Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Patient Navigation topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bill would require hospitals to employ patient advocates daily by 2027; hospitals urge amendments

Washington State Senate Health and Long-Term Care Committee · January 29, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

SB 5,823 would require licensed hospitals to employ patient advocates available every day across a 24‑hour period by Jan. 1, 2027, unless exempt; hospitals and patient groups support the concept but raised operational and independence concerns and suggested narrower, clarified language.

Senate Bill 5,823, sponsored by Sen. Adrian Cortez, would require licensed hospitals to employ a patient advocate who is physically present every day during a 24‑hour period to help patients navigate billing, financial assistance and medical records by Jan. 1, 2027, unless the facility meets exemption criteria. Committee staff told senators the bill outlines services patient advocates may provide and a staffing deadline of 01/01/2027.

Sponsor Adrian Cortez said the bill arose from constituent stories about families struggling to navigate large hospital systems. Witnesses including Lisa Thatcher (Washington State Hospital Association) and Jim Freeburg (Patient Coalition of Washington) said they support the concept but raised concerns about operational overlap with existing social workers, volunteer advocates, critical access hospitals' capacity and the perception of independence when advocates are hospital‑employed.

Stakeholders recommended amendments such as allowing a broader definition of who may serve as an advocate (employee versus at least a person), narrowing the requirement to inpatient beds rather than clinics, and clarifying exemptions for small community or critical access hospitals. The vice chair reported 20 pro, 792 con and 3 other sign‑ins for the bill in the transcript excerpt; the committee closed the hearing and did not record further action in the excerpt.