June 2, 2026 · Children and Human Services Committee · 12,464 words · 17 speakers · 93 segments
I call this meeting of the House Children and Human Services Committee to order. We have about 50,000 committees meeting right now, and several of you have to leave. I understand that. So we're going to move quickly. Clerk, please call the roll.
Chair White. Here.
Vice Chair Salvo. Ranking Member Lutt.
Here. Representative Brewer.
Here. Representative Brownlee.
Here. Representative Bryant Bailey is checked in.
Representative Click. Here.
Representative Dieter. Here.
Representative Feller-Arthur. Here.
Representative Melanie Miller.
Representative Odioso. Here. Representative Ray is excused. Representative Richardson. Present.
Okay, we have a quorum, so we'll proceed as a full committee. The minutes are on your iPads. Are there any objections to the minutes? Seeing none, the minutes are approved. Next, we're going to move on to House Bill 647 for its eighth hearing. I call up House Bill 647, and we do have a sub-bill, and I would like to explain a little bit about the sub-bill. We've been trying to negotiate between some of the senators that are working in this space and the House and figure out where we're at and do as much as we can to address concerns that have been expressed, knowing that people are going to read this. We're not voting on this today, but we would like to accept this sub bill as the draft we're now working from. Basically, I would like to call on Representative Click for a motion.
Madam Chairwoman, I move to amend House Bill 647 with L-136-3186-4.
Okay.
And Ian, there's no problem with me reading over the differences versus – Yeah, it's always they give it to somebody else besides the chair in the six years I've been here. So just making sure I'm allowed to do that. All right.
So basically what it does is it removes definitions of fraud against the publicly funded child care program and misuse of public funds. There are definitions that currently exist in administrative code. These words are used throughout the Ohio Revised Code. Probably a good exercise would be for us to create standard definitions of misuse and abuse and fraud and things like that within the Ohio Revised Code. But at this point, we have changed the language so that we are talking about evidence that dictates, demonstrates, and the department has reason to suspect fraud, waste, or abuse. It clarifies that an absent day is any day that the child was authorized to receive care but did not receive it, and that DCY's recognition of the absent day is contingent on the notice and approval of the child's caretaker, whether that's a parent or a grandparent or whatever, that the parents need to sign off because these days do move between providers. It specifies DCY is able to withhold public funds and suspend or terminate a PFCC agreement if evidence demonstrates and the department has reason to suspect fraud or misuse. It allows for the backdating, it says DCY may allow for the backdating, not shall, of 14 calendar days or 10 business days unless evidence demonstrates and there's suspicion of fraud. So in other words, yes, you can still do the backdating, but if there's suspicion, then they can choose not to allow that. Again, instead of shall recognize DCY may recognize absentees unless evidence demonstrates and there's reason to suspect fraud, waste or abuse. It specifies DCY does make all of the exemptions to do authorizations unless they choose to designate a county department of JFS to serve in that role So the nature of the exemptions for impacts to like a family training or education or employment schedule the exemption will last 30 days unless there's a good cause extension. In other words, you're always working night shift. There's no reason for us to keep revisiting that every 30 days. So it kind of tweaked that language a bit. But the extension shall not exceed six months. So there's a six month review of those longer term ones. And then the biggest area that you may need clarification, it removes the references to the inspector general and instead requires the AG and the AG's Bureau of Criminal Investigation to conduct the investigations upon referral. It still retains the local prosecutor has first dibs on this. And then it gives them that 60 days or longer extension if needed. But it does go back to that. Inspector General is not in that role. It will be the AG as it was in the introduced bills between 647 and 649. Are there any questions or objections to the sub bill? All right, without objection then, the sub bill is accepted and this is the draft we will work from and this concludes the eighth hearing on House Bill 647. Next I will call up House Bill 707 for its first hearing and I recognize Representatives Williams and Representative Brewer to provide sponsor testimony. Oh, he did. He was just there a minute ago. He's going to check and see and otherwise we'll move forward. He's not there? Okay. Moving on, we will call up House Bill 797 for its first hearing, and the chair recognizes Vice Chair Salvo for a motion.
Madam Chairwoman, I move to amend with AM underscore 136 underscore 2636.
Okay. The motion is ordered. Please explain the amendment.
This amendment clarifies that a grant awarded under the Social Work Apprentices Retention and Training Internship Program may be awarded for up to three academic years, subject to available funds, instead of requiring a grant to be awarded for three academic years.
Okay, so it has May instead of?
Correct.
All right, are there any objections to this amendment? Seeing none, we will accept the amendment. All right, I recognize Representative Salvo and Brownlee to provide sponsor testimony.
Thank you.
Chair White, Ranking Member Lett, and members of the House Children and Human Services Committee, thank you for allowing us to provide sponsor testimony on House Bill 797, the Ohio Students and Families Workforce Strengthening Act. The number one complaint regarding behavioral health in Ohio is lack of access to care and severe provider shortages. This year, the Health Policy Institute of Ohio found that 75 out of 88 of our counties in Ohio are reporting a behavioral health care workforce shortage This workforce shortage is even more severe for behavioral health providers who work with children and adolescents Working as a behavioral health provider with children and youth takes a special kind of person You have to love working with children. You have to be willing to learn separate treatment modalities, like play therapy, that work with kids. You have to adjust the way you communicate and support ethics within the work to make sure the child understands and has agency within treatment. You have to be comfortable having glitter all over your office or shooting basketball hoops during a therapy session, even if you're not very athletic like me. But most of all, you have to be comfortable working with not only the child who is your client, but also the parents, the school members, and any other adults who are involved in the child's care in order to make sure the client can attain the desired outcome. Providing behavioral health care, especially to children, is a very complex job that requires significant training, practice, and supervision, yet it is not well paid. In fact, in order to even receive your master's level social work degree, social work students are required to serve 900 hours, or about 20 hours per week, over 18 months, in direct practice internship. Almost all of these internships are unpaid, leaving students struggling to make ends meet while they try to complete their degrees. For many students, the financial stressors of becoming a social worker just don't make sense. The Ohio Students and Families Workforce Strengthening Act, which is a mouthful, is a step towards reducing those financial stressors and investing in our behavioral health workforce. House Bill 797 demonstrates this investment into youth behavioral health by creating an internship pilot program, connecting masters of social work candidates at five state institutions of higher ed with a $15,000 paid internship. if they serve that internship in a public K-12 school where more than 50% of students are on free lunch programs. Specifically, the bill targets five universities in the state, Wright State, Youngstown State, OU, Bowling Green, and Miami, which are outside of Ohio's three main urban cores where behavioral health care deserts are the most severe. By limiting the scope of the pilot program by region, placement location, and type of service, we were able to keep the bill's appropriation to a flat $1 million while also addressing one of the most severe behavioral health care shortage spaces in the state. House Bill 797 establishes a three-year pilot program designed to evaluate strategies for strengthening the school-based social work workforce in underserved and high-need schools. The bill includes an interim report after the second year and a final report at the conclusion of the pilot, allowing legislators to evaluate recruitment, retention, and workforce outcomes while providing flexibility to continue supporting participating students and schools throughout the pilot period. With the Ohio Students and Families Workforce Strengthening Act, our legislature has the opportunity to not only invest in the stability of the behavioral health care workforce, but also in the increased health care and productivity of Ohioans. This bill does not clean up glitter or teach social workers how to have a better basketball shot but for those who wish to work in behavioral health care with children it can help make the attractions to the profession stronger than the barriers The hope you get from helping a young person make a change has the potential to give them many years of a healthy and productive lifestyle. The amount of stress you help relieve on the child is multiplied by the amount of stress, including lost work hours, school meetings, and reduced community resource time that you help relieve within that child's networks of parents, schools, and community members. And with that, I will hand things over to Rep Salvo.
Thanks, Rep. Good morning. Good morning. Chair White, Ranking Member Lead, and members of the House Children and Human Service Committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide sponsored testimony on House Bill 797, the Ohio Students and Families Workforce Strengthening Act. Representative Brownlee has already discussed the workforce shortages affecting children and families, as well as the barriers many social work students face as they pursue careers serving Ohio's youth. I would like to focus on why this bill was structured the way it is and what we hope to learn from the pilot program. House Bill 797 establishes the Social Work Apprenticeship Retention and Training, or SMART, internship program. The goal is simple, to determine whether providing paid internship opportunities can strengthen the pipeline of future school-based social workers in underserved and high-need communities. It is also important to understand the rules social workers play within our schools and communities. School social workers frequently assist with attendance issues, family engagement, crisis response, homelessness, food insecurity, community referrals, and helping students overcome non-academic barriers that interfere with learning. They often serve as a bridge between schools, families, and community resources, so students are better poised to learn, succeed, and thrive. Under current educational requirements, as Rep. Bradley said, Master of Social Work students complete approximately 900 hours of supervised field placement, often the equivalent of 20 hours per week over multiple semesters before earning their degree. In many cases, these internships are unpaid. Students are often balancing coursework, field placement, employment, and family responsibilities at the same time. For some, the financial burden becomes a barrier to entering and remaining in the profession. For students in rural communities where internship sites may require significant travel and outside employment opportunities can be limited. Those financial burdens can be greater than ever. Rather than creating a permanent program, House Bill 797 takes a measured and accountable approach. The bill establishes a three-year pilot program and directs the Chancellor of Higher Ed to evaluate whether paid school-based internships improve recruitment, retention, and workforce placement outcomes. The pilot focuses on the five universities and also for those that have 50% of students qualifying for free or reduced-price meals. This targeted approach allows us to focus resources where workforce shortages and student needs are most significant while maintaining a manageable and fiscally responsible pilot. The pilot is also designed to strengthen Ohio's rural workforce pipeline. The participating universities serve large portions of rural and Appalachian, Ohio, and we know individuals are more likely to work where they train. By creating paid internship opportunities and high needs goals, we increase likelihood that future or social workers will remain and serve in the communities that need them most. This bill also includes multiple accountability measures. Participating students remain subject to the university's existing supervision and evaluation requirements. The chancellor is directed to collect aggregate program data, evaluate outcomes, and provide both an interim report after the second academic year and a final report upon completion of the pilot program. The third year provides flexibility to continue supporting participating students, evaluating workforce outcomes, and make evidence-based recommendations to the GA regarding future policy decisions. At its core, House Bill 797 asks a straightforward question. If we reduce one of the financial barriers facing future social workers, can we strengthen the workforce pipeline for schools serving some of Ohio's highest-need students? The pilot structure allows the GA to answer that question with real data before making any decisions regarding continuation, expansion, modification, or future funding. As a social worker and a prevention professional, I've seen firsthand the impact that early support can have on a child's long-term success. I've also seen the challenges communities face when they cannot recruit and train enough qualified professionals to meet growing needs. House Bill 797 gives Ohio an opportunity to test a targeted workforce strategy, measure the results, and make future policy decisions based on evidence. Thank you for your consideration from House Bill 797, and we would like to address any questions you may have.
Thank you, representatives. Are there any questions for the witnesses? Yes, Ranking Member Lett.
Thank you, Chairwoman. Thank you guys so much for bringing this bill. I feel like you may have just mapped out my career story in social work for me. So appreciate that. Appreciate being seen. I wondered if you could just talk a little bit more about the problem that this bill is trying to address, in particular kind of what are the typical retention rates for child and youth behavioral health, and, you know, how will this bill address those issues?
Sure. Through the chair and to the representative, thank you for that question. You know, people are fleeing the field is really the bottom line, especially in, listen, the subset of people who go into youth behavioral health care is already very limited. Because we must, and I love working with kids. I miss them very much. But you have to work not just with a child, but with their whole world around them. It's so complicated. It makes for difficult recruitment in the first place. And what I would say the majority of people leaving the field leave for is because of financial concerns. It simply doesn't pay well enough. and when you're trying to go to school and make ends meet and you're working and going to school, which is about the equivalency of full-time and not getting paid for it. In fact, you're paying out on loans and what have you. It creates a situation where you're not even able to start saving for your future. So you start your job, which is also not very well paid after you graduate, at a deficit. So you're really kind of struggling from the very beginning. Retention rates are really low A lot of people leave the field after a few years The stress level is incredibly high And again the number one complaint is always around salary I also want to say I am a social worker also, and I live in a rural area. So one of the problems when you're pursuing your master's degree is often your placement is near your university. So it's very challenging to get someone out into those rural areas, and that is where our real deficit remains at this point. I will tell you, most people that come into the field come in because they love to help people, and you will see it time and time again. Wherever your placement is, most likely that is where you will land. So a lot of us, if our placement is in our rural communities and we fall in love with our community because as a social worker we are going to be working in a community systems approach if you fall in love with your community you fall in love with your students there's a much greater chance that you're going to land there but when your placement is in those rural areas and again 900 hours and you're driving from your university into the middle of nowhere it is financially prohibitive so if we can offset some of that cost to to make it a little more appealing, I do think we have that ability to get our social workers out into the areas where there's greatest need.
Thank you so much. Just one quick follow-up. The follow-up is simply, what's gonna happen if we don't address this issue to this field in general? I think especially when we're talking school-based social workers, we know prevention works. If we do not have someone coming in being that conduit? How do we access food resources, housing issues, deal with those non-academic barriers, like we are not getting sleep because my parents work different shifts around the clock. If we have someone's eyes on that, it is able to meet the needs of our students or connect them to the resources, we will see healthier students. We will see healthier communities come out of that. So if we don't feel that position, we are going to see gaps. And I think we're already feeling that in our communities.
And Representative Salva, you bring up a very good point in that the big push for social workers in schools is because the needs have become so great that teachers do not have time to deal with these issues. And so it inhibits learning, it inhibits issues. So thank you for raising that. Did you want to add something real quick? If I may, through the chair and to the representative, to add on to what Rep Salvo said, is that social workers, and I was a school-based therapist. I was in schools. I was working with these kids. We are often the only person within the school system that can be that point of contact to wrap around the child. So if a child is struggling for whatever reasons, they get sent to us for behavioral reasons or what have you, we get to take the opportunity to work with the child, understand what's going on, working with the parents and bridging that gap and connecting to those services. So we can be, honestly, sometimes the single point of contact that makes sure that that kid is getting what they need, whether it is a developmental disability. I've had kids sent to me for so many different reasons. Sometimes it's just simply a developmental disability, not a behavioral issue. Sometimes the family the parent struggles with their own mental health or their own cognitive disability Sometimes the family is struggling with you know being unhoused or what have you We can be that point of contact to help the teachers help the child even better And when it works, it's incredible. We have a very fairly robust school-based therapy situation in the Cincinnati area, although it's harder and harder to keep those positions filled. And it makes a huge difference in the outcomes for the stress levels of the kids, the families, and the school. Shameless plug for social workers.
Representative Richardson.
Thank you so much, Madam Chair. Thank you both for your testimonies. It wasn't a shameless plug. I just want to say that I think social workers are some of the most amazing, wonderful human beings. And for those who work in it, we thank you so much. And I've often thought, how do they pay off their college debt because they earn so very little? So I just want to make sure you know that up front as I ask this question, because when I look at that $1 million, I see it's really just going to cover 67 internships, right? So my question for you is, and I see the criteria that Brett Brownlee had identified, that certain areas and certain schools, 50% of the students are in free lunch programs, But I'm wondering, who actually decides? What's the criteria? I think it would be very difficult to be able to say, well, you're going to get it and you're not going to, and they're in the same program. So does the bill specify that criteria?
Through the chair to the representative, very good question. And no, it does not. So it's a bit of a self-selecting group anyway. There are simply, I would say, the majority of people who go into social work do not wish to work with children directly. So that's already self-selecting out. I will say that if we do pay, will more people maybe be interested in it? Yes, it's a possibility. But so far, I mean, this is an area that has the largest deficit for organic reasons. So I do not believe that people are going to, it's going to be, you know, like a Sophie's Choice here.
Okay. Got it. Follow up? Nope, no follow up.
Any other further questions for the witnesses? All right. Well, thank you both very much for bringing your bill.
Thank you.
This concludes the first hearing of House Bill 797. So next we'll go back and call back up House Bill 707 for its first hearing. I recognize Representative Williams and Brewer to provide sponsor testimony. Welcome.
Good morning, Chairwoman White, Vice Chair Selva, Ranking Member Lett, and members of the Ohio House Children and Human Services Committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide sponsor testimony on House Bill 707, Kamani's Law. I would also like to thank my joint sponsor, Representative Brewer, for his partnership in advancing meaningful children's services reform here in the state of Ohio. On March 24th of 2025, 13-year-old Kamani Latig was found dead inside of an abandoned home in Toledo. Out of respect for her family, I will not elaborate on the conditions she was found in. That is something the family, if they wish to do so, can elaborate on during the committee's proponent testimony. Nonetheless, it was one of the vilest and cruelest and most evil cases I've ever encountered. this whole tragedy was made even worse by the fact that her own father was allegedly the murderer in retrospect Kamani case was an especially difficult one on multiple occasions teachers and staff at Kamani school reported concerns about Kamani well to the Lucas County Children Services To the Lucas County Children's Services' credit, they followed protocol every time. They conducted well-being interviews with Kamani away from her guardian at the time, who was her grandmother. And while they did not find sufficient evidence to remove Kamani from her grandmother's care, the Lucas County Children's Services directed resources to Kamani's grandmother to help better raise her grandchild. Most unfortunate of all, Kamani's father was seldomly involved in her life at this point, never once appearing as a potential risk in those reports. Despite this, tragic reality hit. Everyone felt that something, somehow, this tragedy was preventable. That is why I stand before you with House Bill 707, Kamani's Law, because it is our responsibility to take every step towards protecting our children, whether or not there are clear answers to what needs to be done. Khamani's law is both simple and impactful, requiring each public school to appoint a child protection liaison to manage and track cases of child abuse or neglect involving children who attend those schools. Next, we require Ohio's uniform statewide automated child welfare system to provide interested parties with real-time notification and deadlines. Khamani's law also specifies that public children's service agencies must enter cases of suspected child abuse or neglect immediately, and that they must update those cases at least biweekly and ensure that these cases remain active. Khamani's law also expands the database access to juvenile courts, law enforcement agencies, and child protective liaison for statutory exclusive purposes. This bill also closed a loophole where the database information was not allowed to be requested by criminal courts, despite the evidence being necessary for certain cases. Finally, this bill requires DCY to provide mandatory training for the SACWISE access to all parties, which can use it and provide mandatory training for Ohio's child protective process to appointed child protection liaisons. It is a tragedy that it takes systematic failure that, you know, let down Kamani to expose the holes and gaps that exist in our system, especially systems as critical as the ones which protect and serve Ohio's children. Though, through it all, though we refuse to let Kamani's name be taken in vain, we will never be able to say for sure if these changes would have saved that young girl. But when brainstorming how to overcome the failures that may have caused her death, these gaps became evident. And we have been negligent not to propose these solutions in front of this committee. If these changes can save simply one child from facing the suffering that Kamani was forced to endure, then we would have succeeded. Chairman White, I thank you for the opportunity to testify in support of this important bill, and I'll turn it over to my joint sponsor for further comments.
Thank you, sir.
Thank you, Chair White, Vice Chair Sava, and fellow members of the House Children and Hearing Service Committee for the opportunity to provide sponsor testimony for Kimani's Law. Critical legislation aimed at protecting all of Ohio's children. As you just heard, everyday educators, caseworkers, law enforcement officers, and judges work to safeguard children from abuse and neglect. But too often, the system meant to protect them is fragmented. Critical information delayed, notifications are missed, responsibilities are unclear, and then the gaps between agencies' children fall through. KEMANI law, as you just heard, attempts to close those gaps. As you heard, this bill requires each public school to appoint a child protection liaison, responsible for managing cases of child abuse and neglect involved with students. Schools are often the first place abuses are noticed. This bill creates a clear point of contact, someone accountable for communication, coordination, and follow-through. Child protection liaisons will receive comprehensive training on Ohio's child protection process, ensuring competency and consistency. Humanity laws you heard also strengthen the Univized Statewide Automatic Child Welfare Information System, making sure the information is entered properly and updated often. This system making sure that the information is entered promptly and also updated often will help courts not only child protection liaisons and law enforcement agencies but maintain strict compliance with state and federal privacy laws. While knowledge sharing is a crucial aspect of this legislation, it is also important that those trusted with this information are trained and held to the highest standard. That's why the Department of Children and Youth will provide mandatory training for all individuals and entities to access this system. KEMANI Law provides guardrails to child protection process, making sure that the well-being our child is promoted and their safety is prioritized. And I'll just make a little personal, as you heard from our rep, joint sponsor, hopefully we can have the opportunity to have KEMANI's family here. mom currently resides in my district I've spoken to her several times and even just to hear the story about how something like this or even other recommendations help children in Ohio once again I thank you for allowing me to give sponsored testimony and we have taken questions thank you representatives
for bringing this important bill and first and foremost I lift up the name of Kimani and prayers for her family and all of the suffering that she and they have endured. Thank you for bringing this bill and we will entertain questions
right now. Any questions for the witnesses? Representative Brownlee. Through the chair, thank you and thank you representatives for this bill. You know having been a school-based therapist it is really hard. People don't understand what reporting requirements are and and how to do that. So I am gonna pick it a a little bit because I think it is so incredibly important that we actually delve into it. The first question is around the training and resources behind the training. Is there any appropriation in this bill that would support training on SACWIS, that would support training on understanding requirements of being a mandated reporter, or just reporting in general, even if you are not declared a mandated reporter?
Through the chair to the member, there isn't an appropriation in the bill. As typical in most bills that I draft, I do not put an appropriation in it. We are willing to put it in a glide path, a time period, where DCY becomes aware of their obligations and they can come back to the General Assembly and have a calculation of talking to vendors, what it's going to take to get the training, whether it's digital training or in-person training, and then they're able to come back and ask for an appropriation instead of me just writing a blank number and saying it's going to cost $10 million. I would prefer for DCY to come back and say, because the General Assembly passed this legislation, they gave us a requirement to have this implemented by 2028. We're asking for X amount of dollars because this is how many people we're going to have to train, and this is how we plan on doing the training. That's how I prefer to do legislation like this because I think it's important. I don't want to guess how much money is going to be necessary for the training or what is the best mechanism for training because technology changes so often What important for me So you know my profession as a criminal defense attorney puts me in weird cases and also I pay attention to cases that happen in my district
So in my district, outside of Kamani's case, we had a case where three pastors human trafficked a young girl who was placed in foster care of one of those pastors. When they were arrested in pending trial and they started to take pleas, the girl started the case by telling a counselor what was going on. That started the investigation. She was a mandatory reporter. She reported it. After that, the counselor had no idea what's going on with that report, none whatsoever. So while this case is pending and these gentlemen are getting ready to be sentenced to life in prison in federal court, the wife of one of the gentlemen thought it was a good idea to go and get the girl out of school, kidnap her, threaten her, and make her record a voicemail to the defendant's phone recanting her accusations. So then that woman and her daughter both were charged with kidnapping and witness tampering. The school was never aware that the accusations that were made a year ago resulted in a federal indictment and that the individuals were facing federal prosecution, and this was a witness in a federal case. The school was never aware. There needs to be better communication between the departments, and that's what we're looking to do here is to say, look, this database needs to be available to not only school counselors, but to this liaison that we're saying, which majority of the time is going to be a school counselor. Also available to courts, because I've had cases before where there's a child abuse and neglect case started by a school based on an accusation to a counselor. Children's Services gets involved. Mom or dad gets charged with child neglect or child abuse. I'm representing them in a criminal case, and the judge is asking me at the time of sentencing, what's the result of that? and I can't see it. I don't know if it was substantiated, unsubstantiated, and the court can't ask for those records either. So they're sentencing this person blind, not knowing if they were found, you know, the allegations were substantiated or not. So that's why we added in criminal courts for those instances where criminal courts need to have that information as well. But we are more than willing to have a conversation. I prefer to introduce it in the committee, amend in a glide path, and say it's not going to go into effect until 2027 or 2028, and give DCY a chance to come before you guys next General Assembly and ask for appropriate amount that is the minimal amount necessary to do the training. So that's typically how we try that.
Okay, let me, before you might have a follow-up, I just want to interject. So there is training already being created for mandatory reporters on how to recognize those signs and symptoms through the Ohio Children's Trust Fund. So we already have funding for that aspect. That's what they're doing for all the different mandatory reporters. So that piece is there. We will just have to ensure there's coordination because of this other additional training. So go ahead.
Did you have a follow-up real quick? Yes, please, through the chair. Thank you. And I would just encourage that conversation to be robust with entities that are already doing this work to ensure that, And I think where the trust fund does a great job is giving education on and training on identifying what child abuse is. But connecting the dots with the pieces in place, SACWIS, is really important because it's really the only place where it's the only clearinghouse for all of this information. our systems are done by county and it's when we have multi-county involvement it makes these cases almost impossible and so I just really encourage us to and I will help however I can to get this information sooner so we can really dig into what the costs look like where things already exist, and making this a system that would work to protect all children.
Okay, are there any other additional questions for the committee? Representative Richardson.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you both for your testimonies. You know, the one part, having worked really a lot with K-12 education funding. The concern I have here is to designate another member, to add another member of the staff when a lot of our districts are already struggling financially in some way, shape, or form. So I guess what I'm wondering is, is it necessary to hire someone in,
or can it be something where others who are already on staff are trained? Through the chairs of the member. So we're not encouraging people to hire someone in just for this particular role What we're saying is we want a designated person we saw we like the foster care liaison that we've passed before We're essentially typically what we see is either a dean or guidance counselor is the person just designated So you have a person you know is the point of contact to say there You know a teacher comes across signs of bruising and says, you know I'm a mandatory what am I supposed to go and talk to the child protection liaison make sure that we do everything right and now that person is the one responsible for making sure the system is updated and putting in my goal is eventually passed legislation as well to put what the protocols are for schools when a child is actually needing protection that they're under a active case there should be some red flag when there's someone that's coming to pick that child up or taking that child out of school there there's there needs to be further protections and I'm willing to have that conversation in this bill but you know we worked with community organizations that work with the family to come up with this proposal we accepted about 60% of their proposal because it did include a robust appropriation that was just it was just made-up number to be able to do this but the goal is not to hire new not to add on tons of hours it's in the rare occasion that you actually believe there's abuse neglect dependency case and your mandatory reporter that there's you have someone that can coordinate with the agencies that are involved because as the representative said, we do have cross-county ones. That's one of the things now with abuse, neglect, dependency, you can actually transfer that case in juvenile court to the home county of the juvenile where the offender is over here in Lucas County and the home county is Franklin County and they were visiting grandfather and something happened, and now you've got cross-county. The school in Columbus doesn't know that the offender is back in Toledo. So we need to have better coordination, at least when it comes to children. We're talking about kids. like they deserve the most protection out of anybody in our society.
Did you have a follow-up, Rep. Drifson?
Follow-up, yes, I would agree with you. We really do need to protect our children. Is it permissive? In other words, can the school districts opt into this at all? The reason I'm saying that, too, is we have to be careful about unfunded mandates, you know. So it sounds like it's not permissive.
Yeah, through the chairs of the representative, it's not permissive. We're saying that every school district should have a designated person, a coordinated person, So, you know, Children's Services can coordinate with that person and they have access, if need be, to the database so they can keep updates knowing, hey, last year this person reported something. We reported it to law enforcement. Let's check it. You know, there's something suspicious. All of a sudden the uncle is trying to pick up his niece from school. Let's look up that case. Oh, there's an active protection order from the uncle on the juvenile. There's an active criminal investigation. Well, now that person can be charged with attempted witness tampering. Right.
So we need to have that coordination and I can only do it by just designating someone No follow follow up Thank you Madam Chair Vice Chair Salvo Thank you Chair And thank you for bringing this before us
As far as the FERPA and HIPAA standards, are there issues with that school personnel, that liaison going on to the SACWIS system? Through the chair to the vice chair, I don't believe so, but we can get back.
We can talk to legal about that. I don't, I don't believe there is going to be. an issue. Anyone else?
Representative Odioso. Thank you, Chair. Quick question. The designation, does that person be permitted to do other tasks in the counseling world or whatever else? You're asking for a person just dedicated to that task?
Through the Chair to the member, we're not changing their roles at all. we're not giving them more authority to get therapeutic services or anything like that. We're simply saying the school shall have one designated person that we can point to, and it doesn't expand any other authority of them.
Thank you, Chair. But that person can have other jobs, right? And that person might already exist in these school districts, right?
Through the chair to the member, yes. And we see foster care liaisons designated. I've seen both the dean and a guidance counselor before be designated for that purposes. We have other designations under state law. So this is particular to protection of the minor child when there's abuse, neglect, dependency cases. And you're saying it's a good idea that there is a designated person to be able to track these things? Through the chair to the representative, I think it's a great idea. I mean, we've seen where there's gaps. You know, we have another bill named VJ's Law that talks about kind of those gaps where a mandatory reporter reports to Children's Services, Children's Services doesn't send anybody for 48 hours. The minor child, which is an infant, is sent back home and is further abused by the individual and killed. There's gaps. And I think it's our responsibility that when we find them, we need to fix them. And, you know, we've talked to the family that I don't think there was anything that actually went wrong in Kamani's case other than the dad just being a depraved individual that, you know, begged law enforcement to kill him right here in Columbus. He came from Toledo to Columbus and was shot in the streets here in Columbus and was begging the officers to kill him because he knew what he had did to his daughter. And there was there was no warning signs. Now, mind you, this girl was part of a group of kids that are, you know, in need of protection. She had an active case. She was living with a grandparent. You know, she had children's services.
There was complaints about bruising, things of that nature, and they were going through that normal process. But this was an at-risk youth that had an increased risk for human trafficking, increased risk for a lot of things. And there could have been better resources put in. But when we looked at the case file and we looked at the gaps, her family said, maybe this would not have protected Kamani, but it can protect the next kid that goes to their counselor and reports. Because that counselor didn't know what the results of that reports were. She didn't know that there was an investigation by Children's Services. She didn't know whether or not the allegations were substantiated or unsubstantiated. She didn't know. And it's not that she didn't seek out the information. it's that she wasn't allowed to get that information because children's services investigations are private unless you're part of one of the groups that are allowed to access the database. Do you have another follow-up?
Okay. Any other questions?
I did want to, it's interesting that you brought that up because the one question that I had How in the world did the school not know to not release that little girl to the wife of one of the abusing pastors? And so you brought up, I think that I'm very interested in exploring that about how do we help schools know better, be better informed, not know, you know what I mean, be better informed so that they know that someone should not be released into the custody. And I do agree that this is probably going on already with lots of schools have people doing it. So centralizing it and coordinating it might be something they're already doing, but certainly we do need to look at how do we make that as easy as possible with the tools and technology.
To the chair, for that one case that I talked about, the school released the young lady to the wife of the offender because they were serving as foster parents to the young girl. And as foster parents, they were trafficking that young girl across the city of Toledo. And they were prosecuted. They were prosecuted for that and convicted and are serving time behind bars. But what the school didn't know was when she initially reported the abuse, she reported the abuse by a different pastor. And the investigation showed it was actually her foster father that had sold her to the pastor. So the counselors didn't know. That wasn't the person that they had reported as the offender, but if they would have had access to the database and it was being updated, they would have known that a federal investigation was open, that there was federal prosecutions currently underway, and that she was a witness in a federal human trafficking case where people were pending sentencing after pleading guilty to trafficking her. and maybe there would have been some red flags put up around her that said, hey, if anyone comes to pick up this young girl, you're going to flag the principal before you ever release her from the building. And that may have been enough to stop it. So I think just getting access to the database is crucial and getting a designated person to be the one doing that because we don't want every eye on this sensitive information. We don't want every teacher accessing that information. But we do want our courts and our liaisons now available to get it, and that's what this bill does.
Okay, and just as a follow-up, representatives, so I guess what I'm thinking is the person is not necessarily going to be able to proactively know to go in and look at SACWIS. Is there something we could put in that would be a trigger, i.e., if a child is enrolled in a school, law enforcement, when there is a report of abuse and neglect, is required to notify the school so then the flag could exist?
Through the chair, I would love that.
Yeah, something that makes it easy, because I can't imagine that they're going to be able to have spare time to go through SACWIS. I think it's great that you can, but we need a trigger or a flag so they know to go look.
So let's continue to explore this idea, and thank you both for bringing this. Is there any further discussion?
Really appreciate it today, and this will conclude the first hearing on House Bill 707. All right, next up we will have our second hearing, and we're going a little bit. Let me get back on the order here. Okay, now we're going to call up House Bill 865 for its second hearing, and we welcome a sub-bill. Wait, did I go the wrong order? Yeah, we've got to have discussion to recognize Vice Chair Selva for a motion, and we'll call you up in just a second.
Madam Chairwoman, I move to amend with AM underscore 136 underscore 2353-3.
Could you please explain?
Sure. This amendment comes from the sponsors and makes the following changes. One it specifies that only DCY shall publish profiles of adoptable children Number two it clarifies that a child profile can only be created if the child consents and specifies that the child must be 12 or older in order to give consent. In the case of sibling sets, a child who is 12 or older may give consent for siblings who are unable to give consent. Number three, it prohibits the use of photos or videos in the creation of a profile. Four, it removes the requirement for the PCSA to host a link to the Adopt Us Kid website. Number five, it removes the requirement that each PCSA annually reports to DCY the total number of grants awarded under the Ohio Adoption Grant Program. Okay.
Are there any questions or objections to this amendment? Seeing none, the amendment is accepted. Next, we will recognize Mervette Saw to provide sponsor testimony.
Thank you for coming in. Good morning. Chairwoman White, Vice Chair Salvo, Ranking Member Lett, and members of the House Children and Human Services Committee, thank you for the opportunity to provide proponent testimony on House Bill 865. My name is Mervette Saw, and I serve as the Senior Director of Business Development at the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption. The Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption is a national, nonprofit, public charity created by Wendy's founder, Dave Thomas, who was adopted and is dedicated to dramatically increasing the number of adoptions of children waiting in North America's foster care systems. The foundation focuses on finding permanent, loving families for children who have waited the longest in care. Through our signature, evidence-based Wendy's Wonderful Kids program, we support recruiters in Ohio and across North America who work exclusively with children who face the greatest barriers to permanency. These are often teenagers, children in sibling groups, children with special needs, and youth who have experienced multiple placements, disrupted permanency opportunities, and years of instability and trauma. Recruiters work individually with small caseloads of children and youth to identify and connect them with safe, caring adults already known to them when possible. This includes relatives, fictive kin, former caregivers, teachers, coaches, and other supportive adults. This work is deeply relationship-based and personal, prioritizing dignity, voice, emotional safety, and long-term well-being for every child served. The foundation's support for this legislation is informed by more than three decades of experience working with the longest-waiting children in foster care. Through that work, we've learned that successful permanency efforts are built on trust, relationship building, and meaningful youth engagement. Children and youth in foster care have often experienced significant trauma, instability, loss, and repeated disruptions in placements and in relationships. Many have had little control over major decisions affecting their lives. Because of these experiences, youth voice, informed consent, and privacy are not simply procedural considerations. They are critical components of effective, child-focused permanency practice. Many older youth in foster care carry a deep fear of rejection and a belief that no one will want them. Because of this, the foundation believes informed consent should be more than a single conversation or a simple signature Youth should have meaningful opportunities to understand how their information may be shared who may have access to it and how they are represented throughout the permanency process For many youth, simply being asked their preference and having those preferences respected could help restore a sense of agency and control. We also recognize that privacy protections are especially important in today's digital environment. Once information or images are publicly shared online, youth may have very little ability to control where that information goes or how it may be later accessed or used. Children should never feel defined solely by a profile, an image, a diagnosis, or placement history. Permanency work should recognize the full journey of humanity of each child and ensure recruitment efforts are conducted in a way that respects not only where the child has been, but their potential to thrive. For these reasons, we support House Bill 865's emphasis on youth consent, consultation, and privacy protections. We are particularly encouraged by provisions that strengthen safeguards surrounding children's information, promote developmentally appropriate youth engagement, and ensure children have a voice in decisions related to their profiles and their personal information. Importantly, we do not view privacy protections and permanency efforts as competing priorities. Our experience through Wendy's Wonderful Kids program has consistently shown that permanency outcomes are not determined by a child's characteristics, but by the quality, intentionality, and persistence of the recruitment practices surrounding them. Thoughtful safeguards can coexist with effective recruitment and help ensure permanency efforts remain child-focused. Based on our experience serving the longest waiting children in Ohio and across North America, the Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption believes House Bill 865 represents an important step towards ensuring permanency efforts are conducted in a way that protects children's privacy, elevate youth voice, and preserve dignity while continuing to connect children with safe and permanent families. Thank you again for your time and opportunity to provide testimony today, and I'm happy to answer any questions.
Thank you very much, Ms. Saffer, coming in. Are there any questions for the witness? Okay, well, seeing none, you have gotten off easy, and we really appreciate all the wonderful work that you are doing. Thank you. And thank you for coming in and sharing the stories. All right. I did want to mention on your iPad there is one written testimony from Sarah LaTourette with the Ohio Children's Alliance, and so you can take a look at that and see. And this is going to conclude then the second hearing on House Bill 865. All right. Next up, we are looking at House Bill 496, which is Representative Brewer and Williams. If you may recall, this is related to Father's Walk Week. Representative Brewer, would you like to make a comment right now?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I would just say I hope people read the testimony, the written testimony that was on here, because one of the questions was how do we expand on not just the week. As we look at the testimony, you see people want to expand it to include barbershops a week, chance, things of that nature. So it outlines a lot of the things that many districts are doing not just as a one thing but use it as a kickoff on each other thing So thank you Madam Chair for this opportunity And what is June June is Father Day month so I glad this is part of that as well Thank you
Yeah, thank you for bringing that to our attention. And there are several pieces of written testimony on your iPad, so I do want to highlight that. and there's the Fatherhood Commission we are waiting just a few minutes for Representative Odeoso to get back and I would love for you to tell us because you sit on the Fatherhood Commission a little bit about that can you spend just a moment telling us about the Fatherhood Commission there was a $20 million money allocation in the budget for Fatherhood Initiatives tell us a little more about what you're seeing there. Yes I myself
sit on the Fatherhood Commission there will be a I think Brett McLean sent out a list of all the events that were going around. The state of Ohio, please, if you want to come to any of them, please let me, him, and Orr. We'll get the director. You can be recognized. But this is part of making sure that fathers matter in the state of Ohio. We want fathers to be engaged. And let's not just say fathers, but father figures as well. Because a lot of these activities include father figures who may be part of the community, just to encourage our young men and young women to be better adults here in Ohio. And so we are actually one of the leading states and counties that do stuff when it comes to fatherhood and promoting fatherhood when it comes to father initiative. So thank you so much, Madam Chair.
Thank you very much. So this will conclude the second hearing on this bill, House Bill 496. And I'm going to now turn the gavel over to Vice Chair Salvo.
I will now call up House Bill 939 for its first hearing. I recognize Representative Andrea White and Representative Odioso to provide sponsor testimony.
Thank you, Vice Chair Salvo, Ranking Member Lett, and members of our wonderful Children and Human Services Committee. We are glad to be here today, and I want to just boil it down to two key things. If you remember nothing else from what we say today, the bottom line is early intervention works. and our county boards are on the verge of having so much financial difficulty that unless we step in and say let's invest now instead of paying later, we're going to be in a world of hurt in a few years. So this is what this bill is about. We're basically, you know, I'm a big proponent of invest now or you will pay later in terms of lost lives, lost possibilities, lost more expense. These investments are particularly critical for the child's first 1,000 days of life. As we know, the research just proves this over and over again. The business case is there, that when we intervene in a child's life with early intervention, we see significantly improved developmental outcomes long-term for both the kids and their families. One short but very significant fact was once again demonstrated in research by Linder in 2025 that showed early intervention can reduce long-term special education placements by 50% and support overall kindergarten readiness. So let's think about that. Long-term, reducing special ed by 50%. I'm guessing all of us have heard from our schools the growing cost of special education services. The more we can do to invest now so that we and our local communities and schools and families and kids or not paying so much longer and more expensively. So just in terms of the child's overall life and the savings, on our families, our communities, and the state. So let's make that strategic investment, evidence-based investment now, or you will pay later. Now more than ever, there's tens of thousands of Ohio kids that are enrolling and being assisted with early intervention services. So that's kind of why we brought House Bill 939, to raise the flag and say we've got to do something, we've got to be thinking about this, there's going to be budgetary concerns coming up, we've got to look at this. So Ohio's early intervention system serves nearly 30,000 infants and toddlers each year and gets more than 34,000 annual referrals. It has grown steadily since state year fiscal 2020. Nearly half of the kids that are eligible are because they have substantial developmental delays. So federal law states, okay, get this through your heads. It states, you shall provide as a state early intervention services through Part C of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, IDEA as it's known. But we don't mandate that as a state level for county boards, and we rely heavily on our county boards of developmental disabilities to sustain these services with very little, relatively speaking, coming from the state GRF. And this is in spite of, let's get this down, research shows that every dollar invested in early intervention saves $7 to $17, depending on what research you're looking at. This is the greatest payback yield for any of the DD services that our communities are investing in. So let's remember that, particularly in light of the special education number I gave you. that's just one small piece when we have to talk about the K-12 budget next year. We've got to be investing now in outcomes that work so that kids, families, and taxpayers are saving later. So besides drastically reducing the need for future specialized education and health services later in life, early intervention services are proven to change developmental outcomes, strengthen a family's ability to support their children, And again, let's emphasize this since we're asking the state to change the way we invest through this bill. It creates long-term major savings for taxpayers. Ohio's 88 county boards, now let's get back to the DD part and why our county boards need our help. 88 county boards currently provide a lifetime of services and supports for more than 117,000 people with developmental disabilities across the state. For the past four years or more, our county boards of DD and the DD providers have been coming to us saying, help, we're in imminent risk of collapsing. First it was related to the DSP position, the direct service professionals. They could not recruit people because the pay was so low. We made a significant investment increasing that rate in Medicaid reimbursement by 38% so that they could start providing competitive wages. And it worked. Guess what? They got more workers into the system. The system is helping more and more families and people who need to rely on their paid staff for independence, employment, and basic tasks of independent daily living. Over the past two and a half years, it reached its goal, but actually because of the steep rise in the need for these services, and we've got the provider rates that have gone up, combined with the growth in new individuals being enrolled in Medicaid waivers, and that's a lifelong commitment, and the increase in service needs of those who are enrolled on Medicare waivers as they age, it's now threatening to bankrupt. It now threatening to bankrupt many of our county boards whose property tax budgets were not built to sustain such an increase As of last year 20 county boards are now in a state fiscal watch status up 33 from just the year before More alarmingly, six county boards are now in fiscal warning, up from two in 2024, and these numbers are expected to worsen when the 2026 numbers come out later this summer. As this participation grows and the county boards increasingly rely on the levies to sustain it, you know, it's not a mandated county board service. So guess what's going to be the first thing that gets cut? It's kind of like prevention, those of you in the area of prevention specialists. Basically, this means that this service is particularly vulnerable at risk as our county boards experience strain. House Bill 939 takes an outcomes-based approach by requiring county boards that you've got to provide the core early intervention services to help guarantee that the work is not, you know, what works is not left behind and what is needed is available when it matters. Remember, that's why early is in the title of early intervention. You've got to do it early, otherwise you're going to pay the price later for that child and for that community and for taxpayers. The bill will also require Department of Children and Youth to reimburse at least 50% of associated costs to help ease this burden and make early intervention sustainable. So this is going to keep these services going. But let's remember, you know, this is about paying now so that we will experience dollar savings later as a state. We've got to keep that in mind when you think about what's this going to cost. It's going to cost on two fronts, doing it and not doing it. So I'm going to turn it over here to Representative Odioso.
I will tell you my first experience with early intervention services was when I had just delivered my first child 38 years ago, and I was put on a project with my company of helping promote a program that parents know what to do, what to look for, developmental milestones so that they can help their children, and then what do you do when there's a problem, okay? And then fast forward, I don't know, about 30 years, and my grandson and my daughter and her family heavily relied on the early intervention services in this state. It truly makes a difference. And so I'm going to turn it over to Representative Odioso, who is delighted to join me on this bill, because he also has lived experience and a lot of knowledge base in this space. Thank you. Vice Chair Salvo, Ranking Member Lett, and members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to give sponsored testimony on House Bill 939, which requires county DD boards to provide early intervention services. two notes here that i think are personal first of all i served two years on hamilton county's dds board and it was wonderful experience and i have a lived experience being on the board and dealing with these issues so that's number one number two my oldest daughter audrey was autistic and she benefited directly from these early intervention services. So that was a lived experience as well. Early intervention is a coordinated system of support services for infants and toddlers up to the age of three years of age who have developmental delays or disabilities during a critical stage of development. And upon review, looking back on my wife and I's lived experience, those early years were so critically important to her ability to function at her least restrictive environment At this stage a child brain is highly adaptable and responsive to learning making early intervention especially effective to improving long outcomes and reducing the need for more intensive and costly supports for life. Under current law, early intervention services are optional and funded locally by the county DD boards through property taxes. I have some errata in the next submission in writing. I will correct them now. Collectively, county DD boards invest approximately $85 million annually and serve roughly 34,000 children each year. Most services are delivered through a coaching model that utilizes teams of developmental specialists along with physical, occupational, and speech therapists to support children and their families. I believe my daughter received all three of those services. House Bill 939 establishes an early intervention as required service for county DD boards and provides state support to ensure county access to these imperative services. The county boards want to do this. This is based on their entirety of their experience, long-term experience. Of course, they often are going to be interacting with the same person. from the time that they're zero until the time that they pass in their county. So they have a baseline. And there's a lot of statistics on this that point this out, that this has, in effect, a cost-saving measure for the state and for the counties. Anyway, House Bill 939 establishes early intervention as required service. Under the bill, county D.B. boards may submit annual expense reports and documentation of costs incurred at the Department of Children and Youth Services to the Department of Children and Youth Services while continuing to pay upfront services. Additionally, House Bill 9 requires the Department of Children and Youth to reimburse county DD boards for at least 50% of eligible service costs, excluding costs already covered through service coordination grants or Title 20 of the Social Security Act. I do think in the end, and I'm a big proponent for property tax relief, and I've been pushing that and been voting along those lines, but property tax relief will only work in the end if there's a greater state share of resources coming from the state government. And I think this is a measured, tailored way to do that that can be tracked and will have cost-benefit analysis, be a reduction in costs in the long term. So this is a win-win everywhere I can think of. I appreciate Representative White bringing this legislation to my attention and allowing me to serve as joint sponsor. This bill is fundamental to Ohio DD's community because it ensures early intervention remains a priority, helping children develop crucial life skills while generating long-term cost savings in an increasingly challenging property tax environment. Simply put, House Bill 939 ensures that families have continued access to services they need when it's the most critical. It improves long-term outcomes for children, supports families, provides state support for statewide priority. creates greater consistency in service delivery across Ohio and has the potential to, not the potential, it will reduce future costs.
And right now I guess we turn it over if you have any questions Are there any questions for the witnesses Thank you.
Through the vice chair to the representatives, thank you for this bill. I mean, I couldn't agree with you more. Really, prevention and intervention is crucial to saving money and having healthier Ohioans. I guess my question is, how is this going to be set up sustainably from a funding standpoint and where's the money going to come from? I think it's absolutely crucial to our future, but I would certainly want to make sure that if we start early intervention services, they have to follow through, right? They can't just cut off when the child is two and every other GA. So how would that look?
Vice Chair Salvo, represent Brownlee.
I think that is kind of the fundamental question of we are going to be voting tomorrow or this afternoon in finance to approve zero-based budgeting. That is something long overdue in this state that we have needed, where we start over and say, what do we actually need, what is working, and what is data-driven with outcomes that prove it, so let's keep funding it. I think part of that is it's high time for us to look at what we are funding that we shouldn't be. That's one of the areas. We are getting cost analysis to be able to provide that to the committee. It's going to cost the state money. But the reality is it truly does cost the state a lot of money if we don't intervene early in a child's life. And there will be others that will come after us to talk about that. Many of examples, things as simple as a child needs eye surgery. You know, we just approved tens of millions. I can't remember the dollar amount for the Ohio Sea program. There are children that need intervention on their eyes and their ears, and as a result of not getting that intervention, they experience tremendous delays. They have problems in school. We're investing more in remediation and supports for those kids in K through 12 when if we just would have taken the time to help that child get what they needed in their early years, like we said, 50% reduction in special ed. So we could start there and look at the budget we're spending and see how we might be able to help with money in different pockets.
Through the vice chair to the representatives, thank you for that. And again, could not agree more violently that we need these services. But I just want to act with caution because this body does make changes very regularly. And that DSP funding of reimbursement rate that you were talking about, they did get that updated reimbursement rate in the previous GA. They recruited and retained many more people. And then this GA did not get another reimbursement increase, so are facing the same issues that they faced before. So, again, I am for this. I just urge this body to make sure that we are setting these programs up for success sustainably rather than putting in and then taking out or having places where we are really not funding the mandates. Thank you.
Questions?
Thank you, Madam Vice Chair. I was going to remain silent because I really do care about intervention. But as you know, the big elephant in the room is the funding. And one of the things I have a little bit of a concern about is the mechanism by which this bill pulls the money from DCY instead of funding, like, directly. So just as we, if we're doing zero, you know, if we're really looking at it, let's define it right, and let's get it to the right resources, and perhaps, I'm not saying it's wrong, I just, it flags it to me. Well, like, we're looking to rob Peter to pay Paul, and, you know, potentially with it. So it's not really a question. It's more or less just a comment to say, I really appreciate the work you're trying to do, but I do think the approach of funding has to be measured and targeted.
Yes. Thank you, Vice Chair Salvo.
Thank you, Rep. Richardson. Early intervention currently is under DCY now, and so the reason why the funding is flowing through them would be that, but we're happy to take a look at better ways or if there's other opportunities, and we can speak with DCY and DD about that as well. Thank you.
Thank you. Follow up? No, ma'am. I saw the wheels turning in your brain.
Representative Lett. Thank you, Vice Chair Salvo. Thank you very much for bringing this bill. I love this bill, obviously. I'm co-sponsor of this bill. I just wanted to highlight kind of for the record a little bit, not really a question, but a short comment that, you know, one of the examples provided of the services that people can receive through early intervention is occupational therapy. Occupational therapy, if you receive that immediately, you know, when there is a delay discovered, one of the things they do is feeding therapy. This is a therapy that my son, that we did with my son. because we were able to access OT immediately once we knew his genetic disorder, he was able to eat He can now eat completely independently all on his own He doesn have the sensitivities of putting liquids in his mouth You know a lot of the things that we see as aversions to eating and reasons why kids won eat. The opportunity there that we avoided was to get a G-tube. He had an NG-tube, which is a tube that goes from your nose to your stomach for a little while. With OT, we were able to wean off of use of that NG tube, and we avoided the G tube costs altogether, which would have been Medicaid dollars that we were spending in order to have those surgeries, all of the follow-up and specialty care that's required when you have a G tube, etc. So I have seen how much cost savings happen just with my child alone, let alone you go into physical therapy and the other therapies provided, and I think the cost absolutely will pay for themselves. And to Rep. Richardson and Rep. Brownlee's points, I do think it is really important that we robustly fund these services because it will absolutely save us money in the end and help us better serve, you know, our folks in the DD community in particular that need services increase sometimes as they age. So, thank you. Very good. Any other questions from the committee? Thank you. Thank you for your
testimony. Okay, so this concludes the first hearing then on House Bill 939. Is there any further business to come before the committee? Well, seeing none, we are adjourned. Enjoy this beautiful day.