COMMITTEE ON LEGISLATIVE RESEARCH

OVERSIGHT DIVISION


FISCAL NOTE

 

L.R. No.:         3897-03

Bill No.:          HCS for HB 1619

Subject:           Drugs and Controlled Substances; Health Department

Type:              Original

Date:               February 14, 2008




 

Bill Summary:            This legislation establishes a drug monitoring program and modifies existing record keeping for controlled substances and pseudoephedrine products.


                                    This legislation will sunset six years from the effective date.


FISCAL SUMMARY


ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUND

FUND AFFECTED

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

General Revenue

($1,140,315)

($692,636)

($699,042)

 

 

 

 

Total Estimated

Net Effect on

General Revenue

Fund

($1,140,315)

($692,636)

($699,042)


ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON OTHER STATE FUNDS

FUND AFFECTED

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Estimated

Net Effect on Other

State Funds

$0

$0

$0


Numbers within parentheses: ( ) indicate costs or losses.

This fiscal note contains 9 pages.




ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FEDERAL FUNDS

FUND AFFECTED

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Estimated

Net Effect on All

Federal Funds

$0

$0

$0



ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON FULL TIME EQUIVALENT (FTE)

FUND AFFECTED

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

General Revenue

3 FTE

3 FTE

3 FTE

 

 

 

 

Total Estimated

Net Effect on

FTE

3 FTE

3 FTE

3 FTE


Estimated Total Net Effect on All funds expected to exceed $100,000 savings or (cost).


Estimated Net Effect on General Revenue Fund expected to exceed $100,000 (cost).


ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON LOCAL FUNDS

FUND AFFECTED

FY 2009

FY 2010

FY 2011

Local Government

$0

$0

$0



 




FISCAL ANALYSIS


ASSUMPTION


Officials from the Office of the State Public Defender, Office of the State Courts Administrator, Missouri State Highway Patrol, Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions & Professional Registration and the Department of Public Safety each assume the proposal would have no fiscal impact on their respective agencies. 


Officials from the Department of Social Services (DSS) assume there is no fiscal impact to the DSS. The proposal does not give MO HealthNet Division (MHD) any new responsibility or authority. Responsibility to implement the program rests with the Department of Health and Senior Services (DHSS). The only role MHD plays is to facilitate meetings between the DHSS and the third-party agency to implement and administer the FN electronic logbook. MHD has a current contract with an outside agency that has the capability to provide the electronic logbook as an extension of the current contract with MHD.


Officials from the Office of the Secretary of State (SOS) state many bills considered by the General Assembly include provisions allowing or requiring agencies to submit rules and regulations to implement the act. The SOS is provided with core funding to handle a certain amount of normal activity resulting from each year’s legislative session. The fiscal impact for this fiscal note to the SOS for Administrative Rules is less than $2,500. The SOS recognizes that this is a small amount and does not expect that additional funding would be required to meet these costs. However, the SOS also recognizes that many such bills may be passed by the General Assembly in a given year and that collectively the costs may be in excess of what the office can sustain with the core budget. Therefore, the SOS reserves the right to request funding for the cost of supporting administrative rules requirements should the need arise based on a review of the finally approved bills signed by the governor.


Oversight assumes the SOS could absorb the costs of printing and distributing regulations related to this proposal. If multiple bills pass which require the printing and distribution of regulations at substantial costs, the SOS could request funding through the appropriation process. Any decisions to raise fees to defray costs would likely be made in subsequent fiscal years.


In response to a previous version of this proposal, officials from the Office of the Attorney General (AGO) assume that any costs associated with implementing the provisions of this proposal can be absorbed with existing resources. To the extent the implementation of the prescription monitoring program results in a significant number of new referrals to the AGO in the areas of Medicaid fraud or other possible criminal activity, AGO may seek necessary appropriations to handle the increase in workload.



ASSUMPTION (continued)


In response to a previous version of this proposal, officials from the Office of Prosecution Services (OPS) assume any increase in the number of cases referred for criminal prosecution will have an additional fiscal impact on County Prosecutors. However, officials from the OPS are not aware of any estimates of the number of additional criminal cases that would be referred to County Prosecutors for charges because of this proposed legislation. Additionally, the OPS is not otherwise able to establish a workable estimate of the number of additional criminal cases that would be referred to County Prosecutors for charges. It is therefore, not possible to determine if this proposal would have a significant direct fiscal impact on county prosecutors or the OPS.


Oversight assumes the OPS could absorb the additional caseload that may result from this proposal within existing resources. Oversight assumes any significant increase in the workload of the OPS would be reflected in future budget request.


Officials from the Department of Mental Health (DMH) assume these new legislative requirements between DHSS and DMH to consult and coordinate when implementing patient intervention and referrals (Section 195.396.2(2) will exhaust the existing substance abuse treatment system. In order to permit treatment for the increased number of referrals that may result from this legislation, the existing substance abuse treatment system must expand. The number of persons identified and referred to treatment through the proposed monitoring system cannot be determined. Treatment costs per person in a Primary Recovery program is $1,070. Treatment costs per person in a CSTAR program is $2,511 ($964 GR). To treat an additional 100 persons will cost between $96,400 and $107,000. The Department estimates General Revenue costs as "unknown" to greater than $100,000.


Oversight assumes, because the potential for additional persons to be referred to treatment is speculative, that the DMH will not treat more than 100 additional persons with a cost of $107,000. If a greater fiscal impact were to result, the DMH may request additional funding through the appropriation process.


Officials from the Department of Health and Senior Services assume costs associated with the proposed bill relate to implementation of Sections 195.378 through 195.399, also referred to as the "Drug Monitoring Act", and Section 195.417.7. which requires the implementation of an electronic log of transactions involving the sale of ephedrine, phenylpropanolamine, or pseudoephedrine products.



ASSUMPTION (continued)


Information related to prescription monitoring program vendor contract information was sought and obtained related to other states with active prescription monitoring programs and electronic logs for methamphetamine sales tracking.


The U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance has announced the availability of implementation grants to assist states in implementing prescription monitoring programs. An application will be submitted for a maximum of $400,000 in one time grant monies in response to this competitive grant announcement. Subsequent grant monies may be available for enhancements to the program. Since we are not assured of receiving these grant funds, this amount has not been included in the fiscal note worksheet.


Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs (BNDD) Costs:


One Health and Senior Services Manager (1) will be needed to perform the following duties:

·Develop grant requests for DEA funds and prepare required reporting based on the conditions of any grant received;

·On an on-going basis monitor the program, maintain ongoing communication with the ITSD staff responsible for maintenance of the program applications, communicate with professional organizations regarding compliance with reporting requirements, and communicate with other state and local agencies and the public regarding the program;

·Coordinate with investigative management of the BNDD for enforcement activities and with law enforcement and regulatory agencies of this and other states for sharing data and tracking outcomes;

·Develop regulations, training materials and policies and procedures related to reporting by dispensers, access to data by authorized parties; provide technical assistance to program participants on matters relating to the program;

·          Supervise subordinate staff involved in program implementation and administration; and

·Work with ITSD staff to design and prepare reports of program data; review data reports and report to administration trends identified.


One Office Support Assistant (keyboarding), would be necessary to provide clerical support to the program and to respond to inquiries and requests for database reports received. This individual will perform coordination of communication with other agencies and the public and maintenance of memoranda of understanding for data sharing; assist practitioners in obtaining access to the reporting subsystem of the program and assist in the generation and distribution of reports as requested by authorized individuals and agencies that cannot access this information via the internet. This individual will also be responsible for responding to routine telephone inquiries regarding the program.


ASSUMPTION (continued)


Standard expense and equipment costs are included for the two BNDD positions identified above.


Office of Administration, Information Technology Services Division (ITSD) Costs:


Support from ITSD will be needed to assist DHSS in purchasing and customizing a data system to establish and maintain a program for the monitoring of prescribing and dispensing of all schedule II, III, IV, and V controlled substances except schedule V controlled substances containing any detectable amount of pseudoephedrine that do not require a prescription, by all professionals licensed to prescribe or dispense such substances in this state.


It is assumed that the application(s) will reside on servers at DHSS-ITSD and due to the large amount of data that will be collected and stored, a Storage Area Network (SAN) will need to be purchased. The hardware costs included in this response assumed the ongoing leasing of all hardware.


ITSD estimates that the following costs will apply:

 

Consultant cost for purchase and implementation of application. $810,000 in FY 09, $275,000 in FY10 and FY11.


            The total amount for hardware and leasing requirements is $97,091 annually.


ITSD Staffing:


1 FTE - Computer Information Technology Specialist II will be required to provide project management, development support and administration/maintenance of application.


1 FTE - Computer Information Technologist II will be required to provide on-going support of the application.


.50 FTE - Computer Information Technology Specialist I will be required to provide hardware server support installation and maintenance.


Standard expense and equipment costs related to each position are also included.


Oversight assumes the DHSS/BNDD could absorb one Office Support Assistant FTE and the DHSS/ITSD could absorb a one-half Computer Information Technology Specialist I FTE.


ASSUMPTION (continued)


Oversight has, for fiscal note purposes only, changed the starting salary for the DHSS positions to correspond to the first step above minimum for comparable positions in the state’s merit system pay grid. This decision reflects a study of actual starting salaries for new state employees for a six month period and the policy of the Oversight Subcommittee of the Joint Committee on Legislative Research. Oversight also adjusted the cost of the additional FTE to reflect six months in FY09.


FISCAL IMPACT - State Government

FY 2009

(10 Mo.)

FY 2010

FY 2011

 

 

 

 

GENERAL REVENUE FUND

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Costs - Department of Mental Health

 

 

 

     Treatment Cost of Referred Persons

($107,000)

($107,000)

($107,000)

 

 

 

 

Costs - Department of Health and Senior Services

 

 

 

     Personal Services

($65,897)

($135,749)

($139,821)

     Fringe Benefits

($29,140)

($60,028)

($61,829)

     Equipment and Expense

($31,187)

($17,768)

($18,301)

     Consultant & Purchase of Application

($810,000)

($275,000)

($275,000)

     Specialized Computer Equipment

($97,091)

($97,091)

($97,091)

Total Costs - DHSS

($1,033,315)

($585,636)

($592,042)

          FTE Change - DHSS

3 FTE

3 FTE

3 FTE

 

 

 

 

ESTIMATED NET EFFECT ON GENERAL REVENUE FUND


($1,140,315)


($692,636)


($699,042)

 

 

 

 

Estimated Net FTE Change for General Revenue Fund


3 FTE


3 FTE


3 FTE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



FISCAL IMPACT - Local Government

FY 2009

(10 Mo.)

FY 2010

FY 2011

 

 

 

 

 

$0

$0

$0


FISCAL IMPACT - Small Business


Licensed pharmacies and dispensing practitioners may incur an indeterminate fiscal impact for purchasing electronic equipment, software and related man-hours required in entering and transmitting data to the electronic log for methamphetamine purchases. Tracking this information is already required, but allowed to be kept in a paper log. Also, licensed pharmacies may incur an indeterminate fiscal impact for purchasing electronic equipment, software and related man-hours required in entering and transmitting data to the controlled substance prescription monitoring program in the Department of Health and Senior Services. Any cost incurred may be offset somewhat by the benefits provided by being able to access controlled substance prescription data from the program.


FISCAL DESCRIPTION


This legislation establishes the Drug Monitoring Act in the Department of Health and Senior Services and changes the laws regarding drugs and controlled substances. In its main provisions, the substitute:


(1) Revises the current list of controlled substances;


(2) Requires the Department to develop a program, subject to appropriations, to monitor the prescribing and dispensing of all Schedule II through Schedule V controlled substances by all

licensed professionals who prescribe or dispense these substances in Missouri;


(3) Requires the dispenser to electronically submit to the Department information for each prescription and specifies the frequency of the submissions;


(4) Allows the Department to issue a waiver to a dispenser who is unable to submit the required information electronically. If a waiver is obtained, a dispenser can submit the required information in paper format or by other approved means;


(5) Requires all submitted prescription information to be confidential. Exceptions to this requirement include violations of the law or breaches of professional standards which result in an investigation and the submission or the release of prescription information to authorized persons;


(6) Authorizes the release of non-personal, general information for statistical, educational, or research purposes;




FISCAL DESCRIPTION (continued)


(7) Authorizes the Department to contract with other state agencies or private vendors to implement the provisions of the substitute and requires the Department to develop an educational

course, when appropriate, to work with associations for impaired professionals to ensure the intervention, treatment, and ongoing monitoring of patients who have been identified as addicted to substances monitored by the substitute; and


(8) Requires a person selling pseudoephedrine products to keep an electronic log of each transaction and specifies what information must be recorded in the transaction log.


The provisions of the substitute regarding the Drug Monitoring Act will expire six years from the effective date.


This legislation is not federally mandated, would not duplicate any other program and would not require additional capital improvements or rental space.


SOURCES OF INFORMATION


Office of the Attorney General

Office of the State Courts Administrator

Department of Public Safety

Office of the Secretary of State

Office of the State Public Defender

Department of Insurance, Financial Institutions & Professional Registration

Department of Mental Health

Department of Health and Senior Services

Department of Social Services

Missouri State Highway Patrol

Office of Prosecution Services


 

 




                                                                                                Mickey Wilson, CPA

                                                                                                Director

                                                                                                February 14, 2008