UNIFORM EMERGENCY VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONERS ACT

 

 

drafted by the

 

 

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS

ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS

 

 

and by it

 

 

APPROVED AND RECOMMENDED FOR ENACTMENT

IN ALL THE STATES

 

 

at its

 

 

ANNUAL CONFERENCE

MEETING IN ITS ONE-HUNDRED-AND-FIFTEENTH YEAR

HILTON HEAD, SOUTH CAROLINA

 

 

July 7-14, 2006

 

 

 

WITH PREFATORY NOTE AND COMMENTS

 

 

Copyright ©2006

By

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS

ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS

 

 

December 6, 2006

 

 

ABOUT NCCUSL

 

The National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws (NCCUSL), now in its 115th year, provides states with non-partisan, well-conceived and well-drafted legislation that brings clarity and stability to critical areas of state statutory law.

 

Conference members must be lawyers, qualified to practice law. They are practicing lawyers, judges, legislators and legislative staff and law professors, who have been appointed by state governments as well as the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands to research, draft and promote enactment of uniform state laws in areas of state law where uniformity is desirable and practical.

 

•                     NCCUSL strengthens the federal system by providing rules and procedures that are consistent from state to state but that also reflect the diverse experience of the states.

 

•                     NCCUSL statutes are representative of state experience, because the organization is made up of representatives from each state, appointed by state government.

 

•                     NCCUSL keeps state law up-to-date by addressing important and timely legal issues.

 

•                     NCCUSL’s efforts reduce the need for individuals and businesses to deal with different laws as they move and do business in different states.

 

•                     NCCUSL’s work facilitates economic development and provides a legal platform for foreign entities to deal with U.S. citizens and businesses.

 

•                     NCCUSL Commissioners donate thousands of hours of their time and legal and drafting expertise every year as a public service, and receive no salary or compensation for their work.

 

•                     NCCUSL’s deliberative and uniquely open drafting process draws on the expertise of commissioners, but also utilizes input from legal experts, and advisors and observers representing the views of other legal organizations or interests that will be subject to the proposed laws.

 

•                     NCCUSL is a state-supported organization that represents true value for the states, providing services that most states could not otherwise afford or duplicate.

 

DRAFTING COMMITTEE ON UNIFORM EMERGENCY VOLUNTEER

HEALTH PRACTITIONERS ACT

 

The Committee appointed by and representing the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws in drafting this Act consists of the following individuals:

RAYMOND P. PEPE, 17 N. Second St., 18th Floor, Harrisburg, PA 17101-1507, Chair

ROBERT G. BAILEY, University of Missouri-Columbia, 217 Hulston Hall, Columbia, MO 65211

STEPHEN C. CAWOOD, 108 1/2 Kentucky Ave., P.O. Drawer 128, Pineville, KY 40977-0128

KENNETH W. ELLIOTT, City Place Building, 204 N. Robinson Ave., Suite 2200, Oklahoma City, OK 73102

THOMAS T. GRIMSHAW, 1700 Lincoln St., Suite 3800, Denver, CO 80203

THEODORE C. KRAMER, 45 Walnut St., Brattleboro, VT 05301

AMY L. LONGO, 8805 Indian Hills Dr., Suite 280, Omaha, NE 68114-4070

JOHN J. MCAVOY, 3110 Brandywine St. NW, Washington, DC 20008

DONALD E. MIELKE, 7472 S. Shaffer Ln., Suite 100, Littleton, CO 80127

JAMES G. HODGE, JR., Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 624 N. Broadway, Baltimore, MD  21205-1996, Reporter

 

EX OFFICIO

 

HOWARD J. SWIBEL, 120 S. Riverside Plaza, Suite 1200, Chicago, IL 60606, President

LEVI J. BENTON, State of Texas, 201 Caroline, 13th Floor, Houston, TX 77002, Division    Chair

 

AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION ADVISORS

 

BRYAN ALBERT LIANG, California Western School of Law, 350 Cedar St., San Diego, CA 92101, ABA Advisor

BARBARA J. GISLASON, 219 Main St. SE, Ste. 560, Minneapolis, MN 55414-2152, ABA             Section Advisor

PRISCILLA D. KEITH, 3838 N. Rural St., Indianapolis, IN, 46205-2930, ABA Section Advisor

 

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

 

WILLIAM H. HENNING, University of Alabama School of Law, Box 870382, Tuscaloosa, AL 35487-0382, Executive Director

 

Copies of this Act may be obtained from:

NATIONAL CONFERENCE OF COMMISSIONERS

ON UNIFORM STATE LAWS

211 E. Ontario Street, Suite 1300

Chicago, Illinois  60611

www.nccusl.org

UNIFORM EMERGENCY VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONERS ACT

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

Prefatory Note.................................................................................................................................. 1

SECTION 1.  SHORT TITLE.......................................................................................................... 6

SECTION 2.  DEFINITIONS.......................................................................................................... 6

SECTION 3.  APPLICABILITY TO VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONERS...................... 15

SECTION 4.  REGULATION OF SERVICES DURING EMERGENCY..................................... 15

SECTION 5.  VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONER REGISTRATION SYSTEMS............. 17

SECTION 6.  RECOGNITION OF VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONERS
LICENSED IN OTHER STATES...................................................................................... 24

SECTION 7.  NO EFFECT ON CREDENTIALING AND PRIVILEGING................................. 26

SECTION 8.  PROVISION OF VOLUNTEER HEALTH OR VETERINARY SERVICES; ADMINISTRATIVE SANCTIONS.................................................................................................................... 28

SECTION 9.  RELATION TO OTHER LAWS............................................................................. 33

SECTION 10.  REGULATORY AUTHORITY............................................................................. 34

[SECTION 11.  CIVIL LIABILITY FOR VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONERS; VICARIOUS LIABILITY.  Reserved.].......................................................................................................................... 35

[SECTION 12.  WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COVERAGE.  Reserved.]............................... 36

SECTION 13.  UNIFORMITY OF APPLICATION AND CONSTRUCTION........................... 36

SECTION 14.  REPEALS.............................................................................................................. 36

SECTION 15.  EFFECTIVE DATE............................................................................................... 37

UNIFORM EMERGENCY VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONERS ACT

 

Prefatory Note

            A primary purpose of this act is to establish a robust and redundant system to quickly and efficiently facilitate the deployment and use of licensed practitioners to provide health and veterinary services in response to declared incidents of disasters and emergencies.  This act (1) establishes a system for the use of volunteer health practitioners capable of functioning autonomously even when routine methods of communication are disrupted, (2) provides reasonable safeguards to assure that health practitioners are appropriately licensed and regulated to protect the public’s health, and (3) allows states to regulate, direct and restrict the scope and extent of services provided by volunteer health practitioners to promote disaster recovery operations. 

 

            The act was drafted in an expedited manner in the months immediately following the Gulf Coast Hurricanes of 2005 to remedy significant deficiencies in interstate and intrastate procedures used to authorize and regulate the deployment of public and private sector health practitioners to supplement the resources provided by state and local government employees and other first-responders.  Issues pertaining to civil liability and workers’ compensation protections for volunteer health practitioners have been reserved for future consideration at the 2007 Annual Meeting of the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws.

 

            Prior to Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, which in 2005 struck within a few short weeks of each other in Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas, many states had enacted emergency management laws to allow for emergency waiver or modifications of licensure standards to facilitate the interstate use of licensed health practitioners.  Within the public sector, 49 of 50 states had also ratified the provisions of the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (“EMAC”) which allowed for the deployment of licensed health practitioners employed by state and local governments to other jurisdictions to provide emergency services without having to be licensed in the affected jurisdictions.

 

            The federal government supplemented these provisions of state law by allowing licensed health practitioners it employs on a permanent or temporary basis to respond to disasters and emergencies without compliance with state professional licensing requirements where their services are utilized. (10 U.S.C. 1094(d)(1)). Pursuant to federal law, two systems had also been established to facilitate the use of private sector health practitioners in response to emergencies, especially those mobilized by this nation’s extraordinary array of charitable non-governmental organizations active in disasters.  As authorized by § 2801 of the Public Health Services Act, 42 U.S.C. § 300hh, local Medical Reserve Corps in hundreds of locations throughout the nation are able to recruit, train and promote the deployment of health practitioners in response to emergencies.  Funding was also provided under § 319I of the Public Health Services Act, 42 U.S.C. § 247d-7b, to state governments by the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) to establish Emergency Systems for Advance Registration of Volunteer Health Practitioners (generally referred to as the “ESAR-VHP Programs”).  Through these systems, volunteer health practitioners are recruited and registered in advance to respond to disasters.  Participation in a local Medical Reserve Corps or registration with a state ESAR-VHP Program, however, does not result in the interstate recognition of licenses issued to volunteer health practitioners.

 

            When the Gulf Coast Hurricanes struck during 2005, the deficiencies in federal and state programs to facilitate the interstate use of volunteer health practitioners not employed by state or federal agencies became evident.  Despite the clear recognition in federal and state law and interstate compacts that the interstate recognition of licenses issued to health practitioners was critical to emergency response efforts, no uniform and well-understood system existed to link the various public and private sector programs together effectively and to make health practitioners available to the large array of non-governmental organizations essential to all disaster relief organizations.  For example, while most states issued emergency executive orders or proclamations allowing health practitioners licensed in other states to be used within their boundaries to provide emergency services, each state proceeded somewhat differently to establish and implement these programs.  Amid the breakdown of routine communications and the chaos caused by the hurricanes, this lack of coordination and the absence of information regarding the operation of state emergency declarations generated confusion and uncertainty that significantly delayed the deployment of many volunteer health practitioners and seriously limited the extent to which many others were able to provide valuable needed services.  Significant concerns regarding civil liability and workers’ compensation protections also delayed and impeded the recruitment of volunteers in many critical areas and resulted in limitations upon the scope of services provided by a substantial number of volunteers, especially physicians and nurses providing services in emergency shelters.

 

            An electronic report posted to the website of the Metropolitan Medical Response System program, part of the federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS), summarizes the types of issues that arose:

 

Volunteer physicians are pouring in to care for the sick, but red tape is keeping hundreds of others from caring for Hurricane Katrina survivors.  The North Carolina mobile hospital waiting to help … offered impressive state-of-the-art medical care.  It was developed with millions of tax dollars through the Office of Homeland Security after 9-11.  With capacity for 113 beds, it is designed to handle disasters and mass casualties.  It travels in a convoy that includes two 53-foot trailers, which on Sunday afternoon was parked on a gravel lot 70 miles north of New Orleans because Louisiana officials for several days would not let them deploy to the flooded city.  ‘We have tried so hard to do the right thing.  It took us 30 hours to get here,’ said one of the frustrated surgeons.  That government officials can’t straighten out the mess and get them assigned to a relief effort now that they’re just a few miles away ‘is just mind-boggling,’ he said.

 

            This doctor’s concerns were echoed by a director of the Northwest Medical Teams, a Seattle based group of volunteer medical personnel who expressed frustration when the deployment of the organization’s resources was delayed for several critical days following Hurricane Katrina because its members could not confirm that their professional licenses would be recognized. These concerns were echoed by the Director of Emergency Services in New Orleans, who reported that, “We needed doctors…[and] [i]t was pandemonium in the area.”  (State Laws Become Roadblock to Medical Response in Crisis Services to New Orleans, San Francisco Chronicle, September 2, 2006.)

 

            Rather than treating the injured, sick and infirm, some qualified physicians, nurses and other licensed health practitioners found themselves: (1) waiting in long lines in often futile attempts to navigate through a semi-functioning bureaucracy; or (2) providing other forms of assistance, such as general labor, which failed to utilize their desperately needed health skills.  Others proceeded to treat victims at the risk of violating existing state statutes and potentially facing criminal or administrative penalties or civil liability. Out-of-state practitioners providing medical treatment also faced the real possibility of noncoverage under their medical malpractice policies.  These impediments became especially problematic in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina when, according to the Council of State Governments (CSG), the most pressing need immediately after the storm was the availability of medical volunteers.  As reported by a representative of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals:

 

            “The main thing we worked on was allowing out-of-state medical professionals

            who wanted to volunteer and come help, to waive the requirement of having them

            licensed in our state if they could show they were validly licensed in the state

            that they were coming from…We had to keep renewing that executive order

            because we had so much need for help.” (CSG Quarterly, Winter 2006).

 

            Current systems are not sufficient to integrate public health and medical personnel.  The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials (ASTHO) reported that the lack of national standards for the deployment and use of public health and medical emergency response personnel complicates the use of volunteer health practitioners for both requesting and deploying states. State Mobilization of Health Personnel During the 2005 Hurricanes 1 (ASTHO, July 2006).

 

            To respond to the lack of an effective system to facilitate the interstate deployment of health practitioners after Hurricanes Katrina and Rita made landfall, a number of different organizations quickly developed and implemented systems to promote the deployment of volunteer health practitioners.  These efforts included actions taken by the Federation of State Medical Licensing Boards, the National Council of State Boards of Nursing, the Association of State and Provincial Psychology Licensing Boards, the American Medical Association, the American Nurses Association, the American Psychology Association, the National Association of Social Workers, the American Counseling Association, the National Association of Chain Drug Stores, and the American Veterinary Medicine Association.  The American Red Cross was also able to effectively utilize its Disaster Human Resources System that had been previously established to create a network of volunteers available to respond to disasters, including nurses and mental health workers whose licensure status was reviewed and evaluated by the Red Cross prior to their deployment.  Notwithstanding the efforts of these groups and organizations, the legal status of many health practitioners remained unclear.  Many practitioners and organizations also felt compelled to limit the scope of the services they provided because of concerns about professional licensing sanctions and civil liability.

 

            After the more immediate response efforts associated with Hurricanes Katrina and Rita were complete, the National Conference of Commissioners on Uniform State Laws appointed a Study Committee which convened a meeting in February 2006 hosted by the American Red Cross to determine if the development of a uniform state law could help remedy these problems.  Participants in the February 2006 meeting included most of the national groups and organizations who helped deploy health practitioners during the disaster, as well as representatives of the National Emergency Management Association, the National Governors’ Association, the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials, the American Public Health Association, the Center for Law and the Public’s Health at Georgetown and Johns Hopkins Universities, and various sections and committees of the American Bar Association.  At the meeting, a unanimous consensus emerged that the National Conference should appoint a Drafting Committee and present proposals for consideration at its 2006 Annual Meeting. 

 

            Subsequently, a Drafting Committee was appointed by the National Conference which, after two Drafting Committee Meetings and multiple telephone conferences and informal consultations with its advisors, presented its recommendations to the 2006 Annual Meeting of the Conference.  After extensive debate and further revisions to the Committee’s recommendations, the Conference waived its usual practice of requiring the consideration of uniform laws at two or more Annual Meetings and approved this act on July 13, 2006.  In August 2006 the House of Delegates added this act to its agenda for expedited consideration and unanimously endorsed the proposed law after discussion.

 

            While the magnitude of the emergency presented by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita exceeded the scope of disasters experienced in this country for many decades, foreseeable emerging events pose similar threats.  Future storms (especially in the New York City and New England area); major earthquakes in San Francisco, Los Angeles or other heavily urbanized areas; volcanic eruptions in the Pacific Northwest; tidal waves on the east and west coasts; incidents of terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, biological and chemical agents; and flu or other pandemics may overwhelm the resources of disaster health delivery systems.  To help meet patient surge capacity and protect the public’s health, reliance on private sector health practitioners and nongovernmental relief organizations may be needed.  This act seeks to remedy defects in current state response systems needed to effectively utilize private sector volunteers to meet these needs. 

 

            In the development of this act, the Drafting Committee and its many advisors sought to pursue the following major policy objectives:

 

·                    This act seeks to make volunteer health practitioners available for deployment in response to emergency declarations as quickly as possible without the necessity for affirmative actions on the part of host states, while still allowing host states to act when necessary to limit, restrict and regulate the use of volunteer health practitioners within their boundaries.

·                    To protect the public health and safety, this act requires that prior to deployment, volunteers must be registered with public or private systems capable of determining that they have been properly licensed and are in good standing with their principal jurisdiction of practice and of communicating this information to host states and entities in host states using the services of volunteers. The use of registration systems is intended to discourage the uncoordinated use of “spontaneous volunteers” who may independently travel to the scene of a disaster without the support of public or private emergency response agencies and to promote the recruitment and training of volunteers in advance of emergency declarations, while also allowing and facilitating additional registrations at the time of an emergency.

·                    This act is intended to allow volunteers to register with systems located throughout the country, rather than requiring registration in each affected host state, and to accommodate and facilitate the use of the multiple different types of registration systems that have developed and are being expanded by public and private agencies, especially those systems that provided critical services in response to the Gulf Coast Hurricanes of 2005. Registration systems may be established, however, only by governmental agencies or by private organizations that operate on a national or regional basis in affiliation with disaster relief or healthcare organizations that have demonstrated their ability to responsibly recruit, train and promote the deployment of volunteer health practitioners.

·                    To alleviate confusion and uncertainty regarding the types of services that may be provided by volunteer health practitioners, this act requires volunteers to limit their practice to activities for which they are licensed and properly trained and qualified and to conform to scope-of-practice authorizations and restrictions imposed by the laws of host states, disaster response agencies and organizations, and host entities.  Coextensively, host states can modify the activities of practitioners as necessary to respond to emergency conditions.

·                    To properly regulate the activities of volunteer health practitioners, this act vests authority over out-of-state volunteers in the licensing boards and agencies of host jurisdictions, while also requiring the reporting of unprofessional conduct by host states to licensing jurisdictions and confirming the ability of licensing jurisdictions to impose sanctions upon professionals for unprofessional conduct that occurs outside of their boundaries.  Licensing boards and agencies are required, however, to consider the unique exigent circumstances often created by emergencies and to recognize the limitations upon the communications that may occur which may result in incomplete knowledge regarding any limitations upon the activities of volunteer practitioners.

·                    Finally, this act is not intended to supplant state emergency management laws or to establish new systems for the coordination and delivery of emergency response services.  Instead, host entities using volunteer health practitioners are required to coordinate their activities with local agencies to the extent and in the manner otherwise required by state law.

 

UNIFORM EMERGENCY VOLUNTEER HEALTH PRACTITIONERS ACT

 

            SECTION 1.  SHORT TITLE.  This [act] may be cited as the Uniform Emergency Volunteer Health Practitioners Act.

            SECTION 2.  DEFINITIONS.  In this [act]:

             (1) “Disaster relief organization” means an entity that provides emergency or disaster relief services that include health or veterinary services provided by volunteer health practitioners and that:

                        (A) is designated or recognized as a provider of those services pursuant to a disaster response and recovery plan adopted by an agency of the federal government or [name of appropriate governmental agency or agencies]; or

                        (B) regularly plans and conducts its activities in coordination with an agency of the federal government or [name of appropriate governmental agency or agencies].

            (2) “Emergency” means an event or condition that is an [emergency, disaster, or public health emergency] under [designate the appropriate laws of this state, a political subdivision of this state, or a municipality or other local government within this state].

(3) “Emergency declaration” means a declaration of emergency issued by a person

authorized to do so under the laws of this state [, a political subdivision of this state, or a municipality or other local government within this state].

(4) “Emergency Management Assistance Compact” means the interstate compact

 approved by Congress by Public Law No. 104-321,110 Stat. 3877 [cite state statute, if any].

            (5) “Entity” means a person other than an individual.

            (6) “Health facility” means an entity licensed under the laws of this or another state to provide health or veterinary services.

            (7) “Health practitioner” means an individual licensed under the laws of this or another state to provide health or veterinary services.

            (8) “Health services” means the provision of treatment, care, advice or guidance, or other services, or supplies, related to the health or death of individuals or human populations, to the extent necessary to respond to an emergency, including:

                        (A) the following, concerning the physical or mental condition or functional status of an individual or affecting the structure or function of the body:

                                    (i)  preventive, diagnostic, therapeutic, rehabilitative, maintenance, or palliative care; and

                                    (ii) counseling, assessment, procedures, or other services;

                        (B) sale or dispensing of a drug, a device, equipment, or another item to an individual in accordance with a prescription; and

                        (C) funeral, cremation, cemetery, or other mortuary services.

            (9) “Host entity” means an entity operating in this state which uses volunteer health practitioners to respond to an emergency.

            (10) “License” means authorization by a state to engage in health or veterinary services that are unlawful without the authorization.  The term includes authorization under the laws of this state to an individual to provide health or veterinary services based upon a national certification issued by a public or private entity.

            (11) “Person” means an individual, corporation, business trust, trust, partnership, limited liability company, association, joint venture, public corporation, government or governmental subdivision, agency, or instrumentality, or any other legal or commercial entity.

            (12)  “Scope of practice” means the extent of the authorization to provide health or veterinary services granted to a health practitioner by a license issued to the practitioner in the state in which the principal part of the practitioner’s services are rendered, including any conditions imposed by the licensing authority.

            (13)  “State” means a state of the United States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the United States Virgin Islands, or any territory or insular possession subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.

(14)  “Veterinary services” means the provision of treatment, care, advice or guidance, or

other services, or supplies, related to the health or death of an animal or to animal populations, to the extent necessary to respond to an emergency, including:

                        (A) diagnosis, treatment, or prevention of an animal disease, injury, or other physical or mental condition by the prescription, administration, or dispensing of vaccine, medicine, surgery, or therapy;

                        (B) use of a procedure for reproductive management; and

                        (C) monitoring and treatment of animal populations for diseases that have spread or demonstrate the potential to spread to humans.

            (15)  “Volunteer health practitioner” means a health practitioner who provides health or veterinary services, whether or not the practitioner receives compensation for those services.  The term does not include a practitioner who receives compensation pursuant to a preexisting employment relationship with a host entity or affiliate which requires the practitioner to provide health services in this state, unless the practitioner is not a resident of this state and is employed by a disaster relief organization providing services in this state while an emergency declaration is in effect.

Legislative Note:  Definition of “emergency”:  The terms “emergency,” “disaster,” and “public health emergency” are the most commonly used terms to describe the circumstances that may lead to the issuance of an emergency declaration referred to in this [act].  States that use other terminology should insert the appropriate terminology into the first set of brackets.  The second set of brackets should contain references to the specific statutes pursuant to which emergencies are declared by the state or political subdivisions, municipalities, or local governments within the state.

 

            Definition of “emergency declaration”:  The references to declarations issued by political subdivisions, municipalities or local governments should be used in states in which these entities are authorized to issue emergency declarations.

 

            Definition of “state”:  A state may expand the reach of this [act] by defining this term to include a foreign country, political subdivision of a foreign country, or Indian tribe or nation.

           

Comment

            1. A disaster relief organization is an entity that provides disaster relief services or assistance in response to an emergency declaration.  For example, the American Red Cross, which has been chartered by Congress to provide emergency relief services, constitutes a disaster relief organization as the term is used in this act.  Other members of the National Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster, Inc. (NVOAD) that provide similar services may also be considered disaster relief organizations.  The definition limits such organizations, however, only to those expressly designated in federal or state disaster relief plans, or which regularly plan and conduct their activities in coordination with state or federal agencies.  As used in this context, the reference to “its activities” means emergency or disaster relief services that include the provision of health or veterinary services.  This definition defines the term “disaster relief organization” narrowly to reflect the special rights and privileges afforded to disaster relief organizations by this act.  Disaster relief organizations are one of only three types of private entities, including national or regional associations of healthcare licensing boards or health practitioners and health facilities providing comprehensive inpatient and outpatient care, that are authorized by Section 5(a)(4)(C) to establish and operate registration systems for volunteer health practitioners (without prior governmental approval).  In addition, although generally the term “volunteer health practitioners” does not include individuals with a pre-existing employment relationship with a “host entity,” employees of disaster relief organizations acting as host entities may be classified as volunteers health practitioners when their regular place of employment is located in another state.

 

            2. This act does not define the circumstances and conditions that constitute an emergency, but rather defers to other laws currently in effect in all states, including laws providing for the declaration of public health emergencies.  In deciding which laws to cross reference within this definition, states should include laws using different terminology, such as a “disaster,” “crisis” or “catastrophe.”  Because Section 4(a) allows states to limit or restrict the application of this act when issuing an emergency declaration, states should include within this definition all potentially applicable laws to accomplish the broad objectives of this act.  No matter how a state defines “emergency,” its declaration is the trigger through which the protections of this Act go into effect.

 

            3. An emergency declaration is the official pronouncement made by a state or local official authorized to declare the existence of an “emergency” pursuant to laws referenced in paragraph 2 that authorizes the use, deployment, and protection of volunteer health practitioners who comply with the provisions of this uniform law.  This act defers to other state laws incorporated into the definition of the term “emergency,” however, to establish the methods, procedures, and requirements for issuing and publishing an emergency declaration.

 

            4. The Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC), which is currently in effect in all 50 states, specifies procedures for the use of governmental resources, including state and local employees who are health practitioners, to provide for mutual assistance between states to manage declared emergencies.  This act supplements the provisions of EMAC and other state mutual aid compacts by authorizing the interstate use of volunteer health practitioners who are not state and local employees in same manner as government employees may be used under EMAC and other state compacts.  In addition, Section 9 of this act authorizes the incorporation of private sector health practitioners into “state forces” deployed in response efforts through EMAC and other mutual aid agreements.  The term EMAC includes the provisions of the Compact in effect at the time of adoption of this act and any amendments subsequently enacted to the Compact.

 

            5. An entity may include any public or private legally recognized type of person, but does not include an individual.  The term does not include individuals so as to distinguish the term “health facility” from the term “health practitioner.”

 

            6. A health facility is an entity engaged in the provision of health or veterinary services in its ordinary course of business or activities.  The term does not include individual health practitioners.  Specific types of facilities are not listed within the definition to avoid a restrictive interpretation of the term to mean only facilities similar to the listed entities as provided by the statutory construction doctrine of ejusdem generis.  Instead, all types of entities authorized by state law to provide health or veterinary services are defined as health facilities.

 

            7. A health practitioner is an individual, not an entity, who is licensed in any state, including the host state, to provide health or veterinary services or who holds a national certificate that is recognized by the host state as equivalent to licensure for purposes of providing health services to individuals or human populations or veterinary services to animals or animal populations.  The term makes reference to the laws of other states for the purpose of allowing practitioners licensed in other states to practice as volunteer health practitioners subject to the requirements and limitations provided by this act, including the limitations on their scope of practice as provided by Section 8(a).  The inclusion of veterinary practitioners within the term recognizes the vital role that veterinary practitioners often serve in emergency response efforts (as was well recognized following Hurricane Katrina), but does not imply or suggest that veterinarians are authorized to provide human health services during emergencies, nor does it imply or suggest that nonveterinarians are authorized to provide veterinary services.  The term includes professionals providing services to “populations” to make it clear that individuals licensed for the purpose of providing public health services, rather than services to individual consumers, are included within the definition.  Individual types of professions are not listed within the definition for the same reason that individual types of health facilities are not listed in Paragraph 6.

 

            8. Health services are broadly defined, based on a similar definition of the term from the HIPAA Privacy Rule, 45 C.F.R. 160.103, to include those services provided by volunteer health practitioners that relate to the health or death of individuals or populations and that are necessary to respond to an emergency.  They include direct patient health services, public health services, provision of pharmaceutical products, and mortuary services for the deceased. On an individual level, health services include transportation, diagnosis, treatment, and care for injuries, illness, diseases, or pain related to physical or mental impairments.  On the population level, health services may include the identification of injuries and diseases, and an understanding of the etiology, prevalence, and incidence of diseases, for groups or members within the population.  This may entail public health case finding through testing, and screening, or medical interventions (e.g., physical examinations, compulsory treatment, immunizations, or directly observed therapy (DOT)).  On a broader scale, states may implement traditional public health activities including surveillance, monitoring, and epidemiologic investigations.  The term does not include services that do not provide direct health benefits to individuals or populations.  For example, ancillary services (e.g., administrative tasks, medical record keeping, transportation of medical supplies) are not health services for purposes of this act.  

 

            9. A host entity is a health entity, disaster relief organization, or other entity that uses volunteer health practitioners to provide health or veterinary services during an emergency.  Unlike entities that facilitate the use or deployment of volunteers, the host entity is responsible for actually delivering health services to individuals or human populations or veterinary services to animals or animal populations during the emergency.  Host entities may thus include disaster relief organizations, hospitals, clinics, emergency shelters, doctors’ offices, outpatient centers, or any other places where volunteer health practitioners may provide health or veterinary services.  Host entities must comply with the requirements of Section 4(c) to be authorized to use volunteer health practitioners and have the authority under Section 8(d) to restrict the types of services that volunteer health practitioners may provide.

 

            10. A license is distinct from a non-governmental certification or other privately issued recognition that may be used to designate competency in a particular profession or area of practice.  It is a state-granted designation that regulates the scope of practice.  Licensing laws may either prohibit unlicensed persons from providing services reserved for licensed practitioners or prohibit unlicensed persons from holding themselves out to the public as a member of a profession.  An authorization to provide health or veterinary services pursuant to a national certification is included in the definition to clarify that a tangible certificate or prior government authorization may not in some circumstances be necessary for a governmental permission to constitute a license.  Nothing in this definition, however, is intended to allow individuals holding national certifications to provide health or veterinary services except as otherwise authorized by law.  Instead, pursuant to Sections 8(a) and (e), an individual holding a national certification may function as a volunteer health practitioner only to the extent authorized to do so by the laws of the state in which the individual primarily practices and by the laws of the host state in which an emergency is declared.

 

            11. A person is defined broadly to encompass individuals and entities.

 

            12. Scope of practice is used to define the extent of the authorization provided to a volunteer health practitioner to provide health or veterinary services during an emergency.  Scope of practice may be established by laws, regulations or policies established by licensure boards or other regulatory agencies of the state in which a practitioner is licensed and primarily engages in practice.  Scope of practice also includes any conditions that may be imposed on the practitioner’s authorization to practice, including instances where state law recognizes the existence of a license but declares practice privileges to be “inactive.”  The term is defined by reference to the laws of the state in which the principal part of a practitioner’s services are provided to establish a single standard applicable to practitioners licensed to practice in multiple states.  This act defers to relevant state laws to determine whether a practitioner with an inactive license may serve as a volunteer health practitioner.  To the extent the law of the state in which an individual is licensed and primarily engages in practice allows a practitioner with an inactive license to practice, either generally, only during emergencies, or only in a volunteer capacity, such an individual may practice in a “host state” consistent with the requirements of this uniform law.  On the other hand, if the law of the state in which an individual is licensed only allows an individual with an inactive license to practice if the license is renewed or reactivated (typically by satisfying continuing education requirements and paying additional registration fees), then the individual may only function as a volunteer health practitioner following the renewal or activation of the license.