Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ihss Aps Asset Limit topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate hearing spotlights proposed IHSS, APS and Medi‑Cal asset‑limit cuts that lawmakers and advocates say would harm seniors and people with disabilities
Summary
The May Revision would reinstate a low Medi‑Cal asset limit, reverse an APS expansion and shift IHSS costs; legislators and counties warned the changes risked service disruption, higher long‑term costs and losses of care for thousands of Californians.
The Senate Budget Subcommittee on Health and Human Services spent hours questioning the administration’s May Revision proposals that would scale back certain services for older adults and people with disabilities and shift costs to counties.
Chair Menjivar pressed Department of Social Services (CDSS) officials on the practical effects of several measures: reinstating the Medi‑Cal asset limit to $2,000 for individuals and $3,000 for couples; reversing the 60‑to‑64 expansion of Adult Protective Services (APS); and a plan to set a baseline for average IHSS hours per case and shift non‑federal costs for hours above that baseline to counties. Chief Deputy Claire Ramsey said the APS reversal would reduce state spending by $70 million and that current HomeSafe recipients would remain enrolled, but that roughly 40,000 people aged 60‑64 who were not otherwise eligible could lose access to APS if the change takes effect.
Advocates and county representatives uniformly opposed the measures at the hearing and in public comment. Yasmin Pilar of Justice in Aging said, “This proposal inflicts unnecessary harm,” warning reinstating the asset test would strip insurance and in‑home care from vulnerable residents. County associations and child‑welfare groups told the panel the proposed cost shifts and cuts would force layoffs and reduce services that keep people out of institutions.
CDSS told the committee the department used recent caseload and claims data to update estimates but acknowledged uncertainty. The department said 7,755 IHSS recipients could lose coverage in 2026‑27 under the asset‑limit proposal and roughly 11,166 in the following year, but LAO staff cautioned numbers are sensitive to prior policy changes and data limits. CDSS also described a technical change to automate terminations in the IHSS residual program when Medi‑Cal coverage ends, yielding more modest savings in the May Revision than in January’s plan.
Lawmakers pressed for more analysis of county impacts and asked whether the administration had considered the longer‑term fiscal tradeoffs of removing preventive services that can reduce emergency and institutional care. Several senators and many public commenters urged the subcommittee to reject the cuts and seek alternative revenue or savings to preserve in‑home and protective services.
The subcommittee held the items open for further work and directed staff to return with more detailed estimates and options for limiting harm to beneficiaries and county operations.
