This bill establishes a statewide Aging and Disability Resource Connection (ADRC) program to help older adults, people with disabilities, and caregivers find and access long-term services and supports (LTSS) through locally run ADRCs operated by area agencies on aging and independent living centers. The California Department of Aging (CDA) will administer the program in coordination with the Department of Rehabilitation and the Department of Health Care Services, and CDA will assist qualified local partners with designation applications.
The statute requires ADRCs to provide enhanced information and referral, options counseling, short-term service coordination, and hospital/ skilled nursing facility transition services. It also directs the department to develop a core best-practices model (including specific data-reporting elements) and contains a nonrevocation clause that allows a single partner to operate an ADRC temporarily if the other partner cannot, subject to designation of a replacement.
Implementation is contingent on a legislative appropriation.
At a Glance
What It Does
Creates a formal ADRC program administered by the California Department of Aging working with Rehabilitation and Health Care Services, designates area agencies on aging and independent living centers as core local operators, and prescribes a baseline set of services and data reporting requirements. The department must develop and promulgate a core best-practices model for implementation by local ADRCs.
Who It Affects
Local area agencies on aging (AAAs) and independent living centers (ILCs) seeking ADRC designation, the CDA and partner state agencies for oversight, hospitals and skilled nursing facilities for transition coordination, LTSS providers that receive referrals, and older adults, people with disabilities, and family caregivers seeking services.
Why It Matters
The bill standardizes how Californians access LTSS at the local level, mandates specific service functions and data collection, and sets governance rules for temporary continuity when one local partner is unable to operate—shaping referral flows, local service coordination, and reporting obligations across California's LTSS ecosystem.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The bill codifies a statewide ADRC program intended to be the single local entry point for people seeking long-term services and supports. It charges the California Department of Aging with program administration and requires collaboration with the Department of Rehabilitation and the Department of Health Care Services.
CDA must help interested and qualified area agencies on aging and independent living centers apply for ADRC designation, making those two types of organizations the program’s primary local operators.
Designated ADRCs must deliver enhanced information and referral services at hours convenient to the public, provide person-centered options counseling about public and private benefits, coordinate short-term services, and manage transitions from hospitals and skilled nursing facilities back into the community. ADRCs must serve their geographic jurisdictions and publicly communicate the services they provide so eligible Californians and referral partners can find them.The department must develop a core model of ADRC best practices in consultation with an internal advisory committee.
The bill enumerates minimum practices the model must include, ranging from person-centered counseling and outreach to a formal follow-up process and a specified model for sharing client data and reporting performance metrics. It also requires CDA to review the ADRC Infrastructure Grants Program when updating best practices, tying program design to prior grant implementation experience.Operational continuity is addressed by a nonrevocation provision: if one partner (AAA or ILC) loses its ability to operate, CDA cannot strip the ADRC designation solely for that reason; the remaining partner may run the ADRC alone for a transition period of one to two years while a replacement partner is designated.
Finally, the law’s implementation depends on a specific appropriation in the annual Budget Act or another statute, meaning the program’s launch and scale hinge on future budget action.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill requires ADRCs to provide four core services locally: enhanced information and referral, options counseling, short-term service coordination, and transitions from hospitals and skilled nursing facilities.
CDA must develop and promulgate a core best-practices model that includes person-centered counseling, outreach to specified referral sources, a formal follow-up procedure, models for data-sharing, and a model for data collection and reporting.
The best-practices model must include specific reporting elements: demographic data for each counseled individual, counts of consumers served by service category, and the number of caregivers served.
If an AAA or ILC partner loses designation or temporarily cannot operate, the remaining partner may run the ADRC alone for a transition period of at least one year and up to two years while a replacement partner is found; services must continue uninterrupted.
Program implementation is explicitly contingent on an appropriation in the annual Budget Act or another act earmarked for this purpose.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Establish ADRC program and local purpose
This subsection creates the ADRC program and sets its purpose: to provide information and assist older adults, caregivers, and people with disabilities in accessing LTSS locally. Practically, it frames ADRCs as the statewide mechanism for connecting consumers to both public and private supports and binds the program to community-level access rather than a purely state-run call center model.
State administration and interagency collaboration
Assigns administration to the California Department of Aging and requires formal collaboration with the Department of Rehabilitation and the Department of Health Care Services. That tripartite arrangement signals shared oversight across aging, disability, and Medicaid-related domains, which will shape guidance, referral pathways, and data expectations tied to Medi‑Cal‑related services.
Designation process and core local partners
Names area agencies on aging and independent living centers as the program’s core local operators and directs CDA to assist qualified entities with the designation application. This channels program control to existing local infrastructure and creates an eligibility pathway; it also establishes AAAs and ILCs as gatekeepers for fund flows and local service coordination.
Required ADRC services and public information duties
Specifies four mandatory service types—enhanced information/referral, options counseling, short-term coordination, and transition services—and requires ADRCs to operate within their geographic areas and publicize their offerings. The practical implication is that local ADRCs must staff accessible hours and develop outreach materials and referral coordination processes to meet public-facing expectations.
Core best-practices model and data requirements
Directs CDA, in consultation with an internal advisory committee, to develop a best-practices model that local ADRCs must implement. The statute lists minimum components, including person-centered counseling, outreach coordination with named referral partners, follow-up protocols to verify service delivery, models for sharing client data among agencies, and a specific set of data elements for reporting to CDA. It also instructs CDA to review the ADRC Infrastructure Grants Program (Section 9121) when updating the model, tying future guidance to past grant outcomes.
Nonrevocation rule and transition operator provision
Protects ADRC designations from being revoked solely because one local partner loses designation or is temporarily unable to operate. It permits the remaining partner to operate solo for a transition window of one to two years—subject to agreement among CDA, DOR, and the advisory committee—during which services must continue uninterrupted and a replacement partner is identified and designated.
Appropriation contingency
Makes the statute’s implementation contingent on a dedicated appropriation in the annual Budget Act or another statute. This clause converts the design into a contingent program: the law creates authority and requirements, but the state must provide funds before those requirements take effect in practice.
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
- Older adults seeking LTSS: The ADRC model centralizes information and offers options counseling and transition support, reducing search friction and improving discharge-to-home coordination.
- People with disabilities who use independent living centers: Local ILC involvement means peer-led expertise is formally integrated into intake, expanding access to disability‑focused navigation and referral.
- Family caregivers: The requirement to provide caregiver counts and targeted counseling gives caregivers a clearer point of contact for respite, benefits navigation, and short-term coordination.
- Hospitals and skilled nursing facilities: Standardized transition services and formal follow-up protocols should reduce readmissions and improve discharge planning by providing a single referral destination for community supports.
- LTSS and community providers (211, PACE, adult day care): Consistent referral flows from ADRCs can increase appropriate client referrals and clarify points of contact for service coordination.
Who Bears the Cost
- California Department of Aging: CDA must develop the best-practices model, oversee designation, collect data, and consult with partner agencies—requiring staff time, IT, and administrative resources.
- Area agencies on aging and independent living centers: Local operators face operational obligations (extended hours, data reporting, follow-up procedures) and the administrative burden of applying for and maintaining designation.
- Department of Rehabilitation and Department of Health Care Services: Both agencies must collaborate on oversight and may incur staff and coordination costs without separate funding.
- Community providers and local IT systems: Providers named as referral partners may need to align data-sharing processes and systems with the ADRC model, creating integration and compliance costs.
- State budget/taxpayers: Because the program depends on a budget appropriation, funding the program—staffing, IT, grants—will require new or reallocated state funds.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill seeks to centralize and professionalize local entry to LTSS—improving access and continuity—while relying on existing local organizations and conditioning the program on new funding; the central dilemma is balancing the goal of consistent, person-centered local services (which requires standards, data systems, and oversight) against the reality that those standards create costs, data‑sharing risks, and administrative burdens that are only meaningful if the state funds them.
The statute bundles several operational expectations—service standards, data reporting, interagency collaboration, and continuity rules—while leaving critical implementation mechanics to CDA and future budgets. The bill prescribes specific data elements and mandates a model for data-sharing, but it does not identify privacy safeguards, legal bases for data exchange, or funding to build interoperable systems.
That gap creates immediate questions about HIPAA and California privacy compliance, the liability of local operators for data breaches, and who pays for necessary IT upgrades.
A drafting inconsistency compounds planning risk: the best-practices model is required to be implemented by July 1, 2022, a date that predates this bill and the present legislative session. That retroactive deadline raises interpretive issues—did the legislature intend an earlier policy push, or is this a clerical error that would require correction to set a realistic timeline?
Finally, by conditioning the program on a budget appropriation, the bill creates potential mismatch between statutory obligations and available resources: AAAs and ILCs may need to prepare to meet new standards before funds arrive, and CDA’s enforcement authority could be limited if appropriations are not provided.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.