{
  "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-45501f4b359b",
  "docSlug": "158df8627a0b9aca",
  "documentTitle": "Opioid Conflicts Majority Staff Report",
  "authorId": "McKinsey",
  "authorName": "U.S. House Committee on Oversight and Reform",
  "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck",
  "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck",
  "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting",
  "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting",
  "presentationDate": null,
  "orientation": "portrait",
  "aspectRatio": 0.773,
  "pageNumber": 28,
  "pageCount": 53,
  "prevPage": 27,
  "nextPage": 29,
  "slideType": "appendix_disclosure",
  "function": "appendix",
  "density": "dense",
  "nDataPoints": 0,
  "notes": "This appears to be a page from a formal report or legal document, likely an appendix or supporting evidence section.",
  "elementsJson": [
    "paragraph",
    "footnote"
  ],
  "metadataConfidence": 1,
  "imagePath": null,
  "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-45501f4b359b/28",
  "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-45501f4b359b",
  "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-45501f4b359b.json",
  "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b639-45501f4b359b#slide-28",
  "components": [
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "callout",
      "text": "While McKinsey was working on the contract for FDA's Office of New Drugs, McKinsey was also advising Purdue on issues related to new drugs that would be submitted for approval to the same office.",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Visual emphasis",
      "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-cdec-74db-b49c-306b826b24a4",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.085,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.478
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "In March 2018, while Mr. Smith was simultaneously working for both the FDA Office of New Drugs and Purdue, the Purdue announced that it expected to file its new drug application for Lemborexant. On May 21, 2018, Mr. Smith sent an email to Arnab Ghatak referring to a conversation with Purdue’s Vice President of Business Operations, stating that the Purdue official had told him: “Pipeline—generally more positive than they were a few months ago,” and",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "9581b867-f103-46ee-8094-b915d963f446",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.075,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.178
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "Mr. Smith worked closely with Purdue management on Project Scottsdale, including attending dinners with senior officials. In an email to colleagues on December 22, 2017, one McKinsey consultant noted that Purdue’s chief of staff, a former McKinsey consultant himself, “invited us (Jeff, Abhi, team) to a dinner at his home, and we had a very nice evening.”",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "b2a8f971-2844-44b9-9834-b39f51eef8d7",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.185,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.273
      },
      "kind": "paragraph",
      "text": "While McKinsey was working on the contract for FDA’s Office of New Drugs, McKinsey was also advising Purdue on issues related to new drugs that would be submitted for approval to the same office. As part of Project Scottsdale and Purdue’s reorganization, McKinsey reviewed the company’s pipeline of new drugs. The most valuable of these drugs would be placed in a company called “NewCo,” which would be “built to purpose to source, develop and commercialize a future, non-opioid portfolio.” Purdue believed that Lemborexant, an insomnia drug, held promise. McKinsey produced slides for Project Scottsdale that detailed the status of Lemborexant as well as the budget for the drug. Another presentation, produced in February 2018 by a hedge fund working with McKinsey on Purdue’s reorganization, stated: “Positive head-to-head data for Lemborexant justify further resource allocation.”",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": "paragraph",
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "ebd6d5ba-5643-4c0a-8535-dc7de2263e5c",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": null,
      "kind": "quote",
      "text": "Pipeline—generally more positive than they were a few months ago,",
      "attrs": null,
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": "Authority citation",
      "toolSlug": "authority-citation",
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "019dd951-cdec-74db-b49c-3712b67d591b",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    },
    {
      "bbox": {
        "h": 0.33,
        "w": 0.764,
        "x": 0.118,
        "y": 0.595
      },
      "kind": "source-note",
      "text": "133-140: Detailed citations and references to internal documents and news articles.",
      "attrs": {
        "numbered": true
      },
      "subkind": null,
      "toolName": null,
      "toolSlug": null,
      "confidence": null,
      "componentId": "831b451d-4275-4d85-ba89-d84707f6c9ce",
      "frameworkName": null,
      "frameworkSlug": null
    }
  ],
  "metrics": [],
  "tools": [],
  "frameworks": [],
  "arcBeats": [
    {
      "to": 28,
      "from": 6,
      "beatId": "ca9c3ab4-903c-4ff0-b53d-42335d2ce596",
      "arcName": "Problem-Agitate-Solution",
      "arcSlug": "problem-agitate-solution",
      "beatName": "Evidence & Proof",
      "beatSlug": "consultants-gambit-evidence-proof",
      "evidence": "The document presents extensive evidence of McKinsey's conflicts of interest, including consultant overlaps and contract details.",
      "position": 1,
      "confidence": 0.8,
      "parentBeatName": "Evidence",
      "parentBeatSlug": "evidence"
    }
  ],
  "loops": [
    {
      "to": 53,
      "from": 1,
      "name": "Cost Of Inaction",
      "slug": "27-cost-of-inaction",
      "bestFor": "Urgent budget requests, compliance, risk mitigation",
      "matchId": "ee9686db-f8b5-4bc9-bf6e-2d29966ee033",
      "evidence": "The document implies the cost of inaction through its presentation of McKinsey's conflicts of interest and their potential impact on the opioid epidemic.",
      "position": 0,
      "objective": "What is the cost of inaction in addressing McKinsey's conflicts of interest?",
      "structure": "The Status Quo -> The Hidden Costs Accumulating -> The Future State of Inaction -> The Tipping Point",
      "confidence": 0.7,
      "description": "Quantify what happens if the audience does nothing"
    },
    {
      "to": 40,
      "from": 24,
      "name": "Voice Of Customer",
      "slug": "51-voice-of-customer",
      "bestFor": "Product strategy, customer experience, market research",
      "matchId": "308c22ef-34f3-45b8-b50d-c273c6edeb88",
      "evidence": "The document presents the concerns of regulatory bodies through examples of McKinsey's actions and lack of disclosure.",
      "position": 1,
      "objective": "What are the concerns of regulatory bodies regarding McKinsey's conflicts of interest?",
      "structure": "What Customers Say (Verbatim) -> The Pattern Across Voices -> The Insight -> The Response",
      "confidence": 0.6,
      "description": "Let customer quotes and feedback drive the narrative and validate the insight"
    }
  ],
  "imagePathAlt": null,
  "thumbSrc": null,
  "thumbSrcAlt": null,
  "locked": true
}