HB 979 revises North Carolina’s long-term care ombudsman framework by replacing the existing county nursing home and adult care home community advisory committee structure with a more formal system of “volunteer ombudsman representatives” designated by the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. The bill updates the statutory purpose of these committees to emphasize resident rights, grievance assistance, community involvement, and cooperation with facilities, while making clear that designated volunteers are acting on behalf of the State Ombudsman Program.
The bill makes parallel changes in the nursing home and adult care home statutes. It requires county commissioners in counties with nursing homes or adult care homes to work through nomination and designation processes tied to the State Ombudsman, sets qualifications and training requirements, and provides that designation can be removed by the State Ombudsman, which automatically ends the local appointment. It also preserves and clarifies access rights, reporting duties, confidentiality protections, and the ability of volunteers to visit facilities, communicate with agencies, and help resolve resident grievances. The bill further amends the State Ombudsman statute to expressly authorize designation, suspension, or removal of volunteer representatives, including committee appointees, and repeals two provisions in G.S. 143-157.1 as conforming changes.
HB 979 would affect state law governing nursing homes, adult care homes, county advisory committees, and the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. It shifts authority and accountability away from locally structured advisory committees and toward a state-administered volunteer representative system, while keeping county involvement in nominations and appointments. Facilities remain subject to duties to cooperate with these representatives, and the bill preserves resident rights to present grievances without retaliation. The act is set to become effective October 1, 2025.
The overall sentiment reflected in the bill text is supportive of strengthening oversight and resident advocacy in long-term care settings. Although there were no recorded committee transcripts or votes provided, the bill’s framing suggests a policy goal of modernizing and clarifying the ombudsman volunteer system rather than creating new regulatory burdens on residents. The measure appears to be presented as an administrative and consumer-protection update.
The main point of potential contention is the shift in control from county-based advisory committees to designation and discipline by the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman. That centralization may raise questions for counties, nursing home and adult care home operators, and existing committee members about local input, appointment authority, and the practical effect of state oversight. The bill also continues to require facility cooperation and access rights for volunteers, which could be an area of concern for providers, even though the bill retains confidentiality and good-faith protections for representatives.
HB 979 would substantially revise Chapters 131E and 131D of the General Statutes by recasting community advisory committees as state-designated volunteer ombudsman representatives for nursing homes and adult care homes. It amends licensing, resident-rights, and ombudsman provisions to require certification, designation, and ongoing accountability through the Office of the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman, and it authorizes that office to suspend or remove designations. The bill also repeals two provisions in G.S. 143-157.1 as conforming changes, and it takes effect October 1, 2025.
No committee debate or recorded votes were provided, so there is no direct evidence of partisan or stakeholder opposition in the available materials. Based on the bill’s structure and title, the measure appears generally favorable toward improving long-term care resident advocacy and updating an existing volunteer system. The bill is framed as a strengthening and modernization effort rather than a controversial policy shift, though it does centralize authority in the state ombudsman program.
The most notable issue is the transfer of appointment, certification, and removal authority from county-level advisory structures to the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman, which may reduce local discretion. Nursing home and adult care home operators may also scrutinize the bill’s continued access rights, inspection-like visits, and grievance-reporting duties, since those provisions preserve strong oversight of facilities. Counties and existing committee members could be concerned about how the new designation process affects current volunteers, term lengths, and the role of county commissioners in appointments.