Hospitals could seek binding review of serious inspection disputes

Hospitals could ask arbitrators to settle certain serious inspection disputes through a decision both sides must follow. Disputes must be substantial and genuine. They must involve immediate danger findings at open hospitals, findings blocking a hospital's opening or reopening, or state penalties totaling at least $10,000. Hospitals generally would pay the review costs, excluding lawyer fees. Arbitrators could award costs to a hospital that wins or allocate costs if the department acted willfully or maliciously. A successful challenge would remove findings that should not have been cited and cancel enforcement actions based solely on those findings. These provisions would take effect 60 days after enactment.

Hospitals could choose free review by department staff who were not involved in the inspection or paid review by an independent reviewer. The review would cover violations cited during hospital inspections. A hospital could choose only one review method. The Department of Health would approve independent review fees and retain final approval of the reviewer's recommendations. The department would have to seek any needed federal approval. These provisions would take effect 60 days after enactment. Hospitals would request independent review within the same 10-day period used to submit their correction plans.

The Department of Health would give hospitals and nursing facilities written instructions for disputing inspection findings. The requirement would apply when the department issues a finding that a hospital or long-term nursing care facility failed to meet a requirement. The notice would explain all available dispute rights, the steps to follow, and the applicable deadlines. The notice requirement would take effect 60 days after enactment.