PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE State Administrative Procedure Act, NOTICE is hereby given of the following revised rule:
Proposed Action:
Addition of Part 402 to Title 10 NYCRR.
Statutory authority:
Public Health Law, section 2899-a(4); Executive Law, section 845-b(12)
Subject:
Criminal History Record Check.
Purpose:
Criminal background checks of certain prospective employees of NHs, CHHAs, LHCSAs & long term home health care programs.
Substance of revised rule:
This regulation adds a new Part 402 to Title 10 NYCRR, which relates to prospective unlicensed employees of nursing homes, certified home health agencies, licensed home care services agencies and long term home health care programs who will provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients of such providers.
The regulation establishes standards and procedures for criminal history record checks required by statute. Provisions govern the procedures by which fingerprints will be obtained and describe the requirements and responsibilities of the Department and the affected providers with regard to this process. The regulations address the identification of provider staff responsible for requesting the criminal history checks, supervision of temporary employees, notice to the Department when an employee is no longer employed, the content and procedure for obtaining consent and acknowledgment for finger printing from prospective employees. The Department's responsibilities for reviewing requests are set forth and specify time frames and sufficient information to process a request.
The proposed rule also describes the extent to which reimbursement is available to such providers to cover costs associated with criminal history record checks and obtaining the fingerprints necessary to obtain the criminal history record check.
Revised rule compared with proposed rule:
Substantial revisions were made in section 402.4(b)(2)(ii).
Text of revised proposed rule and any required statements and analyses may be obtained from
Katherine Ceroalo, DOH, Bureau of House Counsel, Regulatory Affairs Unit, Room 2438, ESP, Tower Building, Albany, NY 12237, (518) 473-7488, email: regsqna@health.state.ny.us
Data, views or arguments may be submitted to:
Same as above.
Public comment will be received until:
30 days after publication of this notice.
Revised Regulatory Impact Statement
Statutory Authority:
Section 2899-a(4) of the Public Health Law requires the State Commissioner of Health to promulgate regulations implementing new Article 28-E of the Public Health Law which requires all nursing homes, certified home health agencies, licensed home care services agencies and long term home health care programs ("the providers") to request, through the Department of Health ("the Department"), a criminal history record check for certain unlicensed prospective employees of such providers.
Subdivision (12) of section 845-b of the Executive Law requires the Department to promulgate rules and regulations necessary to implement criminal history information requests.
Legislative Objectives:
Chapter 769 of the Laws of 2005 as amended by Chapters 331 and 673 of the Laws of 2006 establish a requirement for all nursing homes, certified home health agencies, licensed home care services agencies and long term home health care programs to obtain criminal history record checks of certain unlicensed prospective employees who will provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients of such providers. This is intended to enable such providers to identify and employ appropriate individuals to staff their facilities and programs and to ensure patient safety and security.
Needs and Benefits:
New York State has the responsibility to ensure the safety of its most vulnerable citizens who may be unable to protect and defend themselves from abuse or mistreatment at the hands of the very persons charged with providing care to them. While the majority of unlicensed employees in all nursing homes, certified home health agencies, licensed home care services agencies and long term home health care programs are dedicated, compassionate workers who provide quality care, there are cases in which criminal activity and patient abuse by such employees has occurred. While this proposal will not eliminate all instances of abuse, it will eliminate many of the opportunities for individuals with a criminal record to provide direct care or supervision to those most at risk. Pursuant to Chapter 769 of the laws of 2005 as amended by Chapters 331 and 673 of the Laws of 2006 ("the Chapter Laws"), this proposal requires the providers to request the Department to obtain criminal history information from the Division of Criminal Justice Services ("the Division") and a national criminal history check from the FBI, concerning each prospective unlicensed employee who will provide direct care or supervision to the provider's patients, residents or clients.
Each provider subject to these requirements must designate "authorized persons" who will be empowered to request, receive, and review this information. Before a prospective unlicensed employee who will provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients can be permanently hired, he or she must consent to having his/her fingerprints taken and a criminal history record check performed. Two sets of fingerprints will be taken and sent to the Department, which will then submit them to the Division. The Division will provide criminal history information for each person back to the Department.
The Department will then review the information and will advise the provider whether or not the applicant has a criminal history, and, if so, whether the criminal history is of such a nature that the Department disapproves the prospective employee's eligibility for employment, (e.g., the person has a felony conviction for a sex offense or a violent felony or for any crime specifically listed in section 845-b of the Executive Law and relevant to the prospective unlicensed employees of such providers). In some cases, a person may have a criminal background that does not rise to the level where the Department will disapprove eligibility for employment. The proposed regulations allow the provider, in such cases, to obtain sufficient information to enable it to make its own determination as to whether or not to employ such person. There will also be instances in which the criminal history information reveals a felony charge without a final disposition. In those cases, the Department will hold the application in abeyance until the charge is resolved. The prospective employee can be temporarily hired but not to provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients of such providers.
The proposal implements the statutory requirement of affording the individual an opportunity to explain, in writing, why his or her eligibility for employment should not be disapproved before the Department can finally inform a provider that it disapproves eligibility for employment. If the Department maintains its determination to disapprove eligibility for employment, the provider must notify the person that the criminal history information is the basis for the disapproval of employment.
The proposed regulations establish certain responsibilities of providers in implementing the criminal history record review required by the law. For example, a provider must notify the Department when an individual for whom a criminal history has been sought is no longer subject to such check. Providers also must ensure that prospective employees who will be subject to the criminal history record check are notified of the provider's right to request his/her criminal history information, and that he or she has the right to obtain, review, and seek correction of such information in accordance with regulations of the Division, as well as with the FBI with regard to federal criminal history information.
Costs:
Costs to State Government:
The Department estimates that the new requirements will result in approximately 108,000 submissions for a criminal history record check on an annual basis. This number of submissions for an initial criminal history record check will decrease over time as the criminal history record check database (CHRC) is populated. The Department will allow providers to access any prior Department determination about a prospective employee at such time as the prospective employee presents himself or herself to such provider for employment. In the event that the prospective employee has a permanent record already on file with the Department, this information will be made available promptly to the provider who intends to hire such prospective employee.
The provider will forward with the request for the criminal history review, $75 to cover the projected fee established by the Division for processing a State criminal history record check, and a $19.25 fee for a national criminal history record check. The Department estimates that the provider's administrative costs for obtaining the fingerprints will be $13.00 per print. The total annual cost to providers is estimated to be approximately $12 million.
Requests by licensed home care services agencies (LHCSAs) are estimated to constitute approximately 50% of the estimated 108,000 requests on an annual basis. The total annual cost to LHCSAs is estimated to be approximately $6 million. Reimbursement shall be made available to LHCSAs in an equitable and direct manner for the above fees and costs subject to funds being appropriated by the State Legislature in any given fiscal year for this purpose. Costs to State government will be determined by the extent of the appropriations.
The Department estimates that nursing homes, certified home health agencies and long term home health care programs will constitute approximately 50% of the estimated 108,000 requests on an annual basis. The total annual costs to nursing homes, certified home health agencies and long term home health care programs is estimated to be approximately $6 million. These providers may, subject to federal financial participation, claim the above fees and costs as reimbursable costs under the medical assistance program (Medicaid) and may recover the Medicaid percent of such fees and costs. Reimbursement to such providers will be determined by the percent of Medicaid days of care to total days of care. Therefore, approximately $6 million of the total costs for these providers will be subject to a 50 percent federal share and approximately $2.3 million will be borne entirely by the State.
Costs to Local Governments:
There will be no costs to local governments for reimbursement of the costs of the criminal history record check paid by LHCSAs. LHCSAs will receive reimbursement from the State subject to an appropriation (See "Costs to State Government").
Costs to local governments for reimbursement of the costs of the criminal history record check paid by nursing homes, certified home health agencies, and long term home health care programs will be the local government share of Medicaid reimbursement to such providers which is estimated to be annual additional cost to local governments of approximately $123,727 (See "Costs to State Government").
Costs to Private Regulated Parties:
Costs to LHCSAs will be determined by the extent of annual appropriations by the State Legislature (See "Costs to State Government").
Costs to nursing homes, certified home health agencies and long term home health care programs will be determined by their Medicaid percentage of total costs (See "Costs to State Government").
Costs to the Department of Health:
The start up costs for CHRC in SFY 2006/2007 were 5,972,419 which included $3,982,103 for the reimbursement of non-medicaid eligible providers such as LHCSAs (Licensed Home Care Services Agencies) and $1,990,316 in operational costs such as PS (Personnel Services) and OTPS (supplies, equipment and contractual services (temps)). The LHCSAs were fully compensated for their costs. The 1.9 million in operational costs relates to the DOH costs for SFY 2006/2007.
Local Government Mandates:
The required criminal history record check is a statutory requirement, which does not impose any new or additional duties or responsibilities upon county, city, town, village, school or fire districts. The Chapter Laws state that they supercede any local laws or laws of any political subdivision of the state to the extent provided for in such Chapter Laws.
Paperwork:
Chapter 769 of the Laws of 2005 as amended by Chapters 331 and 673 of the Laws of 2006 require that new forms be developed for use in the process of requesting criminal history record information. The forms are, for example, an informed consent form to be completed by the subject party and the request form to be completed by the authorized person designated by the provider. Temporarily approved employees are required to complete an attestation regarding incidents/abuse. Provider supervision of temporary employees must be documented. In addition, other forms will be required by the department such as a form to designate an authorized party or forms to be completed when someone who has had a criminal history record check is no longer subject to the check.
The regulations also contain a requirement to keep a current roster of subject parties.
Duplication:
This regulatory amendment does not duplicate existing State or federal requirements. The Chapter Laws state that they supercede and apply in lieu of any local laws or laws of any political subdivision of the state to the extent provided for in such Chapter Laws.
Alternatives:
No significant alternatives are available. The Department is required by the Chapter Laws to promulgate implementing regulations.
Federal Standards:
The regulatory amendment does not exceed any minimum standards of the federal government for the same or similar subject areas.
Compliance Schedule:
The Chapter Laws mandate that the providers request criminal history record checks for certain unlicensed prospective employees on and after September 1, 2006. These regulations are proposed to be effective upon publication of a Notice of Adoption in the New York State Register.
Revised Regulatory Flexibility Analysis
Effect of Rule on Small Businesses and Local Governments:
For the purpose of this Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, small businesses are considered any nursing home or home care agency within New York State which is independently owned and operated, and employs 100 individuals or less. Approximately 100 nursing homes and 200 home care services agencies would therefore be considered "small businesses," and would be subject to this regulation.
For purposes of this regulatory flexibility analysis, small businesses were considered to be long term home health care programs with 100 or fewer full time equivalents. Based on recent financial and statistical data extracted from the long term home health care program cost report 77 out of 110 long term home health care programs were identified as employing fewer than 100 employees. Twenty-eight local governments have been identified as operating long term home health care programs.
Compliance Requirements:
Providers must, by statute, on and after September 1, 2006, request criminal history information concerning prospective unlicensed employees who will provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients. One or more persons in their employ must be designated to check criminal history information. The criminal history record check must be obtained through the Department. Providers must inform prospective unlicensed employees of their right to request such information and of the procedures available to them to review and correct criminal history information maintained by the State and the FBI. Although prospective employees cannot be permanently hired before a determination is received from the Department about whether or not the prospective employee's eligibility for employment must be disapproved, providers can give temporary approval to prospective employees and permit them to work so long as they meet the supervision requirements imposed on providers by the regulations.
Professional Services:
No additional professional services will be required by small businesses or local governments to comply with this rule.
Compliance Costs:
For programs eligible for Medicaid funding, fees and costs will be considered an allowable cost in the Medicaid rates for such providers (See "Regulatory Impact Statement - Costs to State Government").
For LHCSAs which are unable to access reimbursement from state and /or federally funded programs, reimbursement will be provided on a direct and equitable basis subject to an appropriation by the State Legislature (See "Regulatory Impact Statement - Costs to State Government").
There will be costs to local governments only to the extent such local governments are providers subject to the regulations.
Economic and Technological Feasibility:
The proposed regulations do not impose on regulated parties the use of any technological processes. Fingerprints will be taken generally by the traditional "ink and roll" process. Under the "ink and roll" method, a trained individual rolls a person's fingers in ink and then manually places the fingers on a card to leave an ink print. Two cards would then need to be mailed to the Division by the Department. However, before the Department could submit the card, demographic information would need to be filled in on the card (such as the person's name, address, etc.) into the Department databases. Additional time delays may be encountered if it is determined that the fingerprint has been smudged and must be taken again, or when the handwriting on the fingerprint cards is difficult to read.
The Department hopes to move in the future to Live Scan. Live Scan is a technology that captures fingerprints electronically and would transmit the fingerprints directly to the Department to obtain criminal history information.
Minimizing Adverse Impact:
The Department considered the approaches for minimizing adverse economic impact listed in SAPA Section 202-b (1) and found them inapplicable. The requirements in this proposal are statutorily required. Compliance with them is mandatory.
Small Businesses and Local Government Participation:
Draft regulations, prior to filing with the Secretary of State, were shared with industry associations representing nursing homes and home care providers and comments were solicited from all affected parties. Informational briefings were held with such associations. There will be informational letters to providers prior to the effective date of the regulations.
Revised Rural Area Flexibility Analysis
Effect of Rule:
Rural areas are defined as counties with a population less that 200,000 and, for counties with a population of greater than 200,000 includes towns with population densities of 150 persons or less per square mile. The following 42 counties have a population less than 200,000.
Allegany
Hamilton
Schenectady
Cattaraugus
Herkimer
Schoharie
Cayuga
Jefferson
Schuyler
Chautauqua
Lewis
Seneca
Chemung
Livingston
Steuben
Chenango
Madison
Sullivan
Clinton
Montgomery
Tioga
Columbia
Ontario
Tompkins
Cortland
Orleans
Ulster
Delaware
Oswego
Warren
Essex
Otsego
Washington
Franklin
Putnam
Wayne
Fulton
Rensselaer
Wyoming
Genesee
St. Lawrence
Yates
Greene
Saratoga
The following nine counties have certain townships with population densities of 150 persons or less per square mile:
Albany
Erie
Oneida
Broome
Monroe
Onondaga
Dutchess
Niagara
Orange
Reporting, Recordkeeping and Other Compliance Requirements:
Providers, including those in rural areas, must, by statute, request criminal history information concerning prospective unlicensed employees who will provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients. One or more persons in their employ must be designated to check criminal history information. The criminal history record check must be obtained through the Department. Providers must inform covered unlicensed prospective employees of their right to request such information and of the procedures available to them to review and correct criminal history information maintained by the State. Although prospective employees cannot be permanently hired before a determination is received from the Department about whether or not eligibility for employment must be disapproved, providers can give temporary approval to prospective employees and permit them to work so long as they meet the supervision requirements imposed on providers by the regulations.
Professional Services:
No additional professional services will be necessary to comply with the proposed regulations.
Compliance Costs:
For programs located in rural areas eligible for Medicaid funding, fees and costs will be considered an allowable cost in the Medicaid rates for such providers. (See "Regulatory Impact Statement - Costs to State Government").
For LHCSAs located in rural areas which are unable to access reimbursement from state/and/or federally funded programs, reimbursement will be provided on a direct and equitable basis subject to appropriation by the State Legislature. (See "Regulatory Impact Statement - Costs to State Government").
Minimizing Adverse Impact:
The Department considered the approaches for minimizing adverse economic impact listed in SAPA section 202-bb (2) and found them inapplicable. The requirements in this proposal are statutorily required. Compliance with them is mandatory.
Rural Area Participation:
Draft regulations, prior to filing with the Secretary of State, were shared with industry associations representing nursing homes and home care providers and comments solicited from all affected parties. Such associations include members from rural areas. Informational briefings were held with such associations. There will be informational letters to providers to include rural area providers prior to the effective date of the regulations.
Revised Job Impact Statement
A Job Impact statement is not necessary for this filing. Proposed new 10 NYCRR Part 402 does not have any adverse impact on the unlicensed employees hired before September 1, 2006 as they apply only to future prospective unlicensed employees. The number of all future prospective unlicensed employees of providers who provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients will be reduced to the degree that the criminal history record check reveals a criminal record barring such employment.
Since the inception of the program approximately 14% of all unlicensed employees applying for positions with nursing homes or home health care providers were found to have a criminal record barring such employment.
Assessment of Public Comment
The Department received comments from 16 individuals/organizations in regard to the Criminal History Record Check (CHRC) regulations. The Department believes this regulation simply fulfills the statutory requirement of Chapter 331 of the Laws of 2006, amending Public Health Law (PHL) Article 28-E and Executive Law (EL) Section 845-b relating to requiring the review of criminal history of prospective employees of nursing homes and home health care services agencies, and that most of the comments submitted are in opposition to several provisions of the Department of Health (DOH) regulations at 10 NYCRR Part 402 which were promulgated following the enactment of the statute. The specific issues raised and responses to those issues follow:
Comment:
In response to the provision that would require PHL Article 28 and Article 36 covered providers to designate one or more "Authorized Persons" to request, receive and maintain the confidentiality of criminal history information provided by the Department, virtually all comments received emphasized that this provision is unduly restrictive and recommended the automatic designation of two "Authorized Persons". Likewise, the commenters also stated concerns that the need for backup "Authorized Persons" to cover potential employee absences such as vacation, employee turnover or other employment issues also requires the designation of at least two "authorized persons". As such, the commenters stated that this change eliminates additional administrative burden for both providers and DOH.
Response:
The DOH disagrees because the designation of at least two authorized persons is already permitted by regulation. An "Authorized Person" is defined by the 2006 statute to mean the "one individual designated by a provider who is authorized to request, receive and review criminal history information, except that where the number of applications received by a provider is so great that one person cannot reasonably perform the functions of the authorized person, a provider may designate one or more additional persons to serve as authorized persons". Executive Law 845-b(1)(b). Similarly, 10 NYCRR Section 402.4(a)(1) requires the designation of as many authorized persons as are needed to assure compliance with the CHRC requirements. In order for covered providers to comply with the timely access and response to criminal history information provided by the DOH, covered providers have been instructed in both DOH training sessions and CHRC administrative letters that the designation of at least two authorized persons is encouraged and will not require DOH pre-approval. This was encouraged because the Department requires that the providers not allow prospective employees to provide direct care or supervision to patients, residents or clients in response to CHRC correspondence concerning proposed or final disapproval of eligibility for employment. It follows that due to the provider response requirements to CHRC correspondence, an authorized person should be made available at all times and notwithstanding a provider's internal staffing issues. Moreover, the larger PHL Article 28 and 36 entities have historically been encouraged by the Department to designate more than two authorized persons in recognition of the high volume of criminal history record checking requests submitted by them.
Comment:
Most raised the comment that the supervision requirements concerning prospective employees awaiting the results of the CHRC be revised to require one direct on-site visit and 3 telephone calls for the first month and then monthly calls thereafter to check-in with the patient/client or the patient/client's representative. The commenters also stated since providers speak with patients/clients on a continual basis already, such a requirement would provide financial relief from the restrictive supervision requirements currently imposed, while continuing to maintain appropriate supervision of those temporary employees. The commenters also stated that the supervision requirements be revised to allow the direct on-site visit to be completed by a licensed health care professional, senior aide or other paraprofessional who meets the one year requirement of employment in home care.
Response:
The DOH agrees in part, and to the extent that the current regulation requirement requires Certified Home Health Agencies (CHHAs), Licensed Home Care Services Agencies (LHCSAs) and Long Term Home Health Care Providers (LTHHCPs) to provide direct observation and evaluation of the temporary employee on-site in the home the first week by a registered professional nurse, licensed practical nurse or other professional personnel and should be modified. PHL 2899-a(10) requires that for the purposes of providing direct observation and evaluation, the provider shall utilize an individual employed by such provider with a minimum of one-year's experience working in an agency certified, licensed or approved under Article 36 of the Public Health Law. The DOH agrees that the language in the statute ensures appropriate oversight while allowing the health care agencies to determine what level of supervision is appropriate for the prospective employees. Therefore, the regulation will be changed to allow, solely for the purposes of the CHRC supervision, the direct on-site visits to be completed by a licensed health care professional, senior aide or other paraprofessional who meets the one year requirement of employment in home care. This regulation change, however, does not supplant the existing clinical supervision requirement to be completed by a Registered Nurse or Licensed Practical Nurse. The DOH, however, also recognizes that the home health care setting poses a greater risk to the home care client pending the completion of the criminal history record checking process. On several occasions, the DOH has been informed by law enforcement or media sources of criminal offenses, both physical and financial in nature, by prospective employees during the supervisory period. The regulations at 402.4(b)(2)(ii) provide for a minimal level of CHRC supervisory contacts that ensures providers are supervising individuals while awaiting a response from the Department. Commenters also noted that some providers are still experiencing long delays in turnaround time for processing and finalizing criminal record checks, thereby increasing their supervision costs. Current CHRC processing time has been reduced to about 7 to 10 days for a non-indent (no criminal history information on file) response. The Department strives to further reduce the response time to a provider's or applicant's request for a criminal history record check determination. Several factors may delay issuing a determination to the provider and the prospective employee where there is criminal history. Once the CHRC Legal unit receives a criminal history from the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) it must be reviewed for completeness and accuracy. Very often the information provided by the FBI and to a lesser extent, the DCJS, is incomplete. The legal unit's responsibility is to assure the completeness and the accuracy of the criminal history provided and the outcome of criminal charges before making a final determination about the individual's suitability for employment. Perfection of a criminal history requires the CHRC unit to contact a number of sources including courts, parole officers, probation officers and district attorneys in New York and other jurisdictions. This process can take several days to weeks. We appreciate that this may delay some responses and providers are incurring supervisory costs while awaiting a response from the Department, but we must resolve these issues first in order to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the resident or home care patient. The protections are wholly within the purview of the Department.
Comment:
Most also recommended the removal of the regulation provision allowing prospective employees to withdraw applications for employment prior to the completion of the CHRC process. Commenters stated that this provision subjects providers to additional CHRC related costs while waiting for DOH reimbursement for applicants who may not complete the employment process because of withdrawal.
Response:
The DOH disagrees. Executive Law Section 845-b(3)(d) provides that a prospective employee may withdraw his or her application for employment, without prejudice, at any time before employment is offered or declined, regardless of whether the subject individual or provider has reviewed such individual's criminal history information. Furthermore, CHRC initial fingerprinting costs for the prospective employee remains reimbursable based on availability, whether or not the applicant completes the employment process. The DOH also wishes to underscore that the intent of the DOH CHRC Form 102 "Acknowledgement and Consent Form for Fingerprinting and Disclosure of Criminal History Record Information" is to also inform prospective employees of their right to withdraw their application for employment at any time. This right to withdraw is clearly noted on the consent form. This form was drafted with the intent of full disclosure. Moreover, the DOH CHRC Form 102 also required approval by both the NYS Division of Criminal Justice Services and the FBI prior to its implementation.
Comment:
Several commenters stated that there should be strict time lines, for example 5 days, for the DOH to review criminal history information and make employment eligibility determinations. In large part, due to the supervision costs associated with prospective employees waiting for the results of the CHRC, commenters added that such time limits would reduce their CHRC costs and also enable the DOH to more promptly notify the provider whether or not the CHRC has revealed any criminal history information, and if so, what actions shall or may be taken by the DOH and the provider.
Response:
Executive Law 845-b(5)(e) explicitly states that upon receipt of criminal history information from the division (NYS Division of Criminal Justice Services), the DOH may request, and is entitled to receive, information pertaining to any crime identified in such criminal history information from any state or local law enforcement agency, district attorney, parole officer, probation officer or court for the purposes of determining whether any ground relating to such crime exists for denying an application, renewal, or employment. Furthermore, paragraph (f) of the same subsection follows and states that the DOH shall thereafter promptly notify the provider concerning whether its check has revealed any criminal history information, and if so, what actions shall or may be taken by the DOH and the provider. As mentioned above, several factors may delay issuing a determination to the provider and the prospective employee where there is criminal history. Once the CHRC Legal unit receives a criminal history from the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) it must be reviewed for completeness and accuracy. Very often the information provided by the FBI and to a lesser extent, the DCJS, is incomplete. The legal unit's responsibility is to assure the completeness and the accuracy of the criminal history provided and the outcome of criminal charges before making a final determination about the individual's suitability for employment. Therefore, it is not practical to limit the CHRC response time to 5 days.
Comment:
The proposed regulation at 10 NYCRR Section 402.9(a)(1) requiring providers to establish, maintain, and keep current, a record of employees should be withdrawn given the high turnover rate in the home care industry.
Response:
DOH does not agree. Executive Law Section 845-b(8) requires that providers notify DOH when an employee is no longer subject to a criminal history record check so that the Division of Criminal Justice Services and DOH no longer provides subsequent criminal history information to that provider. Further, the DOH is required by law to annually validate the records maintained on its behalf by the Division of Criminal Justice Services.
Comment:
The proposed regulation at 10 NYCRR Section 402.9(c)(1) requiring providers to retain CHRC records for six years is administratively burdensome.
Response:
The Departmental standard document retention requirement is six years.
