BILL ANALYSIS �
AB 2171
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 1, 2014
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON AGING AND LONG-TERM CARE
Mariko Yamada, Chair
AB 2171 (Wieckowski) - As Introduced: February 20, 2014
SUBJECT : Residential care facilities for the elderly (RCFE);
resident rights.
SUMMARY : Establishes a resident's bill of rights and a
mechanism to enforce them. Specifically, this bill :
1)Expresses legislative intent to:
a. Enhance each RCFE resident's autonomy and strengthen an
RCFE resident's ability to make choices about care,
treatment and daily life;
b. Adopt fundamental rights for people residing in RCFEs,
and to provide residents the ability to enforce them;
c. Encourage facilities to respect and promote those
rights, and treat residents with dignity and kindness;
d. Ensure that every RCFE provide a safe comfortable and
homelike environment for its residents;
e. Ensure that RCFEs protect residents from any type of
physical or mental abuse, neglect, restraint, exploitation,
or endangerment.
1)Establishes definitions for:
a. "Chemical restraint" which means drugs that are used for
discipline or convenience but not required to treat a
medical condition.
b. "Inappropriate us of psychoactive drugs" means a drug
given to a resident without first obtaining consent to
administer the drug, for discipline, or convenience, or to
treat symptoms for which no physician has authorized
administration, or without documentation of appropriate
nonpharmocological methods.
c. "Physical restraint" means methods or devices, material
AB 2171
Page 2
or equipment that restricts a resident from movement.
d. "Psychoactive drug" means medication that is used to
alter mood, anxiety, behavior or cognitive process.
3)Forbids discrimination on the basis of sex, race, color,
disability, religion, national origin, marital status,
registered domestic partner status, ancestry, actual or
perceived sexual orientation or gender identity.
4)Establishes a resident's rights which supplement existing
constitutional and other rights, which may not be waived,
though the exercise of them may be delegated to resident
representatives in case of limited capacity, and shall be
posted prominently in each facility, and presented upon
admission, signed, and entered into the resident's record, to:
a. be treated with dignity and respect;
b. be given privacy;
c. be given control over confidential records;
d. be encouraged and assisted in exercising their rights;
e. be free of coercion, discrimination, and retaliation in
the exercise of their rights;
f. be given a safe, homelike environment;
g. be given individualized care delivered by adequate,
competent staff;
h. be given good food in adequate amounts;
i. be allowed to make choices about their daily life, and
participate to the extent possible in their care;
j. be allowed to consent to or reject services;
aa. be free from neglect, exploitation, seclusion, punishment,
humiliation, intimidation, verbal, mental, and sexual
abuse;
bb. be free from restraints;
cc. be free to complain, or recommend changes in policies;
dd. be allowed to contact licensing authorities, or the
long-term care ombudsman;
ee. be fully informed of rules;
ff. receive a description of what residents are paying for,
itemized;
gg. be informed of facility resident retention limitations;
hh. be given reasonable accommodation;
ii. be given written notice of room changes;
jj. be allowed to share a room with a spouse or partner;
aaa. be allowed to choose their own physician, or
AB 2171
Page 3
pharmacist;
bbb. be protected from involuntary transfers;
ccc. be allowed to move;
ddd. be visited;
eee. receive written information about advanced healthcare
directives;
fff. maintain or develop their fullest potential for independent
living, through educational activities, planned activities,
personal interests, worship and other opportunities for
socialization;
i. participate in resident councils;
ii. to have their property protected;
iii. to manage their affairs.
5)Creates a mechanism to enforce these rights by allowing a
current or former resident to bring an action in a court of
competent jurisdiction for injunctive relief against a
licensee if a violation of one of these rights results in an
immediate or substantial threat to physical health, mental
health, or safety of residents, and limits financial liability
to $1000 per day for each violation, and for attorney's fees.
The measure stipulates that the right to bring such an action
does not expire upon the death of the resident, and that
waiving such rights is contrary to public policy, and
voidable.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Establishes the California Community Care Facilities Act
(CCFA) to provide a comprehensive statewide service system of
quality community care for people who have a mental illness, a
developmental or physical disability, and children and adults
who require care or services by a facility or organization.
2)Defines a "community care facility" (CCF) as a facility,
place, or building maintained and operated to provide
nonmedical residential care, day treatment, adult day care, or
foster family agency services for children, adults, or
children and adults, including, but not limited to, the
physically handicapped, mentally impaired, incompetent
persons, and abused or neglected children.
3)Establishes the California RCFE Act, which requires facilities
AB 2171
Page 4
that provide personal care and supervision, protective
supervision or health related services for persons 60 years of
age or older who voluntarily choose to reside in that facility
to be licensed by DSS. In establishing the RCFE Act, the
Legislature finds and declares that a separate licensing
category is necessary for a humane approach in meeting the
housing, social and care needs of older persons within
homelike environments.
4)Prohibits any person, firm, partnership, association,
corporation or public agency from establishing, operating,
managing, conducting or maintaining a CCF or a RCFE without a
valid licensed provided by the Department of Social Services
(DSS).
5)Provides that any person who violates the CCFA or the RCFE Act
shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction shall be
fined no more than $1,000, imprisoned in county jail for up to
one year, or both.
6)Provides for Community Care Licensing (CCL) within the
Department of Social Services to promote the health, safety,
and quality of life of each person in community care through
the administration of an effective collaborative regulatory
enforcement system by promoting strategies to increase
voluntary compliance, providing technical assistance to and
consulting with care providers, working collaboratively with
clients, their families, advocates, care providers, placement
agencies, related programs and regulatory agencies, and others
involved in community care, training staff in all aspects of
the licensing process, educating the public about CCL and
community care options, and promoting continuous improvement
and efficiency throughout the community care licensing system.
7)Establishes the office of Long-Term Care Ombudsman (LTCO)
program as a result of the federal Older Americans Act (OAA)
and places it within the California Department of Aging (CDA)
in order to encourage community contact and involvement with
elderly patients or residents of long-term health care
facilities or residential facilities through the use of
volunteers and volunteer programs.
8)Requires the LTCO, either personally or through
representatives, to identify, investigate, and resolve
complaints that may adversely affect the health, safety,
AB 2171
Page 5
welfare, or rights of residents of long-term care facilities.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown
COMMENTS :
Author's Statement: "This bill would establish a statutory Bill
of Rights that ensures the basic dignity and autonomy of today's
RCFE residents. This Bill of Rights includes rights for
residents in several areas including visitation, privacy,
confidentiality, personalized care, autonomy, informed consent,
financial management, freedom from abuse and restraint, adequate
staffing and many more. It would also establish a private right
of action giving residents the opportunity to enforce their
rights when they are being mistreated, and prevent or stop
ongoing violations of their rights."
Background: California is home to the largest number of seniors
in the nation, and the older population is expanding at an
unprecedented historical pace. The California Department of
Finance's Demographic Research Unit estimates that California's
65+ population will grow by 43%, from 4.4 million in 2010 to
6.35 million by 2020; another 39%, to 8.83 million by 2030; and
an additional 21% to 10.5 million by 2040. The expanding
population of older Californians will impact every facet of
policy, housing being one of the primary areas, and RCFE growth
is reflected in the above describe demographic shift; since
2002, RCFE licenses have increased nearly 30%.
Recent media revealed misconduct, mistreatment, and neglect of
dependent elders living within licensed RCFEs. Additionally,
over the past several years, the elimination of vacant staff
positions, hiring moratoriums, and rolling staff furloughs have
challenged the Department of Social Services in its mission to
protect vulnerable populations living within facilities that it
licenses. These revelations have led many to believe that RCFE
residents are increasingly exposed to harm.
Background on RCFE's : RCFEs are licensed, assisted living
(non-medical) facilities for persons 60 years of age and over
and other, younger persons with similar needs. Varying levels
of care and supervision, protective supervision, and personal
care such as assistance with hygiene, dressing, eating, bathing,
as well as storage and distribution of medications are provided,
AB 2171
Page 6
based upon residents' needs. All RCFEs provide meals and
housekeeping. Ongoing medical care is not allowed except in
specific cases, although hospice care is allowed. People with
ongoing medical needs require a higher level of care in a
nursing home or an intermediate care facility.
RCFE care is one of the fastest growing components of the
long-term supports and services industries. There are currently
7,570 licensed RCFEs in California serving 176,026 people.
According to DSS, approximately 80% of RCFEs are licensed for
four-six residents; the remaining 20% of RCFEs have an average
capacity of about 60 residents, though facilities can house over
100 people in some cases.
Growth in the number of RCFE Licensees :
Fiscal Year: # of Licenses
FY 2000-2001 6,187
FY 2001-2002 6,204
FY 2002-2003 6,313
FY 2003-2004 6,491
FY 2004-2005 6,730
FY 2005-2006 6,992
FY 2006-2007 7,334
FY 2007-2008 7,707
FY 2008-2009 7,847
FY 2009-2010 7,822
FY 2010-2011 7,681
FY 2011-2012 7,695
*As of March 14, 2014 there were 7,570 RCFEs operating in
California serving 176,026 residents.
Governor's Budget : The Community Care Licensing program within
the Department of Social Services serves as the state's
licensing authority for RCFEs. The Governor's budget proposed a
range of initiatives to address enforcement and oversight of
facilities throughout the state, including:
1)Additional positions: 71.5 positions to assist in CCL
enforcement activities include six special investigator
assistants, a nurse practitioner, five licensing program
managers, and others.
2)Staff training and development for new field staff,
supervisors and managers by expanding the Licensing Program
Analyst Academy, implementing ongoing training, and
AB 2171
Page 7
strengthening the Administrator Certification Section.
3)Recognizing the changing needs of clients in RCFEs, the
Governor's budget proposes that DSS will assist with policy
and practice development for medical and mental health
conditions in community facilities, by establishing medical
expertise resources. Although CCL has no staff with medical
expertise, DSS licenses facilities that do, allow for
incidental medical care.
4)Create a Mental Health Populations Unit which would provide
technical assistance to enforcement staff and licensees, as
well as to individuals who reside in facilities who have
increasing mental health care needs.
5)Establish a Corporate Accountability Unit to perform systemic
noncompliance analysis and ensure corrective actions; create
management reports that identify patterns and trends; make
corrective action recommendations; and, follow-up on
corrective action plans to ensure that licensees with poor
compliance patterns do not support operational expansions.
6)Increased civil penalties, because the current civil penalty
structure is related to a "per violation" event, the current
maximum civil penalty, even in response to serious injury or
death of a resident, is $150.
7)Establish a Temporary Manager and Receivership Process to
appoint a temporary manager or receiver to act as the
provisional licensee, if DSS determines that residents of a
facility are likely to be in danger of serious injury or
death, and the immediate relocation of clients is not
feasible.
8)Specialized complaint hotline and centralized toll-free public
complaint hotline, which can help acquire better initial
information, conduct consistent prioritization, and dispatch
incoming complaints to regional offices.
9)Centralized application processing for Adult and Senior Care
facilities, which is expected to increase inspections of
licensed facilities to at least once every two years.
10)Establish a statewide Quality Assurance Unit to track
information statewide, including complaints, actions, or
performance. It also does not provide aggregate data to review
and identify patterns.
11)Establish an Emergency Client/Resident Contingency Account to
be used at the discretion of the Director of DSS for the care
and relocation of clients and residents, when a facility's
license is revoked or temporarily suspended.
In order to curb the mistreatment of a rapidly growing
AB 2171
Page 8
vulnerable RCFE population, and to assist with the expanding
enforcement and oversight responsibilities of the Department of
Social Services, the author is proposing a statutory "Bill of
Rights," and an enforcement mechanism known as a "private right
of action," which will empower RCFE residents, or their
representative to sue for injunctive relief and limited damages,
including attorney's fees. Rights currently exist within Title
22, Section 87468, regulations that guide facilities and assist
the department with enforcement, though there is very little
consequence for not adhering to them.
Office of the Long-Term Care Ombudsman: The purpose of the State
Long-Term Care Ombudsman is to protect and advocate for the
rights, health and safety of long-term care facility residents,
oftentimes the elderly. California's State Ombudsman delegates
this responsibility to the 35 local ombudsman programs (local
area agencies on aging, or "AAAs") throughout the state. The
local ombudsman program employees are responsible for making
site visits to the facilities in an effort to identify,
investigate, and resolve complaints that may adversely affect
the health, safety, welfare, or rights of residents of long-term
care facilities.
In 2012, the California Long-Term Care Ombudsman Program
received over 4,000 complaints regarding resident rights in
RCFEs, ranging from access for visitors, neglect, verbal and
physical abuse, and issues related to personal dignity, among
others.
Private Right of Action in Long-Term Healthcare Facilities:
Residents of long-term healthcare facilities (also known as
"nursing homes" or skilled nursing facilities), are availed
injunctive relief to compel compliance by a licensee with state
and other laws related to individual resident rights.
California law establishes a statutory bill of rights for
nursing home residents in Division 2, Chapter 3.9 of the Health
& Safety Code, and supplemented it with a regulatory bill of
rights within Title 22 (CCR �72527). For instance, under both
federal and California law, nursing home residents have a
"right" to be free from physical and chemical restraints, and
the inappropriate use of psychoactive drugs, and may sue, or
compel and action by the courts, enforce such a right.
Text of Health and Safety Code Section 1430, granting nursing
home residents the right to seek injunctive relief :
AB 2171
Page 9
1430. (a) Except where the state department has taken
action and the violations have been corrected to its
satisfaction, a licensee who commits a class "A" or
"B" violation may be enjoined from permitting the
violation to continue or may be sued for civil damages
within a court of competent jurisdiction. An action
for injunction or civil damages, or both, may be
prosecuted by the Attorney General in the name of the
people of the State of California upon his or her own
complaint or upon the complaint of a board, officer,
person, corporation, or association, or by a person
acting for the interests of itself, its members, or
the general public. The amount of civil damages that
may be recovered in an action brought pursuant to this
section may not exceed the maximum amount of civil
penalties that could be assessed on account of the
violation or violations.
(b) A current or former resident or patient of a
skilled nursing facility, as defined in subdivision
(c) of Section 1250, or intermediate care facility, as
defined in subdivision (d) of Section 1250, may bring
a civil action against the licensee of a facility who
violates any rights of the resident or patient as set
forth in the Patients Bill of Rights in Section 72527
of Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations, or
any other right provided for by federal or state law
or regulation. The suit shall be brought in a court of
competent jurisdiction. The licensee shall be liable
for the acts of the licensee's employees. The licensee
shall be liable for up to five hundred dollars ($500),
and for costs and attorney fees, and may be enjoined
from permitting the violation to continue. An
agreement by a resident or patient of a skilled
nursing facility or intermediate care facility to
waive his or her rights to sue pursuant to this
subdivision shall be void as contrary to public
policy.
(c) The remedies specified in this section shall be in
addition to any other remedy provided by law.
Supporters Argue:
According to background provided by the author, the purpose of
AB 2171 is to secure a better, safer, more dignified future for
RCFE residents in California by strengthening their rights to
AB 2171
Page 10
make choices about their care, treatment and daily life and to
ensure that their choices are respected. Additionally, AB 2171
is intended to enhance resident safety and dignity by outlawing
dangerous or abusive practices, such as the use of restraints.
In so doing, AB 2171 will bring California in line with the best
practices in many other states.
AB 2171 allows a resident to seek immediate intervention, in the
form of an injunction, to stop a violation of their rights.
Given this option, the resident can obtain timely effective
relief, perhaps even precluding the need for any CCL action. In
other words, a private right of action can overcome the
traditional barriers to enforcement of their rights that
residents have faced. Perhaps most importantly, a private right
of action is meant to empower residents, giving them a resource
to better balance a relationship that is often asymmetric in
power.
According to background provide by the author, California is
very late to respond to the dramatic increase in the use of
RCFEs for late-life care of elders with highly compromised
health conditions such as dementia, diabetes and Chronic
Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD). As the Department of
Social Services has acknowledged, the changing role of the RCFE
"license" necessitates an overhaul of regulatory roles,
structure, and a more sophisticated means to ensure that
residents are safe and secure. By establishing a modern bill of
rights that fits the needs of today's RCFE residents, AB 2171
will take a major step toward that goal while giving residents
and their representatives the abilities to control decisions
affecting their lives.
Co-sponsor of AB 2171, The California Advocates for Nursing Home
Reform, CANHR, cites an "RCFE care crisis" where rapid growth,
inadequate oversight and outdated standards are conspiring to
jeopardize some residents. In a report entitled "Residential
Care in California: Unsafe, Unregulated and Unaccountable," they
describe among other things, a failed inspection system; a
broken complaint system; limited and ineffective penalties for
violations; and "paper tiger" resident rights provisions that
provide no enforcement power to residents, all of which
contribute to a system that is unsafe for RCFE consumers, while
leaving RCFEs essentially unregulated and unaccountable for
their actions. According to CANHR, AB 2171 establishes strong
statutory resident rights, and strengthens a resident's ability
AB 2171
Page 11
to make choices about their care, treatment and daily life while
assuring those choices are respected.
Consumer Attorneys of California describes AB 2171 as the
linchpin of the package of bills introduced this year to protect
seniors and those with disabilities who reside in Residential
Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE). AB 2171 reflects a
model of resident rights and enforcement used by residents in
nursing homes for over 30 years. According to this co-sponsor,
this mechanism has been effective for nursing homes and their
residents and there is no reason these protections should not be
as successful in the RCFE system. They argue that unlike
nursing homes which are more heavily regulated, RCFEs, by
comparison, lack even minimal government oversight and
inspections, making this population extremely vulnerable to
abuse and neglect.
The California Commission on Aging, an independent state agency
made up of gubernatorial and legislative appointees, writes that
the lives of RCFE residents are often "limited and bleak," and
that a resident's bill of rights is a positive step toward
assuring that residents are treated with dignity and respect.
The California Long-Term Care Ombudsman Joseph Rodriguez, and
appointee of the Governor with offices within the Californian
Department of Aging and the designated principle advocate for
older adults living in long-term care facilities believes this
bill will help RCFE residents.
The American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) strongly
believes that the California state legislature should explicitly
provide a private right of action in all legislation intended to
protect individual rights, which is at the heart of AB 2171.
Opponents Argue :
The Civil Justice Association of California (CJAC) argues that
merging current statutory and regulatory standards with those
included in AB 2171 will lead to increased, unjustified
litigation against facilities offering care to seniors by
creating legal traps enforceable through civil lawsuits with
severe penalties, attorney's fees, and an extensive statute of
limitations. Though sympathetic to the importance of protecting
seniors and other vulnerable adults, they assert that the
framework in AB 2171 will needlessly increase litigation and
AB 2171
Page 12
will ultimately result in reduced services for the growing
elderly population. As an example, CJAC cites AB 2171's right
to be free from discrimination from admission. Yet, under
existing law RCFEs are prohibited from accepting or retaining
residents that the state determined the facility is not allowed
to care for. Also, under AB 2171 a person could seek injunctive
relief and damages for example failure to distribute a document
describing a residents rights upon admission. They argue that
AB 2171's three-year statute of limitations, coupled with a
$1,000 per day fine, could allow for financially devastating
consequences for what could be perceived as a technical
oversight.
LeadingAge California which represents more than 400 providers
of not-for-profit senior care living opportunities, such as
affordable housing, continuing care retirement communities,
assisted living (RCFE), skilled nursing, and community-based
care, is concerned that AB 2171 invites litigation and does
little to improve oversight. They cite Title 22's resident
rights and is concerned that AB 2171 would add current
regulatory requirements as new "rights," and would allow for
private enforcement outside of the state's regulatory agency.
LeadingAge is also concerned that AB 2171 inserts RCFE
caregiving staff into the physician's treatment plan regarding
the use of medications. RCFEs do not prescribe medications and
under existing law and practice, all medications must be
self-administered. Requiring RCFEs to verify "informed consent"
is beyond the scope of the social model of care RCFEs provide.
The California Palliative Care Association (CHAPCA) cites
similar concerns with AB 2171. CHAPCA states that they
recognize the intent of AB 2171 to help RCFE residents, but
hospice provider's core mission is to lessen the suffering and
improve the quality of life during the dying process, and
frequently require flexibility to meet their clients' needs.
Requiring informed consent could create barriers to reducing
such suffering if "informed consent" is enforced, and immediate
needs for medication to relieve mental anguish, or physical pain
from the dying process could be prohibited.
Previous and Related Legislation
AB 2791 (Simitian), Chapter 270, Statutes of 2004, provided for
a nearly identical right of action for residents in skilled
nursing or intermediate care facilities.
AB 2171
Page 13
AB 185 (Mello) Chapter 1127, Statutes of 1985, separated
licensure of RCFEs from community care facilities.
SB 894 (Corbett) RCFE Suspension/Revocation of Licenses would
strengthen and clarify the obligations of the department and the
licensee when a license is suspended or revoked and would create
timelines for the safe relocation of residents when a facility's
license has been suspended or revoked.
SB 895 (Corbett) would require Community Care Licensing to
conduct unannounced, comprehensive inspections of all
residential care facilities for the elderly at least annually
and as often as necessary to ensure the quality of care
provided. The inspection must evaluate each facility for
compliance with all laws and regulations governing residential
care facilities for the elderly.
SB 911 (Block) would increase the qualifications and training
requirements for RCFE administrators and staff and require
facilities who accept and retain residents with restricted or
prohibited health conditions to employ trained medical personnel
on a full or part-time basis as appropriate.
SB 1153 (Leno) creates new penalties for non-compliance,
including authorizing the Department of Social Services to
suspend the admission of new residents in facilities where there
is a substantial probability of harm.
SB 1218 (Yee) would increase civil penalties against RCFEs for
violations of laws and regulations from the current maximum of
$150. The fines would vary the minimum and maximum penalties,
depending on the seriousness of the violation. SB 1218 would
also establish the Emergency Resident Relocation Fund, and
require 50% of the revenue from the civil penalties to be
deposited into the Fund for relocation and care of residents
when a facility's license is revoked or suspended.
AB 364 (Calderon) would increase DSS inspections of community
care facilities, passed Assembly Human Services Committee on
March 25, 2014 on a 7-0 vote.
AB 1554 (Skinner) would require the Department to start and
complete complaint investigations in a timely manner, give
complainants written notice of findings and provide complainants
AB 2171
Page 14
an opportunity to appeal.
AB 1571 (Eggman) would require that the Department of Social
Services/Community Care Licensing establish an on-line RCFE
Consumer Information system to include specified updated and
accurate license, ownership, survey, complaint and enforcement
information on every licensed RCFE in California with components
to be phased in over a five (5) year period ending June 30,
2019. This bill also would require complete disclosure of
ownership and prior ownership of any type of facility, including
NFs, and any similar entity in other states, including history
of compliance or non-compliance and require cross check with
Department of Public Health (DPH).
AB 1572 (Eggman) will amend current laws to enhance the rights
of resident councils and family councils in RCFEs.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform (CANHR) -
Co-Sponsor
American Association of Retired Persons (AARP)
California Commission on Aging
California Continuing Care Residents Association
Consumer Attorneys of California - Co-Sponsor
Consumer Federation of California
Elder Abuse Task Force of Santa Clara County
Elder Law & Advocacy
Johnson Moore Trial Lawyers
Long Term Care Services of Ventura County, Inc.
Moran Law
National Association of Social Workers (NASW) California Chapter
National Senior Citizens Law Center
Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman
Ombudsman Services of Contra Costa
Stebner and Associates
Valentine Law Group
WISE & Healthy Aging
Numerous individuals.
Opposition
California Hospice and Palliative Care Association
AB 2171
Page 15
Civil Justice Association of California (CJAC)
LeadingAge California
Analysis Prepared by : Robert MacLaughlin / AGING & L.T.C. /
(916) 319-3990