SECTION 1.
(a) The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:(1) The Public Policy Institute of California estimates that California’s older population will nearly double by 2030, bringing an increase of 4 million people over the age of 65.
(2) The implications of the population aging impact not only older adults and people with disabilities, but also their families, local communities, and the state.
(3) Twenty percent of California’s older adults live in poverty, and this number is expected to increase with the rose of aging adults in the state.
(4) Ninety percent of older adults would like to age in their homes, but often lack access to the necessary services and supports to do so.
(5) The cost of long-term services and supports (LTSS) is unaffordable for most Californians:
(A) The annual cost of 30 hours per week of home care is almost $36,000, three-quarters of the state’s median household income.
(B) The median annual cost of nursing home care is $112,055, more than twice the state’s median household income.
(C) Only 5 percent of Californians aged 40 and older have purchased private long-term care insurance.
(6) Across the state, older adults, people with
disabilities, and families rely on services provided through multiple state entities, including, but not limited to, the State Department of Health Care Services, the State Department of Social Services, the California Department of Aging, the Department of Rehabilitation, the Department of Transportation, the Department of Housing and Community Development, the Department of Insurance, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the State Department of Education.
(7) Despite the programs and services administered by a range of state departments, families struggle to weave together services and finance care in the hopes of helping loved ones remain at home. Individuals and their families do not know where to turn for help or how to pay for services. When help is finally found, many people are bounced between programs with little assurance that their needs will be met.
(8) California
is woefully unprepared to care for this growing and increasingly diverse demographic. California cannot meet the workforce needs of older adults and people with disabilities, with a growing shortage of paraprofessionals and professionals needed to provide culturally competent care to an increasingly diverse population.
(9) The AARP Public Policy Institute reports that in 2015, California’s 4.5 million unpaid family caregivers provided approximately $57 billion worth of unpaid care, yet often without the necessary training and support.
(10) As the population ages, the demand for healthcare, long-term services and supports, affordable housing, accessible transportation, oral healthcare, mental healthcare, and other services will continue to outpace supply unless there is intentional leadership and action.
(11) Recent
polling data shows that more than two-thirds of likely voters feel the state is not prepared to address the healthcare and social support needs of its fast-growing older adult population. Nearly 9 out of 10 voters say it is important for the state to have a master plan to invest in services that allow older adults to age in the place that they prefer.
(12) Numerous entities have issued reports calling for system change, including the Little Hoover Commission in both 1996 and 2011, the Strategic Planning Framework for an Aging Population, a report prepared in response to Chapter 948 of the Statutes of 1999, the Assembly Committee on Aging and Long-Term Care in 2006, and the Senate Select Committee on Aging and Long-Term Care in 2015. Despite hopeful intentions, none of these efforts led to meaningful change.
(13) The 2015 report by the Senate Select Committee on Aging and Long-Term
Care, “A Shattered System: Reforming Long-Term Care in California” identified a number of system challenges including system fragmentation, lack of access to services, workforce challenges and cultural competency, and a crumbling infrastructure.
(14) According to the 2017 Long-Term Services & Supports State Scorecard, the highest-performing states all have one thing in common: a commitment to a clear and strategic plan that guides thoughtful investments as part of an integrated and responsive approach to serving older adults and people with disabilities. As examples, Connecticut, Washington, and Minnesota have outlined clear strategies with a broad framework for systems improvement. Policymakers and elected officials in these states have collaborated in developing a vision with specific benchmarks and goals that serve as the foundation for achieving broad transformation.
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act that a Master Plan for an Aging California is developed that empowers all Californians to age with dignity, choice, and independence.