Transcript Highlights:

• This is an original contract for medical consultant examinations, reviews, and evaluations.
• this is to assist the UA System on planning and strategy development initiatives, and this is for evaluation
• This is an original contract for medical consultant examinations, reviews, and evaluations for medical

Summary: The review subcommittee met to consider a supplemental agenda, methods of finance, an alternative delivery project, discretionary grants, and a large slate of construction, out-of-state, and in-state contracts. The supplemental item was a $2.6 million out-of-state contract with Tyler Technologies for a mobile app that would let citizens access state services through a single sign-on, initially for DFA vehicle and licensing services, with possible expansion to other agencies. Members also reviewed five methods of finance, including University of Arkansas projects for roof and cooling tower replacements, a new $100 million academic classroom building at U of A Fayetteville, a police department renovation at UA Fort Smith, and a boiler/chiller replacement at Hope-Texarkana. Questions focused on project timing, why some items were being reviewed after work had begun, and the high estimated cost of the Fayetteville classroom building; DFA explained that projects under $250,000 are not reviewed and that the larger project was still in design and would later seek a guaranteed maximum price. The committee also reviewed two DHS discretionary grants: one for targeted youth advocacy in southwest Arkansas and another adding $582,000 for family-centered treatment training and implementation. In the services contract section, members discussed construction-related contracts, including an ASMSA electrical scope increase tied to three-phase power requirements and the U of A Fayetteville architect contract for the classroom building. Out-of-state contracts included major items such as ACT Education’s $17 million amendment to provide required pre-ACT testing for 9th and 10th graders, a $12.5 million DFA contract for rural health transformation grant management, DHS’s $16.5 million EBT services contract with updated chip-card and fraud-prevention features, and ADH’s special procurement for the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System survey. The committee also reviewed U of A system consulting contracts for financial advisory and sponsorship strategy work, with university officials saying the outside expertise was needed for specialized planning and revenue-generation efforts. In-state contracts covered corrections reentry services, nursing board investigations, foster care and child welfare services, DHS office janitorial work, emergency management radio system expansion, veterans’ home nursing staffing, and UAMS grants consulting. A lengthy exchange centered on the Department of Corrections’ reentry housing contract, with members pressing officials about vacant beds and urging fuller use of the program, while corrections staff said placements depend on screening and eligibility. Another discussion addressed the balance between out-of-state and in-state contracting, with a member noting the large dollar volume going to out-of-state vendors and asking whether Arkansas vendors receive any preference; State Procurement said current law does not allow an in-state preference. The committee approved the supplemental agenda, the methods of finance, the alternative delivery project, the discretionary grants, and the contract lists, and then received routine reports and an emergency action report before adjourning.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are currently working with the National Institution of Corrections, NIC, in evaluating the academy
• Additionally, we do evaluate CDCR's provision of medical care by conducting medical inspections at each
• investigation and disciplinary process, and reviewing investigative reports and evidence to inform their evaluations

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Banks are meant to evaluate customers based on their financial credibility, not their political views
• Next, HR and finance leaders evaluate those proposals and select the plan they believe delivers the best
• perspective: the Affordable Care Act work group in 2010 and the state of California, just last year, evaluated

Keywords: 923, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• legislature, local governments, the shelter and rescue communities, and the public will have metrics to evaluate
• We just distributed to you the last year evaluation of the doctor's program, which basically tells you
• well as in the United States. to fund anything that needed to be done, especially the two-year evaluation

Keywords: 988, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• One of the items are lacking completion of annual evaluations, lack of having the required background
• One of those items are lacking completion of annual evaluations, lack of having the required background
• Moving on to personnel, FAMU didn't always perform personnel evaluations.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Auditing Committee received a presentation from Auditor General staff on recurring findings from audits of district school boards, colleges, and universities. For school districts, the main issues discussed included missing or outdated safe-school officer training documentation, weak purchasing-card controls, vendor banking-change fraud risks, incomplete background screenings and disqualification-list procedures, missing website budget disclosures, excessive or untimely IT access, late deactivation of former employees’ access, missed emergency drill deadlines, inaccurate capital outlay and resiliency education records, weak tangible property inventories, adult education reporting errors, untimely bank reconciliations, and improper use of workforce development funds. The auditors said many of these issues are repeated from prior years and are summarized in their annual report on significant findings and financial trends. For universities and colleges, the auditors highlighted similar control weaknesses, including vendor information change controls, IT access issues, cash and investment reconciliation problems, purchasing and procurement deficiencies, personnel and compensation issues, and student fee compliance concerns. Specific examples included a UF consulting contract totaling about $6 million, FAU underreporting carry-forward balances by about $77 million, UCF’s payment loss of about $107,000 from an email scam tied to vendor changes, and a North Florida College unauthorized transfer involving a few hundred thousand dollars. The committee asked questions about the UF consulting work, the FAU carry-forward issue, and whether the listed findings meant every named entity had every issue; auditors clarified that the lists reflected entities with findings in those categories, not necessarily each specific problem. The committee then turned to enforcement for entities with long-standing uncorrected audit findings. Staff reported 144 entities with 197 findings repeated in three or more successive audit reports and recommended sending letters requesting updated corrective-action status, including for late-filed 2022-2023 reports where appropriate. The committee approved the staff recommendation and directed letters to be sent. The meeting ended with members emphasizing the importance of audit oversight and taxpayer accountability.

Transcript Highlights:

• >> So, if the child is referred to special education, they go through the process of the evaluation.
• And we don't um we of the evaluation.
• So each individual district has to have a plan on how they will find, identify, and evaluate students
• to see where they have you re-evaluate to see where they were<03:50:41.120> at.
• As long as they were showing progress, they re-evaluate after 60 days or 90 days.

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Summary: The commission met to approve the May 18, 2026 minutes and then focused on how SB 57’s special education cost study should inform HB 1099, which creates a separate study committee on residential placements and related education costs. Members discussed sending the commission’s minutes and findings to that new committee, noting the short timeline for its work and the need to be specific about unresolved issues so the new group does not duplicate the same questions. A major topic was the cost and responsibility for students placed at Spalding and similar residential programs, especially transportation and whether costs are paid through the Department of Education’s episode-of-treatment (EOT) fund, local districts, DHS, or Medicaid. Staff explained that for students with disabilities, EOT funds cover special education and transportation costs tied to the placement, while students without disabilities are handled through DHS care-management and best-interest meetings. Members raised concerns about whether some students at Spalding are receiving no schooling, whether transportation costs are substantial, and whether Medicaid reimbursement could offset some expenses. The commission also discussed confusion over district responsibility when students placed in residential programs attend school in another district, using Winnisquam as an example. Several members said the receiving district was not notified that DHHS-approved programs could bring in additional students and costs, and they suggested DHHS or its care-management entity should notify both the district of residence and the receiving district when a program is approved. The group agreed this notification issue, along with transportation funding, privacy concerns in Medicaid-to-schools billing, and the distinction between special education placements, EOT placements, and other voluntary residential placements, should be passed to the HB 1099 study committee for further work.

Transcript Highlights:

• The final thing to consider for any future allocation is evaluating the relative size of the agency,
• This morning we released our analysis of the May Revision, now evaluating the condition of the General
• 2026-27 through 2028-29, for CDE to receive auditing support from the Office of State Audits and Evaluations
• CDSS is still evaluating all the other recommendations of the single rate structure policies and elements
• Currently, regional centers use the Client Development Evaluation Report, or what is referred to as a

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing on the Governor’s May Revision, with no votes taken. The first major topic was child care and early education, where the Department of Social Services and Department of Finance outlined proposed changes to absorb federal Child Care and Development Fund and Proposition 64 revenue reductions, shift some funding between child care programs, end funding for prospective pay implementation now that the federal requirement has been rescinded, adjust the alternative payment administration structure, and fund child care infrastructure grants and a Low-Income Investment Fund contract closeout. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the budget makes progress on the structural deficit but recommended maintaining the administration’s solution level, making reserve deposits, and avoiding new ongoing commitments; it also raised concerns about shifting reductions to the California Alternative Payment Program and about the proposed administrative-rate change. Committee members strongly criticized the proposed loss of child care slots and said they would oppose eliminating those slots, while also expressing support for child care as essential infrastructure. The committee then reviewed California State Preschool Program proposals. Finance and CDE described reductions to the preschool COLA from 2.41% to 2.01%, removal of prospective pay funding, and increases for the QRIS block grant, audit support, and rate reform implementation. Trailer bill language would codify age-based rate categories, inclusion-rate documentation, family fee collection rules, portability, and excused absences. CDE supported the QRIS increase and some attendance and family-fee changes, but warned that aligning three- and four-year-old rates could reduce support for three-year-olds and that the budget does not fully cover enrollment growth. Members also questioned whether the preschool and child care slot reductions should be reallocated rather than terminated, and the administration said the reductions were intended to reflect current utilization and avoid harm to currently enrolled families. The hearing then moved to CalFresh and nutrition programs. CDSS said the May Revision includes a one-time CalFood augmentation, funding to cover federal SNAP administrative cost-share pressures, and additional staffing and technical assistance to implement HR 1 changes, including the able-bodied adults without dependents time limit and new non-citizen eligibility rules. The department estimated HR 1 could cut CalFresh funding by $2.3 billion to $3.7 billion annually and affect about 500,000 people, with roughly 806,000 adults potentially subject to the time limit and about 34,000 non-citizens expected to lose eligibility once fully implemented. Members pressed for stronger harm mitigation, including a $98 million backfill to protect families from losing food benefits, and raised concerns about county workload and the “chilling effect” on immigrant participation. The final portion of the transcript began the IHSS presentation, noting a revised budget of $33.7 billion total funds and $12.8 billion General Fund, with proposed reductions tied to Medi-Cal asset-limit changes and other federal conformity items.

Transcript Highlights:

• and premier expert in digital behavioral health interventions for youth, conducted an external evaluation
• changes to the MHSA a couple years ago, which eventually became the BHSA, our office was asked to evaluate
• Our mission is to provide evaluation and treatment in a safe and responsible manner by leading innovation
• Our primary tools are data and policy research, program evaluation, grantmaking, technical assistance
• We also evaluate programs so California can learn from implementation, improve performance over time,

Summary: The hearing focused first on behavioral health, especially serious mental illness and anosognosia, a condition described by witnesses as a neurological symptom that prevents people from recognizing they are ill. The chair framed the issue around families cycling through emergency rooms, jails, conservatorships, and short-term stabilization without lasting treatment, and warned that federal changes under H.R. 1 could reduce Medi-Cal funding and worsen access. Dawn Marie Anderson gave a personal account of her son’s long history of psychosis, homelessness, arrests, repeated jail and state hospital stays, and eventual stability when he received sustained medication and coordinated support. She argued that the system often treats the problem as criminal rather than medical and that voluntary programs and short-term services are not enough for people who lack insight into their illness. Other panelists, including representatives from the California Behavioral Health Association, Santa Barbara County Behavioral Health, and the County Behavioral Health Directors Association, agreed that anosognosia is not denial or noncompliance and said the system needs long-term, coordinated care, including assertive community treatment, mobile crisis, supportive housing, medication support, and stronger handoffs between county and managed care systems. They said CalAIM and other reforms have improved some coordination, but significant gaps remain, especially for people with serious mental illness, for those in jail or locked settings, and for people with private insurance, which witnesses said often offers little meaningful coverage for early psychosis or intensive behavioral health services. Several witnesses urged the Legislature to protect Medi-Cal, shore up county safety-net services, and invest in training and family engagement. The committee then turned to the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative, with a focus on the virtual services platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna and the CYBHI fee schedule. DHCS reported strong growth in app registrations, coaching sessions, referrals, and positive user outcomes, saying the platforms provide free, culturally responsive, early-intervention support statewide and help connect users to higher levels of care when needed. On the fee schedule, DHCS said more than 500 LEAs, colleges, universities, and school-linked providers are participating, 181 LEAs have submitted claims, and $9.6 million has been reimbursed to date, with 41,556 students represented in claims. The chair and several members criticized the pace of implementation and the amount of money spent relative to reimbursement levels, saying the Legislature had requested data earlier and that the return on investment still appeared low. DHCS responded that many claims are still being submitted, that 70% of denials are correctable, that $400 million in capacity grants has been distributed locally, and that reimbursement is increasing rapidly as more districts come online. Public comment included a rural county behavioral health director who said private insurance denials leave counties with significant uncompensated work, especially for unlicensed staff providing case management and mobile crisis services.

Transcript Highlights:

• The HCD Budget Office and the Codes and Standards Division will annually evaluate revenue and expenditures
• The HCD Budget Office and the Codes and Standards Division will annually evaluate revenue and expenditures
• And has there been any evaluation? Thank you. And has there been any evaluation?
• When you look at the overall income of the residents there, has the administration evaluated what impact
• So it's... ...evaluating whether they should stay in this business or not.

Summary: The subcommittee heard an extensive presentation on the administration’s housing reorganization proposal, which would centralize multifamily affordable housing finance under the new Housing Development and Finance Committee (HDFC) and align it with the Governor’s trailer bill language. Administration officials said the plan is intended to create a one-stop application and award process, reduce duplicative timelines and costs, and pair state subsidy with private activity bonds and federal tax credits more efficiently. They also described proposed changes to the Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program, including shifting a larger share of funding toward housing-related awards while preserving a portion for sustainable communities investments. The Legislative Analyst’s Office generally supported the streamlining concept but recommended changes to the proposed bond set-aside timing and urged flexibility for integrated applications and future reporting on demand. Senators, especially Senator Cabaldon, raised concerns that the proposal could weaken the original climate-and-transportation purpose of the sustainable communities program and that the reorganization would be undercut by the lack of new housing production funding in the budget. The item was held open without a vote. The committee then received a report from the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee on federal and state housing tax credits. Staff explained that the federal H.R. 1 change lowering the bond-financing threshold from 50% to 25% greatly expanded the number of projects able to use the 4% federal tax credit, allowing California to fund many more projects and units. They also described the state low-income housing tax credit as an important gap-filling tool for projects that still need additional subsidy, and noted existing set-asides for rural, homeless, at-risk, and extremely low-income projects. Members discussed rehabilitation as well as new construction, and the item was informational only. Finally, the Civil Rights Department reported on the effects of federal civil rights policy changes and on three programs facing expiration: California vs. Hate, the Community Conflict Resolution Unit, and Investigations and Conciliation Enhancement. Director Kevin Kish said federal cuts and policy shifts have reduced support for fair housing and other civil rights functions, while CRD’s caseload has grown from about 8,700 open matters a year ago to more than 12,000, with a six-month wait for interviews despite overtime triage efforts. Senators expressed strong support for continuing the programs and concern about the broader federal rollback of civil rights enforcement. The department said it is using overtime, intake triage, and outreach partnerships to manage the workload and direct Californians to appropriate state, local, and nonprofit resources.

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the other two were people that were released because, after numerous attempts to evaluate them
• And so what we need to do is come together and figure out ways to have a better system of evaluating
• <00:30:05.679> these<00:30:06.240> public a judge would evaluating these public a judge
• would evaluating these public safety<00:30:06.960> factors<00:30:07.360> would<00:30:07.520
• It's also a really perfect time to evaluate some of the other reasons for justice involvement, so like

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• on the case and on any post-notice of intent Tier 2 activity until ADOT and FHWA undertake a re-evaluation
• The re-evaluation of the Tier 1 Environmental Impact Statement will review any proposed changes in the
• We can certainly evaluate that. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, please. Thank you.
• Army facility for overseeing the testing and evaluating of military equipment.
• Army facility for overseeing the testing and evaluation of military equipment.

Bills: HB2067, HB2068, HB2127, HB2164, HB2200, HB2201, HB2242, HB2283, HB2284, HB2285, HB2286, HB2287, HB2304, HB2306, HB2399, HB2601, HB2609, HB2760, HB2761, HB2859, HB2887, HB2892, HB2893, HB2894, HB2978, HB4027, HCM2012, HCM2016

Keywords: appropriation, transportation, infrastructure, Apache Junction, funding, Show Low, road extension, special license plates, nonprofits, charitable contributions, Reay Lane, Graham County, HB 2200, State Route 89, SR 89, Chino Valley, Arizona Department of Transportation, ADOT, road widening, highway expansion

Transcript Highlights:

• 1st, the LFC and the Healthcare Authority provided the Administrative Office of the Courts with evaluation
• How are we going to evaluate these services? We can't just give money out and say, "Yay, good job!
• We need to have some data; we need to have some evaluation; we need to have some standards.
• I will say that was a little tricky to establish evaluation guidelines before we know what regions are
• I think, yeah, an update and evaluation. Okay, great. Okay.

Keywords: 996, all

Transcript Highlights:

• 08.159> capacity<00:30:09.440> um,<00:30:09.600> to<00:30:09.760> be evaluated
• for their capacity um, to be evaluated for their capacity um, to be able<00:30:10.000> to<00:
• of those projects, but I would rather have gone through the usual process so that we could have evaluated
• 50.960> it's<00:30:51.520> you<00:30:51.600> know<00:30:51.760> here evaluated
• and since it's you know here evaluated and since it's you know here we<00:30:52.159> are<00:30

Keywords: 1191, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think it's very important for us to note that medical necessity is still evaluated.
• , but also use our medical necessity utilization management controls that are available to us to evaluate
• this as a proposal that we're going to put the additional cost component and evaluating this as a proposal
• To date, the administration has not yet published such an evaluation of Prop. 56.
• The administration has not yet published such an evaluation of Prop. 56 supplemental payments.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Health held the first of several hearings on the Governor’s May Revision for health care, with opening remarks focused on the state’s projected $12 billion deficit, looming federal Medicaid changes, and the potential impact on Medi-Cal, public health, reproductive health, and safety-net providers. Several members criticized the proposal as balancing the budget on vulnerable Californians, while others defended the need for cost containment and questioned the administration’s assumptions. The chair set ground rules for respectful, focused questioning and outlined three topics: the Medi-Cal proposals, Proposition 35, and Proposition 56. DHCS Director Michelle Baas presented the May Revision’s Medi-Cal package, saying the department’s budget totals $200.6 billion overall, including $45.2 billion General Fund, and that the proposals are intended to address rising caseloads, pharmacy costs, and managed care spending. She described proposed changes for adults with unsatisfactory immigration status, including a freeze on new full-scope enrollment for those 19 and older, $100 monthly premiums beginning in 2027, elimination of adult dental and long-term care coverage, removal of PPS/RAP payments to FQHCs and rural health clinics for that population, and a pharmacy rebate aggregator. Other proposals included eliminating certain OTC drug classes, removing GLP-1 coverage for weight loss, prior authorization and step therapy changes, reinstating the Medi-Cal asset test, eliminating acupuncture as an optional benefit, allowing utilization management for hospice, raising the managed care minimum medical loss ratio to 90%, reducing PACE capitation rates toward the midpoint of the actuarial range, eliminating the skilled nursing facility workforce and quality incentive program, and suspending the SNF backup power requirement. The LAO said the revised Medi-Cal spending estimate is about $2.5 billion higher than the Governor’s Budget in the budget year, and that the increase appears driven more by higher per-enrollee costs than by caseload alone. The LAO said the budget solutions are concentrated in a few areas, are largely ongoing, and should be considered in light of federal uncertainty, but suggested the Legislature could explore alternatives such as more targeted income thresholds for the undocumented expansion and simpler asset-test rules. Department of Finance officials said the proposals are difficult but necessary to address a third consecutive deficit and rising Medi-Cal costs. Members then pressed the administration on the methodology and impacts of the proposals, especially the enrollment freeze, premiums, asset test, hospice controls, PACE reductions, and the elimination of benefits and provider payments. No votes or formal actions were taken at this hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I encourage a green vote today because this evaluation covers a lot of helpful information that, in
• So I encourage a green vote today because this evaluation covers a lot of helpful information that, in
• As great as this particular evaluation is, we can do more in Minnesota to track, disclose, and report
• particular communities as great as this particular communities as great as this particular evaluation
• is we can do more in evaluation is we can do more in Minnesota<00:41:11.040> to<00:41:11.280>

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• So they would obviously need to work with the PFFA to evaluate...”
• “So they would obviously need to work with the PFFA to evaluate who their active members are and who

Summary: The Senate Committee on Retirement met on May 11, 2026, with a quorum present and approved the minutes from May 5. The committee then took up House Bill 41, which concerns the board membership of the firefighter retirement system. The author explained that the bill had been revised toward a compromise to better represent non-union active members on the retirement board, while preserving legislative representation. Under the concept amendment discussed, the House-appointed legislative seat would be removed, the Senate designee would remain, and a non-union active member would be added in its place. The author and committee also discussed alternating legislative terms, but clarified that the Senate designee would not be removed. Committee members and staff then reviewed how the new non-union seat would be filled, including an election process limited to non-union active members. Firefighters Retirement System counsel and a representative of the Professional Firefighters Association raised concerns about the difficulty and cost of identifying eligible voters because union membership changes frequently. Staff estimated the election could cost roughly $50,000 to $65,000 every five years, with additional administrative work to verify eligibility and send ballots. A senator asked whether a fixed cutoff date could solve the problem, but witnesses said membership changes would still make that difficult. After discussion, the committee identified the amendment as 3541 and moved the bill forward on a favorable motion, with no objection. The meeting then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• When Bill 1395 comes as a recommendation from the Incentive Evaluation Commission, if you recall, the
• Incentive Evaluation Commission is our watchdog group that reviews the incentives that have been passed

Bills: SB1323, SB1863, SB1932, SB1950, SB1956, SB1970, SB1599, SB1312, SB1776, SB1858, SB1985, SB1302, SB1809, SB1401, SB2053, SB1503, SB1553, SB1427, SB1642, SB1421, SB1837, SB1566, SB1567, SB1794, SB1484, SB1557, SB1564, SB1591, SB1395, SB1456, SB1562, SB1613, SB1983, SB1550, SB2065, SB2152, SB2159, SB2172, SB2110, SB2111, SB2114

Keywords: memorial designation, highway, Sheriff Marty Grisham, transportation, Oklahoma Statutes, memorial highway, road designation, John Skelley, motor carrier, administrative hearing, legal representation, corporate liability, aviation, aircraft, surveillance, regulations, fees, Oklahoma statutes, memorial, highway designation

Transcript Highlights:

• Number four is to evaluate our curriculum and program.
• After an evaluation by Oklahoma Roofing, we've developed a staggered replacement schedule to spread out

Keywords: 914, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A lot of veterans don't realize they can do that after they make their evaluation.
• A lot of veterans don't realize they can do that after they make their evaluation.
• do that after they make their evaluation do that after they make their evaluation they'll<02:19:
• You only have it, and the VA re-evaluates you periodically, and you can lose that rating.
• you only have it and the VA re-evaluates you only have it and the VA re-evaluates you<02:26:27.640

Keywords: 1189, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• more specificity around the topics that a regional center executive director should be annually evaluated
• We've seen some examples where board members have provided evaluations to an ED that aren't particularly
• And once the Legislature receives this information in the future, it will be able to evaluate the merits
• Fifth, regarding measurement, reporting, and evaluation of outcomes, DDS and DOR will use an existing
• These measures will help evaluate the effectiveness of the integrated system.

Keywords: 988, house, all

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee on Human Services held a hearing focused on the Department of Developmental Services (DDS), related safety-net programs, and several administration trailer bill proposals. Members and witnesses discussed the impacts of H.R. 1 on people with intellectual and developmental disabilities, including changes to Medi-Cal and CalFresh eligibility, the need for automatic exemption processes for people with disabilities and caregivers, and the risk that loss of health coverage could shift costs to regional centers or reduce access to services. DDS and the Department of Social Services said they are working on data matching and automation to identify exemptions, with implementation for CalFresh set to begin June 1, 2026. Public testimony from consumers and advocates emphasized that Medi-Cal, IHSS, CalFresh, and regional center services are essential to community living and that cuts or administrative barriers could destabilize households and force people back into more restrictive settings. The committee also reviewed the governor’s IHSS proposals. CDSS described three budget items: setting a baseline for average authorized hours and shifting costs above that baseline to counties, automating IHSS disenrollment and reinstatement tied to Medi-Cal eligibility, and eliminating the IHSS backup provider system. The LAO noted that if Medi-Cal or IHSS access is reduced, regional centers may have to fill gaps as payer of last resort, potentially at higher cost. Several members expressed strong concern about cost shifts to counties and warned that counties are already under severe fiscal pressure. The chair requested a harm-mitigation strategy before the May Revision and asked for more information on how the administration would prevent service reductions or instability for clients. The committee then heard a trailer bill proposal on DDS rate reform and the Quality Incentive Program. DDS asked to extend the contract exemption through December 31, 2030 and extend the deadline for finalizing rate reform regulations to December 31, 2030, saying the changes are budget-neutral and would give the department more time to complete implementation. DDS reported that about 81% of providers met the current Quality Incentive Program prerequisites, while providers and advocates said the 90-10 structure can function like a penalty and may destabilize providers that fail to qualify. Members asked for clearer guidance, more technical assistance, and redlined language before the May Revision, and indicated they may reject the proposal if concerns are not addressed. Finally, DDS presented a trailer bill to revise regional center governance and operations, including consolidating multiple contracts into one, giving DDS more flexibility to allocate funds through fiscal letters, strengthening board training and oversight, and removing barriers to provider capacity such as outdated office-location requirements and courtesy vendorization. The hearing ended without any votes, but members repeatedly emphasized protecting consumers, avoiding harmful cost shifts, and ensuring that any policy changes preserve services and community living for people with developmental disabilities.