WA facility caring for drug-exposed newborns at risk of closure after state funding cut
The only medical facility focused on caring for drug-exposed babies in western Washington is pleading for help after Gov. Bob Ferguson vetoed its funding and the state abruptly canceled its contract.
And a group of GOP lawmakers is urging Ferguson to find a way to keep the Kent facility operating.
For decades, the Pediatric Interim Care Center has tended to babies born to mothers with substance use disorder. Just under half of its annual $1.7 million budget has usually come from the state, said Development Director Elaine Purchase. Fundraising makes up the rest.
But this year, lawmakers slashed that funding to $100,000 in the face of a steep budget shortfall. The facility, known as PICC, was ready to make do with the deep cut and dip into its reserves, with the hope of making up for it when the Legislature returns next year.
Then last month, Ferguson vetoed even that $100,000, as part of a slew of small items he removed to save money in the $78 billion two-year spending plan.
And soon after, Purchase was 'blindsided' when the state Department of Children, Youth and Families cut its contract with the nursery, meaning no more babies would be referred there starting July 1.
'Which basically destroys our program,' Purchase said. 'Why would they abandon it for $100,000?'
In a statement, the Department of Children, Youth and Families argued the center's state funding was 'not cost-effective.' Secretary Tana Senn said the center received money for its 13 beds regardless of how many babies it was serving, and didn't meet requirements to get Medicaid funding.
'We also want to clarify that DCYF is not shutting down the Kent PICC,' said Senn, a former state lawmaker. 'They can still accept referrals from hospitals and have informed DCYF on multiple occasions that they have sufficient charitable funding to continue serving children.'
On Friday, state House Republican leadership, including Minority Leader Drew Stokesbary, of Auburn, took issue with the rationale and urged the state agency and Ferguson to reverse course.
'Governor Ferguson, throughout your first legislative session as governor, you said that you just wanted to do things that are 'common sense,'' the half-dozen lawmakers wrote. 'What is more common sense than using the power you hold to save the lives of innocent newborn babies?'
The facility, open for 35 years, was caring for just one newborn Friday, said Purchase. It has been underused as the focus has shifted to keeping babies with their parents.
Research has indicated parental involvement is integral in an infant's development.
'New evidence-based models demonstrate better outcomes for babies when they 'room in' at hospitals under the care of a physician or are in transitional care homes that allow the mother and baby to stay together,' Senn said.
'While hospitals, of course, may choose to continue to refer children to the Kent PICC, they have been doing so much less frequently as demonstrated by the current empty beds at the Kent PICC,' the agency secretary continued. 'Instead, hospitals more often refer infants to other facilities that use the current standard of care.'
In 2021, the Legislature passed a measure known as the Keeping Families Together Act to help relatives take care of children who can't stay with their parents and to reduce racial disparities in the child welfare system. Critics blame the bipartisan law for a reported increase in child deaths, including from drug exposure.
The average stay for babies at the Kent pediatric care center is 30 to 40 days. Most are exposed to fentanyl or methamphetamine. Since opening in 1990, the facility says it has cared for over 3,500 babies.
'We just want there to be a safe place for these little ones,' Purchase said.
The governor did not provide comment on Friday, with a spokesperson for his office referring to the statement from the Department of Children, Youth and Families.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
34 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Map Shows Best—and Worst—States to Have a Baby 2025
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. A newly released study by personal finance website WalletHub has revealed which states are the best and worst to have a baby—with Massachusetts, North Dakota, and Minnesota leading the nation. How It Was Calculated WalletHub ranked the best and worst states to have a baby by evaluating all 50 states and the District of Columbia across four categories—cost, health care, baby-friendliness, and family-friendliness—using 31 weighted metrics scored on a 100-point scale. Each state's overall score reflected a weighted average of those factors. The dataset used by WalletHub in its calculations ranged from hospital conventional-delivery charges to annual average infant-care costs to pediatricians per capita. What To Know Massachusetts claimed the top spot in WalletHub's overall rankings, buoyed by its first-place health care score and top-tier performance in baby- and family-friendliness. The Bay State boasts the third-lowest infant mortality rate, the eighth-lowest maternal mortality rate, and among the best neonatal hospitals in the nation for premature births or babies with health problems, the report said. It also leads the country in paid leave policy and access to Medicaid-covered parenting programs. North Dakota ranked second, driven largely by its affordability. It offers the lowest cost for conventional deliveries without complications—just $7,500 compared to as much as $27,000 in more expensive states, according to WalletHub. The Peace Garden State was also found to have the third-lowest hourly rate for babysitters, and ranked among the top ten in childcare access and mom support groups. Minnesota came in third, offering the second-lowest health insurance premiums and ranking highly for medical staff availability. With one of the lowest maternal mortality rates and a high number of pediatric professionals per capita, WalletHub said it provides ample healthcare options for new parents. Additionally, the North Star State was found to have the fourth-highest share of nationally accredited childcare centers. Rounding out the top 10 best states to have a baby include: New Hampshire, Maine, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, Iowa, the District of Columbia. At the other end of the spectrum, West Virginia, Oklahoma, Florida, Arkansas, New Mexico, Georgia, South Carolina, Nevada, Alabama, and Mississippi were ranked as the bottom 10. What People Are Saying WalletHub analyst Chip Lupo said in the report: "The best states for having a baby minimize costs while providing top-notch care for both newborns and their mothers. They also continue to be good environments for parents even long after the birth, with high-quality pediatric care, affordable and accessible child care, and a strong economic environment that makes providing for a child easier." What Happens Next? WalletHub releases its "Best & Worst States to Have a Baby" report annually. Newsweek previously mapped the states with the best—and worst—school systems based on a separate, recent report from WalletHub.
CBS News
2 hours ago
- CBS News
New Medicaid federal work requirements mean less leeway for states
When President Trump signed a law adding work requirements for some Medicaid recipients, he may have undercut lawmakers in at least 14 states who were designing their own plans, according to health industry observers. Georgia is the only state with a work requirement in place for Medicaid, but several states have been pursuing such a policy for years, only to be blocked by courts or, most recently, the Biden administration. Some seek state-specific touches to the new rules. Others aim to implement work requirements before the federal law takes effect at the end of 2026. These states' moves and Mr. Trump's massive tax-and-spending law share one demand: To keep their Medicaid health coverage, adults who can work must prove they're logging a minimum number of hours at a job or school, or else qualify for one of the few exemptions. But now, states that jumped ahead need to ensure their proposals, which require federal approval, don't stray too far from Mr. Trump's law. "The statute sets both the floor and ceiling" for work requirements, said Sara Rosenbaum, a health law and policy professor with George Washington University. South Dakota, for example, announced in July that it would not submit an application for work requirements as previously planned amid concerns that the state's laxer rules would not be allowed under the new federal law. The state's Department of Social Services secretary had warned that working on a state proposal while the federal rules are being hashed out could be "an exercise in futility." Arkansas' plan, on the other hand, is more stringent than the federal law. There are no exemptions to its work requirements in the application, which is pending with the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Arizona's proposal also includes something that's not in the federal law: a ban on "able-bodied adults" receiving Medicaid benefits for longer than five years total in their lives. Arkansas and Arizona government officials said they were working with federal officials to square their plans with the new standards. Andrew Nixon, a spokesperson for the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, said the department is analyzing how the new federal standards interact with state waivers. The federal health department must release rules by next June that outline how states are to implement work requirements, according to Elizabeth Hinton, who has been tracking such waivers as part of the Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured at KFF, a health information nonprofit that includes KFF Health News. "We don't exactly know what that will cover," Hinton said. It's unclear how federal officials will respond to the states' requests, she added, but "we are aware that some folks think there is no wiggle room here." States can tweak their Medicaid programs through what are known as demonstration waivers, which are subject to federal approval. The waivers are designed to test new ideas in policy gray areas. The states that have filed or plan to file such applications with work requirements include Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Utah. Congressional Republicans who passed the budget reconciliation bill left room for states to use waivers to fast-track the national standards. Tara Sklar, a professor leading the University of Arizona's Health Law & Policy Program, said she expects states seeking certain stricter requirements to have a chance of approval, while more lenient ones may face denials. Federal officials may look favorably on Arizona's plan, Sklar said, as a five-year lifetime Medicaid limit is different from work requirements. Even if the federal government greenlights stricter work requirements than the federal law calls for, those programs are likely to face legal challenges, she added. The federal law includes an 80-hour-per-month minimum for work or education, with exemptions for certain adults, including people who are medically frail and parents with young, dependent children. Montana is the first state to draft a waiver application since Congress finalized national work requirements. State lawmakers first approved work requirements — called "community engagement" standards under the state plan — in 2019, but the state's application stalled through the end of the first Trump term and the Biden administration. After Mr. Trump was elected again, Montana lawmakers lifted the 2025 expiration date of its Medicaid expansion program, making permanent the program that covered more than 76,000 adults in April, with the expectation that the Trump administration would approve work requirements. In mid-July, state officials released their draft plan to make that a reality "as soon as is practicable." The Montana plan largely aligns with the federal law, but it would create additional exemptions, including for people who are homeless or fleeing domestic violence. Republican state Sen. Gayle Lammers said work requirements that also protect such people who need Medicaid were a big part of persuading legislators to keep the expansion program. At the time, officials didn't know where the federal government would land on work requirements. And now, Lammers said, it makes sense for Montana to stick to its plan. "The state should have a say," Lammers said. "We're very independent, and everyone is different." In South Carolina, state officials are seeking to roll out work requirements for a limited number of newly eligible Medicaid beneficiaries. South Carolina is one of 10 states that has not expanded Medicaid eligibility under the Affordable Care Act, and yet the state submitted a request with the federal government in June for a partial Medicaid expansion that includes a work requirement component that largely reflects the new federal standards. In a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., South Carolina Gov. Henry McMaster, a Republican, called South Carolina's proposal "a state-specific solution." The only state with an active work requirement program now wants to scale it back and awaits federal approval to do so. "Georgia Pathways to Coverage" expires at the end of September unless CMS greenlights an extension of the program with a key change: requiring enrollees to document once a year that they're working, not monthly. That's a pivot away from the program's initial design but also differs from the new federal rules, which call for checks every six months. Fiona Roberts, a spokesperson for Georgia's Medicaid agency, said the state is still waiting to hear whether it needs to alter its plan. So Georgia is among the states in limbo, awaiting guidance from the federal government. KFF Health News correspondents Sam Whitehead and Lauren Sausser contributed to this report. KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism.
Miami Herald
9 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Dave Ramsey has blunt words on Medicare, Medicaid
As Americans prepare for retirement, they often weigh a variety of financial factors - ranging from Social Security benefits to income sources such as 401(k) plans and Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs). One crucial area that deserves attention is health care planning. For many, this means navigating the complex systems of Medicare and Medicaid. In an effort to make these topics more approachable, personal finance expert Dave Ramsey offers guidance that breaks down the basics of Medicare and Medicaid, helping individuals build a solid understanding of how these programs work. Don't miss the move: Subscribe to TheStreet's free daily newsletter Ramsey acknowledges that the details around Medicare and Medicaid are complicated. "Have you seen that meme with the lady's face covered in math equations looking confused?" he asked. "We're willing to bet that might sum up how you feel right now - because that's how pretty much everyone feels after looking into Medicare." "But it's not hopeless," Ramsey added. Related: Dave Ramsey sends strong message to Americans on Medicare Understanding Medicare is essential for anyone approaching retirement, Ramsey emphasizes. Medicare is a federal health insurance program for people 65 and older, or younger individuals with certain disabilities or diseases. It's divided into several parts: Medicare Part A covers hospital Part B covers medical C (Medicare Advantage) combines A, B, and often D through private Part D covers prescription drugs. Parts A and B together form Original Medicare, which offers more flexibility. Many people either choose Original Medicare with Part D and a Medigap policy, or go with a Medicare Advantage Plan, which limits provider networks. Ramsey also stresses the importance of knowing the Medicare enrollment periods. There are five: The Initial Enrollment Period (IEP) begins three months before one's 65th birthday and lasts seven months. One can enroll in Parts A and B, then add Part D or Medicare Special Enrollment Period (SEP) applies if a person had coverage through work, lived abroad, or experienced other qualifying General Enrollment Period (GEP) runs Jan. 1 to March 31. If the IEP or SEP is missed, one can enroll here, but lifetime penalties are to be Annual Enrollment Period (AEP) is from Oct. 15 to Dec. 7. This is for making changes to existing coverage, not first-time Medigap Open Enrollment Period starts the month one enrolls in Part B and lasts six months. Ramsey advises buying during this window to avoid denial or higher costs due to preexisting conditions. Ramsey advises Americans not to procrastinate and to talk with experts about the best Medicare options depending on a person's individual circumstances. More on personal finance: Dave Ramsey warns Americans on Social SecurityJean Chatzky sends strong message on major 401(k) changesFinance expert has blunt words for car buyers Related: Secretary Bessent's Social Security remarks spark AARP outcry Dave Ramsey explains that Medicaid is a joint federal and state assistance program designed to help Americans with limited income afford essential health care. Unlike Medicare, Medicaid isn't insurance, Ramsey clarified. It's more of a support system that helps cover costs such as nursing home care, personal assistance, and even Medicare premiums for those who qualify. Because states help administer Medicaid, the program varies depending on where one lives. Eligibility requirements differ by state, though they're always based on income. Ramsey notes that while the Affordable Care Act aimed to expand eligibility to anyone earning below 138% of the federal poverty level, states still have the choice to opt in or out of that expansion. To ensure consistency, the federal government mandates a minimum set of benefits that all states must provide. These include hospital services, physician visits, lab work, nursing facility care, and transportation to medical appointments. States can also offer optional benefits such as dental, vision, physical therapy, and hospice care. Ramsey emphasizes that Medicaid typically doesn't require premiums, but some states do impose small copayments for certain services. Eligibility is determined by income and assets, including wages, pensions, Social Security, veterans' benefits, and withdrawals from retirement accounts. Each state sets its own thresholds, so Ramsey emphasizes the fact that it's important to check one's local guidelines. Related: Dave Ramsey has blunt words for Americans buying a car The Arena Media Brands, LLC THESTREET is a registered trademark of TheStreet, Inc.
