Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Qa Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee votes to ITL SB37 after members say mandatory QA would be too broad and unfunded
Summary
The committee recommended Inexpedient to Legislate on SB37 after members criticized language that would convert a voluntary residential care quality-assurance program into a mandatory program covering all licenses under a broad RSA chapter, and raised concerns about fiscal and scope implications.
The House committee voted 10–8 to recommend ITL on Senate Bill 37 after prolonged debate about whether a voluntary quality-assurance program for residential care facilities should be made mandatory and expanded to all licensees under RSA cited in testimony.
Representative Drew moved for ITL, arguing the bill "essentially takes what is a voluntary QA program for residential care facilities, makes it mandatory, and then applies it to everything licensed under RSA 150 one-two," language he called an "extraordinary expansion of state power" in the absence of a fiscal note or funding for the expanded inspection program.
Opponents of the ITL motion said the bill was intended to increase transparency and safety for vulnerable populations. Representative Weber said the proposal mostly required work already done and said withholding it would be a disservice to families seeking safety information for loved ones. Representative Lamontagne said New Hampshire's aging population makes staff education and consistent standards more important.
Supporters of ITL said the bill as drafted was too broad, might sweep in facilities such as birthing centers and dialysis centers, and lacked funding for an expanded inspection regime. The committee concluded the scope and fiscal uncertainty warranted recommending ITL so that the bill could be reconsidered or redrafted in a narrower form.
The committee recorded a roll-call vote of 10–8 in favor of ITL. Members who said they might support a narrower or more targeted bill were encouraged to work on amendments addressing scope and funding.
