Legislature trims back governor’s proposed funding increases for state-run residential services
For the second year in a row, the state Legislature cut back a modest increase in funding that Governor Maura Healey had proposed for state-operated group homes for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities (I/DD) in Massachusetts.
Our analysis of key Department of Developmental Services (DDS) line items in the Fiscal Year 2026 state budget also shows that for the first time in several years, the Legislature reduced Healey’s similarly modest, proposed increase in funding for Intermediate Care Facilities (ICFs).
The ICF line item funds the operation of the Wrentham Developmental Center and the Hogan Regional Center. Healey signed the Fiscal 2026 budget into law on July 4.
The final Fiscal Year 2026 budget legislation shows that funding appropriated by the Legislature for the state-operated group home line item was increased from $330.7 million, in the previous fiscal year, to $347.2 million. But that 5% increase was $14.8 million lower than the 9.5% increase the governor had initially proposed in January.
Similarly, the ICF line item received a 5% increase in funding in Fiscal 2026, from $124.8 million to $131 million. But that increase was $1 million less than the 5.8% increase the governor had proposed.
What appears to have happened to the state-operated group home and ICF line items is that the Senate adopted the governor’s proposed increase for each line item for Fiscal 2026, but the House approved a smaller increase. In both cases, a House-Senate Conference Committee on the budget adopted the lower House version.
Corporate provider line item fully funded
In contrast, the Legislature fully adopted the governor’s proposed increase in the residential corporate provider line item of nearly 19% for Fiscal 2026. That amounted to an increase of $320.4 million, from $1.7 billion to over $2 billion.
In addition, the Legislature approved $207 million in funding for a reserve fund for the corporate providers. As we have reported, 75% of the funding in the reserve fund is supposed to be used to boost direct-care wages; but there doesn’t seem to be a method for tracking or enforcing that 75% requirement.
Funding trimmed for state-run services in the previous year
In July of 2024, we reported that while the state-operated group homes received a modest 4% increase in funding for Fiscal 2025, that increase ended up being $2.4 million less than the increase the governor had proposed when she submitted her budget to the Legislature in January 2024.
This trend continues to be concerning because the administration and Legislature are continuing to allow the residential population or census at Hogan and Wrentham and in the state-operated group homes to drop steadily by attrition.
No apparent cut in Medicaid
We would note that we haven’t yet seen an indication that there has been a cut in Medicaid funding to DDS as a result of recent budget action at the federal level in Washington.
That may still happen. But we don’t think the reduced funding increases for the state-operated group homes or the ICFs reflect federal Medicaid cuts. If that were the case, there would be a similar reduction in federal Medicaid reimbursement to the state for its funding of DDS corporate residential providers, which doesn’t appear to have been the case.
But even if federal Medicaid cuts don’t occur, we need to continue to impress upon our leaders at the state and federal levels that state-run services for some of the most vulnerable among our citizens are being neglected.
In cutting or trimming back funding for state-run services, while at the same time boosting funding to corporate providers, those leaders are sending the message that they are on the side of those corporate interests and not necessarily on the side of their own clients and their families and guardians.
COFAR blog 
State-run services for our most vulnerable indeed suffer. The most severe barely get out of the house, which is “in the community,” but has nothing to do with the community.The severely disabled become frustrated, as do they staff, who are only human. Acting up on the part of the disabled is tamed with medication. A vicious cycle. Wish everyone knew the reality.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I’m pretty confident the legislature does know the reality. They don’t care. They care about lining the pockets of the corporations that fund their campaigns and keep them in power. The budget and spending the legislation branch puts forward is a pile of BS. It somehow never matches the Comptrollers books. It’s people that suffer from corruption. The public needs to be aware so we can vote them all out and only put those in office who are willing to actually change the greed, corruption and blatant abuse of power.
LikeLike
thanks for raising awareness on this issue. Why is there no audit or oversight- especially for the 75% in the reserve fund to boost direct care wages?
LikeLike
We’re experiencing a downward trend in quality of care, to save a few bucks. The legislature is either uninformed or uninterested in providing quality care. This is very troubling. How can we inform the uninformed?
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think that Mina is talking about special needs families knowing the reality. The fact of the matter is that many families still believe that the advocacy organizations that advocated for this highly corrupt and discriminatory system are our friends. For instance, they don’t see the connection from the Blueprint for Success and the fact that their adult child has no job, no day program, and nothing at all to do during the day but watch TV. They continue to give money and advocate for these organizations. They believe- if only those organizations had even more power and money that things would change for them. More families need to follow the money.
LikeLiked by 2 people
How can we educate these people?
LikeLiked by 1 person
expose, in writing, what really happens to your developmentally disabled loved one. Here, in blogs, everywhere.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ingrid, I think that your book was a help in documenting Wrentham’s history. Because it is an academic text, it is too expensive to purchase for most people. My advice is to keep writing. Keep publishing. Keep up as much publicity as possible. You have the knowledge of history and the skill to do this. Understand that the other side has tremendous resources for public relations experts to push a false narrative. We don’t have that. What we do have is a group of highly motivated advocates and the truth. We can’t dismiss the power of telling the truth. It will be good in the end, and if it isn’t good, it isn’t the end.
LikeLiked by 1 person