Healthcare Representatives in Texas are overhauled by a program aimed at avoiding abortion after the PROPBLICA and CBS News investigation, which found that tens of millions of taxpayers were thrown into the state, providing slight expense control.
Money is received on a network of non -profit organizations that are included in the prosperous Texan families, a state program that supports children and adoption as an alternative to abortion and provides counseling, financial assistance and other services. Most groups act as crisis centers of pregnancy, or resource centers of pregnancy, which often resemble medical clinics, but are often criticized that they have virtually no real medical care and mislead women about their possibilities.
Over the 20 years of its existence, the program’s financing has grown – reaching $ 100 million a year, starting from September 1 – making it the most strongly fined efforts in the country.
According to the new rules that have come into force, the organizations in the program now have to document all their expenses, and they will only be offset for the costs related to the services approved by the state. And they cannot seek compensation when re -distributing the donated items, efforts to prevent taxpayers’ money to go to the organizations for the goods they received for free.
Meanwhile, Texas opens the program administration A competitive selection process Instead of automatically updating contractors agreements, including one contractor who has overseen most of the program for almost two decades.
Changes addressed the refusals revealed year ago Investigation PROPUBLICA/CBS. As the Texas families currently operate, most providers pay a single bet for each service they claim, regardless of the actual cost of this service. As a result, one client’s visit can create some paid payments, which significantly increases the amount of public money spent. In some cases, the providers put up separately for each item or service provided by the client – for example, diapers, baby clothes, blankets, napkins, snacks and even educational brochures – according to the records, considered Propublica and CBS News.
Such an agreement allowed organizations to bill the state for more than services actually cost – and keep the difference. One group, the Sely Torthernacy resource center, has overcome its assets for more than three years, engaged in some compensation. His Executive Director Patrice Penner recognized this practice, saying that her goal was “to make sure we had enough to continue and continue for many years.”
“There is no guarantee that the funds we receive will be enough to make the center,” Penner added, “and this is my duty of the director to make sure we accept any services we get to make sure we can take care of these young ladies when they come in the door.”
Two others, the Makalen pregnancy center and the Coastal Center bending in the Christie housing, used compensation to finance real estate transactions. McALLEN Center, which receives almost all the income from the state, bought the building in which the clinic had previously housed for abortion. The center of the coastal bending Openly recognized by public funds buy land for a new object. The centers did not answer the questions.
In San -Antonio, flowering Texan families have shut off financing in the center of pregnancy known as new life for the new generation after local news reported spent money taxpayers on vacationOn a motorcycle and financing a business on the smoke owned by his president and the CEO. The center did not respond to a comment request.
Propublica and CBS News also found that government officials in the health care field are not visible in what services are provided, or they achieve the people most in need. In many cases, the state offered the suppliers of $ 14 each time they handed out donated goods or materials, regardless of their value and how they received them.
This included the spread of brochures for the upbringing of children, the development of the fetus and the adoption, which can cause the same compensation as providing material assistance as diapers or formula. The state could not say exactly how much it spent on these materials because it did not track what it spread.
The state-approved brochures and lessons considered by the reporter stated that the fetal heart begins 21 days after conception-depicted as a single motherhood as a risky and lonely, marriage or adoption as the best options.
While compensation at a single rate is sometimes used in state contracts, non-profit experts and accounting states that the application of it to the distribution of sacrificed goods-beas of accurate standards for the number and cost-it was very irregular.
Officials from the State Health and Human Services Commission, which controls the thriving Texan families, did not say that it caused a shift in politics, only that he followed the recommendations of the state supervisor. This guide recommends awarding public grants as compensation for real costs.
The state has long allowed its main contractor, the Texas Nursing Net, to cope with most of the program supervision. Last year, the network reported to information organizations that after the state funds were transferred to the subcontractor, “it is no longer taxpayers” and these groups could spend free as they considered fit. HHSC pushed to the network, saying that he still believes that the money would be taxpayers and is expected to be used in accordance with the state recommendations.
It seems that the transition to the cost model seems to bring more to the program in accordance with how public money is usually distributed to different state institutions in Texas.
Texan Networking Network, which has received almost 75% of the Tesk families in recent years, which funded and extended it by dozens of crisis centers of pregnancy, groups based on faith, and other charitable organizations that serve as subcontractors.
State Representative Donna Hovard, Democrat from Austin and vocal critic of the state in programs against abortion, said in an interview that when she opposes the support of taxpayers in programs against abortion, she sees new rules as a step in the right direction.
But with new compensation requirements, Howard asked if many centers can even use financing. Unlike the previous flat fee system, providers should now track costs, document services and provide receipts to justify their costs. “Who knows if they can actually use the funds if they have to show the revenues,” she said.
In demand that the centers of pregnancy monitor the income, the level and employment of customers – and provide customers information about public benefits available to them – the state depart from the system that allowed non -profit organizations to raise funds without taking the help.
Pregnancy resource centers and abortion activists lobby lobbyed republican lawmakers to block policy changes during the last legislative session, and some publicly announced it.
On the social media platform X, Jeff’s representatives believe, a Republican from the suburbs of the Northern Dallas, called on the agency “not to veto” over the program “Media bias”. The figure did not respond to the requests for comment.
In an interview, Texas President John Sigo warned that the new compensation model would interfere. He said that “it is not worth the small providers who get into the program from all the red tape.”
And in written testimony, Penner, from Sealy, called on the legislators to Save your current modelSaying that it allowed her team “focus on serving our customers rather than staffing to process documents” needed to compensate.
Despite the deviation, legislators did not take action to block new rules.
Gay Bai, Professor of Accounting and Health Policy at John Hopkins University, said the transition to the cost of the cost could help prevent waste, making sure that the organizations will receive salaries only for being spent.
But she warned that this model had its risks. Because providers know that they will be offset, they may not be cautious to reduce costs – or even can fall asleep their costs to get more money. She pointed to Medicare, which in the past used a similar system but refused it after the costs came out of control.
In order to avoid the same problem, she said, the program will need strong public supervision to make sure that the organizations do not exceed the costs just because they know that the state will cover the bill.
One of the reproductive health policy specialists, which carefully monitored Texas’s costs on the crisis centers of pregnancy, warned that the reforms were little to resolve the broader gaps on the state’s social security network.
“You really can’t replenish the lack of Medicaid health insurance for very poor in Texas, giving people educational services, brochures and diapers,” said Laura Dixon, a researcher with a sharp study of reproductive health based in Austin.
But at least she said, “Understanding where the money is going is a really good step for this program.”
