KFF Review: CMS Slack Channel Gave AI Companies a Direct Line to Health Officials

A Slack workspace run with the Trump administration's health officials has served as a back channel for AI companies to shape federal policy on health apps, according to a KFF Health News review of thousands of Slack messages, meeting transcripts and video recordings. The outlet's reporting was published Oct. 9.

The workspace connects tech executives, financiers and senior officials at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. KFF describes it as the engine of a year-long push to get Americans to manage their health care and medical records through apps and AI-powered tools.

The February listening session

In February, federal health officials invited AI companies to a listening session on conversational AI products for patients, such as chatbots. The invitees included Microsoft, Anthropic, OpenAI, Apple and Google.

Representatives from at least 35 industry organizations attended the session, which the Food and Drug Administration held. The FDA regulates health apps as medical devices. Companies were asked in advance to explain their AI products and how those products access patients' sensitive medical information.

The meeting was not on the FDA's public calendar or in its regulatory notices. The public was not invited.

The invitation went out in the Slack workspace instead. "This is a great opportunity to support HHS' goals and share your state-of-the-art understanding of safe Conversational AI development and monitoring to help FDA shape future guidance," wrote Morgan Taylor, a CMS senior policy adviser.

What the chat room is, and is not

CMS has not formally announced the chat room through federal regulatory channels. CMS officials have, however, discussed it at industry conferences.

Legal experts told KFF Health News the workspace resembles a federal advisory panel. Such panels are required to operate in public view.

The workspace gave industry a direct line to top officials, KFF reports, including Amy Gleason. Gleason formerly led the Department of Government Efficiency and is now chief product officer of the CMS Office of Health Technology and Products.

The public side of the push

The private conversation ran alongside a public campaign. Last year, President Trump, CMS Administrator Mehmet Oz and Gleason announced a "Health Technology Ecosystem" meant to integrate AI and other technology into health care.

Oz was open about the aim at a September launch of a program that lets health apps bill Medicare for AI services, such as wearable device tracking. "We wanted to give industry a chance to play in the sandbox of government-supported healthcare," he said.

The design KFF describes is one in which the government reimburses AI health apps for services the way it pays medical professionals, under what the outlet calls loose regulation. That reimbursement pathway is not hypothetical. The Medicare billing initiative launched publicly in September.

Last week, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. gave an enthusiastic endorsement of AI in health care. He claimed it is "much better informed than any doctor in the country."

The administration's broader approach

The health push fits the administration's wider stance on AI oversight. On Sept. 29, Trump and tech executives signed a voluntary accord after a White House meeting. Its text says "every company is responsible for developing its own technology safely." It calls for internal controls, outside auditors, and board review of auditor reports.

Trump described the arrangement as "tremendous self-policing." He added that the government already has oversight through the Department of Justice and the FBI.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei, who attended, told reporters the technology "has very real risks." He said the mechanism for addressing them "is still under discussion."

House Speaker Mike Johnson said ahead of the meeting that the country does not need a moratorium on AI development "because we'll lose the race to China." Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Congress must keep America ahead of China while making sure innovation happens "in a safe way."

What is at stake

The argument for industry input is straightforward. Regulators who write guidance on fast-moving software need to hear from the people building it. Officials say they want to move quickly, and China is the competitor everyone in this debate names.

But the sensitive data at issue belongs to patients, and the money involved is Medicare's. A closed Slack room in which companies that stand to be paid by the program help shape the rules for it is a process question taxpayers are entitled to ask about. Open meetings, public calendars and notice requirements exist so that hospitals, patient groups and privacy advocates can weigh in on the same terms as Microsoft and Google.

The central question is still open. If the workspace functions as an advisory panel, as the legal experts KFF consulted say it resembles, it would have to operate publicly. CMS has not formally noticed it through regulatory channels. Whether it must be opened, or disclosed on the record, is unresolved.