Alaska Legislature: Senate Health & Social Services, 4/9/26, 3:30pm

process.

I understand the recommendation structure as you've described,

but what happens if projects don't move forward and folks do want to appeal to the commissioner and make a case for their project or lawmakers hear from stakeholders who want to appeal to the commissioner?

What does that structure look like?

Through the Chair,

Through the chair, Senator Tobin, there is an appeals process for grants that is outlined in our department regulations,

and we can follow up with the committee with those regulations,

but that would be the appeals process.

Very good.

And just to reiterate something I asked about before,

for those who aren't awarded grants,

what kind of feedback will they get from the department?

Will it just say, you know, we regret to inform you that your grant wasn't funded or your LOI wasn't accepted?

Or will it be something more substantive that lays out, you know, these two numerical values and the portfolio review will sort of explain to them why they weren't awarded?

To the chair, we will provide them with as much information as we can.

I think the challenge...

I think part of the challenge will be for some entities,

I think it will be somewhat self-evident why it's not awarded.

Not everything is a good fit.

Not everyone is ready.

You can look at an LOI and see that clearly.

For others, they may have a really good idea and it might be a very good project or something that they would like planning for.

But with the number of letters of interest we've received,

it's very competitive. And I think that there are...

a surprising proportion of very good ideas and very thorough letters of interest that we've seen so far.

So for those entities that may have a really good project idea,

but it just may not be some of the, you know.

Given the competitive nature,

it may not rise to the top.

I would anticipate that they would want and we will provide more information on that.

And I think one of the things that we have been discussing and it hasn't been fully built out yet is how can we provide some feedback to organizations so they can think about taking that into consideration for the next round,

which is coming up very quickly for round two. So again, this is not the only time that organizations will have a chance.

the chance to submit their ideas.

Very good.

Oh, Senator Tobin.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I apologize,

you just said something that I think is really interesting,

that there potentially are significantly good ideas that we just can't use this pot of money to fund.

Is the department working on a series of recommendations maybe to the legislature in the next legislative cycle to fund some good ideas that we may not be able to use these resources for,

but we do have other dollars in the state government?

I'm all about implementing good ideas from the public.

Through the Chair,

Senator Tobin.

Again,

we are not through even kind of the first half of this process yet, although we're moving quickly.

So I think at the end of this, one of the things we would like to do is probably...

put on the advisory council agenda a review of how did the process go what would we do better what are some of the things that we would like to share out I think that's a great idea to to look at what are we not able to fund in this but we think is a good idea we also know that we are also talking with some of the other philanthropic groups in Alaska because they may have funding available to support some of these projects if they're projects that we're not able to fund

fund using rural health transformation program dollars. So it's an opportunity, I think, for us to really align on projects that have merit and think about how we can effectively use funding outside of the rural health transformation program too.

Thank you, Senate Chairman. I'll just add as a note to that, we have a resolution in our committee now from Representative Mina talking about the Rural Health Transformation Program,

and it is directed towards the federal delegation,

the federal government,

and if there are very meritorious projects that you have that cannot fit this rubric, we can also ask the federal government to change the rubric in certain cases of capital expenditures,

for example. This was a program created.

created in great haste by Congress last year and then you know CMS is trying to implement it very quickly I would anticipate some statutory changes in the coming years and if there are places where you find very good projects that can't fit I hope that there is some mechanism to tell our federal delegation or the legislature so we can tell the federal delegation

Okay.

No other further questions on that.

We sort of derailed your testimony,

Deputy Commissioner Ricci,

but I don't know if you know where you could pick up or if there is further comments you'd like to make.

To the chair,

I would just add we have another advisory committee meeting that we are working to schedule on the morning of the 22nd. I think that was just noticed either last night or this morning. There will be more meeting minutes.

We are also working to stand up something called IMPACT series.

series and these are just intended to be a way for people,

providers,

organizations in Alaska who are working on specific initiatives,

right?

We have six different initiatives to come together on a monthly basis via a Zoom call to kind of share those ideas and have different focus areas.

So how do we continue to educate and bring people together across the state to keep discussing that?

We just had those, I think we just finished up the first month of those series, but we will be holding them every month with a break in July for summer,

maybe a break in January.

But that's just another way that we're trying to bring people together to raise awareness and to start to identify common themes in these different initiatives.

I would also add that we are beginning regional planning meetings. Those were also part of the proposal and the intent is to bring

communities and regions together to really talk about the healthcare delivery system,

what is working,

where are the gaps,

and are there agreed upon areas that they want to focus for the next few years, and to use that as a way to start thinking about future years funding for rural health transformation program projects,

and to start again to identify those areas of alignment.

I think in many communities people already know where many of those areas or gaps are,

but they don't always come together for a day to talk about that and to kind of have that shared understanding.

So we are building that out right now, and I think the first series will start at the end of this month in the Kenai.

So again,

we will be reaching out as well to make sure that individuals know which of those meetings are happening in their regions or districts.

districts.

Very good.

Well, thank you, Deputy Commissioner.

We do have also Director Wood from the Office of Health Savings here.

Director Wood,

do you have anything you'd like to add today?

Thank you, Chair Dunbar.

I did want to address Senator Tobin's question that came up earlier during Director Rob's presentation,

if that would be helpful.

I think it was around the physician's assistant compacting and what would happen if the state

you know, joined, but the compact hadn't been up and going.

My understanding from the information that's been provided by CMS is that the requirement was that the, that we have legislation enacted to become a PA compact member.

So i.e. that we've joined that compact,

but I don't believe that a part of the requirement is whether or not the compact is actually up and running.

So I think we have a little bit of leeway there,

but I think CMS is willing to kind of work with states based off of what.

of what is the landscape when we kind of hit those 2027 and I think 2028 for some of those those deadlines.

To the chair,

to just clarify and add a little bit of context,

CMS has said if there are

If there are issues that occur that are not outside,

that are not within the control of the state,

right,

and are not anticipated, those are areas where they would work with the state to be successful.

And so I would anticipate if we joined and we are just waiting for something that is outside of our control to occur,

that that would be the type of area where we could talk with CMS.

But I just want to differentiate that's different than the state not taking action on something that is within its controls.

Awesome.

Very good.

Because she's been waiting this entire time or has been online this entire time,

I want to ask the commissioner,

Commissioner Hedberg,

do you have anything you'd like to add today?

We appreciate having you here at the committee.

For the record,

this is Heidi Hedberg.

Thank you. I appreciate this conversation. I think what you have heard from DC Ritchie and Bessewood is a lot of work is underway.

I think the only thing I would add is that we did create positions, both policy positions and accountants.

and to clarify not policy but program staff those program positions are filled and they're going through training right now and then we're in the middle of hiring our accountants so that we will be fully staffed to manage the real health transformation program.

Very good. That is good news. Thank you, Commissioner Hedberg.

Is there any final questions or discussion?

Not seeing any, thank you very much for being here, Deputy Commissioner and Director,

and we will certainly be discussing both the CS, uh, two

Oh.

eighty one and R.H.T.P. more generally in the weeks to come. Thank you very much.

Okay.

Thank you.

So

All right. Final announcements today, unless anyone has any discussion.