Legal Effects of the Physician Payments Sunshine Act(PPSA)

Write a 25 page paper on the legal effects of the physician payments sunshine act. 

I have a document with relavant information to use, including quotes. 
I also have a very short outline of what the format of the paper should look like. 

Here are instructions from the professor.

Try to develop a roadmap paragraph for the introduction that clearly describes the organization of the paper to follow and then follow that structure.  A possible structure, somewhat more straightforward than what you have now, is

      Part I   Why the Concern Over Financial Conflicts of Interest and How They Arise  
       Part II  Basics of the Sunshine Act – how it came to be, what it requires, etc.
      Part III Promise and Pitfalls of the Sunshine Act – what’s working, what gaps, weaknesses, loopholes, remain
       Part IV  How to Improve?  Recommended next steps?

 Introduction should also clearly state your thesis – your ultimate position/elevator pitch and rest of paper should advance this piece by piece.  Make the thesis statement the equivalent of your elevator pitch – what in just a few sentences will be the main take-aways you want the reader to know about what your’re claiming.  Right now I’m not sure what the main thesis is – seems to be a combo of Sunshine Act offers needed transparency but it has certain problematic gaps?  Whatever your real thesis is, need to clarify that.  And if you are worried about gaps in the law, have your thesis statement clearly identify the most problematic gaps you are mentioning.
Work on transitions between sections and key points.  Right now you have interesting source material and issues raised, but it’s all almost separate  bulletpoints. In final paper, try to link up each section for the reader (i.e., “having explored what the Sunshine Act requires, we now turn to how well it’s working in practice and here there are these key concerns….”.)
Not sure why you are making preemption of state laws such a big issue.  Is there much concern that important state laws are in fact being preempted in a way that’s leading to less transparency?  Only a handful of states had reporting laws as broad as Sunshine Act to begin with.  
When discussing definitional issues and what COIs are, you should reference the definition from the Institute of Medicine’s Conflict of Interest Report from 2009  by Bernard Lo and co-authors. (you later cite to this source in your Section III). It’s widely viewed as the more authoritative source on what COIs are and how to define them.
Do you think transparency here is ultimately helping patients make better choices?  Or is it more muddled?  Does all this data offer enough context for patients to decide which financial ties are problematic and which are legitimate? You might go on the Open Payments website and see what you think as a patient. (Indeed, you could look up the doctors who recently treated you!)
You refer at end of paper to punishment under Sunshine Act being “severe.”  Are the financial penalties for non-compliance really that onerous?  Or do you mean something else?  In any event, I would include your discussion about penalties in the same section when you discuss the basics of the Sunshine Act.  You do not need an entirely new section about that later in the paper (your current Section V as it’s best discussed together with what the Act requires at the beginning)
I’ve attached a writing tips document by Prof. Froomkin at Univ. of Miami.  His general suggestions track many of mine.  So I am sharing this document with all students as an additional resource when you get to the editing stage and want to tighten and improve the writing.
Please also remember to Bluebook all final citations in the paper.