BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 1880 |
By: Laubenberg |
Human Services |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Currently, health and human services agencies are required to maintain a record of certain types of licensed health and human services providers, including youth camps, hospitals, child-care facilities, assisted living facilities, and mental health facilities, that have been subjected to adverse licensing decisions, such as the suspension or revocation of a license. This allows the licensing agencies to share information regarding adverse licensing decisions and helps the agencies prevent an applicant whose license was revoked because persons under the applicant's care were harmed from obtaining another license. Interested parties contend that the law governing these adverse licensing decisions does not currently apply to certain types of treatment facilities and programs. C.S.H.B. 1880 seeks to address this issue.
|
||||||
CRIMINAL JUSTICE IMPACT
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly create a criminal offense, increase the punishment for an existing criminal offense or category of offenses, or change the eligibility of a person for community supervision, parole, or mandatory supervision.
|
||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
|
||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 1880 amends the Government Code to include a licensed ambulatory surgical center, licensed birthing center, licensed abortion facility, licensed end stage renal disease facility, licensed freestanding emergency medical care facility, and authorized narcotic drug treatment program among the entities to which statutory provisions regarding an adverse licensing, listing, or registration decision by an applicable health and human services agency apply.
|
||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2015.
|
||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 1880 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and formatted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||
|