HB 4115
Provides that a criminal records check on certain caregivers shall last for three years, subject to exceptions.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
94%
Oppose
6%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill updates background check requirements for caregivers in Oregon, primarily focusing on those providing in-home care or working in residential facilities. It establishes a three-year criminal records check period for certain caregivers, subject to exceptions like new convictions or credible complaints of abuse. The bill also addresses retroactive payments to providers, streamlines credentialing processes, and ensures portability of criminal records checks when caregivers change employers or care settings. Finally, it outlines specific criminal convictions that would disqualify individuals from providing care to recipients of support services or residents of residential facilities.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Cosponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of House Bill 4115 advocate for its passage due to concerns about delays and workforce shortages in Oregon's behavioral health system. They believe the bill addresses these issues by streamlining processes, reducing bureaucratic hurdles, and improving access to care. The proposed changes aim to modernize the state's background check system, reduce administrative hassle, and enable qualified professionals to enter the field more quickly. By addressing these challenges, supporters argue that HB 4115 will strengthen Oregon's behavioral health workforce, improve residents' timely access to care, and ultimately have a positive impact on individuals and communities affected by the shortage.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of the bill express concerns that it will disrupt existing healthcare networks and create financial burdens on individuals managing their behavioral health services. Specifically, they argue that retroactive payment to non-contracted providers is necessary to mitigate potential disruptions to care continuity, as testified by one submitter who cited this need in their testimony. Additionally, opponents propose technical changes to the bill, such as revising subsection (2), to address these concerns and ensure a smoother transition for affected networks.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.