BILL ANALYSIS �
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 138 (Beall)
Hearing Date: 8/25/2011 Amended: 8/15/2011
Consultant: Katie Johnson Policy Vote: Human Services 4-3
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 138 would establish the Elder Economic Security
Act of 2011 and would require the California Department of Aging
(CDA) to report the Elder Economic Security Standard Index
(Index) for each service area in its state plan and use it as a
reference when making decisions about allocating its existing
resources. Each area agency on aging (AAA) would be required to
use the Index as a reference when making decisions about
allocating existing resources to specify the costs in the
private market of meeting the basic needs of elders in each
planning and service area and to identify the number or
percentage of elders who are living at or below the Index.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Cost pressure to unknown, potentially significant General/
increase services Federal/
available for elders Local
*AAAs purchase services with a variety of funding sources
including mainly federal funds, but also with state and local
penalty and fine revenue and the State HICAP Fund.
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE. AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED.
This bill would define the Elder Economic Security Standard
Index (Index) to mean an index that quantifies the costs that
elders face in meeting their basic needs, including, but not
limited to, food, shelter, health care, transportation,
utilities, and essential household items, in the private market.
This bill states that the Index is updated biennially by the
University of California, Los Angeles Center for Health Policy
Research using publicly available data sources on the cost of
AB 138 (Beall)
Page 1
living in each county in California. The costs of updating the
Index would not be borne by the state.
This bill would require:
1) The California Department of Aging (CDA) to report the
Index score for each of its service areas in its state plan
and to use it as a reference when making decisions about
allocating its existing resources. CDA would be required to
implement this bill only to the extent that the data needed
to update the Index is available and is made available to
the department in a format that displays each county's
specific data.
2) The 33 area agencies on aging (AAAs) to utilize the
Index data in its area service plan. The AAAs would be
required to use the Index as a reference when making
decisions about allocating existing resources to specify
the costs of meeting basic needs for elders in each
planning and service area and to identify the number or
percentage of elders who are living at or below the Index.
This bill would state that it is the intent that the Index, when
updated and available, be used as a planning tool in the
development of local area plans and as a guide in allocating
exiting resources that support senior services in their
communities. This bill would state that it should not be
construed to advocate for or to mandate changes in the current
funding allocations to AAAs nor to affect means tested programs.
Cost Pressure to Increase Services and Resources for Elder
Californians
In the FY 2009-2010 Budget Act and subsequent line-item vetoes
by the Governor, all General Fund support for 9 months of
funding for 5 community-based services programs and their state
and local administration was eliminated for a total savings of
$10.5 million. The remaining General Fund support for CDA is
necessary to draw down federal funds. AAAs purchase services
with a variety of funding sources that consist mainly federal
funds, but also include state and local penalty and fine revenue
and the State HICAP Fund.
Although this bill states that the Index should be used by CDA
and AAAs to prioritize services within existing resources, the
Index currently available online shows that the federal poverty
AB 138 (Beall)
Page 2
level (FPL), as of 2007, covers less than half of the basic
costs experienced by older California adults and that that gap
is roughly $10,000 per elder. Additionally, the AAAs would be
required to identify the number or percentage of elders who live
at or below the Index. By referencing the Index and identifying
the number of elders living at or below the Index, this bill
would imply that elder Californians are in need of additional
resources and programs. Thus, there would be unknown, but
significant, cost pressure 1) on existing AAA programs to the
extent that this bill were to move AAAs or CDA to fund one
program instead of another, and 2) to respond to the Index's
illustration that existing resources available to elders through
current sources are inadequate to meet an elder's basic needs.
There are over 4 million Californians aged 60 and up, of which
about 10 percent live below the poverty line. There would be
cost pressure to bring at least those individuals up to the
Elder Index.
This bill is similar to AB 2114 (Beall, 2010), which died on the
Senate Appropriations Committee's Suspense File.
AS PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED. The committee's proposed amendment
would delete the requirement that AAAs would need to include in
their plans the number or percentage of elders who live at or
below the Index. By removing this requirement, it would decrease
cost pressure, but would not eliminate it.