Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Developmental Disabilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Families and advocates urge Senate to spare self‑direction funds and small DDA grants in BRFAA
Summary
Parents and disability advocates told the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee that proposed BRFAA language would remove services that keep people with developmental disabilities safe in the community, and they urged preservation of the DDA’s low‑intensity support services and self‑direction allocations.
Parents, self‑directing participants and advocacy groups urged the Senate Budget and Taxation Committee on Feb. 23 to reject proposed BRFAA language that would limit individual and family-directed goods and services (IFDGS) and to retain the low‑intensity support services program (LISP) for families not otherwise eligible for DDA waiver services.
Why it matters: Dozens of witnesses described real-world consequences if the administration’s FY26 cuts and proposed code changes go forward. Several parents said their adult children rely on IFDGS funds for swim lessons, fences and other safety measures that prevent drowning or elopement, and for day‑to‑day administrative supports that coordinate medically complex care. Witnesses described the day‑to‑day administrator role—created by the Maryland Self‑Direction Act of 2022—as vital to long‑term sustainability for families and as a cost‑effective alternative to institutional care.
What advocates said: Self‑direction supporters, including the Self Directed Advocacy Network and several parents, told the committee that the proposed $5,000 cap on IFDGS would ‘‘threaten my son's success’’ and could push adults into institutional settings, increasing long‑term costs. They pointed to state data and DDA reporting that self‑directed models generally deliver a high proportion of authorized hours at a lower cost-to-state compared with some traditional provider models.
Administration and committee response: The governor’s team told the committee that budget constraints drive difficult choices and that the administration had prepared an amendment to preserve the LISP statute for future years, even if FY26 general funds could not be allocated in the governor’s allowance. Committee leadership and members acknowledged ongoing work with House appropriators and signaled active negotiation on alternative solutions.
Clarifying details: Witnesses described use of LISP grants (about $2,000 annually) for respite, assistive devices and summer programming and said roughly 2,500 households currently use the LISP program. Parents and advocates testified that the proposed IFDGS cap applies only to self‑directing participants and that many of the administrative and programming functions currently paid under IFDGS are necessary to schedule and operate person‑centered services.
What’s next: Committee staff signaled ongoing engagement with DDA, the administration and disability advocates to identify alternatives that preserve core supports while achieving the administration’s FY26 savings target. No formal committee action on the statutory language was recorded in the hearing.
Ending note: Parents and self‑direction advocates framed their testimony as pragmatic and collaborative but warned that statutory caps or program eliminations would have immediate consequences for individuals’ safety, independence and state long‑term costs.
