Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Programs And Contracts topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DCYF delays rate roll‑out for some models, standardizes caseload expectations and notifies local agencies
Summary
DCYF said it will delay implementing rate‑based payments for certain home‑visiting models until state funding and federal approval are clearer, set standardized caseloads, and sent letters to local implementation agencies advising them of forthcoming program reviews and contract discussions.
Department of Children, Youth and Families staff told the Home Visiting Advisory Committee that, given current state budget uncertainty and pending federal approvals, the agency will delay extending rate‑based payment methodology to some models and will move ahead with contract‑level changes that are within current authority.
Delay of rates and federal approval
Laura (DCYF program staff) told the committee that DCYF had not yet submitted formal requests to HRSA for approval of a fixed‑rate subaward approach for MIECHV and that HRSA guidance and staff availability were factors in the timing. DCYF said it was preparing materials and expected to submit requests in late summer, but that HRSA had not provided a review timeframe. Laura said, “we have not submitted yet a formal request” and that the agency’s fiscal team was completing a landscape analysis and materials.
Caseload standardization and model fidelity
DCYF said it will standardize caseload expectations in contracts: the agency told HVAC it planned to set Nurse Family Partnership caseloads at 21 per nurse (the presentation text said “21 per nurse navigator for NFP”) and Parents as Teachers (PAT) caseloads at 18. Several providers raised fidelity concerns. Matthew Richardson from Nurse Family Partnership clarified that the national model allows a target caseload of 25 with an acceptable range down to 21 (85% of the target) and said programs must retain model fidelity even as caseload rules are standardized.
Communications to LIAs and program reviews
DCYF said it had sent letters to all funded LIAs summarizing program performance and contract expectations and that program specialists will schedule meetings with each LIA to review performance and to discuss contracts and slot allocations for state fiscal year 2026. DCYF staff emphasized that they were trying to minimize service disruptions and to consider tribal and rural program contexts in any contract changes.
Provider concerns
Providers said the agency’s letters felt abrupt and in some cases were experienced as dismissive, particularly by tribal and culturally specific programs that reported long lead times to build trust and services. Several providers asked that any reductions be phased, explicitly account for tribal commitments, and prioritize staff retention and culturally matched services.
Ending
DCYF said it will hold program‑level meetings, share materials used to calculate rate and budget allocations, and continue to consult with LIAs and HVAC about caseload standards and contract changes once the state budget is final.
