Childhood lead poisoning: screening and prevention.
Summary
Existing law establishes the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, which is administered by the State Department of Public Health. Existing law requires the department to adopt regulations establishing a standard of care that include the determination of specified risk factors for lead exposure, including a child's time spent in a home, school, or building built before 1978. Existing law requires the department to ensure appropriate case management for children who have been identified with lead poisoning, and authorizes the department to contract with any public or private entity, including any local agency, to perform that duty. This bill would add several risk factors to be considered as part of the standard of care specified in regulations, including a child's residency in or visit to a foreign country. The bill would require the department to update its formula for allocating funds to a local agency that contracts with the department to administer the Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program, and to revise funding allocations before each contract cycle. Existing law provides for the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law authorizes the department to enter contracts with managed care plans to provide Medi-Cal services, and imposes requirements on the Medi-Cal managed care plans, including network adequacy standards. Under existing law, Medi-Cal covers early and periodic screening, diagnostic, and treatment services for individuals under 21 years of age, consistent with federal law. Existing regulations of the department require a health care provider who performs a periodic health assessment of a child who receives services from a publicly funded program for low-income children, to order the child screened for lead poisoning, as specified, unless a parent or guardian of the child, or other person with legal authority to withhold consent, refuses to consent to the screening or if the risk of screening is a greater risk to the child's health than the risk of lead poisoning. Existing regulations also require the health care provider to provide oral or written guidance to a parent or guardian that includes information relating to the risk of childhood lead poisoning. This bill would require a contract between the department and a Medi-Cal managed care plan to require the Medi-Cal managed care plan, on a quarterly basis, to identify every enrollee who is a child without a record of completing the blood lead screening tests, and to remind the contracting network provider of the requirement to perform the required blood lead screening tests and the requirement to provide the oral or written guidance to a parent or guardian relating to risk of childhood lead poisoning. The bill would require the department to develop and implement procedures to ensure compliance with those requirements would authorize the department to impose sanctions for a violation of those requirements. The bill would authorize the department to implement these provisions by means of plan or county letters, or other similar instructions.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2020
Committee Review
Aug 2020
Assembly Passage
Jun 2020
Senate Passage
Aug 2020
Signed into Law
Sep 2020
Introduced Feb 14, 2020
Signed Sep 28, 2020
Floor votes · Senate Aug 29, 2020 · Assembly Jun 10, 2020
How they voted
34–0
Passed · 1 other
Total votes 35
Aug 29, 2020
D
Democratic26
96% Yea
R
Republican9
100% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
29
Key actions
11
Committee
8
Amendments
6
Sep 28, 2020
Signed into law
Approved by the Governor.
legislature
Aug 30, 2020
Lower · Passed
Senate amendments concurred in. To Engrossing and Enrolling. (Ayes 75. Noes 0. Page 5363.).
lower
Aug 29, 2020
Introduced
In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending.
lower
Aug 29, 2020
Upper · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 38. Noes 0. Page 4436.).
upper
Aug 25, 2020
Upper · Passed
Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
upper
Aug 20, 2020
Upper · Passed
Read second time and amended. Ordered returned to second reading.
upper
Aug 20, 2020
Upper · Passed
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended. (Ayes 7. Noes 0.) (August 20).
upper
Aug 13, 2020
Committee
In committee: Referred to APPR. suspense file.
upper
Aug 4, 2020
Upper · Passed
From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (August 1).
upper
Jul 1, 2020
Committee
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
upper
Jun 10, 2020
Lower · Passed
Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 4758.)
lower
Jun 3, 2020
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 18. Noes 0.) (June 3).
lower
Jun 2, 2020
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
May 19, 2020
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (May 18). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
May 13, 2020
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Feb 24, 2020
Committee
Referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Feb 15, 2020
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 16.
lower
1 primary · 3 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Eloise Reyes
DDemocratic
Co
Bill Quirk
DDemocratic
Co
Connie M. Leyva
DDemocratic
Co
Cristina Garcia
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 2276
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 2276. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline