House Standing Committee on Human Services & Homelessness

Good morning. We are convening the Committee on Human Services and homelessness. Tuesday, February 3, 20269:00am in Conference Room 329. It is our first meeting of the session so I'd like to introduce some of my Committee Members. My name is Lisa Marten representing. For welcoming new Member Daisy Hartsfield and welcoming Our returning Members Rep.

Mato, Rep Alcos and Rep Garcia with others joining us on video conference or perhaps in person. I visited New Zealand where I was very impressed how they start all of their meetings in Maori with a genuine nod to their bilingual nation. And so I'm always going to do something in Hawaiian. So Aloha amahalo loka heleanamai Ikea Holabag.

And with that we will start with our first measure HB 1518 relating to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program which requires pre release SNAP application processes for inmates nearing release. And first up, on our testimony, we have here in person the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. Tommy Johnson.

Morning Chair Marten, Vice Chair Olds. I'm Tommy Johnson, Director of the Department of Corrections Rehabilitation. I'll summarize our testimony. We support House Bill 1518 that requires the DHH to establish a process in which persons incarcerated would qualify for SNAP benefits.

We have a pilot project working with them now at two of our facilities Rimish directly facility and W praction for that purpose. And so we will continue to expand that pilot program to hopefully all facilities statewide. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Next up we have is the Department of Human Services here in person.

Good morning Chair. Vice Chair and esteemed colleagues. I'm Jeanette Hayes on behalf of the Department of Human Services. I serve with the Benefit Employment Support Services Division as the SNAP administrator to concur with DCR.

We are in the midst of a pilot program to be able to launch a pre release process for us to be able to introduce people to be able to get them on benefits sooner. That pilot is currently with two facilities and we're slated for that to begin later this month to be able to see some success.

I had thought in your testimony it said October of this year, so maybe that was a typo. I'm glad to hear its this month.

Oh yeah, the PI, our pilot in terms of our system is slated for October but the actual partnership with DCR is slated to begin.

So we've already heard discussions with the reentry group and facilitating that work with the case managers and the different staff to be able to help with that partnership to get people to do their applications and to process them.

Thank you very much. Next up we have the Attorney General's office.

Good morning, Chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Erin Yamashiro. I'm from the Department of Attorney. The Department of Attorney General appreciates the intent of this Bill and provides the following comments. It's just that section three of the Bill, the proposed amendments, would affect both the TANF program and the SNAP program.

And the title of the Bill is only related to the SNAP program. And so the title of the Bill doesn't appear to encompass the time. Thank you for the opportunity to testify. This morning and I'll be available for questions.

Next up, we have Catholic Charities, Hawaii. Betty Lou Larson.

Catholic Charities will stand on its written testimony in support.

Thank you. And next, Hawaii Public Health Institute in support.

Good morning, Chair, vice chair, Members of the Committee, I'm Kris Coffield from the Hawaii Public Health Institute. We're in strong support of this measure, freedom should not begin without food. And for too many people, the first steps to reentry are taken on an empty stomach.

As you've heard, this proposal would allow inmates to apply for SNAP benefits before being released. The research shows that this is a pervasive problem. There are studies that show that up to 90, not over 90% of individuals or who are released from prison report food insecurity.

More than a third in some studies report going an entire day without food. Formerly incarcerated people experience higher rates of food insecurity, homelessness, elevated mortality during that critical gap period when they're released from incarceration. So this is targeting a real critical need during that gap period to help people stabilize, getting back on their feet.

There are 13 states across the nation already doing this, including states as varied as Louisiana and Kansas and California and Oregon. They're proving that this can work.

We do want to acknowledge that the Bill has a delayed implementation date to account for the benefit eligibility system upgrade, as well as interplay inter organizational, interdepartmental collaboration between DCR and DHS. So if we want to prevent recidivism, we need to prevent hunger. And so we're in strong support of this measure. Thank you so much for hearing this.

And thank you very much. Next up, we have Hawaii Appleseed in support. Not present. We have the Hawaii Hunger Action Network in support. Are they on zoom?

Yes. Aloha, Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, Genevieve Mama from Hawaii Hunger Action Network. And we'd like to stand on our written testimony in strong support of HB 1518 Mahalo.

Thank you very much. And next up, we have Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks. Are they on zoom? In support and we have the Hawaii Food Industry association in support on Zoom. Not present we have is a Drug Policy forum of Hawaii. Here in person.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair and Members Nicholas Levins with Drug Policy Forum of Hawaii. Importantly, this Bill allows all individuals convicted of drug related offense to apply for SNAP benefits regardless of treatment status.

Criminalization is the most severe and lasting stigma a government perpetuates against those with substance use disorders, others who use drugs and those with mental health conditions. Continued criminalization of behavioral health issues and poverty has lasting and far reaching impacts on individuals and families from under resourced communities, often across generations.

We recommend that those convicted of drug related offenses also be eligible to apply for TANF benefits regardless of treatment status. Per the Collateral Consequences Resource Center, 25 states have done so. States that have repealed both SNAP and TANF restrictions include Mississippi, Louisiana, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kentucky, Virginia, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wyoming. So let's join them.

Mahalo for the opportunity to provide testimony.

Next up we have the Kapalama Neighborhood Security Watch. On Zoom? Yes, go ahead. Angela Young.

And to implement strategy in collaboration with I think can provide a perspective of.

Angela. You know what Angela, it's very difficult to understand you, but I understand that you're in strong support and I appreciate your testimony and we're going to move on. Thank you. So yeah.

And next up we have Jordan Smith on Zoom.

Aloha, can you hear me?

Yep.

Aloha Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Jordan and I volunteer with the Prison Reentry Program on Oahu, which means one day a week we stand outside of the Lava Correctional Facility with backpacks full of basic toiletries and shelf stable snacks packed by facial volunteers from a local church.

Oftentimes we're the only ones waiting for the men when they're released. And when we ask how many years they've been inside, the most common number is 5 and 10. And we ask of their experience. The words used to describe the food are often bland and inedible.

And so we know we're regularly welcoming people back to community that may not have had a healthy, nutritious, well balanced meal in half a decade or longer. So we hope you can really support this Bill and join 13 states implementing preliminaries.

Thank you very much. Next up we have Teliyah Haywood on Zoom.

Good morning. My name is Talia Haywood and I am a social work student at UH Manoa. I am strongly speaking to support Bill HB 1518.

The passing of this Bill is crucial to reducing food insecurity specifically for formerly incarcerated individuals those have those who have been recently released from prison that do not have essential support are worse off than they were during their time in prison. Without access to food.

The expectation of these individuals to maintain their mental health, employment, sobriety and overall well being is nearly impossible. Over 25% of formerly incarcerated individuals experience difficulty in establishing employment due to their conviction, increasing the likelihood of experiencing food insecurity.

Additionally, Article 25 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Article 11 of the International Covenant of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights define food security as a fundamental human right. This Bill will ensure the opportunity of food security is presented to all formerly incarcerated individuals. Mahalo for your time.

Thank you very much. Next up we have Lindsay Pacheco on Zoom.

Aloha and good morning Chair Martin, Vice Chair Old and Members of the Committee. My name is Lindsay Pacheco and I'm here today as an individual to provide testimony and strong support of House Bill 1518.

As someone with prior lived experiences in being both incarcerated and houseless, I'm here before you today to share with you how huge of a help this will be for folks who will be returning to society without any positive support system set in place.

When someone no longer has the ability to feed themselves, not only does it break down one sense of dignity and self worth, it also puts one into a pure survival mode frame of mind, often leading individuals to whatever it takes to doing whatever it takes to ensure their own survival at whatever cost. Everyone needs to eat at some point in order to stay alive.

I have witnessed firsthand too many times people who come out of incarceration only to land right back out on the streets with real ability to get a good head start in staying on a more positive path without the ability to at least start the application and approval process for basic human needs such as food, financial support, or even housing.

Someone who's released from prison without even one of these in place will only find themselves returning right back to the facility that they just left within a matter of time. House Bill 1518 will provide those who have done the hard work to better themselves with a much better chance to get back up on their feet successfully.

Someone's chance of reintegrating back into society successfully greatly increases when even the most basic human needs are met right at the gate. Thank you for allowing me to share my testimony. I strongly support HB 1518.

Thank you for your testimony. Next up we have Courtney Pera on Zoom.

Good morning. My name is Courtney Pera and I'm a social work student at the University of Hawaii at Manoa and I'm in strong support of House Bill 1518. As it currently stands these individuals felony drug charges are not eligible to apply for staff until they have completed or in the process of completing a treatment program.

This assumes that people being released have support in a set place to live where they will have access to food before they are able to start a treatment program. This expectation is simply not a reality for so many people being released from prison.

This is an already vulnerable population and the stipulation to them being able to easily access food is more inhibiting to reentry and the desire to see them go through a treatment program is helpful. I've seen firsthand with a family member with this exact conviction struggle to get and keep a job for years.

Even with familial support, there's still struggle to reach the ultimate goal of independence and structured living post release. Food is a human right and that doesn't go away when someone commits a crime and it is essential to recovery from substance use disorders.

If one of the intentions, if one of the intentions when releasing individuals with drug addictions is to see them enter treatment with the goal of continued recovery, then food should be a key part of this process, not a carrot dangled. In front of people. Thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. And do we have Brandon, Brandon Kennard. Here. Also in support?

In support, we also had written testimony from the County of Hawaii, Department of Research and Development, Hawaii Correctional System Oversight Commission, Panelani Farm, Hawaii Substance Abuse Coalition, Community Lines of Prisons, Yanamalka Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Hawaii alliance for Progressive Action, Aloha United Way, Hawaiian Food Policy Foundation, Aloha Care, Big island substance abuse council, CLU of Hawaii and some 50 individuals.

So a lot of support. Is there anyone else here wishing to testify in person? Please.

Hi, Representative Marten, I'm sorry I missed when you called on me. I'm Nicole Wu from Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks. I was on the wrong zoom link. Just quickly, I was trying to find some statistics on how many incarcerated individuals in Hawaii are parents.

And most of the statistics are old, but they do show that it seems like the majority of incarcerated individuals are parents anywhere. I've seen estimates from 6,000 to 16,000 children in Hawaii have a parent who is imprisoned at 1.0 or another.

So definitely in terms of family reunification, family stability and making sure that one obstacle, which is access to food, when parents are trying to reconnect with their children, this kind of waiver is one way to help with that stability of families and make sure that the parents can Focus on their families and not have to struggle to afford food.

So thank you and please, please pass this Bill. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Hi, sorry if I missed. Lauren Zirbel with Hawaii Food Industry Association. We'll stand on our testimony in strong support. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good morning. Chair Martin, Vice Chair Olds, Members of the Committee, my name is Daniela Spoto. I'm with Hawaii Appleseed. We are in strong support of this measure. As others have said, coming out of incarceration is one of the most challenging things to reintegrate to society. This Bill really helps folks that are in that position.

It does it in a couple of ways. One of course is that it allows folks to apply to complete their application before they're actually released so that they have their EBT card on day one and can go right into being able to re enter society.

And the second way is that it removes a restriction that requires that people that are applying do not have a felony drug conviction on their, on their criminal record.

We think that, you know, when folks are really trying to get a leg up, these kinds of restrictions just make it really difficult and keep them sort of in the position of being set back.

The other thing I wanted to note is that the Department of Human Services is doing a lot of work in the background to try and upgrade their systems to be able to take on these types of innovations.

And I appreciate that this Bill is post dated until the I think it's 2028 so that to allow them to sort of time to implement all of these things. So we thank you so much for the opportunity to testify. Thank you.

Good morning. My name is Josh Frost. I'm a policy advocate at the ACLU Hawaii. You have a written testimony. So I just wanted to highlight a couple things. We're thrilled to hear that DHS and DCR are already taking steps to do this sort of program. That's really exciting to hear.

We nonetheless believe that, you know, codifying it in law is essential. We also support the recommended amendment from the Department of the Attorney General. This sort of thing is can really reduce or contribute to reduced recidivism. Not to mention just, you know, getting out and having access to food is fundamentally important.

And finally, as some others have said, in deference to the work being done by BESD to upgrade their systems. The Bill is posted till 2028. We hope you pass this.

Members, are there any questions for any of our testifiers? I have a question. So I see that the Attorney General was concerned with the title not including tanf, but the program that you're working on right now and piloting is exclusively snap, is that correct?

That's correct. But we don't object to the Attorney General's amendments to the Bill. I think they're actually smart.

Just checking in and it actually doesn't change either what you're doing at this time. Okay, that's it. Thank you very much. Okay.

We are moving on to our next measure, HB 1747, which is requiring the Department of Human Services to request and implement waivers or waiver extensions from the Federal Government to make sugary drinks and candy and multiple products for purchase weeks. And first up, we have. The Department of Human Services.

Good morning. Chair Martin, Vice Chair Olds and Members, I'm Scott Morishige, administrator of the Benefit Employment Support Services Division, on behalf of Director Ryan Yamani for Department Human Services. The Department stands on our written testimony with comments and notes that we have been approved for a demonstration waiver with a target implementation date of August 1st. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Except we have Hawaii Appleseed in opposition.

Chair, vice chair, Members, Daniela Spoto with Hawaii Appleseed. Hawaii Appleseed opposes HB 1747, understanding that this is a measure that, as the Department just mentioned, they already have been approved for a waiver that is a sort of limited restriction. We put out a statement in opposition to this when the waiver went out in the first place.

This one would add additional restrictions. The reason for this is that it seems, you know, like limiting SNAP purchases to unhealthy items. It seems like a public health measure. And as a public health person, I can understand why that would seem like something to improve the health of our population.

But evidence from other states shows that these restrictions have failed to use yield any meaningful health outcomes and can actually create serious unintended consequences, posing major challenges for Hawaii's 894 retailers and 157,000 residents who rely on the program. The reasons for this are outlined in our testimony, but quickly.

It's because they are targeting the sort of lowest income Members of our society in a stigmatizing way. The impact on retailers, I think, cannot be understated. The difficulties that they will have and putting in place these restrictions means that some small mom and pop retailers may drop out of the program entirely.

This puts additional administrative burden on the DHS that will make it harder for them to take proactive measures in other ways to expand access to the program. And we also have other options to. Improve the health of our communities. Things like the bucks incentivizing the purchase. Of local fruits and vegetables rather than putting restrictions on people's sources. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Next up, we have Nate Hicks from the Hawaii Public Health Institute in person.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee. Good to be back here. Appreciate you taking the time with us today. Appreciate the intent of trying to improve the healthy choices of our residents. However, this is an attack on our lower income people, framing them as less capable than the rest of us of making these decisions.

If we want to limit or ban sugary products, it needs to be something that's statewide. If we're going to say our SNAP population cannot eat it, it should be implemented for the rest of us as well. We are no different or better than them. We need to face the same impacts.

While 1 in 3 families are facing food insecurity, while 1 in 10 people are on SNAP, we need to be doing what we can to improve the economic situation where zero people are hungry, zero people are on SNAP. This is where our efforts should be.

Rather than limiting what they already struggling situation, we need to improve the status and make sure that the economy works for all of us. Thank you. Appreciate and obviously oppose this measure.

Next up, we have, we have on Zoom, Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks.

Aloha chair, vice chair and Members of the Committee again, Nicole Wu from Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks. We're also opposed to this measure for many of the reasons that Daniela and Nate have outlined. These waivers are part of the Make America Healthy Again initiative under Secretary Secretary Kennedy.

And in prior years, these types of waivers or restrictions were seen as kind of a government nanny state policy. So it's unusual, not expected for this to be happening right now. Knowing Secretary Kennedy, it sort of makes sense.

In addition to all the effects on families in terms of not having choice and stigmatizing SNAP families and the effects on retailers making their having to reprogram their systems and deal with new rules, it's also a burden on our Department of Human Services.

They're already struggling with all the effects of the federal Bill, that law that was passed last year that is making big changes to Medicaid and staff and for federal benefit programs.

And we also know that we need to get our SNAP error rate down to avoid a huge cost that might be coming down the pike, cost sharing in snap.

So we really need DHS to be able to focus on some of the other changes that are mandatory and coming down the pike rather than this waiver which is it's not mandatory and it's just more work for their already awareness. So those are some of the reasons that Our organization is also opposing this Bill. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, we have Hawaii Food Industry Association.

Thank you. Chair Lauren Zirbel on behalf of Hawaii Food Industry Association. We represent about 200 Member companies, grocery stores, food suppliers, distributors. We are in strong opposition to this measure. I sit on national calls for implementation and the states that have a broader waiver than us have been unable to implement the measure.

It is a lot more complicated than people think. They end up looping in products that are essential for people's survival. It creates a tremendous amount of work for retailers, distributors and departments. Extremely costly. I've yet to see a state implement it successfully.

There's a reason why Florida has repeatedly asked for delayed implementation and received it from the Federal Government. This is. This is a really problematic measure. So for those reasons, we oppose it. And I would echo what Nicole said about GHS being under a lot of stress to bring down the error rates.

It's extremely crucial that we bring down our error rates so we don't have this massive amount of funding requested burdening the states. So just strongly opposed and available to talk with anyone after about more details. So thank you.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have the American Beverage Association. Not present. Thank you. In person. Thank you. Okay, and then we have about a dozen individuals in support and two in opposition. Members, are there any questions for our testimony?

Chair, Question for DHS. Thanks. Scott, you mentioned something's happening August 1st. Could you briefly explain what's happening on August 1st? I know the Governor and the Administration is supportive of this federal initiative to a certain extent. So what's happening here in Hawaii on August 1st and how will this impact SNAP recipients?

So thank you for the question. So as mentioned in our testimony, we applied for and were approved for a very narrow demonstration waiver to restrict the purchase of soft drinks meeting a specific definition that's described in our testimony between now and August 1st, we're working with retailers, including from HFIA, to get their input, to figure out how we are going to implement this and to also develop an outreach plan to notify both members of the public who receive SNAP as well as retailers about how we plan to implement the law.

Right now, the target date is August 1st.

And just to clarify, that is for sugary drinks and beverages containing more than 10 grams of sugar, correct? Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Scott. Any other questions? Seeing none, we will move on to our next measurement, which is HB 1705 related to child custody. Allows licensed mental health counselors to be appointed as child custody evaluators. We had testimony from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs in support? No in person or zoom testimony.

But can I ask, is the Department of Health, excuse me, Department of Human Services, able to testify on this measure at all? No. Okay. Well, no one to ask questions of, so we will move on to our next measure, HB 1565, relating to child welfare services.

It establishes a working group in the judiciary to improve family court processes, including legal representation for youth in the child welfare system. And we have for that the Attorney General's office with comments.

Good morning, Chair Marten and Members of the Committee. I'm Deputy Attorney General Derek Peterson. The Department appreciates the intent of this Bill and has two minor technical amendments to ensure clarity. Those written amendments are discussed in our written testimony along with specific suggestions for possible amended language. Thank you for the opportunity to testify.

And I'm available for any questions you may have.

Thank you very much. And testimony is always welcome early, so I have a chance to read it before the hearings.

Okay, next up, we do we have the Office of Wellness and Resilience.

Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee, my name is Naomi Laipold. I'm here on behalf of the Office of Wellness and Resilience. We stand on our testimony in support and I'm here for any questions. Thank you very much.

Next up, we have High Hopes Hawaii on Zoom.

Aloha, can you hear me?

Yes, just fine. Go ahead.

Thank you so much. Aloha Chair Martin, Vice Chair Olds and Members of the Committee. My name is Patricia Chin and I serve as the High Hopes initiative manager for EPIC Ohana.

Our statewide initiative works with young people ages 14 to 26 who have experienced foster care, ensuring that they have the relationships, resources and opportunities that they need to thrive. I'm here in strong support of House Bill 1565 because legal representation changes outcomes in states that have already provided counsel for youth.

Young people are 40% more likely to exit foster care within the first six months, 45% more likely to reunify with family and experience fewer placements and school moves. These numbers represent something truly deeper. Stability, healing, and hope.

The most powerful evidence comes from Hawaii's young people themselves, many of whom would like to testify today but are unable to due to work, school and family responsibilities. One youth shared I often felt lost and did not feel represented. And another shared that if I had a lawyer, I would have been.

I could have avoided four grueling years in a placement that wasn't right for me. A young person also told us that I had a guardian at Litem, but I still didn't feel like I was part of the decisions that impacted my life.

And finally, a 17 year old who is currently still in foster care shared important decisions were made without me about my future, without my full understanding or my involvement.

As a former foster youth myself, I know exactly what they mean and I didn't understand the decisions being made about me and I didn't have the support I needed to participate in my own case. Legal representation would have changed that.

House Bill 1565 is a meaningful step forward and Hawaii has the opportunity in leading the way in honoring young people's voices and protecting their rights and building a system where they truly feel seen and heard. It ensures that no young person has to navigate the system in the dark or rely on chance to be listened to.

The High Hopes Initiative with EPIC OHANA stands firmly in support of this Bill as a necessary step toward ensuring that young people in Hawaii's foster care system have the opportunity to thrive and have a real voice in the decisions that shape their lives. Mahalo for your time and your commitment to Hawaii's young people.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have Hawaii Children's Action Network Speaks.

Hello, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee again, Nicole Wu from Hawaii Children's Action Network speaks. I can't testify better than Patty about the lived experience of foster care youth, but I would like to remind you or let you know that the Hawaii children's policy agenda has included this Bill in our agenda this session and the prior session.

Upon learning about this issue that Hawaii is only one of 13 states that does not guarantee foster youth the right to legal representation in their court proceedings, our organizations decided to include it in our agenda because it does seem to make a lot of sense.

And this Bill starts with a working group to figure out how to do this, which seems like a very prudent and kind of cautious first step to getting to something that I think most of us can agree is needed for our foster youth here in Hawaii. So we support this Bill and urge you to pass it. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next up do we have in person Richard Dominguez.

Hello, I'm Chair Martin, Vice Chair Olds, and Members of the Committee. My name is Richard Dominguez. As a social work student, I am testifying in support of House Bill 1565. As an emerging social worker, I have seen firsthand how system gaps disproportionately affect vulnerable youth, particularly Native Hawaiian and other historically marginalized communities within Hawaii.

Providing legal representation is not only a matter of fairness but also a preventative measure that can reduce prolonged court involvement and system related harm and trauma.

House Bill 1565 is critical is a critical step toward improving outcomes for youth involved in child protection proceedings by establishing a working group focus on strengthening family court process and access to legal robust representation for children.

Youth and young adults involved in child welfare are the experts of their own lives and case plans and services are more effective with their input. Studies show that engaging youth in case work leads to improved safety, well being and permanency outcomes.

This authentic engagement means creating a safe, supportive space where youth feel heard, respected and protected when sharing their experiences. It honors the youth's voice but also provides the support they need from the working group helping them maneuver the complex child welfare system.

By establishing a working group that includes lived experiences and examines best practices, House Bill 1565 creates an opportunity for child welfare professionals to meet you where they are at, provide clear information and support, and follow their lead throughout the court process.

For these reasons, I respectfully urge you to support HB 1565 as this Bill represents a thoughtful, collaborative and necessary approach to improving. Improving Hawaii child welfare and family court systems. Mahalo for your time and for having me in this space.

And for some reason, the Judiciary who was testified in support is not on my list. I don't. I just want to make sure I don't skip them if they are here. Okay.

I see their written testimony, but it was not okay. So and in person, do we have Judith Clark? Are you testifying on this matter for the Youth Council for Youth? Maybe not. Okay. On zoom. Melissa Mayo.

Aloha chair, Vice chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Melissa Mayo. I'm a former foster youth and proud former Member of the Malama Ohana Working Group and a youth Advocate with over 8 years of experience working alongside young people impacted by the child welfare system. I'm here today in strong support of House Bill 1565.

In my work, I have the privilege of listening to many young people in Hawaii's foster care system. I want to also acknowledge that many of them would like to be here today to share their own experiences, but because of the demands of work, school and family responsibilities, that makes that difficult.

I'm here today carrying their perspectives and hope that their and their hope for a system that truly listens to them. I often say that Hawaii's child welfare system operates as a system of luck.

I was fortunate to have adults in my life who listened to me and advocated for me while I was in foster care, but many young people do not. Too often, young people are left out of conversations of their own lives and are expected to accept decisions that they do not understand or did not have a voice in.

During my work on the Malama Ohana working group and in my advocacy roles, I consistently heard youth say, stop making decisions about our lives without even hearing from us. And that statement has stayed with me.

This Bill is an important step towards changing that reality by establishing a working group focused on improving family court processes and access to legal representation for youth. This Bill helps to ensure young people have someone whose role is to listen to them, protect their rights, and advocate for their voices in court.

No young person's future should depend on luck. This Bill moves Hawaii's foster care system closer to a fair, transparent, and grounded in dignity and youth voice. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify. And I respectfully urge your support for House Bill 1565. Mahalo.

Okay. Do we have Dana? Okay. So support also provided from the national center for Youth Law from another dozen former foster individuals and associated with the High Hopes initiative from National Association Council for Children Hawaii Cuba and another five individuals. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure?

Aloha. I'm Judith Clark. I'm speaking today as a community advocate and the former Executive Director of Hawaii Youth Services Network.

I have more than 25 years of experience working with young people in foster care and I believe strongly that they deserve a voice in decisions that affect their lives and that having their own attorneys will improve their ability to participate in those decisions. Thank you for this opportunity to testify.

Anybody else? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions of any of our testifiers?

No, thank you. Should have just really curious. Chair pointed out the judiciary letter and the Guardium item as part of the Member of the working group and within that testimony because we're trying to move to a new model. Maybe the Guardian added item as a Member be taken off of the working group.

Is there any suggestion from Office of Wellness on who would be an alternative to the working group?

Thank you. I saw that testimony too. I'm sorry, was it from the Department of. Was it from the judiciary or the?

From the judiciary like I understand their wisdom. They're trying to move to this new model and the model that we have is the Guardian Aditum model. We just. If they're in the working group, we're not sure if we're going to get to a brand new model.

Thank you for that question. We would of course we would defer to the judiciary knowledge on why the Guardian Alanum working group Member might not be the best. I do not want to speak on behalf of lived experience. I would follow their lead on who they think a good alternative might be.

But we do see their intention of why they want the Guardian ad Litem to be there because they are such part of this current system. So I would defer to a lived experience or even the judiciary to see who that might be. Okay, great. Thanks. Thanks. Any other questions?

All right, seeing none, we will move on to our next measure which is HB 1801 which appropriates funds for the Department of Human Services to contract with somebody for domestic violence training and on site support. First up we have the Department of Human Services.

Aloha, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, I am Elladine Olevao representing Social Services Division on behalf of Director Yamani. We stand on our testimony of support court and will be available for any questions.

Next up we have the Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic violence. Is Angie Mercado there with us? Oh, so sorry, I didn't see you. Please come.

Morning, Chair. Vice Chair Committee Members I'm Angie Mercado, the Executive Director of Hawaii State Coalition Against Domestic Violence. And we are a membership of 20 Member program strong serving survivors of domestic violence.

Our mission is to unite all of Hawaii and all forms of domestic violence and we want to applaud the Legislature for including training in this measure and making sure that we are adequately preparing all of our systems partners to serve survivors of domestic violence.

And we just want to make sure that if the Legislature is going to be prescriptive in what should be included in that training, that we really are taking a look at some of the really important factors when it comes to working with survivors of domestic violence.

And it's using evidence based tools and assessments so that people know exactly what the dangers are and the legislation are and the relationships that survivors who are going through the child welfare system are experiencing so that safety planning and decisions around who has access to children are appropriately made.

Those are just some of the biggest things that really stand out for us. Available for any questions you may have and thank you again for this opportunity to testify.

We also have Judith Clark. Did you want to weigh in on this as an individual? Judy, this is on the domestic violence training. You were listed as wanting to testify.

Okay. Sorry, I'm having trouble hearing you. Again, I'm Judith Clark. I'm testifying as a community advocate. It is not uncommon for abusive spouses. To attempt to get the other parent. In trouble with child welfare services as a form of control.

Having domestic violence training for CWS workers and having a specialist with expertise in this area will help sort out these very complex issues. Thank you.

Thank you for that. Next up we also had written testimony in support from Halequipa and from one individual. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Go ahead.

Thank you. Chair for the Department of Human Services. I have a few questions. I was here. I was happy to hear the Department is in support of this Bill. I did have some questions based on the written testimony. First is what clarification is the Department needing from the Legislature.

I wasn't clear as to what the Department needs clarification on.

I believe we need to continue. Thank you for the question. I believe we need to do more internal discussions about speaking to our Attorney General and how we're actually going to be able to implement the strategies of training and supporting our workforce. As far as what kind of clarification we need from you folks as our.

Legislative partners, I would need to go back and get more information from our team.

But thank you. And I have a second question now. If for some reason this Bill were not to pass, would the Department still go ahead and implement what this Bill proposes?

Our goal is always to continue to provide training that will help the workforce to better service our families. So I believe that we will continue to make every effort to implement this type of domestic life training.

Yes, thank you. I appreciate the answers. Mahalo.

Any other questions Members? I have a question. So I appreciate, you know, your interest in this it's measure. And, and what I need is budget to put in my Committee report. I need a cost. I understand you have an existing contract with a district domestic violence nonprofit to support agency.

But this will be additional funds for training, maybe additional funds for having somebody housed at least part time in different offices. And so do you think it would be possible to get me a budget? Because I don't want to just make something up that may not meet.

I will make sure I follow up with who can provide you with a budget.

Okay, I appreciate that and we'll try to include that. Thank you very much. Moving on to our next measure. HB 1645 is attempting to deal with the increase in insurance costs for nonprofits who are are foster care adjacent in some way. And we have here to testify the state of Hawaii DCCA Insurance Division.

Morning, Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Matt Sujimore on behalf of the Insurance Division. The division has submitted testimony offering comments on the Bill. And I just if you haven't already. So I just want to highlight the division is aware of this issue, not just here locally in Hawaii, but as a national trend.

You know, as I noted in the testimony, the concern is that tort reform alone may not be enough to actually have a significant impact on the cost of insurance.

And so for those reasons, the division has been working with other insurance regulators across the country to figure out other risk management mechanisms or structures in order to provide insurance coverage to nonprofits that provide child welfare services. One of them being potentially forming a captive insurance company.

So happy to answer any questions, but that's all from the division. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Appreciate that. And pay attention to this issue. Next up we have Department of Human Services next.

Good morning Chair, Vice Chair, Members of the Committee, Elladine Olevao representing Social Services division on behalf of Director Amane. We stand on our written testimony and will be available for any questions.

We have in person. Parents and children together.

Good morning Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee. My name is Trisha Kajimura, Vice President of Strategy and External affairs for Parents and Children Together or PACT. Thank you for hearing this Bill and the opportunity to testify in support of the Bill with amendments.

PACT is a statewide social services organization founded in Kuhio Park Terrace incoming Kalihi in 1968. We have grown to offer services on all islands. With 20 programs and 350 employees, we approach our work with deep respect and humility for the contributions of all community Members.

In September 2025, PACT was up for our annual insurance renewal and faced with a problem we'd never encountered before. Our liability insurer had pulled out of the market for child welfare organizations nationwide. Other companies declined. Our business and our broker struggled until the last minute to find a replacement.

We ended up paying three times the premium for less coverage than we had the year before. The reason for this difficulty getting insurance again was clearly stated as due to our work as a non profit providing child welfare services or foster care adjacent services on behalf of the state, we cannot operate without insurance.

Our operations, serving 18,000 people statewide annually would cease without insurance. One reason is that it's required by our state contracts. So this was a very close call and unfortunately it could happen again this year and every year until solutions are implemented. We have been researching this issue ever since and I'm very grateful for DCCA's help.

And this discussion started about starting a captive insurance program. But in the process of our research, we found that this is a nationwide problem documented as a crisis for child welfare organizations in 46 states. I attached the Executive summary from that report in my testimony.

To avert this crisis in our state, we're going to need to implement solutions from different points of view. And we need to make organizations like PACT more insurable. So what's in this Bill accomplishes that in different ways, aside from the two requested amendments. So if I may review those.

First of all, the first one on the term foster care agencies, we propose replacing that with child welfare organizations because foster care services are just a small portion of child welfare services provided by organizations such as ours. We're not a foster care agency, so we wouldn't qualify under those definitions. And also the second point being indemnification.

The Bill requires indemnification of the state by contracted nonprofits. This is already in our contracts. We already fulfill this requirement. However, this requires us to take on the state's liability and their legal costs.

And since we provide these services on behalf of the state, we ask that this be changed so that the Bill prohibits the requirement that child welfare service contractors indemnify the state Our current insurance crisis shows that when we're required to take on the state's liability, the burden becomes untenable.

So thank you again for considering this Bill and we're happy to participate in any discussions going forward.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have in person, we have Nayak here.

Good morning, Chair, vice chair, Members of the Committee, apologies. I think it might have been submitted under the wrong organization with the Hawaii Association for Justice, but I'm in oa. Yeah.

Okay. Is that correct?

Yes. Is that the correct estimate? Thank you so much. Appreciate the opportunity. So the Hawaii Association for Justice, we represent victims of or the plaintiffs bar, and we represent a lot of the victims who are victims of the abuse that they face in a lot of the foster care system.

So we do stand in strong opposition to this measure. You know, this measure does reduce accountability for a lot of the operations here across the state, and we understand the insurance concerns. However, we did like to note a few main points. You know, first, the removal of joint and sexual liability.

You know, it does, at the end of the day, hurt and harm the abuse victims the most, and primarily because it leaves them with limited forms of recourse after the abuse occurs. Secondly, of course, it removes the use of punitive damages as a way to deter, you know, often very u grossly negligent acts that that could occur.

So, you know, this tool in the judicial system is pretty vital in order to assure accountability within a lot of the agencies. And, you know, third, you know, overall, we feel as though this is not, from a public policy standpoint.

Liability limitations are not the way to go about, you know, reducing costs personally or, you know, from an organizational standpoint, we feel as though, you know, other alternatives both prioritized the victims of the abuse themselves and while maintaining services for them as well. So, you know, for those reasons, we respectfully stand.

Thank you very much. We also have. We have. Support.

Are you there?

Aloha. Aloha, Chair. I'm having a hard time. Your mic keeps going in and out.

Oh, I'm sorry. We hear you perfectly.

Okay, great. Aloha, chair, vice chair and Members of the Committee. My name is Venus Rosete-Medeiros and I'm the President and CEO of Hale Kipa, a community based organization that has served Hawaii's children, youth and families for over 55 years. And I am here in strong support of House Bill 1645 with amendments.

Hale Kipa operates emergency shelters and residential programs for children who have experienced abuse, neglect, homelessness and significant trauma. These shelters are often the last Safe place for a child when there is no other options. Keeping them open is not optional.

It is essential today the ability to be threatened by the liability liability insurance crisis facing child welfare service organizations. Insurance carriers are leading the market or dramatically increasing premiums for organizations that provide foster care and shelter based services. Coverage is shrinking, costs are skyrocketing and in some cases insurance is becoming nearly impossible to secure.

If organizations like Hale Kipa cannot afford insurance, we cannot operate our shelters and children will have nowhere to go. HB 1645 is a critical step towards stabilizing this system.

By addressing liability exposure, limiting punitive damages and clarifying legal standards, this Bill makes child welfare service organizations more insurable and helps ensure that essential shelters and services remain open for Hawaii's Keiki. However, we respectfully request two amendments to ensure the Bill fully accomplishes its intent. As Tricia mentioned.

First, we ask that the Bill replace the term foster care agencies with child welfare service organizations. Hale Kipa and many providers deliver critical services across the child welfare Continuum, not just foster care, including emergency shelters, placements, stabilitation and family support. Narrow language risks excluding organizations children depend on.

And second, we ask that the Bill prohibit indemnification clauses in state contracts rather than require them. Current contracts shift the state's liability onto non profit nonprofit providers, significantly increasing insurance risk and costs. Removing these clauses would better align responsibility and immediately reduce pressure on insurers and providers.

HB 1645 with these amendments protects children by protecting the organizations that care for them. Without it, Hawaii risks losing shelter capacity, experienced staff and stable placements outcomes none of us want for our Kiki. So I respectfully urge you to pass HB 1645 with the amendments. Mahalo Nui for your opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have child and family service on zoom. Amanda Pump

Good morning Chair and Vice Chair. My name is Susan Richard on behalf of Amanda Pump and Child and Family Service. Child and Family Service strongly supports HB 1645 relating to liability with amendments.

House Bill 1645 is important because of the liability protections help nonprofit welfare child welfare providers maintain access to professional liability insurance has costs rise sharply. But over the past year, as with the others that have testified, CFS's liability insurance costs have tripled while the coverage options actually narrowed.

So because of this, insurance is because insurance is required under state contracts. Without affordable coverage, providers like CFS and the others that have testified here today may be unable to continue delivering essential services. CFS respectfully requests two amendments.

First is like the others, please replace foster care agencies with Child welfare service organizations to better reflect the full range of contracted CW child welfare services.

And second is to prohibit the indemnification clauses and the requirement to name the state as an additional insured because these provisions shift liability and defense costs onto nonprofits and drive up insurance risk and cost. With these changes, HB 1645 will better protect Hawaii's child welfare system and the families who rely on it. Mahalo for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much. We had also four written testimonies in support from Hawaii Insurers Council, American Property Casualty Insurance Association, another from Child and Family Service, and another from Child and Family Service. Is there anyone else wishing to testify of this measure? Oh, please come up. Introduce yourself.

Aloha Kakou. My name is Laʻakea Yoshida. I'm the President of the CEO, Family Programs Hawaii. We're an organization that provides prevention, support and transition services for children in the child welfare system, as well as support for families. I want to say the same as my colleagues. We support 1645 with amendments.

Say that we also support the exact same amendments, and we stand on the same reasons, which is that the changing face of the insurance environment, especially for nonprofits who are dealing with children and child welfare and foster care, is changing rapidly.

And as was shared, that it's a nationwide search, you see this as something that's happening across the board.

And, you know, we stand, especially with our partners, folks like PACT, for example, who have experienced work experience, the same thing, which is, you know, almost losing insurance because of the environment, which would then put back a lot of the cases that we deal with on behalf of the state back to the state, you know, and I don't know, you know, how that would look for the state, but I presume it would be pretty bad.

So I think that for us, we support, you know, we support this again with the exact same amendments proposed by our colleagues. So thank you very much.

Thank you very much. Anyone else wishing to seeing none. Members, are there any questions?

Hi. Thank you. Chair, I have a question for DCC. Thank you for your testimony. I believe everybody in this room agrees that there is a crisis in regards to the insurance situation in child welfare services to protect our most vulnerable of children.

In your written Testimony on page 3, the Department describes some of its efforts that are being made to address this problem. What is the department's position in terms of the progress of these efforts being made, and would those efforts alone be sufficient to address the concern that we're discussing and trying to solve with this Bill?

Yeah. Thank you for the question, Rep. You know, I would say this is the discussions that the division has had with other state regulators across the country have are pretty preliminary right now.

I mean, I think we're trying to understand the depth of the issue because as you can imagine, while we feel a very severe hit in Hawaii, the depth of the issue in say, a state like California is we're talking almost 100 times the scale.

And so we're just right now trying to understand what is the depth of the issue in these different states to determine the feasibility of certain, certain solutions. So, for example, you know, earlier I brought up potentially starting a captive the core function or the core structure of a captive is essentially self insurance.

And when we're talking about a large risk liability, the depth of that self insurance and the requirements for capital of that self insurance are quite high.

And so trying to understand are there certain states that we can partner with that match our risk, our risk factors versus are there other states that maybe we can't really feasibly partner with them? So to answer your question, it is a little bit early.

We do think though that, you know, ultimately the thing that drives insurance cost is the underlying risk. And so the greater the risk, the greater the cost. And so the question is how do we we can address the insurance cost, but really the biggest solution to lowering the cost is to lowering the risk.

And so that's kind of where we're trying to determine. We can try to work the back end insurance costs, but those will, I guess anecdotally, they'll basically kind of be bandages that you'd stick on without really addressing the underlying risks that cause a lot of these issues.

Members, are there any other questions? Go ahead.

Thanks for being there. Absolutely. Get this delta. So I want to focus on what you shared is costs are tied to risk. And so what I'm hearing is you lower the risk, you lower the cost and you don't have to answer. Now maybe we can have a offline conversation.

I want to hear what things help lower the risk. Do you have any suggestions on lowering the risk?

Because I think we're all chasing the same thing and this Bill is addressing it from one angle, but I also think we have to look at policy to help our child welfare systems actually implement things that actually lower the risk.

Yes, I 100% agree with you and I think I don't have a direct answer to your question. So we can have that conversation as we get more information. But I will say this is, you know, kind of the two, I guess, bigger subsets within risk are frequency and severity. Right.

And what we're seeing is not necessarily an increase in the frequency of claims and issues. What we're seeing is a big increase in the severity.

And so I believe it was just April of last year, California had done a temporary extension of their statute of limitations which resulted in, I believe it was somewhere around a $4 billion settlement with regards to child welfare service claims. And so, you know, it's things like that where insurance has to gauge towards the worst case scenario.

And so, you know, it's not, again, it's not really a direct answer to your question, but I think when we're talking about risk factors, those settlements that have already been agreed to and they're kind of in the past, that is automatically baked into the calculation.

And so what we can do to address that, I think we're open to trying to have that conversation. But I think that's where for us in our written testimony we say this. Right. Is that tort reform alone may not be kind of the proverbial golden bullet to lower the insurance costs.

No, absolutely understood. And this Bill really modifies the definition. Right. Foster care. And that's great. But to the point of that risk, that's baked in to how we have to provide this insurance card. Thanks. Yeah, let's kind of have that conversation. Thank you so much

I do, I have questions too. First of all, I appreciate you folks are looking into this as a long term strategy.

And I want to say that this Bill which I do really appreciate from our CPC chair is trying to minimize the risk to our non profit service providers by having them separating their culpability from that of the state. State. Right.

So they, they are trying to minimize our risk by not being held accountable for things that they didn't do. Right. That were done by the other actors connected to the state. But I wanted to ask for a reaction from you on the proposed amendment to prohibit indemnification clauses in the, in the state contract.

Yeah. So in conversations we've had with the Attorney General's office, I believe, and I don't want to speak for them, so please don't. I don't mean to put words in their mouth, but I believe that indemnification classes generally are required in every state contract.

And so that would be a fairly significant divergence from current practice that's kind of outside the purview of the insurance division when it comes to contractual obligations between the state and non profit entities such as child welfare service providers. So I can't really, I'm not. It's kind of outside of the scope of our office.

So I don't know that it's appropriate for me to comment on that. Okay.

Thank you for that. Thank you for that comment. All right, moving on to our next measure, HB 2115, which appropriates funds to the Department of Human Services to issue supplemental contracts to community based organizations to address their increased costs related to labor, insurance, utilities, rent and gas.

And we have here to testify the Department of Human Services.

Good morning again. Scott Morishige today, the Department of Human Services. The Department stands on our record this morning with comments. A respectful fee requests that any appropriation document does not reduce or replace priorities the Executive budget. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And in person, we have True Cost Coalition. Hannah? How do we pronounce your last name?

Leziak. Aloha Chair Martin, Vice Chair Olds, and Members of the Committee, My name is Hannah Leziak here on behalf of the True Cost Coalition in strong support of HB2115. This measure would provide critical funding to DHS so that community based organizations can keep up with rising costs.

Our Coalition represents over 70 community based nonprofit organizations serving over 500,000 residents statewide each year. So in other words, these organizations are the safety net of our state and we have to ensure that the safety net does not fray.

And one other thing that I wanted to be clear is the recent federal funding cuts did not create a new problem. They exposed and exacerbated a decade old one. And so for that reason, I really want to thank you all for hearing this measure and I'm available for any questions. Thank you. Thank you very much.

We have also in person, Tricia Kajimura from Parents and Children Together.

Aloha again, I'm Tricia Kajimura for PACT. We strongly support this bill. It's one of our highest priorities this session. And I just wanted to make sure to state that the necessity for this bill exists independent of issues brought up in other measures.

Operating costs across the board have gone up over the years, and we do have a variety of contracts that cover a gamut of services impacted by these increasing costs. So we respectfully request your highest attention to this b ill. Thank you. Thank you.

We also have in person, Aloha United Way.

Michelle.

Aloha, chair, Vice chair and Members of the Committee, thank you so much for the opportunity to testify. My name is Michelle Bartel. I'm here today on behalf of Aloha United Way and A True Cost Coalition proud member. And we are in strong support of this bill.

I'm not going to reiterate a lot of the points in the testimony, but one of the things that we don't often talk about is the ripple effects that happen to organizations, even if they're not direct recipients of government contracts.

Because what happens is if government is not funding the true cost to provide these services on behalf of government, they must go out and seek out private funding. Right? I mean, they. Nonprofits are already very clever at maximizing their resources, but the last thing they want to do is have to cut service. Right.

Which would put them in breach of their contract that they sign. So they have to go out and they have to seek out other private sources of funding. So what does that do? The pie isn't getting bigger of private funding. And so that also impacts smaller nonprofits that previously maybe were counting on some of that funding.

So it really does have this ripple effect, not sustainable for organizations to continue to operate under contracts that haven't been adjusted and sometimes in more than a decade. And it's also not fair to our community to expect that private philanthropy is going to be subsidizing, essentially government, what government should be paying for.

So we very much appreciate the support and the opportunity to testify in support of this bill. And thank you so much, so much.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center. Nikos.

Good morning again, Madam Chair, Vice Chair and Members. Nico Lever with Hawaii Health and Harm Reduction Center. We are in strong support of this bill. We are a Member of Partners in Care and the True Cost Coalition.

As you know, Madam Chair, we've been meeting with legislators like yourself and departments in recent years to Increase funding for work that's outlined in multi year service contracts. And deepest, deepest gratitude to you Madam Chair for getting baseline homelessness services funding into the budget. Long overdue, much needed.

As you know, service providers across the state have been struggling to meet the significant increases in costs related to business operations, including increases to insurance premiums, rent, equipment procurement and maintenance and energy. We know that. I first met the Vice Chair as a frontline worker outreach for the Department of Education working with the homelessness community.

The homeless community. And we have a lot. We continue to have difficulty recruiting and maintaining frontline staff, including those with valuable lived expertise, homelessness, behavioral health issues and criminal legal system involvement.

With some of our staff taking part time jobs in the service sector to augment their income and some leaving our agency to enter the service sector entirely because they can make more money with tips than the vital work that we provide.

So mahalo for the opportunity to provide testimony and mahalo for your continued commitment to our underserved community communities.

Thank you very much. On zoom. Do we have Hale Keepa still Venus?

Yes. Aloha Chair, Vice chair, Members of the Committee once again. I'm Venus and I'm the President and CEO of halequipa. I'm also a Member of the True Cause Coalition and I'm here today in strong support of House Bill 2115. Community based organizations like ours are on the front front lines of care.

We serve youth who have experienced abuse, neglect, homelessness and deep trauma, often stepping in at the most critical moments of their lives. But I want to be very clear. The cost of doing this work in Hawaii has changed dramatically and our state contracts have not kept up.

We are facing steep increases in labor costs as we try to pay our staff fair. Livable wages and insurance premiums have skyrocketed. As we mentioned earlier, utilities, rent and fuel continue to rise. And these are not optional expenses. They are the basic costs of keeping our doors open, our facilities safe and our staff supported.

When contracts remain flat while costs increase, nonprofits are forced into impossible choices. We have to cut services, leave positions vacant or operate at a deficit just to keep our programs running. And when that happens, it is not the organization that suffers most. It's the youth and the families who rely on us.

So HB 2115 is a necessary and responsible response. It recognizes that community based organizations are true partners of the state. Helping the state do their work. And the sustaining essential services requires funding that reflects today's economic realities.

If we want stable programs, experienced staff and safe, consistent care for our most vulnerable residents Then we must ensure the organizations providing that care can survive. I respectfully urge you to pass HB 2115. Supporting this bill is not just about covering costs. It is about protecting people and strengthening the systems that care for them.

Mahalo Nui for the opportunity to testify.

Thank you very much. And next up, we have Child and Family Service on zoom.

Hi, good morning and mahalo for the opportunity to testify. My name is Tremond Wong. I'm testifying on behalf of Amanda Pump for a Child and Family Service. As Members of the True Cost Coalition as well, we're in strong support of HB2115.

Child and Family Service is a community based organization delivering DHS contracted services to over 7,000 children and families across Hawaii each year. And our ability to provide timely, ethical and effective services depends on rates reflecting the true cost of care, including workforce expenses, compliance requirements and administrative demands.

As others have spoken about today, true costs have increased significantly while contract rates have largely remained flat. In particular, the professional liability insurance has tripled in cost for CFS in just the past year. And when funding does not reflect true costs, it strains providers, destabilizes our workforce, and ultimately impacts the quality of care available to families.

HB2115 is a necessary step toward aligning DHS contract rates with the true cost of service delivery. We respectfully urge your support on this bill and mahalo for your commitment to children and families across our state. Thank you.

Thank you very much. We also have in person Judith Clark.

Aloha. I'm Judith Clark. I have more than 50 years experience working in the nonprofit sector managing government contracts and I can tell you it's really hard when the amount of the contract is not enough to cover the cost of providing the services that are mandated. Our nonprofits struggle to attract and retain qualified staff.

When grants and contracts don't cover the full cost, we are not able to pay competitive wages our workers leave us for for higher paying jobs or move to places with a lower cost of living. It is shameful that so many of our lower level nonprofit staff qualify for public benefits such as SNAP and Medicaid.

Staff working with homeless individuals are often concerned about losing their own housing. One homeless outreach worker said to me, if my landlord raises my rent, I won't be able to afford my housing. Nonprofits cannot take on state contracts and provide high quality services without adequate compensation. Thank you for this opportunity to testify.

We also had testimony, written testimony just called, comments from the state Procurement office and in support from Catholic Charities Hawaii, Adult Friends of Youth Responsive Caregivers of Hawaii, Hawaii Substance Abuse Coalition, Community alliance of Prisons, Kina Mauka, Hanoi Domestic Violence Action Center, Goodwill Hawaii, Kumukahi Health and Wellness, Hawaii Youth Services Network, Hawaii Primary Care association, the Institute for Human Services, Aloha Care, Hawaii Youth Services Network.

Again, Child and Family Services and from a handful of individuals as well in support. Members or is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? See none Members, Are there any questions? Go ahead.

Go ahead, Jenna. You haven't had it go yet for. The Department of Human Services. Hi, thanks for being here.

Just a quick question from the Department standpoint. Is there long term planning being done on this issue? And I kind of asked this because I kind of brought this up in the info briefing already. It does feel like this is the third year we're having this conversation about these contracts.

I think the Department has acknowledged every year that they know that this gap exists. And it kind of feels like on our end again that we're having different conversations with the Department because you guys are not coming in with an admin bill to kind of work on this while we're hearing from the nonprofits.

You know, all these rising costs are really putting us trained on them. So what is there a long term planning being done on this issue?

So you know, I can take this back to our Department leadership and thank you for the question. I will note that back in 2023 we did include in our Executive budget a report requests to increase the lighting for the homeless program, office contracts that provide services, you know, within our BSD division.

So we, this is something that we are aware of and we're looking at. But I'll take your concerns back to our leadership representative. Thank you.

Because I mean. Sorry, just a quick comment. Chair. I mean I think that's the solution because I mean I do agree with a lot of the concerns that procurement office brought up, I think. Right.

And even this is going to be a one time payment that I think we acknowledge that it's not gonna, you know, solve the issue even if we can do this one time payment to everybody.

And I mean I'd rather help right size the whole situation and find that long term solution to make sure these services are getting to people. So yeah, I hope the Department is kind of going to take lead on helping us right size what's going on knowing that we need to provide these services to community.

Thank you, Chair. Thank you. Thank you again for being here on behalf of the Department. I also am not sure if you'll be able to answer this question, but Similar to what the representative had said prior, I am aware that there were one time payments in regards to supplemental increases in contracts for certain programs.

So, you know, wanting to write the. Situation. If you're not able to today, could you provide us the number of contracts that need to be supplemented and also provide an amount as to how much the contracts need to be supplemented by?

I think that would be helpful for all of us in trying to help our providers and get this bill moving along.

Thank you, Representative. Again, you know, I'll take this question back to our Department leadership. I know we do look at the Executive budget very closely and so it's something that, you know, we'll do some follow up and get back to it.

But even the past, we did provide estimates at the current level of funding contracts of the permit overseas.

Thank you. So, yeah, I appreciate. Annie has been working with me trying to give me information on exactly how many direct service, the quantity of direct service contracts, you know, by budget number so that we can think through this. And some of them, the numbers we have are from last year.

And there was some question about, wait, is this accurate? So I'm getting, I've gotten updated numbers for some agencies, but not all of them.

So it'd be really great to have the rest of the updated numbers before this hits finance and also to be able to separate out the ones that already did have a 5% increase a few years ago versus those that did not because we do have the intent of trying to keep it fair by, you know, adjusting those that have not had an increase in recent years, probably by more.

So I appreciate the work done so far, but as this moves quickly, hopefully towards finance, we want to get the numbers accurate. As you can tell, our finance Vice chair is thinking very strategically ahead.

Thank you, Chair. And just for clarity, are we looking Primarily at the 103?

We're looking at direct service.

Yeah.

Thank you. Yeah, I can, I can provide. Well, I have already been communicating, but this was just a reminder to get the rest of the numbers in. Yeah, I'll pull up that. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. All right, any more questions? Seeing none, we're moving on to our last measure. Thank you all for your patience.

HB2114, which establishes the Hawaii Benefits Hub within the Office of Enterprise Technology Services and appropriate funds. And for that Bill, we have the Department of Human Services in support.

Good morning again, Chair. The Department supports this measure and will stand in a written testimony. Just note that we respectfully request any appropriation obligation, also replace priorities Executive budget thank you.

Thank you very much. We also have testimony with comments from the Enterprise Technology Services office.

Aloha Chair, Vice Chair, and Members of the Committee. My name is Christine Maii Sakuda, and I am the state Chief Information Officer from the Office of Enterprise Technology Services, a division within the Department of Accounting and General Services. And ETS focuses its priority on statewide IT strategic planning and operations.

We support the departments in their endeavors to develop and implement state IT strategic plans that are also aligned with the department's business goals. In addition to that, we also have our cybersecurity office, our network office, in addition to our data and AI office that's emerging.

So we cover a pretty broad, broad area and we support the intent of this Bill. It's important for me, even personally, to ensure that our public is able to get access to the services that they need within state government and recognition that there are different systems that could be connected better together.

So we provided commnet just because in addition to providing the infrastructure, we feel that we're kind of like... What was I going to say? The carpenter with the tool set.

So we have a lot of tools in our tool set that we just described. But the Bill to just ensure that the system runs well, needs a kind of architect and like a homeowner of the building. So we want to partner with you.

We also want to partner with the stakeholders that are really the end users of the system, that administrate the system, so that there's a lot of alignment in the business goals and meeting those goals with the right infrastructure, and that's in harmony together. And so we respectfully offer comments and are happy to provide any additional input. Mahalo.

Thank you very much. We also had written testimony in support from the Hawaii alliance of Nonprofit Organizations, Hawaii Primary Care association, and Aloha Care. Is there anyone else wishing to testify on this measure? Seeing none. Members, are there any questions? Seeing none. I have asked my questions already, so I'm good.

But I really appreciate the creativity and the thought of your agency on this matter of bringing those tools to bear in an area that we haven't used them before. So we really appreciate that. And with that, we will move on to decision making. I appreciate the Committee for being so patient today. Vice Chair.

So first up, we have HB1518, relating to the Supplemental Nutrition Program.

For this one, I would like to recommend that we pass it with amendments, affecting the date, adding to the Committee report, the proposed start date of January 9, 2028 to give time for implementation and to adopt the AG's amendments to clarify that this applies to SNAP only and not TAN, since that is not in the title and is not actually the intent of this measure.

Vice Chair?

All right, voting on HB1518. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Chair and Vice Chair vote aye. Representative Amato.

[Role Call]

Thank you very much. The next measure, HB1747 relating to SNAP and soft drink sugar consumption. I will defer this measure. I do appreciate the work of the Department. I think that we should discourage use of limited budgets on stuff that doesn't nourish our bodies. And I personally don't drink soft drinks or give them to my kids.

Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

But I appreciate the work is already being done and so they. This measure is not needed. Okay, next up, we have HB1705 relating to child custody. On this one we have very limited testimony. I'd like to keep it moving forward and hope that the Department of Human Services will weigh in in the future.

So I'd like to defect the date and add to the Committee report that the proposed start date is upon approval. Vice chair?

Okay, voting on HB1705. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Voting all Members present. Any Members voting with reservations? Reservations. Any nos? Chair recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have HB 1565 relating to child welfare services. This is the working group for Council for Youth in Foster Care. I'd like to add to the Committee report a proposed budget of $50,000 and per testimony from the judiciary strike.

Change the composition of the working group to strike out the guardian at item to based on other testimony, to change the language around three or more experts with lived experience to instead be three or more individuals, not experts, because it's not clear what constitutes an expert to strike out.

Per the AG's recommendation, the two representatives from the Molama Ohana Working group since that working group actually doesn't exist anymore at this time.

And to add, the co Chairs of the working group may invite other persons to serve as working group Members who the co Chairs believe will effectively assist in fulfilling the working group's duties pursuant to subsection one, so they have the ability to bring in other expertise as needed.

Defect the date and add to the Committee report that the proposed start date is upon approval. Vice Chair for the vote, please. Does the Committee have any comments or concerns seeing that? Vice Chair for the vote and thank you for that.

HB 1565 Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments any Members voting no with reservations. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next up we have HB 1801 related to child welfare services. This is on training on domestic violence and I propose passing with the following amendments.

On page three line seven expand that the intaking case management staff will be trained to use evidence based screening tools to measure the level of exposure to an involvement in violence in the home and community as well as other risk factors.

And also add they will also be trained in evidence based risk assessments to assess lethality factors and the risk of serious or fatal harm and defect. The date and I ask DHS for a proposed budget and if we receive that in a timely manner I will also add that to the Committee report.

Are there any questions or comments Members? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 1801 Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments any Members voting no with reservations. Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next up, HB 1645 relating to liability.

This is trying to reduce the liability for nonprofits working in social welfare services and as such I'd like to adopt their proposed change to replace the nonprofit foster care agency with the term nonprofit child welfare service organization in all places it is found on pages 34 and 6 and 5 anywhere it is found in the document and delete the reference to and the corresponding definition of foster care.

And then Also on page 2 line 7 clarify by adding that the litigation strategies often include naming nonprofit child welfare service organizations in lawsuits.

Other technical amendments defect the date and also note in the Committee report the request by several testifiers to prohibit indemnification clauses in state contracts rather than requiring them and ask that this be looked into further and as the bill moves on to see if this is something that is possible or not in our state.

With that Members, are there any questions or concerns? Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 1645 Chair's recommendations that pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations? Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. HB 2115 relating to human services. This is the true Cost coalition bill for this one I'd like to defect the date and put in the Committee report the information that I have already on the budgets of the various state contracts and the most recent increases in contract amount.

With that Members, are there any comments or questions? Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB2115 Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations? Chair, your recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Next up, we have HB2114 relating to human services. This is the Hawaii Benefits Hub bill. I'd like to clarify the role of state agencies as collaborative customers of the services proposed.

And so in that I would like to add to the existing text that the Department of Human Services and its attached agencies shall provide direction on the application processes to be included included in the Hawaii Benefits Hub and the eligibility data to be collected, as well as to facilitate needed links to their own data systems in accordance with all existing federal and state legal agreements and restrictions.

Expansion of the Hawaii Benefits Hub to new benefit programs shall be subject to available capacity within the Office of Enterprise Technology Services.

In addition to that, I'd like to expand the scope of work and statute of the Chief Information Officer to include, in addition to the items already listed, a line that says work with the Executive branch departments and agencies to develop and implement a statewide portal to government services and finally defective Members. Are there any comments or questions?

Seeing none. Vice Chair for the vote.

Voting on HB 2114. Chair's recommendation is to pass with amendments. Any Members voting no? With reservations?

Reservations.

Chair Recommendation is adopted.

Thank you very much. Thank you all for attending today and thanks for the great testimony. We are a adjourned.