Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Home Visiting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents, providers urge Oregon lawmakers to expand home visiting as committee opens hearings on two bills
Summary
The Oregon Senate Committee on Early Childhood and Behavioral Health held an informational session on home visiting programs and opened public hearings on Senate Bill 420 and Senate Bill 1033, with parents, home visitors, researchers and lawmakers describing benefits of home visiting and urging expanded funding.
Get email alerts on the Home Visiting topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Oregon Senate Committee on Early Childhood and Behavioral Health held an informational session on home visiting programs and opened public hearings on Senate Bill 420 and Senate Bill 1033, with parents, home visitors, researchers and lawmakers describing benefits of home visiting and urging expanded funding.
Senators heard parents who credited home visitors with stabilizing housing, connecting families to speech and behavioral therapy, and helping parents manage postpartum depression. "There is no doubt in my mind that having a home visitor has been the single most important and constant support in our life," said Mika Maggard, a Coos Bay parent who testified about her son born premature and drug affected.
Committee members heard research and program details showing home visiting is voluntary, offered by nurses, doulas, community health workers and other trained staff, and targets the prenatal period through the first years of life. Beth Green, director of Early Childhood and Family Support Research at Portland State University, summarized decades of research showing home visiting improves child development and parental well‑being. "Home visiting is unique in that it takes a two‑generational approach and works with both the parent and the child," Green said.
Why it matters: witnesses argued home visiting is an upstream prevention strategy that can reduce low birth weight, preterm birth, emergency room use and child welfare involvement, and that expanding services would deliver long‑term budget savings. Dana Heffer, director of policy and advocacy at the Children’s Institute, told the committee the home visiting partnership is requesting "just under $26,000,000" in the 2025 session to stabilize programs, raise wages, reduce turnover and expand capacity.
What speakers described - Parents: Two parents described long‑term relationships with a single home visitor who coordinated referrals to speech and behavioral therapy, helped with diapers and connected them to housing resources. One parent, Alexandra Gonzalez Vaughn Taller, said the program gave her "the courage and hope to look for the future with confidence." - Home visitors and program staff: Angela Hurkorn, a Lane County Nurse Family Partnership home visiting nurse, described meeting families every one to two weeks during pregnancy through the child’s second birthday and said the work increases well‑child visits and reduces emergency room use. Christina Causey of Healthy Families Oregon said HFO served about 2,120 families in 2023 with ~236 staff and that the model reduces child abuse and neglect and low birth weight in studies shared with the committee. - Researchers and system leads: Peg Miller, a pediatrician and co‑chair of the Home Visiting Systems Committee, and Beth Green described coordination models and gaps in referrals where communities lack a single intake or referral point. Green noted workforce challenges and reported an average reported take‑home pay for home visitors near $18 an hour in a recent study.
Barriers and workforce issues discussed Witnesses and legislators emphasized several persistent gaps: limited statewide capacity so fewer than 1 in 20 families can access any home visit; uneven geographic coverage across counties; stigma or fear about someone coming into the home; complex and fragmented referral systems in many communities; and a home‑visiting workforce with low pay and high turnover. Panelists recommended building coordinated local intake systems, raising wages and investing in shared professional development and career pathways for home visitors.
Bills described before the committee - Senate Bill 420: Testimony summarized SB 420 as an appropriation to the Department of Early Learning and Care to expand or sustain the Healthy Families Oregon Home Visiting Program. The bill text presented to the committee initially appropriated $3,000,000 in general fund for the 2025–27 biennium; the -1 amendment on OLIS increased that appropriation to $6,000,000. Bella Noble, program manager for Healthy Families in Marion and Polk counties, and Christina Causey (Impact Northwest) provided model details and program outcomes. - Senate Bill 1033 (introduced in committee as SB 10 33 in testimony): SB 1033 would exempt a county operating a Nurse Family Partnership (NFP) program from paying the non‑federal share of targeted case management costs for Medicaid members enrolled in the program; the -1 amendment would expand the exemption to counties or other entities that run NFP programs. Representative Bobby Levy and Matthew Richardson (NFP government affairs manager) described the program’s evidence base and said the state paying the non‑federal match last year prevented program closures; witnesses urged making that change permanent to stabilize rural programs.
Discussion, data requests and next steps Committee members asked for research and executive summaries on outcomes and return on investment. Multiple witnesses cited national and Oregon studies, including program‑level statistics: Healthy Families reported serving 2,120 families and delivering about 26,000 home visits in 2023; witnesses gave model ROI figures (Healthy Families up to $3.16 returned per $1 invested; Nurse Family Partnership cited up to $6.10 per $1). Committee members requested the materials and data cited in testimony be submitted via OLIS or to staff for follow‑up.
Formal committee actions The committee opened public hearings on SB 420 and SB 1033 and heard invited and public testimony. No committee votes were recorded during the hearing.
The committee closed the informational session and left both bills in hearing status for further legislative consideration and possible amendment. Witnesses and staff indicated they would provide the committee with cited studies, program cost estimates and expansion proposals.
