End is near, Pillen says, for persistent ‘wait list' for Nebraskans with developmental disabilities
OMAHA — Gov. Jim Pillen said Monday that, by July, his administration expects to have accomplished a goal it announced a year ago: elimination of a long-running 'wait list' for Nebraskans seeking services for intellectual and developmental disabilities.
Last March, the list contained about 2,700 people, and a projected wait for available funds stretched for up to eight years. The governor said the number has been whittled to about 700.
'This is the first time in the last 35 years that this wait list is going to be eliminated,' Steve Corsi, chief executive officer of the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, said at a press conference in Omaha that also closed Developmental Disabilities Awareness Month.
Pillen, Corsi and Tony Green, director of the DHHS Division of Developmental Disabilities, updated progress on cutting the wait, the public cost and what they've described as the state's reimagining of how services are offered to Nebraskans with developmental disabilities.
After a tour of the recently opened new headquarters for Madonna Ability Alliance, which helps support Nebraskans with disabilities, state officials answered questions from reporters and mingled with Madonna families and participants filling the lobby of the building near 72nd and Pine Streets in Omaha.
Among the lineup of speakers was Blake Hodgen, a Madonna participant who stole the show by relaying his educational, music therapy and job-training experiences since second grade at Madonna, which he and others said helped prepare him for his long-time catering job with the University of Nebraska Medical Center.
Pillen told the group he took aim at shortening the list, known also as the Developmental Disabilities Registry, because it didn't make sense.
'You break the glass if that's what you have to do,' Pillen said. 'But when the most vulnerable Nebraskans' needs weren't being met for eight years, (it) popped my top off.'
Eliminating the wait list, Pillen said, requires a roughly $40 million annual investment, with the state footing about $19 million each year and federal funds covering the rest. He foresees Nebraska becoming a model for other states with long waits to access developmental disabilities services — though advocates say they see some flaws, and they are still evaluating the full impact of changes.
At one time, Green said, the Nebraska registry listed 4,500 names.
Clearing the wait, he said, means that all the families will have been offered at least some specialized support through a Medicaid waiver program that lets states to tap federal funding for accessing home- and community-based services intended to keep people out of institutions.
Key to the list shrinkage, said Green, is a new approach that 'meets families where they're at' — providing for a more immediate and targeted service, such as funding for child or respite care or vehicle modification. Family advocates have said a family support waiver was created, for instance, as an intermediary solution that provides up to $10,000 a year for such services.
In the old system, Green said a family would put their name on the registry and wait as long as eight years to get what is known as a 'comprehensive' developmental waiver — which is more costly but provides access to a wider array of services, including full-time residential services outside the home, particularly for adults.
Green said not all families require such a gamut, and state officials believe that the overall needs of the population are better met by providing more narrow services closer to when a family needs them.
Also new and crucial, he and advocates said, is that the state now allows youths with disabilities access to medical care through Medicaid — even if their household income is beyond typical Medicaid limits.
Said Green: 'What we're working on now is a system that says, 'What's your need that's being unmet?' And we'll figure out which waiver has the right service and supports for you. I would say it's a continuum of care … It will be individualized to the family and child.'
Edison McDonald is executive director of The Arc of Nebraska, the state's largest membership organization for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities and their families. He said the state's new approach takes positive steps, including the Medicaid expansion that helps ensure that kids with developmental disabilities get access to health care.
However, he cited drawbacks. For example, he said, the often lengthy wait used to be a pathway to guaranteed access to comprehensive services including the out-of-home residential services. That is no longer the case, McDonald said.
'They call it innovation when really it is barring a lot of people from that access to residential services. In some cases, it misses the mark and can potentially be harmful,' he said.
McDonald said the comprehensive service option is still available, but for adults with the highest needs such as being homeless or being a danger to themself. He said advocates are still trying to grasp the breadth of the impact the changes will bring.
In some cases, it misses the mark and can be potentially harmful.
– Edison McDonald, The Arc of Nebraska
McDonald said what advocates thought was an 'intermediary' solution — the family support waiver offering up to $10,000 of services annually — appears possibly to be more of a 'destination.' He also said the state's system includes what advocates view as an outdated rate schedule for service providers.
Alana Schriver, executive director of Nebraska Association of Service Providers, applauded the Pillen administration's commitment overall. But she worries about the state rates allowed for service providers. Without better wages for more workers, she said, 'this whole conversation is moot.'
'If there is nobody to serve the people, what are we doing?'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


American Military News
3 hours ago
- American Military News
Video/Pic: Trump demands drug companies lower prices
President Donald Trump sent 17 pharmaceutical companies letters on Thursday and demanded that the companies lower prices for Americans. The president warned that the 'unacceptable burden' of prescription drug prices will 'end' with his administration. During a press briefing on Thursday, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, 'The president signed an executive order earlier this year to solve the problem of exorbitant pharmaceutical pricing.' 'According to recent data, the prices that Americans have been paying for brand-name drugs are more than three times the price other similarly developed nations pay,' Leavitt added. 'The president is determined to solve this problem and took further action today. He has signed 17 letters to pharmaceutical companies' CEOs.' .@PressSec reads one of the letters sent by @POTUS today to the CEOs of pharmaceutical companies: "Moving forward, the only thing I will accept from drug manufacturers is a commitment that provides American families immediate relief from the vastly inflated drug prices…" — Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 31, 2025 Leavitt also shared the letter Trump wrote to the CEO of Eli Lilly and Company. In the letter, Trump warned Eli Lilly and 16 other pharmaceutical companies that the 'unacceptable burden' of brand-name drugs costing 'up to three times higher on average' for Americans than for citizens of other countries 'ends with my administration.' Trump told the pharmaceutical companies, 'Most proposals the Trump administration has received to resolve this critical issue promised more of the same shifting blame and requesting policy changes that would result in billions of dollars in handouts to industry.' The president added, 'Moving forward, the only thing I will accept from drug manufacturers is a commitment that provides American families immediate relief from the vastly inflated drug prices and an end to the free ride of American innovation by European and other developed nations.' READ MORE: Video: Trump order against 'Big Pharma' aims to reduce drug prices While Trump explained that a collaborative effort to reach 'global pricing parity' would be most effective for pharmaceutical companies, the U.S. government, and U.S. patients, he warned that his administration will 'deploy every tool in our arsenal to protect American families' if pharmaceutical companies refuse to take action. In addition to the letter sent to Eli Lilly and Company, Trump sent letters to AbbVie, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bristol Myers Squibb, EMD Serono, Genentech, Gilead Sciences, GSK, Johnson and Johnson, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, and Sanofi. In the letters, Trump gave the companies 60 days to extend 'Most-Favored-Nation' pricing to Medicaid and provide 'full portfolios' of drugs for Medicaid patients, guarantee Most-Favored-Nation pricing for new drugs, negotiate with 'foreign freeloading nations' and return 'increased revenues abroad' to patients in the United States, and allow Americans to directly purchase drugs at Most-Favored-Nation prices. Today, @POTUS sent letters to 17 drug manufacturers outlining steps they must take to bring down prescription drug prices. If they refuse to step up, the Administration will use every tool to protect Americans from continued abusive drug pricing practices. Letter to Eli Lilly: — Rapid Response 47 (@RapidResponse47) July 31, 2025


Newsweek
4 hours ago
- Newsweek
California Removes 900,000 People From Health Care Plan
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. Hundreds of thousands have been removed from a health care plan in California over the course of two years, according to data from KFF, a nonprofit health policy research and news organization. About 900,000 Americans were disenrolled from Medicaid in the state as part of the unwinding process happening nationwide after Medicaid coverage was expanded following the COVID-19 pandemic. Newsweek has contacted the California Department of Public Health via email for comment. Why It Matters The unwinding process has resulted in significant drops in Medicaid enrollment across the U.S. There is now growing concern about the rising population of those without health insurance and the wider impacts this could have, such as worsening health outcomes, increasing strain on emergency services and rising medical costs. The worry has been amplified by the recent passing of President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill, in which funding cuts, a focus on "waste, fraud and abuse" and work requirements are in store for Medicaid. Many have voiced concern that the measures will result in millions losing health coverage. File photo: A doctor walks with a young boy through a hospital. File photo: A doctor walks with a young boy through a To Know In California, there were 14,285,643 covered by Medicaid in March 2023, but by March 2025, that number was 13,392,566, KFF data shows. This was because during the pandemic, some states expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), causing nationwide enrollment levels to increase. Federal rules forced states to keep most Medicaid enrollees on the program, even if their eligibility status changed, until March 2023, when they were then allowed to start rolling recipients off the program. This marks a change of about 900,000, a decline that was smaller than other highly populated states like Texas, Florida and New York. In March 2025, the number of people with Medicaid coverage in California was still higher than pre-pandemic levels, by 16 percent. The reason why Medicaid coverage is unwinding at different rates in states is because "states approached the process of reviewing the eligibility of their Medicaid beneficiaries with fundamentally different strategies," Michael Sparer, professor and chair of the Department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University, told Newsweek. He said that Florida and Texas began the review process "as fast as they could and immediately declared ineligible those beneficiaries who did not promptly respond to review notices." "There is clear evidence that many beneficiaries who were still eligible lost coverage simply because they did not timely navigate the administrative hurdles to recertification," he added. Meanwhile, he said that New York and California "were far more deliberate in how they approached the review process, thus the number who've lost their eligibility via this process is far fewer." What People Are Saying Michael Sparer, professor and chair of the Department of Health Policy and Management at Columbia University, told Newsweek: "Medicaid enrollment surged during the pandemic for several reasons, including increased unemployment combined with a requirement that in exchange for additional federal funding, states could not recertify beneficiary eligibility until the "public health emergency" was declared over. Put simply, millions signed up during the pandemic and their eligibility could only be reviewed beginning in the spring 2023. "There is reason to be quite concerned about how this has played out and also what it suggests may happen when Medicaid work requirements, which create their own set of administrative hurdles, are implemented. First, persons who are eligible for coverage should not lose coverage. Bad health outcomes will follow. Second, persons who are no longer Medicaid eligible should be guided to other options, such as subsidized ACA marketplace coverage. Finally, the variation in how states conduct Medicaid eligibility reviews leads to unfortunate inequities." What Happens Next As the unwinding continues, more reductions in enrollment are expected in California and across the country. With millions already having lost health coverage, concerns remain about access to care for low-income individuals and families.

Epoch Times
4 hours ago
- Epoch Times
What to Know About the Fight Over Planned Parenthood Funding
Funding for Planned Parenthood has been the source of legal and legislative contention in recent months since the passage of the Republican-backed One Big Beautiful Bill Act. The abortion provider has received federal funds since the early 1970s through Title X grants, as well as Medicaid reimbursements.