This bill provides general purpose revenues to the board to support the
Biomedical Technology Alliance in southeastern Wisconsin.
This bill requires the board to allocate $200,000 of its general program
operations funding in the 2008-09 fiscal year to establish the UW-Milwaukee School
of Public Health, but only if the board approves the school.
This bill changes the funding source for several technical college system
appropriations from the general fund to the transportation fund.
Other educational and cultural agencies
Under current law, HEAB awards various grants to resident students for
higher education. This bill establishes a Wisconsin Covenant Scholars Program
under which, beginning in the 2011-12 academic year, HEAB must award grants
based on financial need to undergraduates enrolled at least half time at nonprofit
public or private institutions of higher education or at tribally controlled colleges in
this state. A student is eligible for a grant under the program for up to the equivalent
of ten semesters, so long as the student meets acceptable academic standards.
The bill also requires DOA to conduct certain activities to promote attendance
at nonprofit postsecondary educational institutions in this state. Those activities
include contracting with The Wisconsin Covenant Foundation, Inc., to establish and
implement a campaign to promote attendance at nonprofit postsecondary
educational institutions in this state and distributing not more than $250,000 in
each fiscal year as grants to school districts for reimbursement of teachers and
administrators for costs incurred in participating in training relating to character
education.
Under current law, HEAB awards Wisconsin higher education grants (WHEG
grants) to undergraduates enrolled at least half time at nonprofit public institutions
of higher education or tribally controlled colleges in this state. Currently, a WHEG
grant may not exceed $3,000 for an academic year. This bill sets that maximum grant
amount during any academic year at 50 percent of the resident undergraduate
academic fees charged to attend the University of Wisconsin-Madison for the
previous academic year.
Under current law, DOA receives aid from a federal program that supports
universal access to telecommunications services, commonly referred to as the
E-Rate Program, that DOA uses to provide educational telecommunications access
to educational agencies that are eligible for a rate discount under the E-Rate
Program, specifically, public or private elementary and secondary schools and public
libraries. This bill permits DOA to use moneys received under the E-Rate Program
to make payments to telecommunications providers that provide educational
telecommunications access to those educational agencies.
This bill appropriates to the Medical College of Wisconsin, Inc., general purpose
revenues for translational research, which is the transfer of knowledge gained from
basic research to new and improved methods of preventing, diagnosing, or treating
disease, as well as the transfer of clinical insights into hypotheses that can be tested
and validated in the basic research laboratory.
Under current law, historical organizations in this state may be incorporated
as affiliates of the State Historical Society of Wisconsin if their purposes and
programs are similar to and consonant with those of the Historical Society. This bill
directs the Historical Society to distribute a grant annually to the Wisconsin Black
Historical Society and Museum to fund the operations of that society and museum.
employment
Under current law, faculty and academic staff of the UW System do not have
collective bargaining rights under the State Employment Labor Relations Act
(SELRA). This bill provides faculty and academic staff of the UW System collective
bargaining rights under state law in a manner similar to that provided other state
employees under SELRA, including the right to collectively bargain over wages,
hours, and conditions of employment.
Unfair labor practices for UW System academic staff and faculty collective
bargaining are generally the same as those under SELRA, except that the bill
specifically provides that it is not an unfair labor practice for the Board of Regents
of the UW System to implement changes in salaries or conditions of employment for
members of the faculty or academic staff at one UW institution and not for such
persons at other UW institutions if certain conditions are met. Under the bill, the
subjects of collective bargaining are the same as under SELRA, except that collective
bargaining is prohibited on the mission and goals of the Board of Regents; the
diminution of the right of tenure provided faculty; the rights granted faculty and
academic staff under current law; and academic freedom. Finally, under the bill,
collective bargaining agreements covering UW faculty and academic staff must be
approved by the Joint Committee on Employment Relations and adopted by the
legislature.
Under current law, in local government employment other than law
enforcement and fire fighting employment, if a dispute relating to the terms of a
proposed collective bargaining agreement has not been settled after a reasonable
period of negotiation and after mediation by the Wisconsin Employment Relations
Commission (WERC), either party, or the parties jointly, may petition WERC to
initiate compulsory, final, and binding arbitration with respect to any dispute
relating to wages, hours, and conditions of employment. An arbitrator or arbitration
panel must adopt the final offer of one of the parties on all disputed issues, which is
then incorporated into the collective bargaining agreement.
This process does not apply, however, to a dispute over economic issues
involving a collective bargaining unit consisting of school district professional
employees if WERC determines that the employer has submitted a qualified
economic offer (QEO). A QEO consists of a proposal to maintain the percentage
contribution by the employer to the employees' existing fringe benefit costs and the
employees' existing fringe benefits and to provide for an annual average salary
increase having a cost to the employer at least equal to 2.1 percent of the existing
total compensation and fringe benefit costs for the employees in the collective
bargaining unit plus any fringe benefit savings. Fringe benefit savings is that
amount, if any, by which 1.7 percent of the total compensation and fringe benefit
costs for all municipal employees in a collective bargaining unit for any 12-month
period covered by a proposed collective bargaining agreement exceeds the increased
cost required to maintain the percentage contribution by the municipal employer to
the municipal employees' existing fringe benefit costs and to maintain all fringe
benefits provided to the municipal employees.
This bill eliminates the QEO exception from the compulsory, final, and binding
arbitration process.
This bill requires DWD to use moneys received by DHFS from licensing, review,
and certifying activities to implement and operate youth summer jobs programs in
the city of Milwaukee and to award grants to the Boys and Girls Clubs of Greater
Milwaukee to fund programs that improve the social, academic, and employment
skills of youths who reside in the city of Milwaukee.
This bill changes the funding source for the Employment Transit Assistance
Program, which funds projects to improve access to jobs in areas that are not served
by an adequate mass transit system, from the general fund to the transportation
fund.
Environment
Water quality
Under the Clean Water Fund Program, the state makes loans at subsidized
interest rates for projects to control water pollution, including sewage treatment
plants. This bill changes the interest rate for projects that are necessary to prevent
a municipality from violating a pollution limit in its wastewater discharge permit
from 55 percent of the market interest rate to 70 percent of the market interest rate.
This bill sets the present value of the Clean Water Fund Program subsidies that
may be provided during the 2007-09 biennium at $99,100,000. The bill also
increases the general obligation bonding authority for the Clean Water Fund
Program by $49,500,000 and increases the revenue bonding authority for the Clean
Water Fund program by $368,145,000.
Under the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program, the state makes loans at
subsidized interest rates to local governmental units for projects to construct or
modify public water systems. This bill sets the present value of the Safe Drinking
Water Loan Program subsidies that may be provided during the 2007-09 biennium
at $16,700,000. The bill also increases the general obligation bonding authority for
the Safe Drinking Water Loan Program by $6,090,000.
Current federal law authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to
carry out projects to clean up contaminated sediment in the Great Lakes and
tributaries of the Great Lakes. The federal law requires a portion of the funding for
a project to be provided from a source other than the federal government. This bill
authorizes DNR to pay a portion of the costs of a project to remove contaminated
sediment from Lake Michigan or Lake Superior or a tributary of Lake Michigan or
Lake Superior if EPA provides federal funds for the project, and the bill provides
$17,000,000 in bonding authority for this purpose.
Under current law, DNR provides funding for the management of urban storm
water runoff and for flood control and riparian restoration projects. This bill
increases the general obligation bonding authority for these projects by $6,000,000.
Under current law, DNR provides funding for measures to reduce water
pollution from nonpoint (diffuse) sources. This bill increases the general obligation
bonding authority for nonpoint source measures by $12,000,000.
Under current law, under the targeted runoff management grant process, local
governmental units annually apply for funding from DNR for new nonpoint source
projects. DNR annually ranks the eligible applications based on specified criteria
and selects projects to receive funding. Local governmental units provide
cost-sharing grants to land owners to implement the projects.
This bill authorizes DNR to provide funding, outside of the targeted runoff
management grant process, for animal waste management. DNR may provide
funding to a local governmental unit for a project at an animal feeding operation that
is discharging pollution to the waters of this state if DNR determines that such
funding outside of that process is necessary to protect fish and aquatic life.
Environmental cleanup
Under the Land Recycling Loan Program, the state makes interest-free loans
to political subdivisions for projects to remedy contamination that has affected, or
threatens to affect, groundwater or surface water. This bill sets the present value
of the Land Recycling Loan Program subsidies that may be provided during the
2007-09 biennium at $3,400,000.
Under current law, the Department of Commerce (Commerce) administers a
program (known as PECFA) to reimburse owners of certain petroleum product
storage tanks for some of the costs they incur in cleaning up discharges from those
tanks. This bill authorizes Commerce to contract with consultants and contractors
to clean up a discharge from a storage tank and to pay the consultants and
contractors directly.
This bill also authorizes Commerce to contract with a person to empty, remove,
and dispose of an underground petroleum product storage tank that has not been
properly closed if Commerce is unable to identify the owner of the tank or Commerce
determines that the owner is unwilling or unable to pay.
Current law authorizes DNR to conduct or fund activities to investigate and
remedy environmental contamination in some situations. This bill increases the
authorized general obligation bonding authority to finance those activities by
$3,000,000.
Other environment
This bill creates an Office of Public Intervenor attached to DOJ. The bill
requires the attorney general to appoint an assistant attorney general to serve as the
public intervenor. The bill authorizes the public intervenor to commence or
intervene in court proceedings whenever necessary to protect the public rights in
water and other natural resources; act as an interested party in actions in which he
or she intervenes, and present evidence, cross-examine witnesses, and file briefs;
and appeal administrative rulings to the courts.
Current law imposes a recycling fee of $3 per ton on solid waste, other than
certain kinds of high-volume industrial waste, disposed of at a landfill or other waste
disposal facility. The recycling fee is deposited into the recycling fund. This bill
increases the recycling fee to $6 per ton.
Current law imposes an environmental repair fee on solid and hazardous waste
disposed of at a landfill or other waste disposal facility. The environmental repair
fee is 50 cents per ton, except that the fee is lower for mining waste and certain kinds
of high-volume industrial waste. The environmental repair fee is deposited into the
environmental fund. This bill increases the environmental repair fee to $1.60 per
ton.
This bill transfers $13,000,000 in fiscal year 2007-08 and $20,000,000 in fiscal
year 2008-09 from the recycling fund to the general fund. The bill also transfers
$4,000,000 in fiscal year 2007-08 from the petroleum inspection fund to the general
fund.
This bill changes the funding source for DNR's administration of the Motor
Vehicle Emission Inspection and Maintenance Program from the general fund to the
transportation fund.
HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES
Medical Assistance
Under current law, DHFS administers the Medical Assistance (MA) program
and the BadgerCare health care program, which provide health care benefits for
eligible individuals (generally, pregnant women, certain children, and elderly or
disabled individuals, all of whom must meet specific low-income requirements).
Families, children who do not reside with their parents, and unborn children whose
mothers are not eligible for MA or BadgerCare may be eligible for BadgerCare if their
incomes do not exceed 185 percent of the federal poverty line and they meet certain
nonfinancial criteria, such as not having access to employer-subsidized health care
coverage.
Under this bill, DHFS must request a waiver from, and submit amendments
to the state MA plan to, the secretary of the federal Department of Health and
Human Services to allow DHFS to implement an MA health care program called
BadgerCare Plus (BC+). BC+ would be financed as are other MA programs, partly
with federal funds and partly with state funds. BC+ would replace all of BadgerCare
and part of MA. Thus, individuals who satisfy eligibility criteria under both BC+ and
BadgerCare would receive benefits under BC+, and individuals who satisfy
eligibility criteria under both BC+ and MA would receive benefits under either BC+
or MA, depending on the basis for their eligibility for MA.
BC+ would provide health care benefits to recipients under two different plans,
depending on the basis for the recipient's eligibility. The first plan provides the same
benefits that are provided under regular MA. Individuals eligible for BC+ benefits
under the regular MA plan include: a pregnant woman whose family income does
not exceed 200 percent of the poverty level; a child under one year of age whose
mother, on the day on which the child was born, was eligible for and receiving
benefits under MA or BC+ under the regular MA plan; any child whose family income
does not exceed 200 percent of the poverty level; an individual whose family income
does not exceed 200 percent of the poverty level and who is the parent or caretaker
relative of a child who is, generally, living in the home of the parent or caretaker
relative; certain migrant workers and their dependents; and an individual between
19 and 21 years of age who was in foster care on his or her 18th birthday.
The second plan, called the Benchmark Plan, provides specified benefits, such
as coverage for prescription drugs; physicians' services; inpatient and outpatient
hospital services; home health services; physical, occupational, speech, and
pulmonary therapy; treatment for nervous and mental disorders and alcoholism and
other drug abuse problems; durable medical equipment; and transportation to
obtain emergency medical care. Individuals eligible for BC+ benefits under the
Benchmark Plan include: a pregnant woman whose family income exceeds 200
percent, but does not exceed 300 percent, of the poverty level; a child under one year
of age whose mother, on the day on which the child was born, was eligible for and
receiving BC+ benefits under the Benchmark Plan; any child whose family income
exceeds 200 percent, but does not exceed 300 percent, of the poverty level; and an
individual whose family income exceeds 200 percent, but does not exceed 300
percent, of the poverty level and who is the parent or caretaker relative of a child who
is, generally, living in the home of the parent or caretaker relative. In addition, any
child whose family income exceeds 300 percent of the poverty level may purchase
coverage under the Benchmark Plan at the full per member per month cost of the
coverage.
For coverage under both the regular MA plan and the Benchmark Plan, a child
is defined to include an unborn child whose mother is not eligible for MA or BC+ but
satisfies all other eligibility criteria except that she is not a U.S. citizen or qualifying
alien or is an inmate of a public institution. If the mother's family income does not
exceed 200 percent of the poverty level, the unborn child is eligible for prenatal care
under the regular MA plan; if the mother's family income exceeds 200 percent, but
does not exceed 300 percent, of the poverty level, the unborn child is eligible for
prenatal care under the Benchmark Plan.
As a condition of eligibility for BC+, an individual who is eligible for enrollment
in a group health plan must apply for enrollment in that plan if DHFS determines
that it is cost-effective. With exceptions for pregnant women, individuals in foster
care on their 18th birthday, and certain children, no individual whose family income
exceeds 150 percent of the poverty level is eligible for BC+ if the individual has health
care coverage under the state employee health plan or coverage that is provided by
an employer and for which the employer pays at least 80 percent of the premium.
Regardless of family income, however, an unborn child is not eligible for BC+ if the
unborn child or its mother has any type of health insurance coverage. If an
individual whose family income exceeds 150 percent of the poverty level or an unborn
child or its mother had access, in the 12 months before applying for BC+, to health
care coverage under the state employee health plan or coverage that is provided by
an employer and for which the employer pays at least 80 percent of the premium, the
individual or unborn child is not eligible for BC+ unless there is a good cause reason
that the individual or unborn child or its mother did not enroll in the coverage. A
pregnant woman whose family income exceeds 200 percent of the poverty level and
who has health insurance coverage must maintain that coverage as a condition of
eligibility for BC+. If an individual whose family income exceeds 150 percent of the
poverty level had coverage under the state employee health plan or
employer-provided coverage but no longer has the coverage, if an unborn child or its
mother had health insurance coverage but no longer has the coverage, or if a
pregnant woman whose family income exceeds 200 percent of the poverty level did
not maintain the coverage that she had, the individual, unborn child, or pregnant
woman is not eligible for BC+ for three calendar months following the month in
which the coverage ended unless there was a good cause reason for the termination
of the coverage.
With certain exceptions, for an individual whose family income exceeds 150
percent of the poverty level, DHFS must verify directly with the employer, if any,
whether the individual has or had insurance coverage or access. An employer must
supply the information upon request within a certain time or pay a penalty equal to
the full per member per month cost of coverage under BC+ for each month the
individual is covered under BC+ until the employer provides the information.
Penalties are limited to no more than $1,000 in any six-month period for an employer
with fewer than 250 employees, and to no more than $15,000 in any six-month period
for other employers.
Generally, the same copayment requirements that apply under MA apply to
BC+ recipients with benefits under the regular MA plan. BC+ recipients with
benefits under the Benchmark Plan are subject to the copayment and coinsurance
requirements specified in the bill for that plan. A BC+ recipient who is an adult, who
is not a pregnant woman, and whose family income is at least 150 percent of the
poverty level must pay a premium for BC+ coverage that may not exceed 5 percent
of the recipient's family income. A BC+ recipient who is a child whose family income
is at least 200 percent of the poverty level must pay a premium for BC+ coverage that
may not exceed the full per member per month cost of coverage for a child with a
family income equal to 300 percent of the poverty level. A BC+ recipient who is an
unborn child or a pregnant woman whose family income exceeds 200 percent of the
poverty level must pay a premium that may not exceed the full per member per
month cost of coverage for an adult with a family income equal to 300 percent of the
poverty level. If a recipient who is required to pay a premium does not pay it when
due, the recipient's coverage terminates and the recipient may not be eligible for BC+
again for six months.
This bill creates the health care quality fund, consisting of moneys obtained
from an increase in cigarette and other tobacco products taxes, from assessments on
hospitals, and from certain other sources. The health care quality fund is used as
another source of funding for MA and for BadgerCare.
Currently, MA provides federal and state moneys to pay for health care and
long-term care services, including care in a nursing home, for persons who are
low-income, elderly, or disabled and who meet other specific eligibility
requirements. To be eligible for MA for long-term care services, an individual must
meet certain very low income and resource requirements, and may have to reduce
his or her income and resources by paying for his or her own long-term care until the
eligibility requirements are met.
Currently, if a person transfers his or her assets for less than fair market value
for the purpose of reducing his or her income and resources to become eligible for MA
for long-term care services (divestment) on or after the person's look-back date
(generally, three years before the person applies for MA for long-term care services),
the person may be ineligible for MA for a specified time (penalty period). This bill
does all of the following with respect to divestment:
1. Changes the look-back date to five years for transfers that occur on or after
February 8, 2006.
2. Changes the beginning date for the penalty period from the date on which
assets were transferred to the later of the date on which assets were transferred or
the date on which the person applies and is eligible for MA for long-term care
services.
3. Provides that the purchase of a loan, promissory note, mortgage, or life estate
after February 8, 2006, is a divestment and specifies the requirements for when such
a purchase is not to be considered a divestment.
4. Provides that as a condition of receiving MA for long-term care services an
applicant or recipient must disclose any interest he or she or his or her spouse has
in an annuity that was purchased on or after February 8, 2006, or with respect to
which a transaction occurred on or after February 8, 2006.
5. Specifies the conditions under which the purchase of an annuity on or after
February 8, 2006, is not considered a divestment, including designating DHFS as a
remainder beneficiary under the annuity in the first position.
6. Requires DHFS to establish a process, to determine if the divestment rules
would result in undue hardship for a person and should not apply.
7. Provides, generally, that a person is ineligible for MA for long-term care
services if the equity in the person's home exceeds $750,000, unless his or her spouse
or minor or disabled child is living in the home. Under current law, a person's home,
regardless of its value, is not counted when the person's income and resources for MA
eligibility are determined.
This bill requires DHFS to request a waiver from the secretary of the federal
Department of Health and Human Services to conduct a demonstration project
under which DHFS would provide health care coverage of primary and preventive
care for adults under the age of 65 who have family incomes not exceeding 200
percent of the poverty level; who are not otherwise eligible for MA, BadgerCare, or
Medicare; and who did not have coverage under the Health Insurance Risk-Sharing
Plan within six months before applying.
Under current law, DHFS provides block grant moneys to Milwaukee County
for providing health care services to persons who meet certain criteria for
dependency. Under this bill, the amount that DHFS would otherwise provide in such
block grant moneys would be offset by amounts paid for individuals in Milwaukee
County under the demonstration project to provide health care coverage for eligible
adults.
Currently, DHFS may obtain from insurers information DHFS needs to identify
an MA recipient who is eligible for benefits under a disability insurance policy or, if
enrolled as the dependent of a beneficiary, would be eligible for benefits; claims
submittal information; and types of benefits provided under the policy. DHFS must
enter into an agreement with the insurer that identifies the information to be
disclosed, safeguards confidentiality, and specifies how the insurer's reasonable
costs for this work will be determined and paid by the state. Insurers must provide
the information within specified deadlines, and the commissioner of insurance may
initiate enforcement proceedings for noncompliance.
Under this bill, DHFS may receive health care services coverage information
from, in addition to insurers, self-insured plans, service benefits plans, and
pharmacy benefits managers (third parties). DHFS may also gather information
about BadgerCare recipients who are eligible or who would be eligible as dependents
for health care coverage from a third party. DHFS must pay compensation for
providing the information. DHFS may notify the attorney general of third parties,
other than insurers, that fail to provide information requested.
Under the bill, third parties must accept assignment to DHFS of an individual's
right to receive payment from the third party for a health care item or service paid
for under MA, BadgerCare, or a program administered under MA under a federal
waiver. Third parties must also accept DHFS's right to recover third-party
payments for which assignment had not been accepted. A third party must respond
to an inquiry by DHFS concerning a claim for payment of a health care item or service
if the inquiry is made within 36 months after the item or service is provided. Further,
third parties must agree not to deny a DHFS claim on the basis of certain
circumstances, if submitted less than 36 months after the health care item or service
is provided and if action by DHFS to enforce its rights is commenced less than 72
months after DHFS submits the claim.
Under current law, nursing home reimbursements for care provided to MA
recipients are determined under a system that considers, among other things, direct
care costs, as adjusted by DHFS for regional labor cost variations. For this purpose,
DHFS treats the counties of Dane, Iowa, Columbia, and Sauk as a single labor region.
This bill adds Rock County to this labor region.
Currently, under the MA waiver community integration program for persons
relocated from, or meeting requirements of, MA reimbursements to nursing homes
(commonly known as CIP II), DHFS provides enhanced MA reimbursement for up
to 150 persons who are diverted from imminent entry into nursing homes. Enhanced
reimbursement for more than 150 persons must be approved by JCF. This bill
requires the approval from the secretary of administration instead of from JCF.
Under current law, some individuals who are eligible for MA are also eligible
for Medicare Part D, which is the portion of the federal health insurance program
that provides prescription drug coverage for individuals who are, generally, 65 years
of age or older or disabled. Enrollment in Medicare Part D is voluntary. Not all Part
D plans in which individuals may enroll cover all of the prescription drugs that may
be covered under Medicare Part D.
Under this bill, if an individual is eligible for both MA and Medicare Part D, MA
will not pay for any prescription drug for which there may be coverage under
Medicare Part D, whether or not the individual is enrolled in Medicare Part D and,
if he or she is enrolled, whether or not the individual's Part D plan covers the drug.
Currently, some individuals who are eligible for MA are also eligible for
Medicare, a federal health insurance program for individuals who are, generally, 65
years of age or older or disabled. Medicare Part A covers hospital and related
services, and coverage is automatic. Medicare Part B covers outpatient, nursing, and
physician services and various other health care services, such as diagnostic tests.
Enrollment in Medicare Part B is voluntary, and an enrollee must pay a premium.
Current law does not require an individual who is eligible for both MA and Medicare
to enroll in Medicare Part B, and DHFS reimburses providers under MA for services
that would be covered under Medicare Part B if the individual were enrolled in
Medicare Part B.
This bill provides that DHFS may require an individual who is eligible for
Medicare and for MA services under a number of eligibility categories to enroll in
Medicare Part B as a condition of receiving those MA services. If DHFS requires an
individual to enroll in Medicare Part B, DHFS must pay the monthly premiums for
the coverage. Because MA does not pay for benefits to which an individual is entitled
under another benefit program, MA would no longer pay for any benefits that are
covered under Medicare Part B after the individual enrolls in Medicare Part B.
Currently, one category of MA recipients is termed "categorically needy"; these
persons have incomes and resources at the eligible levels and can be determined to
be retroactively eligible for MA for a certain period of months. Another category of
recipients is termed "medically needy"; these persons have resources at eligible
levels and incur medical expenses that, if paid, bring their incomes to eligible levels.
Currently, if an MA applicant is found to be retroactively eligible as a "categorically
needy" recipient and a provider has billed the recipient directly for services provided
during the retroactive period, the provider, upon notice that the applicant is
retroactively eligible, must submit claims for MA payment to DHFS. When paid by
DHFS, the provider must reimburse the MA recipient for payment the recipient or
another person made to the provider for services provided to the recipient during the
retroactively eligible period. Regardless of the amount the provider has charged the
MA recipient, the provider may not be required to reimburse the recipient more than
the amount that the provider is paid for the services by MA.
This bill eliminates the prohibition on requiring a health care provider to
reimburse for services paid for by a "categorically needy" MA recipient in an amount
that is greater than the provider is paid for the services under the MA program.
Instead, the bill requires that the health care provider reimburse the MA recipient
or another person in the amount that the recipient or other person has paid the
provider for the recipient's care and extends this repayment requirement to
"medically needy" MA recipients.
Currently, in addition to providing family planning as a benefit to MA
recipients, DHFS administers, under a waiver of federal Medicaid laws, a
demonstration project to provide family planning services to women between the
ages of 15 and 44 with family incomes of not more than 185 percent of the federal
poverty level.
This bill requires DHFS to request an amended federal waiver for the
demonstration project to provide family planning under MA to men between the ages
of 15 and 44 and to increase the financial eligibility limitation under the
demonstration project to 200 percent of the federal poverty level.
Children
Under current law, DHFS provides or oversees county provision of, various
services to children and families. These services include services for children in need
of protection or services and their families; adoption services; licensing of child
welfare agencies, foster homes, group homes, day care centers, and shelter care
facilities; investigating cases of suspected child abuse or neglect; providing a state
supplemental food program for women, infants, and children; and distributing
funding for children's community programs, child abuse and neglect prevention
programs, food distribution programs, domestic abuse services, tribal adolescent
services, community action programs to assist poor persons, and a brighter futures
initiative to prevent delinquent behavior, alcohol and other drug abuse, child abuse
and neglect, and nonmarital pregnancy.
This bill creates the Department of Children and Families (DCF), effective July
1, 2008, and transfers from DHFS to DCF the duty to provide or oversee the provision
of these services. The bill also renames DHFS the Department of Health Services.
Under current law, DWD administers the Wisconsin Works (W-2) program,
which provides work experience and benefits for low-income custodial parents, job
search assistance, and child care subsidies. DWD also administers the program for
establishing and enforcing child and spousal support and establishing paternity and
medical support liability. This bill transfers from DWD to DCF the responsibility for
administering these programs.
Under current law, DHFS administers the Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention
Program, under which DHFS awards grants to counties and Indian tribes that offer
voluntary home visitation services to first-time parents who are eligible for MA.
Current law requires DHFS to determine the amount of a grant awarded to a county
or an Indian tribe in excess of the statutory minimum grant amount of $10,000 based
on the number of births that are funded by MA in that county or the reservation of
that Indian tribe in proportion to the number of those births in all of the counties and
the reservations of all of the Indian tribes to which grants are awarded. Currently,
no more than six rural counties, three urban counties, and two Indian tribes may be
selected to participate in the program.
This bill requires DCF, beginning January 1, 2009, to determine the amount of
a grant in excess of the statutory minimum based on the number of births that are
funded by MA in a county or a reservation of an Indian tribe without regard to the
number of those births in other counties and reservations. The bill also eliminates
the caps on the number of counties and Indian tribes that may be selected to
participate in the program.
The bill directs DCF to award grants to applying counties, local health
departments, Indian tribes, private nonprofit agencies, and local partnerships
(organizations) to provide voluntary one-time home visits to all first-time parents
in the community served by the organization. The purposes of the home visits are
to provide those parents with basic information regarding infant health and
nutrition, the care, safety, and development of infants, emergency services for
infants, and shaken baby syndrome and impacted babies; to identify the needs of the
parents; and to provide the parents with referrals to programs, services, and other
resources that may meet those needs.
Recently, the U.S. Congress enacted the Adam Walsh Child Protection and
Safety Act of 2006, which requires the states to conduct criminal records checks,
including fingerprint-based checks of national crime information databases, of
prospective foster or adoptive parents and to check any child abuse or neglect
registry maintained by any other state in which a prospective foster or adoptive
parent or any other adult living in the home of that prospective parent (adult
resident) has resided in the preceding five years before the prospective foster or
adoptive parent may be finally approved for placement of a child, regardless of
whether foster care maintenance or adoption assistance payments will be provided
on behalf of the child.
This bill conforms state law relating to background checks of prospective foster
parents, adoptive parents, and adult residents to federal law, as affected by the Adam
Walsh Act.
Under current law, if a court assigned to exercise jurisdiction under the
Children's Code (juvenile court) issues an order placing, or maintaining the
placement of, a child outside the home, the order must include findings that
continued placement of the child in the home would be contrary to the welfare of the
child, that reasonable efforts have been made to prevent the removal of the child from
the home, and that reasonable efforts have been made to achieve the goal of the
child's permanency plan, which is a plan designed to ensure that the child is
reunified with his or her family whenever appropriate or that the child quickly
attains a placement providing long-term stability. This bill requires the juvenile
court to make the finding that reasonable efforts have been made to achieve the goal
of the child's permanency plan in a termination of parental rights order.
Under current law, in an action affecting the family (for example, a divorce
proceeding), if the circuit court finds that neither parent is able to care for the child
adequately or is fit and proper to have care and custody of the child, the circuit court
may declare the child to be in need of protection or services and transfer legal custody
of the child to the county or to a licensed child welfare agency. This bill requires a
circuit court that so transfers legal custody of a child to refer the matter to the
juvenile court intake worker, who must conduct an intake inquiry to determine
whether a petition alleging the child to be in need of protection or services should be
filed with the juvenile court, and to include in the order transferring legal custody
of the child a finding that placement of the child in his or her home would be contrary
to the welfare of the child and, subject to certain exceptions, a finding that reasonable
efforts have been made to prevent the removal of the child from the home.
The bill also requires a juvenile court, when ordering a child to be placed outside
the home under the supervision of a county or, in Milwaukee County, DHFS, to order
the child into the placement and care responsibility of the county or DHFS and to
assign the county or DHFS primary responsibility for providing services to the child.
In addition, the bill requires a county, DHFS, or DOC, when placing a child outside
the home under a voluntary agreement, to explicitly state in the voluntary
agreement that the county, DHFS, or DOC has placement and care responsibility for
the child and has primary responsibility for providing services to the child.
This bill requires DWD to provide a child care quality rating system for child
care providers licensed by DHFS that receive reimbursement under the W-2
program or that volunteer for rating under the system. The rating information must
be made available, including on DWD's Internet site, to parents, guardians, and legal
custodians of children who are recipients, or prospective recipients, of care and
supervision from a child care provider.
This bill increases the age-related basic maintenance rates that are paid by the
state or a county to a foster parent for the care and maintenance of a child.
This bill permits DHFS in fiscal year 2007-08 and DCF in fiscal year 2008-09
to expend not more than a total of $500,000 in certain federal revenues received in
fiscal year 2006-07 or 2007-08 for unexpected or unusually high-cost out-of-home
care placements of Indian children ordered by tribal courts.
