Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Provider Enforcement Idd topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would allow DHS to disqualify or revoke providers who repeatedly fail IDD service standards
Summary
Senate Bill 136 would give the Department of Human Services clearer criteria and timelines to revoke certificates, endorsements or licenses for providers deemed unqualified, expanding the agency’s prescriptive enforcement tools for community‑based IDD services.
Senate Bill 136 was heard Feb. 11 in the Oregon Senate Committee on Human Services. The measure would permit the Department of Human Services’ Office of Developmental Disability Services (ODDS) to deem a provider “unqualified” under specified criteria and take enforcement actions up to revocation of certificates, endorsements or licenses.
Dana Hittle, interim director of ODDS, told the committee the bill “introduces the term unqualified to describe a provider who meets certain criteria” and directs the department to adopt Oregon Administrative Rules specifying when and for how long a provider may be deemed unqualified. Hittle said the bill does not expand ODDS’s regulatory authority but makes enforcement criteria more prescriptive and sets timelines for licensing action.
Hittle explained the existing enforcement tools ODDS uses — conditions on certificates or endorsements, civil penalties, and site licensing — and said ODDS can already revoke certification under current administrative rules. “Conditions may include limiting new enrollments… or restricting the types of services that the agency can deliver,” Hittle said. She confirmed the department had lifted certain conditions on a certificate after those conditions were met; that action was separate from any ongoing criminal charges related to the provider.
Provider and labor groups testified in support. Amanda Dalton of the Oregon Resource Association said revocation authority is necessary to ensure safety and quality and prevent operators who “fail to meet standards” from continuing to serve vulnerable people. Courtney Graham of SEIU Local 503 said stronger enforcement tools are needed to maintain public trust in Medicaid‑funded services and to stop fraud or waste.
Committee discussion focused on how to define the scope and duration of exclusion, the relationship between individual misconduct and agency status, and whether the statute should use the term “disqualified” instead of “unqualified.” Sponsors and staff noted the bill clarifies that sanctions can apply to agencies when owners, board members or employees engage in disqualifying conduct and that rules will spell out specific timelines and appeal rights for providers.
The committee closed the public hearing. No vote was taken at the hearing.
