State Regulators Float New Rules in Hospital War Battles
House Speaker Jose Oliva made eliminating the certificate of need programs a top priority during the legislative session that ended in May.
July 08, 2019 at 01:24 PM
4 minute read
Eliminating the certificate of need program for hospitals may have been the easy part, but how to license them in the future may be more complex.
Tallahassee health-care regulators on Wednesday started the layered process of reshaping the state's certificate of need program, moving ahead to focus it on nursing homes, hospices, and institutions for individuals with developmental disabilities.
But the proposed changes to the CON rules are only the beginning of a two-step process for Florida hospitals, as the Agency for Health Care Administration simultaneously moves to change the licensure requirements for hospitals.
The changes are necessary after the Legislature eliminated certificate of need program requirements for general acute care hospitals and tertiary services. The new law, which went into effect last Monday, keeps CON requirements for specialty hospitals in place until July 1, 2021.
Agency officials considered a pair of proposed changes to the CON regulations at a public meeting last Wednesday.
Before the new law, regulators reviewed applications in four cycles: two for hospitals and two for “other beds and programs.”
The proposed rules would maintain the four review cycles, but split them into two different categories. One category would deal with applications for hospital facilities and hospice.
The other category would be dedicated to nursing homes and intermediate-care facilities for individuals with disabilities.
The regulators moved quickly Wednesday to quash any questions related to any of the future licensure requirements that also are under consideration, such as changes to the rules for tertiary programs.
“I would like to just ask that we limit our questions to the rules that we are addressing today, as opposed to the questions related to HB 21 or other impacts that we will be addressing,” said Laura MacLafferty, AHCA bureau chief of Health Facility Regulation. “We will have rules that address those services in the very near future on the licensure side, as opposed to the CON rules we are addressing today.”
House Speaker Jose Oliva, R-Miami Lakes, made eliminating the certificate of need programs a top priority during the legislative session that ended in May. Gov. Ron DeSantis signed the CON measure into law last month.
Florida has had a CON program since the 1970s. The program limits the ability to create health-care services and build new facilities. Advocates for CON have argued that overbuilt environments can lead to overutilization and can increase health-care costs. Moreover, proponents maintain that certificates of need help create safer environments in a variety of ways. For example, providers must perform a minimum number of procedures to maintain their certificates.
Opponents of the process argue that it limits the free market and, because CONs stifle competition, leads to increased costs. Critics have long argued that the requirements to maintain CONs can be shifted from certificates of need to licensure requirements.
Though the changes mostly impact hospitals, most health-care providers are watching them closely. Wednesday's meeting at the agency's headquarters was standing room only. A telephone line was available for those who couldn't travel to Tallahassee to attend the public meeting.
“This is a major change to our health-care laws, and it's more than nuance here because there also is going to be change to the licensure law,” said Florida Health Care Association lobbyist Bob Asztalos said of the larger-than-usual crowd. “I think the question everyone has here is, how much of the CON requirements for hospitals will actually roll over into licensure. We'll see how much leeway the agency is going to give hospitals to build or whether or not they are going to have a lot of requirements in licensure.”
Christine Sexton reports for the News Service of Florida.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllRFK Jr. Will Keep Affiliations With Morgan & Morgan, Other Law Firms If Confirmed to DHHS
3 minute readAttorneys, Health Care Officials Face Nearly $80M RICO Suit Over Allegedly Fabricated Spreadsheet
Amid Growing Litigation Volume, Don't Expect UnitedHealthcare to Change Its Stripes After CEO's Killing
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Roundup Special Master's Report Recommends Lead Counsel Get $0 in Common Benefit Fees
- 2Georgia Justices Urged to Revive Malpractice Suit Against Retired Barnes & Thornburg Atty
- 3How Gibson Dunn Lawyers Helped Assemble the LA FireAid Benefit Concert in 'Extreme' Time Crunch
- 4Lawyer Wears Funny Ears When Criticizing: Still Sued for Defamation
- 5Medical Student's Error Takes Center Stage in High Court 'Agency' Dispute
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250