BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE HUMAN
SERVICES COMMITTEE
Senator Carol Liu, Chair
BILL NO: AB 40
A
AUTHOR: Yamada
B
VERSION: March 21, 2011
HEARING DATE: June 14, 2011
4
REFERRAL: Banking & Financial Institutions;
Appropriations 0
CONSULTANT:
Park
SUBJECT
Elder abuse reporting
SUMMARY
Requires mandated reporters of elder or dependent adult
abuse to report suspected or known instances of elder or
dependent adult abuse, which is believed to have occurred
in a long-term care facility, to both the Long-Term Care
Ombudsman (LTCO) and local law enforcement. Also requires
mandated reporters of suspected financial abuse of an elder
or dependent adult to report known or suspected instances
of financial abuse against an individual living in a
long-term care facility, to both the LTCO and local law
enforcement. Current law requires mandated reporters of
elder and dependent adult abuse to report to either the
LTCO or local law enforcement.
ABSTRACT
Existing law:
1.Under the Elder and Dependent Adult Civil Protection Act
(EADACPA), requires any mandated reporter Ýdefined as
any person who has assumed the care or custody of an
elder or dependent adult (compensated or not), including
administrators, supervisors, or licensed staff of a
Continued---
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
2
public or private facility that provides care to elder
or dependent adults, elder or dependent adult care
custodian, health practitioner, clergy member, employee
of county adult protective services, or a local law
enforcement agency] who, within the scope of his or her
employment or professional capacity, observes or has
knowledge of physical abuse, abandonment, abduction,
isolation, financial abuse, or neglect, or is told by an
elder or dependent adult, as defined, that he or she has
experienced abuse above, or reasonably suspects abuse,
to report the known or suspected abuse, to appropriate
parties, as specified below.
a. For abuse that has occurred in a long-term care
facility, except a state developmental center or
state mental health hospital, requires the mandated
reporter to make a report to the local ombudsperson
or the local law enforcement agency.
b. For suspected or alleged abuse occurring in a
state mental hospital or state developmental center,
requires the report to be made to the Department of
Mental Health or the Department of Developmental
Services, or to the local law enforcement agency.
c. For abuse that occurs any place other than what is
described above, requires the report to be made to
the adult protective services agency or the local law
enforcement agency.
1.Requires the local ombudsperson or the local law
enforcement agency to, as soon as practicable, except
immediately in the case of an emergency, report known or
suspected abuse to the appropriate state departments
(Department of Public Health, Department of Social
Services, and the Department of Aging) with regulatory
oversight for the type of long-term care facility, as
specified. Also requires the local ombudsperson or
local law enforcement agency to make reports to the
Bureau of Medi-Cal Fraud and Elder Abuse any case of
known or suspected criminal authority, and all cases of
known or suspected physical abuse and financial abuse to
the local district attorney's office in the county where
the abuse occurred.
2.Separately, requires any mandated reporter of suspected
financial abuse of an elder or dependent adult, defined
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
3
as all officers and employees of financial institutions,
under prescribed circumstances, to report known or
suspected instance of financial abuse, as defined, to
the local adult protective services agency or local law
enforcement agency. If the mandated reporter knows that
the elder or dependent adult resides in a long-term care
facility, as defined, requires the report to be made to
the local ombudsman or local law enforcement agency.
Sunsets these particular provisions on January 1, 2013.
3.Provides for exceptions to reporting, when specified
conditions have been met, and provides for civil or
criminal penalties for failure to report.
4.Provides for cross reporting between licensing entities,
county adult protective services, and ombudsmen, as
specified. Specifically requires local law enforcement
to cross report to the local ombudsman for cases in a
long-term care facility.
5.Establishes the Long-Term Care Ombudsman program, by the
Older Americans Act (OAA) and places it within the
California Department of Aging (CDA) by the Older
Californians Act (OCA) in order to encourage community
contact and involvement with elderly patients or
residents of long-term care facilities or residential
facilities through the use of volunteers and volunteer
programs. Federal law generally prohibits ombudsman from
making a disclosure of personal information pertaining to
an ombudsman program client, unless the client provides
written consent.
This bill:
1.Requires mandated reporters to report physical abuse
which occurs within a long-term care facility, and
financial abuse of a resident of a long-term care
facility, to both the LTCO and local law enforcement.
Current law provides for a mandate to report to the
Long-Term Care Ombudsman or local law enforcement.
2.Clarifies that anyone who is not a mandated reporter who
knows, or reasonably suspects, that an elder or dependent
adult has been the victim of abuse can report that abuse
to both the long-term care ombudsman and local law
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
4
enforcement agency, or either.
3.Makes other technical changes.
FISCAL IMPACT
According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee, costs
associated to the ombudsman receiving additional complaints
would be minor and absorbable within existing resources,
while minor nonreimbursable costs would accrue to local
government for additional enforcement, offset to some
extent by additional fine revenues.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Author's statement
The author states that the State Long-term Care Ombudsman
program operates under two conflicting mandates: federal
law prohibits any disclosure of personal information
pertaining to an ombudsman program client, unless the
client provides written consent; while state law mandates
cross reporting of abuse reports with local law
enforcement, in order to assure resolution. The author
asserts that this conflict is causing criminal abuse and
neglect to occur, because ombudsman employees and
volunteers are unable to share the contents of their
reports with law enforcement. The author highlights that
the consent issue is exacerbated by the high number of
long-term care facility residents-up to 65 percent, who
have diminished capacity and are unable to provide consent.
Ombudsman and elder and dependent adult abuse reporting
The state's Long-Term Care Ombudsman program is
administered through the California Department of Aging and
35 local programs contracted through the network of local
area agencies on aging (AAA). The program utilizes
approximately 950 volunteers and 155 paid full-time and
part-time staff to serve as resident/patient advocates of
residents in over 9,000 long-term care facilities.
Volunteers initially receive a minimum of 36 hours of
training to carry-out their duties. According to the CDA
website, the primary responsibility of the program is to
investigate and endeavor to resolve complaints
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
5
made by, or on behalf of, individual residents in long-term
care facilities. The goal of the program is to advocate
for the rights of all residents of long-term care
facilities.
In April 2010, Disability Rights California, Investigations
Unit, issued a report that documented several problems with
elder and dependent adult abuse reporting and investigation
in nursing homes, which are one type of long-term care
facility. Of the findings, the report stated that reports
of criminal abuse are frequently made to the long-term care
ombudsman and are never referred to law enforcement, and
criminal investigations are not thorough and produce
insufficient evidence for prosecution. In several of its
case studies, it appeared that physical evidence was not
gathered in a timely way, which weakened evidence
sufficient for prosecution.
In November 2009, the California State Senate Office of
Oversight and Outcomes (SOOO), a non-partisan team from the
office of the Senate President pro Tempore that
investigates and measures government performance, issued a
report entitled, California's Elder Abuse Investigators:
Ombudsmen Shackled by Conflicting Laws and Duties,
highlighting the role of the ombudsman in investigating
instances of abuse and its inherent limitations, due to
consent requirements for ombudsman under federal law, among
other factors. The report noted:
Over three decades, the state has strayed far
from the original intent of the federal
program. The Older Americans Act envisioned ombudsmen
as advocates for the elderly
in nursing homes, listening to their concerns and
working with administrators to improve
living conditions. Like all the states, California
established its own ombudsman program
with the help of federal funding.
In the 1980s, the state made ombudsmen key
players in another new initiative
- requiring health care professionals and others who
work in facilities to report
suspected abuse and neglect. Ombudsmen became legally
responsible for receiving and
investigating these mandated reports. But there was a
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
6
hitch: they were also bound by a
requirement in the federal law to obtain consent from
long-term care residents before
releasing their names or forwarding their complaints
to other agencies.
The conflict put ombudsmen in the difficult
position of knowing about abuse or neglect,
but being forced by federal law to remain silent. The
state long-term care ombudsman's
office found that three-quarters of residents who made
abuse and neglect complaints
refused to consent to release of their identities.
California is one of only four states that
put ombudsmen in this bind. The rest rely instead on
Adult Protective Services, state
agencies that license long-term care facilities, or
others not constrained by the consent
requirement in the Older Americans Act. ÝEmphasis
added.]
Additionally, the report noted several other problems that
hindered prompt and thorough reporting of abuse and
neglect. Among them:
While some local programs ban volunteers from
doing these complex
investigations, others rely on them, raising questions
about whether they are
qualified or prepared to handle such high-stakes
cases. Volunteers themselves
report feeling overwhelmed. They also feel torn by
their dual roles. They work
with facilities to correct the everyday problems faced
by residents. Yet they must
act as adversaries of those facilities in abuse and
neglect investigations.
Until last month, the state ombudsman
interpreted federal law to require consent
from witnesses, including the alleged abuser, before
ombudsmen could forward
full reports to outside agencies. This interpretation
put California at odds with
other states and went beyond what the federal
government itself says the law
requires. It further handcuffed local programs
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
7
charged with handling serious
abuse and neglect complaints. The state still has not
revised its erroneous view
that witnesses have the right to block the forwarding
of full reports, but as a result
of this investigation, that interpretation is under
review.
In the absence of regulations or other
guidance, local ombudsman programs have
widely varying understandings of the state office's
requirements. Many fail to get
consent at all, even from the long-term care resident.
Some intentionally ignore
consent requirements when they consider the case too
serious. Others, including
volunteers, simply don't know the rules. The state
ombudsman says the office
failed to follow its own five year plan and state law
requiring regulations because
the department lacks a regulation writer. The office
submitted regulations ten
years ago, but the Office of Administrative Law found
them deficient, and they
were never revised.
In its review of other states, the SOOO report stated that,
"California is almost alone among the states in depending
on ombudsmen to investigate mandated reports." Recent data
show that ombudsmen receive more than 50,000 complaints
statewide. Between 6,400 and 7,100 involve abuse or
neglect.
The Disability Rights California report made several
recommendations to improve abuse reporting and
investigation, including a recommendation to report to law
enforcement and the ombudsman. The SOOO report also
recommended the Legislature consider dual reporting to
these two entities; however, this recommendation was in
addition to several alternative options, such as
centralized reporting, dual reporting to different
entities, prohibiting ombudsman volunteers from conducting
investigations, as well as other complementary (rather than
alternative) recommendations.
Other groups have also weighed in. Some recommend dual
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
8
reporting to the licensing agency and local law
enforcement. Yet others, such as Developmental
Disabilities Area Board 10, are proponents of a centralized
reporting entity, such as a licensing agency or adult
protective services, which could disseminate information as
needed. ÝSee arguments section.]
Reporting and cross-reporting
Mandated reporters must report to a different entity
depending on the setting. For long-term care facilities,
current law requires reporting to the ombudsman OR to local
law enforcement. If the setting is a state mental hospital
or developmental center, the report must be made directly
to the state department in charge of the institution or
local law enforcement. Outside these facilities, the
report must be made to adult protective services or local
law enforcement.
With cross reporting for a long-term care facility, local
law enforcement and the ombudsman must report to the state
licensing entity or entities, and the Bureau of Medi-Cal
Fraud and Elder Abuse, and to the local district attorney's
office in some cases. Local law enforcement must also
cross report to the local ombudsman for cases in a
long-term care facility, and to county adult protective
services in cases outside of a long-term care facility.
County adult protective services must cross-report criminal
activity to local law enforcement and any other public
agency with responsibility for such an investigation.
County adult protective services must also cross-report to
the local ombudsman and local law enforcement for suspected
abuse occurring in a long-term care facility. County adult
protective services, like local law enforcement and the
ombudsman, are also required to cross report to the
licensing agency for alleged abuse in a long-term care
facility. According to the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman,
local ombudsmen do not always receive cross-reports from
law enforcement.
Each of these entities has separate statutory authority for
investigations; however, a measure passed last year (SB
110, Liu, Chapter 617, Statutes of 2010) stated that law
enforcement agencies must retain exclusive responsibility
for criminal investigations.
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
9
Related legislation
SB 718 (Vargas) of 2011 allows mandated reporters of elder
and dependent adult abuse to make reports through the
Internet, as specified. Pending in Assembly for referral.
SB 33 (Simitian) of 2011 deletes the January 1, 2013,
sunset date on the Elder and Dependent Adult Financial
Abuse Reporting Act, originally enacted in 2005. Referred
to the Assembly Aging and Long-Term Care and Public Safety
committees.
AB 367 (Smyth) of 2011 allows mandated and non-mandated
reporters of elder and dependent adult abuse to report
suspected elder and dependent adult abuse occurring within
a community to any adult protective services agency or law
enforcement agency, regardless of whether the agency lacks
geographical or subject matter jurisdiction or obligation
to receive the report. Pending in Assembly Aging and
Long-Term Care committee as a two-year bill.
AB 518 (Wagner) of 2011 is nearly identical to SB 33
(Simitian). Pending in Senate Banking and Financial
Institutions Committee.
Prior legislation
AB 1765 (Blakeslee) of 2008 was identical to this measure.
Hearing cancelled at author's request.
AB 2100 (Wolk), Chapter 481, Statutes of 2008, requires the
local ombudsperson or local law enforcement to whom a case
of abuse against an elder or dependent adult has been
reported, in addition to existing reporting requirements,
to report all cases of known or suspected physical abuse
and financial abuse to the local district attorney's office
in the county where the abuse occurred. ÝThis is an example
of another conflicting mandate for ombudsmen, when consent
cannot be obtained.]
Arguments in support
The Arc of California writes that current law effectively
defeats much of the purpose of mandating reports of abuse
of people with disabilities and elders in long-term care
facilities because it allows mandated reporters to report
exclusively to the LTCO who have no law enforcement powers
and are prohibited by federal law from reporting these
crimes to the police.
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
10
The Contra Costa Area Agency on Aging writes that AB 40
would strengthen reporting requirements so that the crime
of elder abuse can be investigated and prosecuted more
expeditiously and effectively.
Developmental Disabilities Area Board 10 writes (support,
if amended) that, while it appreciates the intent of the
bill to improve upon the reporting and investigation of
abuse allegations, the Board does not believe it will do so
as currently written. The Board suggests, instead, that all
such reports be made to adult protective services, instead
of local law enforcement and the ombudsman, citing the
limited knowledge of investigatory techniques of the
ombudsman.
The California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform (CANHR)
states that a recent joint hearing of the Assembly
Committees on Public Safety and Aging and Long-Term Care
made it clear that having a choice of agencies to report to
has resulted in situations where notification about
criminal activity does not reach law enforcement. CANHR
believes that this bill would be a major advancement to
California's mandated reporting law.
The Los Angeles County District Attorney (LADA) writes that
if an ombudsperson does not recognize the criminal
implications of a consumer complaint or fails to report to
the district attorney, a perpetrator can escape prosecution
for crimes of violence or financial crimes against elderly
or dependent adults. The LADA states that this allows
individuals to victimize others, and nothing will appear on
the criminal background check.
Arguments in opposition
The California Association of Health Facilities (CAHF)
writes that it is concerned that over-reporting may
overwhelm scarce facility and/or community resources. CAHF
further argues that the California Department of Public
Health's failure to issue regulations defining specific
portions of the reporting statute, including what
constitutes "alleged or suspected" abuse and
"resident-to-resident" abuse has led to over reporting of
incidents by mandated reporters in long-term care settings.
CAHF supports Senate Office of Oversight and Outcome's
recommendation of reporting to a single entity, either
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
11
adult protective services or the licensing agency, which
would triage reports and refer to the ombudsman or law
enforcement. CAHF also supports dual reporting to law
enforcement and the licensing entity. The latter option,
CAHF believes, would align state law with federal changes
made through the Patient Protection and Affordable Care
Act.
The California Association of Marriage and Family
Therapists (CAMFT) writes that mandating that reports be
made not only to the ombudsperson, but also law
enforcement, is duplicative and inefficient in a time when
county and community departments are overburdened and
spread thin. CAMFT contends that making these reports can
become onerous for mandated reporters who may be on hold
for long periods of time -- times that have grown with
budget cuts. CAMFT believes that, for the mandated reporter
who is a therapist with a full client load, attempting to
make the call, as soon as practically possible as the law
requires, becomes an impossible chore often with only ten
minutes available time between clients. CAMFT believes that
the report should be required to be made solely to the
local law enforcement agency (who is required under current
law to then share the information with the ombudsperson).
The California Bankers Association (CBA) states that the
bill creates a duplicative, unnecessary new compliance
burden on financial institutions. CBA points out that local
ombudsmen have limited power to investigate elder financial
abuse, and they already receive the report of suspected
abuse. CBA also asserts that financial institutions will be
forced to modify their existing employee training programs,
as their current practice is to make one report to law
enforcement, and retrain hundreds of thousands of bank
employees on this new compliance obligation.
Concerns
CALA, the California Assisted Living Association, expresses
concerns that AB 40 would have the effect of criminalizing
common dementia-related behaviors. CALA writes that, under
this bill, a care provider who witnesses an 82-year-old
assisted living resident with advanced Alzheimer's disease
push another resident would be required to contact the
police, and such behaviors should be managed from a
caregiving perspective that involves the provider. CALA
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
12
suggests that instead of requiring identical reports to be
made to multiple government entities for review, serious
consideration should be given to requiring reports to go to
a central reporting entity that can summon law enforcement
when appropriate, such as a state licensing entity or adult
protective services.
PRIOR VOTES
Assembly Floor: 58 - 18
Assembly Appropriations:17 - 0
Assembly Public Safety: 6 - 0
Assembly Aging & LTC: 4 - 2
QUESTIONS & COMMENTS
1.Double-referred. This bill has been double-referred to
this committee and the Banking and Financial Institutions
committee.
2.Dual reporting for telephone versus written report
unclear. The bill currently requires mandated reporters
to make reports to both local law enforcement and the
ombudsman. It is unclear whether the mandated reporter
must make two telephone calls immediately, followed by
two written reports within two working days, or one
telephone call, followed by two written reports within
two working days. The former would allow for dual
immediate notification, while the latter would still
cause the mandated reporter to choose the entity to whom
to make the immediate telephone report.
3.Interaction between ombudsman and law enforcement is
lacking. The bill requires dual reports to be made; yet,
the bill does not provide for any interaction between
ombudsman and law enforcement, which appears to be
necessary as the ombudsman is considered the residents'
advocate. When law enforcement is called 100 percent of
the time, such interaction with the local ombudsman can
be considered paramount in cases involving residents who
have dementia. Additionally, both local law enforcement
and local ombudsmen have many tasks and few resources.
The scope of their duties allows them to play different
roles and fulfill different functions in dealing with a
suspected or known case of abuse. Interaction and
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
13
coordination between the two parties can reduce confusion
and duplication of effort. In child welfare services,
such responses to abuse are coordinated between county
child welfare departments, local law enforcement, and
licensing agencies.
4.With greater coordination, dual may be reporting
unnecessary. Statute requires local law enforcement to
cross-report to the ombudsman when suspected or known
abuse occurs in a long-term care facility. If
coordination between local law enforcement and the
ombudsman is also required, a single report to law
enforcement may suffice, as both parties would have
access to the same information, while alleviating
mandated reporters from making two phone calls, followed
by two reports.
5.Recommended amendments. Staff recommends the following
amendments to streamline reporting to a single entity and
facilitate a coordinated response.
a. Page 2-3:
1 SECTION 1. Section 15630 of the Welfare and
Institutions
2 Code is amended to read:
3 15630. (a) Any person who has assumed
full or intermittent
4 responsibility for the care or custody of an
elder or dependent
5 adult, whether or not he or she receives
compensation, including
6 administrators, supervisors, and any licensed
staff of a public or
7 private facility that provides care or services
for elder or dependent
8 adults, or any elder or dependent adult care
custodian, health
9 practitioner, clergy member, or employee of a
county adult
10 protective services agency or a local law
enforcement agency, is
11 a mandated reporter.
12 (b) (1) Any mandated reporter who, in his
or her professional
13 capacity, or within the scope of his or her
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
14
employment, has
14 observed or has knowledge of an incident that
reasonably appears
15 to be physical abuse, as defined in Section
15610.63, abandonment,
16 abduction, isolation, financial abuse, or
neglect, or is told by an
1 elder or dependent adult that he or she has
experienced behavior,
2 including an act or omission, constituting
physical abuse, as defined
3 in Section 15610.63, abandonment, abduction,
isolation, financial
4 abuse, or neglect, or reasonably suspects that
abuse, shall report
5 the known or suspected instance of abuse by
telephone immediately
6 or as soon as practicably possible, and by
written report sent within
7 two working days, as follows:
8 (A) If the abuse has occurred in a long-term
care facility, except
9 a state mental health hospital or a state
developmental center, the
10 report shall be made to both the local
ombudsperson ombudsman
11 and the local law enforcement agency , and may be
also made to the local ombudsman .
12 The local ombudsperson ombudsman and the
local law
13 enforcement agency shall, as soon as
practicable, except in the
14 case of an emergency or pursuant to a report
required to be made
15 pursuant to clause (v), in which case these
actions shall be taken
16 immediately, do all of the following:
17 (i) Report to the State Department of Public
Health any case of
18 known or suspected abuse occurring in a
long-term health care
19 facility, as defined in subdivision (a) of
Section 1418 of the Health
20 and Safety Code.
21 (ii) Report to the State Department of
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
15
Social Services any case
22 of known or suspected abuse occurring in a
residential care facility
23 for the elderly, as defined in Section 1569.2 of
the Health and
24 Safety Code, or in an adult day care facility,
as defined in paragraph
25 (2) of subdivision (a) of Section 1502.
26 (iii) Report to the State Department of
Public Health and the
27 California Department of Aging any case of known
or suspected
28 abuse occurring in an adult day health care
center, as defined in
29 subdivision (b) of Section 1570.7 of the Health
and Safety Code.
30 (iv) Report to the Bureau of Medi-Cal Fraud
and Elder Abuse
31 any case of known or suspected criminal
activity.
32 (v) Report all cases of known or suspected
physical abuse and
33 financial abuse to the local district attorney's
office in the county
34 where the abuse occurred.
b. Page 8-9:
27 (d) (1) Any mandated reporter of suspected
financial abuse of
28 an elder or dependent adult who has direct
contact with the elder
29 or dependent adult or who reviews or approves
the elder or
30 dependent adult's financial documents, records,
or transactions,
31 in connection with providing financial services
with respect to an
32 elder or dependent adult, and who, within the
scope of his or her
33 employment or professional practice, has
observed or has
34 knowledge of an incident, that is directly
related to the transaction
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
16
35 or matter that is within that scope of
employment or professional
36 practice, that reasonably appears to be
financial abuse, or who
37 reasonably suspects that abuse, based solely on
the information
38 before him or her at the time of reviewing or
approving the
39 document, record, or transaction in the case of
mandated reporters
40 who do not have direct contact with the elder or
dependent adult,
1 shall report the known or suspected instance of
financial abuse by
2 telephone immediately, or as soon as practicably
possible, and by
3 written report sent within two working days to
the local adult
4 protective services agency or the local law
enforcement agency.
5 (2) When two or more mandated reporters
jointly have
6 knowledge or reasonably suspect that financial
abuse of an elder
7 or a dependent adult for which the report is
mandated has occurred,
8 and when there is an agreement among them, the
telephone report
9 may be made by a member of the reporting team
who is selected
10 by mutual agreement. A single report may be
made and signed by
11 the selected member of the reporting team. Any
member of the
12 team who has knowledge that the member
designated to report has
13 failed to do so shall thereafter make that
report.
14 (3) If the mandated reporter knows that the
elder or dependent
15 adult resides in a long-term care facility, as
defined in Section
16 15610.47, the report shall be made to the local
ombudsman or and
17 local law enforcement agency , and may also be
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
17
made to the local ombudsman .
c. Add section that amends WIC 15640:
15640.
(a) (1) An adult protective services agency shall
immediately, or as soon as practically possible,
report by telephone to the law enforcement agency
having jurisdiction over the case any known or
suspected instance of criminal activity, and to any
public agency given responsibility for investigation
in that jurisdiction of cases of elder and dependent
adult abuse, every known or suspected instance of
abuse pursuant to Section 15630 or 15630.1 of an elder
or dependent adult. A county adult protective services
agency shall also send a written report thereof within
two working days of receiving the information
concerning the incident to each agency to which it is
required to make a telephone report under this
subdivision. Prior to making any cross-report of
allegations of financial abuse to law enforcement
agencies, an adult protective services agency shall
first determine whether there is reasonable suspicion
of any criminal activity.
(2) If an adult protective services agency receives a
report of abuse alleged to have occurred in a
long-term care facility, that adult protective
services agency shall immediately inform the person
making the report that he or she is required to make
the report to the long-term care ombudsman program or
to a local law enforcement agency , and may also make a
report to the local long-term care ombudsman program .
The adult protective services agency shall not accept
the report by telephone but shall forward any written
report received to the long-term care ombudsman.
(b) If an adult protective services agency or local
law enforcement agency or ombudsman program receiving
a report of known or suspected elder or dependent
adult abuse determines, pursuant to its investigation,
that the abuse is being committed by a health
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
18
practitioner licensed under Division 2 (commencing
with Section 500) of the Business and Professions
Code, or any related initiative act, or by a person
purporting to be a licensee, the adult protective
services agency or local law enforcement agency or
ombudsman program shall immediately, or as soon as
practically possible, report this information to the
appropriate licensing agency. The licensing agency
shall investigate the report in light of the potential
for physical harm. The transmittal of information to
the appropriate licensing agency shall not relieve the
adult protective services agency or local law
enforcement agency or ombudsman program of the
responsibility to continue its own investigation as
required under applicable provisions of law. The
information reported pursuant to this paragraph shall
remain confidential and shall not be disclosed.
(c) A local law enforcement agency shall immediately,
or as soon as practically possible, report by
telephone to the long-term care ombudsman program when
the abuse is alleged to have occurred in a long-term
care facility or to the county adult protective
services agency when it is alleged to have occurred
anywhere else, and to the agency given responsibility
for the investigation of cases of elder and dependent
adult abuse every known or suspected instance of abuse
of an elder or dependent adult. A local law
enforcement agency shall also send a written report
thereof within two working days of receiving the
information concerning the incident to any agency to
which it is required to make a telephone report under
this subdivision.
(1) When a local law enforcement agency receives an
initial report of suspected abuse in a long-term care
facility, pursuant to 15630 or 15630.1, the local law
enforcement agency shall coordinate efforts with the
local ombudsman to provide the most immediate and
appropriate response warranted to investigate the
mandated report. If the mandated report involves a
resident with dementia, or otherwise involves a
resident who does not have decision-making capacity,
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
19
the local law enforcement agency shall work
collaboratively with the local ombudsman in the
response to the mandated report. The State Long-Term
Care Ombudsman may develop protocols, in collaboration
with law enforcement entities, to implement this
section.
POSITIONS
Support: The Arc of California
Association of California Healthcare Districts
Board of Behavioral Sciences
California Advocates for Nursing Homes Reform
California Board of Behavioral Sciences
California District Attorney's Association
California Long-Term Care Ombudsman Association
California Narcotic Officers' Association
California Police Chiefs Association
California Senior Legislature
Congress of California Seniors
Contra Costa County Advisory Council on Aging
Crime Victims United of California
Disability Rights California Developmental
Disabilities Area Board 10
(if amended)
Emergency Medical Services Association of
California
Los Angeles County District Attorney's Offices
National Association of Social Workers,
California Chapter
San Luis Obispo County Adult Abuse Council
1 individual
Oppose:California Bankers Association
California Association of Health Facilities
(unless amended)
California Association of Marriage and Family
Therapists
(unless amended)
Concerns: California Assisted Living Association
-- END --
STAFF ANALYSIS OF ASSEMBLY BILL 40 (Yamada) Page
20