Agency
Department of Medical Assistance Services
 
Board
Board of Medical Assistance Services
 
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
10/17/26  9:35 pm
Commenter: Stephanie Flick Valley Community Services Board

soft cap of 55 hours for personal attendant services.
 

As a support coordinator with over 15 years of experience, the soft cap causes me real concerns.  There are numerous individuals with significant health and behavioral support needs receiving personal attendant services that require supports far beyond the 55 "soft cap".  The vast majority of these individuals are living in homes with family members.  Most individuals prefer to live with their family or at least to have that choice.  The reimbursement rate, coupled with the duties of personal attendants ( i.e. bathing, restroom supports) make it exceedingly difficult to find staff to provide that service.  The needs of the typical individual in this service would require around the clock care in a group home setting.  Individuals with needs beyond the cap are often served in a sponsored residential arrangement which can be provided by families if their home is licensed.  Families who are economically challenged are often in homes that fall short of licensure guidelines.  This proposed cap seems to disproportionately affect some of the  folks that I serve that have the highest needs and are already being provided services that while meeting their needs are already poorly funded.  The service traditionally had no more than 18 hours a day.  This is a service being utilized for individuals who actually need 24 hours a day of supervision/support.  Over the past several years these hours have been reduced while staff have become increasingly hard to find and agencies have withdrawn contracts due to the low reimbursement rate.  These PA services need to be better funded, to better support these individuals who desire staying in their family home with care of their choice by their family members or paid attendants who are unrelated or possibly employees of agencies.

CommentID: 242626