Transcript Highlights:

• and mental health services?
• We did do a survey.
• The Health and Human Services Medical Services Division The Health and Human Services Medical Services
• So we can say we have a service, but if it's not filled, you don't have a service.
• services.

Committees: Joint Human Services , Joint Human Services Committee

Transcript Highlights:

• I am the Youth Services Program Manager at Northeast and a bit.
• , to broaden survey outreach.
• And these were the key themes from our survey findings.
• And these were the key themes from our survey findings.
• So once the survey was completed, the work group compiled the...

Summary: The Employment Subcommittee of the Permit Commission on Status of Persons with Disabilities met on April 27 and approved the prior meeting minutes before hearing a presentation from the Lawrence Partnership for Transition to Employment (LPTE). Presenters from UMass Boston’s Institute for Community Inclusion, the Arc of Greater Haverhill-Newburyport, Northeast, and Lawrence Public Schools described LPTE as a five-year grant focused on improving transition outcomes for youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Lawrence through community partnerships, work groups, and family engagement. A major focus was a family survey designed to better understand barriers to transition planning and IEP participation. Presenters said the survey response rate increased sharply after Lawrence Public Schools helped distribute it, rising from about a dozen responses to more than 200. Survey findings showed common barriers such as scheduling conflicts, language access, childcare, transportation, and limited understanding of IEPs and transition planning. The data also suggested that many families expect college or employment outcomes for their children, but fewer reported access to pre-employment training, indicating a communication gap rather than a lack of services. Lawrence school staff explained that the district has a five-person transition team, bilingual resources, workshops, and a developing online transition hub, and that they are using the survey results to improve visibility and access to existing supports. Committee members discussed the need to start transition planning earlier, expand real-world work experiences, improve outreach to Latino families, and better connect students with college, trade, and employment pathways. Several members suggested partnerships with summer youth employment, volunteer programs, and college or alumni panels. The presenters said the grant ends in September, but the resource hub will continue through the Arc and they are exploring ways to sustain the consortium model. The meeting ended with thanks to the presenters, an update that committee members would meet with Seed on Massachusetts as a model employer, and notice that the next meeting would feature the Office of Veteran Affairs before adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• So, application development: we wanted to start with a public survey.
• survey?
• health services, behavioral health, dental...
• So I'm going to ask Strengthen home and community-based services.
• We say thank you for your service. Follow-up? Yes, thank you.

Summary: The Rural Health Transformation Committee met to receive an overview from Department of Health and Welfare Director Juliet Sharon on Idaho’s Rural Health Transformation Program, created under the federal One Big Beautiful Bill Act. Sharon explained the $50 billion federal program, Idaho’s application timeline, the state’s ranking and award amount, and the five broad initiative areas in the approved plan: technology and access, innovative care models, workforce development, chronic disease and behavioral health, and rural infrastructure/partnerships. She emphasized that the funding is tightly overseen by CMS, with required reporting, compliance checks, sustainability plans, and the risk of losing funds if Idaho does not obligate money or meet milestones on time. She also outlined the state’s plan to hire a 12-person temporary team and to use a mix of RFPs and competitive subgrants, with monthly reporting to the committee and a shared information space to track solicitations, rubrics, and awards. Committee members questioned several parts of the plan, especially scope-of-practice issues tied to the application, the use of telehealth funding, workforce retention, and the survey process used to shape the application. Representative Tanner asked whether the state could continue pursuing scope changes for dental hygienists and physician assistants and whether legislative action could affect funding outcomes; Sharon said the state would continue to evaluate those policies, but that compliance, timely spending, and performance would be the main factors affecting funding. Representative Healy raised concerns about the survey’s heavy use of “other” responses and about telehealth spending, arguing some telehealth uses may not be practical for specialty care. Representative Manwaring requested a shared drive for real-time data and asked for raw survey results and dollar-based funding caps. Sharon agreed to provide follow-up information, including survey data and additional details on funding limits. Chris Jones of Catalyst Policy Group then presented broader policy observations and examples from other states. He praised Idaho’s application, urged the committee to keep the focus on patient-centered rural access, and highlighted ideas such as community health workers, remote patient monitoring, rural training pipelines, value-based care networks, and telehealth models that reduce staffing needs and improve sustainability. He also cautioned against relying on social determinants of health funding, noted the importance of rural training and partnerships, and praised Idaho’s 3.5% tribal set-aside. The committee ended by agreeing to set up a shared information hub with LSO, to expect follow-up materials and possible solicitation drafts soon, and to tentatively plan its next meeting around CMS’s Idaho visit on May 28.

Transcript Highlights:

• What we call survey 6, the earliest data that we have that's available. That's not fte survey data.
• So and of course, we 2 major county or we get survey to an October survey 3 in February.
• We also extend that crosscheck process to even the preliminary survey to count the October survey count
• Your reported in a in a in a survey count once we get to the final survey to count if there is a match
• Survey reviews.

Transcript Highlights:

• , to broaden the survey outreach.
• And we'll hear more about this when the survey results.
• So these are the results of the family survey.
• And these were the key themes from our survey findings.
• of Student Support Services.

Summary: The Employment Subcommittee of the Commission on the Status of Persons with Disabilities met on April 27 and approved the prior meeting minutes. The main presentation was from the Lawrence Partnership for Transition to Employment (LPTE), a five-year grant project focused on improving transition outcomes for youth with intellectual and developmental disabilities in Lawrence. Presenters described the project’s community conversations, consortium, and four work groups, with emphasis on the family-partnership work group and a family survey designed to better understand engagement barriers and transition needs. The survey results showed that family participation increased sharply when Lawrence Public Schools helped distribute the survey, rising from about a dozen responses to more than 200. Key findings included barriers such as scheduling conflicts, language access, childcare, and limited understanding of the IEP and transition process. Many families said they wanted their children to pursue college or employment after high school, but fewer reported access to pre-employment training, suggesting a gap between expectations and awareness of available services. The Lawrence team also described a bilingual transition website, workshops offered at different times with interpretation and childcare, and efforts to make transition planning more visible and accessible. Committee members responded with questions and comments about cultural barriers, early transition planning, college and community college pathways, trades, summer youth employment, and how to reach families earlier, especially in middle school. Presenters said Lawrence has a strong transition team and existing resources, but needs more real-world work experiences and better communication so families understand and use them. The meeting ended with thanks to the presenters, a note that committee members would meet with SEED later in the week about Massachusetts as a model employer, and an announcement that the May meeting would feature the Office of Veterans Affairs.

Transcript Highlights:

• </c> you today that encompasses the survey you today that encompasses the survey findings<00:08:54.560
• ><00:09:25.000><c> behemoth</c><00:09:25.959><c> it</c><00:09:26.079><c> was</c> survey this survey was
• a behemoth it was survey this survey was a behemoth it was 106<00:09:27.279><c> questions</c><00:09:
• </c> work and coming up with these survey work and coming up with these survey results<00:21:08.120><
• </c><00:50:45.040><c> but</c> years of service 30 years of service but years of service 30 years of service

Transcript Highlights:

• VRS is video relay services.
• We did do a survey.
• The Health and Human Services Medical Services Division The Health and Human Services Medical Services
• So we can say we have a service, but if it's not filled, you don't have a service.
• services. ...at what services are designed at the community level for residential services for DD children

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:

• But it just got me kind of trying to understand the difference in this survey versus a survey that we
• That's just very different than your survey.
• So first of all, I guess question number one: do you know about this other survey, and maybe who it surveyed
• compared to who you surveyed?
• Again, a survey is just based on who answers it.

Summary: The committee first approved the May 18 meeting minutes and then received a Legislative Audit presentation summarizing Arkansas Department of Education grant distributions for fiscal year 2025. Auditors said the department distributed about $4.6 billion in grants overall, including $3.2 billion from the Public School Fund, $1.1 billion in federal funds, and $268 million from other state and miscellaneous sources, across 56 Public School Fund programs, 14 other state programs, and 29 federal programs. Members asked about specific recipients and programs, including ClassWallet, master principal bonuses, Economics Arkansas, and CDC surveillance funding; audit staff and Department of Education representatives explained that the report was only a distribution summary and not a recipient-level audit. Members also questioned why many districts showed lower funding, and staff said the decline was largely due to reduced federal and one-time COVID-related funds. Senators and representatives also discussed whether some incentive programs, such as master principal and national board bonuses, were tied to student outcomes, and whether Economics Arkansas was the sole entity named in special language for financial literacy funding; department staff said they would follow up on several details. The committee then heard a Bureau of Legislative Research presentation on consumer price index projections from Moody’s Analytics and S&P Global, with discussion of CPI-U and core CPI estimates for future fiscal years. Dr. Carlos Silva explained that the forecasts generally trend toward about 2 percent over time and that recent projections may have understated actual inflation because of recent shocks. Members asked about the accuracy of past projections, and he said he would provide more detail later if needed. The bulk of the meeting focused on the final adequacy report on teacher recruitment, retention, and salaries. BLR staff reported that Arkansas had about 32,800 teachers and 473,000 students in 2025, with a statewide student-to-teacher ratio of about 14 to 1, average teaching experience of 11.9 years, and a slight increase in National Board Certified teachers. The report found that districts with higher poverty and minority concentrations generally had less experienced teachers, and that teacher shortages remained widespread, especially in special education, math, science, and foreign language. Members asked about licensure exceptions, alternative preparation pathways, incentives for ESL and special education endorsements, and the cost and return on investment of traditional versus alternative routes. Staff said some licensure exceptions are being phased out under Act 304 of 2025 and that they would follow up on several requested details. The report also found that teacher retention averaged 87 percent statewide in 2025, with districts retaining teachers at higher rates than charters, and that 30 percent of surveyed teachers were considering leaving the profession. Principals and teachers identified school leadership as the strongest positive factor in recruitment and retention, while workload and salary were the strongest negative factors. On salaries, BLR reported a statewide average teacher salary of $60,254 in 2025, with districts averaging $60,458 and charters $55,724. Arkansas ranked 45th nationally on average teacher salary in 2025, though its cost-adjusted ranking improved to 36th; among SREB states it ranked 12th, and among neighboring states it ranked fourth. Members asked about starting salaries, salary compression, district step increases, and whether the report should be shared more broadly with educators and school leaders. Staff said they would provide follow-up information on several questions, and the committee took no formal action beyond receiving the presentations and asking for additional data.

Transcript Highlights:

• So I am curious, on a self-survey, if the person answering the survey said they had insecurity or if
• Next, we're going to go to our policy brief, which is a physician survey to inform surveys and shortages
• You do, I understand, in the survey we did... Not break the survey down by employer. So, Mr.
• The results of our survey show that the largest share of funding for new or expanded services has been
• enough money to create new services?

Transcript Highlights:

• The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services will now come to order.
• To support these efforts, the Health and Human Services budget represents a $1.8 billion increase over
• Additionally, each nursing home will conduct a patient safety culture survey at least biannually.
• And this amendment requires ACA to begin working with those survey results, working those survey results
• , ensuring survey validity, reporting survey results, and protecting the identity of individual respondents

Summary: The Appropriations Committee on Health and Human Services first heard and adopted the proposed fiscal year 2025-26 budget for the committee, which was presented as a $1.8 billion increase over the current base budget. The budget emphasized Medicaid and KidCare funding, IT modernization, workforce reductions tied to unfilled or augmented positions, provider rate increases, mental health and substance use funding, opioid treatment, elder care, veterans’ services, cancer research, and school nurse staffing. The committee approved technical adjustments and then adopted the budget proposal for submission to the full Senate Appropriations Committee. The committee then considered several bills, most of which were reported favorably. SB 152 on surgical smoke required hospitals and ambulatory surgical centers to adopt smoke evacuation policies; it drew strong support from nurses and other health care workers describing workplace and patient safety risks. CS/SB 958 on early detection of type 1 diabetes required the Department of Health to develop informational materials for schools and, by amendment, early learning coalitions. CS/CS/SB 170 on nursing homes required consumer satisfaction surveys, patient safety culture surveys, reporting to the health information exchange, financial reporting penalties, and Medicaid quality incentive reporting; an amendment exempted state-operated homes, including veterans’ facilities, and directed a study of quality incentive systems. CS/SB 738 updated and streamlined child care regulation, and CS/SB 1356 created the Florida Institute for Pediatric Rare Diseases at Florida State University and a related pediatric rare disease screening pilot. The committee also passed SB 1370, which reorganized ambulatory surgical centers into their own statutory framework, with testimony emphasizing their lower costs compared with hospitals. Finally, the committee considered CS/CS/SB 1626 on child welfare and related issues. After adopting multiple amendments that removed references to unaccompanied alien children and special immigrant visas, changed language on child abuse definitions, and required DCF to set room-and-board rates by methodology rather than fee schedule, the bill was explained as strengthening child welfare protections, codifying military-family coordination, improving domestic violence shelter certification, adjusting children’s services council appointments, clarifying missing-child procedures, and updating licensing and compliance provisions. The bill drew both support and opposition, particularly over missing-child jurisdiction and immigration-related concerns, and was ultimately reported favorably. A final motion to record a vote on SB 958 was also adopted.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2012, we conducted a routine survey of Kaiser's behavioral health services and identified deficiencies
• related to the delivery of behavioral health services.
• The non-routine survey.
• We look at access during those surveys.
• or when we go out and do our routine surveys.

Committee: House Health

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee held an informational hearing on Kaiser Permanente’s behavioral health care system, focusing on Department of Managed Health Care (DMHC) enforcement actions, Kaiser’s corrective action work plan, and member access to timely behavioral health services. DMHC officials reviewed a long history of deficiencies and enforcement, including a 2012 survey and fine, a 2017 settlement, a 2022 non-routine survey that found multiple deficiencies in Northern and Southern California, and a 2023 settlement that included a $50 million penalty and $150 million in required community investments over five years. Officials said Kaiser’s corrective action work plan was initially too vague, was revised after extensive meetings, and will be monitored through quarterly reports, ongoing surveys, complaint review, and possible additional enforcement if Kaiser fails to comply. Committee members pressed DMHC on what “timely access” means, how continuity of care should work in behavioral health, and how the department evaluates whether treatment is clinically appropriate. DMHC explained that appointments generally should be available within about two weeks for initial care, within days for urgent needs, and within 10 days for follow-up, with out-of-network care required when in-network access is unavailable. Officials also said the department looks at complaints, medical records, surveys, and annual timely-access reporting, and that the help center can assist enrollees in real time. Members raised concerns that the corrective action plan lacked specific dates and metrics, and DMHC said the quarterly reporting process is intended to provide more detail and flexibility as implementation continues. In the second panel, a Kaiser enrollee described delayed and inadequate care for his daughter after a suicide attempt, including long waits for follow-up, intensive outpatient treatment, and dialectical behavior therapy. A Kennedy Forum representative argued that stronger transparency, standardized reporting, and more aggressive corrective enforcement are needed, including out-of-network reimbursement when networks are inadequate. A Kaiser therapist and NUHW member testified that short appointment times, heavy caseloads, inappropriate referrals, and pressure to use group therapy or webinars undermine clinical care, while NUHW’s president said Kaiser systematically undervalues behavioral health compared with medical-surgical care, especially in Southern California, and urged legislative action. Several lawmakers echoed concerns about Kaiser’s absence from the hearing and asked about workforce shortages, regional disparities, and whether the state’s remedies are arriving too slowly to protect patients in real time.

Transcript Highlights:

• We recently did a survey in July of this year.
• Sorry, I'm just going to— president and CEO of BAMSI, a full-service human services organization... .
• So, to clarify, that number came from a separate survey.
• It wasn't a survey that Open Door Arts conducted.
• It wasn't a survey that Open Door Arts conducted.

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities

Summary: The Joint Committee on Children, Families, and Persons with Disabilities held a hearing focused on accessibility-related legislation, with the chairs emphasizing ASL and CART accessibility and asking testifiers to speak slowly and clearly. The committee heard testimony first on H.223/S.130, a bill to establish a livable wage for community-based human service workers by reducing the pay gap with state employees. Providers’ Council, Communities for People, the Key Program, and BAMSI all supported the bill, describing persistent wage disparities, high vacancy and turnover rates, and the impact on continuity of care for children, youth, and families. Witnesses said the bill would help recruitment and retention and stabilize services across the Commonwealth. The committee then heard extensive testimony on H.224/S.160, the ACE Act, which would create a dedicated funding source to improve accessibility in the creative economy. Arts organizations and advocates, including Community Access to the Arts, Abilities Dance Boston, Jacob’s Pillow, the Multicultural Arts Center, Northampton Community Music Center, Mass Creative, Open Door Arts, and Monkey House, described barriers such as inaccessible buildings, lack of ASL interpretation and captioning, inadequate lifts and backstage access, and the high cost of renovations. Testifiers said the bill would help smaller and historic institutions make physical and programmatic improvements and allow people with disabilities to participate as artists, workers, and audiences. The committee also heard testimony on H.4180, which would require DDS to consider neuropsychological evaluations when determining eligibility for intellectual disability services. Parents and advocates argued that IQ cutoffs alone can miss significant functional needs, especially for autistic adults and others with complex developmental profiles, and urged broader access to DDS supports. Additional testimony supported S.101 on closed captioning and telecommunications in public areas, and S.158 on requiring restaurants to have some chairs with arms to better accommodate physically disabled and older patrons. No votes were taken during the hearing, and the chair adjourned after hearing from the scheduled witnesses and noting a few signups that were not present.

Transcript Highlights:

• In 2012, we conducted a routine survey of Kaiser's behavioral health services and identified deficiencies
• related to the delivery of behavioral health services.
• Then in 2016, through another routine survey, we identified a Then in 2016, through another routine survey
• We look at access during those surveys.
• or when we go out and do our routine surveys.

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee held an informational hearing on Kaiser Permanente’s behavioral health care system, focusing on Department of Managed Health Care enforcement actions, Kaiser’s corrective action work plan, and testimony from patients, advocates, and union representatives. DMHC officials reviewed a long history of complaints, surveys, fines, and settlements involving Kaiser’s access to behavioral health services, including deficiencies found in 2012 and 2016, a 2022 non-routine survey, and a 2023 settlement that imposed a $50 million penalty and required $150 million in community investments over five years. DMHC said it continues to monitor Kaiser through quarterly meetings, complaint review, follow-up surveys, and a reimbursement process for members who could not obtain timely in-network care. Committee members pressed DMHC on what “timely access” and continuity of care mean in practice, how virtual care and group therapy fit into the standards, and what triggers a non-routine survey. DMHC said initial behavioral health appointments generally should not take more than two weeks, urgent care should be within days, and follow-up care within 10 days, with out-of-network care required when plans cannot meet standards. Officials also said Kaiser’s initial corrective action work plan lacked detail, but the revised plan was accepted and will be tracked through quarterly reporting and possible additional enforcement if Kaiser fails to comply. The second panel featured testimony from a Kaiser enrollee, a behavioral health policy expert, a Kaiser therapist, and the NUHW president. The enrollee described serious delays and inadequate treatment for his daughter after a suicide attempt, while the therapist and union leader said Kaiser’s behavioral health system is understaffed, relies too heavily on short appointments, group therapy, and webinars, and treats behavioral health as less important than medical-surgical care. They argued Kaiser’s one-appointment-at-a-time scheduling rule and limited treatment time violate parity requirements and harm continuity of care. Several members criticized Kaiser for not appearing at the hearing and said the testimony underscored the need for stronger oversight, clearer metrics, and faster remedies for patients.

Transcript Highlights:

• And as a reminder, BLR's full survey results BLR's full survey results are in your binder in tab three
• But it just got me kind of trying to understand the difference in this survey versus a survey that we
• surveyed compared to who you surveyed?
• Can you tell me more about who you did survey?
• I will say that when this survey came out, I heard a lot of I will say that when this survey came out

Transcript Highlights:

• So market rate survey...
• We have only done the market rate survey.
• So we will do what's called a wraparound service.
• How much are we trying to contact them before we cut off their services?
• We would look at providing direct services to children.

Committee: All EDUCATION- HOUSE EARLY CHILDHOOD SUBCOMMITTEE

Summary: The Early Childhood Committee met to receive an update from the Office of Early Childhood on Arkansas child care and early learning programs. Committee members discussed the state’s child care crisis, including reported economic losses from lack of access, the need to track access, affordability, workforce shortages, rural and infant/toddler care gaps, and the role of local leads in identifying needs across the state. The committee also approved the February 17 minutes. Office of Early Childhood staff explained their responsibilities under the LEARNS Act, including kindergarten readiness, provider quality, and access to affordable seats. They reviewed licensing, quality efforts, and the two main funding streams: School Readiness Assistance (SRA), a federally funded voucher program serving about 14,600 children with a wait list of more than 3,000, and Arkansas Better Chance (ABC), a state-funded program serving about 23,000 children, with approval to increase to 24,000 slots. Members asked about the difference between market rate surveys and cost analyses, and staff said the office is procuring both, with results expected by the end of the year. Several members raised concerns about funding levels, especially that ABC reimbursement has not kept pace with K-12 funding increases and that child care reimbursement remains below the true cost of care. Staff said ABC requires certified teachers and lower ratios than SRA, but pays less, and that some federal pre-K slots were moved into ABC to preserve continuity of care. They also explained that SRA eligibility changes, including a higher work requirement and ending a child care worker eligibility category, were made to reduce spending and serve families on the wait list. The committee discussed communication with providers and parents, technical assistance for centers, and possible future legislative action to stabilize providers and expand access, but no votes or formal actions were taken beyond approving the minutes and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• I'll just give a short synopsis of what's been going on. surveying with the new new technology surveying
• </c> and every other uh assessment or survey and every other uh assessment or survey that's<00:10:48.000
• </c> maintaining the public land survey maintaining the public land survey system<00:20:22.039><c> the
• <00:37:09.880><c> we</c><00:37:10.079><c> stand</c><00:37:10.520><c> at</c> survey we stand at survey
• and Mental Health Services 44.9% of survey<01:05:27.640><c> respondents</c><01:05:28.200><c> were</c

Committee: Senate State and Local Government

Transcript Highlights:

• new service um Education Service Service Service options<01:44:15.880><c> um</c><01:44:16.360><c> so
• survey?
• survey?
• survey?
• survey?

Summary: The committee opened with House Bill 184, which would create a committee to study changing school start times. Members discussed Amendment 0394, which made the study committee’s duties more investigative and adjusted reporting recipients, including the Governor. Several members raised questions about whether the committee should review evidence-based studies, local district decisions, and existing district reports; supporters said the amendment would better allow the committee to gather information and recognize local control. The amendment passed 17-0, and the bill as amended also passed 17-0. Representative Litchfield noted that no one had testified in opposition and encouraged the future study committee to review an Oyster River School District report on school start times. The committee then took up House Bill 394, concerning cooperative school district budget committees and board member representatives. Amendment 0476 was adopted 17-0 after discussion that it clarified the bill’s language and reflected work with the School Boards Association. The committee then voted OTPA on the bill, which also passed 17-0. House Bill 738, requiring background checks for employees and volunteers at certain non-public schools or education service providers receiving public funds, was moved inexpedient to legislate. Supporters said the bill would create practical and legal problems for private citizens and homeschooling families, and the motion passed 15-2 with no minority report, placing the bill on consent. The committee next considered House Bill 235, which would amend the educator code of ethics and conduct to add responsibilities to parents. Supporters argued parents should be explicitly included in the code, while opponents said parents were already covered in existing ethics language and statute. The bill passed narrowly, 9-8. The committee then returned to House Bill 532 on alternate dispute resolution and individualized education plan team meeting facilitation. Amendment 0480H clarified that different rules would apply separately to neutral conference, mediation, and IEP facilitation; it passed 17-0, and the bill as amended also passed 17-0. Finally, the committee moved to House Bill 564, concerning adoption of school administrative unit budgets, and voted to retain the bill for further review because members said there was still confusion about how it would apply to single-district and multi-district SAUs.

Transcript Highlights:

• Surveying isn't only about equipment or calculations.
• Surveying isn't only about equipment or calculations.
• They get repeated and reinforced in future surveys.
• I own Selkirk Cabinet Land Surveying in Sandpoint.
• I'm also owner of Stryker Surveying in Payette, Idaho.

Committee: House Business

Transcript Highlights:

• In relation to various services that you provide, what would be television type services, and what would
• be safety type services?
• That would be like services like.
• a survey.
• and not to be relied upon as a survey,' but then give them a survey, something that looks like a survey

Committee: House Administrative Rules

Transcript Highlights:

• We're going to set up a survey.
• billing for behavioral services.
• Services in schools, schools billing for behavioral services. Maybe that's the way you say it.
• on those services, correct?
• So that's that survey piece.

Summary: The meeting began with approval of the May minutes and then moved into administrative updates on several 2025 legislative workstreams. Staff reported progress on two marketing efforts tied to the youth mental health crisis: one focused on increasing awareness and use of urgent crisis centers, and another broader crisis-continuum campaign led by United Way. Both projects are refining materials based on working-group feedback and aim to have materials ready before the start of the school year. Updates were also given on the UCC private insurance review and the crisis continuum review, both of which are gathering data and reconvening working groups over the summer. The main discussion centered on a Civic Solutions Group update on Medicaid school billing. The contractor explained that the project is examining why Connecticut schools are not billing for behavioral health and related services, with the goal of maximizing federal reimbursement. Members clarified that the study is about schools billing for services, not private providers billing in schools. Questions focused on whether Medicaid has caps or authorization issues when students receive services both in school and in the community, and whether recent federal or state changes affect billing. The contractor said the work is still in data collection and analysis, and that some issues, such as reauthorization procedures, were outside his scope. Participants also raised concerns about perceived barriers, fee-for-service limitations, and the need to distinguish school-based billing from provider billing. A second major presentation came from Disability Rights Connecticut on a separate legislative study concerning behavioral health issues affecting students receiving special education. The subgroup is examining the feasibility and impact of requiring evidence-based interventions, especially for challenging behaviors that can lead to restraint and seclusion, and is also looking at monitoring and random audits of restraint and seclusion practices. The team described its project plan, including literature reviews, interviews, focus groups, surveys, and data requests from the State Department of Education and other stakeholders. Members emphasized that the work is aimed primarily at private providers under the statute, but may have broader relevance. Questions from the group focused on whether the study would include public schools, how evidence-based practices apply to students with intellectual disabilities and autism, and whether caregivers or parents would be interviewed; the presenters said caregiver input is not currently part of the charge. The meeting ended with reminders about the July 15 meeting, which will include a Solnit briefing, and a note that August TCB meetings will not be held, though a workshop on the Connecticut Children’s Behavioral Health Provider Survey is being planned for late July or early August.