SB 648

This text below is courtesy of:
Consumer Federation of California


SB 648: Protection For Seniors From Unethical Long-Term Care Referral Agencies Headed to Assembly

January 25, 2016
iStock

iStock

1/27/15 update: SB 648 (Mendoza) cleared the Senate today, with Anthony Cannella (R-Ceres) joining all Democrats in favor; all other Republicans voted No except Tom Berryhill (R-Modesto), who did not vote. The bill now goes to the Assembly. If you haven’t already urged your Assembly Member to vote Aye on SB 648’s safeguards for the elderly, please click here for an email you can customize and send.

MARCH 12, 2015 – When seniors need long-term care following illness, accident or other life-altering changes, the daunting alternatives they face include skilled nursing homes, extended-care facilities and residential care facilities for the elderly (RCFEs). Services – and costs – vary widely, so a referral industry has grown up to help with this important decision, typically compensated with fees paid by the residential facilities where seniors are placed.

Referral agencies that recommend skilled nursing or intermediate-care facilities have to be licensed by the state Department of Public Health. But this requirement doesn’t apply to agencies that only recommend placements in RCFEs, where services are limited to assistance with such daily living activities as meals, bathing and grooming. Unfortunately, referrals to substandard facilities made by agencies eager to earn their fees are all too common.

That’s why the Consumer Federation of California (CFC) is sponsoring Senate Bill 648 (Mendoza). The bill would:

  • Extend to RCFEs an existing requirement that placement agencies which refer seniors to higher levels of long-term care be licensed (update: as amended in January 2016, the licensing agency would be the state Department of Social Services instead of the Department of Public Health)
  • Require referral agencies to notify clients of an agency’s most recent tour or visit to a facility it recommends, and to include in the agency’s disclosure statement any regulatory violations identified by the most recent evaluation of the RCFE
  • Prohibit a referral agency from holding any property or power of attorney for a client
  • Require specific written notice of any fees charged for referral services and include a description of the services to be rendered
  • Require a referral agency to maintain liability insurance

“SB 648 will help give the elderly and their families the information they need to make good decisions in difficult times. They have a right to know whether a placement agency is being paid to promote a particular facility, whether through fees, commissions or other considerations. They have a right to know that a recommendation is based on first-hand observation of a facility. And they have a right to know what qualifies a placement agency to advise them on such a life-changing decision,” said CFC Executive Director Richard Holober. “Our elders ought to be able to count on these agencies to have their clients’ best interests at heart, not their own profits. These vulnerable people need services, not salesmanship.”

Background

As the least-regulated long-term care facilities, RCFEs are easy targets for greedy referral agencies seeking to dump seniors in under-supervised environments. Some 7,800 RCFEs operate in California now, with roughly 175,000 beds available, and their numbers are expected to grow as the ranks of the elderly swell with aging baby boomers.

Many of these facilities deliver conscientious care, but too many provide poor or even nonexistent service, as seen in the owners’ abandonment of 14 sick and elderly patients in a Castro Valley assisted living facility in 2013. The results can be tragic. The deaths of at least 27 seniors in San Diego County RCFEs between 2008 and 2013 were documented in “Deadly Neglect,” a series of reports from the San Diego Union Tribune and the California Healthcare Foundation’s Center for Health Reporting.

This situation invites corruption in unscrupulous referral agencies, and can even lead to collusion between those agencies and unethical assisted-living operators:

  • In San Bernardino, a one-man operation reportedly referred seniors who had just been discharged from a hospital to unlicensed care facilities – part of a larger alleged scheme to temporarily place seniors in high-quality facilities during family visits and then move them to lower-quality, unlicensed facilities after the visitors left.
  • In San Luis Obispo, there are reports of referral agencies intentionally making bad placements for profit, only to refer seniors to a second or even a third facility – collecting a commission every step of the way.
  • In San Diego, a referral agency representative allegedly pressured a blind woman in her hospital bed to use the agency’s services and give over power of attorney.

SB 648 would provide seniors who seek the services of placement referral agencies with basic consumer protections by requiring the agencies to meet disclosure standards regarding any financial interest in a placement.

“I want to ensure that seniors and their families are not taken advantage of by strengthening the licensing and financial disclosure requirements for referral agencies. This will help protect against referral agencies that engage in unscrupulous business practices,” said Senator Tony Mendoza in announcing his introduction of SB 648. “Referral agencies targeting a senior or family member during one of the most difficult times in their life and profiting from it without full disclosure of their financial interest is just wrong. My bill will end this practice.”

Click here to read SB 648 (health and care facilities: referral agencies) and check its status in the state Legislature.

- See more at: http://consumercal.org/sb-648-cfc-sponsors-bill-to-protect-seniors-from-unethical-long-term-care-referral-agencies/#sthash.qFHR5Thi.dpuf
Comments