BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 142
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:   June 30, 2009

                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HUMAN SERVICES
                                Jim Beall, Jr., Chair
                    SB 142 (Maldonado) - As Amended:  May 19, 2009

           SENATE VOTE  :  32-1
           
          SUBJECT  :  In-home supportive services:  authorized tasks

           SUMMARY  :  Requires the Department of Social Services (DSS), on  
          or before December 31, 2011, in consultation with county welfare  
          departments and other stakeholders, to develop a process to  
          ensure that In-Home Supportive Services (IHSS) program providers  
          receive a list of approved tasks to be performed for each  
          recipient under the provider's care.

           EXISTING LAW  

          1)Establishes the IHSS program to assist qualifying aged, blind,  
            and disabled individuals to remain safely in their homes.

          2)Requires DSS to establish statewide hourly task guidelines for  
            the chores and services provided through IHSS and to provide a  
            standardized tool for consistent and accurate assessment of a  
            recipient's service needs.

          3)Requires county social services staff to do an assessment, at  
            least annually, of the needs of each IHSS recipient and to  
            authorize that certain tasks and services be provided to that  
            recipient by a provider of his/her choosing.

          4)Permits recipients of IHSS to select their own provider(s).

          5)Requires recipients and providers of IHSS to sign a timesheet  
            every fourteen days showing the number of hours per day of  
            services received, and to submit that timesheet to the county  
            for payment for services rendered.

          FISCAL EFFECT  :   According to the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee, pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8, negligible state costs.

           COMMENTS  : 

           Need for this bill  :  The author believes that there is a need to  








                                                                  SB 142
                                                                  Page  2

          continue the professionalization of the IHSS program, a process  
          significantly boosted by statutory changes that established  
          quality assurance activities:  SB 1104 (Committee on Budget and  
          Fiscal Review), Chapter 229, Statutes of 2004.  

          One of the centerpieces of the quality assurance program is a  
          statewide standard for the various services available through  
          IHSS:  "time for task" guidelines are now in place and are used  
          by social workers in calculating the amount of time that a  
          provider is available to work for an IHSS recipient.  A provider  
          is not paid for more hours of service than are authorized for a  
          recipient by the county social worker during the assessment.

          An IHSS recipient is not obliged to give his or her service  
          provider a copy of the assessment or a list of the approved  
          tasks on that assessment, however.  The provider knows the  
          maximum hours of service for which he or she will be paid, and  
          the provider receives direction from the client as to what to  
          do.

          The author believes that if the provider knows what tasks have  
          been approved for the client, the provider will provide those  
          services needed and will submit a time sheet that covers only  
          the time used to provide those services.  The result will be a  
          closer match between services authorized and services provided.

           Oversight hearing policy debate of this issue  :  On March 24,  
          2009 the Senate Human Services Committee conducted an oversight  
          hearing on IHSS.  In conjunction with that hearing, the  
          California Senate Office of Oversight and Outcomes prepared a  
          report entitled,  In-Home Supportive Services: Examination of the  
          Impact of SB 1104: The 2004 Quality Assurance Initiative  (OOO  
          Report).  The OOO Report (pages 20-24) discusses the policy  
          debate on the advantages and disadvantages of having providers  
          know which chores, tasks, and services the county has authorized  
          for a particular individual.  The OOO Report notes that the  
          Legislative Analyst's Office (LAO) recommended that recipients  
          be required to notify providers of the authorized tasks and to  
          direct that only authorized tasks be done.

          The Senate Human Services Committee analysis of this bill  
          summarizes the March 24th oversight hearing testimony on this  
          issue as follows:

               Representatives of providers in general testified that  








                                                                  SB 142
                                                                  Page  3

               sharing this information is a good idea and would add to  
               the program's integrity.  Representatives from the LAO also  
               discussed their recommendation that such a change be  
               enacted into law.

               Representatives of IHSS clients either raised  
               implementation questions or opposed the idea.  Those  
               raising implementation questions had two main concerns.   
               First, they argued that any disclosure process would need  
               to protect the client's privacy.  For example, witnesses  
               did not want personal identifying information such as  
               social security numbers and personal information such as  
               medical diagnoses shared with providers.  Second, clients  
               with more than one provider would need ways to control the  
               information given each service provider.

               Those opposing the idea outright noted that there is  
               generally at least one year between assessments, so the  
               list of authorized tasks may be out of date before another  
               assessment is completed.  IHSS clients often have  
               complicated medical problems, multiple disabilities, or  
               changing symptoms.  The current system allows the client to  
               be in control of using IHSS to address his or her needs at  
               the time the services are provided.

               Witnesses also spoke of the positive aspect of IHSS being a  
               virtual block grant for services needed to assist an  
               individual to remain safely at home--again, with the client  
               in control of how his or her budget for services is  
               utilized.

          In support of this bill, United Domestic Workers of  
          America/AFSCME, argues that giving providers information about  
          the specific list of tasks that have been approved for the  
          recipient "would be a valuable tool to IHSS providers to best  
          manage the provision of services within the total amount of  
          hours that are authorized for the consumer."  

          It should be noted that the issue addressed by this bill may  
          also be under consideration in the budget process as part of the  
          Governor's anti-fraud initiative.

           Arguments in opposition  :  Opponents, on the other hand, are  
          concerned that provision of this list would mean that providers  
          would not have the flexibility needed, based on common sense, to  








                                                                  SB 142
                                                                  Page  4

          meet a consumer's needs on a particular day if they vary at all  
          from the assessment used to determine the individual's total  
          allotted hours.  Disability Rights California (DRC) asserts that  
          this bill conflicts with a fundamental principle underlying the  
          IHSS statute:  the consumer is the employer for the purposes of  
          hiring, firing and supervising the worker.  Moreover, DRC  
          argues, strictly adhering to a prescriptive list of tasks and  
          hours assigned to each would be impractical.  For example, they  
          note, "if a consumer doesn't have hours approved for meal  
          preparation because usually she or he can do that independently,  
          but becomes sick with a flu and can't prepare meals, that  
          consumer should be able to direct the worker to prepare meals--a  
          legitimate IHSS task."  

          The hourly task guidelines are a useful tool for creating  
          uniformity in how the total number of hours consumers need on a  
          weekly or monthly basis are determined; however, they are less  
          useful as a tool for identifying the specific assistance a  
          consumer needs on a particular day.  Absent either some degree  
          of flexibility or some means of getting immediate approval of  
          alternative tasks, recipients' day-to-day needs will often go  
          unmet.  As an alternative, DRC proposes that providers, instead,  
          be given a generic list of approved IHSS services.  With a  
          generic list of IHSS services, and information on the individual  
          consumer's total allotted hours, a consumer could direct the  
          provider to perform IHSS-authorized tasks to meet his or her  
          needs on a particular day, even if they do not exactly match the  
          tasks reflected in the most recent assessment, which could be  
          many months old.

           PROPOSED AMENDMENT  :

          The author is reportedly agreeable to the following amendment,  
          as an author's amendment:

          Amend Section 12301.22, page 2, lines 3-8, as follows:

               12301.22. On or before December 31, 2011, the department,  
               in consultation with county welfare departments and other  
               stakeholders, shall develop a process to ensure that a  
               provider of services under this article receives a list  
               specifying the approved duties to be performed for each  
               recipient under the provider's care  and a complete list of  
               supportive service tasks available under the IHSS program  .









                                                                  SB 142
                                                                  Page  5

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :

           Support 
           
          United Domestic Workers of America/AFSCME
           
            Opposition 
           
          Disability Rights California (unless amended)

           Analysis Prepared by  :    Eric Gelber / HUM. S. / (916) 319-2089