The Alabama CON Program

Jun 04, 2007 at 10:30 pm by steve


Most healthcare providers in Alabama have heard of a certificate of need, commonly referred to as a "CON." A CON is essentially a permit that allows a person or entity to construct a new healthcare facility or offer a new healthcare service. Through the end of April 2007, there were 23 CON applications filed by healthcare providers. In the greater Birmingham area, most notably Trinity Medical Center has filed a CON application to build a new hospital in Irondale, St. Vincent's Hospital has filed a CON application to develop a new ambulatory surgery center in Shelby County, and Vestavia Surgical Services, LLC has filed a CON application to develop a new ambulatory surgery center in Vestavia Hills. Without a CON, Trinity Medical Center stays in Birmingham and the two surgery centers will not exist.

The Alabama CON program was established to prevent the construction of unnecessary and inappropriate healthcare facilities through a system of mandatory reviews. At one time, every state had its own CON law, but today only 35 states maintain a CON program. At times, the CON process can be political, as the recent events with Richard Scrushy and former Governor Don Siegelman highlight. It can also be subject to abuse by healthcare providers who use the process to keep competitors out of the market or oppose projects to gain concessions on other matters. However, the CON program does help to prevent the unnecessary duplication of health services. Regardless of one's view, the CON program is here to stay and every healthcare provider should become familiar with its requirements.

The State Agencies

Alabama CON law is regulated by the Alabama State Health Planning and Development Agency (SHPDA), which is run by Alva Lambert, the executive director. Lambert is a political appointee of Governor Bob Riley and is in charge of the daily operations of SHPDA. Generally speaking, SHPDA is separated into two divisions: the Alabama Certificate of Need Review Board (the Board), and the Alabama Statewide Health Coordinating Council (SHCC). The Board is a nine member panel consisting of three consumers, three providers and three representatives of the governor, all of whom are appointed by the governor. The Board is the primary rulemaking/adjudicatory segment of SHPDA and is charged with determining the appropriateness of healthcare proposals (i.e., awarding CONs). The Board also interprets the CON rules by issuing what are called declaratory rulings. The SHCC, like the Board, is composed of members (approximately 30), who are appointed by the governor to develop the Alabama State Health Plan, a document prepared triennially and approved by the Governor. The State Health Plan is essentially an assessment of Alabama health resources, evaluated with regard to current utilization and future need. Its most important feature is a catalogue of the methodologies which are used by parties in the CON process to demonstrate that a need for a particular facility or service does or does not exist. The State Health Plan, for example, addresses the need for radiation therapy services, ambulatory surgery, home healthcare, cardiac services and end stage renal disease services.

Who Needs a CON?

If a desired new venture falls within the types of arrangements regulated by the Alabama CON program, a person will need to obtain a CON from the Board, or qualify under an exemption. Consequently, significant effort is usually made to characterize a proposed project as one which is outside the scope of CON law and, hence, is not reviewable.

Legal authority for determining what types of facilities and services are subject to review is found in the CON statute, Ala. Code § 22‑21‑260, et seq., and under the regulations promulgated by SHPDA, Ala. Admin. Code § 410‑1‑1, et seq. Under the statute and regulations, four types of "new institutional health services" are subject to CON review:
As noted, each new service is subject to review only to the extent that it is offered by a healthcare facility or HMO. Healthcare facilities include hospitals, rehabilitation centers, nursing homes, ambulatory surgery centers, kidney disease treatment centers, home health agencies, alcohol and drug abuse facilities and other statutorily defined types of facilities. Most notably, the term "healthcare facility" does not include "the offices of private physicians or dentists, whether for individual or group practices and regardless of ownership." Currently, the capital expenditure thresholds over which a CON is needed are $2,277,273 for major medical equipment, $910,909 for new annual operating costs, and $4,554,545 for any other capital expenditure by a healthcare facility or HMO. These numbers are adjusted annually by SHPDA based on the Consumer Price Index — All Urban Consumers Professional Medical Services. However, since 2003 the offering of lithotripter, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography (PET) services or the purchase of such equipment is exempt from CON review, regardless of the cost.

Letters of Non-Reviewability

If a person believes its project falls within the physician's office exemption, (or is outside of CON review in general), the person may request a letter of non‑reviewability from the executive director of SHPDA. In order to receive such a letter, a written request must be filed with the executive director disclosing fully the scope and extent of the project and the reasons the person believes CON review is not required. In addition, a $500 nonrefundable filing fee must be submitted. A letter of non‑reviewability is by regulation "for informational purposes only" and is only valid as long as the law and facts upon which its issuance was based do not change. Notwithstanding, a letter of non‑reviewability is usually honored by SHPDA and the other Alabama administrative agencies such as the Alabama Department of Public Health. The drawback in requesting a letter of non‑reviewability is that the request may be denied and the proposal deemed reviewable under CON law. Unless the proposal is revised accordingly and a letter of non‑reviewability subsequently obtained, a CON would need to be acquired prior to the institution of the project.

The CON Hearing Process

Within 45 days following the date a CON application is deemed complete by SHPDA, any person or entity who can demonstrate that it is "adversely affected" by the proposal can request "intervention." Intervention allows a party to speak in opposition to the project before the Board. Within 55 days following the date a CON application is deemed complete by SHPDA, an intervenor can request a Contested Case hearing, which is an administrative proceeding conducted before an administrative law judge (ALJ) to decide the appropriateness of the application. Generally speaking, a Contested Case hearing is a "mini trial" where both the applicant and the opponent introduce testimony and evidence to support their respective positions. Once the Contested Case hearing is completed, the ALJ issues his or her recommended findings of fact and conclusions of law which are directed back to the Board. The Board, at its next regularly scheduled meeting, will approve or deny the application.

If a Contested Case hearing is not held, an aggrieved party has the right following a Board decision to appeal the matter to a Fair Hearing before an ALJ. A Fair Hearing is similar to a Contested Case hearing, except the decision of the ALJ in a Fair Hearing becomes the final order of the Board.



June 2007
Sections: Birmingham Archives