Family Caregiver Peer Support Act
The Family Caregiver Peer Support Act would amend the Older Americans Act of 1965 to authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to award grants for the development or expansion of in-person and virtual peer support programs for family caregivers. The bill defines eligible entities broadly to include states, nonprofits, institutions of higher education, aging and disability network entities, junior or community colleges, Indian tribes, and tribal organizations.
Grant funds could be used to build or expand peer support services that help caregivers navigate administrative and financial forms, policies, and processes, while also providing emotional support. Funds could also support workforce development for certified peer support specialists and improve virtual, peer, mental health, and behavioral health support services, including translation and interpretation services for caregivers who are not English-proficient or who use American Sign Language. The bill also directs the Secretary to identify underserved regions and populations, prioritize grants for communities and caregiver groups with greater need, and conduct outreach to increase awareness of the program.
If enacted, the bill would add a new section to Title IV of the Older Americans Act and create a federal grant program focused specifically on family caregiver peer support. It would expand the federal role in caregiver assistance by funding state, nonprofit, educational, tribal, and aging-network partners to deliver support services, with explicit attention to underserved communities, language access, and caregivers with disabilities. The bill authorizes $10 million annually for fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be framed as a supportive, service-oriented proposal with a public-health and caregiver-assistance focus. Its emphasis on virtual access, language services, and underserved populations suggests a broadly inclusive approach. No formal opposition or recorded vote history is available in the provided materials.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no documented controversy in the available materials. Potential points that could draw discussion, however, include the scope of eligible entities, the use of federal grant funding, and the bill’s explicit prioritization of certain populations such as immigrants, LGBTQ+ caregivers, younger caregivers, and caregivers with disabilities. The inclusion of these priority groups and language-access requirements may be the most likely areas of policy debate if the bill advances.