Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation by the State Department of Public Health of health facilities, including general acute care hospitals, as defined. Existing law requires a health facility to allow a patient's domestic partner, the children of the patient's domestic partner, and the domestic partner of the patient's parent or child to visit unless no visitors are allowed, the facility reasonably determines that the presence of a particular visitor would endanger the health or safety of a patient, a member of the health facility staff, or other visitor to the health facility, or would significantly disrupt the operations of a facility, or the patient has indicated to the health facility staff that the patient does not want this person to visit. A violation of this provision is a misdemeanor. This bill would require a general acute care hospital to allow a patient with physical, intellectual, or developmental disabilities, a patient with cognitive impairment, including dementia, and a patient with another disability, as specified, to have a family or friend caregiver with them as needed, including outside standard visiting hours, unless specified conditions are met, including, but not limited to, that the hospital reasonably determines that the presence of a particular visitor would endanger the health or safety of the visitor, a patient, a member of the staff, or other visitor to the hospital, or would significantly disrupt the operations of the hospital. The bill would not prohibit a hospital from otherwise establishing reasonable restrictions upon visitation. The bill would authorize the hospital to impose legitimate health and safety requirements on visitors, as specified. The bill would specify that its provisions do not prohibit restrictions to patient visitation policies implemented during a state of emergency declared by the Governor, a health emergency declared by the State Public Health Officer, or a local health emergency declared by a local health officer, as specified. The bill would specify that its provisions do not create any new civil or criminal liability, including, but not limited to, liability for any illness, infection, or injury experienced by a patient or visitor on the part of a hospital that complies with its requirements. By expanding the scope of a 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.
(1) Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) , an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, established the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission to oversee the implementation of the MHSA. Existing law specifies the composition of the 16-member commission, including the Attorney General or their designee, the Superintendent of Public Instruction or their designee, specified members of the Legislature, and 12 members appointed by the Governor, as prescribed. Existing law, the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) , an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 1 at the March 5, 2024, statewide primary election, recast the MHSA by, among other things, renaming the commission to the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission and changing its composition and duties. This bill would make technical changes to reflect the correct name of the commission. (2) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of health facilities by the State Department of Public Health. Existing law requires a health facility to develop, implement, and comply with a patient safety plan to improve the health and safety of patients and to reduce preventable patient safety events. Existing law requires a patient safety plan to contain specified elements, including, but not limited to, a reporting system for patient safety events that allows anyone involved to make a report of a patient safety event to the health facility and a process for a team of facility staff to conduct analyses related to root causes of patient safety events. Existing law, commencing January 1, 2026, and biannually thereafter, requires a health facility to submit a patient safety plan to the department. A violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill would instead require a health facility to submit a patient safety plan to the department biennially. The bill would also make technical corrections to those provisions. (3) Existing law establishes the State Department of Public Health and sets forth its powers and duties to license and administer health facilities, as defined, including skilled nursing facilities and intermediate care facilities. Existing law requires the department to prepare and maintain a list of approved training programs for nurse assistant certification, which are required to include a precertification training program consisting of at least 60 classroom hours of training on basic nursing skills, patient safety and rights, the social and psychological problems of patients, and elder abuse recognition and reporting and at least 100 hours of supervised and on-the-job training clinical practice. Existing law requires at least 2 hours of the 60 hours of classroom training and at least 4 hours of the 100 hours of the supervised clinical training to address the special needs of persons with developmental and mental disorders, including intellectual disability, Alzheimer's disease, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, dementia, Parkinson's disease, and mental illness. A violation of these provisions is a crime. This bill would require that at least 2 of the 60 hours of classroom training address the special needs of persons with Alzheimer's disease and related dementias. By changing the definition of a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (4) Existing law requires a hospital, as defined, to maintain an understandable written policy regarding discount payments for financially qualified patients as well as a written charity care policy, and requires a hospital to negotiate the terms of a discount payment plan with an eligible patient, as specified. Existing law requires each hospital to provide patients with written notice, provided at the time of service, about the availability of the hospital's discount payment and charity care policies, and other additional information. This bill would authorize, with the exception of emergency room visits, a hospital to provide the written notice in either hard copy or, if the patient has previously consented to receive electronic communications, using the patient's preferred electronic notification method. The bill would require the written notice related to an emergency room visit to be provided in hard copy. The bill would require, if the notice is provided electronically, the notice to be sent separately from any other electronic communications and to prominently indicate in the subject line that the notice is related to the hospital's discount and charity care policies. (5) Existing law authorizes the State Department of Public Health to develop and administer a syndromic surveillance program and, subject to an appropriation, to either designate an existing system or to create a new system that would be required, at a minimum, to provide public health practitioners access to an electronic health system to rapidly collect, evaluate, share, and store syndromic surveillance data, as specified. This bill would make technical corrections to related provisions. (6) Existing law provides for the regulation of health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law requires a large group disability insurance policy and a small group disability insurance policy, except as specified, issued, amended, or renewed on or after January 1, 2026, to provide coverage for the diagnosis and treatment of infertility and fertility services, as specified. This bill would instead require a large group health insurance policy and a small group health insurance policy, except as specified, to offer the above-described services. (7) Existing law requires an insurer to provide an insured with an annual written or electronic notice regarding the benefits of a behavioral health and wellness screening, as defined, for children and adolescents 8 to 18 years of age. This bill would make technical changes to those provisions. (8) 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 requires, commencing January 1, 2022, that Community-Based Adult Services (CBAS) continue to be available as a capitated benefit for a qualified Medi-Cal beneficiary under a comprehensive risk contract with an applicable Medi-Cal managed care plan. This bill would make a technical correction to this provision. (9) Existing law, subject to any necessary federal approvals, sets forth various Medi-Cal provisions relating to complex rehabilitation technology (CRT) , which is a form of durable medical equipment, including, but not limited to, complex rehabilitation manual and power wheelchairs. Existing law requires a CRT provider to comply with certain standards, including requiring a qualified rehabilitation technology professional to be physically present for the evaluation. This bill would make a technical correction to this provision. (10) Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, provides for the regulation of various subjects relating to the manufacturing, processing, labeling, advertising, and sale of food, drugs, and cosmetics under the administration and enforcement of the State Department of Public Health. Existing law requires a manufacturer of baby food, as defined, for sale or distribution in this state to test a representative sample of each production aggregate of the manufacturer's final baby food product, at a proficient laboratory meeting certain criteria, for toxic elements, as specified. Existing law defines baby food as food packaged in jars, pouches, tubs, and boxes represented or purported to be specifically for babies and young children less than 2 years of age and excludes infant formula. This bill would clarify that baby food does not include dietary supplements, as defined. (11) 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.
Under existing law, the State Department of Health Care Services is responsible for administering prevention, treatment, and recovery services for alcohol and drug abuse. Existing law also provides for the certification and regulation of adult alcoholism or drug abuse recovery and treatment programs by the department and authorizes the department to enforce those provisions. Existing law requires the department's death investigation policy to be designed to ensure that a resident's death is addressed and investigated by the department in a timely manner, and requires specified procedures if a death occurs in a licensed facility, including requiring a written report related to the death that includes a description of the followup action that is planned to prevent a future death. Existing law requires that report to be submitted to the department within 7 calendar days of the event or incident. This bill, John's Law, would additionally require a facility to submit to the department, within 30 days of the initial incident, any relevant information that was not known at the time of the initial incident. If the department identifies any violations of specified licensing provisions during its investigation of a resident's death, the bill would require the department to issue a written notice of deficiency to the facility. The bill would authorize the department to implement, interpret, or make specific these provisions through the use of all-county letters, provider bulletins, or similar instructions without taking any further regulatory action.
Existing law establishes the California Children's Services (CCS) Program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and counties, to provide medically necessary services, based on financial eligibility, for persons under 21 years of age who have any of specified medical conditions, including, among others, cystic fibrosis or hemophilia. Existing law requires the board of supervisors of each county to designate the county department of public health or the county department of social welfare as the designated agency to administer the program. Existing law authorizes counties with a total population under 200,000 persons to administer the county program independently or jointly with the department. Existing law requires counties with a total population in excess of 200,000 persons to administer the county program independently. This bill would authorize counties with a total population under 2,000 persons to designate another county to administer the program, if the other county agrees to the designation and otherwise meets certain CCS standards established by the Director of Health Care Services and if neither county is a Whole Child Model county under certain provisions of the Medi-Cal program. The bill would require the department to adopt regulations necessary to implement these provisions.
(1) Existing law, the Massage Therapy Act, provides for the certification and regulation of massage professionals by the California Massage Therapy Council, which is a private nonprofit organization governed by a board of directors composed of 13 members. Existing law requires one member to be appointed by the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, and authorizes the California Association of Private Postsecondary Schools to appoint one member. Existing law requires one member to be a certified massage therapist or a certified massage practitioner who is a California resident who has practiced massage for at least 3 years before appointment and is selected by a specified professional society, association, or other entity the membership of which is composed of massage therapist professionals, and that chooses to participate in the council. This bill would remove the above-described appointment of one member by the office of the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges, and would limit the appointment authority of the California Association of Private Postsecondary Schools by requiring that their appointed member represent an approved massage school. The bill would add an additional member who is a certified massage therapist or a certified massage practitioner who is selected by a specified professional society, association, or other entity, as described above, and would make conforming changes related to that provision. Existing law authorizes the council to take any reasonable actions necessary to carry out the responsibilities and duties set forth in the Massage Therapy Act, including hiring staff. This bill would prohibit the total annual salary for any individual employed or contracted by the council from exceeding the annual salary provided to certain state officers during that fiscal year. Existing law requires the council to issue a certificate to practice massage therapy to an applicant who meets specified qualifications, including that the applicant has successfully completed at least 500 hours in the curricula in massage and related subjects, as specified, from approved schools. Existing law requires the council to determine whether the school from which an applicant has obtained their education meets the requirement of the Massage Therapy Act. If the council has any reason to question whether or not the applicant received that education from the school or schools that the applicant is claiming, existing law requires the council to investigate the facts to determine that the applicant received the education before issuing the certificate. This bill would authorize, instead of require, the council to conduct that investigation regarding the applicant's education, as described above. The bill would require an applicant who meets all of the other requirements for certification and who received the instruction described above at an approved school that was not under formal investigation at the time at which the applicant began instruction but was subsequently placed under investigation by the council to, as a condition of certification, have the opportunity for an interview or educational hearing, as specified, provided that their application for certification was submitted to the council no more than 90 days from the date of a final decision by the council to revoke the school's approval. The bill would require the council to issue a certificate to any applicant who successfully passes the interview or hearing, provided that the school at which the applicant completed the instruction was a school approved by the council within 90 days from the date the applicant submitted their application for certification and was considered to be in good standing, as specified, at the time the applicant passed the interview or hearing. Existing law, beginning January 1, 2027, also requires an applicant to pass a massage and bodywork competency assessment examination that meets generally recognized psychometric principles and standards and that is approved by the council, as specified. The bill would remove the requirement that an applicant pass a massage and bodywork competency assessment examination as described above, and would require an approved massage school, upon each student's completion of curriculum at the massage school, to provide notice to the student that the massage and bodywork competency assessment examination is not a requirement for certification but may be required for licensure or certification as a massage therapist in any other state. Existing law requires a certificate holder to notify the council within 30 days of any changes in the certificate holder's home address or the address of any massage establishment or other location where the certificate holder provides massage for compensation, except as specified. This bill would also require a certificate holder to notify the council within 30 days of any changes in the certificate holder's legal name. Existing law makes it a violation of the Massage Therapy Act for an applicant or certificate holder to commit certain acts, and makes the commission of those acts grounds for the council to deny an application for a certificate or to impose discipline on a certificate holder. Those acts include being convicted of any felony, misdemeanor, infraction, or municipal code violation, providing massage of female breasts without the written consent of the person receiving the massage and a referral from a licensed California health care provider, and dressing in certain attire or manners while engaged in the practice of massage for compensation, or while visible to clients in a massage establishment as specified. This bill would specify that the council may take action for a conviction, as described above, when the time for appeal has elapsed, the judgment of conviction has been affirmed on appeal, or an order granting probation is made suspending the imposition of sentence. The bill would define a "conviction" for these purposes to mean a judgment following a plea or verdict of guilty, a plea of nolo contendere, or a finding of guilt. The bill would also revise and recast the above-described acts that are considered a violation of the Massage Therapy Act. In this regard, the bill would remove the requirement of a referral from a licensed California health care provider to provide massage of female breasts. The bill would remove the list of prohibited attire or manners of dressing while engaged in the practice of massage for compensation, or while visible to clients in a massage establishment, except that the bill would maintain the prohibition on dressing in a manner that is deemed by the council to constitute unprofessional attire based on the custom and practice of the profession in California. The bill would also include among those specified acts that are considered a violation the determination of being a threat to public safety based on mental health reasons by a medical or mental health professional, or the rendering of a finding of not guilty in a criminal proceeding by reason of insanity. Existing law authorizes a board to deny a license on the grounds that the applicant has been convicted of a crime or was subject to formal discipline within the preceding 7 years from the date of application based on professional misconduct that is substantially related to the qualifications, functions, or duties of the business or profession for which the present application is made, as specified and subject to certain exceptions. This bill would require the denial of an initial certificate to practice massage therapy on the grounds that the applicant has been convicted of a crime or has been subject to formal discipline as provided under the act to be consistent with the above-described provisions authorizing a board to deny a license on certain grounds. Existing law requires the council to follow specified procedures for deciding upon and imposing the denial of a certificate or the discipline of a certificate holder under the Massage Therapy Act. Existing law requires, with certain exceptions, the council to provide an opportunity for the applicant or certificate holder to be heard, orally or in writing, not less than 5 days before the effective date of the denial or discipline, by a person or body authorized to decide whether the proposed denial or discipline should go into effect. This bill would require the person or body authorized to make that decision to be qualified. The bill would authorize an applicant or certificate holder to request an appeal of a final decision of the council to deny a certificate or discipline a certificate holder by submitting a request in writing within 30 days of the date of the final decision. In this regard, the bill would require a request to appeal a final decision to be considered by a committee of the board of directors within 120 days of the final decision, as specified. If a request to appeal is granted, the bill would require the appeal of the final decision to be heard at the next board of directors meeting, as specified, that is at least 120 days from the date that the request to appeal was granted, except as specified. The bill would require the council to notify the applicant or certificate holder of its right to request an appeal pursuant to these provisions at the time of the final decision. Existing law requires the council to develop policies, procedures, rules, or bylaws governing the requirements and processes for approving, denying approval of, imposing corrective action on, or unapproving schools from which applicants obtain their education, as specified. Existing law requires the council, on or before one year from the date the council receives an initial application for approval as a school, to approve the school, propose to deny approval of the school, or notify the school that corrective action is required, and authorizes the council to deny the application of a school that fails to adequately rectify the deficiencies. Existing law authorizes a school to appeal the council's final decision to deny approval of the school, and requires the appeal to be heard at the next board of directors meeting, as specified. This bill would require the council to notify the school of its right to appeal pursuant to these provisions at the time of the final decision. Existing law states the intent of the Legislature that, among other things, the Massage Therapy Act enables consumers and local government to more easily identify certified massage professionals and provide for consistent statewide certification and oversight of massage professionals. Existing law repeals the Massage Therapy Act on January 1, 2026. This bill would also state the intent of the Legislature that, among other things, both state and local regulation of massage therapy reflect the recognized status of certified massage professionals as health care providers. The bill would instead repeal the act on January 1, 2030. Existing law, the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, requires, with specified exceptions, that all meetings of a state body be open and public and all persons be permitted to attend any meeting of a state body. The act imposes various requirements on a state body holding a meeting subject to the act, including, among other things, requiring the state body to provide notice of its meeting to any person who requests that notice in writing. The Massage Therapy Act requires meetings of the council to be subject to the rules of the Bagley-Keene Open Meeting Act, and authorizes the board to adopt additional policies and procedures that provide greater transparency to certificate holders and the public than required by the act. This bill would, except as otherwise provided in the Massage Therapy Act, require meetings of the council to be governed by either Rosenberg's Rules of Order or Robert's Rules of Order, Newly Revised. The bill would require the council to provide a meaningful opportunity for public participation in the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any policies, procedures, rules, or bylaws that substantially impact the rights, benefits, privileges, duties, obligations, or responsibilities of individuals or entities subject to certification or approval by the council, including, among other things, actions by the council to increase fees. In this regard, the bill would require the council, at a minimum, to publish the complete text of any policies, procedures, rules, or bylaws proposed for adoption, amendment, or repeal along with a summary of the changes being considered for a period of at least 45 calendar days before the adoption, amendment, or repeal, and to accept written public comments during the 45-day period and allow further public comment during a meeting held for these purposes. Existing law, the California Public Records Act, requires state and local agencies to make their records available for public inspection, unless an exemption from disclosure applies. This bill would require the council, beginning July 1, 2027, and to the extent practicable, to make the records of the council available for public inspection in a manner consistent with the California Public Records Act, as specified, and would authorize the council to charge for the direct costs of responding to requests for records, as specified. (2) Existing law establishes the California Private Postsecondary Education Act of 2009, which provides for student protections and regulatory oversight of private postsecondary educational institutions, as defined, in the state. The act is enforced by the Bureau for Private Postsecondary Education within the Department of Consumer Affairs. Existing law requires an institution with an approval to operate under the act that knows that it is being investigated by an oversight entity other than the bureau to report that investigation, as defined, to the bureau in writing within 30 days of the institution's first knowledge of the investigation, and requires an institution with an approval to operate under the act that is the subject of a judgment by, a regulatory action by, increased oversight or monitoring by, or a settlement with, any oversight entity other than the bureau to report it to the bureau within 30 days. Existing law defines "oversight entity" for these purposes to include, among other entities, a governmental agency. This bill would also include any private entity authorized pursuant to any provision of the Business and Professions Code to approve schools or educational programs for purposes of a professional certification as an "oversight entity" for the above-described purposes.
(1) Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, requires the California State Board of Pharmacy within the Department of Consumer Affairs to license and regulate the practice of pharmacy, including pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, and pharmacies. Existing law authorizes the board, with the approval of the Director of Consumer Affairs, to appoint an executive officer to exercise certain powers and to perform certain duties delegated by the board, as specified. Existing law repeals the provisions establishing the board and authorizing the appointment of an executive officer on January 1, 2026, rendering the board subject to review by the appropriate policy committees of the Legislature. This bill would provide that the board has exclusive authority to administer and enforce the Pharmacy Law related to the practice of pharmacy and the licensing of pharmacists and pharmacies, and would specify that its provisions do not prohibit the board from evaluating or acting regarding unlicensed activity, as provided. The bill would extend the repeal date of the above-described provisions to January 1, 2030. The bill would additionally require the board to establish a Pharmacy Technician Advisory Committee to advise and make recommendations to the board, as specified. Existing law specifies the fees for issuance or renewal of licenses issued pursuant to the Pharmacy Law, including, among others, pharmacy licenses. This bill would require the board to waive the application fee for a pharmacy operating a physical location in a medically underserved area, as defined, and would authorize the board to waive the fee for the annual renewal of a license if the licensee provides the board with certification of continued operation in the medically underserved area. (2) Existing law authorizes a pharmacist to perform various procedures and functions, including those related to dispensing or furnishing drugs or devices, as specified. Existing law generally requires a pharmacist's dispensing or furnishing drugs to be done pursuant to a valid prescription, except as provided in specified circumstances. Those exceptions include furnishing an FDA-approved opioid antagonist, emergency contraception drug therapy, self-administered hormonal contraceptives, nicotine replacement products, certain medications for individuals traveling outside of the United States, and certain HIV medications, as specified. Existing law requires certain conditions to be met for a pharmacist to authorize the initiation of a prescription under certain of those exceptions or to otherwise provide clinical advice, services, information, or patient consultation. This bill would revise and recast the above-described provisions to authorize a pharmacist to, among other things, furnish dangerous devices, to furnish FDA-approved or authorized medications as part of preventative health care services that do not require a diagnosis, as specified, and to complete missing information on a prescription for a noncontrolled medication if there is evidence to support the change. The bill would require that a pharmacist provide those and other specified services or activities consistent with the accepted standard of care, defined to mean the degree of care a prudent and reasonable pharmacist licensed under the Pharmacy Law, with similar education, training, experience, resources, and setting, would use in a similar situation. The bill would make nonsubstantive, conforming changes. Existing law requires the clinical advice, services, information, or patient consultation that a pharmacist provides to be provided to a health care professional or to a patient. This bill would authorize a pharmacist to provide the clinical advice, services, information, or patient consultation to a patient's agent. Existing law, until January 1, 2026, authorizes a pharmacist to furnish COVID-19 oral therapeutics, as defined, following a positive test for SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, in accordance with specified requirements. This bill would delete the January 1, 2026, repeal date, thereby extending this authorization indefinitely. Existing law prohibits a dangerous drug from being refilled without the authorization of the prescriber, except under specified circumstances. Under those circumstances, existing law requires a pharmacist to make every reasonable effort to contact the prescriber. This bill would remove the above-described requirement that the pharmacist make every reasonable effort to contact the prescriber. Existing law authorizes a pharmacist to dispense not more than a 90-day supply of a dangerous drug other than a controlled substance pursuant to a valid prescription that specifies an initial quantity of less than a 90-day supply followed by periodic refills of that amount if certain requirements are met. Existing law prohibits a pharmacist from dispensing a greater supply pursuant to that provision if the prescriber indicates that there is to be no change to the quantity of the refill, as specified. This bill would remove that prohibition. Existing law authorizes a pharmacy to dispense epinephrine auto-injectors to a prehospital emergency medical care person or lay rescuer for the purpose of rendering emergency care, as specified. This bill would remove the above-described authorization. (3) Existing law authorizes a licensed pharmacist to perform additional functions if the licensee is recognized by the board as "an advanced practice pharmacist" by meeting certain requirements. Those additional functions include, among others, performing patient assessments, ordering and interpreting drug therapy-related tests, and initiating, adjusting, or discontinuing drug therapy, as specified. The requirements for recognition as an advanced practice pharmacist include having completed a combination of specified certifications, postgraduate residencies, or experience under a collaborative practice agreement or protocol with a physician. Existing law also requires an advanced practice pharmacist to complete 10 hours of continuing education in addition to the continuing education otherwise required at the time of a second or subsequent license renewal. This bill would revise those and other related provisions to refer to those licensees as "advanced pharmacist practitioners," instead of as "advanced practice pharmacists." (4) Existing law prohibits any person from furnishing or dispensing any dangerous drug or device on the internet for delivery to any person in California without a prescription issued pursuant to a "good faith prior examination," as provided. This bill would instead refer to that examination as an "appropriate prior examination." (5) Existing law authorizes the board to issue citations containing fines and orders of abatement for violations of specified law, as provided. Existing law authorizes the board to bring an action against a chain community pharmacy under common ownership or management for fines for a violation of the Pharmacy Law that was expressly encouraged by the common owner or manager, as provided. This bill would instead apply those fines for a violation that was expressly encouraged by any owner or manager of the chain community pharmacy. Existing law authorizes the board to bring an action for fines for repeated violations of materially similar provisions of the Pharmacy Law within 5 years by 3 or more pharmacies operating under common ownership or management within a chain community pharmacy, as specified. Existing law provides a pharmacy with a defense if it establishes that the violation was contrary to a written policy that was communicated by the common owner or manager to all employees where the violation occurred. Existing law also provides a defense if the pharmacy establishes that, within 6 months after the violation, the common owner or manager corrected all unlawful policies, communicated the change in policies, and provided the board with proof of abatement of the violation, as specified. This bill would, for the defense that the violation was contrary to a written policy, also require the entity to establish that it has complied with the policy. The bill would revise the above-described corrective-actions defense by allowing those actions to be undertaken by any owner or manager of the pharmacy. The bill would additionally authorize the board to bring an action for fines for repeated violations of materially similar provisions of the Pharmacy Law against a mail order pharmacy, defined as a nonresident pharmacy that dispenses medications and ships them to patients via the postal service or other mail delivery method, as provided. The bill would require the board, in determining the amount of the fine, to consider mitigating and aggregating factors, as specified. (6) Existing law prohibits the board from issuing a pharmacy license to a person who has a shared community or financial interest with a person authorized to prescribe or write a prescription, as provided. This bill would establish an exception to the above-described prohibition under which the applicant and the prescriber would be required to provide statements that the prescriber disavows any community or financial interest in the license and to transmute any interest in the license that is shared community property into the separate property of the applicant, as provided. The bill would prohibit a pharmacy granted a license pursuant to this exception from filling any prescriptions issued or prescribed by a person who shares a community or other financial interest with the licensee or a prescriber at the same place of business as that person if the prescriber owns an interest greater than 10% in the practice issuing the prescription. Existing law authorizes the board to issue a retired license to a licensed pharmacist, as specified. Existing law authorizes the holder of a retired license to restore their license to active status by passing the examination that is required for initial licensure with the board. This bill would instead authorize the holder of a retired license to request to restore their license to active status within 3 years of issuance of the retired license by paying a renewal fee and successfully completing certain continuing education within the 2 years preceding the request, as specified. If more than 3 years have elapsed since the issuance of the retired license, the bill would require the holder of the retired license to reapply for licensure as a pharmacist, as specified. Existing law authorizes the board to deny a license application if the applicant has been convicted of a crime or subjected to formal discipline that would be grounds for denial of a federal registration to distribute controlled substances. This bill would also authorize the board to deny a license application if the applicant has been convicted of a crime involving fraud in violation of state or federal laws related to health care or involving financial identity theft. Existing law requires certain licensed facilities to perform a self-assessment evaluating compliance with specified provisions of the Pharmacy Law, as provided. This bill would require all licensed facilities to complete a self-assessment every odd-numbered year and within 30 days of certain changes to the license, management personnel, and location, as provided. The bill would require this self-assessment to be signed under penalty of perjury, thereby imposing a state-mandated local program by expanding the crime of perjury. (7) Existing law requires a pharmacy to designate a pharmacist-in-charge and notify the board within 30 days of that designation, as specified. Existing law authorizes the pharmacist-in-charge to, among other things, make staffing decisions and notify store management of dangerous conditions, as specified. This bill would require the pharmacist-in-charge to determine the appropriate pharmacist-to-technician ratio, within prescribed limits, and prohibit anyone else from interfering with the exercise of the pharmacist-in-charge's independent professional judgment in setting this ratio. The bill would additionally require the pharmacist-in-charge to notify the owner or hospital administrator of dangerous conditions, as specified. Existing law provides for the licensing of nonresident pharmacies, as specified. Existing law prohibits a pharmacist at a nonresident pharmacy whose license has been revoked from prescribing a dangerous drug or providing other pharmacy-related services, as specified. This bill would, beginning July 1, 2026, require a nonresident pharmacy, as a prerequisite to registering with the board and ongoing licensure, to identify a California-licensed pharmacist employed and working at the nonresident pharmacy to be proposed to serve as the pharmacist-in-charge. The bill would also require the nonresident pharmacy, within 90 days of designating a pharmacist-in-charge, to notify the board of the identity and license number of that pharmacist and the date they were designated, as specified. The bill would require the nonresident pharmacy, within 90 days, to notify the board of a pharmacist-in-charge ceasing to act as the pharmacist-in-charge and to propose another pharmacist to take over as the pharmacist-in-charge. The bill would additionally, beginning July 1, 2026, prohibit a nonresident pharmacy from permitting a pharmacist-in-charge who is not licensed in California from working at a nonresident pharmacy. The bill would authorize the board to inspect a nonresident pharmacy. The bill would require a nonresident pharmacy to deposit a reasonable amount, as determined by the board, necessary to cover the board's estimated reasonable costs of performing the inspection, as specified. (8) Existing law limits a pharmacy with only one pharmacist to one pharmacy technician performing packaging, manipulative, repetitive, or other nondiscretionary tasks. This bill would increase this limit to 3 pharmacy technicians performing those tasks. (9) Existing law requires a pharmacy to preserve certain records, as provided. This bill would require a pharmacy to additionally maintain records related to prescribed policies and procedures in a readily retrievable format. The bill would also impose requirements related to electronically maintained records. (10) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 4064.5 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by SB 418 to be operative only if this bill and SB 418 is enacted and this bill is enacted last. This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 4076 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 260 to be operative only if this bill and AB 260 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (11) Because a violation of these provisions would be 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 Pharmacy Law, establishes in the Department of Consumer Affairs the California State Board of Pharmacy to license and regulate the practice of pharmacy. Exiting law requires a pharmacist, when furnishing self-administered hormonal contraceptives, to follow specified standardized procedures or protocols developed and approved by both the board and the Medical Board of California in consultation with the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the California Pharmacists Association, and other appropriate entities. Existing law requires those standardized procedures or protocols to require that the patient use a self-screening tool that will identify related patient risk factors and that require the pharmacist to refer the patient for appropriate followup care, as specified. Existing law requires the pharmacist to provide the recipient of the drug with a standardized factsheet that includes the indications and contraindications for use of the drug, the appropriate method for using the drug, the need for medical followup, and other appropriate information. Existing law authorizes a pharmacist furnishing an FDA-approved, self-administered hormonal contraceptive pursuant to the above-described protocols to furnish, at the patient's request, up to a 12-month supply at one time. This bill would limit the application of those requirements to self-administered hormonal contraceptives that are prescription-only, and would authorize a pharmacist to furnish over-the-counter contraceptives without following those standardized procedures or protocols. The bill would additionally authorize a pharmacist to furnish up to a 12-month supply at one time of over-the-counter contraceptives at the patient's request. The bill would make related conforming changes. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law prohibits a person or business, as defined, from collecting, using, disclosing, or retaining the personal information of a person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, as defined, except as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested and prohibits a person or business from selling or sharing this personal information. Existing law authorizes an aggrieved person or entity to institute and prosecute a civil action against a person or business for a violation of these provisions and specifies the damages and costs authorized to be recovered. This bill would recast the above-described provisions, and instead prohibit the collection, use, disclosure, sale, sharing, or retention of the personal information of a natural person who is physically located at, or within a precise geolocation of, a family planning center, except under certain circumstances, including, among others, for the collection or use as necessary to perform the services or provide the goods requested. The bill would also provide that these provisions do not alter applicable law regarding use by a law enforcement agency, as defined, of personal information generated by an electronic monitoring device. The bill would authorize an aggrieved person to institute and prosecute a civil action against a natural person, association, proprietorship, corporation, trust, foundation, partnership, or any other organization or group of people acting in concert for a violation of these provisions. The bill would also make other nonsubstantive changes. This bill would, subject to specified exceptions, prohibit geofencing, or selling or sharing personal information with a third party to geofence, as defined, an entity that provides in-person health care services in California for specified purposes, and would prohibit the use of personal information obtained in violation of this provision. The bill would provide that violators are subject to an injunction and liable for a civil penalty assessed and recovered in a civil action brought by the Attorney General, and deposited in the California Reproductive Justice and Freedom Fund. The bill would require those penalties to be awarded by the State Department of Public Health for grants to implement a program or to fund an existing program that provides and promotes medically accurate and comprehensive reproductive and sexual health education, as provided. The bill would also provide that a statement signed under penalty of perjury, as specified, that the personal information will not be used for selling or sharing personal information in violation of these geofencing provisions is prima facie evidence that the personal information was not sold or shared in violation of these geofencing provisions. By expanding the crime of perjury, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. Existing law, the Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA) , generally prohibits a provider of health care, a health care service plan, or a contractor from disclosing medical information regarding a patient, enrollee, or subscriber without first obtaining an authorization, unless a specified exception applies. The CMIA prohibits a provider of health care, a health care service plan, a contractor, or an employer from releasing medical information that would identify an individual or related to an individual seeking or obtaining an abortion in response to a subpoena or a request or to law enforcement if that subpoena, request, or the purpose of law enforcement for the medical information is based on, or for the purpose of enforcement of, either another state's laws that interfere with a person's rights to choose or obtain an abortion or a foreign penal civil action. This bill would, similar to the provisions of the CMIA, prohibit the release of research records, in a personally identifying form, developed or acquired by a person in the course of conducting research relating to anyone seeking or obtaining health care services, or relating to personal information, in response to a subpoena or a request or to law enforcement if that subpoena, request, or the purpose of law enforcement for the medical information is based on, or for the purpose of enforcement of, either another state's laws that interfere with a person's rights to choose or obtain an abortion or a foreign penal civil action. 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.
(1) The California Constitution provides for the fundamental rights of privacy and to choose to have an abortion. Existing law, the Reproductive Privacy Act, prohibits the state from denying or interfering with a pregnant person's right to choose or obtain an abortion before the viability of the fetus, or when the abortion is necessary to protect the life or health of the pregnant person. Existing law prohibits conditions or restrictions from being imposed on abortion access for incarcerated persons and committed juveniles. Existing laws requiring parental consent for abortion and making assisting in or advertising abortion a crime have been held to be unconstitutional. This bill would repeal those unconstitutional provisions and delete obsolete references to criminal abortion penalties. The bill would make technical changes to provisions authorizing abortion for incarcerated and committed persons. (2) Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, provides for labeling requirements of drugs and devices. The Pharmacy Law requires a pharmacist to dispense a prescription in a container that is correctly labeled with specified information, including the name of the prescriber and the name address of the pharmacy. A violation of the Pharmacy Law is a misdemeanor. This bill would authorize the State Department of Public Health to adopt regulations to include or exclude mifepristone and other medication abortion drugs from the requirements of the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, but would exclude the drugs from those requirements if the drugs are no longer approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) , as specified. The bill would authorize a pharmacist to dispense mifepristone or other drug used for medication abortion without the name of the patient, the name of the prescriber, or the name and address of the pharmacy, subject to specified requirements. The bill would require the pharmacist to maintain a log, as specified, that is not open to inspection by law enforcement without a subpoena, and would prohibit the disclosure of the information to an individual or entity from another state. The bill would prohibit criminal, civil, professional discipline, or licensing action against a pharmacist for manufacturing, transporting, or engaging in specified other acts relating to mifepristone or other medication abortion drugs, and would prohibit the California State Board of Pharmacy from denying an application for licensure or taking disciplinary action against an applicant or licensee for engaging in certain acts relating to mifepristone or other medical abortion drugs. By expanding the scope of a crime under the Pharmacy Law, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (3) Existing law establishes various healing arts boards in the Department of Consumer Affairs that license and regulate various healing arts licensees. This bill would prohibit subjecting a healing arts practitioner who is authorized to prescribe, furnish, order, or administer dangerous drugs to civil, criminal, disciplinary, or other administrative action for prescribing, furnishing, ordering, or administering mifepristone or other medication abortion drugs for a use that is different from the use for which that drug has been approved for marketing by the FDA or that varies from an approved risk evaluation and mitigation strategy under federal law, as specified. The bill would state that the laws of another state or federal actions that interfere with the authority of a healing arts practitioner to take specified actions relating to mifepristone or other medication abortion drugs are against the public policy of this state. The bill would prohibit criminal, civil, professional discipline, or licensing actions against an applicant or licensee for manufacturing, transporting, or engaging in certain other acts relating to mifepristone or other medication abortion drugs. (4) Existing law provides for the licensure and regulation of clinics and health facilities by the State Department of Public Health. This bill would prohibit criminal, civil, professional discipline, or licensing action against a licensed clinic or health facility for transporting or engaging in certain other acts relating to mifepristone or other medication abortion drugs that are lawful in California. The bill would prohibit the department from denying an application for licensure or taking disciplinary action against an applicant or licensee for engaging in certain acts relating to mifepristone or other medical abortion drugs. (5) Existing law prohibits a health care provider from knowingly disclosing, transmitting, transferring, sharing or granting access to identifiable medical information related to an individual seeking, obtaining, providing, supporting, or aiding in the performance of an abortion that is lawful under the laws of this state, as specified and subject to specified exclusions. Existing law exempts a health care provider from liability for damages or from civil or enforcement actions for failing to comply this prohibition before January 31, 2026, if the health care provider is working diligently and in good faith to comply with the prohibition. This bill would exempt a health care provider from liability for damages or from civil or enforcement actions for an additional year, until January 31, 2027. (6) Existing law, the Knox-Keene Health Care Service Plan Act of 1975, provides for the licensure and regulation of health care service plans by the Department of Managed Health Care, and makes a willful violation of the act a crime. Existing law provides for the regulation of disability and health insurers by the Department of Insurance. Existing law prohibits a health care service plan contract or a group or individual disability insurance policy or certificate that covers prescription drugs from limiting or excluding coverage of a drug on the basis that the drug is prescribed for a use that is different from the use for which that drug has been approved for marketing by the FDA. Existing law prohibits a contract between a health care service plan or health insurer and a health care services provider from containing any term that would result in termination or nonrenewal of the contract or otherwise penalize the provider based on a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or another professional disciplinary action in another state if the judgment, conviction, or professional disciplinary action is solely based on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive care that would be lawful if provided in California. Existing law also prohibits a health care service plan or health insurer from discriminating against a licensed provider solely on the basis of a civil judgment, criminal conviction, or another professional disciplinary action in another state if the judgment, conviction, or professional disciplinary action is solely based on the application of another state's law that interferes with a person's right to receive care that would be lawful if provided in California. This bill would prohibit a health care service plan contract or a group or individual health insurance policy or certificate that covers prescription drugs from limiting or excluding coverage for brand name or generic mifepristone solely on the basis that the drug is prescribed for a use that is different from the use for which that drug has been approved for marketing by the FDA or that varies from an approved risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, except if the state deems it necessary to address an imminent health or safety concern. The bill would require those contracts and policies to include coverage for brand name or generic mifepristone, even if it has not been approved by the FDA if specified requirements are met, except if the state deems it necessary to address an imminent health or safety concern. The bill would prohibit a plan or insurer from contracting with a health care services provider to terminate or nonrenew the contract or otherwise penalize the provider, or from discriminating against a licensed provider, for manufacturing, transporting, or engaging in certain other acts relating to mifepristone or other medication abortion drugs that are lawful in California. Because a violation of these provisions by a health care service plan would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. (7) This bill would incorporate additional changes to Section 4076 of the Business and Professions Code proposed by AB 1503 to be operative only if this bill and AB 1503 are enacted and this bill is enacted last. (8) 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. (9) This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
(1) The Confidentiality of Medical Information Act (CMIA) prohibits a provider of health care, a health care service plan, a contractor, or a corporation and its subsidiaries and affiliates from intentionally sharing, selling, using for marketing, or otherwise using any medical information, as defined, for any purpose not necessary to provide health care services to a patient, except as provided. The CMIA prohibits a provider of health care, health care service plan, or contractor from disclosing medical information regarding a patient of the provider of health care or an enrollee or subscriber of a health care service plan without first obtaining authorization from the patient, except if the disclosure is compelled by, among other things, a search warrant lawfully issued to a governmental law enforcement agency or a court order. Existing law makes a violation of these provisions that results in economic loss or personal injury to a patient punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would revise the definition of "medical information" to include immigration status, including current and prior immigration status, and place of birth, if that information is known or collected, as specified, and would define "immigration enforcement" to mean any and all efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal civil immigration law, and also includes any and all efforts to investigate, enforce, or assist in the investigation or enforcement of any federal criminal immigration law that penalizes a person's presence in, entry or reentry to, or employment in, the United States. The bill would specify that a provider of health care, health care service plan, or contractor shall disclose medical information regarding a patient of the provider of health care or an enrollee or subscriber or a health care service plan pursuant to a valid search warrant issued by a judicial officer, including a magistrate, to a governmental law enforcement agency, or pursuant to a state or federal court order issued by a court of this state or a federal court. The bill would also prohibit, except to the extent expressly authorized by a patient, enrollee, or subscriber, or as otherwise permitted or required, a provider of health care, health care service plan, contractor, or corporation and its subsidiaries and affiliates from disclosing medical information for immigration enforcement. Because the bill would expand the scope of a crime, it would impose a state-mandated local program. (2) Under existing law, the State Department of Public Health is responsible for the licensing and regulation of various facilities and settings that provide health care services, as specified. Existing law makes a willful violation of these provisions a crime. This bill would require health care provider entities, as defined, to establish or amend procedures for monitoring, documenting, and receiving visitors to health care provider entities to the extent possible. The bill would require health care provider entity personnel to immediately notify health care provider entity management, administration, or legal counsel of any request for access to a health care provider entity site or patient for immigration enforcement, and to provide any requests for review of health care provider entity documents, as prescribed. The bill would prohibit, unless required by state or federal law, a health care provider entity and its personnel from allowing any person access to nonpublic areas of the provider's facilities for immigration enforcement purposes, except as specified. The bill would require health care provider entities to inform staff and relevant volunteers on how to respond to requests relating to immigration enforcement that grants access to health care provider entity sites or to patients. The bill would require that health care provider entities comply with these provisions within 45 days from their effective date. By expanding the scope of a crime and increasing duties on local health officials, 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 with regard to certain mandates no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. With regard to any other mandates, this bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs so mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
