BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �






                  SENATE COMMITTEE ON BUDGET AND FISCAL REVIEW
                                Mark Leno, Chair
                                        
          Bill No:       SB 67
          Author:        Budget and Fiscal Review
          As Amended:    May 7, 2013
          Consultant:    Jennifer Troia
          Fiscal:        Yes
          Hearing Date:  May 9, 2013
          
          Subject:  Budget Act of 2012:  In-Home Support Services  
          (IHSS)

          Summary:  Statutory changes needed to effectuate a  
          settlement agreement reached by plaintiffs and the  
          Administration in several lawsuits against the state based  
          on reductions to the IHSS program enacted in recent years.

          Background:  Among several other changes to IHSS that were  
          adopted in the past four budgets, and that have taken  
          effect, a 3.6 percent across-the-board reduction in  
          authorized hours for all recipients has been in effect  
          since the 2010-11 fiscal year.  This reduction is currently  
          scheduled to expire on June 30, 2013.  

          In 2010-11, the budget also included savings that would  
          have resulted from enhanced federal funding obtained as a  
          match on revenues the state expected to receive and use to  
          fund IHSS from extending the sales tax to support services,  
          including IHSS.  IHSS providers would have received a  
          supplemental payment equal to the amount of their new tax  
          liability.  The Department of Health Care Services  
          submitted its plan to implement this funding mechanism to  
          the federal government, but the state has still not  
          received a formal response.

          As summarized in the chart below, several additional  
          reductions to the IHSS program made in the last four state  
          budgets were enjoined by federal courts from taking effect.  
           


            ---------------------------------------------------------- 
           |                                    |                     |
                                       -1- 










           |              Policy                |   Name of Lawsuit   |
           |                                    |  Enjoining Policy   |
           |                                    | from Taking Effect  |
           |------------------------------------+---------------------|
           |                                    |                     |
           |Loss of eligibility for individuals |Oster (V.L.) v.      |
           |with assessed needs below specified |Lightbourne, et al.  |
           |thresholds                          |(Oster I)            |
           |------------------------------------+---------------------|
           |                                    |                     |
           |Across-the-board reduction of 20    |Oster (V.L.) v.      |
           |percent of authorized hours, with   |Lightbourne, et al.  |
           |exceptions as specified             |(Oster II)           |
           |------------------------------------+---------------------|
           |                                    |                     |
           |Reduction in state participation in |Dominguez v.         |
           |provider wages (from maximum of     |Schwarzenegger, et   |
           |$12.10 to $10.10 per hour)          |al.                  |
            ---------------------------------------------------------- 


          In March 2013, the Administration and plaintiffs in these  
          cases reached a settlement agreement, which a federal  
          district court has tentatively approved.  This bill  
          reflects the language proposed to effectuate the settlement  
          agreement, with some technical, non-substantive changes.  
          
          Proposed Law:  This bill:
          

          1)Repeals the provisions underlying the reductions at issue  
            in the lawsuits settled by the agreement, including: 



             a)   Provisions that had required the State Department  
               of Social Services (DSS) to implement, under specified  
               circumstances, a 20 percent reduction in authorized  
               hours of service for each IHSS recipient, beginning  
               January 1, 2012, except as specified.  



             b)   Provisions that had reduced the state contribution  
                                       -2- 










               to IHSS provider wages and benefits from a maximum of  
               $12.10 per hour to $10.10 per hour, effective July 1,  
               2009.  



             c)   Provisions that had established a stricter  
               threshold of need to receive IHSS hours based on a  
               recipient's assessed functional index score (requiring  
               IHSS recipients to have an overall functional index  
               score equal to or greater than 2 on the 5-point scale  
               in order to qualify).  



             d)   Provisions that had established a stricter  
               threshold of need to receive domestic and related care  
               services, such as housework, meal preparation, and  
               laundry (requiring a functional index ranking greater  
               than 4 for each activity in order to receive service  
               hours).  

          1)Establishes an across-the-board reduction of eight  
            percent in authorized hours of IHSS that would apply to  
            all recipients for a period of 12 months, starting July  
            1, 2013; 

          2)Establishes an ongoing, across-the-board reduction of up  
            to seven percent in authorized hours of IHSS that would  
            apply to all recipients upon the expiration of the eight  
            percent reduction described above, unless it is triggered  
            off, in whole or in part, by an "assessment" on home care  
            services, including IHSS, which results in enhanced  
            federal funding for IHSS.

          3)Specifies with respect to these across-the-board  
            reductions that:

             a)   They shall be applied to the recipient's hours as  
               authorized pursuant to the most recent assessment,  
               and, if applicable, shall be taken first from any  
               documented unmet need.

             b)   IHSS recipients may direct the manner in which the  
                                       -3- 










               reduction of hours is applied to previously authorized  
               services.

             c)   If a recipient requests a reassessment based only  
               on the eight or seven percent reductions, his/her  
               request can be administratively denied.  At the same  
               time, this bill reiterates existing law that a county  
               shall assess a recipient's need for supportive  
               services any time the recipient notifies the county of  
               a need for adjustment or when there are other  
               indications of a change in circumstances that affects  
               the recipient's need for services.  

             d)   The notices of action informing recipients of the  
               eight and seven percent reductions shall be mailed at  
               least 10 and 20 days, respectively, prior to the  
               reduction taking effect and include specified  
               information.

             e)   Recipients continue to have all appeal rights as  
               otherwise provided under existing law.


          4)Establishes the intent of the Legislature to enact an  
            assessment on home care services, including IHSS, to  
            offset the up to seven percent reduction described above.

          5)Specifies that, to the extent that the assessment is  
            implemented retroactively, any resulting funds shall be  
            used to provide one-time direct reinvestments benefiting  
            IHSS recipients that do not create ongoing General Fund  
            obligations.  Further, specifies that the fund created to  
            receive those retroactive resources shall be continuously  
            appropriated after specified notice or legislative  
            approval requirements, as applicable, are met.

          6)Specifies that the departments of Health Care and Social  
            Services may implement and administer its provisions  
            through all-county letters or similar instructions until  
            regulations are adopted, as specified.



          7)Makes an appropriation and declares that the measure is  
                                       -4- 










            to take effect immediately as a bill providing for  
            appropriations related to the Budget Bill.
          
          Fiscal Effect:  The Administration estimates that the eight  
          and seven percent across-the-board reductions in 2013-14  
          and 2014-15 would save approximately $160 million General  
          Fund and $159 million General Fund, respectively.  

          Support:   Unknown

          Opposed:  Unknown
































                                       -5-