PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Congressional Research Service
No official summary is available in the imported record yet.
People & committees
Rep. Barragán, Nanette Diaz [D-CA-44] · D–CA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.10013 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.10013 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.10013 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.10013 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2026-08-03 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Compassionate Care Act would help people plan medical care for a time when they cannot make decisions themselves. It would require public education, provider training resources, and measures of care quality for patients with potentially fatal conditions. It would also expand certain Medicare uses of remote health care and require studies on making patients’ recorded wishes easier to access and use across care settings.
The term advance care planning means the process of discussion of care in the event that an individual is unable to make treatment decisions on their own behalf, clarification of related values and goals, and embodiment of preferences and decision-making through written documents and medical orders.
develop and implement a national campaign to inform the public of the importance of advance care planning and of an individual’s right to direct and participate in health care decisions affecting such individual.
shall develop or enhance new and existing curricula on advance care planning and end-of-life care for continuing education that States may adopt for qualified health care providers.
shall require the development of specific end-of-life quality measures for each relevant qualified health care provider setting
The term end-of-life care means all aspects of care of a patient with a potentially fatal condition, and includes care that is focused on preparations for an impending death.
The geographic requirements described in paragraph (4)(C)(i) shall not apply with respect to telehealth services furnished on or after January 1, 2027, for purposes of furnishing advance care planning services, as determined by the Secretary.
the usability, accessibility, interoperability, and portability of advance directives, including cases involving the transfer of an individual from one health care setting to another
Section 2 defines an advance directive as a recorded instruction, recognized under the law of the State where it was made, about care when a person cannot make decisions. A health care agent is someone designated through a health care power of attorney to make medical decisions during that incapacity.
The term advance directive means a written or otherwise recorded instruction, such as a living will or durable power of attorney for health care, recognized under the law of the State in which it was executed (whether statutory or as recognized by the courts of the State) and relating to the provision of such care when the individual is incapacitated.
The term health care agent means the person, designated in a health care power of attorney, who is selected to make medical decisions on behalf of the person who executed such power of attorney, in the case of incapacity of such person who executed the power of attorney.
The bill's definition of qualified health care providers extends beyond doctors and nurses to social workers, home health aides, community health workers and educators, and other listed or designated roles. The Secretary of Health and Human Services would administer the duties assigned to the Secretary.
The term qualified health care provider means a medical doctor, doctor of osteopathy, nurse, physician assistant, nurse practitioner, social worker, home health aide, palliative care professional, community health worker, community health educator, or individual in a similar position, as designated by the Secretary.
The term Secretary means the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
Section 101 expresses a nonbinding Senate recommendation that, where practical, planning involve the patient and an agent, clinician, authorized decisionmaker, or care team. Plans should be recorded, updated as needed, and allow flexibility for the patient's medical situation.
It is the sense of the Senate that, to the extent practicable, advance care planning should— (1) occur with an individual and such individual’s health care agent, primary clinician, other authorized decisionmaker, or members of the entire interdisciplinary health care team; (2) be recorded and updated as needed; and (3) allow for flexible decisionmaking in the context of the patient’s medical situation, in accordance with best practice guidelines provided by the Secretary.
Section 102 would require the Secretary, through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and in consultation with public and private entities, to develop and implement a national education campaign by January 1, 2027. It could be delivered directly or through grants, contracts, or agreements between agencies, and would run continuously for at least five years.
Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary, acting through the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and in consultation with public and private entities, shall, directly or through grants, contracts, or interagency agreements, develop and implement a national campaign
be conducted continuously over a period of not less than 5 years
The campaign would use multiple media and culturally and linguistically appropriate information. It would encourage ongoing conversations about care choices, explain ways to communicate decisions through legal documents, and raise awareness of hospice and palliative care. Its communication methods would have to follow evidence-based research.
(A) employ the use of various media, including social media platforms and televised public service announcements; (B) provide culturally and linguistically appropriate information;
(E) address the importance of individuals speaking to family members, health care proxies, and qualified health care providers as part of an ongoing dialogue regarding health care choices; (F) address the need for individuals to use portable, interoperable, and accessible methods to communicate their health care decisions through a variety of means, using legally effectuated documents that express their health care decisions in the form of advance directives (including living wills, orders for life-sustaining treatment, and durable powers of attorney for health care);
(G) raise public awareness regarding the availability of hospice and palliative care and the quality of life benefits of early use of such services;
(I) adhere to evidence-based research on the most effective ways to communicate the necessity and benefits of advance care planning.
The Secretary would report to the appropriate congressional committees on the campaign's effectiveness by July 1, 2029, including recommendations the Secretary considers appropriate about continuation or legislative or administrative changes.
Not later than July 1, 2029, the Secretary shall report to the appropriate committees of Congress on the effectiveness of the public education campaign under this section, and include in such report any recommendations that the Secretary determines appropriate regarding the need for continuation of legislative or administrative changes to facilitate changing public awareness, attitudes, and behaviors regarding advance care planning.
Section 102 would also repeal section 4751(d) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990. The supplied text does not reproduce that provision, so its substantive effect cannot be explained from this bundle alone.
(b) Repeal Section 4751(d) of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 1396a note; Public Law 101–508) is repealed.
Section 111 would require a new or expanded provider website by January 1, 2028, maintained and publicized on an ongoing basis. It would address patients' rights to accept or refuse treatment and plan future care, serving providers in Medicare, Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program, the Indian Health Service, and other covered provider groups.
Not later than January 1, 2028, the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and the Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, shall establish an, or expand upon an existing, internet website for providers under Medicare, Medicaid, CHIP, the Indian Health Service (including contract providers), and other qualified health care providers, including qualified health care providers receiving assistance under the Older Americans Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3001 et seq.) to serve older individuals, on each individual’s right to make decisions concerning medical care, including the right to accept or refuse medical or surgical treatment, and engage in advance care planning.
The internet website described in subsection (a) shall be maintained and publicized by the Secretary on an ongoing basis.
The term CHIP means the State Children's Health Insurance Program under title XXI of the Social Security Act
The website would explain legal requirements and quality improvement to providers and certified chaplains. It would help providers put planning documents into electronic health records, prepare patient information, find continuing education, and discuss care with patients and families.
(1) Inform qualified health care providers and certified chaplains about the advance directive requirements under the health care programs described in subsection (a) and State and Federal laws and regulations related to advance care planning. (2) Educate qualified health care providers and certified chaplains about advance care planning quality improvement activities.
(3) Provide assistance to qualified health care providers to— (A) integrate advance care planning documents into electronic health records; and (B) develop and disseminate advance care planning informational materials for patients. (4) Inform qualified health care providers about advance care planning continuing education requirements and opportunities. (5) Encourage qualified health care providers to discuss advance care planning with patients of all ages, as appropriate.
(7) Inform qualified health care providers of best practices for discussing end-of-life care with patients who have a serious or terminal diagnosis or prognosis and their loved ones.
Section 112 would establish a pilot grant program to support end-of-life training requirements in eligible education programs. Eligible institutions would include medical, nursing, social work, allied health, physician assistant, and specified graduate medical programs, plus other schools the Secretary considers appropriate.
The Secretary, in consultation with appropriate professional associations, shall establish a pilot program by which the Secretary awards grants to eligible entities for purposes of supporting such entities in establishing end-of-life training requirements in the entities' applicable degree programs.
be a school of medicine, school of osteopathic medicine, a physician assistant education program (as defined in section 799B(3) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295p(3))), a school of allied health (as defined in section 799B(4) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 295p(4))), a school of nursing, a school of social work, a graduate medical education program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or the American Osteopathic Association, or other school, as the Secretary determines appropriate
Participating institutions would need experienced or trained palliative medicine teachers, training across varied care settings, and measures of trainee competence. They would have to offer applicable faculty, or others the Secretary considers appropriate, retraining in hospice and palliative medicine within two years after enactment.
(2) be staffed by teaching health professionals who have experience or training in palliative medicine; (3) provide training in palliative medicine through a variety of service rotations, such as consultation services, acute care services, extended care facilities, ambulatory care and comprehensive evaluation units, hospice, home health, and community care programs; (4) develop specific performance-based measures to evaluate the competency of trainees; and (5) ensure that by not later than the end of the 2-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act, professionals who are applicable faculty at the entity, or others as determined appropriate by the Secretary, shall be offered retraining in hospice and palliative medicine.
Pilot-program training would cover conversations with patients and loved ones, available services, medical and legal issues, and language and cultural skills. Trainees who would work with children would receive specialized pediatric training. The specified accredited graduate medical programs would need a training component lasting at least six months.
Eligible entities participating in the pilot program under this section shall require minimum training for trainees that includes— (1) training in how to discuss and help patients and their loved ones with advance care planning; (2) with respect to trainees who will work with children, specialized pediatric training; (3) training in the continuum of end-of-life services and supports, including palliative care and hospice; (4) training in how to discuss end-of-life care with dying patients and their loved ones; (5) medical and legal issues training associated with end of life care; (6) training in linguistic and cultural competency; and (7) in the case of a graduate medical education program accredited by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education or the American Osteopathic Association, a longitudinal component of at least 6 months.
Grant recipients would report program outcomes within 18 months after their final grant allotment. The Secretary would compile those results for Congress within one year after receiving all recipient reports.
Each recipient of a grant under this section shall report to the Secretary on the outcomes of the program within 18 months of receipt of the final allotment of grant funds. Not later than 1 year after receipt of all such reports, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report compiling such results from all grant recipients.
Sections 102 and 112 would authorize Congress to provide whatever funding is necessary for the campaign and pilot program. These clauses do not specify dollar amounts or themselves provide the appropriations needed to spend that money.
(4) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.
(e) Authorization of appropriations There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.
Section 113 would require patient-focused measures of end-of-life care quality for relevant provider settings identified by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Selection would consider likely improvements in care and involve affected providers, patients, and private organizations that developed such measures.
The Secretary, acting through the Director of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (in this section referred to as the Director) and in consultation with the Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, shall require the development of specific end-of-life quality measures for each relevant qualified health care provider setting, as identified by the Director
Selection of the specific measure or measures for an identified provider setting shall be based on an assessment of what is likely to have the greatest positive impact on quality of end-of-life care in that setting, and made in consultation with affected providers, patients, and private organizations, that have developed such measures.
The measures may be structure-oriented, process-oriented, or outcome-oriented, as determined appropriate by the Director, and shall be patient-oriented.
Quality reporting would have to account for existing legal requirements, measures, patient needs, services, and provider administrative burdens, and include demographic information. Requirements would be distributed by January 1, 2027, with a 60-day public comment period; initial provider reporting would begin no later than January 1, 2029.
The Director shall ensure that reporting requirements related to such measures— (A) are imposed consistently with other applicable laws and regulations, and in a manner that takes into account existing measures, the needs of patient populations, the specific services provided, and the potential administrative burden to providers; and (B) include demographic information to account for race, ethnicity, age, and gender, and other appropriate categories.
Not later than— (A) January 1, 2027, the Secretary shall disseminate the reporting requirements to all affected providers and provide for a 60-day period for public comment; and (B) January 1, 2029, initial reporting by health care providers relating to the measures shall begin.
Section 114 would require federal development or improvement of continuing education curricula by January 1, 2027. States could choose whether to adopt them. Required topics would include planning documents, treatment orders, counseling, palliative care, hospice, and introducing those services early in illness.
Not later than January 1, 2027, the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration, shall develop or enhance new and existing curricula on advance care planning and end-of-life care for continuing education that States may adopt for qualified health care providers.
The continuing education curriculum developed or enhanced under subsection (a) shall, at a minimum, include— (1) a description of the meaning and importance of advance care planning; (2) a description of advance care planning documents, including living wills and durable powers of attorney, and the use of such directives; (3) the appropriate use of orders for scope of treatment; (4) counseling skills for when and how to introduce and engage in advance care planning with patients and their loved ones; (5) palliative care principles and approaches to care; (6) the continuum of end-of-life services and supports, including palliative care and hospice; and (7) the importance of introducing palliative care and hospice early in illness in order to improve quality of life.
Section 121 proposes a permanent extension of telehealth use for the encounter required before renewing hospice eligibility. It would replace statutory language ending on March 31, 2025, with language allowing use during and after the referenced emergency period. The surrounding eligibility conditions are not reproduced.
121. Permanent extension of authorization for use of telehealth to conduct face-to-face encounter prior to recertification of eligibility for hospice care Section 1814(a)(7)(D)(i)(II) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395f(a)(7)(D)(i)(II)) is amended by striking during the emergency period and all that follows through ending on March 31, 2025 and inserting the following: during and after the emergency period described in section 1135(g)(1)(B).
Section 122 would remove the referenced Medicare geographic requirements for telehealth advance care planning services furnished on or after January 1, 2027, as determined by the Secretary. It would also add references to the new exception in two existing provisions; the bundle does not reproduce their full context.
(1) in paragraph (4)(C)— (A) in clause (i), in the matter preceding subclause (I), by striking and (7) and inserting (7), and (10); and (B) in clause (ii)(X), by inserting or paragraph (10) before the period;
The geographic requirements described in paragraph (4)(C)(i) shall not apply with respect to telehealth services furnished on or after January 1, 2027, for purposes of furnishing advance care planning services, as determined by the Secretary.
Section 201 would require a study of barriers to a uniform national advance-directive policy. Topics would include whether families believe patients' wishes were followed, whether directives can be accessed and used across care settings, and differences among State laws. The Secretary would consult interested parties and report to Congress with recommendations within two years after enactment.
shall conduct a study to evaluate the barriers to establishing and implementing a national uniform policy on advance directives and what needs to be done to overcome those barriers.
(A) family satisfaction that a patient’s wishes, as stated in the patient’s advance directive, were carried out; (B) the usability, accessibility, interoperability, and portability of advance directives, including cases involving the transfer of an individual from one health care setting to another;
(D) State variations in advance directive laws that are relevant to the establishment and implementation of a national uniform policy of advance directives.
Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the study conducted under subsection (a), together with recommendations for such legislation and administrative actions as the Secretary considers appropriate.
In conducting the study and developing the report under this section, the Secretary shall consult with relevant stakeholders and other interested parties.
The section 201 study would examine an optional national advance-directive form that participating Medicare, Medicaid, and Children's Health Insurance Program providers would recognize regardless of State law. The provision calls for studying that possibility; it does not itself establish the form or override State law.
The matters studied by the Secretary under paragraph (1) shall include issues concerning
the feasibility of establishing an optional, national advance directive form deemed valid by any health care entity or qualified health care provider participating in Medicare, Medicaid, or CHIP, regardless of State law
The term CHIP means the State Children's Health Insurance Program under title XXI of the Social Security Act
Section 202 would direct the Comptroller General to study whether a national advance-directive registry is feasible, taking federal health privacy constraints into account. A report and recommendations would be due to Congress within 18 months after enactment. This provision would study a registry, not establish one.
The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the feasibility of a national registry for advance directives, taking into consideration the constraints created by the privacy provisions enacted as a result of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–191).
Not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress a report on the study conducted under subsection (a) together with recommendations for such legislation and administrative action as the Comptroller General of the United States determines to be appropriate.
Section 202 would also require the federal health information technology coordinator to study a possible certification requirement for electronic health record vendors: a prominent field for storing and sharing planning documents and related clinical notes. The bill would require a study of this requirement rather than impose it on vendors.
The National Coordinator of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology shall conduct a study on the feasibility and impact on advance care planning of requiring that electronic health record vendors seeking certification have a prominent and easily visible field for storing and sharing advance care planning documents and related clinical notes.
The health information technology coordinator, working with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, would initiate two demonstration programs. They would develop practices and recommended standards for accessible directives that can be transferred and used across systems, and for electronic signatures, witness authentication, and notarization to put directives into effect.
The National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, in collaboration with the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, shall initiate 2 demonstration programs to establish best practices and recommended standards to support— (1) usability, portability and interoperability of advance directives that are accessible to individuals, clinicians, and other authorized individuals; and (2) the use of electronic signatures (as defined in section 106 of the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (15 U.S.C. 7006)), electronic authentication of witnesses, and electronic notarization to effectuate advance directives.
The Comptroller General would conduct another study and report to Congress on how often providers deliver care paid for by the Federal Government or the patient that was not the preference of the patient or authorized health care agent.
The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study and submit a report to Congress on the incidence of health care, tests, surgeries, drugs, and other services paid provided by qualified health care providers and paid for by the Federal Government or the patient and that were not the preference of the patient or the authorized health care agent of the patient.
The official-actions snapshot updated August 12, 2026, records introduction in the House on August 3, 2026, and referral that day to the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees. This dated snapshot does not establish what happened afterward.
Source snapshot updated 2026-08-12T12:39:31Z.
2026-08-03: Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
2026-08-03: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2026-08-03. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy rider attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish what appears in other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for a particular recipient or place was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. General program funding authorizations do not by themselves establish earmarks. This conclusion is limited to that version; formal disclosure and accompanying materials are not supplied.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
None identified in the reviewed text
No materially narrow preferential benefit warranting a finding was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. Program eligibility and service-access provisions were assessed in relation to the bill's main policy. This conclusion is limited to that version and does not establish absence in other versions or accompanying materials.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Aug 12, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI