What is one primary function of a formal judicial review?

The primary function of a formal judicial review is to provide a mechanism for challenging decisions made by agencies or organizations, particularly those made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS). This review process allows healthcare providers or organizations to contest findings such as deficiencies identified during surveys or audits that may affect their accreditation status or reimbursement rates.

In the context of healthcare, judicial review serves as a critical check and balance, ensuring that decisions impacting patient care and organizational legitimacy are fair and justified. It allows for a legal platform to argue against actions that could be detrimental to a healthcare provider's operation and reputation.

The other options, while important in their own right, do not align with the specific purpose of formal judicial review. For example, assessing patient satisfaction and staff performance focuses on quality of care rather than legal compliance. Examining compliance with state regulations pertains more to regulatory audits than judicial review. Finally, reviewing financial audits is primarily a matter of internal or external financial oversight rather than a formal legal challenge. Thus, the choice that encompasses the main role of judicial review within the healthcare accreditation context is the ability to challenge deficiencies with CMS.