Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Older Adult Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ADRC staff say ILSP pilot helped local residents stay home but was slowed by state claims delays
Summary
ADRC staff told the March 16 advisory committee that the Independent Living Supports Pilot helped about 248 people with home modifications, assistive technology and caregiver support but was hindered by 6–8 week authorizations and centralized claims processing; staff recommended narrowing allowable services and giving local providers more authority over authorizations.
Mary Lindberg, an ADRC staff member, told the Aging and Disability Resource Center Advisory Committee on March 16 that the Independent Living Supports Pilot (ILSP) produced meaningful local benefits but encountered administrative bottlenecks that slowed services.
The ILSP combined three main components — supportive home care, home modifications and assistive technology — and targeted adults with disabilities and older adults who met a brief functional screen and income limits at or below 300% of the federal poverty level, Lindberg said. “Many of our clients were not able to self-manage the program,” she said, adding that staff often had to rework service plans and assist with claims processing.
Why it matters: The pilot distributed roughly $1.4 million in planned service authorizations across the consortium and had roughly $1 million paid in claims, Lindberg reported, numbers she said supported local businesses. “We can with great confidence say about 95% of that stayed within the local community,” she said, and the project submitted 2,152 claims during its run.
Lindberg offered specific counts reported in the meeting: the Chipua Valley Consortium enrolled about 248 participants, of whom the meeting record lists 87 in “Oaklair,” 78 in “Chipua County” and 83 in Dunn County (these place names are as spoken during the meeting record). She cautioned that some place-name spellings are drawn from the spoken record.
Committee members and staff criticized the state-level fiscal agent arrangement used for claims. Lindberg said the state-hired fiscal agent centralized enrollments and claims management, producing authorization delays of six to eight weeks after a budget was approved. Those delays, she said, “really bogged down things” and limited the consortium’s ability to authorize services quickly once a participant’s plan was approved.
Recommendations and program design: Lindberg said the consortium would advise state leaders to narrow the program’s allowable expenses so participants and staff are less likely to revise plans repeatedly; she also recommended giving local providers authority to authorize services once a budget is approved rather than having local staff manage claims processing.
Participants and scope: Lindberg said the pilot’s income cutoff (300% of the federal poverty level) allowed broad eligibility and that many projects — from shower conversions to ramps and mobility devices — produced durable benefits for recipients. She described instances in which household-level awards covered multiple occupants and said some families continued to privately fund caregivers after the pilot ended. Lindberg also warned that funding for ILSP came from reallocated federal COVID-era funds and that similar funding levels may be unlikely in the near term.
Next steps: Lindberg and other staff said they would apply lessons learned — clearer service scoping, strengthened contractor relationships, and better claims systems — in future local programs and grant proposals. The committee took no formal action on ILSP at the March 16 meeting.
