Existing law establishes various healing arts boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs that license and regulate various healing arts licensees. Existing laws, including, among others, the Medical Practice Act and the Dental Practice Act, make it a crime for a person who is not licensed as a specified health care professional to use certain words, letters, and phrases or any other terms that imply that they are authorized to practice that profession. Existing law requires, with certain exemptions, a health facility, clinic, physician's office, or office of a group practice that uses generative artificial intelligence, as defined, to generate written or verbal patient communications pertaining to patient clinical information, as defined, to ensure that those communications include both (1) a disclaimer that indicates to the patient that a communication was generated by generative artificial intelligence, as specified, and (2) clear instructions describing how a patient may contact a human health care provider, employee, or other appropriate person. Existing law provides that a violation of these provisions by a physician shall be subject to the jurisdiction of the Medical Board of California or the Osteopathic Medical Board of California, as appropriate. This bill would make provisions of law that prohibit the use of specified terms, letters, or phrases to falsely indicate or imply possession of a license or certificate to practice a health care profession, as defined, enforceable against an entity who develops or deploys artificial intelligence (AI) or generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) technology that uses one or more of those terms, letters, or phrases in its advertising or functionality. The bill would prohibit the use by AI or GenAI technology of certain terms, letters, or phrases that indicate or imply that the advice, care, reports, or assessments being provided through AI or GenAI is being provided by a natural person with the appropriated health care license or certificate. This bill would make a violation of these provisions subject to the jurisdiction of the appropriate health care profession board, and would make each use of a prohibited term, letter, or phrase punishable as a separate violation. By expanding the scope of existing crimes, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of various types of clinics, including alternative birth centers, by the State Department of Public Health, and makes a violation of those provisions a crime. Existing law defines an alternative birth center as a clinic that is not part of a hospital and that provides comprehensive perinatal services and delivery care to pregnant women who remain less than 24 hours at the facility. Existing law requires a licensed alternative birth center specialty clinic, and a licensed primary care clinic that provides services as an alternative birth center, to meet certain criteria, including, among others, being located in proximity to a facility with the capacity for management of obstetrical and neonatal emergencies, as specified. Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law sets forth certain criteria for Medi-Cal reimbursement to alternative birth centers for facility-related delivery costs. Under existing law, as a criterion under both the licensing provisions and the Medi-Cal reimbursement provisions described above, the facility is required to be a provider of comprehensive perinatal services as defined in the Medi-Cal provisions. This bill would remove, under both sets of criteria, the certification condition of being a provider of comprehensive perinatal services as defined in the Medi-Cal provisions. The bill would require the facility to provide perinatal services that are comprehensive in nature, as specified, consistent with certain standards. The bill would remove the above-described proximity requirement and would instead require a written policy for hospital transfer. The bill would require the policy to include certain requirements relating to, among other things, arrangements for the referral of a complication, arrangements for the transfer of care, provision of medical records, information about the estimated transfer time, and a clear explanation of the facility's overall emergency transfer plan, as specified. The bill would also make a technical change to an obsolete reference within a related provision. By creating new requirements for an alternative birth center or a primary care clinic that provides services as an alternative birth center, the violation of which is a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, requires the State Department of Developmental Services to contract with regional centers to provide services and supports to individuals with developmental disabilities, including intellectual disabilities and other conditions, and their families. Under existing law, the regional centers purchase needed services and supports for individuals with developmental disabilities through approved service providers, or arrange for their provision through other publicly funded agencies. Existing law defines "services and supports for persons with developmental disabilities" to mean specialized services and supports or special adaptations of generic services and supports directed toward the alleviation of a developmental disability, or toward the social, personal, physical, or economic habilitation or rehabilitation of an individual with a developmental disability, or toward the achievement and maintenance of an independent, productive, and normal life. Under existing law, specialized medical and dental care are included within that definition. This bill, subject to an appropriation by the Legislature, would require the department, no later than July 1, 2027, to contract with a public or private California dental school or college to administer the Oral Health for People with Disabilities Technical Assistance Center Program to improve dental care services for people with developmental and intellectual disabilities by reducing or eliminating the need for dental treatment using sedation and general anesthesia. The bill would require the department to prioritize contracting with a public California dental school or college to administer the program. The bill would authorize the contracted California dental school or college to partner with a public or private dental school or college, and would require the schools to meet certain criteria relating to location, accreditation, and a demonstrated record of working with regional centers. The bill would require the contracted school or partnership, among other responsibilities, to work with the department to engage up to 21 regional centers to participate, provide practical experience, systems development, and expertise in relevant subject areas, to train, monitor, and support regional center and oral health personnel, and to collect and analyze program data with the support of participating regional centers and oral health providers. The bill would require the department to submit an annual report of the collected data to the Legislature, and to provide guidance and establish protocols to support the program, among other things. The bill also would specify regional center duties, including identifying consumers who can benefit from the program, and establishing vendor agreements with interested oral health professionals.
Existing law finds and declares that prenatal care, delivery service, postpartum care, and neonatal and infant care are essential services necessary to assure maternal and infant health, and that these services are not currently distributed so as to meet the minimum maternal and infant health needs of many Californians. Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health to develop and maintain a statewide community-based comprehensive perinatal services program, as specified, to deliver services in medically underserved areas or areas with demonstrated need. Existing law provides for the licensure of health facilities, including general acute care hospitals, by the department. Existing law generally makes a violation of those licensing provisions a crime. Existing law sets forth provisions for critical access hospitals, as designated by the department and certified as such by the Secretary of the United States Department of Health and Human Services under the federal Medicare Rural Hospital Flexibility Program. This bill would require the department, by July 1, 2026, to establish a 10-year pilot project within up to 5 critical access hospitals to allow participating hospitals, on an application basis, to establish standby perinatal services, as defined. Under the bill, the first 2 hospitals selected, if qualified, would be nonprofit and located in the County of Humboldt and the County of Plumas. The bill would set forth various criteria for the selection of the participating hospitals with regard to standards and resources. The bill would require the department to develop a template to collect and evaluate data on safety, outcomes, utilization, and populations served under the pilot project, as specified. The bill would require the department to prepare and submit an evaluation to the Legislature and to make the evaluation publicly available. Under the bill, an approved standby perinatal service would be subject to all relevant licensing enforcement provisions, as specified. The bill would set forth provisions relating to suspension or revocation for noncompliance and to a hospital's request for program flexibility. The bill would require a hospital requesting approval to establish a standby perinatal service to implement and maintain certain requirements relating to, among other things, compliance with professional standards and recommendations, having specified equipment and supplies, defining the responsibility of the medical staff and administration, implementing contracts, and developing a quality improvement program. The bill would set forth specific requirements for a physician who has responsibility of the standby perinatal services. Because a violation of these provisions would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would make legislative findings and declarations as to the necessity of a special statute for the County of Humboldt and the County of Plumas. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment (CARE) Act, authorizes specified adult persons to petition a civil court to create a voluntary CARE agreement or a court-ordered CARE plan and implement services, to be provided by county behavioral health agencies, to provide behavioral health care, including stabilization medication, housing, and other enumerated services, to adults who are currently experiencing a severe mental illness and have a diagnosis identified in the disorder class schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders, and who meet other specified criteria. Existing law authorizes a specified individual to commence the CARE process, known as the original petitioner. Existing law authorizes the court to dismiss a case without prejudice when the court finds that a petitioner has not made a prima facie showing that they qualify for the CARE process. Existing law requires the court to take prescribed actions if it finds that a prima facie showing has been made, including, but not limited to, setting the matter for an initial appearance on the petition. Existing law requires the court, if it determines the parties have entered or are likely to enter into a CARE agreement, to either approve or modify the CARE agreement and continue the matter at a progress hearing in 60 days, or continue the matter for 14 days to allow the parties additional time to enter into an agreement. Existing law prohibits a person from being tried or adjudged to punishment while that person is mentally incompetent. Existing law requires the court to, for a person found mentally incompetent and not charged with certain offenses, among other things, determine whether restoring the person to mental competence is in the interests of justice. Existing law requires the court to, if restoring the person to mental competence is not in the interests of justice, conduct a hearing, as specified, and determine the person's eligibility for diversion. Under existing law, if the court determines, at the first hearing, that the person is ineligible for diversion, the court is required to hold a hearing to determine the person's other options, including the CARE program. Existing law authorizes a court to refer an individual from, among other things, assisted outpatient treatment or conservatorship proceedings, as specified, to CARE Act proceedings. Existing law provides that if the individual is referred from assisted outpatient treatment, the county behavioral health director or their designee shall be the petitioner, whereas if the referral is from conservatorship proceedings, the conservator or proposed conservator is the petitioner. This bill would allow the court to make a prima facie determination without conducting a hearing. The bill, in the first hearing to determine competence to stand trial, would authorize the court to consider the petitioner's eligibility for both diversion and the CARE program. The bill would authorize the court to refer the petitioner to the CARE Act court if the defendant or counsel for the defendant agrees to the referral and the court has reason to believe the petitioner may be eligible for the CARE program. If the petitioner is not accepted into the CARE program or if the CARE Act court refers the petitioner back to criminal court, as specified, the bill would require the criminal court to conduct a hearing to determine whether the petitioner is eligible for a diversion program. The bill would authorize the county behavioral health agency and jail medical providers to share confidential medical records and other relevant information with the court for the purpose of determining likelihood of eligibility for behavioral health services and programs. The bill would authorize the court to call additional progress hearings after 60 days. The bill would also include persons suffering from bipolar I disorder with psychotic features, except for psychosis related to current intoxication, in the disorder class. The bill would additionally authorize a court to refer an individual from felony proceedings, as specified, to the CARE Act program. The bill would authorize a CARE Act court to consider a referral as a petition for participation in the CARE program if certain requirements are met. The bill would make additional technical and conforming changes. Existing law requires the Judicial Council to develop a mandatory form for use to file a CARE process petition with the court, and requires the petition to be signed under penalty of perjury and include either an affidavit of a licensed behavioral health professional, as defined, or evidence that the respondent was detained for a minimum of 2 intensive treatments, as specified. The bill would additionally include a nurse practitioner and physician assistant as a licensed behavioral health professional for purposes of individuals authorized to prepare an affidavit supporting a CARE process petition. By increasing various duties on county behavioral health agencies, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
(1) Existing law, the California Nutrition Monitoring Development Act of 1986, requires the State Department of Public Health to assess the availability and adequacy of existing state and local food and nutrition data systems. The act requires different state departments, including the State Department of Education, to provide to the State Department of Public Health, upon request, nutrition-related data collection forms, documentation, and reports of various programs. This bill would define "ultraprocessed food" for certain school-related purposes and would require the State Department of Public Health to adopt regulations, on or before June 1, 2028, to define "ultraprocessed foods of concern" and "restricted school foods," as specified. The bill would require the department, when defining ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods, to consider specified factors, including, among others, whether, based on reputable peer-reviewed scientific evidence, a substance or group of substances are linked to health harms or adverse health consequences, as specified. The bill would require schools, as defined, to begin to phase out restricted school foods and ultraprocessed foods of concern by no later than July 1, 2029. Beginning July 1, 2032, the bill would prohibit a vendor from offering restricted school foods and ultraprocessed foods of concern to a school. This bill, on or before February 1, 2028, and on or before February 1 of each year thereafter through February 1, 2032, would require a vendor to report specified information to the State Department of Public Health for each food product sold to a school in the past calendar year, including, among others, the total quantity of food product sold to schools and whether that food product is an ultraprocessed food, a restricted school food, or an ultraprocessed food of concern. The bill, on or before July 1, 2028, and on or before July 1 of each year thereafter through July 1, 2032, would require the State Department of Public Health, in consultation with the State Department of Education, to submit to the Legislature and the Governor a report that contains, among other things, a summary and analysis of the information reported to the State Department of Public Health by vendors and recommendations for state and local legislative actions that could reduce the consumption of ultraprocessed foods, restricted school foods, and ultraprocessed foods of concern in schools. The bill would require the State Department of Public Health to consult with the State Department of Education regarding compliance training and technical assistance for school food service and procurement staff for these purposes and would require the State Department of Public Health to establish a structure to deliver training and technical assistance to local educational agencies. (2) Existing law requires the State Department of Education to develop and maintain nutrition guidelines for school lunches and breakfasts, and for all food and beverages sold on public school campuses, consistent with the requirements for a nutritionally adequate breakfast and a nutritionally adequate lunch. Existing law defines a nutritionally adequate breakfast and a nutritionally adequate lunch for these purposes to mean those that qualify for reimbursement under the most current meal pattern for the federal School Breakfast Program and the federal National School Lunch Program, respectively. Existing law requires a school district, county superintendent of schools, or charter school maintaining kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, to make available a nutritionally adequate breakfast and a nutritionally adequate lunch, free of charge, during each schoolday to any pupil who requests a meal without consideration of the pupil's eligibility for a federally funded free or reduced-price meal. Existing law authorizes a school operated and maintained by a school district or county office of education, from the midnight before to 30 minutes after the end of the official schoolday, to sell food and beverages other than meals reimbursed by specified federal nutrition programs, only if the food or beverages meet dietary guidelines, as specified, depending on grade level. This bill, beginning July 1, 2035, would prohibit a school district, county superintendent of schools, or charter school maintaining kindergarten or any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, from offering a nutritionally adequate breakfast or lunch that includes restricted school foods or ultraprocessed foods of concern, as provided, and would prohibit a school operated and maintained by a school district or county office of education from selling food or beverages, except for food items sold as part of a school fundraising event, containing those restricted school foods or ultraprocessed foods of concern, as provided. (3) To the extent this bill would impose additional requirements on public schools, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Under existing law, in-person, face-to-face contact is not required under the Medi-Cal program when covered health care services are provided by video synchronous interaction, asynchronous store and forward, audio-only synchronous interaction, remote patient monitoring, or other permissible virtual communication modalities, when those services and settings meet certain criteria. Existing law required the department, on or before January 1, 2023, to develop a research and evaluation plan that, among other things, proposes strategies to analyze the relationship between telehealth and access to care, quality of care, and Medi-Cal program costs, utilization, and program integrity. The department created that plan in December of 2022 and published the Biennial Telehealth Utilization Report in April of 2024. This bill, the Telehealth for All Act of 2025, would require the department, commencing in 2028 and every 2 years thereafter, to use Medi-Cal data and other data sources available to the department to produce analyses in a publicly available Medi-Cal telehealth utilization report. The bill would authorize the department to include those analyses in each of the department's Biennial Telehealth Utilization Reports, as specified. The bill would require the analyses to address telehealth access and utilization data, including various metrics on telehealth visits and claims, disaggregated by geographic, demographic, and social determinants of health categories to identify disparities. The bill would require the department to identify additional data elements for inclusion in future reports to help to identify and address access-to-care issues or provide greater insight into utilization of telehealth modalities.
Existing law, the California Community Care Facilities Act, provides for the licensing and regulation of community care facilities by the State Department of Social Services, including adult day programs and residential facilities. A violation of provisions relating to these facilities is a misdemeanor. This bill would authorize a licensed facility or licensee, as defined, upon receipt of a request from a client, or the authorized representative of a client, who has been diagnosed with seizures, a seizure disorder, or epilepsy and who has been prescribed intranasal emergency antiseizure medication, to allow an administrator or authorized volunteer, as defined, to administer intranasal emergency antiseizure medication to the client during a seizure emergency. The bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2028, to establish minimum standards for this training, as specified. The bill would prohibit intranasal emergency antiseizure medication from being administered to a client unless the licensee has a seizure action plan for the client that contains specified information, including, among other things, a signed written authorization verifying that a seizure experienced by the client may be responded to at the licensee by a nonmedical professional, including through the administration of emergency antiseizure medication, as specified. The bill would require licensees to maintain with the client's seizure action plan a description of how the licensee will coordinate care for a client in the absence of an administrator or authorized volunteer and what actions will be taken to ensure the continued safety of the client. The bill would require licensed facilities to provide a specified notice to all administrators and authorized volunteers that, among other things, informs them of their right to rescind an offer to volunteer at any time, as specified, and explains the liability protections and indemnification requirements described below. The bill would require any licensee that authorizes administrators or authorized volunteers to ensure that each administrator or authorized volunteer will be provided defense and indemnification for any and all civil liability, as specified. The bill would prohibit an administrator or authorized volunteer who administers intranasal emergency antiseizure medication, any person who provides training to an administrator or authorized volunteer, or any person who otherwise complies with the requirements of the above-described provisions, in good faith and not for compensation, from being subject to professional review, civil liability, or criminal prosecution for their actions or omissions, or the actions or omissions of a volunteer, as specified. By expanding the scope of an existing crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, establishes the California State Board of Pharmacy for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacies. Existing law authorizes a prescriber to dispense a dangerous drug, including a controlled substance, to an emergency room patient if specified requirements are met, including that the dangerous drug is acquired by the hospital pharmacy. This bill would, notwithstanding any other law, authorize a prescriber to dispense an unused portion of a dangerous drug acquired by the hospital pharmacy to an emergency room patient upon discharge if certain conditions are satisfied, including that the dangerous drug is not a controlled substance and that dispensing the unused portion of the dangerous drug is required to continue treatment of the patient. Existing law requires an automated drug delivery system (ADDS) that is installed, leased, owned, or operated in California to be licensed by the board. Existing law exempts an automated unit dose system (AUDS) , a type of ADDS, from licensure if the AUDS is used solely to provide doses administered to patients while in a licensed general acute care hospital facility or a licensed acute psychiatric hospital facility if the licensed hospital pharmacy owns or leases the AUDS and owns the dangerous drugs and dangerous devices in the AUDS. This bill would also exempt from licensure an AUDS that is used to dispense dangerous drugs to emergency room patients in accordance with specified requirements.
Existing law, the Home Care Services Consumer Protection Act, requires a home care organization, as defined, to ensure that an affiliated home care aide completes specified training requirements prior to providing home care services, including annual training related to the aide's clients' rights and safety and how to provide for a client's daily living needs. A violation of the act is a misdemeanor. This bill would, beginning on January 1, 2027, additionally require a home care organization to ensure that a home care aide completes, prior to providing home care and annually thereafter, training related to the special care needs of clients with dementia. Because the bill creates new crimes by expanding the act to include additional requirements for home care organizations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
