Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Senate panel backs continuity-of-care team and multiple DHS changes in A1 draft
Loading...
Summary
Committee staff and legislative analysts described Article 1 and related DE provisions that establish a Department of Human Services continuity‑of‑care team, clarify payment‑withhold procedures, and include several cross‑jurisdictional long‑term‑care proposals; members pressed for details on costs, FTEs and implementation.
Chair Hoffman opened the meeting and turned the floor over to fiscal staff to walk members through the A1 fiscal index for the DE of the human services supplemental package.
"I'm Kyle Raymond, fiscal analyst to this committee," Raymond said, and proceeded to summarize the spreadsheet, noting a corrected formula error in an earlier posted version and that the DE "reduces general fund appropriations by just over 55,000,000 in the '26‑'27 biennium" while increasing tail‑period spending by about $184,200,000.
Mr. Monahan told the committee Article 1 establishes a continuity‑of‑care team at DHS to "preplan, coordinate, and oversee the continuity of care of all clients of a residential waiver service provider who is subject to a payment withhold" and requires the commissioner to coordinate with that team before implementing a withhold so continuity planning can occur. Monahan said language was modified to clarify county roles when counties must fund portions of care the department would assume after a lead‑agency failure.
The A1 index also folds in a number of cross‑jurisdictional and governor proposals, Monahan said, including technical changes and items tied to long‑term services and supports: modified nursing facility level‑of‑care eligibility proposals, an assessor team and study for MN Choices assessment work, and proposals that wind down or repeal portions of the waiver loan and HCBS innovation grants programs. Raymond provided cost estimates for many of these items when available; for example, the continuity‑of‑care team was shown at just over $4,500,000 in FY26‑27 with larger tail costs.
Members asked for follow‑up detail on specific lines and any outstanding formula corrections. Senator Rasmussen and others asked whether forecast adjustments and other fiscal changes would appear in this bill or a separate forecast/finance vehicle; Raymond said the appropriations article did not include the forecast adjustments and that historically those items have been placed in health and human services or forecast bills, and Miss Bailey confirmed several forecast bills were merged by Finance.
The committee did not take formal action; Chair Hoffman said the plan is to reconvene for markups on Friday at 11 a.m. and asked members to provide any additional language they want included in the A1 before that work session.
