Transcript Highlights:

• They were a good provider. Access said they were a good provider and a valued provider.
• I also understand there are providers that we need to partner with who want to provide good treatment
• I also understand there are providers that we need to partner with who want to provide good treatment
• How many providers are...
• This can occur when a provider is entering an incident that the reporting provider is unaware of, or

Committee: Senate Health and Human Services

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• access to providers that may provide gender-affirming care services.
• providing care.
• providing care.
• that is providing those services in provider directories.
• So we're looking broadly at the types of providers that provide these services.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on access to gender-affirming care in California, with members of the Senate and Assembly budget subcommittees hearing first from the Department of Justice, Department of Managed Health Care, and Department of Health Care Services. State officials described California’s legal protections against discrimination, privacy protections, shield laws, and Medi-Cal and commercial plan coverage requirements for medically necessary gender-affirming care. They also outlined ongoing litigation and advocacy against federal actions and proposed rules that could restrict care, including challenges to executive orders, HHS declarations, and federal reimbursement rules, as well as a temporary restraining order protecting care at Rady Children’s Hospital. Committee members pressed the agencies on why some hospitals that had stopped providing care had not been sued, how the state measures network adequacy and equitable access, whether the $15 million previously allocated for gender-affirming care had been used, and what additional statutory changes might be needed. DMHC and DHCS said they regulate health plans rather than providers directly, rely on complaints and independent medical review to address denials or delays, and do not track utilization or have a specific provider category for gender-affirming care. DOJ said it is focused on the federal government as the source of pressure on hospitals and providers, while members discussed possible shield-law expansions and, if federal rules are finalized, the possibility of state-only funding to preserve access. The second panel featured a physician, clinic leaders, parents, and a transgender teen describing how families navigate care and the effects of hospital closures and insurance barriers. Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy gave a history of transgender health care, described puberty blockers and hormones as established treatments, and said minors need parental consent for medical interventions. J.M. Jaffe of Lyon Martin Community Health Services said community clinics are absorbing patients after hospital programs closed and asked for $26 million in state funding to expand capacity. Parents and youth testified about delays, out-of-network referrals, lost coverage, and the emotional strain of uncertainty, while also urging the Legislature to stabilize access and protect continuity of care.

Transcript Highlights:

• care providers.
• Providers, the non-child care assistance providers, and also to get some feedback from those providers
• providers.
• We would be able to provide information on where those providers are located.
• And providers, you'll see that we had a significant increase in providers.

Committee: Joint Human Services Committee

Summary: The committee first approved the February 11, 2026 minutes and then received an update from the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency on the interagency council on homelessness and continuum of care funding. Testimony described rising homelessness tied to tight housing markets, low incomes, aging homelessness, barriers to rental assistance and public benefits, and limited shelter and case-management capacity. Members discussed the need for more affordable housing, continued one-time funding for the North Dakota Homeless Grant and Housing Incentive Fund, better coordination with Health and Human Services on economic assistance and human service zones, landlord engagement, recovery housing, and reentry housing. The committee also heard that federal continuum of care funding remains uncertain, with possible shifts away from permanent supportive housing and housing-first models; members asked for a future update on the impact if federal rules reduce the share available for permanent housing. The committee then took testimony on accessibility of government services for people who are blind or visually impaired. Paul Olson of North Dakota Vision Services School for the Blind described current screening and service delivery, including infant referrals, regional staff, short-term programs, and collaboration with vocational rehabilitation. He said the targeted screening system is working, recommended maintaining the current model, and noted ongoing challenges with staffing, public awareness, and accessible state websites and documents. Public testimony from a visually impaired resident and a deaf resident emphasized barriers such as CAPTCHAs, inaccessible PDFs, employment forms that screen out applicants based on driver’s license status, shortages of interpreters, and the need for video remote interpreting and video relay services, along with training for users and agencies. Finally, the committee heard a final report on the study of child care provider licensing from HHS Early Childhood Director Kay Larson. The report summarized provider input and committee discussion on simplifying North Dakota’s child care licensing structure, reducing administrative burden, and balancing that with health and safety standards. Key topics included licensing categories, child care assistance eligibility, food program sponsorship, staff qualifications, training requirements, ratios and group size, age bands, and preschool exemptions. The committee’s recommendations included streamlining to three provider types plus a preschool designation, revising ratio and age-band rules, and carrying forward certain preschool outdoor-space exemptions. Larson noted that any changes would require statutory changes, rulemaking, and a transition period before new licensing rules could take effect.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our programs are provided through both voucher-based programs, which provide certificates for families
• be the sole navigation provider?
• Claire Ramsey, CDSS: We have worked very hard to ensure that we are providing timely payment to providers
• Claire Ramsey, CDSS: We have worked very hard to ensure that we are providing timely payment to providers
• I am a family child care home provider in San Jose for 18 years and a member of Child Care Providers

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittees on early childhood education heard a broad review of the Governor’s child care and preschool budget proposals, with testimony from the Department of Finance, the Department of Social Services (CDSS), the California Department of Education (CDE), and the Legislative Analyst’s Office (LAO). The main topics were cost-of-care-plus and COLA adjustments, the California State Preschool Program, child care slot reductions tied to federal and Proposition 64 funding changes, disaster recovery grants for child care facilities, trailer bill proposals on family fees and absences, prospective pay, and several budget change proposals for departmental staffing and licensing. Officials also discussed the state’s transition toward an alternative methodology for setting rates based on the true cost of care. On rate reform, CDSS and CDE said the current reimbursement system remains below the alternative methodology in many counties and that providers continue to struggle with recruitment and retention. The LAO recommended aligning cost-of-care-plus increases across provider types, while CDE urged that any COLA be added to base rates rather than cost-of-care-plus payments because providers view the latter as less ongoing. CDSS said the next alternative methodology update will be developed with a contractor during fiscal year 2026-27, with public engagement and legislative input, and estimated that fully transitioning to rates informed by the methodology would take about 24 months once policy and funding are in place. CDSS also said the direct-service cost of care under the methodology was estimated at about $18.7 billion in a July 2025 report. A major point of contention was the proposed reduction of 4,167 child care slots due to lower federal CCDF funding and reduced Proposition 64 revenue. CDSS said it expects to absorb the reduction through unspent funds and relinquishments so currently enrolled children are not disrupted, while the LAO supported the reduction as a way to avoid worsening the structural deficit. Members strongly objected to the slot cuts, arguing the administration has repeatedly proposed reductions after prior budget agreements and emphasizing the economic and family benefits of child care. The committee also discussed preschool enrollment trends, including growth in three-year-old enrollment and a sharp increase in two-year-olds served under a temporary provision, with CDE warning that the temporary two-year-old authority expires in 2027. The committee also reviewed an $11.5 million Proposition 64 proposal for child care infrastructure grants for facilities impacted by 2025 state disasters, especially the Los Angeles fires, and members asked for trailer bill language to make the funds flexible for repairs, equipment, insurance, and permitting. On trailer bill items, the panel discussed codifying family fee reimbursement rules, defining excessive unexplained absences to allow disenrollment after prolonged nonuse, and expanding temporary provider absences; CDSS said the absence policy is meant to mirror federal CCDF rules, while CDE said it is already pursuing its own rulemaking. The hearing also covered prospective pay, with CDSS and CDE saying they are waiting for final federal guidance before moving ahead; LAO said the state could save ongoing costs if the federal requirement is rescinded. Finally, the committee reviewed staffing and support budget requests for CDSS and other implementation items, and held several items open for further discussion before the May Revision. Public comment overwhelmingly urged full funding for child care slots, true cost-of-care payments, and ongoing support for early education programs and county offices of education.

Transcript Highlights:

• That would be those family child care providers or in-home providers providing a service and then going
• and all providers live with.
• , providers I don't know.
• The providers of child care— Providers of child care. Go ahead. Go ahead and translate.
• I'm a daycare provider. I've been a daycare provider for 16 years.

Summary: The Assembly Select Committee on Child Care Costs held its third hearing, focused on how transitional kindergarten (TK) fits into California’s mixed-delivery early learning system, with an emphasis on the Central Valley. Opening remarks stressed that TK and child care should complement each other, not compete, and that families need both part-day school-based options and full-day, year-round care. Committee members outlined hearing goals around aligning TK with existing programs, understanding family needs, and examining the economic impact of early learning on workforce participation and local economies. Panelists from the Legislative Analyst’s Office, Every Child California, Early Edge, Children Now, and others described TK’s rapid expansion to all four-year-olds, the growth in enrollment, and related changes to state preschool and after-school programs. Witnesses generally supported TK but warned that its expansion has shifted enrollment away from community-based providers, especially centers and family child care homes, creating financial strain, vacant classrooms, and staffing challenges. They urged stronger partnerships between school districts and community providers, more flexible licensing and facilities support, higher and more uniform reimbursement rates, permanent authority for state preschool to serve two-year-olds, and better compensation and training for educators across settings. Parents and providers testified about the importance of trusted, culturally and linguistically responsive care, the need for infant-toddler and home-based options, and the difficulty of affording child care when TK is not full-day or does not fit family schedules. Several speakers emphasized that many families still face long waits for subsidies and that reimbursement and payment delays threaten provider stability. Public comment echoed these concerns, with providers calling for true cost-of-care rates, more vouchers, support for transportation and nontraditional hours, and protection from insurance and facility costs that can force programs to close. State education officials said California’s UPK system works best when TK, state preschool, Head Start, and community-based providers are treated as a shared system, and noted that planning and implementation grants and local coordination efforts have helped build mixed-delivery partnerships. The hearing ended without formal votes or actions, but committee members indicated they would continue gathering input to inform future policy and budget decisions.

Transcript Highlights:

• access to providers that may provide gender-affirming care services.
• indicate that they are a provider that is providing those services in provider directories.
• So we're looking broadly at the types of providers that provide these services.
• Hire more providers.
• Hire more providers.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on access to gender-affirming care in California, with opening remarks from the subcommittee chairs emphasizing the importance of protecting transgender, gender-diverse, and intersex Californians and asking for decorum during public comment. The first panel from the Department of Justice, Department of Managed Health Care, and Department of Health Care Services described existing state protections, including nondiscrimination rules, privacy protections, shield laws, and Medi-Cal and commercial coverage requirements for medically necessary gender-affirming care. State officials also outlined ongoing litigation against federal actions and against hospital decisions to end or restrict care, including the Rady Children’s case and challenges to federal proposed rules and declarations affecting Medicaid, Medicare, and provider participation. Members questioned state agencies about why some hospitals that had stopped providing care had not been sued, how network adequacy is measured, whether the state can track actual access to gender-affirming care, and what legislative changes might strengthen protections. DMHC said it monitors complaints and independent medical reviews but does not track gender-affirming care as a separate provider category or collect utilization data, while DHCS said Medi-Cal continues to cover medically necessary care and that the state is preparing for possible federal rule changes. Finance staff said the previously approved $15 million for gender-affirming care was still being implemented through Covered California. The second panel featured a physician, clinic leaders, a parent, and a transgender teen describing how care is delivered and the effects of hospital closures and federal pressure. Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy described the history and medical basis for gender-affirming care, said minors need parental consent for medical interventions, and argued that care should be individualized and supported by families. Providers and families testified that hospital closures and insurance barriers have disrupted continuity of care, forced patients to travel farther, and shifted demand to community clinics that lack sufficient funding and contracting support. Several witnesses asked the Legislature to provide new funding, strengthen insurance enforcement, and stabilize access to care for transgender youth and families.

Transcript Highlights:

• access to providers that may provide gender-affirming care services.
• providing care.
• providing care.
• that is providing those services in provider directories.
• So we're looking broadly at the types of providers that provide these services.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• to providers that may provide gender-affirming care services.
• providing care.
• providing care.
• that is providing those services in provider directories.
• So we're looking broadly at the types of providers that provide these services.

Summary: The joint hearing focused on access to gender-affirming care in California, with opening remarks emphasizing the state’s legal protections, the importance of decorum, and the impact of federal actions on transgender, gender-diverse, and intersex Californians. The Department of Justice, Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC), and Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) described current state protections, including nondiscrimination rules, privacy and shield laws, Medi-Cal and commercial coverage requirements for medically necessary care, and ongoing litigation challenging federal executive orders, proposed rules, and HHS actions that could restrict care or threaten provider participation in Medicare and Medicaid. Officials also noted that California continues to oppose federal proposals through lawsuits and public comments, and that the state is preparing strategies if those proposals are finalized. Members asked about hospital closures or pauses in care, continuity of care, provider network adequacy, whether additional legislation or funding is needed, and how the state can better track access and enforce existing protections. DMHC said it monitors complaints and independent medical reviews, but does not have a specific provider category for gender-affirming care and does not collect utilization data by service type; DHCS said Medi-Cal covers medically necessary gender-affirming care and that federal proposals are not yet final. Finance staff said the previously approved $15 million allocation is still being implemented through Covered California. The second panel heard from a physician, clinic leaders, parents, and a transgender youth about how families and providers navigate access to care. Dr. Johanna Olson-Kennedy described the history of transgender medical care, the role of puberty blockers and hormones, and said minors need parental consent for medical interventions, while emphasizing that care should be individualized and that supportive parents improve outcomes. She also described the closure of the Children’s Hospital Los Angeles youth program and the difficulty of rebuilding care in private practice, including insurance contracting barriers and inadequate reimbursement. J.M. Jaffe of Lyon Martin Community Health Services said the clinic has expanded to serve minors after hospital programs closed, but that the shift has created major financial strain and increased demand, and asked for a $26 million state investment to stabilize transgender health services. Parents and youth described delays, cancellations, and uncertainty at Kaiser, Stanford, UCSF, and Rady Children’s, along with the emotional and medical consequences of interrupted care. One parent said TRICARE stopped covering her son’s care after federal changes and that Rady later closed its clinic; her family urged California to backfill lost access and funding. A 16-year-old trans student and other witnesses argued that California should remain a reliable source of care and that current protections are not enough without funding, provider support, and stronger enforcement.

Transcript Highlights:

• interested providers.
• That is for existing provider agencies providing services.
• might provide.
• might provide.
• </c> providers in Minnesota I also provide providers in Minnesota I also provide advocacy<00:53:35.359

Committees: Senate Health and Human Services , Senate Human Services

Keywords: 1187, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> people who actually provide shared care. people who actually provide shared care.
• The services provided by providers who receive Medicaid reimbursement.
• If you're providing a service that is meant to be provided by two people, one person providing that service
• </c> residents to other service providers. residents to other service providers.
• </c><01:09:14.319><c> to</c> remove a provider to find a provider to remove a provider to find a provider

Bills: HF3797 , HF3780 , HF4068 , HF3935

Committee: House Human Services Finance and Policy

Keywords: long-term care, insurance policy, healthcare, partnership policy, Minnesota, human services, wage increase, support workers, shared services, community first services, medical assistance, sanctions, healthcare services, monetary recovery, government accountability, assisted living, training, unlicensed personnel, resident rights, safety regulations

Transcript Highlights:

• Our programs are provided through both voucher-based programs, which provide certificates for families
• be the sole navigation provider?
• We have worked very hard to ensure that we are providing timely payment to providers.
• Pay providers what it costs to provide care and find the money.
• I am a family child care home provider in San Jose for 18 years and a member of Child Care Providers

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• care providers.
• On April 1st, the department provided contact information for child care providers.
• Well, the payment goes to the provider. Provider. I know.
• We would be able to provide information on where those providers are located.
• And providers, you'll see that we had a significant increase in providers.

Summary: The committee first heard an update on North Dakota’s Interagency Council on Homelessness and Continuum of Care funding. Jennifer Henderson of the North Dakota Housing Finance Agency reported that homelessness remains driven by tight housing markets, low incomes, rising rents, and barriers to rental assistance, public benefits, and disability determinations. She said the state’s one-time North Dakota Homeless Grant is serving all regions but reaches far fewer households than the former Rent Help program, and that aging homelessness, shelter staffing shortages, and limited affordable units are growing concerns. Members discussed the need for more housing supply, better coordination with Health and Human Services, landlord engagement, reentry housing, and possible continued one-time funding for the $10 million Homeless Grant and $25 million Housing Incentive Fund. Henderson also warned that federal Continuum of Care funding is uncertain, with HUD expected to issue a new notice June 1 and possible shifts away from permanent supportive housing toward transitional housing and other models. The committee then took testimony on accessibility of government services for people who are blind, visually impaired, deaf, or hard of hearing. Paul Olson of North Dakota Vision Services School for the Blind described the school’s services for infants, children, and adults, including screenings, mobility training, assistive technology, and outreach across the state. He said the agency works closely with Vocational Rehabilitation and is also involved in improving website and document accessibility, especially for PDF materials. Public testimony highlighted barriers such as inaccessible CAPTCHA systems, online forms, driver’s license requirements on job applications, and limited transportation in rural areas. A deaf resident urged broader use of video remote interpreting and video relay services, along with training so people know how to use them effectively. Finally, Kay Larson presented the final report on the child care provider licensing study. The report recommended streamlining North Dakota’s child care licensing structure into three provider types plus a preschool designation, while preserving health and safety standards and maintaining eligibility for child care assistance. The committee discussed simplifying training and qualification rules, revising ratio and group-size requirements, and adjusting age bands for infants and toddlers. The report also noted that some changes would require statutory amendments and later administrative rule changes, with a transition period likely extending through 2029. No formal votes were taken in the transcript, but the committee accepted the updates and scheduled follow-up presentations for a later meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• First, pay providers a fair wage.
• Provider low pay creates a revolving door of providers who can't afford to stay open.
• that they wish and help connect them and provide the payment then to that provider.
• Payment then to that provider.
• child care providers leave the field at one, or to rate one provider per hour.

Summary: The California State Assembly Select Committee on Child Care Costs held its first hearing to examine the state of child care access, affordability, and provider compensation. Chair Cecilia Aguiar-Curry and other members described child care as essential infrastructure for working families and the economy, noting that costs are unaffordable for many households and that providers are underpaid. Early testimony came from a San Francisco parent, Quinn Chung, who described the difficulty of finding safe care and the financial and career sacrifices caused by lack of child care, and from Tuolumne County provider Anita Viscini, who detailed her monthly costs, low margins, and the need to work weekends and teach CPR classes to make ends meet. Assemblymembers also emphasized the crisis in rural communities and the need for a long-term strategy. The first policy panel featured Jennifer Troia of the California Department of Social Services, Laura Pryor of the California Budget and Policy Center, and Alexa Frankenberg of Child Care Providers United. Troia said the state has nearly doubled child care funding in five years, expanded subsidy slots, and reached a new tentative three-year agreement with providers that includes cost-of-living adjustments, stabilization payments, and continued work on an alternative rate methodology and single rate structure. Pryor argued that despite funding gains, child care remains too expensive, only a fraction of eligible children receive subsidies, and provider wages remain far below comparable jobs, worsening racial and gender inequities. Frankenberg said the tentative agreement is progress but not enough, calling for a true cost-of-care system, fair wages, paid time off, better support for emergency and nontraditional care, and stronger integration of family child care into the mixed-delivery system. Members asked about why the crisis persists, how the alternative methodology will work, how family fees and sliding-scale help are being used, and why middle-income families still struggle. The panel said the problem reflects long-term underinvestment, a broken market, and a system that still leaves many families without access. The committee also heard an economic panel from Ashley Hoffman of the California Chamber of Commerce and Sarah Bone of the Public Policy Institute of California. Hoffman described employer child care benefits and public-private partnership models in other states, including shared-cost programs and local chamber efforts. Bone said child care costs reduce family financial security and labor force participation, especially for mothers of young children, and estimated that if mothers of young children worked at the same rate as mothers of older children, more than 80,000 additional women could be in the workforce each year. In the final panel, parent and provider advocates, including Jennifer Greppie and Black Californians United for Early Care and Education co-founder Keisha Doyle, argued for fully funding child care, ending waiting lists, protecting culturally affirming care, and addressing racial inequities and private equity’s role in the sector.

Transcript Highlights:

• Our child care and development programs are provided through voucher-based programs, which provide certificates
• And then we do anticipate providing an update of this estimate in May and be able to provide more around
• The other thing I would add is we are trying to work with providers who may not be the typical providers
• We do not have a contract manager to provide oversight for that as well as provide support.
• I have been a child care provider for 28-plus years, providing 24-hour child care.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• access to providers that may provide gender-affirming care services.
• providing care.
• providing care.
• indicate that they are a provider that is providing those services in provider directories.
• providers or mental health providers.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• This is when a patient or a provider consults with another provider in a different location electronically
• In particular, it sought to ensure that providers, including safety net providers, including FQHCs and
• versus smaller providers.
• to provider.
• of a corporate provider.

Committee: House Health

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Our child care and development programs are provided through voucher-based programs, which provide certificates
• And then we do anticipate providing an update of this estimate in May and be able to provide more around
• The other thing I would add is we are trying to work with providers who may not be the typical providers
• The other thing I would add is we are trying to work with providers who may not be the typical providers
• who contract with the state. and providers who may not be the typical providers who contract with the

Summary: The committee heard an extensive Department of Social Services presentation on child care budget issues, including the Governor’s proposed 2026-27 budget, federal CCDF changes, Prop. 64 revenue adjustments, and a one-time $11.5 million disaster-related infrastructure grant for licensed child care facilities affected by 2025 declared disasters. DSS said federal formula updates and lower Prop. 64 revenues would reduce funding and could result in about 4,176 CCTR slots being reduced, but the department said it was working to avoid impacts to currently enrolled children. The LAO supported aligning general child care funding with lower revenues and asked for more detail on the disaster grant. Members pressed DSS and Finance on why reductions were not being backfilled and why so many awarded slots remain uncontracted or unused; DSS said delays are largely due to providers building new infrastructure, licensing, staffing, and enrollment challenges, and that some unspent funds revert to the General Fund. The committee also discussed whether some contract dollars should be shifted to vouchers and whether more flexibility should be allowed for infrastructure and expansion costs. A second panel focused on the state’s commitment to expand child care and on rate reform. DSS reported that nearly 125,000 new slots have been awarded since 2021-22, but speakers from Stanislaus County Office of Education, Parent Voices California, and the California Budget and Policy Center argued that unmet need remains large and that the system still leaves many families without access. Stanislaus County described a large local shortage of infant and toddler care and said reimbursement disparities between child care programs and state preschool create disincentives for providers. Parent Voices gave testimony about the burdens and instability families face when trying to access care, especially for survivors and low-income parents, and called for a universal, publicly funded system. The Budget Center said only about 16% of eligible children were enrolled in 2024, urged expansion across the mixed delivery system rather than concentrating investment in TK, and called for faster rate reform and new revenue. LAO estimated that bringing certain CCTR adjustment factors up to CSPP levels would cost $88 million to $131 million ongoing. Members and witnesses discussed the single rate structure, automation needs, and the need for deadlines and a ramp-up plan; DSS said the goal is to eliminate disparities, but that policy decisions are still needed before automation can proceed. The committee then reviewed several trailer bill proposals. DSS outlined a 2026-27 COLA proposal that would apply a 2.41% increase through cost-of-care-plus payments, though the department said it had inadvertently excluded CalWORKs Child Care and the Emergency Child Care Bridge Program and would revise the proposal; LAO recommended making the COLA methodology uniform across programs. DSS also proposed replacing the market rate survey with the federally approved alternative methodology on a triennial schedule, limiting temporary absences in family child care homes to 20% of monthly hours, defining excessive unexplained absences as more than 30 days in a year, and aligning family fee deductions with new federal requirements so providers receive the full voucher value. Members generally supported the temporary absence change and asked about implementation timing for the family fee deduction, with DSS saying it was in contact with Riverside County. The committee also heard a brief update on the Early Childhood Policy Council reappropriation, which would extend unused funds through June 30, 2028 because prior costs came in higher than expected.

Transcript Highlights:

• This is when a patient or a provider consults with another provider in a different location electronically
• In particular, it sought to ensure that providers, including safety net providers, including FQHCs and
• to provider.
• Offer it for your other contracted providers so everybody can get an ability to see their provider instead
• of a corporate provider.

Summary: The committee held an outcomes review hearing on AB 744 and AB 32, two telehealth bills authored by Majority Leader Aguiar-Curry. Members and witnesses discussed how AB 744 established payment parity for telehealth in the commercial market and how AB 32 expanded Medi-Cal access to audio-only telehealth in appropriate circumstances, especially for patients facing broadband, transportation, language, and other access barriers. The hearing framed telehealth as a permanent part of California’s health care system rather than a temporary pandemic measure, while noting that disparities and implementation gaps remain. First-panel testimony from the California Health Care Foundation and the Center for Connected Health Policy reviewed telehealth trends, evidence of patient satisfaction, and the effectiveness of telehealth for behavioral health, chronic care, and e-consults. Witnesses said audio-only care remains important for patients without reliable internet, but Medi-Cal still has gaps in asynchronous care, FQHC/RHC billing, and remote-only provider participation. Committee members asked about reimbursement, data collection, clinical safeguards, broadband access, language access, and whether telehealth is being used to speed up appointments or reduce disparities. A second panel of providers and advocates described how telehealth has changed practice. A family physician said parity allowed his health system to invest in staffing and scheduling, and that virtual visits help seniors, working patients, and those with mobility or transportation barriers, while still allowing escalation to in-person care or emergency services when needed. Planned Parenthood said telehealth is essential for sensitive sexual and reproductive health services and urged broader Medi-Cal coverage for asynchronous care. A behavioral health clinician from Shasta County said telehealth has been critical for rural patients, though broadband and affordability remain barriers. Public comment from hospital, telemedicine, and consumer groups generally supported telehealth expansion while urging fixes to remaining Medi-Cal gaps and continued access to in-person care.

Transcript Highlights:

• The provider provides services. And then payment is available after the provider provides care.
• We have over 600 family home providers that provide overnight care, right?
• We have some providers that just provide care over the weekends.
• We authorize that provider, and then the provider bills the state, and the state pays the provider directly
• Then the provider provides the services.

Bills: SB5952 , SB5961 , SB5969 , SB5841 , SB5943

Committee: Senate Early Learning & K-12 Education

Keywords: physical education, school districts, student requirements, education policy, high school, early literacy, childhood literacy, book distribution, Imagination Library, Dolly Parton Imagination Library, preschool, pre-K, reading readiness, school readiness, birth to age five, young children, nonprofit contract, OSPI, Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction, DCYF

Transcript Highlights:

• facility-based settings or clinics, but it also can be provided, and often is provided, in the community
• and often is but it also can be provided and often is provided<00:02:51.560><c> in</c><00:02:51.680>
• </c> that um some of the services provided that um some of the services provided look<00:03:26.239><c
• </c><00:35:33.440><c> aren't</c><00:35:33.720><c> providing</c> that um if providers aren't providing
• <c> in</c> provider also providing services in provider also providing services in Minnesota<01:05:51.319

Committee: House Human Services Finance and Policy

Keywords: 1183, house