Arkansas House Bill HB1382

Arkansas 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/3/25
• Refer: 2/3/25
• Report Pass: 2/11/25
• Engrossed: 2/13/25
• Refer: 2/13/25
• Report Pass: 3/19/25
• Enrolled: 4/3/25
• Chaptered: 4/8/25
• Passed: 4/8/25

Caption

To Require Certain Reporting By The Designated Protection And Advocacy Agency For The State And The Designated Client Assistance Program For The State.

Impact

The bill's implementation will likely have a significant impact on the operations of the Protection and Advocacy Agency as it provides a structured framework for reporting and accountability. The requirement for regular reporting enhances the oversight of state agencies, ensuring that they remain focused on their responsibilities, such as providing adequate support and advocacy for individuals with developmental disabilities. This structured approach to reporting is expected to lead to an increased emphasis on the effectiveness of such programs and how well they meet the needs of the community.

Summary

House Bill 1382 aims to enhance the accountability and transparency of the designated Protection and Advocacy Agency and the Client Assistance Program in Arkansas. Specifically, the bill mandates these agencies to submit biannual reports to the Hospital, Medicaid, and Developmental Disabilities Study Subcommittee of Legislative Council, as well as the Governor. The reports will detail advocacy efforts for individuals with developmental disabilities, expenditures, and contracts made by the agencies. This legislative action seeks to ensure that these agencies are adequately monitored and held responsible for their commitments to the state's vulnerable populations.

Contention

While the bill is primarily positive in its intentions, some stakeholders may express concerns regarding the administrative burden that biannual reporting might impose on the agencies involved. There could be debates around the resources required to compile and submit these reports and whether such efforts could detract from direct advocacy work. Opponents might argue that rather than increasing bureaucratic oversight, more funds and resources should be directed towards frontline services and direct support for individuals with developmental disabilities.