DO and MD residency data reporting

Summary#

This bill requires hospitals that run approved medical residency programs to report how many applicants and accepted trainees they have, broken out by graduates of osteopathic (DO) and allopathic (MD) medical schools. It also requires hospitals to say whether they consider both DO and MD applicants and whether they accept either the COMLEX (osteopathic) or USMLE (allopathic) exam score when they require an exam. The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) must publish the reported data. Hospitals that do not submit the data risk a cut to certain Medicare inpatient payments.

• Main change: Hospitals with approved residency programs must submit yearly counts of applicants and accepted applicants by DO vs MD, plus an affirmation about application and exam-score policies.
• Publication: HHS will post the reported numbers and affirmations on a public website.
• Penalty: If a hospital fails to submit, certain Medicare inpatient payments may be reduced by 2% for each fiscal year of non‑submission, starting for discharges on or after October 1, 2026.
• Clarification: The bill says it does not force residency programs to accept any particular number of applicants or federalize medical education.

What it means for you#

• Hospitals with residency programs

  • Must collect and submit yearly data on residency applicants and acceptances, split by DO and MD graduates.
  • Must state whether they consider both DO and MD applicants and whether they accept COMLEX scores, USMLE scores, or both when an exam is required.
  • Could lose a portion of certain Medicare inpatient payments (2% per missed year) if they do not submit the data.

• Medical residency applicants (students and graduates from DO and MD schools)

  • Their school type may be visible in public reports showing how many applicants and offers came from DO vs MD schools.
  • Programs may be publicly identified as accepting COMLEX, USMLE, or both, which could affect application choices.

• Medical schools and training programs

  • Public data may allow comparison across programs on how many DO and MD applicants are considered and accepted.
  • Programs that require only one exam may face public scrutiny if they do not accept the other exam.

• General public and researchers

  • Will have access to program-level data on applicant and acceptance counts by school type, which could be used for analysis or reporting.

Expenses#

No publicly available information.

• The bill creates administrative work for hospitals to collect and submit the data each year. This could require staff time or IT changes.
• HHS will need to receive, store, and publish the data. That implies administrative and possibly tech costs for the agency.
• The penalty structure could reduce Medicare inpatient payments to non‑compliant hospitals (2% per fiscal year missed). The bill text does not give dollar estimates of these reductions or of overall budget impact.

Proponents' View#

• The bill appears intended to increase transparency about how residency programs treat graduates of osteopathic (DO) and allopathic (MD) schools.
• A possible argument for the bill is that public reporting will encourage programs to consider both DO and MD candidates fairly.
• Requiring programs to say whether they accept COMLEX or USMLE scores could reduce confusion for applicants and could make it easier for DO graduates to apply where their exam is accepted.
• The payment penalty creates an incentive for hospitals to submit the data so the public record is complete.

Opponents' View#

• One concern is that the bill adds reporting requirements and administrative burden for hospitals, without specifying how HHS will collect or standardize the data.
• The bill does not explain how it will protect applicant privacy; published counts could raise privacy questions if programs are small.
• It is unclear exactly which Medicare payments will be reduced and how the 2% per-year penalty will apply in complex real-world cases (for example, multi‑site hospitals or programs that start mid‑year).
• The bill does not define some key terms and situations (for example, who counts as an “applicant” in match systems or how dual‑degree or international graduates are categorized), which may cause inconsistent reporting across hospitals.
• There is no publicly available fiscal estimate in the provided material to show how much HHS or hospitals will need to spend to implement these reporting and publication requirements.