BILL ANALYSIS SB 700 Page 1 Date of Hearing: August 4, 2010 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Felipe Fuentes, Chair SB 700 (Negrete McLeod) - As Introduced: January 26, 2010 Policy Committee: Business & Professions Vote: 11-0 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: SUMMARY This bill modifies disciplinary reporting and peer review policies and procedures related to professionals under the jurisdiction of the Medical Board of California (MBC), the Osteopathic Medical Board of California (OMBC), and the California Board of Podiatric Medicine (CPBM) (boards). Specifically, this bill: 1)Increases the amount of information available in a board's central file. Requires specified information to be disclosed to the public about a former licensee. Specifies that information will not be disclosed if a court finds that a peer process was conducted in bad faith. 2)Expands the definition of peer review to include a process in which information is reviewed to determine whether a licentiate may practice and to determine parameters of that practice. 3)Requires the chief of staff of a medical or professional staff, a chief executive officer, medical director, or other administrator of a peer review body, to file a report following a formal investigation within 15 days after a peer review final determination that specified acts may have occurred, including gross negligence, substance abuse, and excessive prescribing of controlled substances. FISCAL EFFECT No direct fiscal impact to the healing arts boards addressed by this bill to continue oversight of medical professionals in SB 700 Page 2 California. COMMENTS 1)Rationale . This bill addresses peer review processes and "805 reports" and is similar to SB 820 (Negrete McLeod) in 2009. Section 805 of the Business & Professions Code details the peer review process and reporting related to disciplinary investigations and conclusions related to alleged physician misconduct. SB 820 was vetoed due to concerns about the definition of "serious" cases of incompetence and perceived misalignment with national accreditation requirements that hospitals adopt a zero tolerance policy toward disruptive physician behavior. According to the author, subsequent discussions with the Administration have reduced these concerns. 2)Background . The term peer review generally refers to when a group of medical professionals review their colleagues' performance. Peer reviews are conducted in many health care settings, including hospitals, clinics, health plans, and medical groups. Peer reviews are not always related to performance concerns, but may also be used in a routine review of a physician's practices. The methods of peer review can vary widely. Under state law, when peer review involves disciplinary action, the review and outcomes must be reported to the respective boards, including the MBC. 3)Medical Board 805 Reports . In 2007-08, the MBC received 138 Section 805 reports regarding the approximately 100,000 physicians practicing in California and licensed by the MBC. The number of 805 reports varies from year to year but population-adjusted data show a reduction in the number of reports year-over. Pursuant to Section 805, the information reported to the MBC is confidential. Section 805 also specifies that willful failure to file an 805 report is punishable by a maximum fine of $100,000 per violation and any failure to file an 805 report is punishable by a fine of $50,000. Analysis Prepared by : Mary Ader / APPR. / (916) 319-2081