AB 834 — Health care practitioners: peer review: voluntary remediation.
Last action — From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
No card. One bill, free forever — alerts when it moves.
-
✓Introduced
-
2In Committee
-
3Passed Assembly
-
4Passed Senate
-
5To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
This bill is no longer active — its legislative session has ended, so there is no live prognosis. It would have to be reintroduced in the current session to move again.
Summary
Existing law requires peer review bodies, as defined, and the chief executive officer or administrator of any licensed health care facility or clinic to file reports with the applicable state licensing agency of specified health care practitioners upon the occurrence of specified events, including, without limitation, a practitioner voluntarily accepting restrictions on staff privileges, membership, or employment, as specified, for a medical disciplinary cause or reason. Existing law also entitles a practitioner to a hearing, as specified, concerning a final proposed action for which a report is required to be filed. Existing law prohibits a hearing officer from gaining any direct financial benefit from the outcome, from acting as a prosecuter or advocate, and from having a vote. This bill would provide an alternative to the requirement to file a report of voluntary acceptance of these restrictions, by authorizing a peer review body to impose, and a practitioner to accept, voluntary remediation which may include mandatory proctoring, consultation, education, and retraining. The bill would also authorize the peer review body to limit the practitioner's staff privileges, and prohibit a practitioner from seeking new staff privileges, during the pendency of the voluntary remediation. The bill would also require the reporting person, as defined, to file a report, as specified, with the applicable agency within 15 days following the commencement date of a voluntary remediation, to immediately file a supplementary report if the practitioner fails to fulfill the terms of the remediation, and to file another report within 30 days following completion of a remediation. The bill would require the reporting person to provide the subject practitioner with all reports it files and with a notice of the practitioner's right to submit additional statements or other information. Within 15 days following the commencement of a voluntary remediation, the reporting person would be required to provide a notice of remediation to each facility where the practitioner then has staff privileges. The bill would provide that a practitioner who accepts a voluntary remediation is not entitled to a hearing with respect to the remediation, and would specify that a practitioner who rejects the remediation would be entitled to a hearing concerning any proposed final action for which a reporting person is required to file a report pursuant to existing law. The bill would prohibit a lawyer who has represented the applicable peer review body or licensed health care facility or clinic within the prior 2 years from serving as a hearing officer, and would prohibit any hearing officer from gaining any benefit from the outcome. The bill would also make conforming changes.
Bill Text
- Amended 04/14/09 - Amended Assembly Current pdf April 14, 2009
- Introduced 02/26/09 - Introduced pdf February 26, 2009
- AB834 View text html
Action History
-
From committee: Filed with the Chief Clerk pursuant to Joint Rule 56.
-
Died pursuant to Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution.
-
Re-referred to Com. on B. & P.
-
From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & P. Read second time and amended.
-
Referred to Com. on B. & P.
-
From printer. May be heard in committee March 29.
-
Read first time. To print.
Sponsors
- Solorio · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on
Sponsors (1)
- Solorio
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does AB 834 do?
- Existing law requires peer review bodies, as defined, and the chief executive officer or administrator of any licensed health care facility or clinic to file reports with the applicable state licensing agency of specified health care practitioners upon the occurrence of specified events, including, without limitation, a practitioner voluntarily accepting restrictions on staff privileges, membership, or employment, as specified, for a medical disciplinary cause or reason. Existing law also entitles a practitioner to a hearing, as specified, concerning a final proposed action for which a report is required to be filed. Existing law prohibits a hearing officer from gaining any direct financial benefit from the outcome, from acting as a prosecuter or advocate, and from having a vote. This bill would provide an alternative to the requirement to file a report of voluntary acceptance of these restrictions, by authorizing a peer review body to impose, and a practitioner to accept, voluntary remediation which may include mandatory proctoring, consultation, education, and retraining. The bill would also authorize the peer review body to limit the practitioner's staff privileges, and prohibit a practitioner from seeking new staff privileges, during the pendency of the voluntary remediation. The bill would also require the reporting person, as defined, to file a report, as specified, with the applicable agency within 15 days following the commencement date of a voluntary remediation, to immediately file a supplementary report if the practitioner fails to fulfill the terms of the remediation, and to file another report within 30 days following completion of a remediation. The bill would require the reporting person to provide the subject practitioner with all reports it files and with a notice of the practitioner's right to submit additional statements or other information. Within 15 days following the commencement of a voluntary remediation, the reporting person would be required to provide a notice of remediation to each facility where the practitioner then has staff privileges. The bill would provide that a practitioner who accepts a voluntary remediation is not entitled to a hearing with respect to the remediation, and would specify that a practitioner who rejects the remediation would be entitled to a hearing concerning any proposed final action for which a reporting person is required to file a report pursuant to existing law. The bill would prohibit a lawyer who has represented the applicable peer review body or licensed health care facility or clinic within the prior 2 years from serving as a hearing officer, and would prohibit any hearing officer from gaining any benefit from the outcome. The bill would also make conforming changes.
- Who sponsors AB 834?
- AB 834 is sponsored by Solorio.
- What is the current status of AB 834?
- This bill died with 2009-2010 Regular Session. It reached “In Committee” and never advanced before the session ended, so it can no longer move — a new version would have to be reintroduced in the current session.
- Where can I track AB 834?
- Track AB 834 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on AB 834
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of AB 834
Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →