Relates to subcontracted facilitators of the statewide fiscal intermediary.
Summary
This bill amends the Social Services Law provisions governing the statewide fiscal intermediary for New York’s consumer-directed personal assistance program. It creates and defines the term “subcontracted facilitators” as community-based organizations that provide delegated fiscal intermediary services, including enrollment assistance, ongoing customer service, peer support, and training for consumers who use the program to live independently. The bill also requires these facilitators to provide disability-competent, culturally and linguistically competent support.
The bill directs the statewide fiscal intermediary to subcontract with certain qualified entities, including service centers for independent living and at least one entity in each rate-setting region with a proven record of serving people with disabilities and the senior population. It requires teaming agreements, capacity plans, consumer notice about available facilitation services, public posting of facilitator listings, and consumer choice in selecting a facilitator. It also bars the statewide fiscal intermediary from performing subcontracted facilitation services itself or creating affiliated entities to do so, and it adds payment and compliance requirements for the intermediary and its subcontracted facilitators.
Impact
The bill would revise section 365-f of the Social Services Law by expanding and clarifying the structure of fiscal intermediary services under the statewide fiscal intermediary model. It would impose new registration, disclosure, payment, and operational requirements on subcontracted facilitators, while limiting the statewide fiscal intermediary’s ability to directly provide those services or route them through affiliated corporate structures. The measure would also affect consumers in the consumer-directed personal assistance program, especially individuals with disabilities and older adults, by strengthening access to local facilitation options and requiring more transparent choice and continuity of services.
Sentiment
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears designed to improve consumer access, continuity, and culturally competent support within the fiscal intermediary system, suggesting a consumer-protection and service-access orientation. The absence of recorded votes or discussion means the overall political sentiment cannot be directly measured from the provided materials.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the bill’s restrictions on the statewide fiscal intermediary’s role, the requirement to subcontract with specified entities, and the added compliance and payment obligations. Stakeholders that favor centralized control or administrative flexibility may object to limits on the intermediary’s ability to provide services directly or through affiliates, while disability advocates, independent living centers, and consumer groups may support the bill’s emphasis on choice, local access, and culturally competent services. The bill also appears to create financial enforcement consequences for noncompliance, which could be disputed by the intermediary or contractors.