BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 1667
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   April 30, 2014

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS
                                  Mike Gatto, Chair

                   AB 1667 (Williams) - As Amended:  April 2, 2014 

          Policy Committee:                             HealthVote:18-0
                       Education                        Vote: 7-0

          Urgency:     No                   State Mandated Local Program:  
          Yes    Reimbursable:              Yes

           SUMMARY  

          This bill replaces current mandatory tuberculosis (TB) testing  
          for school employees and volunteers with a TB risk assessment  
          and targeted testing structure, and requires testing only in  
          instances where individuals are deemed high-risk.  It also:

          1)Applies TB assessment requirements to individuals employed  
            under contract. 

          2)Requires the state Department of Public Health, in  
            consultation with the California TB Controllers Association,  
            to develop a TB risk assessment questionnaire for use by  
            schools. 

           FISCAL EFFECT  

          1)Minor staff costs, likely under $100,000 GF, to DPH to develop  
            regulations clarifying roles and responsibilities for TB  
            testing at schools, and a TB risk assessment questionnaire.

          2)Unknown, potentially significant annual state reimbursable  
            mandate costs if schools are successful in filing mandate  
            claims for the imposition of a new TB risk assessment  
            requirement and the addition of contractors to the TB  
            requirements.  As many school districts are choosing to  
            receive a block grant in lieu of filing mandate claims, actual  
            potential mandate costs are unknown, but costs could easily  
            exceed $150,000 annually. 

           COMMENTS  









                                                                  AB 1667
                                                                  Page  2

           1)Purpose  .  According to the author, the best public health and  
            medical evidence suggests that universal TB testing is neither  
            necessary nor cost-effective.  As such, this bill seeks to  
            replace mandatory testing for all employees with a more  
            targeted approach.    

           2)Background  . According to the Centers for Disease Control and  
            Prevention (CDC), TB is a bacterial infection that usually  
            infects the lungs.  It can be spread through the air from one  
            person to another. Certain individuals are more likely to get  
            TB disease, and are recommended for TB testing.  Current law  
            requires all school employees and volunteers be tested for TB.  
             

            CDC has stated that blanket testing of low-risk populations  
            should be replaced by targeted testing.  This is particularly  
            important because there is a shortage of drugs used for TB  
            treatment, and the false positives generated by blanket  
            testing of low-risk populations can worsen the shortage and  
            subject individuals without TB to potentially toxic treatment  
            regimens.

           3)Staff Comment  .  This bill does not specify who is responsible  
            for conducting risk assessments and making the determination  
            of who needs TB testing pursuant to the risk assessment.  In  
            the absence of such specification, it is assumed DPH will need  
            to issue regulations to clarify roles.  In addition, the lack  
            of such specification increases risk for confusion at the  
            school level with respect to who is responsible, and increases  
            the likelihood that mandate claims will be successful, as the  
            bill appears to require a new activity on the part of schools.  
             The author may wish to clarify the language to specify the  
            risk assessment/testing is conducted by a health care  
            professional and the school is only responsible for verifying  
            compliance with the assessment/testing requirement, similar to  
            what schools do under current  law with respect to verifying  
            compliance with TB testing.

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916) 319-2081