Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Provider Reaction topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Providers and disability advocates warn DHS budget cuts, service limits would destabilize community care
Summary
Family residential providers, intensive residential treatment staff and disability advocates told the Human Services Finance and Policy Committee that governor-proposed billing limits, tighter documentation and removal of remote supports would reduce pay, increase closures and risk "institutionalization by policy."
Several providers and disability advocates testified in strong opposition after DHS presented the governor's human services proposals.
Linda Fairchild, a family residential service provider in Wright County, told the committee she and other small providers would face large pay cuts under the proposals that limit certain billing days. "This is not fair. This is not okay," Fairchild said, describing hourly reimbursements she called far below minimum wage and warning that homes could close if the changes proceed.
An intensive residential treatment director (identified in testimony only by role) said clinical oversight requires flexibility beyond short administrative limits. "30 days is simply not sufficient," the treatment director said of a discussed length-of-stay cap, arguing that premature discharge would increase hospitalizations and undermine recovery.
Josh Bergen, director of Minnesota services and strategic growth at Accessible Space Inc., urged lawmakers to reject caps and the elimination of some remote supports. Bergen said policy that removes flexible community supports risks pushing people into institutions: "When policy treats this work like you can be chopped into units ... institutionalization by policy," he said, urging legislators to consider lived experience in residential settings when designing reforms.
A disability advocate who spoke later asked the committee to hold DHS accountable for oversight failures at some provider sites and to ensure safety for people with disabilities.
Committee members acknowledged the testimony and repeatedly asked DHS for draft bill language and fuller implementation details before considering statutory changes. Several members signaled categorical opposition to new cuts for people with disabilities during a policy year.
No votes were taken on the proposals during the session; the committee concluded the public-comment portion and continued member questioning.
