Autism Alliance urges Michigan committee to clear barriers so clinical BCBA support can operate inside schools under HB 5044

House Committee on Education and Workforce · November 13, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

Heather Eckner of the Autism Alliance of Michigan told the House Education and Workforce Committee HB 5044 would let clinically recommended services such as ABA be delivered in school settings, helping keep autistic students in general education classrooms.

Heather Eckner, statewide director of education for the Autism Alliance of Michigan, described seven years of in‑school applied behavior analysis (ABA) and urged the House Committee on Education and Workforce to advance House Bill 5044 so clinically recommended services can be delivered in school settings.

Eckner opened with her personal experience: her son was initially placed in a self‑contained preschool and struggled, then — when a board‑certified behavior analyst (BCBA) worked with him in natural settings such as community preschool and later in his neighborhood school — he succeeded academically and socially. "That was his least restrictive environment," Eckner said, describing how BCBA support allowed her son to stay in general education classrooms rather than being pulled out.

Eckner said HB 5044 addresses barriers that currently prevent outside clinicians from routinely delivering medically recommended supports in schools. She noted the bill concerns reasonable accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act and stressed it is not intended to remove students from class: "That is not the intent of this policy," she told the committee, adding the aim is to "open up this access" so students who need clinical interventions can receive them in the classroom.

Committee members asked detailed questions. Representative Saint Germain asked whether interventions occurred in the classroom or in separate spaces; Eckner replied that the BCBAs who supported her son "never once left the classroom for any of the intervention." Representative Weiss voiced concern about the bill’s wording, noting the draft states any student with "a prescription, recommendation, or order from a private health care specialist" could receive treatment while at school but that "medically necessary treatment" is not defined in the bill. Eckner agreed the language could be tightened and suggested focusing the policy lane on autistic students given the research basis for ABA is strongest in that population.

Eckner and several representatives discussed classroom logistics and class size. Saint Germain pointed to an example of a third‑grade teacher with 32 students and multiple academic levels and asked whether bringing in outside clinicians could further fragment class time; Eckner said collaborative planning and clear parameters can allow clinicians to support a student’s functional needs without disrupting instruction.

The clerk recorded public comment cards showing mixed stakeholder positions: the Michigan Association of Superintendents and Administrators registered opposition (Matt Schuler) but did not speak; Jordan Millham registered support and did not speak; the Michigan Disabilities Rights Coalition registered opposition but did not speak; two teachers submitted letters supportive of additional help in classrooms.

No formal committee action on HB 5044 was taken during this session. Chair DeBoer said the committee expects additional testimony at future meetings from the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services and other stakeholders.

Eckner closed by reiterating the bill’s purpose: to remove artificial barriers to coordinated clinical support in school settings so that students with disabilities can access interventions that keep them in least‑restrictive, peer‑inclusive classrooms.