Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Family Home Health Aid topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to certify family caregivers as home health aides to address workforce gaps
Summary
Senate Bill 1073 would create a Family Home Health Aid Program to certify family caregivers and require reimbursement through the state medical assistance program; proponents said the model would expand care in rural areas and for medically complex children, while union representatives urged coordination with existing state programs.
Senate Bill 1073, which would establish a Family Home Health Aid Program to allow family caregivers to be certified as family home health aides and reimbursed through state medical assistance, received testimony March 6 in the Senate Committee on Human Services.
Sen. Todd Nash, sponsor of the bill, described the program as a complement to private duty nursing (PDN) that would expand options for medically fragile children and adults and help families in rural areas where staffing shortages are most acute. “The Family Home Health Aid program creates a model for PDN-focused family caregiving program in Oregon,” Nash said.
Justin Kilgore of Maxim Healthcare Services and Kate (Catherine) Morrison, Maxim’s director of West Coast government affairs, testified in favor of the bill, saying the program follows best practices from other states and would include training, clinical supervision, verification and reporting to deter fraud and collect metrics. Morrison said the proponents have discussed the bill with the Oregon State Board of Nursing and with ODHS and OHA and are “open to figuring out the right fit for Oregon.”
Courtney Graham, political director for SEIU Local 503, opposed the bill as drafted and urged the committee to coordinate with existing programs. Graham noted Oregon already has a program that allows family members to be paid caregivers through the Oregon Home Care Commission and said the bill as written could duplicate or conflict with current career pathways, scope-of-practice rules and payment structures. “Introducing a new certification without integrating it into this framework could further fragment the workforce,” Graham said.
Questions from senators addressed whether the bill duplicates SB 91 (passed last year for nonmedical personal care services), whether other states have similar programs (witnesses cited Arizona, Colorado and California), and which agency should administer the program. Kilgore and Morrison said they were open to alternative administration—one senator suggested leveraging extension services as a community-based manager—but proponents stressed the bill includes electronic visit verification and fraud-prevention measures.
Sen. Nash invited further discussions to align stakeholders and suggested convening parties to work through overlaps with existing programs. No formal committee action or vote was taken at the hearing; the public hearing was closed.
