[{"_1":2,"_112":-5,"_113":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88,100],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6534952,"mediaKeyId","3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245","parentId",3445852,"title","Subcommittee probes CFAP expansion trigger and Sunbucks operations; advocates press for protecting SNAP benefits amid federal uncertainty","audioSeconds",104,"startMs",24433000,"endMs",24537000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245&start=24433&end=24537","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245/thumbnail_24433000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6534952/California/Subcommittee-probes-CFAP-expansion-trigger-and-Sunbucks-operations-advocates-press-for-protecting-SNAP-benefits-amid-federal-uncertainty","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6534952-80d0482252b1c992ae9fb6921787376a/orig.mp4?Expires=1775444372&Signature=PJ~A0ewpsQEohjWgvILXYYaamhBwieRrxdyfMabibNRGjRSkDj~Cd0Yfojgg-OIAFrBq8g5fBPMi92vQ6mR9qOVj7OyaHprLw5zrkFGpMBbucq5UpUqGig4OB10UoBWmXOLR-tpQz5cFEDYGO6DsWDMGQb96w2DW-YTsODF3N5lo~J-nzpx2aC3NQQa02Tc~qWXxmsf6o-MoCMNnJRwyE7mLEzEYixiTENgrNhB8-PZKwtE9-ze5TMH~gi~2e8tk~xybgsjBjLtUOZFQmjF5fzgaOmr~EQXZK6Vj5g5MrcfsPGTwdP6~EOK4qEabqCXaSo3Q6qW5~Ks~Nu~mqPvkYA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","California State Assembly","date","2025-05-21T00:00:00Z","article","The committee reviewed several food‑assistance and nutrition items in the May Revision. Jennifer Troia of the Department of Social Services summarized a proposed trigger that would allow Department of Finance to decide in spring 2027 whether to proceed with an expansion of the California Food Assistance Program (CFAP) that current law schedules for Oct. 1, 2027. Under current law the CFAP expansion would extend eligibility to all Californians age 55 and older regardless of immigration status; DSS said roughly 75,000 additional people could become eligible.

The May Revision also reappropriates $38 million for CFAP automation and outreach through June 2029 to prepare for the expansion if it proceeds. DSS reported it has resumed automation planning and will publish final policy letters by year‑end; the department paused automation earlier to ensure the work aligns with program design.

On Sunbucks (the federally approved summer EBT option that the state calls Sunbucks), DSS asked for position authority and operational funding to continue helpline and issuance activity and requested four positions (three funded, one position authority). The department said Sunbucks operations generated substantial caller‑volume and escalations in its first year and that the new positions would support appeals, notices, and customer service functions.

Other technical proposals included a $270,000 federal‑fund automation enhancement to auto‑populate income information in CalSAWS and a $2 million update to the CalFresh Standard Utility Allowance to comply with a 2024 federal rule; DSS said the new allowance is expected to increase benefits for some households. LAO urged caution on trigger language similar to its recommendation on the foster‑care trigger and asked the Legislature to retain its role in deciding whether to expand CFAP when that question becomes ripe.

Assemblymembers raised concerns about federal SNAP policy proposals under consideration in Washington, which some witnesses warned could sharply reduce benefits (national policy risk noted by speakers). Assemblymember Dr. Akilah Sharp Collins and others urged state contingency planning to prevent a cut to household benefits in the event of federal reductions; one legislative member is pursuing a bill to require state backfill in the event of substantial federal SNAP reductions.

No final budget actions were adopted; the committee asked DSS for details on projected CFAP caseload, outreach plans, automation timelines, and Sunbucks staffing needs.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Human Services (1)","oneSentenceSummary","Committee members examined May Revision proposals for CFAP expansion, Sunbucks operational funding, and CalFresh technical fixes.","taxTitle","California State Assembly, House, Legislative, California","taxId",17099,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6534962,"IHSS proposals draw criticism: lawmakers warn cuts would harm seniors and people with disabilities",34,18505000,18539000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245&start=18505&end=18539","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245/thumbnail_18505000.jpg","/articles/6534962/California/IHSS-proposals-draw-criticism-lawmakers-warn-cuts-would-harm-seniors-and-people-with-disabilities","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6534962-583394eb4001c2de623836069a79f36c/orig.mp4?Expires=1775444372&Signature=E6e~BLIfiv7Rl5t-s01JlI5niZw6VGm4M6jn10xeguGSpzlH~i3ZNqmTfCkTO74laD6PvjOxhNh6ESyEi-YDzNs~yEmwEC78z~q4Oh2WzbKoQc1XRotjqBxQTSe2kZIYeGb4O4Gu0BkMgdXIcxHPG9Uax0sfqWtSlbC8x7ckJrHQQD4YXduiA9VUKBY-QJUUjHWaNi7bp6zMvpv8oQGPMRlh5g1iPXsR7RUzRnpN5l4wbN6EsnsppXu-Egn7ncGCR1lE4TNL2wk8wwmSXFjT5b9JC2A2ihCN0-dJjyhYNqNJFHueGSlIwZFXZ6E4HKPIrpJwmzn4LLEVwEQUvK84iw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 heard detailed administration proposals on In‑Home Supportive Services (IHSS), the state program that pays caregivers to help older adults and people with disabilities remain at home. Jennifer Troia, director of the Department of Social Services, outlined five May Revision proposals intended to reduce state general fund exposure by constraining IHSS growth.

Troia said the administration proposes a 50‑hour weekly cap on hours a single IHSS provider can work (current caps are 66 hours for providers working with multiple recipients and 70 hours, 45 minutes for single‑recipient providers). The administration estimated the full‑year general fund savings at $688 million but said implementation timing would push a likely effective date to Oct. 1, 2025, reducing 2025–26 savings to about $516 million. She emphasized that authorized hours for recipients would not change and that recipients could hire a second provider to cover hours beyond one provider’s cap.

The department also proposed eliminating IHSS for undocumented adults ages 19 and older. DSS said about 3,300 undocumented recipients age 19+ currently receive IHSS and estimated around 5,400 individuals would lose services under the proposal; because of implementation time the budget‑year savings were updated to about $79 million. The proposal conforms to larger Medi‑Cal changes under consideration in other budget subcommittees.

DSS described a proposal to shift responsibility for penalties tied to the Community First Choice Option (CFCO) — penalties imposed when required reassessments are late — from the state to counties. Troia said counties can avoid penalties by prioritizing CFCO reassessments; LAO raised questions about whether counties have the resources to do so without additional funding. LAO also cited a county administrative cost estimate of roughly $25 million that it said was not included in the May Revision scoring.

Another May Revision item is a conforming IHSS adjustment tied to a proposed reinstatement of a Medi‑Cal asset test for older and disabled adults; on the IHSS side, DSS estimates about 1,900 recipients could lose IHSS under the proposed conforming change (budget‑year savings about $13 million after implementation timing). The administration characterized these estimates as conforming to Medi‑Cal changes and said implementation could occur Jan. 1, 2026.

DSS also requested funds needed to implement federal home‑and‑community‑based‑services (HCBS) automation changes and to comply with a 2024 federal rule expansion. The department said failure to implement necessary automation could expose the state to federal penalties.

Lawmakers and advocates pushed back hard. Assemblymember Dr. Akilah Collins (member of the subcommittee) and others described the IHSS workforce as already fragile and warned a cap that reduces overtime pay could reduce availability of caregivers in many communities and create downstream costs, including increased homelessness and higher institutional care costs. Several legislators asked the administration to provide more detailed modeling, to consider alternatives short of a hard cap, and to provide the committee and counties with further implementation details and timelines.

LAO said it was still early in its review, raised questions about the assumptions underpinning the overtime cap’s savings, asked how many new providers would be needed if recipients hire additional providers, and requested more detail on county administrative costs tied to CFCO reassessments.

No formal decisions were made during the hearing. Legislators asked the administration and Department of Finance for written follow‑up on scoring assumptions, county workload impacts, and alternatives that would reduce state costs without disrupting care.","The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 reviewed May Revision proposals that would change IHSS operations including a proposed 50‑hour weekly provider cap, elimination of IHSS for undocumented adults 19+, CFCO penalty shifts to counties, a Medi‑Cal asset‑test conforming change, and automation to meet a federal HCBS rule.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6534968,"Assembly hearing: advocates, providers warn May revision undermines child care progress; administration defends technical funding for federal changes",221,2194000,2415000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245&start=2194&end=2415","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245/thumbnail_2194000.jpg","/articles/6534968/California/Assembly-hearing-advocates-providers-warn-May-revision-undermines-child-care-progress-administration-defends-technical-funding-for-federal-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6534968-d5fb23e1b784e64b2f36815dadcf7e42/orig.mp4?Expires=1775444372&Signature=Burn7EjnTqVvjMaUf9kAahPguUGyXMK4QZfqsYtF1xJePGkzgUsZv9rpR03GKOHOk-8WRtRIfKX3yJDqgqOCmxx8yjkO3KwlXl3DT0wGtLekY2DdMilpTzODExzg5aDP5MYLyLqFbF8S-sDEKVdAxU1-AlHqrdV0rvqOkFWO01V9YxIc95tdB8IxKkS5eHa5x0L~bR87de0QzOsrgiuYMm-GmM-CqTybZy4ps96s0Ry2rO1~NGVj2gskA-ubfSUoMztGBMfCiD~zQceHbbzxXnjENEW5yGcoY1lVFOJePjpWwGhS8ApX1n7viORYJU9R5nuylxdQuUDdRNSwtu5drQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Assemblymember Phil Ting Jackson, chair of the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Human Services, opened a May revision hearing on child care by saying the state faces “one of the more difficult budget problems since the Great Recession” but emphasized a priority to “ensure our most vulnerable Californians stay housed” and that child care remain a core investment.

Majority Leader (as identified in the hearing) told the committee the May Revision “fails to adopt the urgent need for child care rate reform and slot expansions,” urged the Legislature to “reject all cuts to child care and to restore the cost‑of‑living adjustment known as the COLA,” and said the May Revision breaks a promise to add 200,000 subsidized slots announced in 2021.

Jennifer Troia, director of the California Department of Social Services, summarized the administration’s May Revision outline for child care and development: $6.8 billion total funds in 2024–25 and $6.4 billion in 2025–26, maintenance of about 46,000 slots added since 2021–22, and funding to begin administrative work required to implement a federally required shift to prospective payments for providers. Troia said the administration expects a federal waiver delays full prospective‑pay implementation until August 2026 but included funding for local administrative support, automation, and state positions to prepare.

Troia described specific items in the May Revision: $43.8 million to support local administrative costs tied to prospective payments, $8.2 million for automation, six state positions, and $21.8 million in one‑time federal funds to support startup automation activities for the single‑rate structure. She also said the May Revision suspends the 2025–26 child care/preschool COLA (scored at about $60 million general fund savings) and reduces the Emergency Child Care Bridge program for foster youth by $42.7 million; the administration said the reduction “aligns with utilization” and is not intended to disenroll current participants.

Bill Knox of the Legislative Analyst's Office said the office is still reviewing details but raised concerns about exempting rate‑reform automation from Department of Technology review and asked for more legislative oversight and detail on how the administration scored the proposed automation and prospective‑pay costs.

Virginia Early of the California Department of Education said CDE appreciates continued prioritization of early education in a difficult budget year but flagged that the May Revision does not include needed ongoing resources for CDE to implement rate reform (she said CDE needs roughly $3.5 million and 24 ongoing positions to support its portion of rate reform). Early also asked that if prospective pay is extended to the California State Preschool Program, CDE would need parallel resources and technical assistance to implement that change.

Members of the Legislature and witnesses focused repeatedly on wildfire impacts in Altadena and other communities. Claire Ramsey of DSS said the department has been actively working with affected providers, licensing and local jurisdictions to expedite temporary licensing and support displaced providers. Multiple family child care providers testified during public comment about losing homes and businesses to the Eaton Fire, difficulties accessing small business loans or FEMA assistance, and out‑of‑pocket costs to repair or replace equipment. Felisa Wright, a home provider from Altadena, said she lost her home and business in January’s fire and urged immediate support for rebuilding and affordable housing for providers.

Advocates asked the Legislature to codify the alternative methodology for rate setting, to resume progress toward the 200,000‑slot goal, to restore the COLA, and to protect bridge vouchers for foster youth. Every Child California and the Child Care Law Center urged paying based on enrollment (not attendance) and called for targeted support for providers affected by disasters.

The administration repeatedly described the May Revision as maintaining current rate levels (cost‑of‑care‑plus payments) and funding preparatory, time‑limited activities tied to federal requirements. No final budget decision was made in the hearing; the May Revision items discussed are proposals the Legislature may accept, reject, or change.

What happens next: the panel’s discussion included requests from legislators for more detail and for written responses from the administration and Department of Finance on cost and timeline assumptions. Lawmakers and advocates said they plan to press for alternatives that preserve provider pay and expand access rather than pause or reverse recent investments.

Ending note: the hearing combined technical budget questions about federal compliance and automation with personal testimony from providers who lost homes and classrooms to recent fires, highlighting the political and human stakes of the May Revision proposals.","Assemblymember Phil Ting Jackson, chair of the Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 2 on Human Services, opened a May revision hearing on child care by saying the state faces “one of the more difficult budget problems since the Great Recession” but emphasized a priority to protect vulnerable Californians and child care investments.",{"_33":101,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":102,"_41":103,"_43":104,"_45":105,"_47":106,"_49":107,"_51":108,"_53":109,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":110,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":111,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6534957,"Foster‑care rate overhaul delayed? Subcommittee questions administration’s trigger language and seeks help for foster family agencies",2051,22439000,24490000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245&start=22439&end=24490","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3445852-579ff5abdd5486dbd99abd96eb6e0245/thumbnail_22439000.jpg","/articles/6534957/California/Fostercare-rate-overhaul-delayed-Subcommittee-questions-administrations-trigger-language-and-seeks-help-for-foster-family-agencies","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6534957-0a315d923a9212cb882100ec513dec4f/orig.mp4?Expires=1775444372&Signature=QdQdKmTrB5TpZZoSgoXLOkQqqa5smAMucVOYhH6dsfTShMqzWK6PmnOVUfHt7NjSLzZkgvCj4TFe-GhDtj3yEOMp9HmBqd3EXrZgRYmDEmz3Os1ZNGdUfQSlXd1d3l71fPFQZI~u4zSiyewunLh4AX~hDNsspUa7-isVYFTEKTMB0mnTCVWa5J24T2Bm207Kbe~HcsV2VfoKeXVLME2on4mGgB4QE-ntPtEZIWXs62PL35R3wqPQdVKqV3s2uarkBF4HdNKC4-e6Rp~FNSaRCVgJ-ba-A4QVnpD7-aeAvljfM2ZqQZgy-p~RRArL7fKznqFwE2LXDjoByeRa6K49Gg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Assembly Subcommittee examined proposals affecting child welfare services, focusing on the permanent foster‑care tiered rate structure and short‑term operational items. Jennifer Troia of the Department of Social Services told the panel the state is transitioning from an interim rate system toward a “tiered rate structure” intended to match funding to children's needs; implementation is projected for July 1, 2027, subject to readiness and automation.

The May Revision includes provisional (trigger) language: the Department of Finance would determine in spring 2027 whether sufficient general fund exists to implement the tiered rate structure on the scheduled July 1, 2027, date. The administration said preparatory work — automation, county readiness, training and fidelity activities — should continue so the state is ready if the trigger is met.

The Legislative Analyst's Office recommended the Legislature should not cede that future policy decision to a Department of Finance trigger and noted that the trigger could produce inefficient spending if preparatory work proceeds but the policy is not approved later. LAO suggested alternatives such as phasing in elements of the rate structure rather than an all‑or‑nothing trigger.

DSS requested positions to support first‑phase implementation (six permanent, three limited‑term) and explained higher‑acuity children would receive additional supports under the permanent structure, while foster family agencies (FFAs) could receive higher administrative payments tied to a child’s tier rather than to placement type. DSS said the administration included $27.4 million in 2025–26 for automation, county administration and state operations to support the transition; DOF characterized the trigger as a way to manage out‑year cost risk.

Lawmakers also discussed a short‑term insurance crisis for foster family agencies. DSS reported 10 FFAs had closed due to rising insurance costs. Advocates recommended a short‑term bridge of roughly $42 million over two years (DSS noted an earlier ask near $47 million, subsequently reduced to about $42.2 million) to help agencies cover premiums until the tiered rate structure becomes operational; the Governor’s May Revision does not include that bridge appropriation. Legislators asked for options and for a more detailed plan to avoid losing placement capacity.

Other May Revision technical items discussed included aligning the Foster Family Home and Small Family Home Insurance Fund (FISH) appropriation with claims, a revised CANS/CFT fidelity and training request (about $2.9 million total funds), and provisional language to augment prior CWS CARES automation funds. LAO urged the Legislature to retain its role in the timing and scope of implementation decisions and to consider phased alternatives if budget constraints prevent full implementation in 2027.

No final budget actions were taken; members asked DSS and DOF for follow‑up on the tiered rate trigger, the short‑term FFA insurance bridge request, and implementation timelines for automation and training.","Lawmakers pressed the Department of Social Services on the May Revision’s plan for the permanent foster‑care tiered rate structure and on immediate insurance pressures facing foster family agencies.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Subcommittee probes CFAP expansion trigger and Sunbucks operations; advocates press for protecting SNAP benefits amid federal uncertainty

IHSS proposals draw criticism: lawmakers warn cuts would harm seniors and people with disabilities

Assembly hearing: advocates, providers warn May revision undermines child care progress; administration defends technical funding for federal changes

Foster‑care rate overhaul delayed? Subcommittee questions administration’s trigger language and seeks help for foster family agencies