PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Oct 21, 2015
Nursing Home Accountability Act of 2015
This bill amends the National Housing Act to condition a nursing home's eligibility for a Section 232 loan upon its quality rating. (A Section 232 loan is insured by the Federal Housing Administration and may be used to finance or refinance the purchase, construction, or renovation of a nursing home or assisted living facility.)
A nursing home becomes ineligible for a Section 232 loan if, for any period of 30 or more consecutive months, the home achieves two or fewer stars under the five-star quality rating system established pursuant to the Social Security Act for purposes of the Medicare and Medicaid programs. However, a nursing home's eligibility shall be renewed if the home subsequently maintains a rating of three or more stars for a period of at least 30 consecutive months.
The bill does not affect existing mortgages.
People & committees
Rep. Walker, Mark [R-NC-6] · R–NC
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. 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.3796 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.3796 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.3796 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.3796 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.