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