Connecticut House Bill HB05239

Connecticut 2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/18/26
• Refer: 2/18/26
• Report Pass: 3/3/26
• Refer: 3/11/26
• Report Pass: 3/17/26
• Engrossed: 4/8/26
• Report Pass: 4/10/26
• Passed: 5/5/26

Caption

An Act Concerning The Department Of Developmental Services' Recommendations Regarding The Independent Mortality Review Board And Fatality Review Board.

Summary

HB 5239, as enacted, revises the Department of Developmental Services’ (DDS) mortality review process for deaths of people with intellectual disability for whom DDS has direct or oversight responsibility for medical care. The bill requires the commissioner or designee to conduct a comprehensive and timely review of the events, overall care, quality-of-life issues, and medical care preceding a death, and to refer certain cases to a newly established Independent Mortality Review Board when specified conditions are met. The new board is created within DDS and is tasked with reviewing deaths involving alleged abuse or neglect, cases accepted by the Chief Medical Examiner or a local medical examiner, sudden and unexpected deaths deemed appropriate for independent review, and cases where the DDS review raises questions about the appropriateness of care. The board may request documentation and information needed for its review, and its work is subject to peer review and confidentiality protections tied to existing medical review and records statutes. The bill also allows DDS to seek information from health care providers to the extent permitted by HIPAA and other federal law.

Impact

The bill amends Connecticut General Statutes section 17a-210 and adds a new statutory section establishing the Independent Mortality Review Board within DDS. It changes the existing mortality review framework from a DDS-led process that could involve an outside board under prior executive-order-based practice to a more formal statutory structure with defined referral criteria, membership requirements, and confidentiality rules. It also clarifies that the board must have a majority of members who are not DDS employees, while preserving access to necessary records and information under state peer review and confidentiality provisions.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It passed the Public Health Committee 31-0, the House 142-0, and the Senate 36-0, indicating strong consensus that the mortality review process for DDS clients should be formalized and strengthened. The absence of recorded committee discussion suggests no major controversy surfaced in the available record.

Contention

No significant contention is evident in the available materials. The main policy questions implicit in the bill are how independent the review board should be, what cases should trigger an independent review, and how to balance access to medical information with confidentiality and federal privacy requirements. The final language addresses these concerns by requiring a majority of non-DDS members, limiting referrals to specified categories of deaths, and tying information sharing to HIPAA and other applicable law.