Relates to a review of reimbursement adequacy for early intervention services

• Democratic35
• Republican9

◆ The sponsor's argument

Why Gustavo Rivera says this is needed

The early intervention (Ei) program provides services for babies and toddlers (0-3 years old) with developmental delays and disabilities. Ei services help many children meet developmental milestones they would otherwise miss. Most Ei services are provided in each individual fami- ly's home and some are provided in groups and centers. Ei reimbursement rates have only been raised once since the 1990s, the FY24-25 budget provided a 5% increase. Individual providers and provider agencies have been steadily leaving the program because they cannot afford to keep providing the services at the State's payment rates. In some parts of the State, there is an utter lack of providers qualified to provide Ei services. In areas without an overall provider shortage, there is still a shortage of Ei providers because they can make a more sustainable living by serving people through other types of programs. Even in areas that have a pool of available Ei providers, families in certain neighborhoods are unable to find a provider who will come to their home. From New York City to Rochester and throughout the State, babies with disabilities are waiting months to receive the time-sensi- tive services they need and deserve. Since Ei is only available to chil- dren until their third birthday, a delay in services is a denial of services. Despite years of raising the issue of low reimbursement and the result- ing provider shortage, no serious effort has been made to evaluate the true costs of providing Ei services or to compare the salaries of the same type of provider in and out of the Ei program. The reimbursement rates were not high in 1990 and they are certainly not adequate now. The State needs to reevaluate its payment methodologies and ensure that all children eligible for Ei are able to access the services they need before it's too late.

This is the sponsor's own case for the bill, quoted from their memorandum. It is not Agora's description of what the bill does.