BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                            



           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |SENATE RULES COMMITTEE            |                        SB 895|
          |Office of Senate Floor Analyses   |                              |
          |1020 N Street, Suite 524          |                              |
          |(916) 651-1520         Fax: (916) |                              |
          |327-4478                          |                              |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           
                                           
                                 UNFINISHED BUSINESS


          Bill No:  SB 895
          Author:   Corbett (D)
          Amended:  8/22/14
          Vote:     21

           
           SENATE HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE  :  5-0, 4/8/14
          AYES:  Liu, Berryhill, DeSaulnier, Hancock, Wyland

           SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE  :  7-0, 5/23/14
          AYES:  De Le�n, Walters, Gaines, Hill, Lara, Padilla, Steinberg

           SENATE FLOOR  :  36-0, 5/28/14
          AYES:  Anderson, Beall, Berryhill, Block, Cannella, Corbett,  
            Correa, De Le�n, DeSaulnier, Evans, Fuller, Gaines, Galgiani,  
            Hancock, Hernandez, Hill, Hueso, Huff, Jackson, Knight, Lara,  
            Leno, Lieu, Liu, Mitchell, Monning, Morrell, Nielsen, Padilla,  
            Pavley, Roth, Steinberg, Torres, Vidak, Wolk, Wyland
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Calderon, Walters, Wright, Yee

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  61-11, 8/26/14 - See last page for vote


           SUBJECT :    Residential are facilities for the elderly:   
          unannounced visits

           SOURCE  :     California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform


           DIGEST  :    This bill adds additional requirements to the  
          Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly Act (RCFE) and  
          requires the Department of Social Services (DSS) to post  
          specified licensing information on its Internet Web site and  
                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 895
                                                                     Page  
          2

          provide additional information on the projected costs of  
          conducting annual licensing inspections for RCFEs.

           Assembly Amendments  revise and recast the bill by deleting the  
          requirements for DSS to inspect each RCFE at least once a year  
          and post reports on the results of each inspection on its  
          Internet Web site, and instead require DSS to provide additional  
          information on the projected costs of conducting annual  
          inspections and post information on its Internet Web site on how  
          to obtain an inspection report; also adds legislative intent for  
          DSS to make inspection reports available on its Internet Web  
          site by January 1, 2020.  

           ANALYSIS  :    Existing law: 

          1.Establishes the RCFE Act which provides for DSS to license and  
            regulate RCFEs as a separate category within the existing  
            residential care licensing structure of DSS. 

          2.Provides that RCFEs shall be subject to unannounced visits by  
            DSS and that DSS shall visit facilities as often as necessary  
            to ensure the quality of care provided. 

          3.Requires annual unannounced inspections when a license is on  
            probation, when required by the terms of a facility compliance  
            plan, when an accusation is pending, when required for federal  
            financial participation, or to verify that a person who has  
            been ordered out of the facility is no longer present. 

          4.Requires DSS to perform random inspections each year on no  
            fewer than 20% of the RCFE facilities not subject to annual  
            inspections. Provides that this percentage shall increase by  
            10% if the total citations issued by DSS exceeds the previous  
            year by 10%.  As a result of this trigger, DSS currently is  
            required to perform random inspections on 30% of the RCFE  
            facilities not subject to annual inspection.  Requires DSS to  
            visit every facility no less than every five years. 

          5.Requires DSS to visit a newly licensed facility within 90 days  
            after a facility accepts its first resident to evaluate  
            compliance with regulatory requirements. 

          6.Permits any person to request an inspection of any RCFE by  
            transmitting notice of an alleged violation orally or in  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 895
                                                                     Page  
          3

            writing.  Requires DSS to make a preliminary review and an  
            onsite inspection within 10 days after receiving the complaint  
            except where the visit would adversely affect the licensing  
            investigation or the investigation of other agencies,  
            including, but not limited to, law enforcement agencies.

          7.Through regulation, requires DSS to conduct a follow-up visit  
            within 10 working days following the latest date of correction  
            specified in the notice of deficiency, unless the licensee has  
            demonstrated that the deficiency was corrected as required.   
            Provides that no penalty shall be assessed unless a follow-up  
            visit is conducted.

          This bill:

          1.Brings statute into alignment with regulations pertaining to  
            the time period a RCFE must remedy a deficiency, as specified.  


          2.Provides that the failure to remedy a deficiency within the  
            prescribed timeline would result in a misdemeanor. 

          3.Requires DSS to post on its Internet Web site information on  
            how to obtain an inspection report, and would state the intent  
            of the Legislature that the department make inspection reports  
            available on its Internet Web site by January 1, 2020. 

          4.Requires DSS to design, or cause to be designed, a poster that  
            contains information on the appropriate reporting agency in  
            case of a complaint or emergency. 

          5.Requires RCFEs to post the poster in the main entry way of its  
            facility, and would provide that a violation of this provision  
            is a misdemeanor under the act. 

          6.Requires DSS to report the projected costs of conducting  
            annual inspections of residential care facilities for the  
            elderly beginning January 1, 2018. 

          7.Requires DSS to provide the Office of the State Long-Term Care  
            (LTC) Ombudsman a precautionary notification for the purposes  
            of providing advocacy services to residents if the Director is  
            "reasonably contemplating" issuing a temporary suspension  
            order (TSO) to a RCFE or revoking a facility's license. 

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 895
                                                                     Page  
          4


          8.Requires DSS to contact the Office of the State LTC Ombudsman  
            and local placement and advocacy agencies, as specified, and  
            to notify local agencies and the licensee if DSS has issued  
            the facility a TSO or has revoked the facility's license. 

          9.Deletes misdemeanor exemptions for the failure of a  
            residential facility for the elderly to remedy an identified  
            deficiency within a specified time period or for failing to  
            post specified reporting information. 

           Background
           
          According to the author's office, California's current  
          inspection requirements for RCFEs fail to adequately ensure the  
          health and safety of our fast growing elderly population.  A  
          series of recent events has drawn attention to questions about  
          the adequacy of DSS oversight and the state's ability to protect  
          people who reside in RCFEs. 

           In July 2013, ProPublica and Frontline reporters wrote and  
            produced a series of stories on Emeritus, the nation's largest  
            RCFE provider.  Featured in the article was a woman who died  
            after receiving poor care at in a facility in Auburn,  
            California. The series documented chronic understaffing and a  
            lack of required assessments and substandard care. 

           Reports in September 2013, prompted by a consumer watchdog  
            group that had hand-culled through stacks of documents in San  
            Diego, revealed that more than two dozen seniors had died in  
            recent years in RCFEs under questionable circumstances that  
            went ignored or unpunished by CCL. 

           In late October 2013, 19 frail seniors were abandoned at  
            Valley Springs Manor in Castro Valley by the licensee and all  
            but two staff after the state began license revocation  
            proceedings.  DSS inspectors, noting the facility had been  
            abandoned, left the two unpaid service staff to care for the  
            abandoned residents with insufficient food and medication,  
            handing them a $3,800 citation before leaving for the weekend.  
             The next day sheriff's deputies and paramedics sent the  
            patients to local hospitals.

           Prior Legislation

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                    SB 895
                                                                     Page  
          5


           AB 313 (Monning, Chapter 365, Statutes of 2011) requires each  
          RCFE to provide residents, their responsible party, and the  
          local long-term care ombudsman with a 10 day written notice when  
          DSS commences proceedings to suspend or revoke its license, or a  
          criminal action relating to health or safety of the residents is  
          brought against the facility, and makes other changes related to  
          these actions.

          AB 2066 (Monning, Chapter 643 Statutes of 2012) requires RCFEs  
          to provide a 60-day written notice to residents or the  
          responsible person within 24 following receipt of DSSs order of  
          revocation.  Permits the licensee to secure an alternative  
          manager, as specified. Requires RCFEs to refund all or a portion  
          of preadmission fees to residents transferring as the result of  
          a license revocation, as specified.

          SB 897 (Leno, Chapter 376, Statutes of 2011) requires licensed  
          RCFEs to notify DSS, the Office of the State Long-Term Care  
          Ombudsman and the facility's residents when the property is  
          subject to foreclosure or certain other events occur due to  
          financial distress.

          AB 419 (Mitchell, 2011) would have required every community care  
          facility licensed by DSS to be inspected unannounced at least  
          once per year using research based, field tested inspection  
          protocols, as specified.  This bill died in the Assembly  
          Appropriations Committee.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :    Appropriation:  No   Fiscal Com.:  Yes    
          Local:  No

          According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee: 

           Ongoing costs to DSS of approximately $5 million General Fund  
            (GF) once the inspection frequency has increased to at least  
            annually for all RCFEs. 

           Initial costs to DSS in the low millions (GF) annually for  
            approximately three years during the inspection frequency  
            phase-in period. 

           Ongoing costs to DSS in the low hundreds of thousands for  
            project development, testing and maintenance and other related  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 895
                                                                     Page  
          6

            IT contract work necessary to make inspection result details  
            available on its Web site. 

           Ongoing costs to DSS of approximately $50,000 (GF) to verify  
            that deficiencies have been corrected within 10 days of  
            notification to the facility. 

           SUPPORT  :   (Verified  8/26/14)

          California Advocates for Nursing Home Reform (source) 
          Assisted Living Consumer Alliance
          California Commission on Aging
          California Continuing Care Residents Association
          California Long-Term Care Ombudsman Association
          Consumer Attorneys of California
          County of San Diego
          Disability Rights California
          Elder Law & Advocacy
          Jewish Family Services
          Johnson Moore, Trial Lawyers
          National Consumer Voice for Quality Long Term Care
          National Senior Citizens Law Center
          Ombudsman Services of Contra Costa
          Valentine Law Group

           OPPOSITION  :    (Verified  8/26/14)

          Community Residential Care Association of California 

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :    Many supporters of this bill state that  
          California's current inspection system is one of the weakest in  
          the country and that for most RCFEs, the state is using an  
          experimental "key indicator" inspection protocol, which is an  
          abbreviated version of a comprehensive inspection. Supporters  
          claim this is a recipe for neglect and abuse.  The supporters  
          state by requiring annual, comprehensive inspections of RCFEs,  
          oversight will be improved, RCFE residents' rights will be  
          enhanced, and care standards will be modernized. 

           ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION  :    The Community Residential Care  
          Association of California opposes this bill, arguing "This bill  
          deletes current language authorizing the Department to determine  
          a workable correction timeline.  In some cases, deficiencies  
          make take more than 10 days to correct.  The current language  

                                                                CONTINUED





                                                                     SB 895
                                                                     Page  
          7

          allows the Department to determine the timeline based on the  
          violation."

           ASSEMBLY FLOOR  :  61-11, 8/26/14
          AYES:  Achadjian, Alejo, Ammiano, Bigelow, Bloom, Bocanegra,  
            Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown, Buchanan, Ian Calderon,  
            Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Cooley, Dababneh, Daly,  
            Dickinson, Eggman, Fong, Fox, Frazier, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez,  
            Gonzalez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray, Hall, Roger Hern�ndez, Holden,  
            Jones-Sawyer, Levine, Lowenthal, Medina, Melendez, Mullin,  
            Nazarian, Nestande, Olsen, Pan, Perea, John A. P�rez, V.  
            Manuel P�rez, Quirk, Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Ridley-Thomas,  
            Rodriguez, Salas, Skinner, Stone, Ting, Weber, Wieckowski,  
            Williams, Yamada, Atkins
          NOES:  Allen, Conway, Donnelly, Grove, Harkey, Jones, Linder,  
            Logue, Maienschein, Mansoor, Wilk
          NO VOTE RECORDED:  Dahle, Beth Gaines, Hagman, Muratsuchi,  
            Patterson, Wagner, Waldron, Vacancy


          JL:AL:nld  8/27/14   Senate Floor Analyses 

                           SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:  SEE ABOVE

                                   ****  END  ****




















                                                                CONTINUED