Audit finds thousands were improperly enrolled in Illinois health care program for noncitizens, while costs were vastly underestimated
Aside from inaccurate projections of the programs' cost and the number of people who would enroll, the audit uncovered more than 6,000 people enrolled in the programs who were listed as 'undocumented' despite having Social Security numbers, and nearly 700 who were enrolled in the program for people 65 and older despite being younger than that. In addition, almost 400 people were enrolled in the programs but appeared to have been in the country long enough to qualify for Medicaid, which is jointly funded by the federal government.
The report from Illinois Auditor General Frank Mautino's office was published a week after Pritzker proposed eliminating funding for the program that provides Medicaid-style insurance coverage for people younger than 65 who are in the country without legal permission or are in the U.S. legally but have not yet qualified for a green card. The cut, estimated to save $330 million, was part of Pritzker's plan to close a budget hole once pegged at more than $3 billion.
The cost overruns were particularly pronounced in the program for younger recipients, with the actual expenditure of $485 million through the three years ending June 30, 2023, coming in at nearly four times the estimated cost of $126 million, according to the audit.
At a news conference in Chicago on Wednesday to announce another round of medical debt relief for Illinois residents, Pritzker did not answer directly when asked why the estimates his administration used for the programs were so far off. Instead, he said some individuals were at times kept on the programs' rolls for a period before the state determined they were no longer eligible, either because of a change in immigration or employment status or some other factor.
Despite his proposal to do away with funding for coverage of those under 65, Pritzker reiterated his support for universal health care coverage in an unspecified form.
'The broader context is people need to get health care,' Pritzker said, adding: 'It's some evidence, anyway, that there are an awful lot of people out there that need coverage who aren't getting it or who will do anything to get it, and I think that's a sad state of affairs in our society.'
As of December, there were 41,505 people enrolled in the programs — one for those 65 and older, one for those under 65. Roughly 80% of them were in the program for younger immigrants for which Pritzker has proposed eliminating funding beginning July 1.
Illinois initially offered Medicaid-style health care coverage for noncitizen immigrants 65 and older in 2020 under a program called Health Benefits for Immigrant Seniors. This group of recipients was ineligible for the traditional health insurance program for the poor, which is jointly funded by the federal government.
This state-run health care initiative has been expanded twice and now covers those 42 and older. The ballooning costs of the program complicated budget negotiations two years ago.
Together, the two programs do not extend to the asylum-seekers arriving in Chicago from the southern U.S. border.
The two programs launched in Illinois at a time when Medicaid redeterminations — annual checks that verify whether an enrollee is eligible for that benefit — were put on pause by the federal government during the COVID-19 pandemic.
But the costs for the programs eventually spiraled upward and the issue has roiled the General Assembly in recent years. In February 2023, Pritzker took steps to curtail enrollment in the programs after an initial cost estimate from his administration of $220 million swelled fivefold three months later to $1.1 billion. Ultimately, a little over $500 million was set aside in the budget that passed by the legislature that spring.
Last year, the governor announced plans to cut as many as 6,000 health care recipients across the two programs to save more money.
Pritzker in the past has defended immigrant health care as a state effort to save more taxpayer money by providing this kind of coverage to noncitizens by keeping them out of emergency rooms and hospitals. But hours after announcing his budget proposal last week, Pritzker explained how there's been people of working age in the 42-to-64 program that have later been able to find a better-paying job 'that has health care associated with it.'
'Yes, we're making sacrifices across the budget,' Pritzker said in his ceremonial office at the state Capitol. 'I'm making sacrifices on things that matter to me.'
_____
(Petrella reported from Chicago. Tribune reporter Olivia Olander contributed.)
_____
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Social Security's Future: 5 Backup Income Sources Every Retiree Should Consider
Potential cuts to Social Security benefits understandably concerns many retirees. Social Security often comprises a significant portion of income for its near 58 million recipients, according to the Social Security Administration (SSA). A reported insolvency in seven years may create growing unease for those depending on monthly benefits. Be Aware: Check Out: Dual-earning couples may see an $18,100 annual reduction in benefits, according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget (CRFB). Amounts can vary depending on specific circumstances. Taking prudent action now can help provide income to offset any loss in benefits. Before considering any backup income source, retirees should consult with a trusted financial advisor to create a plan. Retirement Accounts IRAs and 401(k) accounts are popular retirement planning tools for many Americans. Roughly 54% of Americans had such accounts in 2022, according to Wisely tapping these accounts can be a good way to complement a reduction in benefits. 'If you have 401(k)s, IRAs or other retirement accounts, it is time to make a plan to access them if your Social Security benefits get squeezed. The challenge is to set up a withdrawal and tax plan that maximizes the income you can get from your retirement accounts across the rest of your life,' said Jay Zigmont, PhD, certified financial planner (CFP) and founder at Childfree Trust. Speaking with an advisor can help seniors create a withdrawal plan. Consider This: An Annuity Annuities often get a bad rap, thanks to fees and other potential charges. While not for everyone, an annuity can be a good fit for some retirees. Fixed annuities commonly have reduced points of entry, making them easier for seniors to purchase. 'One of the most reliable ways to create backup income in retirement is through fixed indexed annuities with guaranteed income riders,' noted Matt Eilers, CEO and Founder of Medalist Wealth Management. 'These income sources grow based on the performance of a stock index, like the S&P 500, but the principal is protected against market volatility, and the income riders guarantee a predictable income payment through retirement.' A Part-Time Job Having a part-time job in retirement may not be desirable, but it can be a good way to supplement Social Security payments. Retirees can earn up to $62,160, as of 2025, before benefits are reduced, according to the SSA. Working a side gig may be attractive, but Zigmont advises seniors to look elsewhere for work. 'While gig work, like driving for Uber, may be popular, it is unpredictable and comes with other costs. Part-time jobs are probably the best bet, as you don't need the benefits,' said Zigmont. Dividend-Paying Stocks Investing in dividend-paying stocks has long been a way for retirees to earn income. Americans can house such investments in both retirement and non-retirement accounts. Holding them in the latter can provide cash flow, and lower-income retirees may face 0% federal tax on them, if they're classified as qualified dividends, according to Fidelity. This strategy poses some risk of placing you in a higher tax bracket and potentially losing the tax deferral benefits found in retirement accounts. Speak with an advisor to identify if this is an option for you. Use Your Home For many Americans, their home is their most valuable asset. If you can downsize, it can free up cash. For example, if your current home is paid off and worth $350,000, and you move to a $200,000 home, that's $150,000 in cash you can claim, before fees tied to selling the house. Such an amount could offset a reduction in benefits. A reverse mortgage is another possibility, but it may not be worth the risks and fees associated with such an action. A reduction in Social Security benefits can cause grave concern for many seniors. Pairing the right backup income source with reduced spending can help mitigate the financial impact. More From GOBankingRates 5 Ways Trump Signing the GENIUS Act Could Impact Retirees7 Luxury SUVs That Will Become Affordable in 2025 This article originally appeared on Social Security's Future: 5 Backup Income Sources Every Retiree Should Consider Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Need to Supplement Your Retirement Income? Buy This Extremely Safe, High-Yielding Dividend Stock.
Key Points Realty Income owns a high-quality portfolio of income-generating real estate. The REIT has a strong financial profile. It has delivered reliable and resilient growth that should continue. 10 stocks we like better than Realty Income › Many retirees face a shortfall between their Social Security benefits, savings, and actual income needs. One study found this gap to be as high as 33% for the average U.S. household. As a result, current and future retirees must find additional income sources to live comfortably. Realty Income (NYSE: O) is an excellent choice for those seeking additional income. The real estate investment trust (REIT) owns a reliable and high-quality real estate portfolio that generates stable rental income. This enables the REIT to pay a steadily rising monthly dividend currently yielding 5.5%. Here's why Realty Income is a safe way to supplement your retirement income. A high-quality portfolio Realty Income's foundation is its high-quality real estate portfolio. The REIT owns over 15,600 properties in the U.S. and parts of Europe. Its portfolio includes retail (approximately 80% of its rent), industrial (15%), gaming (3%), and other properties, such as data centers (2%), net leased to over 1,600 tenants across 90+ industries. About 90% of rent comes from tenants in recession-resistant industries and those less affected by e-commerce, such as grocery stores, home improvement centers, and convenience stores. The company invests in properties secured by long-term net leases that provide predictable rental income because tenants cover all property operating costs, including routine maintenance, real estate taxes, and building insurance. Most leases raise rents at a low single-digit rate each year. As a result, Realty Income's existing portfolio delivers steadily rising rental income. A fortress financial profile Realty Income pairs its strong real estate portfolio with a robust financial profile. The REIT pays about 75% of its adjusted funds from operations (FFO) in dividends each year. This cushion will enable it to retain over $750 million of excess free cash flow in 2025 to fund new investments. The company also has a strong A3/A- bond rating (its credit rating is in the top 10 within the REIT sector) backed by a low leverage ratio, and it has ample liquidity. This financial strength enhances Realty Income's ability to continue expanding its real estate portfolio. Resilient and consistent growth Realty Income's portfolio has demonstrated its durability over the decades. Since completing its public market listing in 1994, the REIT had only one year (2009) when it failed to grow its adjusted FFO per share. Overall, it has grown adjusted FFO per share at a more than 5% compound annual rate. The company's growth and financial strength have enabled it to raise its dividend every single year since its public market listing. Realty Income has increased its payout 131 times, including the last 111 quarters. It has grown the payout at a 4.2% compound annual rate since it went public. That steady growth is likely to continue. Realty Income's financial strength gives it the capacity to invest in more income-generating real estate. There is a $14 trillion potential market opportunity to invest in net lease properties in the U.S. and Europe. That provides the REIT with a very long growth runway. It has been steadily enhancing its growth prospects by investing in additional property classes (data centers and gaming), more countries in Europe, and through new investment platforms (credit and private capital). A great way to supplement your retirement income Realty Income's portfolio generates reliable rental income to support its high-yielding monthly dividend. Its strong financial profile further supports the dividend and its continued expansion. These features make Realty Income an exceptionally safe choice for those seeking to supplement their retirement income. Should you buy stock in Realty Income right now? Before you buy stock in Realty Income, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Realty Income wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $668,155!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,106,071!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,070% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 184% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 18, 2025 Matt DiLallo has positions in Realty Income. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Realty Income. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Need to Supplement Your Retirement Income? Buy This Extremely Safe, High-Yielding Dividend Stock. was originally published by The Motley Fool Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data


Chicago Tribune
29 minutes ago
- Chicago Tribune
Editorial: A state law giving school kids mental health screenings leaves the sensitive details to bureaucrats
America has moved from ignoring mental health to openly embracing it. That's progress. But a new Illinois law, which makes schools — not parents — the gatekeepers of children's mental health screenings, crosses a line into new territory, and the details on what exactly happens next are shockingly light. On July 31, Gov. JB Pritzker signed a bill that does two things. First, it requires all school districts to offer mental health screenings to students enrolled in grades three through 12, at least once a year, beginning with the 2027-28 school year. Second, the bill requires the Illinois State Board of Education to provide resource materials for schools to implement these universal mental health screenings, including model policies and guidance, by Sept. 1, 2026. The legislation stipulates that screening tools will be made available by the state, adding no extra cost to districts. We're the first state in the country to do this. We have no issue with making resources available to kids. They deserve support, and kids in mental crisis need it more than anyone. But how will this work? We have a lot of questions, and this new law is extraordinarily light on detail. First: Will these screenings be required or not? The law doesn't say explicitly. Legislative language requires 'the option to opt-out' — does this refer to parents or can kids just say no thanks? Who will administer the screenings? How will the data be stored and protected? What exactly will children be asked? What happens next if a child is flagged after a screening? State lawmakers, in their haste to pass well-intentioned legislation, sure did leave a heck of a lot of details to unelected bureaucrats. There's also the question of efficacy. Evidence shows that mental health screenings tend to yield a high rate of false positives. An article published by Harvard Medical School in 2021 showed 50% of mental health screenings in primary care settings were false positives. What this underscores is that, when you institutionalize something as sensitive as kids' mental health, you can have all the protocols and guidance possible, and it still won't catch everything. Some of what these screenings capture, too, are the negative feelings of teens simply having a bad week at the time the screening was administered. 'Kids are wildly suggestible, especially where psychiatric symptoms are concerned. Ask a kid repeatedly if he might be depressed — how about now? Are you sure? — and he just might decide that he is,' author Abigail Shrier wrote in a recent essay in The Free Press. Shrier studied adolescent mental health for her book 'Bad Therapy.' Letters: State measure that expands mental health screenings for children will save livesShrier also cites Dr. Allen Frances, Duke University professor of psychiatry and a leading expert in this field, who said 'most kids who screen positive will have transient problems, not mental disorder.' That funnels too many kids dealing with temporary challenges into the system while siphoning resources from the ones who really need them, he said. 'Transient problems' in this case is another way of describing the normal ups and downs of life, fluctuations felt acutely during preteen and teenage years as young people learn to handle their emotions, social challenges and changing bodies. That's not to say serious illness doesn't exist — of course it does. Navigating these situations with children is a delicate process that must be led by parents or caregivers, alongside the kids themselves. And all of this is urgent, as depression and anxiety among young people are higher than they've ever been. We also agree with the sentiment that it's irresponsible for the grown-ups in the room not to do something about this problem. If lawmakers truly want to address the drivers of youth distress, social media and smartphones — which we know are deeply connected to rising youth mental health problems — are a more urgent target than annual screenings. In fact, Pritzker proposed a ban on phones in the classroom — not a panacea by any means, but certainly a positive first step in making schools a place where kids can focus on their studies and their interpersonal relationships instead of being glued to a tiny screen. That bill did not pass. But soon, the bill that did become law will trigger the widespread implementation of mental health screenings in schools across the state. We don't see what's wrong with teachers or other school staff flagging problematic behavior or troubling signs directly to parents. That way, the proper chain of command — in this instance, parents and guardians making decisions about when and how to talk to kids about serious issues, not people outside of the family — can be maintained. We're sure conscientious teachers, coaches, counselors and administrators are already doing this, and we'd encourage parents to be open-minded to the input they're getting from these folks who are seeing their kids every day. We need much more detail on what's going to happen here, and when these details emerge, we encourage ISBE to make sure to recommend protocols informing parents of these screenings — the timing, details and questions to be asked — before they happen. Parents are juggling a lot, and it's incumbent on trusted teachers and administrators to be forthcoming about something this sensitive. Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@