BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 541
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 28, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND CONSUMER
PROTECTION
Mary Hayashi, Chair
SB 541 (Price) - As Amended: June 21, 2011
SENATE VOTE : 39-0
SUBJECT : Regulatory boards: expert consultants.
SUMMARY : Authorizes any board within the Department of
Consumer Affairs (DCA), the State Board of Chiropractic
Examiners, and the Osteopathic Medical Board to enter an
agreement with an expert consultant. Specifically, this bill :
1)Authorizes any board within the DCA, the State Board of
Chiropractic Examiners, and the Osteopathic Medical Board to
enter an agreement with an expert consultant to do any of the
following:
a) Provide an expert opinion on enforcement-related
matters, including providing testimony at an administrative
hearing;
b) Assist the board as a subject matter expert in
examination development, examination validation, or
occupational analyses; or,
c) Evaluate the mental or physical health of a licensee or
an applicant for a license as may be necessary to protect
the public health and safety.
1)Specifies that an executed contract between a board and an
expert consultant shall be exempt from the State Contract Act.
2)Requires each board to establish policies and procedures for
the selection and use of these consultants.
3)Specifies that these provisions shall not be construed to
expand the scope of practice of an expert consultant.
4)Is an urgency measure.
SB 541
Page 2
EXISTING LAW
1)Licenses and regulates various professions and businesses by
23 boards, 4 committees, 7 bureaus, and 1 commission within
the DCA.
2)Licenses and regulates chiropractors by State Board of
Chiropractic Examiners.
3)Licenses and regulates osteopathic physicians and surgeons by
the Osteopathic Medical Board.
4)Establishes standards relating to personal service contracts
in state employment.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
Purpose of the bill . According to the author's office, "On
November 10, 2010, the DCA issued a memo which stated that all
boards and bureaus must enter into a formal consulting services
contract with each expert consultant they use to provide an
opinion in an enforcement matter. Going through the formal
contracting process in order to utilize the services of an
expert consultant would create an enormous backlog for both DCA
and for each board and would significantly impact the time
required to complete the initial review and investigate
complaints filed with boards. This process would severely limit
a board's ability to take disciplinary actions against licensees
and result in tremendous case delays and could also mean cases
would be lost due to the statute of limitations expiring.
"SB 541 would allow the boards and bureaus to essentially
continue the existing practices they have had in place to use
exert reviewers."
Background . DCA boards and bureaus regularly enlist the
expertise of their own licensees to assist with evaluating
investigative documents, applications, educational and
examination materials. Rather than placing these "subject
matter experts" on payroll, they are hired as consultants on an
as-needed basis and are paid an hourly fee.
For years, these consultants were not required to enter into
SB 541
Page 3
formal contract agreements, which can be laborious, cumbersome
and time-consuming to execute. The boards and bureaus operated
with customized agreements that did not require the review or
approval of oversight entities. This process allowed the boards
and bureaus to select a consultant and get them started on the
services in a matter of days, rather than weeks or months.
However, on November 10, 2010, DCA issued a memorandum
instructing the boards and bureaus that they are now required to
enter into formal consulting services contracts that follow all
guidelines, procedures, and rules governed by the State
Contracting Manual and the California Public Contract Code.
The memo states that DCA recognized the potential for delays in
obtaining consulting services and indicated that a rollout plan
will be developed to minimize the impact to licensing and
enforcement units. Difficulties in identifying, hiring and
training subject matter experts were also identified as a
problem and a reason for delays in completing enforcement cases
by DCA's Consumer Protection Enforcement Initiative in June
2010. For example, during the past calendar year, the Medical
Board of California (MBC) referred approximately 2,900 cases to
expert consultants pertaining the initial or triage review to
determine the need to move the case forward for investigation.
The MBC utilized 281 expert consultants in one quarter to review
completed investigations. Under the new DCA policy, the MBC
would be required to go through the contracting process for each
expert consultant, even if the expert only reviews one case.
The contract would need to be approved before the MBC could
utilize the expert's services and the MBC would have to encumber
the funding for the expert consultant once the contract is
approved.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Medical Board of California (co-sponsor)
Contractors State License Board (co-sponsor)
Board of Barbering and Cosmetology
Board of Behavioral Sciences
Board of Optometry
Board of Pharmacy
Board of Podiatric Medicine
Board of Psychology
Board of Registered Nursing
SB 541
Page 4
Board of Vocational Nursing and Psychiatric Technicians
California Board of Accountancy
California State Pipe Trades Council
Court Reporters Board of California
Dental Board of California
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Physician Assistant Committee
Respiratory Care Board of California
State Board of Guide Dogs for the Blind
Western States Council of Sheet Metal Workers
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by : Marina Wiant / B.,P. & C.P. / (916)
319-3301