Whole Child Model program.
This legislative change aims to enhance the operational effectiveness of the Whole Child Model program by ensuring that the advisory committee is composed of individuals more closely aligned with the delivery of healthcare services and those representing specific regions. By extending the termination date of the advisory group to December 31, 2023, the bill allows for continuous consultation and adjustment to the program based on ongoing stakeholder feedback. This move is anticipated to foster improved outcomes for Medi-Cal eligible children receiving services through CCS, thus impacting state laws related to healthcare delivery and oversight.
Assembly Bill 382, known as the Whole Child Model program, amends Section 14094.17 of the Welfare and Institutions Code. The bill is focused on altering the structure of the stakeholder advisory group involved in the administration of the Medi-Cal program, particularly for California Children's Services (CCS), which provides necessary medical services for physically disabled children. Notably, the bill removes labor organizations from the advisory board, replacing them with recognized exclusive representatives of CCS county providers, thereby emphasizing a shift towards direct representation of those providing services at the local level.
The overall sentiment surrounding AB 382 is supportive among local service providers who believe that a more tailored advisory group will allow for better-aligned policy decisions and potentially enhance the quality of care for children. However, there are concerns from labor organizations and some advocates who view the removal of labor representation as a detrimental step that could undermine broader workforce issues affecting healthcare delivery. This underscores a tension between ensuring provider representation and maintaining comprehensive advocacy for healthcare workers and patients.
Key points of contention include the removal of labor organizations from the stakeholder advisory group, which some argue restricts essential perspectives that labor representatives bring to the table regarding the healthcare workforce. Opponents of this change fear that without labor input, the emphasis may shift too heavily towards operational efficiency at the expense of worker protections and the needs of families reliant on CCS services. The debate highlights the balance between provider interests and the necessity for advocacy that encompasses broader health policy issues impacting families.