BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 348
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB
348 (Brown)
As Amended May 28, 2015
Majority vote
-------------------------------------------------------------------
|Committee |Votes |Ayes |Noes |
| | | | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Health |18-0 |Bonta, Maienschein, | |
| | |Bonilla, Burke, | |
| | |Chávez, Chiu, | |
| | |Gomez, Gonzalez, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Roger Hernández, | |
| | |Lackey, Nazarian, | |
| | |Patterson, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Ridley-Thomas, | |
| | |Rodriguez, | |
| | |Santiago, Thurmond, | |
| | |Waldron, Wood | |
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Aging |7-0 |Brown, Hadley, | |
| | |Gipson, Gray, | |
| | |Levine, Lopez, | |
| | |Mathis | |
AB 348
Page 2
| | | | |
|----------------+------+--------------------+----------------------|
|Appropriations |17-0 |Gomez, Bigelow, | |
| | |Bonta, Calderon, | |
| | |Chang, Daly, | |
| | |Eggman, Gallagher, | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
| | |Eduardo Garcia, | |
| | |Gordon, Holden, | |
| | |Jones, Quirk, | |
| | |Rendon, Wagner, | |
| | |Weber, Wood | |
| | | | |
| | | | |
-------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: Establishes a 45-working-day timeframe by which the
Department of Public Health (DPH) would be required to complete
investigations of long-term health care facility complaints or
reports. Specifically, this bill:
1)Requires DPH to complete its investigation of a long-term health
care facility complaint or report within 45 working days of its
receipt, and authorizes DPH to extend the 45-working-day
timeframe by an additional 30 days if DPH has diligently
attempted, but has not been able to obtain necessary evidence
related to the investigation.
2)Requires DPH, in the case that it extends an investigation
beyond 45 working days, to notify the complainant, in writing,
of the basis for the extension, any outstanding evidence sought
to complete the investigation, the source of the outstanding
evidence, and the anticipated completion date.
3)Effective January 1, 2018, applies the 45-working-day, and
30-day extension timeframes to investigations of entity-reported
incidents (ERIs), which are incidents such as epidemics,
outbreaks, disasters, fires, disruptions of services, major
AB 348
Page 3
accidents, or other unusual occurrences that long-term health
care facilities are required to self-report to DPH.
4)Effective January 1, 2018, requires long-term health care
facilities that self-report to DPH pursuant to existing law, in
the case that they extend an investigation beyond 45 working
days, to notify the complainant, in writing, of the basis for
the extension, any outstanding evidence sought to complete the
investigation, the source of the outstanding evidence, and the
anticipated completion date.
5)Requires DPH, effective July 1, 2016, to include in its written
notice of investigation determinations, specific findings
concerning each alleged violation, and a summary of the evidence
upon which its determination is made. Prohibits the written
determination from disclosing the names of individual residents.
6)Grants complainants 15 days, rather than five days, to request
an informal conference with DPH if the complainant does not
agree with the findings of the investigation.
7)Requires DPH to analyze its compliance with the complaint and
ERI investigation timeframes in its annual system and staffing
analysis.
8)Provides that none of the provisions proposed in this bill are
to be interpreted to diminish the DPH's authority and obligation
to investigate any alleged violation of state or federal law, or
to enforce applicable state and federal requirements.
FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
AB 348
Page 4
1)Assuming the significant backlog of complaints is cleared by
2018, ongoing costs may be in the range of $1 million to $2
million beginning in 2018.
2)Unknown one-time costs to develop policies and procedures for,
and for training on, the requirement to include a summary of the
evidence upon which the determination is made. This provision
would also result in significant ongoing costs, potentially in
the range of $1 million overall (Licensing and Certification
Program special fund).
3)Additional minor costs to DPH to expand notification pursuant to
the bill's requirements and report specified data.
COMMENTS: According to the author, DPH is charged with protecting
nursing home residents from harmful events and with investigating
complaints filed by the public and facilities. However, the
author contends that, by any measure, DPH's system of
investigation is not functioning as expected. The author states
that in 2009, DPH eliminated its policy calling for complaint
investigations to be completed within 40 days, and now has no
specific time frames for completing investigations of nursing home
complaints. Despite the elimination of this policy, the author
cites numerous reports issued by federal and state agencies,
private organizations, and the media documenting DPH's failures to
investigate nursing home complaints in a timely manner. The
author also states that DPH has been the subject of two recent
lawsuits for failing to investigate nursing home complaints with
timeliness. The author concludes by stating that legislation to
improve timeliness of complaint investigations is critically
needed.
Supporters of this bill state this bill is critical to establish
AB 348
Page 5
meaningful complaint investigation deadlines, that the timely
investigation of nursing home complaints is a matter of life and
death for nursing home residents, and that by improving complaint
investigation standards, this bill will help restore public
confidence in California's nursing home oversight system. Other
supporters state that this bill will provide certainty about DPH's
responsiveness and dedication to completing investigations,
thereby strengthening and improving the state's nursing home
oversight and enforcement process. Other supporters state that,
due to chronic understaffing within the Licensing and
Certification Program, health facility evaluator nurses have not
had the ability to consistently complete and close investigations,
resulting in a serious backlog of complaints.
There is no known opposition to this bill.
Analysis Prepared by: An-Chi Tsou / HEALTH /
(916) 319-2097 FN: 0000851