Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Herndon
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 2/13/2025
SHORT TITLE Health Care Whistleblower Protection Act
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 337
ANALYST Chenier
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
AOC
No fiscal
impact
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Recurring General Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
Health Care Authority (HCA) New Mexico Attorney General’s Office (NMAG) Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 337
House Bill 337 creates protections for health care whistleblowers who disclose to the state, New
Mexico Attorney General’s Office (NMAG), Health Care Authority (HCA), or other agency,
information about an action or a failure to act that the whistleblower believes in good faith
constitutes an unlawful or improper act on the part of a health care entity. The bill defines an
unlawful or improper act as a violation of federal or state law, or rule that is illegal, unsafe or
fraudulent, and that constitutes: malfeasance, gross mismanagement, a waste of funds, a
misrepresentation, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to patients,
consumers, or the public. The bill would protect whistleblowers by prohibiting retaliatory action
and requiring the entity be liable to the whistleblower for actual damages, reinstatement to prior
positions, double the back pay, litigation costs, and attorney fees dependent on the relationship of
the whistleblower to the entity.
The effective date of the provisions of this act is July 1, 2025.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) notes:
There will be a minimal administrative cost for statewide update, distribution and House Bill 337 – Page 2
documentation of statutory changes. Any additional fiscal impact on the judiciary would
be proportional to the enforcement of this law and commenced civil actions and appeals
from the awarding of damages, fees, costs, back pay, injunctions and reinstatement. New
laws, amendments to existing laws and new hearings have the potential to increase
caseloads in the courts, thus requiring additional resources to handle the increase.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
HCA notes:
The bill is limited to a specific subset of licensed health care facilities and does not
include all types of licensed health care facilities, nor does it include home and
community-based waiver providers who provide Medicaid waiver services to individuals.
The bill includes “home health” within the definition of “health care services” and home
health agencies may provide services under the Developmental Disabilities Supports
Division Medically Fragile Waiver. The bill omits information pertaining to other
services on the Medically Fragile Waiver and other home and community-based waivers,
rendering it unclear if and how this bill may apply to providers of home and community-
based services.
It does not include the following types of health facilities licensed by the Division of
Health Improvement: adult day care facilities, freestanding birth centers, skilled nursing
facilities, intermediate care facilities, boarding homes, child care facilities, or shelter care
homes.
In Section 2(D), the definition of “health care facility” has conflict as it includes long
term care facilities as to what is applicable; however, it then excludes the following long
term care facilities in the definition: skilled nursing facilities, intermediate care facilities,
and boarding homes.
The bill would include assisted living facilities as defined.
The definition of “health care facility is also in conflict with the definition of “health
facility” as defined in the health care code 24A-1-2 D.
Section 4 prohibits retaliatory action for disclosure of three categories of information. It
does not include a section for the reporting of abuse, neglect, exploitation, suspicious
injuries, injuries of unknown origin, environmental hazards that pose an immediate threat
to health and safety and death.
The bill’s definition of “health care entity” includes “telemedicine provider”, and
“telemedicine provider” is defined as providers who use telecommunications “from a
distance to evaluate, diagnose and treat patients in real time.” The Developmental
Disabilities Supports Division’s Developmental Disabilities, Mi Via, and Medically
Fragile Waivers allows individuals to receive some healthcare services via StationMD, a
telemedicine provider. The bill does not determine how whistleblower protections will be
applied to and enforced amongst out-of-state telemedicine providers.
Section 4 does not specify what state agency would have oversight authority, nor does it
authorize any powers to enforce the bill or impose any type of remedy or sanction. House Bill 337 – Page 3
Potential for harm: Staff could fear retaliatory actions, such as termination from
employment, for reporting abuse neglect and exploitation. When health care entities
“retaliate” against caregivers, hospital caregivers, and other professional staff and
employees for reporting abuse, neglect, and exploitation, it has a potential negative
impact “chilling effect”, upon staff who may choose not to report abuse neglect and
exploitation of individuals receiving care out of fear of retaliation including loss of
employment. This could result in an increase of unreported abuse, neglect and
exploitation in our most vulnerable New Mexicans.
AOC notes:
Several states have enacted anti-retaliation provisions that protect health care workers.
See Whistleblower Protection Laws for Healthcare Workers, National Nurses United,
2017, https://www.nationalnursesunited.org/whistleblower-protection-laws-for-
healthcare-workers. California Code, Health and Safety Code - HSC Section 1278.5
prohibits a health facility from discriminating or retaliating against a whistleblower who
is a patient, employee, member of the medical staff, or other health care working of the
health facility. https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/health-and-safety-code/hsc-sect-1278-5/. See
also New York’s Chapter 31, Article 20-C, Section 740, prohibiting retaliatory action by
employers, https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/LAB/740 and State Whistleblower
Laws, https://www.whistleblowerinfo.com/state-laws/.
TECHNICAL ISSUES
The Bill at (N)(1-3) is conjunctively unclear. After clause (1) probably an “or” was intended to
make the entire definition inclusive. The “and” at the end of (3) is superfluous.
In Section 2(D), the definition of “health care facility” has conflict as it includes long term care
facilities as to what is applicable; however, it then excludes the following long term care
facilities in the definition: skilled nursing facilities, intermediate care facilities, and boarding
homes. The bill would include assisted living facilities as defined. The definition of “health care
facility” is also in conflict with the definition of “health facility” as defined in the health care
code 24A-1-2 D.
In the realm of Medicaid this is duplicative as this area is currently covered by the False Claims
Act.
EC/rl/SL2