Certificate of Need: State Health Laws and Programs
Updated: January 2011; material added March 2012
Certificate of Need (C.O.N.) programs are aimed at restraining health care facility costs and allowing coordinated planning of new services and construction. Laws authorizing such programs are one mechanism by which state governments seek to reduce overall health and medical costs. Many "CON" laws initially were put into effect across the nation as part of the federal "Health Planning Resources Development Act" of 1974. Despite numerous changes in the past 30 years, about 36 states retain some type of CON program, law or agency as of December 2011.

HISTORY
In 1964, New York became the first state to enact a statute granting the state government power to determine whether there was a need for any new hospital or nursing home before it was approved for construction. Four years later the American Hospital Association expressed an interest in Certificate of Need laws. The AHA started a national campaign for states to generate their own CON laws. By 1975, 20 states had enacted CON laws; by 1978, 36 states had enacted them.
The 1974 federal Act required all 50 states to have a structures involving the submission of proposals and obtaining approval from a state health planning agency before beginning any major capital projects such as building expansions or ordering new high-tech devices. Many states implemented CON programs in part because of the incentive of receiving CON federal funds.
The federal mandate was repealed in 1987, along with its federal funding. In the decade that followed, 14 states discontinued their CON programs. However, 36 states currently maintain some form of CON program, and even the 14 that repealed their state CON laws still retain some mechanisms intended to regulate costs and duplication of services. Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia also have CON programs.
States that have retained CON programs currently tend to concentrate activities on outpatient facilities and long-term care. This is largely due to the trend toward free-standing, physician owned facilities that constitute an increasing segment of the health-care market.
In some states, the debate regarding the future of CON remains intense. For example Georgia spent 18 months examining the role of CON, with a final Commission report issued in December 2006. See GA Final CON Report by the State Commission on the Efficacy of the Certificate of Need Program online. They state, "The Commission has been able to reach consensus on a number of ways to improve upon Georgia’s Certificate of Need Program. However, sharp disagreement remains with regard to a number of areas of regulation, most notably, regulation of ambulatory surgery centers and free-standing imaging centers." [ PDF, 267 pages]
INTENT AND STRUCTURE OF CON
The basic assumption underlying CON regulation is that excess capacity (in the form of facility overbuilding) directly results in health care price inflation. When a hospital cannot fill its beds, fixed costs must be met through higher charges for the beds that are used. Bigger institutions have bigger costs, so CON supporters say it makes sense to limit facilities to building only enough capacity to meet actual needs.
CON programs originated to regulate the number of beds in hospitals and nursing homes, and to prevent overbuying of expensive equipment. Mandatory regulation through health planning agencies determined the most urgent health care needs, contributed to solutions for these needs, and attempted to manage the fluctuations in prices often caused by a competitive market. The idea was that new or improved facilities or equipment would be approved based only on a genuine need in a community. Statutory criteria often were created to help planning agencies decide what was necessary for a given location. By reviewing the activities and resources of hospitals, the agencies made judgments about what needed to be improved. Once need was established, the applicant organization (corporation, not-for-profit, partnership or public entity) was granted permission to begin a project. These approvals generally are known as "Certificates of Need."
|
C.O.N. SUPPORTERS' VIEWS |
C.O.N. OPPONENTS' VIEWS |
|
Advocates of CON programs say that health care cannot be considered as a “typical” economic product. They argue that many “market forces” do not obey the same rules for health care services as they do for other products. In support of this argument, it is often pointed out that, since most health services (like an x-ray) are “ordered” for patients by physicians, patients do not “shop” for these services the way they do for other commodities. This makes hospital, lab and other services insensitive to market effects on price, and suggests a regulatory approach based on public interest.
The American Health Planning Association (AHPA) is the professional group of state agencies responsible for regulation and planning. They identify three factors that suggest the need for CON programs. The primary argument is that CON programs limit health-care spending. CONs can promote appropriate competition while maintaining lower costs for treatment services. The AHPA argues that by controlling construction and purchasing, state governments can oversee what expenditures are necessary and where funds will be used most effectively. This helps eliminate projects that detract attention from more urgent and useful investments and reduces excessive costs. A study conducted by the "big-three" automakers claims lower health care costs in CON states then in non-CON states. AHPA also asserts that CONs have a valuable impact on the quality of care. When facilities and equipment are monitored, hospitals and other treatment centers can acknowledge what sort of services are in demand and how effectively patients are being taken care of.
Additionally, according to supporters, the programs distribute care to areas that could be ignored by new medical centers. CON programs are a resource for policymakers. CON regulations are described as a reliable way to implement basic planning policies and practices, and aid in distributing health care to all demographic areas. The CON process can call attention to areas in need because planners can track and evaluate the requests of hospitals, doctors and citizens and see which areas are underserved or need to be improved and developed.
|
CON programs also have been subject to wide criticism. To start, opponents argue that "it is not clear that these state-sponsored programs actually controlled health care costs." For example, by restricting new construction, CON programs may reduce price competition between facilities, and may actually keep prices high. Barriers to new building are seen as unfair restrictions, sometimes by both existing facilities and their potential new competitors. There is little direct broad proof that overcapacity or duplication leads to higher charges. In 2004 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice both claimed that CON programs actually contribute to rising prices because they inhibit competitive markets that should be able to control the costs of care and guarantee quality and access to treatment and services. (1)
Some opponents felt that changes in the Medicare payment system (such as paying hospitals according to Diagnostic Related Groups – “DRGs”) would make external regulatory controls unnecessary, because health care organizations would be more subject to market pressures. Some pointed out that the CON programs are not consistently administered. A 'flexible' program could allow development, to the dismay of competitors. A 'restrictive' program could limit competition, with the same effect. Many argued that health facility development should be left to the economics of each institution, in light of its own market analysis, rather than being subject to political influence.
Some evidence suggests that lack of competition paradoxically encouraged construction and additional spending. Some opponents of CON programs believe an open health care market, based on quality rather than price, might be the best principle for containing rising costs. Proponents of CON programs disagree. This debate rests on the same arguments as many other “Regulated market” vs. “Open market” discussions.
In theory, Certificates of Need are granted based on objective analysis of community need, rather than the economic self-interest of any single facility. However, opponents of CON programs claim that the programs have not worked this way. They cite examples in which CONs were apparently granted on the basis of political influence, institutional prestige or other factors apart from the interests of the community. Furthermore, it is sometimes a matter of debate what sort of development is actually in the community’s interest, with people of good will sharply divided on how to determine this.
|
Other Approaches
Many approaches have been tried to controlling health care costs, including government and industry regulation, provider incentives, “free market” incentives and educational efforts. Some of these include:
-
Limitations on physician referrals to facilities in which they or a family member have a financial interest (so-called "Stark regulations").
-
Supervision by insurers to make sure a treatment request is necessary (precertification, concurrent or retrospective medical necessity review).
-
Prepayment for insured or covered services (“managed care”)
-
Fixed payments for defined services (“Information Individual Programs DRGs”- uniform Diagnostic-Related Groups)
-
Providing information to patients about the costs and necessity of certain tests and treatment (includes "transparency" and disclosure programs)
-
Providing information to patients about the quality of and outcomes at certain medical facilities.
CON In the News
Footnotes:
1. The Federal Trade Commission, Department of Justice, Improving Health Care: A Dose of Competition (Washington D.C.: FTC, DOJ, 2004) 361 pages PDF.

STATES WITH CON PROGRAMS (2011)
|
State/District with CON Programs
|
Dates of Programs
|
Certificate of Need Contact Information
|
Individual CON Websites
|
|
Alabama
|
1979-present
|
James E. Sanders, Deputy Director
Phone: 334-242-4103; Fax: 334-242-4113
james.sanders@shpda.alabama.gov
|
http://www.shpda.state.al.us
News Article: AL: Bill introduced in Alabama House that would abolish the Certificate of Need process for health services 2/12/09.
|
|
Alaska
|
1976-present
|
Karen Lawfer, CON Coordinator
Phone: 907-465-8616; Fax: 907-465-6861
Karen.Lawfer@alaska.gov
|
Alaska's Certificate of Need Program
|
|
Arizona
|
1971-1985
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Arkansas
|
1975-present
|
Deborah Frazier, Director
Phone: 501-661-2509; Fax: 501-661-2399
Deborah.Frazier@Arkansas.gov
|
http://www.arhspa.org
|
|
California
|
1969-1987
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Colorado
|
1973-1987
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Connecticut
|
1973-present
|
Melanie Dillman, Director, CON & Compliance
Phone: 860-418-7060; Fax: 860-418-7053
melanie.dillman@ct.gov |
Connecticut's Certificate of Need Program
|
|
Delaware
|
1978-present
|
Francis Osei-Afriyie, Management Analyst
Phone: 302-744-4555; Fax: 302-739-3313
francis.osei-afriyie@state.de.us
|
Delaware's Certificate of Public Review Program
|
|
District of Columbia
|
1977-present
|
Vacant, Chief, Project Review
Phone: 202-442-5875; Fax: 202-442-4822
|
DC Certificate of Need Website
|
|
Florida
|
1973-present
|
Jeff Gregg, Bureau Chief
Phone: 850-412-4402; Fax: 850-413-7955
jeffrey.gregg@ahca.myflorida.com
|
Florida Licensing and Certification
|
|
Georgia
|
1979-present
|
Marsha Hopkins, Executive Director
Phone: 404-656-0468; Fax: 404-656-0654
mhopkins@dch.ga.gov
|
Georgia's Certificate of Need Program
|
|
Hawaii
|
1974-present
|
Darryl Shutter, Regulatory Branch Chief
Phone: 808-587-0788; Fax: 808-587-0783
darryl.shutter@shpda.org
|
Hawaii's website for Certificate of Need
|
|
Idaho
|
1980-1983
|
They are attempting to pass CON legislation; Contact Steve Millard or Toni Lawson 208-338-5100 or sammillard@teamiha.org, tlawson@teamiha.org
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Illinois
|
1974-present
|
Courtney Avery, Administrator
Phone: 312 814-4825; Fax 312 814-1503
courtney.avery@illinois.gov |
http://www.hfsrb.illinois.gov
|
|
Indiana
|
1980-1996, 1997-1999
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Iowa
|
1977-present
|
Barb Nervig, Program Manager
Phone: 515-281-4344; Fax: 515-281-4958
bnervig@idph.state.ia.us
|
http://www.idph.state.ia.us/do/cert_of_need.asp
|
|
Kansas
|
1972-1985
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Kentucky
|
1972-present
|
Shane O'Donley, Policy Advisor
Phone: 502-564-9589; Fax: 502-564-0302
|
http://chfs.ky.gov/ohp/con
|
|
Louisiana
|
1991-present
|
James Taylor, Facility Need Review Manager
Phone: 225-342-5457; Fax: 225-342-3893
jhtaylor@dhh.la.gov
|
http://www.dhh.state.la.us/
|
|
Maine
|
1978-present
|
Phyllis Powell, Manager Division of Licensure & Regulatory Services Phone: 207-287-9338; fax: 207-287-5807
Phyllis.Powell@maine.gov
|
Maine Certificate of Need Program
|
|
Maryland
|
1968-present
|
Paul Parker, Chief
Phone: 410-764-3261; Fax: 410-358-1311
pparker@mhcc.state.md.us
|
Maryland Certificate of Need Program
|
|
Massachusetts
|
1972-present
|
Joan Gorga, Director
Phone: 617-753-7340; Fax: 617-753-7349
Joan.Gorga@state.ma.us
|
http://www.state.ma.us/dph/dhcq/don.htm
|
|
Michigan
|
1972-present
|
Scott Blakeney, Manager
Phone: 517-241-3344; Fax: 517-241-2962
blakeneys@michigan.gov
|
http://www.michigan.gov/con
The Michigan Certificate of Need Program (68 pp)- an in-depth analysis by CRC-Michigan
|
|
Minnesota
|
1971-1985
|
Public Utilities Commission (PUC) of Minnesota
Bret Eknes, Senior Facility Planner
Phone: 651-201-2236; Fax: 651-297-7073
|
Minnesota Certificate of Need Program
|
|
Mississippi
|
1979-present
|
Rachel Pittman, Chief
Phone: 601-576-7874; Fax: 601-576-7530
rachel.pittman@msdh.state.ms.us
|
Mississippi Certificate of Need Program
|
|
Missouri
|
1979-present
|
Karla Houchins, Program Coordinator
Phone: 573-751-6403; Fax: 573-751-7894
Karla.Houchins@health.mo.gov
|
http://health.mo.gov/information/boards/certificateofneed/index.php
|
|
Montana
|
1975-present
|
Kathy Lubke, Project Manager
Phone: 406-444-9519; Fax: 406-444-1742
klubke@mt.gov
|
Administrative Rules of Montana CON
|
|
Nebraska
|
1979-present
|
Claire Titus, Program Manager
Phone: 402-471-4963; Fax: 402-471-3577
claire.titus@nebraska.gov
|
http://www.hhs.state.ne.us/crl/need.htm
|
|
Nevada
|
1971-present
|
Luana J. Rich, Bureau Chief
Phone: 775-684-4155; Fax: 775-684-4156
lritch@health.nv.gov
|
http://www.health2k.state.nv.us/vs/letter.htm
|
|
New Hampshire
|
1979-present
|
Cynthia Carrier, Managing Analyst
Phone: 603-271-4606; Fax: 603-271-4141
ccarrier@dhhs.state.nh.us
|
http://www.nhha.org/nhha/state_law/con.php
|
|
New Jersey
|
1971-present
|
John Calabria, Director
Phone: 609-292-8773; Fax: 609-292-3780
john.calabria@doh.state.nj.us
|
http://www.state.nj.us/health/forms/cn-7.pdf
|
|
New Mexico
|
1978-1983
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
New York
|
1966-present
|
Christopher Delker, Program Research Specialist
Phone: 518-402-0966; Fax: 518-402-0971
cpd02@health.state.ny.us
|
http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/cons/index.htm
|
|
North Carolina
|
1978-present
|
Craig Smith, Chief
Phone: 919-855-3873; Fax: 919-733-8139
craig.smith@dhhs.nc.gov
|
http://facility-services.state.nc.us/
|
|
North Dakota
|
1971-1995
|
|
No CON Program
|
|
Ohio
|
1975-present
|
Joel Kaiser, CON Director
Phone: 614-466-3325; Fax: 614-752-4157
joel.kaiser@odh.ohio.gov
|
Ohio CON webpage
|
|
Oklahoma
|
1971-present
|
Darlene Simmons, Director
Phone: 405-271-6868; Fax: 405-271-7360
darlen@health.state.ok.gov
|
Oklahoma CON Abstract
|
|
Oregon
|
1971-present
|
Jana Fussell, CON Coordinator
Phone: 971-673-1108; Fax: 971-673-1299
jana.fussell@state.or.us
|
Oregon CON Webpage
|
|
Pennsylvania
|
1979-1996
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Puerto Rico |
1975-present
|
|
|
|
Rhode Island
|
1968-present
|
Michael K. Dexter, Chief, Office of Health Systems Development
Phone: 410-222-2788; Fax: 410-222-1797
michael.dexter@health.ri.gov
|
http://www.health.ri.gov/hsr/healthsystems/index.php
|
|
South Carolina
|
1971-present
|
Beverly A. Brandt, Chief
Phone: 803-545-4200; Fax: 803-545-4579
brandtba@dhec.sc.gov
|
http://www.scdhec.gov/hr/cofn/
|
|
South Dakota
|
1972-1988
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Tennessee
|
1973-present
|
Melanie M. Hill, Executive Director
Phone: 615-741-2364; Fax: 615-741-9884
melanie.hill@tn.gov
|
http://tennessee.gov/hsda/cert_need_sum.html
|
|
Texas
|
1975-1985
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Utah
|
1979-1984
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
|
Vermont
|
1979-present
|
Donna Jerry, Health Policy Analyst
Phone: 802-828-2900; Fax: 802-828-2949
donna.jerry@bishca.state.vt.us
|
Vermont CON program
|
|
Virginia
|
1973-present
|
Erik Bodin, Director
Phone: 804-367-2126; Fax: 804-527-4501
erik.bodin@vdh.virginia.gov
|
http://www.cvhpa.org/COPN.htm
|
|
Washington
|
1971-present
|
Janis Sigman, Manager
Phone: 360-236-2956; Fax: 360-236-2901
janis.sigman@doh.wa.gov
|
Washington CON program
|
|
West Virginia
|
1977-present
|
Timothy E. Adkins, CON Director
Phone: 304-558-7000; Fax: 304-559-7001
tadkins@hcawv.org
|
http://www.hcawv.org/CertOfNeed/conHome.htm
|
|
Wisconsin
|
1977-1987, 1993-2011
|
|
No CON Program
|
|
Wyoming
|
1977-1989
|
|
No CON Program; see planning agency below
|
HEALTH PLANNING AGENCIES IN STATES WITHOUT CURRENT C.O.N. PROGRAMS
|
State |
Dates of CON law |
Planning Agency & Contacts |
|
|
Arizona |
1971-1985 |
Patricia Tarango, Chief
Phone: 602-542-1436; Fax: 602-542-2011
tarangp@azdhs.gov
|
No CON Program |
|
California
|
1969-1987
|
David M. Carlisle, Director
Phone: 916-326-3600; Fax: 916-322-2531
OSHPD_DO@oshpd.ca.gov
|
No CON Program
|
|
Colorado
|
1973-1987
|
Christopher E. Urbina, Executive Director and Chief Medical Officer
Phone: 303-692-2011; Fax: 303-691-7704; In-state: 800-886-7689
christopher.urbina@state.co.us
|
No CON Program
|
|
Idaho |
1980-1983
|
Richard Armstrong, Director
Phone: 208-334-5500; Fax: 208-334-6581
armstrongr@idhw.state.id.us
|
No CON Program |
|
Indiana
|
1980-1996, 1997-1999 |
Terry Whitson, Assistant Commissioner
Phone: 317-233-7022; Fax: 317-233-7053
twhitson@isdh.in.gov
|
No CON Program |
|
Kansas |
1972-1985 |
Robert Moser, Director
Phone: 785-296-1086; Fax: 785-368-6368
rmoser@kdheks.gov
|
No CON Program |
|
Minnesota |
1971-1985
|
James G. Koppel, Deputy Commissioner
Phone: 651-201-5810; Fax: 651-215-5801
jame.koppel@health.state.mn.us
|
No CON Program |
|
New Mexico |
1978-1983
|
Sam Howarth, Director
Phone: 505-476-1732; Fax: 505-827-2942
sam.howarth@state.nm.us
|
No CON Program |
|
North Dakota |
1971-1995 |
Terry Dwelle, M.D., State Health Officer
Phone: 701-328-4727; Fax: 701-328-4727
tdwell@nd.gov
|
No CON Program |
|
Pensylvania |
1979-1996
|
Dr. Eli N. Avila, M.D., J.D., M.P.H., F.C.L.M., Secretary of Health
Phone: 717-787-6436; Fax: 717-705-6525
eavila@state.pa.us
|
No CON Program |
|
South Dakota |
1972-1988
|
Doneen Hollingsworth, Secretary
Phone: 605-773-3361; Fax: 605-773-5683
doneen.hollinsgworth@state.sd.us
|
No CON Program |
|
Texas |
1975-1985
|
Ramdas Menon, Director
Phone: 512-459-7261; Fax: 512-458-7344
ramdas.menon@dshs.state.tx.us
|
No CON Program |
|
Utah |
1979-1984
|
David N. Sundwall, Executive Director
Phone: 801-538-6111 Fax: 801-538-6301
dnsundwall@utah.gov
|
No CON Program |
|
Wisconsin |
2011-present |
Neal Brandt, District Auditor
Phone: 608-267-0243; Fax: 608-264-7720
neal.brandt@wisconsin.gov
|
No CON Program |
|
Wyoming
|
1977-1989
|
Thomas O. Forslund, Director
Phone: 307-777-7656; Fax: 307-777-7439
tforslund@state.wy.us
|
No CON Program |
Contact information obtained from American Health Planning Association National Directory, 2011 edition.
FACILITIES AND SERVICES REGULATED BY C.O.N.,
|
Regulated Services
|
Number of States |
States, Districts & Commonwealth
|
|
Acute Hospital Beds
|
28
|
AL, AK, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IA, KY, ME, MD, MI, MS, MO, NV, NH, NJ, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Air Ambulance
|
6 |
AL, ME, MA, MI, VT, DC
|
|
Ambulance Services, Ground |
|
AZ |
|
Ambulatory Surgical Centers (ASC)
|
27 |
AL, AK, CT, DE, GA, HI, IL, IA, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, MS, MT, NV, NH, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Burn Care
|
11 |
AL, HI, ME, MD, NJ, NY, NC, TN, VT, WA, DC
|
|
Cardiac Catheterization
|
26 |
AL, AK, CT, DE, GA, HI, IL, IA, KY, ME, MD, MI, MS, MO, NH, NJ, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Computed Tomography (CT) Scanners
|
13 |
AK, CT, HI, ME, MI, MO, NY, NC, RI, VT, VA, WV, DC
|
|
Gamma Knives
|
15 |
AL, AK, GA, HI, ME, MA, MI, MS, MO, NC, RI, SC, VT, VA, DC
|
|
Home Health
|
18 |
AL, AR, GA, HI, KY, MD, MS, MT, NJ, NY, NC, SC, TN, VT, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Hospice
|
18 |
AL, AR, CT, FL, HI, KY, MD, MS, NY, NC, OR, RI, SC, TN, VT, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Intermediate Care Facilities/Mental Retardation (ICF/MR)
|
22 |
AR, FL, GA, HI, IL, IA, KY, LA, MD, MS, MO, MT, NV, NJ, NC, OK, SC, TN, VT, VA, WV, WI
|
|
Long Term Acute Care (LTAC)
|
28 |
AL, AK, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IA, KY, ME, MD, MI, MS, MO, NH, NJ, NC, OR, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Lithotripsy
|
15 |
AK, DE, GA, HI, ME, MA, MI, MO, NY, NC, SC, TN, VT, VA, DC
|
|
Nursing Home Beds/Long Term Care Beds
|
37 |
AL, AK, AR, CT, DE, FL, GA, HI, IL, IA, KY, LA, ME, MD, MA, MI, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, NV, NJ, NY, NC, OH, OK, OR, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI, DC
|
|
Medical Office Buildings
|
2 |
VT, DC
|
|
Mobile Hi Technology (CT / MRI / PET, etc)
|
16 |
AK, CT, HI, KY, ME, MI, MO, NH, NY, NC, RI, SC, VT, VA, WV, DC
|
|
Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Scanners
|
19 |
AK, CT, HI, KY, ME, MA, MI, MS, MO, NH, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WV, DC
|
|
Neo-Natal Intensive Care
|
23 |
AL, AK, CT, FL, GA, HI, IL, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, NJ, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Obstetrics Services
|
15 |
AL, AK, CT, GA, HI, IL, ME, MD, NY, RI, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Open Heart Surgery
|
25 |
AL, AK, CT, GA, HI, IL, IA, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, MS, NH, NJ, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Organ Transplants
|
21 |
AL, AK, CT, FL, HI, IL, IA, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, NJ, NY, NC, RI, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Positron Emission Tomography (PET) Scanners
|
20 |
AK, CT, DE, GA, HI, KY, ME, MA, MI, MS, MO, NH, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WV, DC
|
|
Psychiatric Services
|
26 |
AL, AK, AR, CT, FL, GA, HI, IL, KY, ME, MD, MA, MI, MS, NH, NJ, NC, OK, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Radiation Therapy
|
23 |
AL, AK, CT, DE, GA, HI, IA, KY, ME, MA, MI, MS, MO, NH, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WV, DC
|
|
Rehabilitation
|
25 |
AL, FL, GA, HI, IL, KY, ME, MD, MA, MS, MO, MT, NE, NH, NJ, NY, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, VA, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Renal Failure/Dialysis
|
12 |
AL, AK, HI, IL, ME, MS, NY, NC, VT, WA, WV, DC
|
|
Assisted Living & Residential Care Facilities
|
5 |
AR, LA, MO, NC, VT
|
|
Subacute Services
|
13 |
AK, FL, HI, IL, NC, OK, RI, SC, TN, WA, WI, VT, DC
|
|
Substance/Drug Abuse
|
19 |
AL, CT, FL, GA, HI, KY, ME, MD, MA, MS, MT, NH, NC, RI, SC, TN, VT, WV, DC
|
|
Swing Beds
|
12 |
AL, HI, IL, ME, MI, MS, MT, OR, TN, VT, WA, DC
|
|
Ultra-Sound
|
4 |
HI, ME, VT, DC
|
|
Exemptions frrom CON |
|
|
“Certificate of public advantage"
Source: WestLaw, 9/2011 |
|
11 states with statutes: Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin. |
Source: AHPA, 2011; NOTE: The categories listed above are for general information. See state-specific limitations, exceptions and requirements.
Certificate of Need (CON) Moratoria and Duration of Statutes (2011 data)
Table compiled by NCSL - March 22, 2012
|
State
|
Hospital Bed Moratorium
|
Long Term Care Moratorium
|
Other Moratorium
|
CON in place (dates)
|
Comments on Moratoria
|
|
Alabama
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
1979 - present
|
Moratorium is on nursing homes and in-patient hospice beds.
|
|
Alaska
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1976 - present
|
No moratoria. Hospitals include two military, six PHS/ANH, three rural primary care, two psychiatric facilities.
|
|
Arkansas
|
No
|
No
|
Yes
|
1975 - present
|
Moratoria by date of implementation: ICF-MR since 1994; Residential Care Facilities since 2005; Psychiatric Residential Facilities for Children/Adolescents since 2008.
|
|
Connecticut
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
1973 - present
|
Statewide moratorium on long term care (nursing home facilities).
|
|
Delaware
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1978 - present
|
No additional hospitals offering medical/surgical or obstetrical beds shall be established for five years (2014).
|
|
D.C.
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1977 - present
|
|
|
Florida
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
1973 - present
|
Moratorium through June 2011 on the issuance of CON for additional community nursing home beds. Expected to be extended to 2016.
|
|
Georgia
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1979 - present
|
|
|
Hawaii
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1974 - present
|
|
|
Illinois
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1974 - present
|
|
|
Iowa
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1977 - present
|
|
|
Kentucky
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1972 - present
|
|
|
Louisiana
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
1991 - present
|
Moratorium on long term care nursing facilities and ICF/DD.
|
|
Maine
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
No
|
1978 - present
|
|
|
Maryland
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1968 - present
|
|
|
Massachusetts
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
1972 - present
|
|
|
Michigan
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1972 - present
|
|
|
Mississippi
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
1979 - present
|
Home health agencies; long term care facilities.
|
|
Missouri
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1979 - present
|
Long term care moratorium in effect from 1983 through 2002, expired January 1, 2003.
|
|
Montana
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1975 - present
|
|
|
Nebraska
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
1979 - present
|
Moratoria on nursing home and rehabilitation beds.
|
|
Nevada
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1971 - present
|
|
|
New Hampshire
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
1979 - present
|
Physical rehabilitation beds.
|
|
New Jersey
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
1971 - present
|
LTC applications subject to the issuance of a call for applications.
|
|
New York
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1966 - present
|
|
|
North Carolina
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1978 - present
|
|
|
Ohio
|
No
|
Yes/No
|
No
|
1975 - present
|
Prohibition on adding new nursing home beds through June 31, 2009.
|
|
Oklahoma
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
1971 - present
|
|
|
Oregon
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1971 - present
|
|
|
Rhode Island
|
No
|
Yes
|
No
|
1968 - present
|
Moratorium on nursing home beds in place since 1996.
|
|
South Carolina
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1971 - present
|
|
|
Tennessee
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1973 - present
|
|
|
Vermont
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1979 - present
|
|
|
Virginia
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1973 - present
|
|
|
Washington
|
No
|
No
|
No
|
1971 - present
|
Nursing home beds include 1,580 banked (alternate use) and 2,158 beds banked - full facility.
|
|
West Virginia
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
1977 - present
|
Moratorium on skilled/intermediate nursing homes since 1987.
|
|
Wisconsin
|
No
|
Yes
|
Yes
|
1977-87; 1993 - present
|
|
Source: American Health Planning Association, National Directory State Certificate of Need Programs Health Planning Agencies 2011
CON Online Sources & Resources:
Diagnostic Imaging on Rise in Managed Care -Use of radiology imaging tests has soared in the past decade with a significant increase in newer technologies, according to a new study that is the first to track imaging patterns in a managed care setting over a substantial time period. Study results are reported in the November/December 2008, Health Affairs.
2009 - 2010 Passed Bills/Signed Laws: CON State Legislation
|
State/Bill/Web link/Sponsor
|
Descriptions of Bills/Excerpts of bill text
|
MD
SB 1039, HB 1486
Sen. Currie
Rep. Hubbard
|
Allows the Maryland Health Care Commission to issue an exemption from Certificate of Need and waive the requirements of the State Health Plan in order to facilitate a recommendation by the authority to relocate beds or services of all or part of a facility. Any health care entity that acquires all or part of the Prince George's County health care system shall be recognized as a merged asset system for certificate of need purposes.
(filed 3/2/09; signed into law by governor as Chapters 116 & 117, 4/14/09) |
NJ
AB 3389
Assm. Barnes |
The termination of provision of hospital acute care services shall not preclude the commissioner from issuing a new Certificate of Need with respect to the provision of hospital acute care services at the location to a party unrelated to the party to whom the Certificate of Need with respect to the termination of the provision of hospital acute care services was issued.
(filed 10/23/08; signed into law by governor as Chapter 2009-2, 1/15/2009) |
VA
HB 1768
Rep. Dance |
Exempts medical care facilities of the Department of Corrections from the definition of medical care facility for purposes of the Certificate of Need process. (filed 1/14/09; signed into law by governor as Chapter No.67, 2/25/09) |
VA
SB 1162
Sen. Watkins |
Provides that when a certificate of need holder fails to satisfy the conditions of the certificate, the certificate holder shall file a plan of correction with the Department of Health; relates to methods to satisfy the certificate, which may include direct payments to a private nonprofit foundation that funds basic insurance coverage for indigents or other documented efforts to provide primary or specialized care to underserved populations. (filed 1/14/09; signed into law by governor as Chapter 711, 3/30/09) |
VA
HB 1598
Rep. Hamilton |
Sets guidelines for the issuance of certificate of need by the Commissioner of Health.
(filed 1/14/09; signed into law by governor as Chapter No. 175, 3/25/09) |
VA
HB 1605
Rep. Purkey |
Authorizes the Commissioner of Health to accept and approve a request to amend the conditions of a certificate of need issued for an increase in beds in which nursing facility or extended care services are provided to allow such facility to continue to admit persons, other than residents of the cooperative units, to its nursing facility beds when created in connection with a real estate cooperative or offers residents a level of continuing care.
(filed 1/14/09; signed into law by governor as Chapter No. 394, 3/27/09) |
WA
SB 5423
Sen. Pflug |
Exempts from the certificate of need process up to a specified number of swing beds in a critical access hospital that is located in a city or town without a nursing home in the city or town limits.
(filed 1/21/09; signed into law by governor as Chapter 54, 4/10/09) |
WA
HB 1926
Rep. Cody |
Exempts hospice agencies from the certificate of need process if the agencies provide services designed to meet the religious or cultural needs of religious groups or ethnic minorities.
(filed 2/3/09; signed into law by governor as Chapter 89, 4/15/09) |
WV
SB 321
Sen. Prezioso |
Modifies certificate of need process and review; sets standards for ambulatory health care facilities not subject to certificate of review; provides that electronic health records are not subject to certificate of review; provides that nonhealth-related projects are subject to certificate of review; modifies the fee structure for certificate of review.
(filed 2/20/09; signed into law by governor, 4/13/09) |
Additional Professional Reports and Opinions:
Medical/Surgical Bed Occupancy Rate Targets - AHPA Newsletter, 2007 (page 7)
Certificate of Need Programs - A consumer guide & Overview by Community Catalyst & FUSA, 2009.
DaimlerChrysler Corporation. Certificate of Need: Endorsement by DaimlerChrysler Corporation, February 2002:
Illinois: Hospital Approval Laws Criticized by U.S. Antitrust Agencies - SHN, 9/15/08.
"Certificate of Need: Protecting the Public Interest" Slides by Thomas Piper, Director MO CON Program. 8/06.
Ambulatory Surgery Center Payment Information Now Available - report by CMS, 11/06.
Hospital Inpatient Payment Information Now Available - report by CMS, 8/06.
Authors: 2007-09 edition research and updates by Richard Cauchi, Health Program Director, Denver, Colorado
Additional research and writing contributed by Karmen Hanson (2006-07) and Andrew Thangasamy (2008) and Ariel Victoroff (2006). Earlier material and editions by Elana Mintz (2000), Andrew McKinley (2004) |
|