Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Welfare Carveout topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
JBC debates child‑welfare residential carve‑out timing and placement readiness; staff to revise dates and require reporting
Summary
Committee introduced a bill delaying the child‑welfare residential carve‑out from managed care for a year but debated whether development and implementation deadlines provide counties and providers time to create step‑down placements; staff will return with revised dates and reporting requirements.
The Joint Budget Committee reviewed a draft bill to delay moving child‑welfare residential treatment into behavioral‑health capitation and engaged in focused debate over whether the department and counties have the policies and placements necessary to make the transition safely.
Emily Pope (JBC staff) told the committee the draft delays the carve‑out for one year and that staff recommends using an RFI for reporting requirements rather than embedding mandatory statutory reports. She said there are "about $5,000,000 right now in the budget for the carve out," and that most of those dollars are used elsewhere in the child‑welfare system rather than directly for residential placements.
Several members pushed staff to move up development and implementation dates and to separate the two deadlines. Senator Kirkmeyer warned that implementing the carve‑out without step‑down placements and finalized policies risks increasing child‑welfare system caseloads and could prompt litigation: "I think it just gets us into another lawsuit, quite frankly." Members proposed a development deadline in the fall or early winter (committee discussion settled on a December 1 target for development) and an implementation target of July 1 of the following year, with the committee directing staff to refine statutory language to reflect those dates.
Emily Pope agreed to bring a revised draft, and the vice chair moved to introduce the behavioral‑health services bill as amended; the motion passed 6–0. The committee also retained an RFI and requested that reporting be tied to existing statutory reports so members can assess progress before deciding whether to repeal the temporary carve‑out in a future session.
What to watch: staff will return with an amended bill defining (a) a development due date (committee discussed Dec. 1), (b) a separate implementation date (discussed as July 1 of the appropriate year), and (c) reporting language; the committee emphasized that implementation should not proceed unless counties and providers have placements and step‑down options in place.
