State Procurement - Prompt Payment of Subcontractors and Suppliers - Alteration
HB1478 concerns home health care provider information and the creation of a statewide online directory. As enacted, it requires the Maryland Department of Health to study and report on the feasibility of establishing and maintaining an online directory of home health care providers, in consultation with stakeholders such as the Department of Aging, trade associations, consumer groups, and worker organizations. The report must address how a directory could help consumers find providers by criteria such as language proficiency, certifications, experience, and special skills, while also supporting provider recruitment, retention, workforce development, and emergency communication.
The bill also defines “home health care” and “home health care provider” for purposes of the new subtitle and specifies the kinds of information that could be included in a directory, such as provider name, identification number, job title, training and certifications, gender, abuse and neglect reports, and associated residential service agency. It directs the Department to review other states’ directories, county-level resources, and existing state consumer resources, and to recommend whether a directory should be established based on available federal and state funding. The legislation further authorizes the Department to adopt regulations and potentially charge a fee to maintain the directory.
The bill adds new provisions to the Health-General Article creating Subtitle 4C, “Home Health Care Provider Directory,” and amends related definitions in Subtitle 4A. In practical terms, it sets up a reporting and planning framework for a statewide home health care provider directory rather than immediately mandating a fully operational public directory. It also imposes information-sharing expectations on residential service agencies and contemplates future regulatory implementation by the Department of Health, with some provider information potentially kept confidential from public disclosure.
The available voting history suggests broad bipartisan support, with unanimous passage in both chambers on third reading. There are no committee transcript snippets indicating opposition or debate, and the bill’s structure as a feasibility/reporting measure likely made it less controversial than a direct mandate. Overall, the sentiment appears favorable, with lawmakers supporting improved access to home health care information and workforce coordination.
The main policy tension is between improving consumer access and workforce support on one hand, and the administrative, privacy, and funding burdens on the other. Potential concerns include the scope of provider data collected, especially sensitive items such as abuse and neglect reports, gender, and work history, as well as the requirement for residential service agencies to submit information annually. Another possible point of contention is whether the state should build and maintain such a directory at all, given the bill’s emphasis on feasibility, existing county resources, and the need to rely on available federal and state funding.