BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                  SB 1002
                                                                  Page  1


          SENATE THIRD READING
          SB 1002 (De León)
          As Amended August 18, 2014
          Majority vote

           SENATE VOTE  :34-0  
           
           HEALTH              17-0        APPROPRIATIONS      12-0        
           
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Ayes:|Pan, Maienschein,         |Ayes:|Gatto, Bocanegra,         |
          |     |Bonilla, Bonta, Chesbro,  |     |Bradford,                 |
          |     |Gomez, Gonzalez,          |     |Ian Calderon, Campos,     |
          |     |Roger Hernández,          |     |Eggman, Gomez, Holden,    |
          |     |Lowenthal, Mansoor,       |     |Pan, Quirk,               |
          |     |Nazarian, Nestande,       |     |Ridley-Thomas, Weber      |
          |     |Patterson, Ridley-Thomas, |     |                          |
          |     |Rodriguez, Wagner,        |     |                          |
          |     |Wieckowski                |     |                          |
          |     |                          |     |                          |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
           SUMMARY  :  Requires a county to begin a new 12-month Medi-Cal  
          eligibility period on a date that aligns the Medi-Cal  
          eligibility period with the beneficiary's household CalFresh  
          (formerly known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance  
          Program) certification period, when a county determines or  
          recertifies CalFresh eligibility.  

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  According to the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee: 

          1)Unknown, significant one-time administrative costs to counties  
            to incorporate new rules into existing redetermination  
            procedures.  Counties are funded by DHCS to process Medi-Cal  
            eligibility, but are currently reimbursed on a historical and  
            negotiated basis, not on a time-basis or per-case basis.   
            Therefore, increased county administrative costs will result  
            in additional one-time cost pressure to the state, but the  
            additional costs will not be funded directly, so there is no  
            direct state cost impact.  On a longer-term basis, the new  
            rules are not likely to have a significant ongoing fiscal  
            impact on administrative costs.   

          2)Information Technology costs, potentially in the range of  








                                                                  SB 1002
                                                                  Page  2


            $600,000 General Fund ((GF)/federal), to program required  
            changes in to the three Medi-Cal eligibility systems used by  
            county offices. 

          3)By increasing the time period for which an individual is  
            continuously enrolled in Medi-Cal, this bill is likely to  
            increase costs for Medi-Cal benefits.  Precise estimates are  
            unavailable, but the increased costs could potentially be in  
            the tens of millions of dollars (GF/federal).  For example,  
            assuming this bill allows 1 million people get an average of  
            an extra week of Medi-Cal benefits at a cost of $43 per week,  
            $43 million total funds (GF/federal).   

          4)One-time staff costs to DHCS and the Department of Social  
            Services to develop a waiver proposal in the range of $200,000  
            (GF/federal). 

          5)If the administration is able to secure a waiver to use a  
            Medi-Cal determination to determine or redetermine eligibility  
            for CalFresh, unknown, potentially significant ongoing costs  
            for increased CalFresh benefits (federal funds).  Actual costs  
            would depend on the terms of the waiver.  

           COMMENTS  :  According to the author, in an effort to further the  
          connection between nutrition and health and ensure that  
          Californians receive the federal benefits to which they are  
          entitled, the link between CalFresh and Medi-Cal should be  
          strengthened.  The author states, with the implementation of the  
          Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, there will be an  
          estimated 10 million Californians on Medi-Cal this year and many  
          households covered through Medi-Cal also receive CalFresh.   
          Based on this significant overlap in eligibility, California has  
          taken great strides to improve dual enrollment and strengthen  
          alignment between CalFresh and Medi-Cal.  The author argues that  
          this bill builds on these efforts by improving program  
          efficiency for both administrators and the low-income families  
          they serve and clarifies that a county may, under certain  
          circumstances, align a household's Medi-Cal redetermination date  
          with the household's CalFresh certification date.  The author  
          states the need to reapply for benefits in such a situation is  
          redundant and inefficient for both low-income families and  
          administering agencies.

          Counties perform Medi-Cal, California Work Opportunity and  








                                                                  SB 1002
                                                                  Page  3


          Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs), and CalFresh eligibility  
          determinations for the state.  Individuals can apply for all  
          three programs at one time using a joint application, but  
          individuals may also apply for each program at different times  
          using separate applications.  While an individual who is  
          enrolled in CalWORKs is automatically categorically eligible for  
          Medi-Cal, when individuals apply for CalFresh and Medi-Cal at  
          different times, they can have different deadlines to renew  
          eligibility for each program.  According to state data from the  
          last quarter of 2012, 66% of Medi-Cal households received  
          CalFresh, and 77% of CalFresh households received Medi-Cal.
     
          While recent efforts to promote horizontal integration between  
          public benefits, such as Medi-Cal and CalFresh, have encouraged dual  
          enrollment at the initial point of application, this does not always  
          happen.  For a variety of reasons, families apply for Medi-Cal and  
          CalFresh at different times.  If dual enrollment is not achieved at  
          application, paperwork deadlines, such as those for annual renewal,  
          are more likely to be unaligned which means that families have to  
          submit duplicative reports and paperwork.  Consequently, individuals  
          and families may become confused and inadvertently miss a deadline  
          for one program or another.

          This bill is jointly sponsored by California Food Policy  
          Advocates and the Western Center on Law and Poverty to improve  
          alignment between Medi-Cal and CalFresh reporting periods.   
          Supporters argue in order to maintain benefits, individuals and  
          families must meet ongoing reporting requirements for both  
          programs, including the submission of paperwork with necessary  
          information for the annual renewal of benefits.  The sponsors  
          state if a household's reporting periods are aligned, a  
          beneficiary will have a common due date for renewal paperwork,  
          thus reducing the administrative burden for program  
          administrators and facilitating joint reporting and renewal for  
          beneficiaries.  Additionally, the sponsors argue, individuals  
          and families are less likely to confuse reporting requirements  
          if the paperwork for both programs is due concurrently and doing  
          so would encourage benefit retention and promote Medi-Cal and  
          CalFresh dual enrollment. 


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Roger Dunstan / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097  










                                                                  SB 1002
                                                                  Page  4



                                                                FN: 0005030