Oklahoma Senate Bill SB214

Oklahoma 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/23
• Refer: 2/7/23
• Report Pass: 2/13/23
• Engrossed: 3/13/23
• Refer: 3/29/23
• Refer: 4/5/23
• Report Pass: 4/11/23

Caption

Oklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology; requiring certain commitments before awarding certain contracts for health research projects; providing for exception. Effective date.

Impact

The legislation is expected to solidify the Oklahoma Center for the Advancement of Science and Technology's role in overseeing health research funding. By mandating that institutions involved in research are primarily located in Oklahoma and have financial responsibilities for the contracts awarded, the bill aims to improve local involvement in health research initiatives and promote economic growth. Additionally, the bill prohibits the use of funds for patient care unless it is an essential aspect of the funded projects, redirecting the focus towards research outputs.

Summary

SB214 aims to amend existing Oklahoma laws regarding health research funding by introducing stricter criteria for awarding professional service contracts. This bill necessitates that funds for health research projects are not only based on scientific merit but also require specific binding commitments from receiving institutions to report on various performance metrics for a period of six years. This change seeks to enhance accountability and ensure that funded projects yield measurable economic and employment impacts.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB214 appears to be generally positive among lawmakers who value accountability and local economic development. Proponents of the bill view it as a necessary update to ensure that health research funding benefits state residents and aligns with scientific standards. However, there may be concerns among some stakeholders regarding the limitations imposed on how funds can be utilized, particularly regarding patient care.

Contention

Notable points of contention may arise from the bill's requirements for detailed reporting and binding commitments from institutions. Some critics could argue that these requirements could deter participation from smaller organizations that may find the reporting burdensome. Additionally, the prohibition of using funds for direct patient care could be contentious, as it might limit the applicability of some research initiatives that inherently involve patient treatment or care as part of their projects.