Existing law, the Lanterman Developmental Disabilities Services Act, requires the State Department of Developmental Services to contract with regional centers for the provision of services and supports for persons with developmental disabilities and their families. Existing law, until July 1, 2026, creates the Advisory Council on Improving Interactions between People with Intellectual and Development Disabilities and Law Enforcement, under the Department of Justice, to, among other things, evaluate existing training for peace officers specific to interactions between law enforcement and individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Existing law requires the council to submit a report including recommendations to the Legislature for improving outcomes of interactions with both individuals who have an intellectual or developmental disability and mental health conditions, as specified. This bill would require the State Department of Developmental Services to conduct a statewide evaluation of safety training services provided by regional centers, as specified. The bill would require the department, by July 1, 2028, to submit a report to the Legislature summarizing its findings and recommendations and would require the recommendations to address specified topics, including, among others, recommendations for establishing standardized, statewide protocols for responding to crises involving individuals with intellectual or developmental disabilities. The bill would state the intent of the Legislature to consider, upon receipt and consideration of that report, providing funding to the department for the purpose of developing, implementing, and sustaining safety training services statewide.
Existing law requires the State Department of Education, on or before January 1, 2024, to develop a plan to expand mental health instruction in California public schools. This bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2028, to develop a plan to expand digital wellness instruction in California public schools, as provided.
Senate Resolution 122 formally recognizes November 2026 as Pancreatic Cancer Awareness Month in California. This non-binding resolution highlights the severity of the disease, noting its high mortality rate and lack of early detection methods, while also pointing out that current federal funding for pancreatic cancer research is low compared to other areas. The bill urges all Californians to take action to end pancreatic cancer and calls for increased awareness and support for research efforts. It does not change any laws or allocate state funds but serves to draw public attention to the issue.
This Senate Resolution officially designates September 2026 as Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month in California. The bill aims to highlight the severity of the disease and encourage women to seek early medical attention for symptoms like bloating and pelvic pain. It does not change laws or allocate funding but serves to raise public awareness and support for those affected by ovarian cancer.
Senate Resolution 126 declares September 2026 as Childhood Cancer Awareness Month in California, aiming to highlight the impact of pediatric cancer on families and the state's medical resources. The resolution encourages individuals, businesses, and organizations to participate in awareness activities and support affected families throughout the year. It also expresses gratitude to healthcare providers and parents while reaffirming the Senate's commitment to finding cures and less toxic treatments for children with cancer.
Existing law requires the State Department of Education to identify an evidence-based online training program that a county office of education, school district, state special school, or charter school that serves pupils in grades 7 to 12, inclusive, can use to train school staff and pupils as part of their policy on pupil suicide prevention. Existing law requires the department, subject to an appropriation for these purposes, to provide a grant to a county office of education to acquire a training program identified by the department and disseminate that training program at no cost to specified educational entities, as specified. This bill would revise and recast these provisions by (1) deleting the requirement to provide the above-described grant, (2) deleting the requirement of the department to identify the above-described evidence-based online training program, (3) instead requiring the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission to develop an online training program to train school staff, pupils who are 13 years of age or older, and parents, guardians, or caregivers of pupils as part of the policy on pupil suicide prevention adopted by county offices of education, school districts, state special schools, and charter schools that serve pupils in kindergarten or in any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, as specified. The bill would require those educational entities that elect to conduct suicide risk screenings to report, on or before June 30, 2027, and June 30 annually thereafter, the number of pupils screened, and which screening instruments were used, for the reporting year, to the department, as provided, and would require the department to compile and post statewide aggregate data on these screenings on its internet website, as provided. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists by the California State Board of Pharmacy. Existing law authorizes a pharmacist to, among other things, perform certain procedures or functions and furnish specified drugs. Existing law authorizes the refilling of a prescription for a dangerous drug without the authorization of the prescriber if the prescriber is unavailable to authorize the refill and, in the pharmacist's professional judgment, failure to refill the prescription might interrupt the patient's ongoing care and have a significant adverse effect on the patient's well-being. Existing law requires a pharmacist to notify the prescriber, as specified, of any prescription refilled without their authorization. This bill would only require a pharmacist to provide that notification if a prescriber is identified.
Existing law, the California Community Care Facilities Act, provides for the licensing and regulation of community care facilities, including short-term residential therapeutic programs, by the State Department of Social Services, and defines a short-term residential therapeutic program as a residential facility licensed by the department and operated by any public agency or private organization that provides an integrated program of specialized and intensive care and supervision, services and supports, treatment, and short-term, 24-hour care and supervision to children that is trauma-informed. Under the act, the department is authorized to issue citations for violations of these provisions. This bill would, notwithstanding any law and commencing January 1, 2027, require licenses for short-term residential therapeutic programs to be renewed annually if the licensee has a total of 5 or more specified citations in the past 12 months. The bill would require that the licensee not be subject to ongoing annual review if it receives less than 5 violations in the 12 months following an annual license review.
Existing law establishes various healing arts boards within the Department of Consumer Affairs, including the Medical Board of California and the Dental Board of California, that license and regulate various healing arts licensees. Existing law, including the Medical Practice Act and the Dental Practice Act, deem certain violations by licensees to be unprofessional conduct subject to discipline by the licensee's licensing board. Existing law requires a physician and surgeon or dentist to refund to a patient any amount paid by the patient for services rendered that was subsequently paid to the physician and surgeon or dentist by a third-party payor and that constitutes a duplicate payment, as prescribed. Existing law requires that the above-described duplicate payment refund be paid, if requested by the patient, either within 30 days of that request or, if the duplicate payment has not been received, within 30 days of receipt of the duplicate payment by the physician and surgeon or dentist. Existing law requires, if the patient does not request a refund, a physician and surgeon or dentist who knows, or should have known, of the receipt of the duplicate payment to notify the patient, as prescribed, and to refund the payment within 30 days of that notification, except as specified. Existing law makes a violation of the above requirements unprofessional conduct subject to disciplinary proceedings as described above. This bill would reduce the duration for a physician and surgeon or dentist to refund a duplicate payment following patient request or patient notification to 21 days.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law provides that a defendant is eligible for diversion if they have been diagnosed with certain mental disorders and the court finds that the mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense, unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the disorder was not a motivating, causal, or contributing factor to the defendant's involvement in the alleged offense. Existing law prohibits defendants charged with specified offenses, including murder, from being placed in this diversion program. This bill would require that the diagnosis or rediagnosis with a mental disorder be within 5 years before the alleged offense. Existing law makes a defendant suitable for this diversion program if, among other criteria, a qualified mental health expert opines that the defendant's symptoms of the mental disorder that caused, contributed to, or motivated the criminal behavior, would respond to mental health treatment and the defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community, as specified. The bill would revise that standard and instead require the court to find that the defendant will not pose a substantial and undue risk to the physical safety of another person if treated in the community. The bill would require the mental health expert's opinion to include that the proposed mental health diversion plan is clinically appropriate to address the symptoms of the defendant's mental disorder, as specified. The bill would require the court to state the reasons for denial on the record.
