NOTE: As provided in LFC policy, this report is
intended only for use by the standing finance committees of the
legislature. The Legislative Finance Committee does not assume
responsibility for the accuracy of the information in this report when used for
other purposes.
The most recent FIR
version (in HTML & Adobe PDF formats) is available on the Legislative
Website. The Adobe PDF version includes
all attachments, whereas the HTML version does not. Previously issued FIRs and attachments may be
obtained from the LFC in
SPONSOR: |
Taylor, J.P. |
DATE TYPED: |
|
HB |
HJM 44/aHEC |
||
SHORT TITLE: |
Improved Health Care access for Students |
SB |
|
||||
|
ANALYST: |
L. Baca |
|||||
APPROPRIATION
Appropriation
Contained |
Estimated
Additional Impact |
Recurring or
Non-Rec |
Fund Affected |
||
FY03 |
FY04 |
FY03 |
FY04 |
|
|
|
NFI |
|
|
|
|
(Parenthesis
( ) Indicate Expenditure Decreases)
Relates to SB 465,
LFC files
Responses
Received From
State
Department of Education (SDE)
Department
of Health (DOH)
SUMMARY
Synopsis
of HEC Amendment
The amendment adopted by the House Education
Committee adds the Department of Health to the original request that a policy
be developed.
Synopsis
of Original Bill
House Joint Memorial
44 requests that the State Board of Education (SDE) establish a policy that
recognizes the unique characteristics and services delivered in school-based
health centers; ensures that school-based health centers are adequately
compensated for services provided to publicly insured patients; and establishes
public health
resources
for support to undeserved children and adolescents.
Significant
Issues
State statutes identify DOH as the agency
charged with oversight of clinical supervision of health services in a school
setting, and DOH has established standards for school-based health centers
(SBHC). School district boards of
education, parents and the community determine whether a SBHC will be located
in a particular school and the types of services that are to be provided.
The DOH reports that 16 SBHC that provided
services to 40 schools were in operation during the 2001-2002 school year. In addition, 20
other sites were in operation that receive funding
from a variety of sources, e.g., Federal Bureau of Primary Health Care, Indian
Health service and community resources.
The DOH also reports that, nationally and in
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
HJM 44 does not contain an appropriation. However, any expansion of services will
require additional funding either through improved agency collaboration,
redirection of existing federal and state funds, or a general fund
appropriation.
ADMINISTRATIVE IMPLICATIONS
Implicit in this
memorial are the need for additional resources, greater inter-agency
cooperation, more effective use of current funds, and a need to implement the
model for SBHCs in additional school sites.
OTHER SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES
The DOH observes that
this bill would be a “catalyst for further collaboration among agencies,
increased accountability, and unification of SBHC funding streams.”
LRB/njw:yr