WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 389

An Act amending the act of March 10, 1949 (P.L.30, No.14), known as the Public School Code of 1949, establishing the New Nursing Faculty Grant Program; providing for duties of the Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency; and making an appropriation.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Johanny Cepeda-Freytiz and 25 co-sponsors

HB 389 would designate a single state health data utility tied to the HIE to centralize EHR access across agencies for improved data sharing and public health use.

Referred to Appropriations
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 389

Summary — HB 389: "State Health Data Utility"

Note: multiple unrelated bills nationwide use the number “HB 389.” This summary focuses on the version titled “State Health Data Utility” (the Electronic Medical Records / Health Data Utility measure described in the fiscal notes and committee materials provided).

Purpose and intent

HB 389 would amend the Electronic Medical Records Act to formally identify a “health data utility” (HDU) and to equate the HDU with the state’s existing health information exchange (HIE). The stated aim is to ensure the State has an electronic health records (EHR) infrastructure that is accessible to state agencies that provide health services, improving statewide health data sharing for disease tracking, program monitoring, and coordinated intervention.

Key provisions

  • Defines/identifies a Health Data Utility (HDU) in statute and treats the HDU as the State’s Health Information Exchange (HIE).
  • Designates the current HIE operator (referred to in agency materials as Syncronys) as the state HDU unless or until otherwise changed.
  • Implicitly requires or enables consolidation/centralization of electronic health records access across state agencies and programs (e.g., import/aggregation of records from other systems into the designated HDU).
  • Does not specify a new effective date in the bill text; default effective date in analyses: 90 days after adjournment (noted as June 20, 2025, if enacted in that calendar).

Who would be affected

  • State agencies that provide or manage health care (Department of Health, Health Care Authority, Medicaid, and similar).
  • The existing HIE operator and any vendors involved in EHR/HIE services.
  • Health care providers and facilities that send/receive data via the HIE/HDU.
  • Patients whose records would be accessible through the centralized utility.
  • The State Ethics Commission and other oversight entities (consulted in agency analyses).

Fiscal and operational impacts

  • Recurring operating cost: Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) analysis and agency input estimate recurring costs “at least” in the range of existing HIE contract maintenance. Specifically:
    • DOH FY24 contract spending (to maintain HIE) was $479,000; LFC assumes comparable or higher recurring costs.
    • LFC shows at least $479,000 in FY26 and at least $479,000 in FY27 (thousands), with a 3‑year subtotal of at least $958,000 (thousands column formatting in the source suggests $479k per year; confirm with agency budget staff).
  • Start-up / transition costs: likely substantially higher than recurring maintenance — costs to import records, consolidate multiple systems, and undertake technical integration are expected but were not quantified precisely.
  • State agencies may need funding for data migration, contracts, and ongoing operations; New Mexico (per agency note) currently uses multiple systems and would either need to migrate data into the designated HDU or fund a new statewide system.

Implementation issues & risks

  • Technical complexity of consolidating disparate EHR systems and importing legacy data.
  • Privacy, security, and governance considerations for centralized access to patient health data (coordination with ethics and privacy oversight advised).
  • Contracting and procurement: designation of an HDU may require new or amended contracts with the HIE operator and vendors.
  • Potential for unmet one-time costs if no appropriation is provided for migration/start-up.

Legislative status / timeline (from provided records)

  • Introduced: Nov. 12, 2024.
  • Bill had committee activity and fiscal review; LFC and agency fiscal notes prepared.
  • Reported and debated in committee(s), but multiple entries indicate final disposition as postponed/withdrawn:
    • Listed status: “action postponed indefinitely.”
    • Noted entries: “Indefinitely postponed and withdrawn from consideration” (05/03/2025) and “Died in Health Care Facilities & Systems Subcommittee” (06/16/2025).
  • If reenacted in the future, analyses indicate the bill would take effect 90 days after adjournment (document example: June 20, 2025).

Bottom line

HB 389 seeks to codify a single, state-designated health data utility (HDU) by equating it with the state HIE to improve cross-agency access to EHRs and statewide health data use. The concept can improve care coordination and public health surveillance, but implementation will require funding for start-up, migration, and ongoing operations and careful planning for privacy, governance, and technical integration. At the most recent procedural update in the provided materials, the measure was postponed indefinitely/withdrawn.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.