BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  August 28, 2012

                            ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
                                 Richard Pan, Chair
                 SB 359 (Ed Hernandez) - As Amended:  August 24, 2012

           SENATE VOTE  :  Not relevant.
           
          SUBJECT  :  Hospital billing: emergency services and care.

           SUMMARY  :  Authorizes health care service plans (health plans) to 
          adjust payment to specified hospitals for prestabilization 
          emergency services and care when a hospital exceeds an 
          out-of-network emergency utilization rate of 50% or greater.  
          Specifically,  this bill  :  

          1)Authorizes a health plan, or its contracting medical provider, 
            that is obligated to reimburse providers for emergency 
            services and care provided to its enrollees prior to 
            stabilization, as specified, to adjust its reimbursement to 
            hospitals in accordance with 3) below.

          2)Requires a hospital with an out-of-network emergency 
            utilization rate of 50% or greater to notify payers at the 
            time the hospital submits bills, statements, or other demands 
            for payment for emergency services and care provided to a 
            patient prior to stabilization, as specified, that the 
            hospital's out-of-network emergency utilization rate is 50% or 
            greater and therefore its billed charges for emergency 
            services may be subject to adjustment, as specified in 3) 
            below.

          3)Requires the adjustment to be such that the hospital's total 
            expected payment from a payer for emergency services and care 
            prior to stabilization shall be 60% of the payer's average 
            in-network payments for similar emergency services and care 
            prior to stabilization.  Authorizes a payer that receives the 
            notification made by a hospital to adjust the reimbursement to 
            the hospital pursuant to this bill. 

          4)Establishes the "out-of-network emergency utilization rate" as 
            the percentage of all emergency department encounters at a 
            hospital during the course of the reporting period that are 
            out-of-network for local, privately insured patients.  
            Requires this rate to be calculated by dividing a hospital's 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  2

            total number of major emergency department encounters during 
            the rate reporting period that involved local, privately 
            insured patients for whom the emergency services and care 
            provided were out-of-network, by the hospital's total number 
            of major emergency department encounters that involved local, 
            privately insured patients.

          5)Defines the "average in-network payments" as the average 
            amount of payments made pursuant to a contract during the 
            preceding calendar year to hospitals in California that offer 
            a comparable range of services and, if applicable, education 
            and research programs, by a health plan or health insurer for 
            reimbursement of care provided by the hospital or hospitals at 
            a negotiated rate, provided that payments made by the plan or 
            insurer during the preceding calendar year for in-system care 
            shall not be included in the calculation of average.

          6)Defines "rate reporting period" as a three-year period, 
            provided that if the most recent calendar year ended within 
            the previous 90 days, then data for the three-year period used 
            to calculate the out-of-network emergency utilization rate 
            shall be taken from the three calendar years preceding the 
            most recently completed calendar year.
          7)Defines "emergency department encounter" as the patient having 
            been registered in the emergency department for a period of 
            five hours or longer.  An emergency department encounter does 
            not include an encounter that results from the receipt of 
            patient transfers pursuant to the transfer requirements of the 
            federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act 
            (EMTALA) from another hospital that is not affiliated with, or 
            owned, operated, or substantially controlled by, the same 
            person or persons or other legal entity or entities as the 
            hospital receiving the transfer.

          8)Defines a "local" patient as a patient whose residence meets 
            both of the following:

             a)   Is in the same county as the hospital at which the 
               patient receives services and care or is in a county 
               adjacent to the county where the hospital at which the 
               patient receives services and care is located; and,

             b)   Has a five-digit ZIP Code that is the same as the 
               five-digit ZIP Code associated with the residences of 
               patients involved in at least 50 emergency department 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  3

               encounters during the most recently completed calendar 
               year.
              
          9)Defines "privately insured patient" as a patient for whom the 
            primary payer is a health insurer, health plan, or an employer 
            plan sponsor, and is not Medicare, Medi-Cal, the Healthy 
            Families Program, the Federal Temporary High Risk Pool, the 
            Major Risk Medical Insurance Program, or any other government 
            program of health benefits or managed care product provided 
            pursuant to any government program of health benefits.  
            Excludes treatment for an injury that is compensable for 
            purposes of workers' compensation.

          10)Provides that if a contract, including a contract with a 
            health insurer, health plan, or other health care coverage 
            provider, governs the adjustment of the total billed charges 
            for prestabilization emergency services and care provided to a 
            patient by the hospital, the contract shall control.

          11)Exempts designated public hospitals, as specified, and a 
            hospital owned and operated by an entity that is a city, 
            county, a city and county, the State of California, the 
            University of California, a local health or hospital 
            authority, a health care district, any other political 
            subdivision of the state, any combination of political 
            subdivisions of the state organized pursuant to a joint powers 
            agreement, or a new hospital, as specified, from the 
            provisions of this bill.  Exempts a rural general acute care 
            hospital, small and rural hospitals, as defined, a general 
            acute care hospital that is located within both of the 
            following: a county with a population of 1.5 million or less 
            according to the 2010 federal census, and a medically 
            underserved population, medically underserved area, or a 
            health professions shortage area, as designated by the federal 
            government.

          12)Exempts a hospital that is part of a health system in which, 
            as of January 1, 2013, at least 50% of the hospitals are rural 
            general acute care hospitals, as defined, or small and rural 
            hospitals, as defined, provided that the health system 
            includes at least five hospitals that are either rural general 
            acute care hospitals or small and rural hospitals.  For the 
            purposes of this provision, hospitals that are part of the 
            same health system if they are owned, operated, or 
            substantially controlled by the same person or other legal 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  4

            entity or entities, and hospitals are considered separate 
            hospitals if they are located at least one mile apart and each 
            has at least 30 beds, regardless of whether the hospitals 
            operate under the same license. 

          13)Prohibits, for the purposes of this bill, the following  from 
            being considered a government program of health benefits:

             a)   A health plan, qualified health plan, or health 
               insurance policy or product offered through the California 
               Health Benefit Exchange; or,

             b)   An employer-sponsored health benefit plan or contract 
               providing health benefits or contract providing health 
               benefits or coverage for state, local, or other government 
               employees, retirees, or their family members, including, 
               but not limited to, a health benefit plan or contract 
               entered into with the Board of Administration of the Public 
               Employees' Retirement System (CalPERS) pursuant to the 
               Public Employees' Medical and Hospital Care Act.

          14)Provides that the adjustment required by this bill does not 
            apply if existing law, including the Hospital Fair Pricing Act 
            of 2006, requires a hospital to limit expected payment for 
            prestabilization emergency services and care provided to a 
            patient to an amount less than the hospital's total billed 
            charges, as adjusted by this bill.

          15)Sunsets the provisions of this bill on January 1, 2017, 
            unless another statute extends or deletes that date.

           EXISTING LAW  :  

          1)Requires in federal law, under provisions of EMTALA, hospital 
            emergency departments to provide emergency screening and 
            stabilization services without regard to the patient's 
            insurance status or ability to pay.  EMTALA requires hospitals 
            to maintain an on-call roster of specialists in a manner that 
            best meets the needs of its patients.

          2)Regulates health plans under the Knox-Keene Health Care 
            Service Plan Act of 1975 through the Department of Managed 
            Health Care.

          3)Requires a health plan, or its contracting medical providers, 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  5

            to reimburse providers for emergency services and care 
            provided to its enrollees, until the care results in 
            stabilization of the enrollee, except as specified.  As long 
            as federal or state law requires that emergency services and 
            care be provided without first questioning the patient's 
            ability to pay, a health plan shall not require a provider to 
            obtain authorization prior to the provision of emergency 
            services and care necessary to stabilize the enrollee's 
            emergency medical condition.

          4)Prohibits payment for emergency services and care from being 
            denied only if the health plan, or its contracting medical 
            providers, reasonably determines that the emergency services 
            and care were never performed; provided that a health plan, or 
            its contracting medical providers, may deny reimbursement to a 
            provider for a medical screening examination in cases when the 
            plan enrollee did not require emergency services and care and 
            the enrollee reasonably should have known that an emergency 
            did not exist.

          5)Requires in state law, licensed hospitals which maintain and 
            operate an emergency department, to provide emergency care and 
            services to any person requesting emergency services or care, 
            or for whom emergency services or care is requested, for any 
            life-threatening or serious injury or illness, including a 
            psychiatric emergency medical condition.

          6)Prohibits a hospital from conditioning the provision of 
            emergency services required pursuant to 5) above, on the 
            person's ethnicity, citizenship, age, preexisting medical 
            condition, insurance status, economic status, ability to pay, 
            or other specified characteristics.  Requires a hospital to 
            render emergency care and services without first questioning 
            the patient's ability to pay.

          7)Requires a health plan that is contacted by a hospital, as 
            specified to, within 30 minutes of the time the hospital makes 
            the initial telephone call requesting information, either 
            authorize post stabilization care or inform the hospital that 
            it will arrange for the prompt transfer of the enrollee to 
            another hospital.  Requires a health plan that is contacted by 
            a hospital to reimburse the hospital for poststabilization 
            care rendered to the enrollee if any of the following occurs:

             a)   The health plan authorizes the hospital to provide 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  6

               poststabilization care;

             b)   The health plan does not respond to the hospital's 
               initial contact or does not make a decision regarding 
               whether to authorize poststabilization care or to promptly 
               transfer the enrollee within the specified timeframe; or,

             c)   There is an unreasonable delay in the transfer of the 
               enrollee, and the noncontracting physician and surgeon 
               determines that the enrollee requires poststabilization 
               care.

          8)Requires, pursuant to regulations associated with the claims 
            settlement process, for contracted providers without a written 
            contract and non-contracted providers, except as specified: 
            the payment of the reasonable and customary value for the 
            health care services rendered based upon statistically 
            credible information that is updated at least annually and 
            takes into consideration:

             a)   The provider's training, qualifications, and length of 
               time in practice;

             b)   The nature of the services provided;

             c)   The fees usually charged by the provider;

             d)   Prevailing provider rates charged in the general 
               geographic area in which the services were rendered;

             e)   Other aspects of the economics of the medical provider's 
               practice that are relevant; and,

             f)   Any unusual circumstances in the case.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  This bill, as amended has not been analyzed by a 
          fiscal committee.

           


          COMMENTS  :

           1)PURPOSE OF THIS BILL  .  According to the author, this bill 
            responds to issues raised at a February 24, 2012, Joint 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  7

            Hearing of the Senate and Assembly Health Committees on 
            hospital reimbursement mechanisms.  The author states that 
            this bill is aimed at a troubling business practice, employed 
            by a very small number of hospitals, whereby a hospital will 
            cancel insurance contracts, and use the emergency room as a 
            source of revenue by charging outrageous prices for 
            "out-of-network" patients.  This bill is intended to remove 
            the economic incentive behind this business practice so that 
            this trend doesn't spread.  This bill addresses this issue by 
            only requiring health plans to pay 60% of their average 
            in-network contract rate when their patient is in a hospital 
            with a very high percentage of out-of-network patients.  
            Public hospitals, as well as all rural hospitals, are exempted 
            from the bill, and the entire bill sunsets in four years.  
            Testimony received at the hearing made clear that Prime 
            hospitals are exploiting this reimbursement structure for 
            non-contracted emergency care in order to maximize billed 
            charges.  

          This bill was substantially amended on August 24, 2012 to 
            address hospital billing and emergency services and care.  The 
            author intends to propose additional amendments:  a) to 
            establish a floor of 150% of the payment the hospital could 
            expect to receive from Medicare for providing similar 
            emergency services and care prior to stabilization, and, b) to 
            revise the definition of emergency department encounter to 
            include when the patient has been admitted as an inpatient 
            following registration and a stay of any length in the 
            emergency department.

           2)BACKGROUND  .  Beginning in October of 2010, the Center for 
            Investigative Reporting's California Watch began publishing a 
            series of articles on Prime's billing practices.  The first 
            article focused on unusually high rates of patients diagnosed 
            with septicemia, an infection of the blood, which has a high 
            reimbursement rate from Medicare compared to other infections. 
            Subsequent articles raised questions about high rates of a 
            rare malnutrition disorder known as Kwashiorkor among Prime's 
            Medicare patients, again raising concern of possible Medicare 
            fraud.  An article published on July 23, 2011, by California 
            Watch, looked at an increase in emergency room admission rates 
            at Prime hospitals, again focusing on Medicare, but this time 
            also describing a conflict regarding emergency room admissions 
            with Kaiser Permanente.  In the article, California Watch 
            described an allegation from Kaiser that Prime had failed to 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  8

            provide Kaiser an opportunity to care for Kaiser patients 
            after an emergency situation had stabilized.  According to the 
            article, "Kaiser accused Prime of using improper medical 
            criteria to 'capture' its patients, treating them without 
            authorization and performing unneeded tests to create hefty 
            bills."  In the same article, California Watch describes 
            Heritage Provider Network, another managed care plan, as 
            making similar allegations against Prime. According to the 
            article, "Heritage claims Prime is engaging in racketeering 
            when it 'mislabels' Heritage members as too sick to be 
            transferred back to the managed care network."  The claims of 
            both Kaiser and Heritage are part of lawsuits between the 
            health plans and Prime.  Prime has denied the allegations.


            The investigative report by California Watch demonstrates a 
            troubling practice among some health care providers which can 
            have significant implications for California's health care 
            markets and more importantly California consumers.  The 
            practice of variation in care based on payer source has been 
            the subject of health policy research and more is being 
            uncovered about trends in California that may be of concern.  


           3)SUPPORT  .  According to SEIU California, this bill would 
            discourage a particular hospital business practice that drives 
            up the cost of healthcare and takes advantage of consumers 
            when they are at their most vulnerable.  SEIU states that this 
            bill would limit the amount hospitals can charge for treating 
            out-of-network emergency patients and these new limits would 
            apply to hospitals that are out-of-network for a majority of 
            their privately-insured emergency room patients-thereby 
            improving incentives for hospitals to be in-network. SEIU 
            believes this bill would reduce costs and improve access to 
            care for thousands of Californians.  SEIU indicates that a 
            different approach to this same problem has been thoroughly 
            reviewed by the Legislature over the course of this past year 
            as SB 1285 (Ed Hernandez).  


           4)NEUTRAL  .  The California Hospital Association indicates that 
            the association's opposition has been removed because of 
            amendments that limit the scope of the bill and ensure that 
            health plans do not have an incentive to cancel or non-renew 
            hospital contracts in order to game the provisions of this 








                                                                  SB 359
                                                                  Page  9

            bill.   
           
           5)OPPOSITION  .  The Private Essential Access Community Hospitals 
            (PEACH) remains very concerned about the negative impact this 
            bill could have on access to emergency room care in community 
            safety net hospitals that depend on non-contracted rates to 
            offset their high volumes of uninsured and underfunded 
            Medi-Cal and Medicare patients.  According to PEACH, by 
            creating default rates significantly below the average 
            commercial rate for emergency room services, this bill would 
            undermine the ability of hospitals to negotiate reasonable 
            rates and create a disincentive for a health plan to negotiate 
            a contract with hospitals.  PEACH believes this bill would 
            further threaten the viability of these hospitals and could 
            force them to make difficult decisions about continuing to 
            provide specific services-including whether they can keep 
            their emergency departments open.   PEACH also believes this 
            bill could reduce access to care in emergency rooms across the 
            state-especially in community safety net hospitals that serve 
            the most vulnerable communities-at a critical time when 
            hospitals are striving to transform their systems of care in 
            preparation for full health reform implementation.
            
           6)RELATED LEGISLATION  .  This bill is similar to SB 1285 (Ed 
            Hernandez) of this year, which was held in the Assembly 
            Appropriations Committee.  
           
          REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          SEIU California
           
            Opposition 
           
          Private Essential Access Community Hospitals

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Teri Boughton / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097