HB 4107
Plain-language analysis
Generated analysis, not an official summary or legal advice. Confirm with linked Oregon documents.
The enrolled bill establishes Oregon’s first statutory definition and regulatory framework for “urgent care centers,” prohibiting unqualified use of the term, mandating specific on-site clinical capabilities and staffing, requiring detailed public disclosures of services and affiliations, and forcing referral record transfers to emergency departments. Material consequences include mandatory facility upgrades, operational restructuring for compliance, increased transparency for patients, and potential consolidation or closure of non-compliant facilities.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The legislature aims to standardize consumer-facing urgent care branding and baseline clinical safety to prevent patient misrouting and ensure minimum care quality.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Enrolled
Must update signage/websites, hire/train staff for specific services, implement record transfer systems, and risk losing branding or operating status if noncompliant.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Gain standardized transparency regarding capabilities, costs, affiliations, and provider types; face potential reduced facility access if centers close or rebrand.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Receive mandatory clinical referral records, improving continuity of care but adding administrative intake steps.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Gains statutory oversight authority over definitions and standards, though fiscal impact is minimal.
Basis: Official analysis · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Operators must invest in IT for website disclosures, physical posting infrastructure, ECG/respiratory testing equipment, and splint/suture supplies. Staffing models must guarantee at least one licensed provider on-site during all open hours, with telemedicine as a contingency. Compliance costs may drive price increases or service consolidation. Patients benefit from predictable service availability and clearer triage information.
Basis: Bill text · Source: Enrolled
Patient with acute abdominal pain
Receives immediate ECG and respiratory testing at a compliant urgent care, correctly ruling out cardiac issues and avoiding unnecessary ER overcrowding while receiving timely treatment.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Enrolled
Rural urgent care center operator
Cannot afford the required on-site licensed provider or specific equipment during off-hours, forcing closure or dropping “urgent care” branding, leaving residents without walk-in acute care access.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Enrolled
The text explicitly allows telemedicine contingency under strict conditions; abuse arises from misapplying that exception to circumvent baseline standards.
Sources · Enrolled
Standardizing urgent care services and disclosures improves patient safety and market transparency but imposes operational and financial burdens that may reduce facility availability, particularly in rural or low-margin markets.
The enrolled version significantly expands the House Amendments to Introduced draft by adding operational mandates alongside definitions. Key changes include: (1) Adding comprehensive mandatory disclosure requirements (website and physical posting of 11 specific data points including affiliations, payment types, and diagnostic capabilities). (2) Establishing explicit minimum on-site service standards (respiratory tests, ECG, splints, sutures) with a telemedicine contingency clause. (3) Mandating clinical record transfer to referred emergency departments. (4) Clarifying the prohibition against using “emergency” branding by explicitly tying it to hospital-licensed EDs under ORS 441.025. The previous draft focused primarily on definitions and the core prohibition; the enrolled version adds transparency rules, operational standards, and referral protocols.
Added mandatory disclosure requirements (website and physical posting of 11 specific data points including affiliations, payment types, and diagnostic capabilities).
Increases administrative burden but standardizes consumer information.
Sources · Enrolled
Established explicit minimum on-site service standards (respiratory tests, ECG, splints, sutures) with a telemedicine contingency clause.
Raises baseline clinical safety but may strain staffing and equipment budgets.
Sources · Enrolled
Mandated clinical record transfer to referred emergency departments.
Improves care continuity but requires new administrative workflows.
Sources · Enrolled
Clarified the prohibition against using “emergency” branding by explicitly tying it to hospital-licensed EDs under ORS 441.025.
Strengthens consumer protection while maintaining jurisdictional distinction between Oregon urgent care standards and federal/hospital licensing definitions.
Sources · Enrolled
Tradeoff: Standardizing urgent care services and disclosures improves patient safety and market transparency but imposes operational and financial burdens that may reduce facility availability, particularly in rural or low-margin markets.
high confidence. Analysis is grounded exclusively in the enrolled bill text and official legislative fiscal/revenue statements. No external speculation or unverified claims are included.
Possible effects if adopted; not current bill text.
The amendment narrows the statutory definitions of 'urgent care center' and 'specialty urgent care center,' requiring general facilities to explicitly use the term 'urgent' or 'urgent care' in their name or signage to qualify, while carving out a narrower exemption for walk-in clinics focused exclusively on specific body systems or behavioral health. It also restricts patient record transfers to emergency departments of hospitals licensed under ORS 441.025. If adopted, this would tighten regulatory oversight over facility naming and service scope, potentially excluding some walk-in clinics from the urgent care classification while clarifying referral pathways for licensed hospital EDs.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment likely aims to prevent non-urgent or general practice clinics from marketing themselves as urgent care facilities by requiring explicit use of the term, while ensuring specialty centers are clearly distinguished.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Must ensure business names and signage explicitly include 'urgent' or 'urgent care' to fall under the statute's standards, requiring potential rebranding and compliance adjustments.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Now explicitly defined as exempt from general urgent care standards if they meet the narrowed criteria, reducing regulatory burden but requiring precise service scope documentation.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Clarified as the sole permissible recipients of referred patient records under this section, standardizing referral protocols.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Will encounter more standardized naming and clearer distinctions between general urgent care, specialty walk-in clinics, and hospital EDs, potentially reducing confusion about service capabilities.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Facilities may incur rebranding and legal compliance costs to align names with the new naming requirement.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Operational obligations to maintain specific service standards (e.g., licensed provider on site, diagnostic capabilities) will apply only to those meeting the revised definition.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Referral workflows must direct records exclusively to ORS 441.025-licensed hospital EDs, streamlining continuity of care but limiting options for non-hospital-based emergency services.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Enforcement will rely on the Oregon Health Authority or local authorities verifying signage and service scope against the new definitions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Behavioral health walk-in clinic
Previously misclassified as a general urgent care center, the facility avoids unnecessary staffing and equipment mandates, preserving resources for mental health services while still operating legally under the specialty exemption.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Established walk-in clinic using alternative naming
A facility that treats acute musculoskeletal injuries but uses 'Walk-In Medical Clinic' in its name is forced to rebrand or cease operations as an urgent care facility, disrupting patient access and incurring significant legal and marketing costs despite providing equivalent clinical services.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
The text legally permits the exemption but relies on accurate self-reporting and oversight to prevent scope creep.
Sources · Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Tightening naming and scope definitions improves consumer clarity and regulatory precision but imposes rebranding costs and access disruptions on facilities that provide equivalent care under different names. Upsides include reduced market confusion and clearer referral pathways; downsides include compliance burdens, potential clinic closures or rebranding expenses, and reduced flexibility for innovative walk-in models.
Reduced consumer confusion regarding facility capabilities and emergency versus non-emergency care levels.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Standardized referral pathways ensure patient records reach licensed hospital EDs, improving continuity of care for acute cases.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Mandatory rebranding and legal compliance costs for facilities that currently operate under non-urgent naming conventions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential reduction in walk-in access for patients who rely on clinics that previously operated outside the 'urgent' naming convention but provided equivalent acute care.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
high confidence. Analysis is grounded in the explicit text of the proposed amendment and official committee summaries. Inferences are clearly labeled and bounded to the statutory language provided.
The amendment redefines "specialty urgent care center" to restrict the designation to facilities treating only a specific body system or behavioral health conditions, clarifies that "urgent care center" must explicitly use those terms while providing walk-in acute care, and aligns referral requirements with hospital emergency departments licensed under ORS 441.025. If adopted, multi-specialty urgent care facilities would lose specialty exemptions and must comply with general service standards or rebrand, while consumers gain stricter naming accuracy and clearer clinical scope disclosures.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Introduced
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment likely tightens definitional boundaries to prevent non-specialty facilities from claiming "specialty" status to bypass general service mandates, ensuring facility classifications accurately reflect clinical scope and align with the bill's broader transparency and care standards.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Must audit business names, signage, and service menus to match revised definitions; multi-specialty centers lose specialty exemptions and face rebranding or compliance costs.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
Gain explicit statutory recognition but must strictly limit clinical offerings to qualify, preserving specialized operational models.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Receive more precise information regarding facility capabilities, service types, and referral pathways, reducing ambiguity in care navigation.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Clarified as the designated referral destination for urgent care centers, standardizing record transfer expectations and limiting informal referral pathways.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Introduced
Receives clearer statutory criteria for oversight and potential registration processes related to facility classification, though fiscal impact remains minimal.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Fiscal Impact Statement A
Facilities must update websites, physical postings, and clinical service menus to ensure naming and scope match the revised definitions. Compliance costs are minimal per legislative analysis but may include rebranding expenses or restructuring clinical capabilities. OHA enforcement will hinge on accurate self-classification and public disclosures, potentially improving consumer navigation while reducing integrated care options if multi-specialty centers cannot meet the narrow specialty threshold.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Fiscal Impact Statement A; Staff Measure Summary A
Behavioral health urgent care clinic
Legally operates under the new specialty definition without being forced to maintain general medical capabilities like ECG machines or splinting supplies, preserving its specialized model while meeting transparency rules.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Rural multi-specialty urgent care center
Forced to close or rebrand because it treats multiple body systems and cannot qualify as a specialty center, leaving the community with reduced acute care access and longer travel times for non-emergency conditions.
Basis: Inferred · Sources: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment; Staff Measure Summary A
The statutory language creates a binary classification threshold; without clear OHA verification protocols, facilities may exploit definitional ambiguity for operational advantage or face disproportionate regulatory burden.
Sources · Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Clarifying facility definitions protects consumers from misleading branding and ensures appropriate care standards, but may restrict operational flexibility for multi-specialty facilities and reduce integrated acute care availability in underserved areas. Upsides include improved consumer transparency and aligned referral pathways; downsides include potential rebranding costs, service restructuring burdens, and reduced access for communities relying on general urgent care models.
Enhanced consumer clarity regarding facility scope, services, and referral destinations.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
Standardized record transfer expectations between urgent care centers and licensed hospital emergency departments.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Operational and financial burden on multi-specialty centers forced to rebrand or restructure clinical services.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -3 — proposed amendment
Potential reduction in integrated acute care options, particularly in rural or underserved regions where multi-specialty models are common.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Staff Measure Summary A
high confidence. The amendment text is explicit in its definitional changes and referral alignment. Fiscal and staff analyses confirm minimal impact and note the amendment's focus on classification. No official rationale is provided, so hypotheses are bounded strictly to textual analysis.
The amendment narrows the statutory definition of a “specialty urgent care center” to facilities treating exclusively one body system or behavioral health, requires urgent care facilities to explicitly use “urgent care” in their branding to qualify for certain provisions, and restricts patient record-sharing obligations to hospital-licensed emergency departments under ORS 441.025. If adopted, it would limit naming exemptions, clarify regulatory scope, and standardize referral data transfers.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Official sources do not state why this measure was proposed.
Sponsor testimony, staff summaries, committee materials, or statutory findings may explain it.
Inferred from cited text; not a stated purpose.
The amendment likely aims to close ambiguity around the “specialty urgent care center” exemption by restricting it to clearly defined clinical scopes, while ensuring that record-sharing requirements apply only to formally licensed hospital emergency departments rather than other acute care sites.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Must align branding with the new explicit phrasing requirement and verify whether their clinical scope qualifies as a “specialty” center to retain naming exemptions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
May lose exemption status and face full service standards, or must cease using “urgent” in their name.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Will receive referral records only from facilities targeting licensed EDs under ORS 441.025, clarifying data transfer boundaries.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
May encounter clearer facility branding and more precise care continuity during referrals, potentially affecting cost transparency and access.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Facilities may incur rebranding costs to meet the explicit “urgent care” phrasing rule or adjust marketing to retain exemptions.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Operational workflows must verify that referral records are directed exclusively to hospital-licensed EDs, potentially requiring updates to health information exchange agreements.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Clinics treating multiple body systems must either reclassify as standard urgent care centers (triggering ECG, splinting, and provider coverage mandates) or cease using “urgent” in their name.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Dedicated behavioral health walk-in clinic
Successfully retains its naming exemption under the narrowed definition, avoiding costly physical exam infrastructure while maintaining public access to mental health services.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Multi-specialty urgent care clinic
Loses its exemption because it treats both orthopedic and dermatological conditions, forcing it to invest heavily in ECG machines, splinting supplies, and on-site provider coverage or face closure.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
The distinction relies on the amendment's explicit scope limits versus potential operational ambiguity in clinical categorization.
Sources · Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
The amendment clarifies regulatory boundaries and naming consistency but risks reducing access to specialized walk-in care by forcing multi-system clinics into costly full-service compliance or branding changes. Upsides include clearer consumer information, targeted record sharing, and reduced regulatory ambiguity for true specialty clinics. Downsides involve increased operational costs for existing facilities, potential reduction in specialized walk-in options, and administrative burden to verify licensing and service scope.
Clearer consumer identification of facility type and services.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Standardized record transfer to formally licensed hospital emergency departments improves care continuity.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Increased rebranding and compliance costs for existing operators.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
Potential reduction in multi-system walk-in options if clinics cannot meet full service standards.
Basis: Inferred · Source: Amendment -2 — proposed amendment
high confidence. The amendment text is explicit in its definitional changes and referral scope limitations. Official fiscal and revenue statements confirm minimal to no impact, supporting the assessment of administrative rather than financial consequences.
37 records currently loaded
Records available in the current snapshot.
Earliest loaded signal
Introduced bill text posted
Posted Jan 28, 2026, 3:25 PM PST
Follow the official text for HB 4107 and every amendment branch. Connections come from each amendment's stated base. Horizontal position shows when each document was first posted, when available. Dotted links flag likely related proposals based on their text.
Click a card to isolate its connected lines; use View summary to jump to its details. Horizontal position shows first posting time in Pacific Time. Drag or use the arrow keys to pan. Pinch with two fingers on mobile, or zoom with the controls, +/− keys, or Control/Command + scroll; press 0 to reset. Dashed branches remained proposals. Dotted teal links are text-based early signals, not official amendment relationships.
Selected document summary
Substantial replacement
What the document says to change
delete lines 18 through 24 and insert:
Inferred policy relationships
Likely revised proposal · Amendment -3
High confidence from shared inserted text: ORS 441.025.
This is a text-based early signal, not an official statement that one amendment changes the other.
Official records (1)
No deeper official pre-number history was found.
Chief sponsors: Representative Nancy Nathanson, Senator Floyd Prozanski, Senator James Manning Jr.
Regular sponsors: House Majority Leader Ben Bowman, Representative Lisa Fragala, Representative Sarah McDonald, Representative Jules Walters, Senator Deb Patterson, Representative Lesly Muñoz, Representative Cyrus Javadi, Representative Zach Hudson, Representative Mark Gamba
House carrier
Representative Nancy Nathanson
Third Reading Of House Bills · Version A
Senate carrier
Senator Cedric Hayden
Third Reading Of House Measures · Version A
A carrier presents the measure or report but is not necessarily its sponsor or author.
Records already listed in Activity are not repeated here.
Official origin records are incomplete; missing facts are not inferred.
37 events
Full timeline
37 entries shown.
Chapter 56, (2026 Laws): Effective date January 1, 2027.
Governor signed.
President signed.
Speaker signed.
Third reading. Carried by Hayden. Passed.
Ayes, 28; Nays, 1--Robinson; Excused, 1--Linthicum.
Carried over to 03-03 by unanimous consent.
Second reading.
Recommendation: Do pass the A-Eng. bill.
Work Session held.
Work Session
Heard and Reported Out · Agenda item 1 · Room HR D · Requires an urgent care center to make publicly available specified information about the urgent care center, offer specified services and, except in certain circumstances, have at least one licensed health care provider on site during the hours of operation.
IS_Impact HB 4107 A
Revenue Impact Statement
Public Hearing held.
Public Hearing
Heard · Agenda item 3 · Room HR D · Requires an urgent care center to make publicly available specified information about the urgent care center, offer specified services and, except in certain circumstances, have at least one licensed health care provider on site during the hours of operation.
IS_Impact HB 4107 A
Revenue Impact Statement
Referred to Health Care.
First reading. Referred to President's desk.
Third reading. Carried by Nathanson. Passed.
Ayes, 41; Excused, 12--Boice, Bunch, Diehl, Edwards, Hartman, Levy B, Lewis, Osborne, Reschke, Smith G, Valderrama, Wright; Excused for Business of the House, 7--Boshart Davis, Harbick, McIntire, Owens, Scharf, Skarlatos, Wallan.
Second reading.
House Amendments to Introduced bill text posted
Recommendation: Do pass with amendments and be printed A-Engrossed.
Work Session held.
Work Session
Heard and Reported Out with Amendments · Agenda item 5 · Room HR 60 · Requires an urgent care center to make publicly available specified information about the urgent care center, offer specified services and, except in certain circumstances, have at least one licensed health care provider on site during the hours of operation.
Amendment -3 adopted
IS_Impact HB 4107 3
Revenue Impact Statement
Public Hearing held.
Public Hearing
Heard · Agenda item 5 · Room HR 60 · Requires an urgent care center to make publicly available specified information about the urgent care center, offer specified services and, except in certain circumstances, have at least one licensed health care provider on site during the hours of operation.
Amendment -3 proposed
Amendment -2 proposed
Referred to Health Care.
First reading. Referred to Speaker's desk.
s treated, can order basic labs and imaging tests, and offer same-day services. House Bill 3221 (2025) would have established standards of service and posting requirements for
s treated, can order basic labs and imaging tests, and offer same-day services. House Bill 3221 (2025) would have established standards of service and posting requirements for
“Enrolled bill text posted”
Confirm with the official record.
Supplemental, source-linked analysis from project researchers and community contributors. It is separate from Oregon's official record.