A campaign to end the nurse-aid training lockout at facilities that have been hit with a significant civil monetary penalties appears to be gaining traction.

Advocates for skilled nursing providers cheered House Bill 1265 when it was introduced in February, arguing that a 32-year-old rule prohibiting penalized facilities from providing in-house CNA training was ill-informed.

The bipartisan bill has been referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and the Committee on Energy and Commerce and has yet to advance it to a hearing. But lawmakers continue signing on as co-sponsors, with the total at 13 as of mid-month.

Ilene Warner-Maron, Ph.D., RN-BC, a geriatric consultant who works as a federal monitor, also recently implored Congress to act on the bill in commentary published in the Annals of Long-Term Care.

“The long-standing penalty does nothing to enhance the delivery of services and, rather, undermines a prospective employee’s ability to access the requisite education in the nursing home setting,” wrote Warner-Maron, a McKnight’s webinar expert, editorial board member at ALTC and an associate professor at the Philadelphia College of Osteopathic Medicine. “The education of staff in the facility using a state-approved curriculum that can be offered continuously will serve to enhance the provision of care. This is one regulation that nursing home residents no longer need.”

Many long-term care facilities have taken to creating their own training programs as they compete with non-medical employers in a tight economy. Some say community college and offsite programs don’t adequately prepare workers for the challenges of working with a geriatric population.

Warner-Maron told McKnight’s Tuesday that in-house CNA programs can go above and beyond required modules; split time between classroom and on-floor learning; and add in-services after the 75-hour course is complete and new employees are officially on board.

But since 1987, many providers have been excluded from providing that type of custom education if they have as little as $10,000 in civil monetary penalties related to an annual review. The prohibition lasts for two years.

Warner-Maron estimated that about 50% of Wisconsin long-term care facilities currently face a lockout. The bill’s original sponsor is Rep. Sean Duffy (R-WI).

LeadingAge supported Duffy’s bill, noting that  CMPs can be unrelated to improvement efforts and the current law makes it more difficult for nursing homes to recruit and retain direct care staff.

“In facilities that are troubled, staffing is the No. 1 issue,” Warner-Maron told McKnight’s. “Why would you make it more difficult for them to educate and hire? The two things just never made sense to me.”