Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Community Health Workers topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Bill would let hospitals direct community‑benefit funds to community health worker partnerships

2407327 · February 26, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

HB 8 71 clarifies that nonprofit hospitals may use community benefit dollars to partner with community‑based organizations to employ and sustain community health workers (CHWs); advocates urged the change, hospitals sought narrower language to avoid unintended consequences.

Delegate Heather Bagnall presented House Bill 8 71 to clarify that nonprofit hospitals may invest community‑benefit funds in partnerships with community‑based organizations (CBOs) to support community health workers (CHWs) and related workforce development. Advocates said CHWs — trusted local workers who connect residents with prevention, social supports and health services — are effective at improving outcomes but face unstable career paths because much CHW funding comes from short‑term grants.

Witnesses from the Community Health Workers Empowerment Coalition and CHWs themselves described CHWs’ roles in outreach, patient navigation, chronic‑condition coaching and community trust building; they urged durable funding and MOUs to ensure insurance, recruitment, training and outcome measurement. Supporters said a clearer statutory framework would reduce barriers that leave CBOs overlooked as community‑benefit partners.

The Maryland Hospital Association signaled support for the bill’s intent but proposed amendments to avoid overly prescriptive language that could deter some hospital–CBO partnerships. Stakeholders were negotiating language to balance accountability and flexibility; delegates said they wanted measurable impact criteria but did not want to block partnerships by imposing burdensome requirements.

Ending: Supporters and MHA said they would continue to refine amendments. The committee did not vote at the hearing and asked sponsors to produce agreed language addressing outcome metrics and whether community‑benefit commitments are permissive or mandatory.