BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 574
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 574 (Bonnie Lowenthal)
As Amended March 23, 2011
Majority vote
AGING 6-0 HEALTH 19-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Yamada, Halderman, Pan, |Ayes:|Monning, Logue, Ammiano, |
| |V. Manuel Pérez, Torres, | |Atkins, Bonilla, Eng, |
| |Wagner | |Garrick, Gordon, Hayashi, |
| | | |Roger Hernández, |
| | | |Bonnie Lowenthal, |
| | | |Mansoor, Mitchell, |
| | | |Nestande, Pan, |
| | | |V. Manuel Pérez, Silva, |
| | | |Smyth, Williams |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
APPROPRIATIONS 17-0
--------------------------------
|Ayes:|Fuentes, Harkey, |
| |Blumenfield, Bradford, |
| |Charles Calderon, Campos, |
| |Davis, Donnelly, Gatto, |
| |Hall, Hill, Lara, |
| |Mitchell, Nielsen, Norby, |
| |Solorio, Wagner |
| | |
--------------------------------
SUMMARY : Gives the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS)
power to authorize ten additional Program for All Inclusive Care
for the Elderly (PACE) sites, bringing the maximum number of
authorized sites to 20, and updates the codes pertaining to that
program.
FISCAL EFFECT : According to the Assembly Appropriations
Committee:
1)It is unknown how many and when additional PACE programs will
apply to contract with DHCS. It is unlikely that any costs
would be realized immediately, as there are currently only
AB 574
Page 2
five programs in the state, and several applications in
process. The following costs would occur in future years,
assuming 10 new PACE programs apply to contract with DHCS and
operate in the state:
a) Potential future administrative cost pressure to DHCS of
up to $200,000 ($100,000 General Fund) to review
applications for new PACE programs and monitor ongoing
contracts; and,
b) Potential future staffing costs of up to $90,000
(special fund) annually to the Department of Public Health
for facility licensure.
2)Potential for future Medi-Cal cost savings, or increased
Medi-Cal costs, to the extent enrollment in PACE is expanded
in the state. The cost impacts would depend on the likelihood
that PACE enrollees would otherwise enter nursing homes.
COMMENTS : This bill allows for the long-term implementation of
the PACE long-term care model in California by increasing the
cap on the number of providers from 10 to 20. Additionally, the
bill modernizes statute relative to PACE by deleting references
to its prior status as a federal demonstration program.
The PACE model was developed to address the needs of long-term
care consumers, providers, and payers. For most participants,
the comprehensive service package permits them to continue
living at home while receiving services--rather than be
institutionalized. Capitated financing allows providers to
deliver all services participants need rather than be limited to
those reimbursable under the Medicare and Medicaid
fee-for-service systems.
In order to participate in a PACE program, a person must be 55
+, meet the requirement for skilled nursing home care, lives in
a service area, and is able to live in the community without
jeopardizing his or her health or safety. For individuals who
are Medi-Cal eligible, the program pays for a portion of the
monthly PACE premium. Medicare pays for the rest. If a person
does not qualify for Medi-Cal, he/she is responsible for the
portion of the monthly premium Medi-Cal would pay.
There are five PACE sites operating in California presently.
AB 574
Page 3
1)Altamed Senior BuenaCare Los Angeles County
2)Center for Elders Independence Alameda County
3)On Lok SeniorHealth San Francisco County
4)Sutter Seniorcare Sacramento County
5)Community ElderCare of San Diego San Diego County
Analysis Prepared by : Robert MacLaughlin / AGING & L.T.C. /
(916) 319-3990
FN: 0001005