ELECTRONIC INPATIENT

PSYCHIATRIC BED REGISTRY

House Bill 5439 as introduced

Sponsor:  Rep. Mary Whiteford

Committee:  Health Policy

Complete to 1-30-18

SUMMARY:

House Bill 5439 would add a section to the Mental Health Code that would require the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to establish and administer an electronic inpatient psychiatric bed registry, accessible through the DHHS website.

Under the bill, DHHS would work with stakeholders, including mental health care providers and payers, to establish a web-based resource to identify available inpatient psychiatric beds in Michigan.  The beds would be categorized by patient gender, acuity, age, and diagnosis.

The bill would require providers to provide DHHS with the number of available inpatient psychiatric beds in their facilities on a regular basis, and the registry would be updated regularly to include this information.

The registry would be made available to prepaid inpatient health plans, inpatient psychiatric hospitals and psychiatric units, and employees and caregivers with other appropriate providers.

Finally, the bill would require DHHS to create a shared governance oversight committee for the registry that would include representatives of its various users.

The bill would take effect 90 days after enactment.

Proposed MCL 330.1151

BACKGROUND:

Currently, DHHS updates and publishes bed inventories on its website, including the availability of adult and child/adolescent psychiatric beds.[1] According to the DHHS website, that information is updated on a bimonthly basis on the first business day of January, March, May, July, September, and November.

The bill is understood to require more specific patient information in order to facilitate placement in appropriate facilities, especially when patients are being transferred from emergency room environments and may only be treated at certain facilities.

FISCAL IMPACT:

House Bill 5439 would increase state costs by up to $150,000 to create an inpatient psychiatric bed registry and would require a nominal, but likely negligible, increase for ongoing maintenance and operation. The bill would not have a fiscal impact on local units of government.

                                                                                        Legislative Analyst:   Jenny McInerney

                                                                                                Fiscal Analyst:   Kevin Koorstra

■ This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan House Fiscal Agency staff for use by House members in their deliberations, and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.

---