(a) Applicability. CMS may deem a laboratory to meet all applicable CLIA program requirements through accreditation by a private nonprofit accreditation program (that is, grant deemed status), or may exempt from CLIA program requirements all State licensed or approved laboratories in a State that has a State licensure program established by law, if the following conditions are met:

(1) The requirements of the accreditation organization or State licensure program are equal to, or more stringent than, the CLIA condition-level requirements specified in this part, and the laboratory would meet the condition-level requirements if it were inspected against these requirements.

(2) The accreditation program or the State licensure program meets the requirements of this subpart and is approved by CMS.

(3) The laboratory authorizes the approved accreditation organization or State licensure program to release to CMS all records and information required and permits inspections as outlined in this part.

(b) Meeting CLIA requirements by accreditation. A laboratory seeking to meet CLIA requirements through accreditation by an approved accreditation organization must do the following:

(1) Obtain a certificate of accreditation as required in subpart D of this part.

(2) Pay the applicable fees as required in subpart F of this part.

(3) Meet the proficiency testing (PT) requirements in subpart H of this part.

(4) Authorize its PT organization to furnish to its accreditation organization the results of the laboratory's participation in an approved PT program for the purpose of monitoring the laboratory's PT and for making the annual PT results, along with explanatory information required to interpret the PT results, available on a reasonable basis, upon request of any person. A laboratory that refuses to authorize release of its PT results is no longer deemed to meet the condition-level requirements and is subject to a full review by CMS, in accordance with subpart Q of this part, and may be subject to the suspension or revocation of its certificate of accreditation under § 493.1840.

(5) Authorize its accreditation organization to release to CMS or a CMS agent the laboratory's PT results that constitute unsuccessful participation in an approved PT program, in accordance with the definition of “unsuccessful participation in an approved PT program,” as specified in § 493.2 of this part, when the laboratory has failed to achieve successful participation in an approved PT program.

(6) Authorize its accreditation organization to release to CMS a notification of the actions taken by the organization as a result of the unsuccessful participation in a PT program within 30 days of the initiation of the action. Based on this notification, CMS may take an adverse action against a laboratory that fails to participate successfully in an approved PT program.

(c) Withdrawal of laboratory accreditation. After an accreditation organization has withdrawn or revoked its accreditation of a laboratory, the laboratory retains its certificate of accreditation for 45 days after the laboratory receives notice of the withdrawal or revocation of the accreditation, or the effective date of any action taken by CMS, whichever is earlier.

(a) Information required. An accreditation organization that applies or reapplies to CMS for deeming authority, or a State licensure program that applies or reapplies to CMS for exemption from CLIA program requirements of licensed or approved laboratories within the State, must provide the following information:

(1) A detailed comparison of the individual accreditation, or licensure or approval requirements with the comparable condition-level requirements; that is, a crosswalk.

(2) A detailed description of the inspection process, including the following:

(i) Frequency of inspections.

(ii) Copies of inspection forms.

(iii) Instructions and guidelines.

(iv) A description of the review and decision-making process of inspections.

(v) A statement concerning whether inspections are announced or unannounced.

(vi) A description of the steps taken to monitor the correction of deficiencies.

(3) A description of the process for monitoring PT performance, including action to be taken in response to unsuccessful participation in a CMS-approved PT program.

(4) Procedures for responding to and for the investigation of complaints against its laboratories.

(5) A list of all its current laboratories and the expiration date of their accreditation or licensure, as applicable.

(6) Procedures for making PT information available (under State confidentiality and disclosure requirements, if applicable) including explanatory information required to interpret PT results, on a reasonable basis, upon request of any person.

(b) CMS action on an application or reapplication. If CMS receives an application or reapplication from an accreditation organization, or State licensure program, CMS takes the following actions:

(1) CMS determines if additional information is necessary to make a determination for approval or denial of the application and notifies the accreditation organization or State to afford it an opportunity to provide the additional information.

(2) CMS may visit the accreditation organization or State licensure program offices to review and verify the policies and procedures represented in its application and other information, including, but not limited to, review and examination of documents and interviews with staff.

(3) CMS notifies the accreditation organization or State licensure program indicating whether CMS approves or denies the request for deeming authority or exemption, respectively, and the rationale for any denial.

(c) Duration of approval. CMS approval may not exceed 6 years.

(d) Withdrawal of application. The accreditation organization or State licensure program may withdraw its application at any time before official notification, specified at § 493.553(b)(3).

(e) Change of ownership. An accrediting organization that wishes to undergo a change of ownership is subject to the requirements set out at § 488.5(f) of this chapter.

[63 FR 26732, May 14, 1998, as amended at 87 FR 25429, Apr. 29, 2022]

CMS's review of an accreditation organization or State licensure program includes, but is not limited to, an evaluation of the following:

(a) Whether the organization's or State's requirements for laboratories are equal to, or more stringent than, the condition-level requirements for laboratories.

(b) The organization's or State's inspection process to determine the comparability of the full inspection and complaint inspection procedures and requirements to those of CMS, including, but not limited to, inspection frequency and the ability to investigate and respond to complaints against its laboratories.

(c) The organization's or State's agreement with CMS that requires it to do the following:

(1) Notify CMS within 30 days of the action taken, of any laboratory that has—

(i) Had its accreditation or licensure suspended, withdrawn, revoked, or limited;

(ii) In any way been sanctioned; or

(iii) Had any adverse action taken against it.

(2) Notify CMS within 10 days of any deficiency identified in an accredited or CLIA-exempt laboratory if the deficiency poses an immediate jeopardy to the laboratory's patients or a hazard to the general public.

(3) Notify CMS, within 30 days, of all newly—

(i) Accredited laboratories (or laboratories whose areas of specialty/subspecialty testing have changed); or

(ii) Licensed laboratories, including the specialty/subspecialty areas of testing.

(4) Notify each accredited or licensed laboratory within 10 days of CMS's withdrawal of the organization's deeming authority or State's exemption.

(5) Provide CMS with inspection schedules, as requested, for validation purposes.

(6) Notify CMS within 10 days of any conditional level deficiency under §§ 493.41 or 493.1100(a).

[63 FR 26732, May 14, 1998, as amended at 85 FR 54873, Sept. 2, 2020]

(a) Specific requirements for accreditation organizations. In addition to the information specified in §§ 493.553 and 493.555, as part of the approval and review process, an accreditation organization applying or reapplying for deeming authority must also provide the following:

(1) The specialty or subspecialty areas for which the organization is requesting deeming authority and its mechanism for monitoring compliance with all requirements equivalent to condition-level requirements within the scope of the specialty or subspecialty areas.

(2) A description of the organization's data management and analysis system with respect to its inspection and accreditation decisions, including the kinds of routine reports and tables generated by the systems.

(3) Detailed information concerning the inspection process, including, but not limited to the following:

(i) The size and composition of individual accreditation inspection teams.

(ii) Qualifications, education, and experience requirements that inspectors must meet.

(iii) The content and frequency of training provided to inspection personnel, including the ability of the organization to provide continuing education and training to inspectors.

(4) Procedures for removal or withdrawal of accreditation status for laboratories that fail to meet the organization's standards.

(5) A proposed agreement between CMS and the accreditation organization with respect to the notification requirements specified in § 493.555(c).

(6) Procedures for monitoring laboratories found to be out of compliance with its requirements. (These monitoring procedures must be used only when the accreditation organization identifies noncompliance. If noncompliance is identified through validation inspections, CMS or a CMS agent monitors corrections, as authorized at § 493.565(d)).

(7) A demonstration of its ability to provide CMS with electronic data and reports in compatible code, including the crosswalk specified in § 493.553(a)(1), that are necessary for effective validation and assessment of the organization's inspection process.

(8) A demonstration of its ability to provide CMS with electronic data, in compatible code, related to the adverse actions resulting from PT results constituting unsuccessful participation in PT programs as well as data related to the PT failures, within 30 days of the initiation of adverse action.

(9) A demonstration of its ability to provide CMS with electronic data, in compatible code, for all accredited laboratories, including the area of specialty or subspecialty.

(10) Information defining the adequacy of numbers of staff and other resources.

(11) Information defining the organization's ability to provide adequate funding for performing required inspections.

(12) Any facility-specific data, upon request by CMS, which includes, but is not limited to, the following:

(i) PT results that constitute unsuccessful participation in a CMS-approved PT program.

(ii) Notification of the adverse actions or corrective actions imposed by the accreditation organization as a result of unsuccessful PT participation.

(13) An agreement to provide written notification to CMS at least 30 days in advance of the effective date of any proposed change in its requirements.

(14) An agreement to disclose any laboratory's PT results upon reasonable request by any person.

(b) Specific requirements for a State licensure program. In addition to requirements in §§ 493.553 and 493.555, as part of the approval and review process, when a State licensure program applies or reapplies for exemption from the CLIA program, the State must do the following:

(1) Demonstrate to CMS that it has enforcement authority and administrative structures and resources adequate to enforce its laboratory requirements.

(2) Permit CMS or a CMS agent to inspect laboratories in the State.

(3) Require laboratories in the State to submit to inspections by CMS or a CMS agent as a condition of licensure or approval.

(4) Agree to pay the cost of the validation program administered in that State as specified in §§ 493.649(a) and 493.655(b).

(5) Take appropriate enforcement action against laboratories found by CMS not to be in compliance with requirements equivalent to CLIA requirements.

(6) Submit for Medicare and Medicaid payment purposes, a list of the specialties and subspecialties of tests performed by each laboratory.

(7) Submit a written presentation that demonstrates the agency's ability to furnish CMS with electronic data in compatible code, including the crosswalk specified in § 493.553(a)(1).

(8) Submit a statement acknowledging that the State will notify CMS through electronic transmission of the following:

(i) Any laboratory that has had its licensure or approval revoked or withdrawn or has been in any way sanctioned by the State within 30 days of taking the action.

(ii) Changes in licensure or inspection requirements.

(iii) Changes in specialties or subspecialties under which any licensed laboratory in the State performs testing.

(9) Provide information for the review of the State's enforcement procedures for laboratories found to be out of compliance with the State's requirements.

(10) Submit information that demonstrates the ability of the State to provide CMS with the following:

(i) Electronic data and reports in compatible code with the adverse or corrective actions resulting from PT results that constitute unsuccessful participation in PT programs.

(ii) Other data that CMS determines are necessary for validation and assessment of the State's inspection process requirements.

(11) Agree to provide CMS with written notification of any changes in its licensure/approval and inspection requirements.

(12) Agree to disclose any laboratory's PT results in accordance with a State's confidentiality requirements.

(13) Agree to take the appropriate enforcement action against laboratories found by CMS not to be in compliance with requirements comparable to condition-level requirements and report these enforcement actions to CMS.

(14) If approved, reapply to CMS every 2 years to renew its exempt status and to renew its agreement to pay the cost of the CMS-administered validation program in that State.

[63 FR 26732, May 14, 1998, as amended at 88 FR 90035, Dec. 28, 2023]

(a) Notice of deeming authority or exemption. CMS publishes a notice in the Federal Register when it grants deeming authority to an accreditation organization or exemption to a State licensure program.

(b) Contents of notice. The notice includes the following:

(1) The name of the accreditation organization or State licensure program.

(2) For an accreditation organization:

(i) The specific specialty or subspecialty areas for which it is granted deeming authority.

(ii) A description of how the accreditation organization provides reasonable assurance to CMS that a laboratory accredited by the organization meets CLIA requirements equivalent to those in this part and would meet CLIA requirements if the laboratory had not been granted deemed status, but had been inspected against condition-level requirements.

(3) For a State licensure program, a description of how the laboratory requirements of the State are equal to, or more stringent than, those specified in this part.

(4) The basis for granting deeming authority or exemption.

(5) The term of approval, not to exceed 6 years.

(a) Reconsideration of denial. (1) If CMS denies a request for approval, an accreditation organization or State licensure program may request, within 60 days of the notification of denial, that CMS reconsider its original application or application for renewal, in accordance with part 488, subpart D.

(2) If the accreditation organization or State licensure program requests a reconsideration of CMS's determination to deny its request for approval or reapproval, it may not submit a new application until CMS issues a final reconsideration determination.

(b) Resubmittal of a request for approval—accreditation organization. An accreditation organization may resubmit a request for approval if a final reconsideration determination is not pending and the accreditation program meets the following conditions:

(1) It has revised its accreditation program to address the rationale for denial of its previous request.

(2) It demonstrates that it can provide reasonable assurance that its accredited facilities meet condition-level requirements.

(3) It resubmits the application in its entirety.

(c) Resubmittal of request for approval—State licensure program. The State licensure program may resubmit a request for approval if a final reconsideration determination is not pending and it has taken the necessary action to address the rationale for any previous denial.

(a) Basis for validation inspection—(1) Laboratory with a certificate of accreditation. (i) CMS or a CMS agent may conduct an inspection of an accredited laboratory that has been issued a certificate of accreditation on a representative sample basis or in response to a substantial allegation of noncompliance.

(ii) CMS uses the results of these inspections to validate the accreditation organization's accreditation process.

(2) Laboratory in a State with an approved State licensure program. (i) CMS or a CMS agent may conduct an inspection of any laboratory in a State with an approved State licensure program on a representative sample basis or in response to a substantial allegation of noncompliance.

(ii) The results of these inspections are used to validate the appropriateness of the exemption of that State's licensed or approved laboratories from CLIA program requirements.

(b) Validation inspection conducted on a representative sample basis. (1) If CMS or a CMS agent conducts a validation inspection on a representative sample basis, the inspection is comprehensive, addressing all condition-level requirements, or it may be focused on a specific condition-level requirement.

(2) The number of laboratories sampled is sufficient to allow a reasonable estimate of the performance of the accreditation organization or State.

(c) Validation inspection conducted in response to a substantial allegation of noncompliance. (1) If CMS or a CMS agent conducts a validation inspection in response to a substantial allegation of noncompliance, the inspection focuses on any condition-level requirement that CMS determines to be related to the allegation.

(2) If CMS or a CMS agent substantiates a deficiency and determines that the laboratory is out of compliance with any condition-level requirement, CMS or a CMS agent conducts a full CLIA inspection.

(d) Inspection of operations and offices. As part of the validation review process, CMS may conduct an onsite inspection of the operations and offices to verify the following:

(1) The accreditation organization's representations and to assess the accreditation organization's compliance with its own policies and procedures.

(2) The State's representations and to assess the State's compliance with its own policies and procedures, including verification of State enforcement actions taken on the basis of validation inspections performed by CMS or a CMS agent.

(e) Onsite inspection of an accreditation organization. An onsite inspection of an accreditation organization may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(1) A review of documents.

(2) An audit of meetings concerning the accreditation process.

(3) Evaluation of accreditation inspection results and the accreditation decision-making process.

(4) Interviews with the accreditation organization's staff.

(f) Onsite inspection of a State licensure program. An onsite inspection of a State licensure program office may include, but is not limited to, the following:

(1) A review of documents.

(2) An audit of meetings concerning the licensure or approval process.

(3) Evaluation of State inspection results and the licensure or approval decision-making process.

(4) Interviews with State employees.

A laboratory selected for a validation inspection must do the following:

(a) Authorize its accreditation organization or State licensure program, as applicable, to release to CMS or a CMS agent, on a confidential basis, a copy of the laboratory's most recent full, and any subsequent partial inspection.

(b) Authorize CMS or a CMS agent to conduct a validation inspection.

(c) Provide CMS or a CMS agent with access to all facilities, equipment, materials, records, and information that CMS or a CMS agent determines have a bearing on whether the laboratory is being operated in accordance with the requirements of this part, and permit CMS or a CMS agent to copy material or require the laboratory to submit material.

(d) If the laboratory possesses a valid certificate of accreditation, authorize CMS or a CMS agent to monitor the correction of any deficiencies found through the validation inspection.

(a) Laboratory with a certificate of accreditation. (1) A laboratory with a certificate of accreditation that refuses to cooperate with a validation inspection by failing to comply with the requirements in § 493.565—

(i) Is subject to full review by CMS or a CMS agent, in accordance with this part; and

(ii) May be subject to suspension, revocation, or limitation of its certificate of accreditation under this part.

(2) A laboratory with a certificate of accreditation is again deemed to meet the condition-level requirements by virtue of its accreditation when the following conditions exist:

(i) The laboratory withdraws any prior refusal to authorize its accreditation organization to release a copy of the laboratory's current accreditation inspection, PT results, or notification of any adverse actions resulting from PT failure.

(ii) The laboratory withdraws any prior refusal to allow a validation inspection.

(iii) CMS finds that the laboratory meets all the condition-level requirements.

(b) CLIA-exempt laboratory. If a CLIA-exempt laboratory fails to comply with the requirements specified in § 493.565, CMS notifies the State of the laboratory's failure to meet the requirements.

(a) Laboratory with a certificate of accreditation. If a validation inspection results in a finding that the accredited laboratory is out of compliance with one or more condition-level requirements, the laboratory is subject to—

(1) The same requirements and survey and enforcement processes applied to laboratories that are not accredited and that are found out of compliance following an inspection under this part; and

(2) Full review by CMS, in accordance with this part; that is, the laboratory is subject to the principal and alternative sanctions in § 493.1806.

(b) CLIA-exempt laboratory. If a validation inspection results in a finding that a CLIA-exempt laboratory is out of compliance with one or more condition-level requirements, CMS directs the State to take appropriate enforcement action.

(a) Accreditation organization inspection results. CMS may disclose accreditation organization inspection results to the public only if the results are related to an enforcement action taken by the Secretary.

(b) State inspection results. Disclosure of State inspection results is the responsibility of the approved State licensure program, in accordance with State law.

(c) CMS validation inspection results. CMS may disclose the results of all validation inspections conducted by CMS or its agent.

(a) Comparability review. In addition to the initial review for determining equivalency of specified organization or State requirements to the comparable condition-level requirements, CMS reviews the equivalency of requirements in the following cases:

(1) When CMS promulgates new condition-level requirements.

(2) When CMS identifies an accreditation organization or a State licensure program whose requirements are no longer equal to, or more stringent than, condition-level requirements.

(3) When an accreditation organization or State licensure program adopts new requirements.

(4) When an accreditation organization or State licensure program adopts changes to its inspection process, as required by § 493.575(b)(1), as applicable.

(5) Every 6 years, or sooner if CMS determines an earlier review is required.

(b) Validation review. Following the end of a validation review period, CMS evaluates the validation inspection results for each approved accreditation organization and State licensure program.

(c) Reapplication procedures. (1) Every 6 years, or sooner, as determined by CMS, an approved accreditation organization must reapply for continued approval of deeming authority and a State licensure program must reapply for continued approval of a CLIA exemption. CMS provides notice of the materials that must be submitted as part of the reapplication procedure.

(2) An accreditation organization or State licensure program that does not meet the requirements of this subpart, as determined through a comparability or validation review, must furnish CMS, upon request, with the reapplication materials CMS requests. CMS establishes a deadline by which the materials must be submitted.

(d) Notice. (1) CMS provides written notice, as appropriate, to the following:

(i) An accreditation organization indicating that its approval may be in jeopardy if a comparability or validation review reveals that it is not meeting the requirements of this subpart and CMS is initiating a review of the accreditation organization's deeming authority.

(ii) A State licensure program indicating that its CLIA exemption may be in jeopardy if a comparability or validation review reveals that it is not meeting the requirements of this subpart and that a review is being initiated of the CLIA exemption of the State's laboratories.

(2) The notice contains the following information:

(i) A statement of the discrepancies that were found as well as other related documentation.

(ii) An explanation of CMS's review process on which the final determination is based and a description of the possible actions, as specified in § 493.575, that CMS may impose based on the findings from the comparability or validation review.

(iii) A description of the procedures available if the accreditation organization or State licensure program, as applicable, desires an opportunity to explain or justify the findings made during the comparability or validation review.

(iv) The reapplication materials that the accreditation organization or State licensure program must submit and the deadline for that submission.

(a) CMS review. CMS conducts a review of the following:

(1) A deeming authority review of an accreditation organization's program if the comparability or validation review produces findings, as described at § 493.573. CMS reviews, as appropriate, the criteria described in §§ 493.555 and 493.557(a) to reevaluate whether the accreditation organization continues to meet all these criteria.

(2) An exemption review of a State's licensure program if the comparability or validation review produces findings, as described at § 493.573. CMS reviews, as appropriate, the criteria described in §§ 493.555 and 493.557(b) to reevaluate whether the licensure program continues to meet all these criteria.

(3) A review of an accreditation organization or State licensure program, at CMS's discretion, if validation review findings, irrespective of the rate of disparity, indicate widespread or systematic problems in the organization's accreditation or State's licensure process that provide evidence that the requirements, taken as a whole, are no longer equivalent to CLIA requirements, taken as a whole.

(4) A review of the accreditation organization or State licensure program whenever validation inspection results indicate a rate of disparity of 20 percent or more between the findings of the organization or State and those of CMS or a CMS agent for the following periods:

(i) One year for accreditation organizations.

(ii) Two years for State licensure programs.

(b) CMS action after review. Following the review, CMS may take the following action:

(1) If CMS determines that the accreditation organization or State has failed to adopt requirements equal to, or more stringent than, CLIA requirements, CMS may give a conditional approval for a probationary period of its deeming authority to an organization 30 days following the date of CMS's determination, or exempt status to a State within 30 days of CMS's determination, both not to exceed 1 year, to afford the organization or State an opportunity to adopt equal or more stringent requirements.

(2) If CMS determines that there are widespread or systematic problems in the organization's or State's inspection process, CMS may give conditional approval during a probationary period, not to exceed 1 year, effective 30 days following the date of the determination.

(c) Final determination. CMS makes a final determination as to whether the organization or State continues to meet the criteria described in this subpart and issues a notice that includes the reasons for the determination to the organization or State within 60 days after the end of any probationary period. This determination is based on an evaluation of any of the following:

(1) The most recent validation inspection and review findings. To continue to be approved, the organization or State must meet the criteria of this subpart.

(2) Facility-specific data, as well as other related information.

(3) The organization's or State's inspection procedures, surveyors' qualifications, ongoing education, training, and composition of inspection teams.

(4) The organization's accreditation requirements, or the State's licensure or approval requirements.

(d) Date of withdrawal of approval. CMS may withdraw its approval of the accreditation organization or State licensure program, effective 30 days from the date of written notice to the organization or State of this proposed action, if improvements acceptable to CMS have not been made during the probationary period.

(e) Continuation of validation inspections. The existence of any validation review, probationary status, or any other action, such as a deeming authority review, by CMS does not affect or limit the conduct of any validation inspection.

(f) Federal Register notice. CMS publishes a notice in the Federal Register containing a justification for removing the deeming authority from an accreditation organization, or the CLIA-exempt status of a State licensure program.

(g) Withdrawal of approval-effect on laboratory status—(1) Accredited laboratory. After CMS withdraws approval of an accreditation organization's deeming authority, the certificate of accreditation of each affected laboratory continues in effect for 60 days after it receives notification of the withdrawal of approval.

(2) CLIA-exempt laboratory. After CMS withdraws approval of a State licensure program, the exempt status of each licensed or approved laboratory in the State continues in effect for 60 days after a laboratory receives notification from the State of the withdrawal of CMS's approval of the program.

(3) Extension. After CMS withdraws approval of an accreditation organization or State licensure program, CMS may extend the period for an additional 60 days for a laboratory if it determines that the laboratory submitted an application for accreditation to an approved accreditation organization or an application for the appropriate certificate to CMS or a CMS agent before the initial 60-day period ends.

(h) Immediate jeopardy to patients. (1) If at any time CMS determines that the continued approval of deeming authority of any accreditation organization poses immediate jeopardy to the patients of the laboratories accredited by the organization, or continued approval otherwise constitutes a significant hazard to the public health, CMS may immediately withdraw the approval of deeming authority for that accreditation organization.

(2) If at any time CMS determines that the continued approval of a State licensure program poses immediate jeopardy to the patients of the laboratories in that State, or continued approval otherwise constitutes a significant hazard to the public health, CMS may immediately withdraw the approval of that State licensure program.

(i) Failure to pay fees. CMS withdraws the approval of a State licensure program if the State fails to pay the applicable fees, as specified in §§ 493.649(a) and 493.655(b).

(j) State refusal to take enforcement action. (1) CMS may withdraw approval of a State licensure program if the State refuses to take enforcement action against a laboratory in that State when CMS determines it to be necessary.

(2) A laboratory that is in a State in which CMS has withdrawn program approval is subject to the same requirements and survey and enforcement processes that are applied to a laboratory that is not exempt from CLIA requirements.

(k) Request for reconsideration. Any accreditation organization or State that is dissatisfied with a determination to withdraw approval of its deeming authority or remove approval of its State licensure program, as applicable, may request that CMS reconsider the determination, in accordance with subpart D of part 488.

[63 FR 26732, May 14, 1998, as amended at 88 FR 90035, Dec. 28, 2023]