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.
| Physician Revises Faxing Procedures to Safeguard PHI Covered Entity: Health Care Provider Issue: Safeguards A doctor's office disclosed a patient's HIV status when the office mistakenly faxed medical records to the patient's place of employment instead of to the patient's new health care provider. The employee responsible for the disclosure received a written disciplinary warning, and both the employee and the physician apologized to the patient. To resolve this matter, OCR also required the practice to revise the office's fax cover page to underscore a confidential communication for the intended recipient. The office informed all its employees of the ...read more |
| Pharmacy Chain Revises Process for Disclosures to Law Enforcement Covered Entity: Pharmacies Issue: Impermissible Uses and Disclosures A chain pharmacy disclosed protected health information to municipal law enforcement officials in a manner that did not conform to the provisions of the Privacy Rule. Among other corrective actions to resolve the specific issues in the case, OCR required this chain to revise its national policy regarding law enforcement's access to patient protected health information to comply with the Privacy Rule requirements, including that disclosures of protected health information to law enforcement only be made in response to written requests from ...read more |
| When does the Privacy Rule allow covered entities to disclose protected health information to law enforcement officials? Answer: The Privacy Rule is balanced to protect an individual’s privacy while allowing important law enforcement functions to continue. The Rule permits covered entities to disclose protected health information (PHI) to law enforcement officials, without the individual’s written authorization, under specific circumstances summarized below. For a complete understanding of the conditions and requirements for these disclosures, please review the exact regulatory text at the citations provided. Disclosures for law enforcement purposes are permitted as follows: To comply with a court order or ...read more |
| Large Provider Revises Patient Contact Process to Reflect Requests for Confidential Communications Covered Entity: General Hospital Issue: Impermissible Disclosure; Confidential Communications A patient alleged that a general hospital disclosed protected health information when a hospital staff person left a message on the patient’s home phone answering machine, thereby failing to accommodate the patient’s request that communications of PHI be made only through her mobile or work phones. In response, the hospital instituted a number of actions to achieve compliance with the Privacy Rule. To resolve this matter to the satisfaction of OCR, the hospital: retrained an entire Department with ...read more |
|
December 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
November 2022 (54)
January 2025 (1)
Blog Labels
ePHI (2)
HIPAA Enforcement (3)
HIPAA (2)
EHR Fraud (1)
BAA (4)
Covered Entity (40)
Data Breach (1)
Telehealth (1)
PPP Fraud (1)
|
