Reservoir Health helps organizations shape the policy, narrative, and market environments to enable health care innovation to reach patients.
We integrate policy, market enablement, and communications to shape how health care innovations are understood, valued, accessed, and adopted. We work with organizations developing new therapies, devices, diagnostics, digital health solutions, and models of care.

Health Care AI’s Rules Are in Flux. The Burden of Proof Isn’t.
While Washington is weighing how to regulate health care AI, the companies bringing these new technologies to market face a tougher test: proving they work, deliver clinical value and cost savings, and can close a trust gap with patients, clinicians and health systems.
Two recent developments underscore that tension. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) finalized a rule that eliminates certain AI transparency requirements, while outgoing Senate HELP Committee Chair Bill Cassidy unveiled a draft framework for how health care AI is paid for and regulated.
The midterm election results add another new variable. With Democrats taking control of Congress in January, health care AI is likely to face new questions and more oversight from Capitol Hill even as the administration weighs its options. But divided government rarely produces new laws quickly, so federal rules may stay unsettled for some time. Companies must earn trust now, with fewer federal standards to lean on and more scrutiny of how they do it.
Transparency Is Now a Market Differentiator
HHS’s new rule removes required disclosures on how certain AI decision-support tools in certified health IT systems, such as electronic health records, are developed, evaluated and used. What was a compliance requirement is now a competitive opening.
Hospitals, physicians, and several medical societies pushed to keep the disclosures, warning that without them, the work of vetting AI tools would fall on providers. Regulators countered that the disclosures hadn’t measurably improved patient care.
Both may be right. Health systems still need to know what they’re buying and the prior disclosures provided little clarity. The same is true across the market: payers want proof of value; employers want evidence before offering AI tools to their workforce; and consumers want to know how AI uses their data. Companies that provide each audience evidence it can act on will stand out.
What Health Care AI Will Have to Prove Next
Cassidy’s draft, the PATIENT AI Act, may never become law, but it raises three questions every health care AI company will face, whoever writes the rules.
1. Who is accountable when AI gets it wrong? The draft would clarify which agency oversees each type of AI tool, reaffirm existing federal limits on some state lawsuits against software-based medical devices, but leave the broader question of liability to further study. For consumer-facing tools that aren’t regulated as devices, the answer is even less settled. Companies that define their own accountability now will be better positioned when Washington does.
2. What evidence earns trust? As federal disclosure rules recede, accreditors and states are stepping in with standards of their own. The Joint Commission, the nation’s leading hospital accreditor, now offers voluntary certification for health systems that govern and monitor the AI they deploy. States are writing rules for consumer-facing AI, from chatbot disclosures to limits on AI in mental health care. Each sets expectations that companies will have to meet.
3. How will reimbursement for AI evolve? The draft would set up a process for Medicare to decide whether and how to pay for AI services, including a pilot to test paying for AI that performs certain clinical tasks on its own. The business question is clear: what evidence of benefit, safety and value will justify reimbursement?
What Companies Should Do Now
Whether you’re a technology platform, consumer health company, clinical workflow vendor or diagnostics developer, three priorities stand out:
The Bottom Line
The rules for health care AI are still being written, and a divided Washington may pull them in different directions. The market’s questions are more settled: Does it work? Where does it fit? Can it be trusted? Companies with credible answers will be ready for whatever comes next.
At Reservoir Health, we help companies bringing AI into health care understand the policy forces shaping their markets, identify stakeholder concerns and develop positioning and communications that explain their value and earn trust.

Jenny Bryant Joins Reservoir Health As Health Policy Chair
Former PhRMA policy leader brings deep experience supporting industries amid market change.
Reservoir also adds several new colleagues to expand its advocacy, corporate communications and market enablement offers.
Washington, D.C. – Nov. 2, 2026 – Reservoir Health, a Washington, D.C.-based health care consultancy, today announced that Jenny Bryant has joined the firm as Health Policy Chair. Bryant, who most recently served as Executive Vice President of Policy and Research at the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), brings decades of experience helping health care organizations understand, prepare for and respond to major policy transitions across markets.
At Reservoir Health, she will advise clients on legislative and regulatory developments, shape policy strategy and help organizations anticipate how reforms will affect patients’ access to care and medical innovation.
“Jenny’s deep policy expertise brings valuable perspective to companies navigating an evolving health policy environment,” said Robert Schooling, President of Reservoir Health. “As our new Health Policy Chair, she will help Reservoir Health’s clients anticipate change, shape policy and advance patient access.”
Bryant’s career spans nearly every corner of the U.S. health care system, giving her a cross-sector view and policy expertise across the commercial, Medicare and Medicaid markets. During nearly two decades at PhRMA, Bryant supported and led the association’s policy development on health care costs and spending, innovation, health care delivery and payment, while overseeing economic and policy research on how medicines are used and valued. Her tenure coincided with some of the most consequential reforms the biopharmaceutical industry has faced, including implementation of Medicare Part D, the Affordable Care Act, and the Medicare drug price negotiation provisions of the Inflation Reduction Act.
Before joining PhRMA, Bryant was a Vice President at The Lewin Group, a national health care consulting firm, where she advised clients on health policy and market issues. Earlier in her career, she held positions at the Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, Blue Cross Blue Shield of Florida, New York Hospital-Cornell Medical Center and the State of New York.
Bryant earned her bachelor’s degree magna cum laude from Harvard College and her MBA from Harvard Business School.
Expanding Reservoir Health's Reach & Expertise
In addition to Bryant, several new colleagues have joined Reservoir Health to expand the firm’s advocacy, corporate communications and market enablement offers.
Tejasvi Hariharan, associate: Tejasvi brings experience in public health, research and strategic advocacy, including recently serving in a health policy and regulatory affairs role at Amrita Technologies. She also supported preventive care access initiatives at Healthwatch Camden in London and studied post-pandemic policy responses in Kingston, Jamaica. She holds a B.A. in Public Health from American University.
Leila Pagel, associate: Leila brings a background in immunobiology, public health and health equity. As a communications and public policy intern at the National Hispanic Health Foundation, she supported advocacy and awareness initiatives addressing health disparities and access to care. She graduated summa cum laude from Georgetown University with a B.S. in Biology and Justice & Peace Studies.
Gabrielle Draper, senior associate: Gabrielle brings experience in government relations and nonprofit management. At Woodberry Associates, she mobilized patient and provider advocates on Capitol Hill to expand access to preventive care. She also interned in the U.S. Senate and at Vall d’Hebron University Hospital in Barcelona, where she analyzed mental health care initiatives. She graduated summa cum laude from Howard University with B.S. degrees in Psychology and Political Science and is pursuing a Master of Public Health at the George Washington University.
Lacey Teal, manager: Lacey brings experience leading integrated communications and stakeholder engagement programs. She previously was a manager at Penn Quarter Partners where she advised executives, built coalitions and translated complex health and policy issues into compelling narratives. She also managed campaigns at Spectrum Science, Woodberry Associates and Ketchum. She holds a B.S. in Health Promotion and a Master of Public Health from the University of Lynchburg.
Casey Cappelletti, manager: Casey brings more than a decade of experience in health policy, advocacy and engagement. She previously led SUNY’s Washington Internship Program, connecting students with professional opportunities and career development support. Before that, she spent nearly 10 years at the Academy for Radiology & Biomedical Imaging Research, supporting government affairs, patient engagement and coalition advocacy. She holds a Master of Public Health from the George Washington University and a bachelor’s degree from SUNY Brockport.
---
About Reservoir Health
Reservoir Health is a leading integrated health care consultancy that helps innovators anticipate and shape the environments—policy, communications, and market—that determine which innovations reach patients. Based in Washington, D.C., the firm brings decades of experience across the health system, government, media, and patient advocacy to deliver integrated, data-driven solutions to health care’s most complex challenges.

Ahead of the Midterms: A Health Policy Field Guide for the 120th Congress
Election Day will determine which party controls Congress for the next two years. But party control alone won't tell us where health policy is headed.
Across both parties, affordability concerns and growing skepticism of large institutions are reshaping policy debates, creating unexpected areas of convergence alongside familiar partisan divides. Regardless of the outcome, the 120th Congress will also bring new members, committee dynamics, policy priorities and oversight agendas.
For health care organizations, the weeks surrounding Election Day should be less about predicting the outcome and more about preparing for what comes next.
Control of Congress matters, but it’s not the only thing
A Democratic majority in either chamber could significantly change the health policy landscape. New committee leaders would set different legislative and oversight agendas and gain leverage in negotiations over must-pass legislation.
Continued Republican control would provide greater continuity, but new members and evolving Trump administration priorities would still change the environment.
Beyond the topline results, organizations should watch who will lead key committees, which incoming members bring health care experience or interest, and where influence within each party may be shifting.
If Democrats gain power, consider the agenda already taking shape
Democratic policy activity in 2026 offers clues about where congressional attention could turn.
Watch for convergence, not just conflict
Some of the next Congress's most consequential health policy debates may not follow traditional partisan lines.
Recent polling suggests voters across the political spectrum are receptive to government intervention framed around affordability and fairness. That could reinforce momentum around drug affordability, PBM and insurer scrutiny, hospital costs, price transparency and policies giving consumers greater visibility into health care spending.
Republicans and Democrats may favor different solutions to these challenges. But concerns about cost, access, transparency and institutional accountability increasingly cross partisan lines, potentially creating unexpected coalitions.
That means reconsidering whether messages built around traditional partisan priorities will resonate with a changing political audience.
Oversight could matter as much as legislation
Election scenarios are often evaluated by asking: What legislation could pass? But that misses the broader context.
If Democrats gain control of at least one chamber, congressional oversight could become an immediate priority. Existing concerns could translate into hearings and investigations involving HHS and federal health agencies, Medicaid and coverage policy, vaccines and public health, and the administration's MFN initiatives and TrumpRx.
Even organizations not directly targeted could become part of broader debates through information requests, hearings, media attention or scrutiny of industry practices.
The question isn't only “What could Congress legislate?” but also “What could Congress investigate, and where might our organization or industry intersect with that scrutiny?”
Regardless of who wins, the audience is changing
New members, staff and committee assignments will create opportunities for organizations to educate policymakers on complex health policy issues. Materials developed for experienced audiences may not resonate with a freshman member or staffer encountering IRA implementation, 340B or reimbursement policy for the first time.
That changing audience extends beyond the Beltway. State elections will also bring changes in governors' offices, legislatures and committee leadership that could reshape debates over drug affordability, coverage, 340B and rural health priorities.
As affordability and accountability gain prominence across party lines, organizations must also be prepared to explain how their organizations and their policy positions deliver tangible value for patients and the health care system.
Now is the time to ask: Is our corporate narrative ready for 2027? Can new policymakers quickly understand our role and priorities? Are our messages relevant across different political environments?
Don’t wait until after November 3 to prepare
Organizations don't need election results to begin preparing. Many of the most valuable steps are “no-regret” actions that will remain relevant regardless of the outcome.
The weeks ahead offer an opportunity to refresh corporate narratives and policy messages, assess materials for new policymakers, and develop scenario-based stakeholder maps. Organizations can also identify potential legislative and oversight exposure, pressure-test positions against questions from both parties, and strengthen their arguments with additional evidence, patient perspectives or credible third-party voices.
The goal isn't to develop a separate strategy for every possible outcome but rather to understand what could change, who will need to be engaged and how to communicate value in the new environment.