RULES AND REGULATIONS
STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF NURSING HOME ADMINISTRATORS
[49 PA. CODE CH. 39]
Fees
[30 Pa.B. 6199] The State Board of Examiners of Nursing Home Administrators (Board) amends § 39.72 (relating to fees) to read as set forth in Annex A, by revising those fees related to applications and services.
A. Effective Date
The amendment will be effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
B. Statutory Authority
Section 7.1(a) of the Nursing Home Administrators License Act (act) (63 P. S. § 1107.1(a)), requires the Board to set fees by regulation. The same provisions require the Board to increase fees to meet or exceed projected expenditures if the revenues raised by fees, fines and civil penalties are not sufficient to meet expenditures.
C. Background and Purpose
General operating expenses of the Board are funded through biennial license renewal fees. Expenses related to processing individual applications or providing certain services directly to individual licensees or applicants are excluded from general operating revenues and are funded through fees in which the cost of providing the service forms the basis for the fee. The fee is charged to the person requesting the service.
A recent systems audit of the operations of the Board within the Bureau of Professional and Occupational Affairs (Bureau) determined that the current fees did not reflect the actual cost of processing applications and performing the services. The amendment updates the fees to accurately reflect the cost of processing the applications and providing the services. The background of the amendment and a description of the fees and services was published at 29 Pa.B. 2582 (May 15, 1999).
D. Summary of Comments and Responses on Proposed Rulemaking
Notice of proposed rulemaking was published at 29 Pa.B. 2582. Publication was followed by a 30-day public comment period. The Board did not receive comments from the general public. Following the close of the public comment period, the Board received comments from the House Professional Licensure Committee (HPLC) and the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC). The following is the Board's response to those comments.
1. Certification and Verification Fees.
The HPLC questioned under what circumstances the Board certifies an examination score. Both the HPLC and IRRC requested an explanation of the difference between the administrative overhead costs for certification of scores and the administrative overhead costs for other services.
The certification of a score is made at the request of a licensee when the licensee is seeking to obtain licensure in another state based upon a license in this Commonwealth which was issued on the basis of a uniform National or regional examination which was taken in this Commonwealth. Generally, the state of original license is the only source of the score of the licensee, as testing agencies do not maintain this information. The licensing laws of many states include provisions that licensure by reciprocity or endorsement based on a license in another state will be granted only if the board or agency determines that the qualifications are the same or substantially similar. Many state agencies have interpreted this provision to require that licensees have attained a score equal to or exceeding the passing rate in that jurisdiction at the time of original licensure. For this reason, these states require that the Board and other licensing boards certify the examination score the applicant achieved on the licensure examination.
The difference between the verification and certification fees is the amount of time required to produce the document requested by the licensee. States request different information when making a determination as to whether to grant licensure based on reciprocity or endorsement from another state. The Bureau has been able to create two documents from its records that will meet all of the needs of the requesting state. The licensee, when the applicant applies to the other state, receives information as to what documentation and form is acceptable in the requesting state. The Bureau then advises the licensee of the type of document the Bureau can provide and the fee. In the case of a ''verification'' the staff produces the requested documentation by a letter, usually computer-generated, which contains the license number, date of original issuance and current expiration date, and status of the license. The letters are printed from the Bureau's central computer records and sent to the Board staff responsible for handling the licensee's application. The letters are sealed, folded and mailed in accordance with the directions of the requestor. The Bureau estimates the average time to prepare this document to be 5 minutes. The Bureau uses the term ''certification fee'' to describe the fee for a request for a document, again generally to support reciprocity or endorsement applications to other states, territories or countries, or for employment or training in another state. A certification document contains information specific to the individual requestor. It may include dates or locations where examinations were taken, or scores achieved or hours and location of training. The information is entered onto a document which is usually supplied by the requestor. The average time to prepare a certification is 45 minutes. This is because a number of resources, such as files, microfilm and rosters must be retrieved and consulted to provide the information requested. The Board staff then seals and issues this document.
2. Administrative Overhead
IRRC requested that the Bureau and the boards thoroughly examine its cost allocation methodology for administrative overhead and itemize the overhead cost to be recouped by the fees. IRRC commented that although the Bureau's method was reasonable, there is no indication that the fees will recover the actual overhead cost because there is no relationship to the service covered by the fees and because the costs are based upon past expenditures rather than projected expenditures. IRRC expressed the view that there is no certainty that the projected revenues of the new fees will meet or exceed projected expenditures as required under the Board's enabling statutes. The HPLC requested an explanation regarding why the proposed fees are rounded up and are not the actual cost of services as estimated by the Board.
In computing overhead charges, the boards and the Bureau include expenses resulting from service of support staff operations, equipment, technology initiatives or upgrades, leased office space and other sources not directly attributable to a specific board. Once determined, the Bureau's total administrative charge is apportioned to each board based upon that board's share of the total active licensee population. In turn, the board's administrative charge is divided by the number of active licensees to calculate a ''per application'' charge which is added to direct personnel cost to establish the cost of processing. The administrative charge is consistently applied to every application regardless of how much time the staff spends processing the application.
This method of calculating administrative overhead to be apportioned to fees for services was first included in the biennial reconciliation of fees and expenses conducted in 1988-89. In accordance with the regulatory review, the method was approved by the Senate and House Standing Committees and IRRC as reasonable and consistent with the legislative intent of statutory provisions which require the Board to establish fees which meet or exceed expenses.
IRRC suggested that within each Board, the administrative charge should be determined by the amount of time required to process each application. For example, an application requiring 1/2 hour of processing time would pay one-half as much overhead charge as an application requiring 1 hour of processing time. The Bureau concurs with IRRC that by adopting this methodology the Bureau and the boards would more nearly and accurately accomplish their objective of setting fees that cover the cost of the service. Therefore, in accordance with IRRC's suggestions, the Bureau conducted a test to compare the resulting overhead charges obtained by applying the IRRC suggested time factor versus the current method. This review of a licensing board's operation showed that approximately 25% of staff time was devoted to providing services described in the regulations. The current method recouped 22% to 28% of the adminis-trative overhead charges versus the 25% recouped using a ratio-based time factor. However, when the time factor is combined with the licensing population for each Board, the resulting fees vary widely even though different licensees may receive the same services. For example, using the time-factor method to issue a verification of licensure would cost $34.58 for a landscape architect as compared with a cost of $10.18 for a cosmetologist. Conversely, under the Bureau method the administrative overhead charge of $9.76 represents the cost of processing a verification application for all licensees in the Bureau. Also, the Bureau found that employing a time factor in the computation of administrative overhead would result in a different amount of overhead charge being made for each fee proposed.
With regard to IRRC's suggestions concerning projected versus actual expenses, the licensing boards note that the computation of projected expenditures based on amounts actually expended has been the basis for biennial reconciliations for the past 10 years. During these five biennial cycles, the experience of both the licensing boards and the Bureau has been that using established and verifiable data, which can be substantiated by collective bargaining agreements, pay scales and cost benefit factors, provides a reliable basis for fees. Also, the fees are kept at a minimum for licensees, but appear adequate to sustain the operations of the boards over an extended period. Similarly, accounting, recordkeeping and swift processing of applications, renewals and other fees were the primary basis for ''rounding up'' the actual costs to establish a fee. This rounding up process has in effect resulted in the necessary but minimal cushion or surplus to accommodate unexpected needs and expenditures. Details of the Board's analysis of the cost of each fee are attached to the Regulatory Review Form, which is available upon request.
For these reasons, the boards have not made changes in the method by which they allocate administrative expenditures and the resulting fees will remain as proposed.
The Board believes that this rulemaking will not put the Commonwealth at a competitive disadvantage with other states. Other states which are funded by fees (New Jersey, Maryland, Ohio and Delaware) seem to anticipate and include the costs of many of these services in their application fees for licensure and renewal fees. As a result, these two combined fees biennially range from $200 (Maryland) to $570 (Ohio) and are significantly higher than the Commonwealth's which is $138. Details of the Board's analysis are in the Regulatory Analysis Form, which is available upon request.
E. Compliance with Executive Order 1996-1, Regulatory Review and Promulgation
The Board reviewed this rulemaking and considered its purpose and likely impact upon the public and the regulated population under the directives of Executive Order 1996-1, Regulatory Review and Promulgation. The final-form regulation addresses a compelling public interest as described in this Preamble and otherwise complies with Executive Order 1996-1.
F. Fiscal Impact and Paperwork Requirements
This final-form regulation will have no adverse fiscal impact on the Commonwealth or its political subdivisions. The fees will have a modest fiscal impact on those members of the private sector who apply for services from the Board. The amendment will not impose additional paperwork requirements upon the Commonwealth, political subdivisions or the private sector.
G. Sunset Date
The Board continuously monitors the effectiveness of its regulations. Therefore, no sunset date has been set.
H. Regulatory Review
Under section 5(a) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5(a)), the Board submitted a copy of the notice of proposed rulemaking, published at 29 Pa.B. 2582, to IRRC and to the Chairpersons of the HPLC and the Senate Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure Committee (SCP/PLC) for review and comment.
In compliance with section 5(c) of the Regulatory Review Act, the Board also provided IRRC and the Committees with copies of comments received, as well as other documentation. In preparing this final-form regulation the Board has considered the comments received from the Committees, IRRC and the public.
Under section 5.1(d) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5a(d)), this final-form regulation was approved by the HPLC on October 11, 2000, and deemed approved by the SCP/PLC on October 23, 2000. Under section 5.1(e) of the Regulatory Review Act, IRRC met on November 2, 2000, and approved the final-form regulation in accordance with section 5.1(e) of the Regulatory Review Act.
I. Contact Person
Further information may be obtained by contacting Melissa Wilson, Board Administrator, State Board of Examiners of Nursing Home Administrators, P. O. Box 2649, Harrisburg, PA 17105- 2649, (717) 783-7200.
J. Findings
The Board finds that:
(1) Public notice of proposed rulemaking was given under sections 201 and 202 of the act of July 31, 1968 (P. L. 769, No. 240) (45 P. S. §§ 1201 and 1202) and the regulations promulgated thereunder, 1 Pa. Code §§ 7.1 and 7.2.
(2) A public comment period was provided as required by law and all comments were considered.
(3) This amendment does not enlarge the purpose of proposed rulemaking published at 29 Pa.B. 2582.
(4) This amendment is necessary and appropriate for administration and enforcement of the authorizing acts identified in Part B of this Preamble.
K. Order
The Board, acting under its authorizing statutes, orders that:
(a) The regulations of the Board, 49 Pa. Code Chapter 39, are amended by amending § 39.72 to read as set forth in Annex A.
(b) The Board shall submit this order and Annex A to the Office of General Counsel and to the Office of the Attorney General as required by law.
(c) The Board shall certify this order and Annex A and deposit them with the Legislative Reference Bureau as required by law.
(d) This order shall take effect on publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
ROBERT H. MORROW,
Chairperson(Editor's Note: For the text of the order of the Independent Regulatory Review Commission, relating to this document, see 30 Pa.B. 6020 (November 18, 2000).)
Fiscal Note: Fiscal Note 16A-626 remains valid for the final adoption of the subject regulation.
Annex A
TITLE 49. PROFESSIONAL AND VOCATIONAL STANDARDS
PART I. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Subpart A. PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL AFFAIRS
CHAPTER 39. STATE BOARD OF EXAMINERS OF NURSING HOME ADMINISTRATORS
FEES § 39.72. Fees.
The following is a schedule of fees charged by the Board:
Biennial renewal of nursing home administrators
license$108 License application fee $40 N.A.B. examination fee $235 State rules and regulations examination $87 Complete nursing home administration
examination$322 Temporary permit fee $145 Certification of examination scores $25 Verification of licensure or temporary permit $15 Continuing education provider application fee $40 Continuing education program application fee
per credit$15 Continuing education individual program
application fee$20
[Pa.B. Doc. No. 00-2060. Filed for public inspection December 1, 2000, 9:00 a.m.]
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
