Passed by the House April 19, 2005 Yeas 80   FRANK CHOPP ________________________________________ Speaker of the House of Representatives Passed by the Senate April 7, 2005 Yeas 34   BRAD OWEN ________________________________________ President of the Senate | I, Richard Nafziger, Chief Clerk of the House of Representatives of the State of Washington, do hereby certify that the attached is ENGROSSED SECOND SUBSTITUTE HOUSE BILL 1688 as passed by the House of Representatives and the Senate on the dates hereon set forth. RICHARD NAFZIGER ________________________________________ Chief Clerk | |
Approved May 4, 2005. CHRISTINE GREGOIRE ________________________________________ Governor of the State of Washington | May 4, 2005 - 3:49 p.m. Secretary of State State of Washington |
State of Washington | 59th Legislature | 2005 Regular Session |
READ FIRST TIME 03/07/05.
AN ACT Relating to creating a task force to review health care facilities and services supply issues; and creating new sections.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:
NEW SECTION. Sec. 1 The legislature finds that:
(1) Since the enactment of health planning and development
legislation in 1979, the widespread adoption of new health care
technologies has resulted in significant advancements in the diagnosis
and treatment of disease, and has enabled substantial expansion of
sites where complex care and surgery can be performed;
(2) New and existing technologies, supply sensitive health
services, and demographics have a substantial effect on health care
expenditures. Yet, evidence related to their effectiveness is not
routinely or systematically considered in decision making regarding
widespread adoption of these technologies and services. The principles
of evidence-based medicine call for comprehensive review of data and
studies related to a particular health care service or device, with
emphasis given to high quality, objective studies. Findings regarding
the effectiveness of these health services or devices should then be
applied to increase the likelihood that they will be used
appropriately;
(3) The standards governing whether a certificate of need should be
granted in RCW 70.38.115 focus largely on broad concepts of access to
and availability of health services, with only limited consideration of
cost-effectiveness. Moreover, the standards do not provide explicit
guidance for decision making or evaluating competing certificate of
need applications; and
(4) The certificate of need statute plays a vital role and should
be reexamined and strengthened to reflect changes in health care
delivery and financing since its enactment.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 2 (1) A task force is created to study and
prepare recommendations to the governor and the legislature related to
improving and updating the certificate of need program in chapter 70.38
RCW. The report must be submitted to the governor and appropriate
committees of the legislature by November 1, 2006.
(2) Members of the task force must be appointed by the governor.
The task force members shall elect a member of the task force to serve
as chair. Members of the task force include:
(a) Four representatives of the legislature, including one member
appointed by each caucus of the house of representatives and the
senate;
(b) Two representatives of private employer-sponsored health
benefits purchasers;
(c) One representative of labor organizations that purchase health
benefits through Taft-Hartley plans;
(d) One representative of health carriers;
(e) Two representatives of health care consumers;
(f) One health care economist;
(g) The secretary of the department of social and health services,
or his or her designee;
(h) The administrator of the health care authority, or his or her
designee;
(i) The secretary of the department of health; and
(j) Two health care provider representatives, chosen by the members
of the technical advisory committee established in subsection (3) of
this section, from among the members of that committee.
(3) The task force shall establish one or more technical advisory
committees composed of affected health care providers and other
individuals or entities who can serve as a source of technical
expertise. The task force shall actively consult with, and solicit
recommendations from, the technical advisory committee or committees
regarding issues under consideration by the task force.
(4) Subject to the availability of amounts appropriated for this
specific purpose, staff support for the task force shall be provided by
the health care authority. The health care authority shall contract
for technical expertise necessary to complete the responsibilities of
the task force. Legislative members of the task force shall be
reimbursed for travel expenses in accordance with RCW 44.04.120.
Nonlegislative members, except those representing an employer or
organization, are entitled to be reimbursed for travel expenses in
accordance with RCW 43.03.050.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 3 (1) In conducting the certificate of need
study and preparing recommendations, the task force shall be guided by
the following principles:
(a) The supply of a health service can have a substantial impact on
utilization of the service, independent of the effectiveness, medical
necessity, or appropriateness of the particular health service for a
particular individual;
(b) Given that health care resources are not unlimited, the impact
of any new health service or facility on overall health expenditures in
the state must be considered;
(c) Given our increasing ability to undertake technology assessment
and measure the quality and outcomes of health services, the likelihood
that a requested new health facility, service, or equipment will
improve health care quality and outcomes must be considered; and
(d) It is generally presumed that the services and facilities
currently subject to certificate of need should remain subject to those
requirements.
(2) The task force shall, at a minimum, examine and develop
recommendations related to the following issues:
(a) The need for a new and regularly updated set of service and
facility specific policies that guide certificate of need decisions;
(b) A review of the purpose and goals of the current certificate of
need program, including the relationship between the supply of health
services and health care outcomes and expenditures in Washington state;
(c) The scope of facilities, services, and capital expenditures
that should be subject to certificate of need review, including
consideration of the following:
(i) Acquisitions of major medical equipment, meaning a single unit
of medical equipment or a single system of components with related
functions used to provide medical and other health services;
(ii) Major capital expenditures. Capital expenditures for
information technology needed to support electronic health records
should be encouraged;
(iii) The offering or development of any new health services, as
defined in RCW 70.38.025, that meets any of the following:
(A) The obligation of substantial capital expenditures by or on
behalf of a health care facility that is associated with the addition
of a health service that was not offered on a regular basis by or on
behalf of the health care facility within the twelve-month period prior
to the time the services would be offered;
(B) The addition of equipment or services, by transfer of
ownership, acquisition by lease, donation, transfer, or acquisition of
control, through management agreement or otherwise, that was not
offered on a regular basis by or on behalf of the health care facility
or the private office of a licensed health care provider regulated
under Title 18 RCW or chapter 70.127 RCW within the twelve-month period
prior to the time the services would be offered and that for the third
fiscal year of operation, including a partial first year following
acquisition of that equipment or service, is projected to entail
substantial incremental operating costs or annual gross revenue
directly attributable to that health service;
(iv) The scope of health care facilities subject to certificate of
need requirements, to include consideration of hospitals, including
specialty hospitals, psychiatric hospitals, nursing facilities, kidney
disease treatment centers including freestanding hemodialysis
facilities, rehabilitation facilities, ambulatory surgical facilities,
freestanding emergency rooms or urgent care facilities, home health
agencies, hospice agencies and hospice care centers, freestanding
radiological service centers, freestanding cardiac catheterization
centers, or cancer treatment centers. "Health care facility" includes
the office of a private health care practitioner in which surgical
procedures are performed;
(d) The criteria for review of certificate of need applications, as
currently defined in RCW 70.38.115, with the goal of having criteria
that are consistent, clear, technically sound, and reflect state law,
including consideration of:
(i) Public need for the proposed services as demonstrated by
certain factors, including, but not limited to:
(A) Whether, and the extent to which, the project will
substantially address specific health problems as measured by health
needs in the area to be served by the project;
(B) Whether the project will have a positive impact on the health
status indicators of the population to be served;
(C) Whether there is a substantial risk that the project would
result in inappropriate increases in service utilization or the cost of
health services;
(D) Whether the services affected by the project will be accessible
to all residents of the area proposed to be served; and
(E) Whether the project will provide demonstrable improvements in
quality and outcome measures applicable to the services proposed in the
project, including whether there is data to indicate that the proposed
health services would constitute innovations in high quality health
care delivery;
(ii) Impact of the proposed services on the orderly and economic
development of health facilities and health resources for the state as
demonstrated by:
(A) The impact of the project on total health care expenditures
after taking into account, to the extent practical, both the costs and
benefits of the project and the competing demands in the local service
area and statewide for available resources for health care;
(B) The impact of the project on the ability of existing affected
providers and facilities to continue to serve uninsured or underinsured
residents of the community and meet demands for emergency care;
(C) The availability of state funds to cover any increase in state
costs associated with utilization of the project's services; and
(D) The likelihood that more effective, more accessible, or less
costly alternative technologies or methods of service delivery may
become available;
(e) The timeliness and consistency of certificate of need reviews
and decisions, the sufficiency and use of resources available to the
department of health to conduct timely reviews, the means by which the
department of health projects future need for services, the ability to
reflect differences among communities and approaches to providing
services, and clarification on the use of the concurrent review
process; and
(f) Mechanisms to monitor ongoing compliance with the assumptions
made by facilities that have received either a certificate of need or
an exemption to a certificate of need, including those related to
volume, the provision of charity care, and access to health services to
medicaid and medicare beneficiaries as well as underinsured and
uninsured members of the community.
(3) In developing its recommendations, the task force shall
consider the results of a performance audit of the department of health
regarding its administration and implementation of the certificate of
need program. The audit shall be conducted by the joint legislative
audit and review committee, and be completed by July 1, 2006.
NEW SECTION. Sec. 4 If specific funding for the purposes of this
act, referencing this act by bill or chapter number, is not provided by
June 30, 2005, in the omnibus appropriations act, this act is null and
void.