HIPAA Website Compliance: 2025 Guide for Clinics and Providers
Summary
California healthcare clinics often overlook how their websites fall under HIPAA website compliance, exposing them to risks from unsecured forms, tracking tools, and outdated privacy policies. A pending lawsuit against Prime Healthcare highlights how regulators and courts are scrutinizing online PHI collection. This article explains common gaps, lessons learned, and how clinics can reduce liability with consent logging, policy management, and audit documentation.
Introduction
For healthcare providers in California, HIPAA obligations extend beyond medical records and EHR systems. A clinic’s website is often the weakest link in protecting patient data. Online intake forms, scheduling tools, chat functions, and even tracking technologies may handle protected health information (PHI), making them subject to HIPAA’s Privacy and Security Rules.
With enforcement actions and lawsuits now targeting digital workflows, clinics that ignore their websites risk fines, reputational harm, and costly litigation.
Why websites fall under HIPAA in California
When a patient enters information into a website form, it is legally treated the same as handing it to a staff member at the front desk. If that information identifies the patient and relates to health services, it qualifies as PHI. Regulators, including the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), are closely scrutinizing digital channels. Even smaller clinics have come under investigation.
Key reasons websites are subject to HIPAA:
- Intake forms collect PHI directly from patients.
- Third-party scheduling or chat tools often process patient data.
- Tracking pixels can transmit PHI to external vendors without consent.
- Outdated privacy policies leave gaps in transparency.
Common gaps California healthcare clinics overlook
Many California clinics unintentionally expose themselves to risk by missing these requirements:
- Unsecured intake forms – Forms without encryption can expose PHI in transit.
- Chat or scheduling tools without BAAs – If a vendor processes PHI, a Business Associate Agreement (BAA) is required.
- Missing authorization logs – Clinics must track disclosures and patient authorizations, including online activity.
- Outdated privacy policies – Notices often omit details on how websites collect and use PHI.
- No audit trail – Without documentation, it’s difficult to prove compliance in an investigation.
HIPAA vs California privacy laws: What’s different?
For healthcare providers in California, HIPAA is not the only regulation that applies to patient data. The California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA), which expands on the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), introduces additional obligations that may overlap with HIPAA. While HIPAA focuses on protected health information (PHI), CPRA governs a broader category known as personal information (PI), which includes online identifiers, behavioral data, and device-level data.
Healthcare websites that handle both PHI and PI, especially for marketing, analytics, or third-party integrations, may be subject to both HIPAA and CPRA. This overlap creates legal complexity and highlights the need for unified tools that can manage consent, disclosures, and logging across both frameworks.
Key differences between HIPAA and CPRA
Requirement | HIPAA (Federal) | CPRA (California State) |
|---|---|---|
Data covered | Protected Health Information (PHI) | Personal Information (PI), including online identifiers |
Consent requirements | Written authorization for disclosures beyond treatment | Opt-out rights and consent for sensitive personal data |
Regulatory body | U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) | California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) |
Business associate agreements | Required for vendors handling PHI | Not required but contracts are recommended |
User rights | Right to access, amend, and restrict PHI | Right to access, delete, correct, and limit PI processing |
Enforcement | Fines, audits, and civil penalties | State fines and private right of action in some cases |
Why this matters for healthcare websites
A healthcare provider using third-party scheduling, analytics, or marketing tools may handle both PHI and PI. For example:
A HIPAA-covered clinic running remarketing ads needs to block tracking technologies unless explicit patient consent is collected and logged.
A provider collecting device data or user behavior for analytics may need to offer opt-out functionality under CPRA, even if the data is not medical in nature.
Solutions like Clym’s Consent Management and HIPAA Authorization tools help address both sets of obligations. These tools offer control over data collection, policy updates, user permissions, and audit logging, all from a single platform.
Pro tip for California clinics: Make sure your website privacy policy references both HIPAA and CPRA if applicable, and clearly explains what types of data are collected, how they are used, and how users can exercise their rights.
Frequently missed triggers of HIPAA liability on websites
Healthcare providers often focus on obvious HIPAA risks like unsecured forms or missing Business Associate Agreements (BAAs). But some of the most common violations happen in overlooked areas, especially involving marketing, tracking technologies, or embedded third-party content.
Hidden HIPAA risks that appear on many clinic websites:
Hidden element | Potential HIPAA violation |
|---|---|
YouTube videos with tracking enabled | Can collect viewing behavior tied to patient conditions or treatments |
Email sign-up forms with health-related prompts | If health data is collected, it may qualify as PHI |
Tag manager scripts loading 3rd-party trackers | Can send data to unknown external vendors without consent |
Default pixel loading on all pages | Even pages with forms or lab results can expose PHI if pixels fire too early |
If the data collected can be linked to an individual’s health status, it qualifies as Protected Health Information (PHI) under HIPAA.
Case study: Prime Healthcare & tracking tools
In R.S. v. Prime Healthcare Services, Inc. (C.D. Cal., Case No. 5:24-cv-00330), a class action lawsuit alleges that Prime Healthcare placed tracking technologies, including Facebook Pixels on its website and patient-facing platforms without patients’ knowledge or consent. These sites weren’t limited to marketing pages; they included portals, appointment schedulers, and lab result platforms where patients provided sensitive health information.
The complaint claims that when patients visited these pages, their PHI was intercepted and disclosed to third parties like Facebook. Some of the data allegedly tied back to identifiable users, and the lawsuit suggests the data may have been used for marketing.
On January 13, 2025, a federal judge denied Prime Healthcare’s motion to dismiss, allowing the case to move forward. The decision highlights that courts see claims about website trackers and PHI sharing as serious enough to warrant full review.
Lessons for California clinics and how to reduce risk
When a case like Prime Healthcare’s proceeds, it shows that courts are treating website trackers as potential HIPAA violations. Clinics can reduce liability with safeguards, many of which can be supported by Clym’s platform:
- Encrypt all forms and submissions – this way PHI is secure in transit.
- Manage tracking pixels responsibly – only load them with explicit patient consent. Clym’s HIPAA Authorization solution logs patient authorizations and controls when trackers fire.
- Maintain clear privacy policies – patients should understand how their data is used. Clym’s policy management tools make it simple to publish and update notices.
- Vendor due diligence – sign BAAs with scheduling, chat, or analytics vendors. Clym gives visibility into vendor data flows and obligations.
- Audit-ready documentation – if challenged, clinics must show which consents were collected. Clym generates exportable evidence logs tailored for audits or litigation.
Practical steps to improve HIPAA website compliance
- Encrypt all forms and submissions so patient data is secure in transit.
- Review vendor relationships and confirm whether BAAs are in place.
- Maintain clear, updated privacy notices explaining PHI collection and sharing.
- Log and store patient authorizations for disclosures, including marketing.
- Document every workflow with audit trails regulators can review.
How Clym helps reduce website compliance risks
Clym provides digital tools to support HIPAA-related website obligations:
- Consent and authorization logging to document patient approvals and disclosures.
- Privacy policy management to publish and update notices across websites.
- Cookie & tracking control to align trackers with patient consent.
- Data Subject Request (DSR) workflows to intake and respond to patient rights requests.
- Audit documentation for regulators or court use.
By consolidating these safeguards, Clym helps healthcare providers reduce manual work while giving patients confidence that PHI is handled responsibly.
FAQs
Yes. HIPAA applies regardless of size if a clinic transmits PHI electronically. Smaller providers have been fined for violations.
Yes. If the tool collects PHI, the vendor must sign a Business Associate Agreement (BAA).
Not by default. If pixels transmit PHI to third parties, they may violate HIPAA unless covered by consent and vendor agreements.
A BAA is a legal contract between a provider and a vendor that processes PHI. It defines responsibilities for protecting patient data.
Any form, chat, or interactive feature that captures identifiable patient data counts as PHI.
Yes. HIPAA requires documentation of authorizations, especially for disclosures beyond treatment or billing (e.g., marketing).
Penalties can include regulatory fines, class action lawsuits, and reputational damage.
Yes. Clym provides exportable audit trails documenting consents, disclosures, and data flows.
Yes. The Clym widget and platform integrate with major CMS and scheduling tools.
Alex is a Content Developer at Clym, where he researches and writes about everything related to data privacy and web accessibility compliance for businesses, helping them stay informed on their compliance needs and spreading awareness about making the web safer and more inclusive. When he’s not writing about compliance, Alex has his nose in a book or is hiking in the great outdoors.
Find out more about Alex