The basics:

• Hackensack Meridian Health CEO Robert Garrett says Medicare Advantage growth and CMS reforms are key industry trends
• Medicaid cuts and reduced ACA subsidies could increase uninsured patients in New Jersey
• Hackensack Meridian expanding ambulatory care, hospital-at-home and AI-driven services
• Partnerships with One Medical, K Health and Google support growth and access strategy

In years past, Robert Garrett has gone to Davos for the World Economic Forum, not merely as an attendee, but as one of the thought leaders in the health care industry. But this year was different.

Garrett, the CEO of Hackensack Meridian Health, missed the proceedings in Switzerland, which featured some newsworthy contretemps between President Donald Trump and some of the other world leaders who attended. Garrett might have had some vivid tales to relate had he made it to the Swiss Alps.

But what Garrett did instead was attend the JPMorgan Health Care Conference in San Francisco. Considered perhaps the preeminent such event in the industry, the meeting draws top executives and investors. Connections made there can have wide-ranging effects for providers.

Hackensack Meridian was invited to present an overview of where the company is financially and its strategies for the future, especially in terms of resilience.

“It was really great, because it was an opportunity for us to reintroduce ourselves to the financial markets,” Garrett said. “And we expect that we’ll probably be in the market for some sort of a borrowing to continue our growth period over the next year to 18 months. So, it was good to get out there to JP Morgan to tell our story, and it was very well received.”

Garrett recently sat down with NJBIZ to discuss those subjects and others, including the policy changes coming out of Washington, the new administration in Trenton and the state of the industry in general. What follows is an abridged version of that interview. The questions and answers have been edited for length and clarity. The complete discussion is available on NJBIZ.com.

NJBIZ: So, would you go back [to the JPMorgan conference]?

Robert Garrett: It would be worthwhile because it’s interesting to hear what other providers are doing, some of the for-profit partners in health care, what they’re up to and where they see the future. And it’s also an opportunity to connect. As an example, we were invited to kind of a semi-private presentation by [Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Administrator] Dr. [Mehmet] Oz and the CMS team. And so, we were able to hear some of their priorities, some of the issues that they’re working on. And there was a good opportunity to ask some questions.

I was impressed with the team that Dr. Oz has assembled. I think they’re very qualified and very focused on improving Medicare, access to Medicare, as well as some reforms on the on the Medicaid side as well.

One of my takeaways there is I think they’re trying to stabilize the Medicare Advantage market. I think that’s the area where they think there’s going to be much more growth than in traditional fee-for-service Medicare, so that was a good takeaway.

That’s the kind of connections that you can make at the JP Morgan meetings in San Francisco.

Q: OK, that’s really actually where I was going to start, with what’s coming out of Washington. When we spoke last year, obviously it was early days. I think there was a lot of folks who were just sort of waiting to see what was going to happen. And we’ve now had a year to watch what’s going on there. I am curious about what you think of what’s coming out. First of all, on the policy level from Health and Human Services, specifically about vaccines and public health. Are you concerned at all about what you’re seeing?

A: Yes, I mean, you have to look at some of the specifics, and like I said before, some of the positives are really what’s happening at the CMS level. I think, certainly, they are focused on the right things, they’re focused on access to care. As an example, they’re giving states, additional dollars, particularly in rural areas to expand access to Medicare. Those are the kinds of things that I think CMS should be working on, and I’m glad to hear that Dr. Oz and his team are working on that.

Having said that, though, some of the information that’s come out of Health and Human Services, the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], and areas like that on vaccines does give me areas to be worried about and to be concerned about. I’ve written about it.

I think it’s really important that we follow the science, and there’s some really good science behind the vaccination schedules that have been developed here in the U.S. I think they have cited that there are other European countries that these new standards are mimicking. I think we’d have to look at that a little bit more closely, but I’d be worried. As a health care professional and as a public health advocate, I would be worried that we’re not vaccinating our children in particular on things like the measles, where we really should be.

So, I do worry about that, and I’m not suggesting that they’re advocating that we don’t vaccinate, but I think just some of the different types of information that have come out might leave consumers – and particularly young parents – very, very confused. And when it comes to public health, we should try to have as much clarity as possible.

So, those are the kinds of things that I am concerned about. And I want to work with Health and Human Services, and with the CDC and with CMS too, try to provide a little bit more clarity.

Q: At the same time, it seems like a lot of the state-level public health officials, particularly in New Jersey, are not really following what the CDC and HHS want. And you see the measles outbreaks in South Carolina and Texas; you’re not seeing that here. Although that must worry you a little bit when you see those things, those kinds of things happen elsewhere.

 A: Yes. I mean, the measles aren’t going to stop at state lines, right? That would be an issue for folks in New Jersey. And I would just advocate for public health officials in New Jersey to follow the science and do what they think is right and what’s best; and if that is consistent with the CDC, fine. If it’s not, then so be it. But I think it’s important that we protect the citizens of New Jersey. That’s what our public health system is all about, and they feel in their judgment that their standards and their guidelines are going to protect the people of New Jersey more so than the CDC, then they should follow their guidelines.

Q: Switching over to Congress and the cutback on subsidies for the Affordable Care Act. What I’ve read suggests that it’s just really bad news for access to health care generally. And that’s something that it seems like is going to be something that has even a wider impact than the public health and vaccine issues.

A: So, two things that are pretty worrisome that have come out of Washington over the past year. One is the cutback on the subsidies, or the lack of subsidies, which is leading to less people being enrolled in the Affordable Care Act, which means more people are uninsured. And then the second is the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which really cuts back on Medicaid reimbursement, particularly to the states.

The Medicaid program was formed as a partnership between the federal government and the state governments. So, in terms of the subsidies for the Affordable Care Act, we’re monitoring it. It’s still early in the game, if you will. This all just happened this past month. But what we think will happen is more people really showing up to the emergency departments around the state, without insurance, because they’re no longer part of the Affordable Care Act insurance plans.

And that’s going to not only lead to inconsistent care, but it will also drive up, cost of care, because the more uninsured there are, the more dollars or the focus gets shifted to the commercial payers. And people will then have higher commercial rates for their insurance. Because as it is now hospitals, physicians, every time they see a Medicare or Medicaid patient, they’re losing significant dollars on those patients, but they do see them. And there’s that balance in spreading some of that to the commercial payers. So, I think that’s one impact.

And then, of course, access to care, as you mentioned, is another. Making your primary care physician the emergency department is just not a viable solution, not a good solution from a lot of different perspectives. And that’s not really good access to care. I thought seriously that our country couldn’t really move beyond those days. With respect to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, Hackensack Meridian Health, as an example, we take care of 20% of all Medicaid patients in the state of New Jersey, so that’s a significant impact on us, but really on all providers.

Again, we get paid through the Medicaid program, just a fraction of what it costs to take care of those patients that are most in need. So, it has to be a partnership between the federal government and the state government, and the subsidies that are going to be cut over many years, those haven’t taken effect yet. But when they do take effect, I am worried that people will not be eligible for Medicaid [and] that hospitals, doctors will not be able to provide some of the programs that they’re providing now to those that are most in need. And generally, those vulnerable populations will suffer the most. So, that is of concern, and I would hope that the states and the federal government can work something out to help restore some of that sorely needed funding.

It has to be a partnership, and I never would advocate for anybody receiving a governmental program, whether it’s Medicaid or Medicare, under false pretenses. I know some of the reasons that this legislation was passed was to cut back on fraud, and certainly I’d be a big proponent of that. If there is fraud in the system in any place we should definitely address it. But I think these cuts and the One Big Beautiful Bill Act go well beyond any documented fraud that’s been identified.

Q: OK, you sort of touched on the next thing I was going to ask you, which was about the implications for the health care industry in general, HMH in particular. A lot of the coverage I’ve seen focused a lot on rural hospitals in other in other states and poorer states. But as you say, there are vulnerable populations here in New Jersey, and that’s where you’re going to see most of the effects, yes?

A: It absolutely is. We have, you know, large areas in our urban centers where people are dependent on Medicaid. Even in suburban areas, you know, we see Medicaid, and certainly in some of the rural areas in the southern part of our state, we see large segments on Medicaid.

But in addition to that, we have to keep in mind that Medicaid also covers children’s programs. It’s not just for adults who might not have the means to afford any other kind of insurance. It also provides insurance for children. And at Hackensack Meridian Health, we have two Children’s hospitals that are in pain by these cuts as well. So, that’s also significant — it’s hitting the most vulnerable populations on both the adult side and on the children’s side.

Q: OK, and that also does bring up the whole question of affordability generally. That’s a big word now in Washington. It was a major part of the gubernatorial campaign last year. I actually was talking to one of your peers last week about this whole question of affordability, and it just seems like an almost insoluble problem. So, I’m curious as to whether there are different models that you can see that may work better? Or is it something that the federal government has to fix? Is it something that the payers and the health systems and the government have to fix together? How do you get out of this? And I don’t expect you to solve all the problems right now; are there steps that, for example, Hackensack Meridian can take, or that the state of New Jersey can take, to make health care more affordable right now?

A: Absolutely, and I’ll try to solve it in the next five minutes.

Q: OK. Good.

A: But I will take a crack at it. First of all, to your question, it’s really all of the above. All the stakeholders need to own a piece of this and to help with the solution. And I’ve always said I’m an optimist by nature, so for all of these challenges, there’s also opportunities. So let me give you a few examples of where I think we can make health care more affordable.

One is – and not just Hackensack Meridian, but other hospitals and health systems are on this journey – building out more ambulatory care; building out greater home care programs. Because if you’re providing more and more care in those settings, not only is it going to be more convenient and more accessible, but it will be more affordable.

And medical standards have changed over the years. More and more procedures, more and more medical care can be delivered outside the four walls of the hospital, which is the most expensive way to receive care. So, I think that’s one way that we can address this. And Hackensack Meridian is an example. We’re building out 500,000 square feet of ambulatory care — whether that’s health and wellness centers or urgent care centers, surgery centers. That’s really going to be the future.

And then, you’ve heard me talk about before, hospital from home, where we’re providing acute care level services in the home, that used to be provided within the hospital, at a fraction of that cost. So that’s another way that we can provide care more efficiently and obviously make it more affordable.

Now, another area I think that all the stakeholders could get together and focus on is prevention and making sure that there is a focus as much on prevention as there is on treatment. We’ve seen that in some of the European health care models, where the focus on prevention, the cost of care is significantly less than what we see here in the U.S. We started this as, I think I’ve told you before, at the medical school level, where we’re training physicians at our new private medical school, Hackensack Meridian School of Medicine, on prevention — a focus on prevention. They team up in our Human Dimension Program with individuals and families, particularly from underserved areas, and they focus on prevention. They understand what’s keeping people not to be as healthy as they should. And I think we need that whole mindset change in the health care system. And we need the private insurers and the governmental payers to re-incentivize, if you will, providers to focus on prevention.

Some would call it value-based care, where you’re really rewarding individual providers for achieving certain results. And some of the results would be to provide care at a higher quality and less cost by focusing on prevention.

So, I do think that, to answer your question, it’s really all the stakeholders getting together. It’s not one segment. But I do think there are things that we can do, whether it’s the focus on prevention or moving care to ambulatory settings, to home care settings.

There’s no question in my mind that we can make health care more affordable, but I just wouldn’t throw my hands up and say there’s nothing that we can do. This is too big a problem to solve. We have to solve it. I mean, it’s not sustainable for the future.

I was happy to hear Gov. [Mikie] Sherrill will focus on affordability, in health care, but [also] across the board in all the sectors. And I’d want to partner with her and other stakeholders to help on the solutions.

Q: Now, the kinds of things you were talking about, ambulatory care, hospital at home, more at-home care. There’s been a trend toward that for a while now. Are you seeing the results of that? Because you hear all these stories about – 10 years ago, you went in for a hip replacement; you were in the hospital for 12 days. Now you’re in and out in a matter of hours. So, I’m guessing that has to have some effect on costs, and yet we’re still here talking about affordability. Are things not moving quickly enough, I guess is the question?

A: The answer to your question is absolutely, we’re seeing some positive impacts on affordability. But don’t forget, we’ve been talking about ambulatory care; we’ve been talking about programs like Hospital at Home for a few years, but it takes time to get those up and running. It takes time to build health and wellness centers, it takes time to focus on urgent care and ambulatory surgery centers.

And with Hospital for Home, with all the bumps that have happened in Washington in terms of reimbursement, it’s a wonder that we have a fairly robust program, but many other hospitals and health systems didn’t want to take the risk in investing while the reimbursement is still outstanding. And even today, with the partial government shutdown that exists as we speak right now [this conversation took place before the federal government shutdown ended Feb. 3, 2026], there’s no funding for the Hospital at Home program. We expect that that will come back in the coming days, but it’s hard for organizations to embrace these strategies with all that uncertainty out there.

So, I do see some impact starting to happen and starting to make health care ultimately more affordable. But we have to give it a little bit more time.

But that in itself is not the only solution. We do need that focus on prevention, re-incentivizing providers so that they focus on prevention, more value-based care. Meaning, pay for performance — achieve those quality outcomes at lower costs. I think we’re moving incrementally in that direction, but not quickly enough that we can honestly say, wow, health care’s becoming more affordable. I think we’ve still got a ways to go.

Q: And how about the impact of technology on all this? We’ve talked about this before, particularly with regard to AI. There’s always sort of a tendency to say, well, technology will save us, something will come along. We’ll save a lot of money because people will be able to do consultations on video and things like that. Are people expecting too much from technology at this point?

A: No, I don’t think they are. I think the jury’s still out, though, in terms of how much impact it’s going to have on affordability. But I do believe that the expectations out there are legit, and people should think that technology is going to help improve care, make health care more accessible and ultimately make health care more affordable. And as AI rolls out – it’s still kind of in its infancy – but as it rolls out, it’s showing significant progress.

A couple examples of identifying disease earlier on. We have an algorithm now in chronic kidney disease that can save years of dialysis, maybe even a transplant. That’s going to save the system a lot of money. Obviously, better care for the patient, but save a lot of money.

If you can detect certain other chronic diseases or illnesses quicker, like radiologists are doing with detecting breast cancer earlier through AI-guided imaging, I think that that shows tremendous potential. And then, just on the back end, if you can make your operating rooms, your surgical suites more efficient, more effective, you can help enhance productivity of the health care workers. I do think that that can help make health care more affordable as well.

So, there are a lot of areas where I think technology can be used. And I think I might have used this example before, but even a virtual nursing program, which uses technology to help bedside nurses perform more of their tasks, spend more time with their patients right at the bedside, is huge because it enhances the satisfaction of those nurses. That’s what they want to do. It takes away some of the administrative burdens that were causing burnout for them, as an example. And, we see, nursing turnover rates coming down significantly. We see less vacancies.

Same thing on the physician side, where an AI algorithm can help physicians do charting, summarize notes and it could give them up to two hours more time to either spend directly with their patients or with their families in the evening. And that stabilizes the physician workforce as well. So, there’s going to be, I think, a lot of positives from technology down the road. I think we’re starting to see some benefits now. But I think, like anything else, you know, I think we’re going to have to be a little patient with technology as well. Because a lot’s emerging now, and folks are doing a lot of use cases and a lot of trial and error, so to speak, but I think it really is showing some good promise.

Since you’ve brought up AI, I do want to make one point, and that is that the ultimate decision in health care has to always be a human being — whether that’s a doctor or a nurse or other health care professional. I want to reassure your audience and others in the public that that’s how it should be. I see these technologies as assisting those human beings in making the right decisions, but not to replace them from ultimately making those decisions.

Q: OK. I remember you had an agreement with a health care system in India to have nurses remotely working with you. I’m curious about that, how that’s working? Is that going on now, or what else is happening in this regard?

A: So, we did, enter an agreement with Apollo Health, which is the largest private health system in India. And we have made some great progress with Apollo. We have some great protocols worked out. The issue that we have is some limitations because of some of the immigration enforcement in the U.S. I mentioned Dr. Oz and his team, and I’m actually working with that team to see if we can’t cut through some of that. And they are receptive to it, but we just have to find a way to be able, through a regulatory kind of reset, if you will, to allow for those nurses to come and practice in places like New Jersey, or even to do virtual nursing care from India. That would be of significant help as well.

But right now, because of some of the regulations that are out there, and some of the issues around visas, etc., it’s been very, very challenging. But I have to say that the folks at CMS are open and receptive to finding a solution here.

Q: All right, in the context of technology, you mentioned some of the workforce issues, particularly with nurses and physicians. Again, I’m curious for an update. How big a problem is it still? And how are you coping with it?

A: Well, you’ve asked me this in the past, and it was certainly a very big problem during and after COVID. We saw 1 out of 5 nurses leaving the profession. We saw significant shortages in the physician areas, particularly primary care and some of the specialty care. I feel that things have stabilized significantly.

We’re seeing – whether it’s through the use of these new technologies or just the market kind of stabilizing – we’re seeing less turnover. … [W]e have three nursing schools within Hackensack Meridian Health that help us with the supply of very ready and very well qualified nurses who hit the ground running at one of our hospitals or at one of our care sites, and that’s really been helpful. We also enjoy great partnerships with other schools that are even outside our health system. But having our own schools there and having our own medical school also helps us.

As an example, with the medical school, there’s an incentive program for those medical students to go into areas of shortage, like primary care. We still are still seeing, in this state, 1 out of 3 people who don’t have access to a primary care physician. So, we’re trying to expand access through this workforce development at our medical school. In addition to that, some of the partnerships that we’ve engaged in have helped recruit primary care physicians to our state.

One example is the One Medical Partnership that is part of the Amazon network. We already have two One Medical brick-and-mortar primary care centers that are up and running. Another one is scheduled to open in just a few months. And keep in mind, we’re going to open up to 20 of those with One Medical, and that’s going to make a big difference in terms of access to primary care.

In addition to that, we formed a partnership, as I think I mentioned to you before, with K Health, and we have rolled out what we call HMH247. That’s a virtual primary care delivery system where folks can access primary care virtually day and night, seven days a week. Those doctors are embedded in the Hackensack Meridian Medical Group, so they’re going to stand for really good quality. And, again, that’s another way to attract doctors, primary care doctors, if you will, to our state to take care of our population.

But in general, you know, we still have workforce challenges, no doubt about it, but I think we’re starting to see things come back to almost pre-pandemic days with respect to turnover and vacancy rates. But there’s still, even beyond nursing and physicians, there’s still shortages of pharmacists, there’s shortages of other kinds of technicians that provide care. So, it’s not something we’re letting our foot off the gas on. We’re going to continue to focus on it, but I would say that things have definitely stabilized a bit since we spoke last

Q: Well, I didn’t expect to hear good news like that, so … glad to hear it. You mentioned at the top, you went to the JPMorgan conference, that you may be interested in doing some borrowing. That leads to the question of where you see growth coming from in the next, say, year, two, three. Are you looking at organic growth? Are you looking more, again, at mergers and acquisitions, partnerships? What’s your priority there at this point?

A: We have – and our board has really been consistent with this – we have a growth strategy that’s focused both on organic growth and inorganic growth through new partnerships.

Matter of fact, on the partnership side we were given accolades at JPMorgan because part of our presentation focused on some of these non-traditional partnerships that we’ve made, whether it be with One Medical or K Health. But also with Google to help develop our AI algorithms and our AI strategy. Other partnerships that we were given some recognition on included the new partnership with Uber for transportation and the company Clear, to help with patient registration and access at our care sites. Those types of partnerships, I think, are getting a lot of attention, and do absolutely make a difference in the provision of health care.

But going back to the organic side, we’re continuing to grow our service lines through development of the ambulatory care network. But it also means developing programs within our hospitals as well. As you know, we’ve had major expansions up at Hackensack University Medical Center. We have the new Helena Theurer Tower that really has transformed that organization. We are now moving forward with the master facility plan for both JFK University Medical Center and Jersey Shore University Medical Center. Those are growing areas in our state, and those hospitals are in need of not only new technology, but new facilities as well. So, we continue to grow clinically, our service lines, our programs at our hospitals, in our ambulatory care settings and the home care setting.

But on the partnership side, aside from some of these non-traditional partnerships, yes, we do have discussions going on with some major health systems as well as with physician groups, medical groups out there that will enable us to grow inorganically, as the term suggests. And we’re excited about that, because if some of those come to fruition, they will absolutely be transformative for our state.

Q: And there are still targets out there? There are still physician groups that are available? Because it seems like every day we read about new deals where previously independent groups are joining one of the big systems.

A: Let me put it this way, there are independent groups that are looking to join health systems like Hackensack Meridian Health: the stability that that represents, the quality of care that we represent to communities. And we also make a good partner. We’ve been a good partner; we’ve had successful partnerships. So, they look for partners like Hackensack Meridian that have that track record.

There are groups like that that are independent out there, and then there are groups that maybe have had partnerships with private equity firms or other big organizations, national organizations, and maybe they haven’t been as happy with those partnerships as they thought they would be when they entered into them. And they’re looking for a partner like HMH. So, we’re definitely a health system that’s in demand from a partnership perspective because of our track record and because of what we stand for. I think there’s some great opportunities there, so I’m optimistic that we will grow in a balanced way, both inorganically and through that organic growth that I spoke about.

Q: And all of this goes back to the quality of care that you’re providing. I know Hackensack Meridian, you generally win with U.S. News & World Report, Leapfrog, you collect those awards. And I asked you about that last year, about how important they were. How do you keep the momentum going? How do you keep up that quality? How do you make sure that everybody’s aligned and moving in the same direction?

A: Listen, that’s what we’re all about. We’re about quality of care, and that is a differentiator, I think, for Hackensack Meridian Health. We could talk about a lot of different things out there, but the bottom line is quality. How you keep everybody aligned, I think, is to focus on what goes beyond the recognitions and the awards. They are great, and I want to take this opportunity, since we spoke last, to give the folks at Hackensack University Medical Center a big shout out, because to be on that honor roll list – to be in the top 20 in the country, where no hospital in New Jersey has ever had that distinction before – is a huge deal.

But what’s most important to that team, and to all of our teams throughout HMH, is what goes behind that recognition. It’s the number of lives that are saved, because that’s what the criteria is all about. It’s lives saved, so your mortality is decreased. It’s complications avoided, it’s readmissions that never happen. It’s a patient experience that is at a whole new level than what we’ve seen before.

And it’s about patients getting discharged directly to home, as an example, as opposed to going to an intermediate care facility, where they can recover more quickly and more effectively at home. So, there’s very specific criteria that goes into these awards and recognitions, and I think that’s how you keep people aligned — continually talk about what this all means. You know, it’s great that we can pat each other on the back about being on the U.S. News World Report list. Believe me, there’s nobody more proud than I am of our team for achieving that. That’s an amazing achievement. But I think what matters most is the impact it’s had on patient outcomes. And honestly, on improving the overall health status of our communities. That’s what it’s all about.

Q: We talked a lot about prevention before, and one of the things that I’ve talked to your peers about in the past was the social determinants of health and trying to reach vulnerable communities where they are. I don’t hear that much about it anymore. Are you still working on those issues?

A: We’re still working on those issues significantly. We’re still screening everybody that comes in contact with an HMH provider for one or more of those social determinants of health. And we’re doing more and more screenings. Millions of people have been screened. People have been referred to various agencies to get the help that they need. In some other efforts, like our Fresh Match program, we’ve teamed up with grocery stores around the state to supplement SNAP benefits so that people buy healthier foods if they’re living in a food desert or they don’t have access to healthy foods. This gives them an opportunity to do that.

That program continues to grow and has done well. We also rolled out a big program over the holidays this year where we provided people in homeless shelters and in homeless settings with a keep warm kit, which obviously came in very handy with the winter that we’re having. That’s part of the social determinants right there, shelter and food, and making sure you’re keeping warm in this kind of a climate. We also gave them some Amazon gift cards to help them with nutrition, with what they need.

So, yes, there’s a lot of work going on in the community around the social determinants of health. And we continue to stress that our medical school also, as I mentioned before, that Human Dimension program continues to focus on giving medical students exposure to some of those social factors that impact health. Again, I probably have used that before, but 80% of a person’s health is really due to these social factors. So, we have not at all eased up on that.

Q: OK. There are a lot of vulnerable populations in New Jersey, there are food deserts in New Jersey, and there are a lot of agencies involved in trying to deal with that. I was just curious as to whether you’re still involved in those efforts?

A: We are, and you know, in speaking to my colleagues out there, in New Jersey and around the country, I think it’s fair to say that they are all still very much engaged in it, involved in it. It’s a priority. Obviously, every health system has multiple priorities, different challenges in their individual systems, their individual markets. They might be focused on it more or less than the next health system, but I can say clearly at Hackensack Meridian Health, it’s a top priority.

Q: All right, getting back to – not politics, but government – just for a minute. Obviously, Gov. Sherrill is new on the job, but she’s not an unknown quantity. Have you heard anything that is either alarming or encouraging that’s come out of the new administration, or during the campaign? How do you assess where the new administration might be going and where HMH might fit in that?

A: We’ve had discussions with Gov. Sherrill when she was a candidate, when she was the governor-elect and even since she’s been governor. And first of all, I want to say I think she’s got off to a really, really good, strong start. Having that snowstorm right away challenged her from an emergency preparedness perspective, but she did really well. Her team did well.

Now, I do want to give her credit, too. I think she’s made some good picks on her team: her chief of staff, her general counsel, the new chief operating officer position that she announced for the state of New Jersey — all really strong people. And I look forward to working with them.

Our new commissioner of health, I look forward to meeting with him and getting to know him and working closely on some of the public health issues. So, I think she’s really off to a really strong start there. And I think her focus on affordability is good. As I mentioned before, I think it’s the top issue in health care. So, she’s talked about affordability across the board — in the energy sector, in the health care sector, financial sector. And it is top of mind for the citizens of New Jersey and across the country. The polls are showing that across the board. So, I do applaud her for taking that on and we’ll continue to work as a partner. As I said before, I’d love to get all the major stakeholders together – whether it’s, government, regulators, insurers, providers – all together to try to prioritize some of the concrete actions we can take, to make things more affordable.

At a time when Trump and RFK Jr. are rewriting longstanding guidelines and undermining trust in medical care, it’s vital for New Jersey to have experienced leadership to keep us healthy. That’s why today, I am honored to nominate Dr. Raynard Washington to be our next Department… pic.twitter.com/PeJ81NiSjs

— Mikie Sherrill (@MikieSherrill) January 15, 2026

Q: Right. Because that’s scary for a lot of people. Can I pay my medical bills; can I pay for my prescriptions? If you can’t, that can be life-threatening. So, you would think it would have to be a priority.

A: It should be, and it is, and you’re right. It is very scary for folks whether they can pay their medical bills. And sometimes we have life and death situations out there. So, I think it’s really important. I think the governor is really focused on the right things at the right time.

And, you know, I would welcome a group to come together to start to brainstorm and let’s get at it. … I think there’s a lot that we can do, but it’s not in one sector. It really will take that team effort to make a real difference here.

Q: OK, in the time we have left, I wanted to get your assessment of the prospects moving forward for the rest of this year and then for the next couple of years, first for the industry in general, and then for Hackensack Meridian Health. How optimistic are you about the future — about where you’re going, where the industry is going, and where HMH is going?

A: As I said earlier, I’m an optimist by nature, so I am optimistic about the future of health care. The reason I’m optimistic is because I think for all these challenges that we have, there are real opportunities. There are real solutions. We may have to reinvent how we deliver care. I mean, who would have thought five or 10 years ago that we would have, as an example, a hospital-from-home program where sick people, patients who were treated in hospital settings, are now being treated in their home. That was really not heard of. We didn’t have certain technologies that we have today that are really revolutionizing how health care is being delivered.

I am optimistic about the future of health care. The reason I’m optimistic is because I think for all these challenges that we have, there are real opportunities. There are real solutions.
– Robert Garrett, Hackensack Meridian Health CEO

So, there will continue to be some great opportunities and great solutions, but we have to take advantage of that. We have to take advantage, if you will, of these times that we’re in crisis to turn that around, to turn that lemon into lemonade and to really act upon, whether it’s technology, whether it’s reinventing how we deliver care, where we deliver care. We need to … take advantage of that.

We need get with our colleagues on the insurance side. They need to get with us to incentivize the providers so that there is a focus on prevention rather than just on treatment. So, I do think there are solutions out there, and with those solutions some great opportunities. So, I’m generally optimistic that we’ll be able to harness that energy and come forth with solutions.

Having said that, though, I don’t want to be naive, either. I know there’s a lot of challenges out there, whether it’s the headwinds coming from Washington, some of the state shortfalls that we’re going to see in the budget. That means we’re just going to have to work that much harder to, to come up with the right solutions and again, turn those challenges into opportunities.

Q: And finally, before I let you go, I’m curious about what we should look for from HMH over the rest of the year. I guess you’re going to open the Metro Park facility at some point fairly soon?

A: We are. You know, that’s a great facility. It’s one of a kind, where we’re going to have a major health and wellness center at a major transportation hub, the Metro Park train station, which will give unprecedented access to patients to providers. And we will start opening that facility in March, so just around the corner. And we expect by the middle of the year it should be fully occupied. So, it’s going to be phased in.

But by the second part of this year, it’ll be delivering that kind of care in an access model that we haven’t seen before, certainly in New Jersey, if not in the nation.

A First Look Inside Metropark (courtesy of HMH):