BILL ANALYSIS
AB 832
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 20, 2009
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
Kevin De Leon, Chair
AB 832 (Jones) - As Amended: May 5, 2009
Policy Committee: Health Vote:16-0
Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program:
No Reimbursable:
SUMMARY
This bill requires the California Department of Public Health
(DPH) to convene a workgroup to develop recommendations
regarding the oversight of ambulatory surgical clinics (ASC) to
address issues raised in recent litigation, Capen v. Shewry,
(155 Cal. App. 4th 378). Findings of Capen have led DPH to
conclude the department no longer has the authority to license
certain ASC.
FISCAL EFFECT
One-time GF costs of $50,000 to $100,000 to DPH to convene the
workgroup and report to the Legislature by July 2010.
COMMENTS
1)Rationale . This bill requires DPH to establish a workgroup to
address Capen. According to the author, as a result of the
court decision, DPH has concluded that DPH is not authorized
to license certain physician-owned ASC, even when clinic
licensure is required to meet payment standards of health
plans and insurers. The workgroup established by this bill
may reduce confusion or ambiguity generated by current law and
Capen. Increased clarity in this area will improve patient
safety and clarify DPH oversight.
2)DPH Licensing Oversight . The DPH is responsible for ensuring
health and safety standards are met in approximately 7,000
public and private health care facilities throughout the
state. These facilities include surgical centers, hospitals,
skilled nursing facilities (SNF), and home health agencies.
SNF and acute care hospitals account for almost 70% of L & C
workload. Since Capen, DPH is not renewing or granting any
licenses to a surgical clinic with any degree of physician
ownership, though the department continues to certify these
AB 832
Page 2
centers for Medicare purposes.
3)Related Legislation . AB 543 (Plescia) in 2007 and AB 2122
(Plescia) in 2008 required surgical clinics to meet specified
operating and staffing standards, including compliance with
Medicare conditions of participation. AB 543 was vetoed due to
concerns the bill did not fully address patient safety. AB
2122 was held on the Suspense File of this committee. AB 2308
(Plescia) in 2006 required DPH to convene a workgroup to
develop licensure criteria to protect patients receiving care
in surgical clinics. AB 2308 was vetoed due to concerns the
bill did not meet objectives.
Analysis Prepared by : Mary Ader / APPR. / (916) 319-2081