AB 143 directs the Department of Developmental Services to implement a statewide Self‑Determination Program (SDP) in every regional center catchment area that gives eligible consumers and families an individual budget and enhanced choice over services and supports used to meet their Individual Program Plan (IPP). The bill codifies roles for independent facilitators and financial management services (FMS), sets program-level oversight and reporting requirements, and requires standardized statewide processes to reduce enrollment barriers and disparities.
The measure tightly binds participant control with public safeguards: it defines how individual budgets are computed and reviewed, requires criminal background checks for nonvendored direct‑care workers, mandates training and outreach, and establishes local and statewide advisory committees. The law also directs leftover federal funds from earlier pilots toward implementation costs and participant supports, and authorizes the department to issue immediate program directives pending formal regulations.
At a Glance
What It Does
AB 143 creates a statewide Self‑Determination Program available through every regional center, gives participants an annually allocated individual budget, and requires standardized processes, oversight, and reporting. It authorizes independent facilitators and vendored financial management services to support participants and allows departmental review of large budgets.
Who It Affects
Regional centers and their contractors, prospective and current regional center consumers and families, independent facilitators, financial management services vendors, local consumer/family‑run organizations, and state agencies responsible for Medi‑Cal and criminal background checks.
Why It Matters
The bill shifts purchasing authority from regional centers to participants while embedding compliance and fiscal-review mechanisms—changing how services are planned, bought, and overseen and creating new operational and fiscal responsibilities for regional centers and service providers.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
AB 143 makes the Self‑Determination Program a permanent, statewide option for people eligible for regional center services who choose to participate. Each participant receives an individual budget intended to reflect what the regional center would otherwise have spent for that person; that budget is attached to the participant’s IPP and is used to buy services, supports, and goods necessary to meet IPP outcomes.
The law requires person‑centered planning, consumer/family training, and options to hire or contract for supports—ranging from traditional service providers to individual support workers or community resources.
The bill prescribes concrete mechanics for program operation. The department must develop standardized statewide timelines and procedures — including enrollment, budget-setting, spending plans, and access to transition supports — with community input by a statutory deadline.
Regional centers must meet department targets and benchmarks (including timely enrollment and reductions in budget disparities), conduct local outreach and training, report enrollment and budget data annually, and certify that spending plans advance IPP outcomes, use generic services where available, and are eligible for federal financial participation.Financial management services must be vendored and are paid by the regional center; they provide monthly budget statements and handle payroll, tax withholding, and employment‑law compliance for participant‑hired staff. Independent facilitators must meet departmental certification standards, but their cost comes out of the participant’s own individual budget; participants may instead use a regional center service coordinator if they decline an independent facilitator.
The department also requires criminal background checks for nonvendored direct‑care workers and certain nonvendored providers, with fingerprints submitted to the Department of Justice and FBI checks routed through the DOJ process.The statute builds oversight and transparency into the program: the department may review individual budgets that meet or exceed a spending threshold, and regional centers must annually review high‑spend budgets. Local volunteer advisory committees and a Statewide Self‑Determination Advisory Committee are required to monitor implementation, share best practices, and advise the department and State Council.
Finally, the bill directs leftover federal matching funds from prior pilot projects to cover implementation costs (criminal background checks, facilitator support for initial planning, training, and regional center support) and requires periodic legislative reporting on participation, budgets, appeals, and withdrawals.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The department must establish standardized statewide processes (enrollment, budgets, spending plans, FMS, transition supports) with community input by March 1, 2027, and regional centers must apply them consistently.
Initial individual budgets for current consumers are generally the most recent 12 months of purchase‑of‑service authorizations (less certain exclusions); budgets may be adjusted only if the IPP team documents changed circumstances and the regional center certifies it would have spent the funds regardless of SDP participation.
The regional center must vend and pay the participant’s financial management services provider, who must deliver monthly budget statements and handle payroll, taxes, and employer compliance; other service providers are exempt from Title 17 vendorization but must not be federally debarred and must meet state licensing requirements.
The department and regional centers must require criminal background checks—fingerprints submitted to DOJ and FBI—for nonvendored direct personal care staff and some other nonvendored providers; providers or their employers must pay fingerprint and administrative costs.
Participants who voluntarily exit the program cannot return for at least 12 months; transfers between regional center catchment areas carry the balance of the participant’s budget to the receiving regional center.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Statewide implementation and availability
Makes the Self‑Determination Program a statewide option in every regional center catchment area and requires the department to offer it on a voluntary basis to all eligible consumers. Practically, this converts the prior pilot into a universal option and imposes operational requirements on every regional center to offer enrollment and supports.
Program design, oversight goals, and standardization deadline
Directs the department to set targets and benchmarks (including diversity and timely enrollment) and to address program elements such as outcome‑based planning, budgets, training, and FMS/independent facilitator standards. Critically, the department must produce standardized processes and procedures with community input by March 1, 2027, to reduce participation barriers and improve equity; regional centers must apply those processes consistently.
Key definitions: FMS, independent facilitator, individual budget, spending plan
Defines the operational roles: FMS providers manage payroll, taxes, employer compliance and must meet Title 17 requirements and departmental certifications; independent facilitators assist with person‑centered planning and are paid from the participant’s budget; individual budgets are the regional center purchase‑of‑service funds available annually and must be set using a fair, transparent method; spending plans attach to the IPP and cannot exceed the individual budget. These definitions determine who is responsible for what and which entities must be vendored or certified.
Eligibility, voluntariness, and funding priorities
Participation is voluntary and open to regional center consumers with developmental disabilities who do not live in licensed long‑term health care facilities (with planned transition exceptions). The bill requires orientation, use of generic services first, and Medi‑Cal application assistance to maximize federal financial participation. It also earmarks additional federal dollars from earlier pilots to cover implementation costs and participant support activities, prioritizing things like facilitators for initial planning, training, and regional center implementation expenses.
Individual budget methodology and adjustments
Specifies how initial and revised individual budgets are calculated: for current consumers, typically using the last 12 months of authorized purchases, with narrowly defined adjustments only when the IPP team documents changed needs and the regional center certifies the expenditure would have occurred anyway. Budgets are recalculated no more than once every 12 months unless circumstances change, and the department may develop alternative methodologies in consultation with stakeholders.
Spending plans, transfers, vendorization, and payments
Requires spending plans to use uniform budget categories, obliges regional centers to authorize inter‑category transfers upon approval, and mandates semi‑monthly payment schedules to FMS providers. Only FMS providers must pursue vendorization under Title 17; other service providers are exempt from Title 17 vendorization but must not be on the federal debarment list and must hold any applicable state licenses. The regionals must certify that spending plans meet IPP outcomes and federal eligibility rules.
Criminal background checks, advisory committees, and reporting
Requires fingerprints and DOJ/FBI checks for specified nonvendored providers (minimum: direct personal care staff and others when requested), allows the department to bar providers based on results, and assigns costs for fingerprints to providers or their employers (with department processing fees offset by pilot funds). Establishes local volunteer advisory committees and a Statewide Self‑Determination Advisory Committee to oversee implementation and produce best practices; requires annual legislative reporting on enrollment, budgets, appeals, and program outcomes and mandates reports from the State Council with program effectiveness analysis.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Social Services across all five countries.
Explore Social Services in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Regional center consumers and families — gain control over spending and choice of services, enabling personalized approaches and the ability to hire nontraditional supports or community resources to meet IPP outcomes.
- Independent facilitators and FMS vendors — create a defined market: FMS vendors receive mandated vendorization and payment by regional centers, and certified independent facilitators become an authorized role funded through participant budgets or regional supports.
- Underserved communities — the standardized processes, outreach, and department targets aim to reduce disparities in enrollment and budgets for racial and ethnic communities, potentially improving access and equity if implemented as designed.
- Local consumer and family‑run organizations — funded and contracted roles for outreach, training, and advisory work expand their operational significance and influence over local implementation.
Who Bears the Cost
- Regional centers — must develop standardized processes, certify spending plans, implement outreach and training, review high‑spend budgets, vend and pay FMS providers, and satisfy reporting requirements, creating administrative and operational costs.
- Nonvendored service providers and employer agencies — must pay fingerprinting and DOJ/FBI criminal background check costs and comply with verification steps; smaller providers may face cashflow and administrative strain.
- Department of Developmental Services — takes on rulemaking, oversight, certification standards, directives pending regulation, and review authorities; administrative costs are only partially offset by pilot funds and may require further appropriations.
- Medi‑Cal/federal funding streams — the program leans on maximizing federal financial participation; shifts in how services are coded or billed could affect state‑federal cost allocation and require careful federal compliance management.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill tries to reconcile two legitimate goals—maximizing individual control over how public funds are used while maintaining fiscal accountability and participant safety—and leaves unresolved how to calibrate budgets, reviews, and vendor rules so that participants get genuine choice without creating perverse incentives, under‑resourced needs, or unacceptable risk.
The bill pushes participant choice while preserving public oversight, but several implementation frictions are unresolved. The budget‑setting rules—which tie an individual budget to historical purchase‑of‑service authorizations unless narrowly adjusted—may underfund new or previously unmet needs, or conversely entrench historical spending patterns that do not reflect desired outcomes.
The statute allows departmental review of budgets above an unspecified threshold, but leaves the threshold, review criteria, and appeal mechanics largely to future directives or regulations, raising short‑term uncertainty for regional centers and participants.
Operational burdens are uneven. Requiring FMS vendorization but exempting most other providers from Title 17 vendorization speeds access to nontraditional supports but reduces pre‑service vetting and raises fraud and quality‑control risks.
Criminal background checks for nonvendored staff protect participants but shift up‑front costs to small providers and complicate rapid hiring by participant‑employers. The law channels leftover federal funds toward implementation, but long‑term sustainability depends on federal financial participation and whether the department’s benchmarks trigger incentive funding—both contingent on administrative design and federal approvals.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.