HB 1493
In CommitteeHouse
DDA employment services age
Concerning the age at which clients of the developmental disabilities administration may receive employment and community inclusion services.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill lowers the eligibility age for DDA employment services from 21 to 19, and expands flexibility for clients to move between employment and community inclusion programs. It also requires DDA to provide clearer information and support for service choices, and to improve community-based options.
- Clients of the Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA) can now receive employment services starting at age 19, down from the previous age of 21.
- DDA must determine employment service hours based on the support needed to achieve employment goals, not just on how many hours the client spends working or in activities.
- Clients who have been in an employment program for nine months can now choose to switch to a community inclusion program, and can switch back to employment services at any time—no prior approval required.
- DDA must provide clear information to clients and their families about all service options—including employment and community inclusion—so they can make informed choices, and must allow exceptions to the nine-month requirement.
- DDA must work with counties and community stakeholders to expand and strengthen community inclusion programs, including offering services in non-residential settings to support community integration and independent living.
Who is affected
- Young adults with developmental disabilities (ages 19–20) — Individuals with developmental disabilities who are 19 or 20 years old and currently ineligible for employment services until age 21; they will now be able to access these services earlier.
- DDA employment program participants — People receiving employment services through the Developmental Disabilities Administration (DDA) who may now choose to switch to community inclusion services earlier than before, or request exceptions to standard requirements.
- Families and legal representatives of DDA clients — Families and legal guardians of DDA clients, who will receive clearer information about service options and can help their loved ones make informed choices about employment vs. community inclusion services.
- County human services departments and community service providers — Counties and community service providers who support DDA clients; they will need to adapt services to support earlier transitions and expanded community inclusion options.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Lowering the eligibility age to 19 allows young adults with developmental disabilities to access early employment and community support, which research shows improves long-term independence, reduces institutionalization risk, and enhances community integration—directly benefiting individuals during a critical developmental window.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1); Sec. 2(1), (2), (5)Removing the nine-month lock-in requirement and allowing flexible transitions between employment and community inclusion programs restores autonomy to clients and families, aligning with person-centered planning principles and reducing bureaucratic gatekeeping over service access.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1), (2), (5)Expanding community inclusion to non-residential settings supports independent living goals by enabling participation in community activities (e.g., volunteering, internships, social clubs) that build skills and networks—reducing isolation and supporting transitions to supported or independent housing.
HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4)Shifting service-hour determination to support needs—not just time spent—better aligns with individualized education and rehabilitation goals, potentially improving outcomes for clients transitioning from high school or seeking competitive integrated employment.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2); Sec. 2(3)Clearer information sharing about service options helps families and clients make informed decisions about care pathways, potentially reducing unnecessary institutional placements and supporting earlier access to mental health or behavioral supports embedded in community programs.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 2(3)
Potential Concerns (5)
Earlier access to employment services for 19–20-year-olds may increase demand on limited service slots and staff capacity, potentially delaying services for others on the waitlist or reducing service quality if staffing does not scale accordingly.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1(1); Sec. 2(1)The requirement that employment service hours be based on support needed—not actual time spent working—may increase administrative burden and complexity for service providers, potentially increasing costs and creating inconsistent implementation across counties or providers.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1), (2), (5); Sec. 1(2)The bill’s mandate to expand community inclusion programs in non-residential settings may require counties and local providers to invest in new infrastructure, transportation, or staffing without guaranteed state funding, shifting costs to local governments and potentially straining already limited resources.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Fiscal Impact; Sec. 2(4)Increased state spending to serve ages 19–20 will likely be funded through general fund or reallocated resources, potentially diverting funds from other critical public services—especially if enrollment exceeds projections—thereby indirectly affecting public education, healthcare, or transportation infrastructure.
FinancialPeopleRef: Fiscal ImpactWhile the bill improves information access, it does not mandate standardized or accessible formats (e.g., plain language, multilingual, disability-accessible), so families with limited English proficiency or cognitive support needs may still face barriers to truly informed choice.
Rights & LibertiesLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(3)
Who Is Most Affected
Young adults with developmental disabilities (ages 19–20) gain earlier access to employment and community services, improving their pathway to independence and reducing time on waitlists—this is a direct, positive impact.
Families gain decision-making power and clearer information, but may face increased stress if service availability lags behind demand or if they must advocate intensively for exceptions—net positive, but with implementation risks.
Community service providers gain flexibility to tailor services, but must absorb new administrative and staffing demands without guaranteed additional funding—mixed impact, leaning negative if resources are not scaled.
Existing DDA clients aged 21+ may face longer wait times if new slots are filled by 19–20-year-olds, especially if the state does not fully fund the expansion—negative impact for this group.
State government faces higher short-term costs and must manage increased caseloads, but may see long-term savings from reduced institutionalization and increased workforce participation—mixed, with net fiscal pressure in the near term.