(1) Chapter 43.371 RCW establishes the framework for the creation and administration of a statewide all-payer health care claims database.

(2) RCW 43.371.020 directs the ((office of financial management))health care authority to establish a statewide all-payer health care claims database to support transparent public reporting of health care information. The ((office))authority shall select a lead organization to coordinate and manage the database. The lead organization shall also contract with a data vendor to perform data collection, processing, aggregation, extracts, and analytics.

(3) RCW 43.371.070 mandates that the director of the ((office of financial management))health care authority adopt rules necessary to implement chapter 43.371 RCW. In addition, RCW 43.371.010 and 43.371.050 direct the adoption of specific rules by the director.

(4) The purpose of this chapter is to implement chapter 43.371 RCW, to facilitate the creation and administration of the Washington statewide all-payer health care claims database.

The following additional definitions apply throughout this chapter unless the context clearly indicates another meaning.

"Capitation payment" means a payment model where providers receive a payment on a per "covered person" basis, for specified calendar periods, for the coverage of specified health care services regardless of whether the patient obtains care. Capitation payments include, but are not limited to, global capitation arrangements that cover a comprehensive set of health care services, partial capitation arrangements for subsets of services, and care management payments.

"Claim" means a request or demand on a carrier, third-party administrator, or the state labor and industries program for payment of a benefit.

"Claimant" means a person who files a workers compensation claim with the Washington state department of labor and industries.

"Coinsurance" means the percentage or amount an enrolled member pays towards the cost of a covered service.

"Copayment" means the fixed dollar amount a member pays to a health care provider at the time a covered service is provided or the full cost of a service when that is less than the fixed dollar amount.

"Data management plan" or "DMP" means a formal document that outlines how a data requestor will handle the WA-APCD data to ensure privacy and security both during and after the project.

"Data policy committee" or "DPC" is the advisory committee required by RCW 43.371.020 (5)(h) to provide advice related to data policy development.

"Data release committee" or "DRC" is the advisory committee required by RCW 43.371.020 (5)(h) to establish a data release process and to provide advice regarding formal data release requests.

"Data submission guide" means the document that contains data submission requirements including, but not limited to, required fields, file layouts, file components, edit specifications, instructions and other technical specifications.

"Data use agreement" or "DUA" means the legally binding document signed by either the lead organization and the data requestor, or the ((office))authority and the data requestor, or the ((office))authority and a Washington state agency, that defines the terms and conditions under which access to and use of the WA-APCD data is authorized, how the data will be secured and protected, and how the data will be destroyed at the end of the agreement term.

"Days" means calendar days.

"Deductible" means the total dollar amount an enrolled member pays on an incurred claim toward the cost of specified covered services designated by the policy or plan over an established period of time before the carrier or third-party administrator makes any payments under an insurance policy or health benefit plan.

"Director" means the director of the ((office of financial management))health care authority.

"Fee-for-service equivalent" means the amount that would have been paid by the payer for a specified service if the service had not been capitated or paid under an alternative payment formula like treatment episodes, or the fee amount reflected in the payer's internal fee schedule(s) for services that are not paid on a fee-for-service basis.

"Fee-for-service payment" means a payment model where providers receive a negotiated or payer-specified rate for a specific health care service provided to a patient.

"Health benefits plan" or "health plan" has the same meaning as in RCW 48.43.005.

"Health care" means care, services, or supplies related to the prevention, cure or treatment of illness, injury or disease of an individual, which includes medical, pharmaceutical or dental care. Health care includes, but is not limited to:

(a) Preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, rehabilitative, maintenance, or palliative care, and counseling, service, assessment, or procedure with respect to the physical or mental condition, or functional status, of an individual or that affects the structure or function of the body; and

(b) Sale or dispensing of a drug, device, equipment, or other item in accordance with a prescription.

"Lead organization" means the entity selected by the ((office of financial management))health care authority to coordinate and manage the database as provided in chapter 43.371 RCW.

"Malicious intent" means the person acted willfully or intentionally to cause harm, without legal justification.

"Member" means a person covered by a health plan including an enrollee, subscriber, policyholder, beneficiary of a group plan, or individual covered by any other health plan.

(("Office" means the Washington state office of financial management.))

"Person" means an individual; group of individuals however organized; public or private corporation, including profit and nonprofit corporations; a partnership; joint venture; public and private institution of higher education; a state, local, and federal agency; and a local or tribal government.

"PFI" means the proprietary financial information as defined in RCW 43.371.010(12).

"PHI" means protected health information as defined in the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Incorporating this definition from HIPAA, does not, in any manner, intend or incorporate any other HIPAA rule not otherwise applicable to the WA-APCD.

"Subscriber" means the insured individual who pays the premium or whose employment makes him or her eligible for coverage under an insurance policy or member of a health benefit plan.

"WA-APCD" means the statewide all payer health care claims database authorized in chapter 43.371 RCW.

"WA-APCD program director" means the individual designated by the ((office))authority as responsible for the oversight and management of the operations of the statewide all payer health care claims database authorized in chapter 43.371 RCW.

"Washington covered person" means any eligible member and all covered dependents where the covered person is a Washington state resident, or the state of Washington has primary jurisdiction, and whose laws, rules and regulations govern the members' and dependents' insurance policy or health benefit plan.

(1) Data suppliers shall submit the required health care data in accordance with the schedule provided in this section.

(2) Test file.

(a) At least sixty calendar days prior to the data suppliers' first required submission, the lead organization will notify the data supplier in writing regarding the obligation to file. The lead organization will schedule time to work with the data supplier to establish a schedule for when the data supplier shall submit the initial test files.

(b) No more than ninety calendar days after notification of changes in requirements in the data submission guide, the data supplier shall submit initial test files. This deadline may be extended by the lead organization when it determines that additional time will be needed in order for the change to be implemented.

(3) Submission file. Data and claim files shall be submitted to the WA-APCD on a quarterly basis. On or before April 30th, July 31st, October 31st and January 31st of each year, data and claim files shall be submitted for all nondenied adjudicated claims paid in the preceding three months.

(4) Resubmission file. Failure to conform to the requirements of this chapter or the data submission guide shall result in the rejection of the applicable data and claim files. The lead organization shall notify the data supplier when data and claim files are rejected. All rejected files must be resubmitted in the appropriate, corrected format within fifteen business days of notification unless a written request for an extension is received by the lead organization before the expiration of this fifteen business day period.

(5) Claims run-out file. If health care coverage is terminated for a Washington covered person, the data supplier shall submit data for a six month period following the health care coverage termination date.

(6) Replacement file.

(a) A data supplier may replace a complete data file, claim file or both data and claim file submission. Requests must be made to the lead organization with a detailed explanation as to why the replacement is needed. The lead organization shall make a recommendation to the ((office))authority as to whether to approve or deny the request. The approval recommendation shall also state whether the approval is for the entire period requested or for a period less than requested.

(b) The ((office))authority shall approve or deny the request and provide written notification to the requestor within thirty calendar days of receipt of the request. The ((office))authority decision on the request for a replacement file will be provided in writing. If the ((office))authority does not approve the complete request for a replacement file, the written notification will include the reason for the denial or approval of the shorter period of time.

(c) Requests may not be made more than one year after the end of the month in which the file was submitted unless the data supplier can establish exceptional circumstances for the replacement. The lead organization may recommend approval and the ((office))authority may approve a request for more than one year for exceptional circumstances. The ((office))authority shall approve or deny the request using the process set forth in (b) of this subsection.

(1) The purpose of collecting historical data into the WA-APCD is to permit the systematic analysis of the health care delivery system including evaluation of the effectiveness of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act signed into law on March 23, 2010.

(2) The lead organization will provide written notification to the data suppliers when the WA-APCD is ready to accept the submission of historical data. Data suppliers shall submit the historical data within sixty days of notification. Requests for an extension of time to submit historical data shall be made in accordance with WAC ((82-75-080(3)))182-70-080(3).

(3) "Historical data" means covered medical services claim files, pharmacy claim files, dental claim files, member eligibility and enrollment data files, and provider data files with necessary identifiers for the period January 1, 2013, through December 31, 2016, or through the end of the quarter immediately prior to the first regular quarterly submission due in accordance with the data submission schedule.

(4) The ((office))authority may grant an exception to this section and approve the filing of historical data for a period less than the period specified in subsection (3) of this section. Requests for an exception under this subsection shall be made to the lead organization within fifteen calendar days of being notified in accordance with subsection (2) of this section. The lead organization shall make a recommendation to the ((office))authority as to whether to approve or deny the request. The ((office))authority may approve the request for good cause.

(1) Data files and claim files shall be submitted to the WA-APCD in accordance with the requirements set forth in this chapter and the data submission guide.

(2) The lead organization shall develop the data submission guide with input from stakeholders. The lead organization shall develop a process to allow for stakeholder review and comment on drafts of the data submission guide and all subsequent changes to the guide. The ((office))authority shall have final approval authority over the data submission guide and all subsequent changes.

(3) The lead organization shall notify data suppliers before changes to the data submission guide are final. Notification shall occur no less than one hundred twenty calendar days prior to the effective date of any change.

(4) Upon good cause shown, data suppliers may be granted an extension to comply with any changes to the data submission guide. Requests for extensions or exceptions shall be made in accordance with WAC ((82-75-080))182-70-080.

(1) The ((office))authority may grant a waiver of reporting requirements or an extension of time to a reporting requirement deadline based on extenuating circumstances.

(2) Waivers.

(a) A data supplier may request a waiver from submission for a period of time due to extenuating circumstances affecting the data supplier's ability to comply with the reporting requirement for that period.

(b) The request shall be for no more than one reporting year and shall contain a detailed explanation as to the reason the data supplier is unable to meet the reporting requirements.

(c) A request for a waiver must be submitted to the lead organization at least sixty calendar days prior to the applicable reporting deadline. The lead organization shall make a recommendation to the ((office))authority as to whether to approve or deny the request. The approval recommendation shall also state whether the approval is for the entire period requested or for a period less than requested.

(d) The ((office))authority may approve a request for extenuating circumstances. Approval may be for a time period shorter than requested. The ((office))authority shall approve or deny the request and provide written notification to the requester within thirty calendar days of receipt of the request. The ((office))authority decision on the request for a waiver will be provided in writing. If the ((office))authority does not approve a request for a waiver, the written notification will include the reason for the denial.

(3) Extensions.

(a) A data supplier may request an extension of time for submitting a quarterly report or the resubmission of a report due to extenuating circumstances affecting the data supplier's ability to submit the data by the deadline.

(b) The request shall be for no more than one reporting quarter and shall contain a detailed explanation as to the reason the data supplier is unable to meet the reporting requirements for that quarter.

(c) A request for an extension must be submitted to the lead organization at least thirty calendar days prior to the applicable reporting deadline unless the requestor is unable to meet this deadline due to circumstances beyond the data supplier's control. If unable to meet this deadline, the data supplier shall notify the lead organization in writing as soon as the data supplier determines that an extension is necessary.

(d) The lead organization shall make a recommendation to the ((office))authority as to whether to approve or deny the request. The approval recommendation shall also state whether the approval is for the entire period requested or for a period less than requested.

(e) The ((office))authority may approve a request for extenuating circumstances. The ((office))authority shall approve or deny the request and provide written notification to the requestor within fifteen calendar days from when the lead organization receives the request from the data supplier. The ((office))authority decision on the request for an extension will be provided in writing. If the ((office))authority does not approve a request for an extension, the written notification will include the reason for the denial.

(1) The ((office))authority may assess fines for failure to comply with the requirements of this chapter including, but not limited to:

(a) General reporting requirements.

(b) Health care claim files and data files requirements.

(c) Health care claim files and data files submission requirements.

The ((office))authority will not assess fines when the data supplier is working in good faith with the lead organization to comply with the reporting requirements.

(2) Unless the ((office))authority has approved a waiver or extension, the ((office))authority may assess a fine for failure to comply with general reporting requirements including, but not limited to, the following occurrences:

(a) Failure to submit health care claim files or data files for a required line of business; and

(b) Submitting health information for an excluded line of business.

(3) Unless the ((office))authority has approved a waiver or extension, the ((office))authority may assess a fine for failure to comply with health care claim file or data file requirements including, but not limited to, the following occurrences:

(a) Submitting a health care claim or data file in an unapproved layout;

(b) Submitting a data element in an unapproved format;

(c) Submitting a data element with unapproved coding; and

(d) Failure to submit a required data element.

(4) Unless the ((office))authority has approved a waiver or extension, the ((office))authority may assess a fine for failure to comply with health care claim file or data file submission requirements including, but not limited to, the following occurrences:

(a) Failure to comply with WAC ((82-75-050))182-70-050 (Data submission schedule);

(b) Rejection of a health care claim or data file by the data vendor that is not corrected by the data supplier; and

(c) Transmitting health care claim or data files using an unapproved process.

(5) Upon the failure to comply with a reporting requirement in this chapter, the ((office))authority shall first issue a warning notice to a data supplier. The warning notice shall set forth the nature of the failure to comply and offer to provide assistance to the data supplier to correct the failure.

(6) A data supplier that fails to comply with the same reporting requirement in this chapter for which it previously received a warning notice, may be assessed a penalty of two hundred fifty dollars per day, not to exceed a maximum of twenty-five thousand dollars per occurrence. Each failure to comply with a reporting requirement for a reporting period is considered a separate occurrence.

(7) For good cause shown, the ((office))authority may suspend in whole or in part any fine assessed in accordance with this section.

(1) Data suppliers may request an administrative review of an ((office))authority decision to deny a request for an extension or waiver, or an assessment of a fine.

(2) A request for an administrative review may be initiated by a written petition filed with the ((office))authority within thirty calendar days after notice of the denial or assessment of a fine. The petition shall include the following information:

(a) Data supplier's name, address, telephone number, email address and contact person.

(b) Information about the subject of the appeal including remedy requested.

(c) A detailed explanation as to the issue or area of dispute, and why the dispute should be decided in the data supplier's favor.

(3) The petition and all materials submitted will be reviewed by the director or director's designee. The reviewing official may request additional information or a conference with the data supplier. A decision from the reviewing official shall be provided in writing to the data supplier no later than thirty calendar days after receipt of the petition. A denial of the petition will include the reasons for the denial.

(1) A data supplier may request an appeal of a denial of its administrative review conducted in accordance with WAC ((82-75-100))182-75-100.

(2) Request for an appeal must be submitted in writing to the ((office))authority within fifteen calendar days after receipt of written notification of denial of its administrative review.

(3) Within ten business days of receipt of a written notice of appeal, the ((office))authority will transmit the request to the office of administrative hearings (OAH).

(a) Scheduling. OAH will assign an administrative law judge (ALJ) to handle the appeal. The ALJ will notify parties of the time when any additional documents or arguments must be submitted. If a party fails to comply with a scheduling letter or established timelines, the ALJ may decline to consider arguments or documents submitted after the scheduled timelines. A status conference in complex cases may be scheduled to provide for the orderly resolution of the case and to narrow issues and arguments for hearing.

(b) Hearings. Hearings may be by telephone or in-person. The ALJ may decide the case without a hearing if legal or factual issues are not in dispute, the appellant does not request a hearing, or the appellant fails to appear at a scheduled hearing or otherwise fails to respond to inquiries. The ALJ will notify the appellant by mail whether a hearing will be held, whether the hearing will be in-person or by telephone, the location of any in-person hearing, and the date and time for any hearing in the case. The date and time for a hearing may be continued at the ALJ's discretion. Other ((office))authority employees may attend a hearing, and the ALJ will notify the appellant when other ((office))authority employees are attending. The appellant may appear in person or may be represented by an attorney.

(c) Decisions. The decision of the ALJ shall be considered a final decision. Either party or both may file a petition for review of the final decision to superior court. If neither party files an appeal within the time period set by RCW 34.05.542, the decision is conclusive and binding on all parties. The appeal must be filed within thirty days from service of the final decision.

(1) The lead organization must adopt clear policies and procedures for data requests and data release. At a minimum, the lead organization, in coordination with the data vendor, must develop procedures for making a request for data, how data requests will be reviewed, how decisions will be made on whether to grant or disapprove release of the requested data, and data release processes. The policies and procedures must be approved by the ((office))authority.

(2) The lead organization should help data requestors identify the best ways to describe and tailor the data request, understand the privacy and security requirements, and understand the limitations on use and data products derived from the data released.

(3) The lead organization must maintain a log of all requests and action taken on each request. The log must include at a minimum the following information: Name of requestor, data requested, purpose of the request, whether the request was approved or denied, if approved the date and data released, and if denied the date and reason for the denial. The lead organization shall post the log on the WA-APCD website that the lead organization is required to maintain.

(1) The lead organization must use an application process for data requests.

(2) In addition to the requirements in RCW 43.371.050(1), at a minimum, the application must require the following information:

(a) Detailed information about the project for which the data is being requested including, but not limited to:

(i) Purpose of the project and data being requested, and level of detail for the data requested.

(ii) Methodology for data analysis and timeline for the project.

(iii) If applicable, copy of an Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol and approval or Exempt Determination and application for the IRB exemption for the project review. Researchers must use an IRB that has been registered with the United States Department of Health and Human Services Office of Human Research Protections. The IRB may however be located outside the state of Washington.

(iv) Staffing qualifications and resumes.

(v) Information on third-party organizations or individuals who may have access to the requested data as part of the project for which the data is requested. The information provided must include the same information required by the requestor, as applicable. Data cannot be shared with third parties except as approved in a data request.

(b) Information regarding whether the requestor has, within the three years prior to the data request date, violated a data use agreement, nondisclosure agreement or confidentiality agreement. Such information must include, but not be limited to, the facts surrounding the violation or data breach, the cause of the violation or data breach, and all steps taken to correct the violation or data breach and prevent a reoccurrence.

(c) Information regarding whether the requestor has, within the five years prior to the data request date, been subject to a state or federal regulatory action related to a data breach and has been found in violation and assessed a penalty, been a party to a criminal or civil action relating to a data breach and found guilty or liable for that breach, or had to take action to notify individuals due to a data breach for data maintained by the data requestor or for which the data requestor was responsible for maintaining in a secure environment.

(d) Submittal of the project's data management plan (DMP), which DMP must include the information required in WAC ((82-75-220))182-70-220.

(e) Require all recipients of protected health information (PHI) to provide an attestation from an authorized individual that the recipient of the requested data has data privacy and security policies and procedures in place on the date of the request and will maintain these policies and procedures for the project period, these policies and procedures comply with Washington state laws and rules, and meet the standards and guidelines required by the Washington state office of chief information officer. Data recipients must also attest that recipients will provide copies of the data privacy and security policies and procedures upon request by the lead organization.

(1) The lead organization must establish a transparent process for the review of data requests, which includes a process for public review for specific requests. The process must include a timeline for processing requests, and notification procedures to keep the requestor updated on the progress of the review. The process must also include the ability for the public to comment on requests that include the release of protected health information or proprietary financial information or both. The ((office))authority shall have final approval over the process and criteria used for review of data requests and all subsequent changes.

(2) The lead organization must post on the WA-APCD website all requests that include the release of protected health information or proprietary financial information, and the schedule for the receipt of public comment on the request. The time frame for public comment should not be less than fourteen calendar days. The lead organization must post the final decision for the request within seven days after the decision is made.

(3) The lead organization has the responsibility to convene the DRC when needed to review data requests and make a recommendation to the lead organization as to whether to approve or deny a data request. The lead organization must establish an annual meeting schedule for DRC and post the schedule on the website. The DRC must review requests for identifiable data and provide a recommendation regarding data release. The lead organization may request the DRC to review other data requests. The review must include a technical review of the data management plan by an expert on the DRC, staff from the office of chief information officer, or other technical expert. The DRC may recommend that the requestor provide additional information before a final decision can be rendered, approve the data release in whole or in part, or deny the release. For researchers who are required in RCW 43.371.050 (4)(a) to have IRB approval, the DRC may recommend provisional approval subject to the receipt of an IRB approval letter and protocol and submittal of a copy of the IRB letter to the lead organization.

(4) The lead organization may only deny a data request based on a reason set forth in WAC ((82-75-280))182-70-280.

(5) The lead organization must notify the requestor of the final decision. The notification should include the process available for review or appeal of the decision.

(6) The lead organization must post all data requests and final decisions on the WA-APCD website maintained by the lead organization.

(1) Upon approval of a request for data, the lead organization must provide notice to the requestor. The notice must include the following:

(a) The data use agreement (DUA). The DUA will include a confidentiality statement to which the requesting organization or individual must adhere.

(b) The confidentiality agreement that requestors and all other individuals who will have access to the released data, whether an employee of the requestor, subcontractor or other contractor or third-party vendor including data storage or other information technology vendor, who will have access to or responsibility for the data must sign. At a minimum, the confidentiality agreement developed for recipients must meet the requirements of RCW 43.371.050 (4)(a).

(c) Requestors must comply with the requirements for data release in WAC ((82-75-500))182-70-500 through ((82-75-520))182-70-520.

(2) A person with authority to bind the requesting organization must sign the DUA; or in the case of an individual requesting data, the individual must sign the DUA.

(3) All employees or other persons who will be allowed access to the data must sign a confidentiality agreement.

(4) No data may be released until the lead organization receives a signed copy of the DUA from the data requestor and signed copies of the confidentiality agreement.

(5) The lead organization must maintain a record of all signed agreements and retain the documents for at least six years after the termination of the agreements.

(6) Data fees, if applicable, must be paid in full to the lead organization. Itemized data fees assessed for each data request are subject to public disclosure and should be included in the approval that is posted on the WA-APCD website.

(1) The lead organization must develop a standard data use agreement. The ((office))authority must approve the final form of the DUA, and all substantial changes to the form.

(2) At a minimum, the DUA shall include the following provisions:

(a) A start date and end date. The end date must be no longer than the length of the project for which the data is requested. The DUA may provide for the ability to extend the end date of the agreement upon good cause shown.

(b) The application for data should be incorporated into the DUA and attached as an exhibit to the agreement. There should be an affirmative provision that data provided for one project cannot be used for any other project or purpose.

(c) Data can be used only for the purposes described in the request. The data recipient agrees not to use, disclose, market, release, show, sell, rent, lease, loan or otherwise grant access to the data files specified except as expressly permitted by the DUA, confidentiality agreement if any and the approval letter.

(d) With respect to analysis and displays of data, the data recipient must agree to abide by Washington state law and rules, and standards and guidelines provided by the lead organization.

(e) A requirement for completion of an attestation by an officer or otherwise authorized individual of the data requestor that the data requestor will adhere to the WA-APCD's rules and lead organization policies regarding the publication or presentation to anyone who is not an authorized user of the data.

(f) A requirement that all requestor employees and all other individuals who access the data will sign a confidentiality agreement prior to data release. The confidentiality requirements should be set out in the DUA and include the consequences for failure to comply with the agreement.

(g) A requirement that any new employee who joins the organization or project after the data requestor has received the data and who will have access to the data must sign a confidentiality agreement prior and passed required privacy and security training prior to accessing the data.

(3) The ((office))authority or lead organization may audit compliance with data use agreements and confidentiality agreements. The requestor must comply and assist, if requested, in any audit of these agreements.

(4) Breach of a data use agreement or confidentiality agreement may result in immediate termination of the data use agreement. The data requestor must immediately destroy all WA-APCD data in its possession upon termination of the data use agreement. Termination of the data use agreement is in addition to any other penalty or regulatory action taken or that may be taken as a result of the breach.

(1) The lead organization must develop a standard confidentiality agreement, as required, before data may be released. The ((office))authority must approve the final form for confidentiality agreement, and all substantial changes to the form.

(2) The confidentiality agreement must be signed by all requestor employees and other third parties who may have access to the data.

(3) In addition to other penalties or regulatory actions that may be taken, including denial of future data requests, breach of a confidentiality agreement may result in immediate termination of the agreement. If an individual breaches the confidentiality agreement, the lead organization must review the circumstances and determine if the requestor's agreement should be terminated or only the agreement with the individual who caused the breach should be terminated. When an agreement is terminated for breach of the confidentiality agreement, the data requestor or individual whose agreement is terminated must immediately destroy all WA-APCD data in his or her possession and provide an attestation of the destruction to the lead organization within seven business days. Attestation of destruction should be in the form as prescribed by the lead organization. Failure to destroy data or provide attestation of the destruction may result in other penalties or regulatory actions.

(1) A data requestor may request an administrative review of the lead organization's decision to deny a request for data.

(2) A request for an administrative review may be initiated by a written petition filed with the ((office))authority and also provided to the lead organization within thirty calendar days after notice of the denial. The petition shall include the following information:

(a) Data requestor's name, address, telephone number, email address and contact person.

(b) Information about the subject of the review including remedy requested.

(c) A detailed explanation as to the issue or area of dispute, and why the dispute should be decided in the data requestor's favor.

(3) The petition and all materials submitted will be reviewed by the director or director's designee. The reviewing official may request additional information or a conference with the data requestor. A decision from the reviewing official shall be provided in writing to the data requestor no later than thirty calendar days after receipt of the petition. A denial of the petition will include the reasons for the denial.

(4) The ((office))authority will post the petition and final decision on the ((office))authority website. The lead organization will provide a link to the petition and decision from its WA-APCD website.

(1) A data requestor may appeal the denial of its administrative review conducted in accordance with WAC ((82-75-290))182-70-290.

(2) Request for an appeal must be submitted in writing to the ((office))authority within fifteen calendar days after receipt of written notification of denial of its administrative review, with a copy provided to the lead organization.

(3) The lead organization must provide notice and a copy of the appeal request to affected data suppliers within five days of being served. Data suppliers may seek to intervene in an appeal by submitting a petition to intervene to the office of administrative hearings, and serving the petition to intervene on the ((office))authority, lead organization and requestor within five days of being notified of the appeal.

(4) Within ten business days of receipt of a written notice of appeal, the ((office))authority will transmit the request to the office of administrative hearings (OAH).

(a) Scheduling. OAH will assign an administrative law judge (ALJ) to handle the appeal. The ALJ will notify parties of the time when any additional documents or arguments must be submitted. If a party fails to comply with a scheduling letter or established timelines, the ALJ may decline to consider arguments or documents submitted after the scheduled timelines. A status conference in complex cases may be scheduled to provide for the orderly resolution of the case and to narrow issues and arguments for hearing.

(b) Hearings. Hearings may be by telephone or in-person. The ALJ may decide the case without a hearing if legal or factual issues are not in dispute, the appellant does not request a hearing, or the appellant fails to appear at a scheduled hearing or otherwise fails to respond to inquiries. The ALJ will notify the appellant by mail whether a hearing will be held, whether the hearing will be in-person or by telephone, the location of any in-person hearing, and the date and time for any hearing in the case. The date and time for a hearing may be continued at the ALJ's discretion. Other ((office))authority employees may attend a hearing, and the ALJ will notify the appellant when other ((office))authority employees are attending. The appellant may appear in person or may be represented by an attorney.

(c) Decisions. The decision of the ALJ shall be considered a final decision. A petition for review of the final decision may be filed in the superior court. If no appeal is filed within the time period set by RCW 34.05.542, the decision is conclusive and binding on all parties. The appeal must be filed within thirty days from service of the final decision.

(1) RCW 43.371.070 (1)(d) authorizes the director of the ((office of financial management))health care authority to adopt rules providing procedures for ensuring that all data received from data suppliers are securely collected and stored in compliance with applicable state and federal law.

(2) RCW 43.371.070 (1)(e) authorizes the director of the ((office of financial management))health care authority to adopt rules providing procedures for ensuring compliance with state and federal privacy laws.

(3) WAC ((82-75-410))182-70-410 through ((82-75-470))182-70-470 provide the procedures required in subsections (1) and (2) of this section.

(1) The data vendor must enter into an agreement with the lead organization that contains the following requirements:

(a) A provision that the data vendor is responsible for ensuring compliance of all aspects of WA-APCD operations with all applicable federal and state laws, and the state's security standards established by the office of the chief information officer;

(b) Provisions that the data vendor is required to keep logs and documentation on activities conducted pursuant to the security plan consistent with the state records retention requirements, which the ((office))authority can request to verify that the security protocols are being followed;

(c) A provision that requires a detailed security process, which should include, but is not limited to, details regarding security risk assessments and corrective actions plans when deficiencies are discovered;

(d) Provisions that require secure file transfer for all receipt and transmission of health care claims data; and

(e) Provisions for encryption of data both in motion and at rest using latest industry standard methods and tools for encryption, consistent with the standards of the office of the chief information officer.

(2) The data vendor must enter into a legally binding data use and confidentiality agreement with the lead organization. The agreement must include provisions that restrict the access and use of data in the WA-APCD to that necessary for the operation and administration of the database as authorized by chapter 43.371 RCW.

(3)(a) The data vendor must annually engage the services of an independent third-party security auditor to conduct a security audit to verify that the infrastructure, environment and operations of the WA-APCD are in compliance with federal and state laws, Washington state information technology security standards, and the contract with the lead organization. The data vendor must prepare a plan to correct any deficiency found in the annual security audit.

(b) The data vendor must submit its latest HITRUST common security framework (CSF) report and the latest statement on standards for attestation engagements (SSAE) No. 16 service organization control 2 (SOC 2) Type II audit report covering the data vendor's third-party data center, to the ((office))authority within thirty calendar days of receiving the final report. The data vendor must develop and implement an appropriate corrective action plan, including remediation timelines, when necessary, and provide the corrective action plan to the ((office))authority or the office of the state chief information security officer upon request.

(1) All data suppliers must submit data to the WA-APCD using a secure transfer protocol and transmission approach approved by the office of the state chief information security officer.

(2) All data suppliers must encrypt data using the latest industry standard methods and tools for encryption consistent with the data vendor's requirements for data encryption as required in WAC ((82-75-410))182-70-410.

(3) The data vendor must provide a unique set of login credentials for each individual acting on behalf of or at the direction of an active data supplier.

(4) The data vendor must ensure that the data supplier can only use strong passwords consistent with the state standards when securely submitting data or accessing the secure site.

(5) The data vendor must automatically reject and properly dispose of any files from data suppliers that are not properly encrypted.

(1) The data vendor must limit access to the secure site. Personnel allowed access must be based on the principle of least privilege and have an articulable need to know or access the site.

(2) The data vendor must conduct annual penetration testing and have specific requirements around the timing of penetration and security testing of infrastructure used to host the WA-APCD by the outside firm. The results of penetration and security testing must be documented and the data vendor must provide the summary results, along with a corrective action plan and remediation timelines, to the ((office))authority and the office of the state chief information security officer within thirty calendar days of receipt of the results.

(1) The data vendor must submit an annual report to the lead organization, the ((office))authority, and the office of the state chief information security office that includes the following information:

(a) Summary results of its independent security assessment; and

(b) Summary of its penetration testing and vulnerability assessment results.

(2) The data vendor, upon reasonable notice, must allow access and inspections by staff of the office of the state chief information security officer to ensure compliance with state standards.

(3) The data vendor, upon reasonable notice, must allow on-site inspections by the ((office))authority to ensure compliance with laws, rules and contract terms and conditions.

(4) The data vendor must have data retention and destruction policies that are no less stringent than that required by federal standards, including the most current version of NIST Special Publication 800-88, Guidelines for Media Sanitization.

(1) To ensure compliance with privacy and security requirements, the data vendor must immediately report to the ((office))authority and the office of the state chief information security officer any data breach of the WA-APCD or knowledge that a data recipient is not complying with confidentiality requirements in accordance with ((OFM-approved))health care authority-approved data breach notification procedures. The data vendor may not unilaterally disclose any information related to a breach of the WA-APCD without written permission from the ((office))authority and the state chief information security officer.

(2) Upon receiving approval from the ((office))authority and the state chief information security officer, the data vendor must notify the data supplier if the data it supplied has been the subject of a data breach for which the reporting requirements in subsection (1) of this section apply. The data vendor is responsible for complying with the applicable notification provisions in state and federal law.

(3) To ensure compliance with privacy and security requirements, the lead organization must:

(a) Conduct follow-up with data recipients of PHI or PFI on a schedule developed by the lead organization;

(b) Request data recipients share any manuscripts, reports, or products with lead organization and ((office))the authority;

(c)(i) Require data recipients to complete a project completion form, attesting that the project has terminated and data have been destroyed in accordance with the data use agreement;

(ii) Require the data recipient to provide the written verification that the data has been destroyed in a manner no less stringent than is required in WAC ((82-75-440(4)))182-70-440(4).

(d) Track all requests and research projects and follow up with the data recipient when the research or project is expected to be completed; and

(e) Follow up and require written verification that data is destroyed.

In order to ensure compliance with privacy and security requirements and procedures, the ((office))authority or the office of chief information officer or both may request from the lead organization any or all of the following:

(1) Audit logs pertaining to accessing the WA-APCD data;

(2) Completion of a security design review as required by Washington state IT security standards;

(3) Documentation of compliance with OCIO security policy (OCIO policy 141.10 Securing information technology assets standards);

(4) All data use agreements.

(1) The format rules apply to all proposed uses of proprietary financial information submitted to the WA-APCD. The format rules apply to three categories of users for which proprietary financial information may be disclosed in accordance with chapter 43.375 RCW:

(a) Lead organization;

(b) Federal agencies, Washington state agencies, and units of Washington local government; and

(c) Researchers with IRB approval.

(2) The lead organization shall assess a data requestor's proposed methods submitted in compliance with RCW 43.371.050 (1)(c) and WAC ((82-75-210(2)))182-70-210(2), which require the data requestor to submit a description of the proposed methodology for data analysis. The lead organization's assessment shall include evaluating the data requestor's methodology as it pertains to the calculation and presentation of cost information that rely upon proprietary financial information.

(3) To evaluate data requestor methodology, the lead organization shall adopt criteria to prevent the disclosure or determination of proprietary financial information to any third party.

(4) The data release advisory committee shall advise the lead organization on the criteria to be adopted.

(5) Nothing in this rule shall contravene the authorized uses of proprietary financial information as provided in RCW 43.371.050.

All reports, analytics or other information drawn from the WA-APCD that an approved WA-APCD data user as defined in WAC ((82-75-510(1)))182-70-510(1) shares with any third party shall comply with the following restrictions.

(1) Allowed amount data may be made available for public use.

(2) Allowed amount data shall be provider or payer deidentified.

(3) Provider-specific allowed amount data shall be suppressed if that payer accounts for more than fifty percent of that provider's patient market share that payer deidentified data could readily be payer reidentified.

(4) Absolute or relative allowed cost information shall be communicated in ways that mitigate the potential to mislead data users including, but not limited to:

(a) Median cost mitigates the impact of outlier cases;

(b) Cost variation statistics (ranges, confidence intervals) illustrate the typical distribution of costs around a point estimate;

(c) Categorization, stratification or risk-adjustment techniques make like-comparisons of patient populations;

(d) Minimum case volume rules and/or reporting of volume alerts users to the universe or sample underlying the cost result; and

(e) Cell size suppression rules are followed whereby cells containing cost data based on a number of patients or providers that is below a minimum threshold count is suppressed.

(1) RCW 43.371.020 (5)(g) requires the lead organization to develop a plan for the financial sustainability of the database, and charge fees for reports and data files to fund the database.

(2) The ((office))authority must approve any fee established by the lead organization.

(3) RCW 43.371.070 requires the ((office))authority to establish by rule, procedures for the lead organization to establish these statutorily required fees.

(4) The process to develop, review and approve fee schedules will be open and transparent, and allow for stakeholder feedback.

(1) The lead organization must develop a draft fee schedule consistent with the requirements in RCW 43.371.020 (5)(g). The lead organization must maintain documentation that supports the development of and final decisions regarding the fee schedule.

(2) The lead organization must present the draft fee schedule and supporting documentation to the data policy committee for review and feedback. The lead organization must provide any other available data requested by the DPC that supports the development and draft fee schedule presented.

(3) The DPC must review the draft fee schedule, supporting documentation, and adopt recommendations, including the basis for each recommendation, as to whether the fee schedule should be approved by the ((office))authority. The DPC must provide the recommendations to the lead organization for its consideration.

(4) The lead organization must review the DPC recommendations and make any changes to the draft fee schedule based on the recommendations. The lead organization must document which recommendations it implemented into the fee schedule. For those recommendations that the lead organization did not act upon, the lead organization must document the reasons why each recommendation was not accepted.

(5) The lead organization must provide the ((office))authority the draft fee schedule, as modified, supporting documentation, the DPC recommendations, and the reasoning for why the lead organization did not make changes for any recommendation not accepted. The lead organization must also provide any other available data requested by the ((office))authority that supports the development and draft fee schedule provided to the ((office))authority.

(6) The ((office))authority shall post on the agency website the draft fee schedule, and solicit public comment for thirty days. The ((office))authority may also convene a stakeholder meeting to provide an opportunity for interested parties another avenue to give feedback on the draft fee schedule. If the ((office))authority decides to hold a stakeholder meeting, the meeting may be in person, by telephone or other electronic means, as determined by the ((office))authority.

After the comment period, the ((office))authority will review all the stakeholder feedback, recommendations of the DPC, and any data received from the lead organization and make a final determination regarding the fee schedule. The ((office))authority shall provide the final determination to the lead organization, publish the final determination on the agency website, and send notification through the ((office))authority listserv or other electronic means.

(1) Fee schedules shall be reissued no less frequently than on an annual basis. The reissuance of the fee schedule can include maintaining the fee schedule without modification, modifying the fee schedule, or a combination of these two actions.

(2) The lead organization shall review fee schedules at least once every year. Annual period shall be from the date upon which the fee schedule is adopted. The review shall include whether any fee should be changed, removed from the schedule, or new fees added. The lead organization must maintain documentation that supports the recommended changes from the review of the fee schedule.

(3) The lead organization must present the changes, supporting documentation, and proposed modifications to the fee schedule to the data policy committee for review and feedback. The lead organization must provide any other available data requested by the DPC that supports the proposed modifications to the fee schedule.

(4) The DPC must review the changes, supporting documentation, and proposed modifications to the fee schedule and adopt recommendations, including the basis for each recommendation, as to whether the changes should be accepted and the modified fee schedule approved by the ((office))authority. The DPC must provide the recommendations to the lead organization for its consideration.

(5) The lead organization must review the DPC recommendations and make any changes to the recommendations and proposed modifications to the fee schedule based on the recommendations. The lead organization must document which recommendations it implemented into the fee schedule. For those recommendations that the lead organization did not act upon, the lead organization must document the reasons why each recommendation was not accepted.

(6) The lead organization must provide the ((office))authority the proposed modifications to the fee schedule, as modified, with supporting documentation, the DPC recommendations, and the reasoning for why the lead organization did not make changes for any recommendation not accepted. The lead organization must provide any other available data requested by the ((office))authority that supports the changes and proposed modified fee schedule provided to the ((office))authority.

(7) The ((office))authority shall post on the agency website the recommendations and proposed modifications to the fee schedule, and solicit public comment for thirty days. The ((office))authority may also convene a stakeholder meeting to provide an opportunity for interested parties another avenue to give feedback on the draft fee schedule. If the ((office))authority decides to hold a stakeholder meeting, the meeting may be in person, by telephone or other electronic means, as determined by the ((office))authority.

(8) After the comment period, the ((office))authority will review all the stakeholder feedback, recommendations of the DPC, and any data received from the lead organization and make a final determination regarding the fee schedule. The ((office))authority shall provide the final determination to the lead organization, publish the final determination on the agency website, and send notification through the ((office))authority listserv or other electronic means.

(1) The ((office))authority may impose penalties for the inappropriate disclosure or use of direct patient identifiers, indirect patient identifiers, and proprietary financial information received from, provided to, or contained in the WA-APCD.

(2) Any penalty imposed pursuant to this subchapter and in accordance with RCW 43.371.050 shall be in addition to and does not prevent the assessment of penalties authorized by state or federal law, contract, or court order.

(3) The following definitions apply to WAC ((82-75-600))182-70-600 through ((82-75-665))182-70-665.

(a) "Inappropriate disclosures" or "uses" are those that are inconsistent or in violation of the requirements in RCW 43.371.050. In addition, inappropriate disclosure or uses also include defamatory or malicious use and disclosure or use and disclosure with the intent to cause harm.

(b) "Protected information" is direct patient identifiers, indirect patient identifiers and proprietary financial information.

(1) Any person, as defined in WAC ((82-75-030))182-70-030, may bring to the attention of the lead organization or the ((office))authority information concerning the inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information as set forth in RCW 43.371.050 and WAC ((82-75-600))182-70-600.

(2) The ((office))authority must conduct an investigation unless it determines that the complaint is without merit or is frivolous, regardless of how the ((office))authority has received the information that led to that belief, including information derived from any audit conducted by or at the direction of the ((office))authority.

(1) Any complaint filed pursuant to WAC ((82-75-605))182-70-605 must be in writing and include the following information, if known:

(a) The name and contact information of the complainant;

(b) The specific facts supporting the violation alleged, including the dates, and locations for all events upon which the complaint is made;

(c) The facts upon which the complaint is based; and

(d) The name of the individual(s) and organization the complainant believes has committed an inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information and should be subject to penalties.

(2) If sufficient information is provided as required in subsection (1)(b) through (d) of this section, the ((office))authority will accept the complaint without the complainant's name and contact information. In cases when the name and contact information is not provided, the complainant waives any future contact or notification from the ((office))authority regarding the complaint.

(3) The complainant must provide additional information if requested by the lead organization or the ((office))authority.

(4) Complaints alleging the lead organization made inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information must be filed directly with the ((office))authority. The complaint must contain the information required in subsection (1) of this section. If a complaint of this nature is filed with the lead organization, the lead organization must forward to the ((office))authority within one business day of receipt, without further review or action.

(5) Regardless of whether the complaint was filed with the ((office))authority or the lead organization, except as provided by subsection (4) of this section, the lead organization will review the complaint and compile any information it may have related to the complaint. The lead may review the complaint as to whether the facts as presented support the finding of an inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information. The lead organization must forward the complaint, and all supporting documents to the ((office))authority, including the result of any initial review the lead may have undertaken.

(6) The ((office))authority must review the information provided by the lead organization pursuant to subsection (5) of this section.

(a) If the ((office))authority determines that the facts as presented, if true, support the finding of an inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information, the ((office))authority will conduct an investigation to substantiate the allegations.

(b) If the ((office))authority determines that the facts as presented, if true, do not support the finding of an inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information, the ((office))authority will close the complaint without further action. If closed without further action, the notice will include the basis for that determination.

(c) The ((office))authority may conduct the investigation, or contract with a third party, other than the lead organization or a subcontractor to the lead organization, to conduct the investigation.

(7) The ((office))authority will notify the complainant in writing and state whether the complaint will be investigated or closed without action.

(1) If the ((office))authority accepts a complaint and conducts an investigation, the ((office))authority will notify the person(s) that is the subject of the complaint in writing.

(2) The notice will include the following information:

(a) The factual allegations supporting each alleged inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information violation in terms sufficient to put the persons on notice of the specific reasons for the investigation;

(b) The statutory and administrative code provisions addressing the allegations, if applicable;

(c) A request that the person provide a written response to the allegations including any documents that support the response, and notice that failure to respond will result in the ((office))authority making a decision without the person's input; and

(d) A directive to cease using or destroy the data received from the WA-APCD until the investigation has been completed and the person is notified that he/she may again use the data provided. The person shall complete an attestation that the person has complied with this directive. A violation of this directive shall be grounds for finding a separate violation of the inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information.

(3) The lead organization and the data vendor shall cooperate with the investigator and timely respond to requests for information or documents during the course of an investigation.

(4) At the conclusion of the investigation, the investigator will issue a report to the WA-APCD program director that includes the following information:

(a) Facts found by the investigator;

(b) Whether the facts support finding inappropriate disclosures or uses of protected information; and

(c) A recommendation to dismiss the complaint with no further action or to issue an order with a penalty, which recommendation may include a penalty amount and any other actions that the ((office))authority should take as a result of the violation(s).

(5) A finding that the person inappropriately disclosed or used protected information is a violation for purposes of this section. In the case of a continuing inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information, each day of the inappropriate disclosure or use is a separate violation.

(1) If, based on the investigation, the WA-APCD program director determines that the facts support finding an inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information and imposition of a penalty as set forth in the investigation report, the WA-APCD program director shall notify the alleged violator. The WA-APCD program director shall cause service of the notice of violation and recommended penalty on each alleged violator. The notice shall include the following information:

(a) Date when the recommended penalty and other actions imposed will take effect, if not appealed;

(b) Each inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information found and the facts supporting each inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information;

(c) The recommended penalty, other monetary amounts to be assessed, including the cost of the investigation, and any other action authorized by WAC ((82-75-625))182-70-625 and ((82-75-630))182-70-630;

(d) If the person will be prohibited from receiving data from the WA-APCD in the future, the period of the recommended prohibition;

(e) Notice that each alleged violator may request a hearing in accordance with WAC ((82-75-645))182-70-645 to dispute the finding of a violation, the recommended penalty, or both. The notice shall state that if no hearing is requested within thirty days of the date of issuance of the notice, the ((office))authority shall issue a final, unappealable order.

(2) In the event the alleged violator or violators do not timely request a hearing, the WA-APCD program director will provide the report and recommendation to the director, who shall issue a final order, which will include the date upon which the order becomes effective.

(3) The WA-APCD program director shall provide a copy of the investigation report and the notice prepared pursuant to subsection (1) of this section to all data suppliers with protected information identified in the report as having been inappropriately disclosed or used. This notice is separate and in addition to any other notice required by law.

In addition to the monetary penalties set forth in WAC ((82-75-625))182-70-625, if a person has been found to have made inappropriate disclosures or uses of direct patient identifiers, indirect patient identifiers, and proprietary financial information received from the WA-APCD, the director may order the following nonmonetary penalties:

(1)(a) Direct WA-APCD program director to review the contract between the person and lead organization to determine whether the finding is a breach of that contract, and take appropriate action including requiring all WA-APCD data provided to be destroyed, termination of the contract, and seeking damages if the contract has been breached; or

(b) In lieu of (a) of this subsection, direct the lead organization to review whether the finding is also a breach of any contract between the person and the lead organization, and take appropriate action including requiring all WA-APCD data provided to be destroyed, termination of the contract, and seeking damages if the contract has been breached, unless the lead organization is the violator, in which case (a) of this subsection shall apply.

(2) Demand the destruction of all WA-APCD data provided, whether stand alone or combined with other data, all data products, and derivatives produced from WA-APCD data, and in the person's custody or contract, including proof of the destruction in the form and manner as prescribed by the ((office))authority;

(3) Bar the person from receiving any data from the WA-APCD for a designated period of time; and

(4) Notify the funding entity of the violation, when the violation involves research funded by another entity, and any other regulatory agency that has oversight over the person or the data that the person requested.

(1) In determining the appropriate sanction, including the amount of any civil penalty, the director will consider the level of culpability associated with the violation. The levels of culpability, in the order of less severe to severe, are as follows:

(a) Did not know. The person did not know and by exercising reasonable diligence, would not have known the violation had occurred.

(b) Reasonable cause. The person knew, or by exercising diligence should have known, that the violation had taken place, but the person did not act with willful negligence.

(c) Willful neglect - Corrected. The violation was due to the person's conscious, intentional failure or reckless indifference, and the violation was corrected within thirty days from the date the person knew or with reasonable diligence should have known of the inappropriate disclosure or use.

(d) Willful neglect - Uncorrected. The violation was due to the person's conscious, intentional failure or reckless indifference, and the violation was not corrected within thirty days from the date the person knew or with reasonable diligence should have known of the inappropriate disclosure or use.

(2) The penalty ranges for each level of culpability and the yearly cap for violations of a similar nature are as follows:

(3) Violations that involve malicious intent, as that term is defined in WAC ((82-75-030))182-70-030, are not subject to the yearly caps set forth in subsection (2) of this section.

(4) The director may assess a penalty outside the penalty ranges set forth in subsection (2) of this section if the person has previously committed the same violation in the same culpability category.

In addition to the culpability category set forth in WAC ((82-75-635))182-70-635, to determine the penalty amount, the director may consider the following factors:

(1) The nature and extent of the violation including, but not limited to, the number of persons affected, the duration of the violation, and whether the violation was done with malicious intent.

(2) The nature and extent of the harm resulting from the violation including, but not limited to:

(a) Whether the violation resulted in physical harm;

(b) Whether the violation resulted in financial harm;

(c) Whether the violation resulted in harm to a person's reputation;

(d) Whether the violation hindered an individual's ability to obtain health care;

(e) Whether the violation resulted in any other actual or potential harm.

(3) The history of compliance with the statutory, regulatory, and contractual provisions related to prior data release from the WA-APCD including, but not limited to:

(a) Whether the current violation is the same or similar to previous noncompliance;

(b) Whether and to what extent the person has attempted to correct previous noncompliance;

(c) How the person has responded to the complaint, investigation and any assistance provided to correct and mitigate any effect from the violation;

(d) How the person has responded to prior complaints for the same or similar violations including, but not limited to, changes in process or procedures for securing the confidentiality of the protected information, changes in recruitment, retention, or training requirements for employees or contractor with access to protected information.

(4) Any other factor relevant to the violation or the impact of the violation including, but not limited to:

(a) The frequency of incidents and/or duration of the wrongdoing;

(b) Whether there is a pattern or prior history of wrongdoing;

(c) Whether the person has accepted responsibility for the wrongdoing and recognizes the seriousness of violation;

(d) Whether the person paid or agreed to pay any criminal, civil, and administrative liabilities for the improper activity, including any investigative or administrative costs incurred by the government, and has made or agreed to make full restitution;

(e) Whether the person has cooperated fully during the investigation and any administrative action. In determining the extent of cooperation, the director may consider when the cooperation began and whether the person disclosed all known pertinent information;

(f) The kind of positions held by the individuals involved in the wrongdoing;

(g) Whether the person fully investigated the circumstances surrounding the violation and, if so, made the result of the investigation available to the reviewing official, and took appropriate corrective action or remedial measures;

(h) Whether effective standards of conduct and internal control systems were in place at the time the violation occurred;

(i) Whether appropriate disciplinary action was taken against the individuals responsible for the activity that constitutes the violation.

(1) Each person to whom a notice of a violation and recommended penalty is issued may request a hearing to be conducted in accordance with WAC ((82-75-655))182-70-655.

(2) The request for a hearing must be submitted to the director in writing within thirty days after receipt of written notification of the notice provided pursuant to WAC ((82-75-620))182-70-620. The person requesting a hearing must also provide a copy of the request to the WA-APCD program director.

(3) The request for hearing must be in writing and specify:

(a) The name of the person requesting the hearing and the person's or representative's contact information;

(b) The items, facts, or conclusions in the notice of violation being contested; and

(c) The basis for contesting the penalty, if applicable, including any mitigating factors upon which the person relies and the outcome the requestor is seeking.

(1) The following procedures are available for informal dispute resolution prior to a hearing that may make more elaborate proceedings under the Administrative Procedure Act unnecessary.

(2) Settlements. Any appeal of a notice of violation and recommended penalty before the director or director's designee, for which a hearing has not yet been held, may be resolved by settlement. The respondent shall communicate his or her request to the WA-APCD program director, setting forth all pertinent facts and the desired remedy. Settlement negotiations shall be informal and without prejudice to rights of a participant in the negotiations.

(3) Stipulations. The WA-APCD program director and respondent may agree to terms of any stipulation of facts, violations, and/or penalty. If a stipulation is reached, the WA-APCD program director shall prepare the stipulation for presentation to the director.

(a) Any proposed stipulation shall be in writing and signed by each party to the stipulation or his or her representative. The WA-APCD program director shall sign for the ((office))authority. Any stipulation shall be provided no later than three business days preceding the hearing.

(b) The director has the option of accepting, rejecting, or modifying the proposed stipulation or asking for additional facts to be presented. If the director accepts the stipulation or modifies the stipulation with the agreement of the parties, the director shall enter an order in conformity with the terms of the stipulation. If the director rejects the stipulation or one or both of the parties does not agree to the director's proposed modifications to the stipulation, then the hearing shall be scheduled and held.

(4) Informal dispute resolution negotiations shall be informal and without prejudice to the rights of the participants.

(1) The director may conduct the hearing or delegate to an individual within the ((office))authority or to an administrative law judge pursuant to chapter 34.12 RCW the authority to conduct the hearing and prepare a proposed decision. The WA-APCD program director, on behalf of the ((office))authority, shall be the petitioner in the hearing, and the requestor shall be the respondent.

(2) The WA-APCD program director shall have the burden of proving the basis for the finding of a violation and the penalty as set forth in the notice of violation and recommended penalty.

(3) The hearing shall be conducted in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, chapter 34.05 RCW and to the extent not covered in this chapter, by the uniform procedural rules in chapter 10-08 WAC.

(4) If the director presides over the hearing, the director shall issue a final written decision that includes findings of fact, conclusions of law, and if appropriate, the penalty. The director shall cause service of the final decision on all parties.

(5) If the director's designee or an administrative law judge presides over the hearing, she or he shall issue a proposed decision that includes findings of fact, conclusions of law and if appropriate the penalty. The proposed decision shall also include instructions on how to file objections and written arguments or briefs with the director. Objections and written arguments and briefs must be filed within twenty days from the date of receipt of the proposed decision.

(1) Except as provided in subsection (2) of this section, the ((office))authority will maintain a website to provide public access to information related to the inappropriate disclosure or use of protected information. For each complaint for which an investigation is conducted, the ((office))authority will post the complaint, the information that the lead organization provided to the ((office))authority pursuant to WAC ((82-75-610(5)))182-70-610(5), investigation report and final disposition of the complaint. In addition, if the complaint finds a violation, the ((office))authority will post the notice of violation and the final hearing order, if a hearing is requested.

(2) If any of the records specified for posting in subsection (1) of this section contains confidential or protected information, that information is privileged and not subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act, chapter 42.56 RCW, and will be redacted from any documents posted on the ((office))authority website.

(1) The ((office))authority may initiate a random audit to ensure compliance with data release requirements. A data requestor may not be subject to a random audit more frequently than once every three years.

(2) The ((office))authority may initiate an audit of a data supplier or data requestor upon notice that one of the following events has occurred:

(a) Reports from the data vendor that there is a material change, without justification or a reasonable basis for the change provided by the data supplier, in the number of claims submitted from a data supplier. Before submitting a report under this subsection, the data vendor should have worked with the data supplier to cure any inadvertent data submission issues.

(b) Reports from the data vendor that certain types of claims are missing for a data supplier.

(c) Notice that the data requestor or data user is publishing data in reports that are not compliant with data use agreements. Violations of the data use agreements are subject to penalties in accordance with the process set forth in this chapter ((82-75 WAC)).

(d) Notice that the data requestor or data user is publishing PFI or PHI not in compliance with state or federal requirements.

(e) Other occurrence that could indicate that the data supplier or data requestor is not in compliance with the requirements in law or rule regarding the WA-APCD.

(1) Once the ((office))authority determines an audit will be conducted, either as a random audit or based on a triggering event set forth in WAC ((82-75-705(2)))182-70-705(2), the ((office))authority shall provide written notice to the subject of the audit at least thirty days before the start of the audit. The notice must include the name of the company or individuals who will be conducting the audit and the subject of the audit, including the time period for which the audit covers, which time period must be no longer than the prior three years. If the audit is the result of a triggering event, the notice will include information regarding the triggering event. The notice will also include information regarding the audit entrance conference that has been scheduled to take place within fourteen days before the audit will begin. The notice will include the location, date and time and contact person for the entrance conference and such other information as required. The ((office))authority will work with the subject of the audit to ensure sufficient time is provided between providing the written notice, the date of the entrance conference, and the start of the audit.

(2) The subject of the audit is required to cooperate with the auditor, providing the information as requested. If there is a dispute during the audit, the issue should be brought to the attention of the WA-APCD program director, who will resolve the dispute. Both the auditor and the subject of the audit will be provided an opportunity to present its issues regarding the dispute, either in writing or in person. The WA-APCD program director may engage a mediator to help resolve the dispute.

(3) The auditor will be required to prepare an audit report. A draft of the audit report shall be provided to the subject of the audit for review and comments. The subject of the audit should be provided no less than thirty days to provide comment to the draft report.

(4) After receiving and reviewing any comments, and revising the draft audit report as deemed necessary, the auditor shall schedule an exit conference with the subject of the audit to review the audit and final audit report. The subject of the audit shall be provided an opportunity to submit comments or responses to the findings in the audit. The auditor shall provide a deadline, not less than thirty days after the exit conference for submission of any response to the audit.

(5) The auditor shall issue a final audit report no later than thirty days after the deadline for submission of any response. The report shall be provided to the ((office))authority and the subject of the audit. The final report shall include any response provided by the subject of the audit. The ((office))authority shall publish the final report on the agency website.

(6) The auditor shall be required to sign a confidentiality/nondisclosure agreement if the auditor will have access to any confidential or proprietary information.

(1) The ((office))authority shall develop the audit guide with input from the data vendor, lead organization, and stakeholders. The audit guide shall include, but is not limited to, the following topics:

(a) The audit standards that will be used for all audits to ensure compliance with generally accepted auditing practices;

(b) The process that will be used to select an auditor, including the auditor qualifications, process to identify and address conflicts of interest;

(c) Specific contract terms that should be included in any contract with an auditor including retention and destruction process for working papers.

(2) The ((office))authority shall develop a process to allow for stakeholder review and comment on drafts of the audit guide and all subsequent changes to the guide. Prior to final adoption, the DPC shall be given an opportunity to review and provide comments on the draft audit guide to the ((office))authority. The ((office))authority shall have final approval authority over the adoption of the audit guide and all subsequent changes.

(3) The ((office))authority shall conduct an annual review of the audit guide. The ((office))authority will post notice that the review is being conducted and provide a time period for stakeholder to submit comments and changes to the audit guide. The ((office))authority will follow the process developed pursuant to subsection (2) of this section for review and comment on draft changes to the guide.

(4) The ((office))authority shall notify data suppliers before changes to the audit guide are final. Notification shall occur no less than one hundred twenty calendar days prior to the effective date of any change.

(5) The version of the audit guide that is in effect must be posted on the ((OFM))authority website. Notice should be given through the ((office))authority listserv when a new audit guide is posted.

(1) If the audit finds that any person has violated laws, rules or data use agreements, the WA-APCD program director shall require an investigation be conducted in accordance with WAC ((82-75-615))182-70-615. If the investigation determines that a violation or violations have occurred, the ((office))authority will take appropriate action as set forth in this chapter ((82-75 WAC)).

(2) In addition to any other penalties authorized by law or rule, the audited party may be required to pay the cost of the audit if, after an investigation conducted pursuant to this chapter ((82-75 WAC)), a violation is found. The subject of the audit may contest the requirement to pay the cost of the audit or the amount requested using the appeal process set forth in this chapter ((82-75 WAC)) for the appeal of penalties.