected health information for litigation?
11/12/22 When does the Privacy Rule allow covered entities to disclose protected health information to law enforcement officials?
Blog Archives
January 2025 (1)
November 2022 (54)
Blog Labels
ePHI (2)
Telehealth (1)
EHR Fraud (1)
Covered Entity (40)
BAA (4)
PPP Fraud (1)
Data Breach (1)
HIPAA (2)
HIPAA Enforcement (3)
|
