|
|  |
|
|
Health and Human Services
For more information, contact Kelly Brooks at 916/327-7500, ext. 531, or kbrooks@counties.org or Farrah McDaid Ting at 916/327-7500, ext. 559, or fmcdaid@counties.org.
Health Reform Update
This week, both Speaker Fabian Nuñez and Senate President Pro Tempore Don Perata released results of the cost analysis of their respective health reform proposals (AB 8 and SB 48). Dr. John Gruber, health economist with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), performed the analysis. Please recall that Dr. Gruber also developed the model to provide estimates about the Governor’s proposal.
The analysis shows that both the Senate and Assembly proposals are sufficiently funded, and would actually generate reserves ($610 million under SB 48 and $380 million under AB 8). These estimates are based on a 7.5% of payroll employer fee,which is the amount that will be amended into both AB 8 and SB 48. Note this is significantly higher than the 4% employer fee in the Governor’s proposal.
Below is a brief overview of what the Gruber model shows.
|
AB 8 (Nuñez)
|
SB 48 (Perata)
|
How many uninsured would be covered?
|
3.4 million or 69% of the state’s 4.9 million uninsured.
|
3.4 million or 69% of the state’s 4.9 million uninsured.
|
Minimum employer contribution for health expenditures.
|
7.5% of total Social Security wages (capped at $97,500 on health expenditures for both full time and part time employees.)
|
7.5% of total Social Security wages (capped at $97,500 on health expenditures for both full time and part time employees.)
|
Number of Californians in statewide purchasing pool
|
In AB 8, Cal-CHIPP is the purchasing pool. 3.23 million are projected to enroll in Cal-CHIPP.
|
In SB 48, the Connector is the purchasing pool. 4.1 million are projected to enroll in the Connector (3.6 million adults, 500,000 children).
|
Estimated premiums for individuals
|
Individuals would pay between 0 and 2.8 percent of income for coverage.
Families would pay up to 4.5 percent of income on coverage.
|
Individuals would pay between 0 and 2.8 percent of income for coverage.
Families would pay up to 4.5 percent of income on coverage.
|
Fiscal Impact
|
$380 million reserve
Revenues:
· individual contributions
· federal matching funds
· employer payroll fees
|
$610 million reserve
Revenues:
· individual contributions
· federal matching funds
· employer payroll fees
|
While the report also estimates that both AB 8 and SB 48 would cover 3.4 million or 69% of the state’s 4.9 million uninsured, it would vary in the two plans under which program or insurance model these newly insured would receive coverage. For example, under AB 8, there would be a reduction in public program enrollment and increase in employer-based employment, due to the wrap-around coverage the state would provide to low-income workers.
Dr. Gruber presented his estimates, at a Capitol briefing Wednesday morning. His presentation is available at http://www.calhealthreform.org/. Please note that the charts containing data on costs to individuals and families are for premiums only, and do not reflect out-of-pocket costs for co-pays and deductibles. At the briefing, Dr. Gruber and California HealthCare Foundation, which funded the work, announced that no additional level of detail will be provided at this time since the political situation is still “evolving.”
Senate Appropriations will hear SB 48 on May 21. AB 8 is not yet scheduled for hearing in Assembly Appropriations.
For more information, contact Kelly Brooks at 916/327-7500 ext. 531, or kbrooks@counties.org or Farrah McDaid Ting at 916/327-7500, ext. 559, or fmcdaid@counties.org.
DMH Releases Initial Planning Estimates for the MHSA Housing Program
The California Department of Mental Health (DMH) released the initial per-county funding estimates for the Mental Health Services Act Housing Program’s (MHSA) Community Services and Support (CSS) component on May 14. The total funding amount is $400 million, which includes allocations of up to $115 million per year for three and a half years to finance the capital costs associated with the development, acquisition, construction and/or rehabilitation of permanent supportive housing for individuals with mental illness and their families.
The initial funding level was supposed to be $75 million per year, but the DMH, in consultation with the California Mental Health Directors’ Association (CMHDA), determined that an additional $40 million per year was required to finance the operating subsidies needed to make the capital projects successful.
Also, based on the recommendation of CMHDA, DMH is setting aside 8% for small counties rather than the 5.3% that was originally set forth in the Planning Estimate Formula. A complete list of each county’s allotment can be found at http://www.dmh.ca.gov/DMHDocs/docs/letters07/07-06_Enclosure1.pdf.
The DMH letter setting forth the funding parameters and application process can be found here: http://www.dmh.ca.gov/DMHDocs/docs/letters07/07-06.pdf.
Legislation
AB 121 (Maze) – Support
AB 121, as introduced by Assembly Member Bill Maze, would revise the definition of "qualified employee" in the Personal Income Tax Law and the Corporation Tax Law to include "qualified former foster care recipient," as defined. This would allow employers to receive a tax credit for hiring former foster care recipients. AB 121 was placed on the Assembly Revenue and Taxation Committee’s Suspense File on May 7, but is scheduled to be heard again by that committee on May 21.
AB 298 (Maze) – Support
AB 298, as amended on March 15 by Assembly Member Bill Maze, would specifically provide that a relative caregiver's preference for legal guardianship rather than adoption under circumstances that do not include an unwillingness to accept legal or financial responsibility for the child may not constitute a basis for recommending removal of the child from the relative caregiver for purposes of adoptive placement. AB 298 passed out of the Assembly on May 17 and now moves to the Senate.
AB 714 (Maze) – Support
AB 714, as amended on April 9 by Assembly Member Bill Maze, would allow counties to search for and contact members of the child’s birth family, including non-related extended family members when the child was previously a dependent of the court, has been returned to the custody of the county child welfare agency, and no members of the adoptive family are willing or able to provide care. Currently, if the birth parent’s parental rights have been terminated, the birth family is no longer related to the child. Current law prohibits the county from approaching these birth family members to inquire about becoming caregivers for a child whose parental rights have been terminated.
AB 714 seeks to remedy the problem when children are placed back in foster care in the custody of a county child welfare agency when an adoption is disrupted for situations such as death or incapacitation of the adoptive parent. The bill has been identified as an open issue for the May Revise Budget, and is scheduled to be heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 22.
AB 845 (Bass) – Support
AB 845, as amended on April 10 by Assembly Member Karen Bass, appropriates $10.5 million (General Fund) to the state Department of Social Services (DSS) for funding increased costs related to the Transitional Housing for Foster Youth Program (THP-Plus). This bill is necessary to ensure that THP-Plus is 100% state-funded as intended in the 2006-07 budget.
Forty-six counties have committed to implementing THP-Plus in the current year (2006-07). However, the budget only includes $4.8 million, which is insufficient to provide services to the eligible youth in these counties. With the $10.5 million increase, the participating counties will be able to provide housing and services to more than 1,200 foster youth.
CSAC has also submitted a letter to both Budget Subcommittees urging them to increase the $15.5 million funding level in the Governor’s May Revised 2007-08 Budget to $35 million to increase county participation and help cover ongoing operation costs associated with the program.
The Assembly Appropriations Committee passed AB 845 unanimously on May 9, and the measure is scheduled for a third reading (Item #89) on the Assembly Floor on May 21.
AB 1578 (Leno) – Support
AB 1578, as amended April 26 by Assembly Member Mark Leno, is called the Foster Youth Higher Education Preparation and Support Act and would provide grant funding to operate an education-based foster youth services program to provide educational and support services for foster children. Additionally, AB 1578 would also authorize new Cal Grant B awards for tuition and fees in the first year for current or former foster youth attend college. The bill would also establish the California Guardian Scholars Program for purposes of providing comprehensive support on college and university campuses to students who are former foster youth.
This bill will benefit California’s foster youth in their efforts to attend college and to succeed once they enter. AB 1578 will eliminate many of the barriers foster youth encounter in their efforts to continue their education and to become productive adults. Financial assistance and the provision of housing and campus assistance are vital components to success for all college students, for foster youth it could be the difference in their future. Counties know first-hand about the shortage in viable housing and struggle to meet the needs of homeless youth, many of whom have emancipated from the foster care system.
Counties are vitally concerned about the health, education and well being of children. In addition to protecting foster youth during their adolescence and teen years, the need to provide support for transitioning into adulthood is also critical. AB 1578 would help eliminate many of the obstacles foster youth face. The bill was heard in the Assembly Appropriations Committee on May 16 and placed on the suspense file.
SB 197 (Ducheny) – Support
SB 197, as amended on April 26 by Senator Denise Ducheny, would allow a foster child who faces the elimination of developmental and child care services due to a new foster care placement to continue to receive services if the service provider is able to verify the ongoing need for services and the child remains within the same service area of the child development program.
SB 197 will help ensure the continuity of care for foster children even as their foster home placements change. The bill was passed out of the Senate on May 17, and has yet to be assigned to a committee in the Assembly.
SB 720 (Kuehl) – Support
SB 720, as amended on March 29 by Senator Shelia Kuehl, would provide clean-up language to SB 500 (Statutes of 2005). Recall that SB 500 encouraged the joint placements of infants and their teen parents when both fall within the jurisdiction of the juvenile dependency court. The bill created a new type of licensed placements called “whole family” placements in which the teens and their children were supported by trained foster parents. As SB 500 was implemented, the state Department of Social Services identified three areas that needed further clarification, including group home placements, existing placements, and non-related legal guardians. SB 720 was passed by the Senate Appropriations Committee on May 14 and is scheduled for a third reading (Item #137) on the Senate floor on May 21.
SB 785 (Steinberg) – Support
SB 785, as amended on April 26 by Senator Darrell Steinberg, will help to ensure that foster children placed outside of their home county are able to access mental health services. Due to the complexity of the state’s mental health program, when children are placed outside their home counties, they often have difficulty accessing needed care. This measure will assist in resolving this problem and meeting the mental health needs of children in the foster care system. SB 785 has been scheduled for a third reading (Item #76) in the Senate on May 21.
PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION
|
|
|
