The Brief

Fortina Hernández is called “the one who knows it all.”

For more than two decades, the community health worker has supported hundreds of families throughout southeast Los Angeles by helping them sign up for food assistance, sharing information about affordable health coverage, and managing medications for their chronic illnesses. She’s guided by the expression “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

But she makes only around $20 an hour from a community health organization and must hold down a second job to make ends meet. “They pay us very little and expect too much,” she said in Spanish. "We build trust. We offer support. We’re the shoulder people rely on, but we don't get fair wages."

California looked to professionalize thousands of community health workers such as Hernández to improve the health of immigrant populations, particularly Hispanic residents, who often experience higher rates of chronic diseases, are more likely to be uninsured, and face more cultural and linguistic barriers when trying to access services. Studies show their work may reduce hospitalizations as well as emergency room and urgent care visits.

The state hewed closely to a series of expert recommendations put out in 2019 to standardize training and certification, integrate these workers into the health care workforce, and provide fair wages, including reimbursements through Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid health insurance program, to compensate for work that traditionally has been done on a volunteer basis or for low pay. But six years in, California has backed out of many of those initiatives.

The state has eliminated a certification program and rolled back nearly all funding to train and expand this workforce even though it set a goal of 25,000 workers by this year. Although Medi-Cal began covering their services, participating health plans set uneven billing requirements, making it difficult for workers to get reimbursed. And the state didn’t follow through on a planned pay raise.

With federal funding cuts just passed and President Donald Trump targeting immigrants for deportation — even sharing personal Medicaid data with the Department of Homeland Security — advocates fear California is abandoning its health equity initiative for immigrants, people of color, and people with low incomes when they say that effort is needed most.

“We're in a very dire situation right now,” said Cary Sanders, senior policy director for the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, a statewide health equity advocacy group.

A spokesperson for Gov. Gavin Newsom, Elana Ross, said “the state has taken difficult but necessary steps to ensure fiscal stability” and that the administration continues to have a dialogue with community health workers. Ross added that the Democratic governor, a potential presidential candidate, remains committed to defending immigrants being targeted by the Trump administration.

‘Our office is on the street’

Lourdes Bernis (left) chats with a resident about Latino health issues. Bernis is a community health worker, or promotora, who helps people manage chronic illnesses, connects them to social services, and promotes healthy lifestyles.

(

Elisa Ferrari

/

for KFF Health News

)

There are more than 60,000 community health workers nationwide, including roughly 9,200 in California, and this workforce is projected to grow 13% over the next decade, three times as fast as for all occupations, according to 2024 data from the U.S Bureau of Labor Statistics. But experts say these numbers are an undercount given the various titles community health workers hold and that many work outside of health care and governmental institutions.

Community health worker is an umbrella term that includes peer supporters and community health representatives. These workers, often known as promotores, tend to be women who work in clinics, hospitals, public health departments, and local nonprofits, places where they are trusted and have a grasp of their community’s most pressing health needs.

Besides helping people manage chronic illnesses such as heart disease and diabetes, they promote reproductive health, children’s health, and oral hygiene, and they help seniors with dementia prevent injuries and review medications. They can make people feel safe when reporting domestic violence and other abuses. They also connect people to housing and food assistance. "The community health worker is not sitting at a desk," Hernández said. "Our office is on the street."

Back in 2019, the California Future Health Workforce Commission recommended integrating community health workers into the health care system, and in 2022, the state authorized $281 million over three years for the California Department of Health Care Access and Information, which oversees health care workforce development, to recruit, train, and certify them.

The agency sought to standardize training and certification, but some community groups feared that would create barriers to entry by not giving enough credit for lived experiences and cultural competency. But just as the agency offered more flexibility and allowed community-based training, the state slashed $250 million in funding last year due to budget constraints. This year, the certification program was officially eliminated.

Spokesperson Andrew DiLuccia said the agency is now considering a program to accredit community organizations rather than individual workers and plans to spend its remaining $12 million on technical assistance, workforce development, and salaries for those working with immigrant communities.

According to the National Academy for State Health Policy, 32 other states offer a voluntary or mandatory community health worker certification program.

Some community health advocates say California’s missing an opportunity to carve a career path for this workforce. Currently, some courses offered by nonprofits, counties, and colleges require a fee, a degree, English fluency, or prior experience. Most are concentrated in the San Francisco or Los Angeles area, leaving training deserts in much of the state.

Lourdes Bernis received training that allowed her to move into a full-time role with the Los Angeles County Department of Mental Health. She says many community health workers remain stuck in low-paying positions and can’t afford training to advance.

(

Elisa Ferrari for KFF Health News

)

Lourdes Bernis, a dentist from Ecuador, is a model for how community health workers could be integrated into the health care system. She began as a volunteer promotora more than a decade ago and in 2019 received free training from Los Angeles County, allowing her to move into a full-time job with benefits for the county’s Department of Mental Health to help Spanish-speaking women manage depression and anxiety as they recover from drug use.

Bernis now plans to become a peer-to-peer support specialist inside hospitals and clinics. Meanwhile, many of her colleagues with decades of experience remain stuck in low-paying roles and can’t afford training to advance. “There are promotoras who have 20 to 25 years of experience, but they are still volunteering,” Bernis said in Spanish.

Medi-Cal's role

To pay community health workers, Medi-Cal began covering their services in July 2022, but California suspended a planned pay increase for them after voters approved Proposition 35, which hiked the pay of physicians, hospitals, community clinics, and other providers instead. Since then, the state has yet to establish a uniform system for how health plans should contract with organizations that employ community health workers.

“We have to jump through hoops,” said Maria Lemus, executive director at Visión y Compromiso, a Los Angeles-based nonprofit representing community health workers. “It just causes havoc, because each plan could have different requirements.”

Lemus said it took the organization nearly six months to establish payment with one health plan.

And though Medi-Cal reimbursements are tied to individual tasks, ranging from $9.46 to $27.54 for 30 minutes of work, advocates say they aren’t fully compensated for the time they spend building trust and following up with patients. Advocates say these workers should earn at least $30 a visit, with benefits, but many earn about $21 an hour, often without benefits.

Advocates say they’re surprised by how infrequently these services are used in a program with 15 million Californians. More than 16,000 Medi-Cal enrollees used these services in the first year, rising to 68,000 last year, according to state data. “I don't think it's reached the potential that the governor talked about, and that we all imagined that it could possibly achieve,” Sanders said.

Griselda Melgoza, a spokesperson for the California Department of Health Care Services, said the agency, which administers Medi-Cal, has seen “a steady, upward trend” and believes the data underestimates utilization because the benefit is sometimes bundled with other services.

A proposal to assess whether Medi-Cal managed care plans are doing enough outreach and education to enrollees about community health services died this year.

More crucial than ever

With health funding cuts from the Trump administration and passage of the GOP’s tax and spending legislation, advocates fear there will be even less funding and support for community health worker positions, shrinking a workforce tackling health disparities. Already, Fresno County’s Department of Public Health said it has cut its community health workers by more than half, from 49 positions to 20.

Yet, outreach is more crucial than ever. As the Trump administration continues immigration raids, which appear to have targeted at least one health clinic in the state, advocates and policy researchers say community health workers could act as intermediaries for immigrant patients afraid to seek medical care in hospitals and clinics.

Without a state certification program, no raises, and dwindling training funds, the path to professionalizing community health workers is unclear, leaving workers feeling left behind.

"The community trusts me,” said Hernández, the veteran community health worker, “but at the government level, there’s still a long way to go before this work is valued and fairly compensated."

This article was produced by KFF Health News, 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. KFF Health News is the publisher of California Healthline, an editorially independent service of the California Health Care Foundation.

Federal agencies responsible for immigration enforcement are set to receive tens of billions more dollars after Congress voted to fund them not just for the year, but through the rest of President Trump's term.

The House narrowly voted on Tuesday to direct roughly $70 billion to the Department of Homeland Security for Immigration and Customs Enforcement and Border Patrol, the second multi-billion dollar infusion of money to the agencies in the last year muscled through by Republicans alone.

The measure passed by a vote of 214 to 212.

The vote marks the end of a 115 day standoff over immigration policy. After federal officers shot and killed two protesters in Minneapolis earlier this year, Democrats refused to back more funding for ICE and Border Patrol, with the goal of forcing changes to immigration enforcement tactics.

But as negotiations fell apart, Republicans moved to circumvent Democrats using a special procedure known as reconciliation to fund the agencies without acquiescing to any of the reforms they were demanding.

In the Senate last week, one Republican joined all Democrats in an unsuccessful attempt to block the measure. The lopsided votes highlighted a Republican caucus continuing to endorse Trump's immigration agenda as Democrats warn that Congress has ceded its ability to provide oversight by funneling these agencies billions of dollars with few strings attached.

ICE gets more than three times its annual funding

Through this legislation, Congress is giving ICE more than three times its last annual budget. Though technically this funding is meant to cover three years, unlike a traditional annual funding bill, the money comes with few stipulations on how and when it should be spent.

While most annual spending measures provide funds for just that fiscal year, this measure includes lump sums that need to be spent only by the end of fiscal year 2029, including:

• $38 billion for ICE to hire, pay, train and equip its officers and agents. That includes $7 billion for Homeland Security Investigations and $31 billion for immigration enforcement work like hiring more attorneys, supporting local law enforcement who coordinate with ICE and technology like body cameras;
• $22 billion for Border Patrol to pay, train, recruit and equip agents and personnel. That includes $13 billion specifically for immigration enforcement work;
• $5 billion for border security technology and screening, including artificial intelligence;
• $350 million for enforcement in localities that do not coordinate directly with ICE.

Legislation passed in April to fund most of DHS except ICE and Border Patrol did include provisions that would provide funding for the agency to purchase body cameras, stipulate congressional oversight of detention centers and deescalation training for officers and agents.

Lawmakers agreed to separate funding for ICE and Border Patrol as Republicans and Democrats struggled to reach a compromise on reforms even as a record-long DHS shutdown dragged on.

But now ICE and Border Patrol will be funded without the changes Democrats were demanding, including requiring judicial warrants to enter homes and prohibiting officers from wearing masks. The package also lacks reforms with bipartisan support, such as requiring officers to wear body cameras.

Neither measure included funding for internal oversight offices that conduct investigations into detention center conditions; however, the April measure to fund all of the agency included $20 million for the DHS inspector general to specifically conduct oversight of detention facilities.

Not only is this standoff ending without Democrats achieving the reforms they pressed for, the agencies will be insulated from additional pressure through the appropriations process for three years.

More dollars after an unprecedented boost

Both ICE and CBP received a massive influx of funding last year, also passed by Republicans through the budget reconciliation process, that has allowed both agencies to largely continue operating even as Democrats refused to provide them annual funding for the last several months.

ICE's usual annual budget is about $10 billion. The $75 billion boost last summer made ICE the highest funded federal law enforcement agency and enabled a hiring surge that doubled its ranks in a matter of months.

Former agency leaders, Democrats and even some Republicans have warned that the surge of money limits the ability of Congress to provide oversight when it comes to how that money is spent and how the agency operates.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, was the only Republican to vote against this latest funding measure in the Senate last week. She wrote in a statement that by appropriating funding for three fiscal years instead of the usual one, the measure "weakens the normal budgeting process and sets another precedent for avoiding it when we find ourselves in disagreement."

"In doing so, it reduces Congress' ability to apply reasonable checks on immigration policy for the remainder of this administration and into the next," she wrote.

Other Republicans say they were left with no choice once Democrats decided to withhold funding for these agencies as leverage to extract reforms.

"We're attempting here to fund ICE and CBP at last year's operating budget plus inflation, that's all we're talking about here," House Budget Chair Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, said shortly before the vote. "This is not a slush fund, it's regular, normal funding. And we're going to do it not for one year, but for three years so we don't end up here again."

ICE "got a shopping list" 

ICE officials have been gearing up for the potential new cash for months.

"Apparently we're going to get more reconciliation money, so I got a shopping list," said Matt Elliston, ICE assistant director for law enforcement systems and analysis, speaking on a panel at the Border Security Expo in Arizona last month.

Among the items on his list are wearable headset displays so that officers do not need to be on their phones during an operation and data to help identify where someone targeted for arrest lives.

Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Rodney Scott said absent the reconciliation funds, the agency was struggling to correctly pay its employees and fulfill contracts.

While the agencies welcome the funds, immigration advocates are concerned that funding the agency outside the normal appropriations process means provisions that tell the agency how to do its work are not included.

ICE agents confront protesters as they gather outside the federal immigration center at Delaney Hall on June 8, 2026, in Newark, New Jersey. The agency will receive tens of billions in new funding through the end of Trump's term under a GOP bill passed by Congress.

(

Spencer Platt

/

Getty Images

)

Heidi Altman, vice president of policy at the National Immigration Law Coalition, said in the past DHS annual funding bills included specific guardrails on the spending including requirements for the agency to report data on who it is detaining and specific treatment of pregnant women in custody.

"It's very dangerous," Altman said. "And it means that the agency will move forward with even fewer accountability mechanisms than we've seen in the past."

Altman also raised concerns about the $350 million dedicated to immigration enforcement in areas that are not "qualified cooperating jurisdictions," meaning a locality that is not a part of programs that allow local law enforcement to enforce federal immigration law.

"The DHS secretary has wide discretion to just say these are not sufficiently cooperating with the White House's mass deportation agenda," she said. "So it's concerning in terms of where the money will go."

Politics of immigration enforcement 

President Trump shakes hands with the newly sworn in Secretary of Homeland Security Markwayne Mullin in the Oval Office on March 24, 2026. Mullin has dialed back some of the aggressive enforcement operations that drew the national spotlight.

(

Jim Watson

/

AFP via Getty Images

)

After the two killings in Minneapolis, Democrats and a contingent of Republicans in Congress said they wanted to take action to reign in the tactics of federal immigration officers.

For weeks this winter, debate over President Trump's immigration policy consumed Capitol Hill. But despite the protracted fight over immigration enforcement funding, that discussion has largely subsided.

Republicans criticized Democrats for pushing an unserious list of demands. Democrats criticized Republicans for dismissing attempts at meaningful reform.

A new DHS secretary, Markwayne Mullin, has dialed back some of the aggressive enforcement operations that drew the national spotlight. And other controversies, like the war in Iran, have overtaken the immigration policy debate.

So much so that when Senate Republicans finally moved to approve the $70 billion for ICE and Border Patrol, much of the debate focused on an unrelated fund proposed by the Trump administration to compensate people who claim to have been wrongfully targeted by the government.

Reflecting on what followed after the two deaths in her home state, Sen. Tina Smith, D-Minn., says it has been hard for her personally to come to terms with the reality that Democrats were unable to extract the policy changes they demanded.

And meanwhile, Smith says Minnesotans are still dealing with the fallout from the crackdown — like kids who did not return to school or businesses that never reopened — even as public attention shifted away.

"This is the way it goes, Americans have really busy complicated lives, they're trying to figure out how to pay rent and buy groceries, but what they saw, I don't think they're going to forget it," Smith says. "And that's what I mean when I say we've lost these votes but that doesn't mean we've lost the fight."

Even if public opinion on Trump's immigration agenda does help Democrats' take control of Congress next year, Democrats' ability to extract changes through the appropriations process will be limited now that the agencies have resources to last until 2029.
Copyright 2026 NPR

This story was originally published by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

For the first time since California insurance commissioner became an elected position, two Democrats will vie for the job in November.

The top two vote-getters in the June primary were former San Francisco Board of Supervisors member Jane Kim and state Sen. Ben Allen, who received about 27% and 20% of the vote, respectively. One of them will succeed Ricardo Lara, the former Democratic lawmaker who has served two terms as insurance commissioner. Lara has presided over the Insurance Department in the past eight years, during which the state saw its deadliest and most devastating fires.

Kim or Allen will be taking on complicated, enormous challenges that have implications for local communities, people’s ability to buy homes and start businesses, and the state’s economy.

In the past few years, insurance companies stopped writing new policies or renewing old ones, especially in high-risk areas, citing increasing wildfire risk from climate change and inflation that followed the COVID-19 pandemic. This caused homeowners to turn to the last-resort FAIR Plan, which is mandated by law to provide fire insurance. The plan, run by an alliance of insurers, has grown to more than 684,000 policies in force as of March, an increase of 152% since September 2022. It has warned about its ability to keep paying claims after major disasters.

Proposition 103, a law approved by voters in 1988, means that among many other things, the elected commissioner has the power to approve rate increases. It has kept the state’s rates from rising too much over the years — Californians’ homeowners insurance premiums have hovered around the middle of the pack nationwide — but that could change. Last year, the commissioner put in place regulations that include new factors insurers can use when setting their premiums, such as catastrophe modeling and reinsurance costs. Some companies have applied for and received approval to raise their rates, so they’re starting to write policies again.

Keeping insurance available but affordable will be the most pressing issue for either Kim or Allen, whose responsibilities will also include regulating auto, pet and some aspects of health insurance, plus workers’ compensation.

Another problem that will need plenty of attention: making sure insurance companies pay their claims in a timely manner that helps communities to rebuild. The L.A.-area fires shed a light on insurer practices that delay and deny claims, as well as underinsurance and the lack of standards for smoke damage, which have held up recovery. Pending legislation — such as those authored by Allen, whose district was hit by the fires last year — and lawsuits will address some of those issues. Well-organized fire survivors who called for Lara’s resignation over his department’s response to their concerns will surely keep up the pressure on his successor.

Here’s a look at each candidate’s record and how she or he would approach the job, based on their interviews with CalMatters and what they have said publicly, including at candidate forums.

Jane Kim

Kim’s proposal to create “natural disaster insurance for all,” inspired by a program in New Zealand, has gotten a lot of attention. She plans to fund such a system with a portion of policyholder premiums that insurance companies would collect and divert to the state. The state would then guarantee fire and flood coverage, while insurance companies would continue to cover other risks.

Naysayers, including consumer advocates, wonder why she hasn’t released any specifics about how much capital such a fund would require. Kim told CalMatters that it would need to be studied, but that at its core her proposal would generate revenue.

Opponents of her proposal also say it’s a bad idea to shift catastrophic burden onto the state, pointing to what they say is the failure of splitting off earthquake insurance from homeowner insurance — most California homeowners now have no insurance coverage.

“We (taxpayers) already are on the hook,” Kim said. “When insurers and utilities refuse to pay, they just pass it on to us anyway. Sharing the risk is important.”

Kim also told CalMatters that an idea Merritt Farren, a Republican candidate for commissioner, proposed — that the state create a reinsurance authority to encourage insurers to write policies in the state — “may turn out to be a more efficient model.”

Among Kim’s shorter-term priorities if she wins:

• Create public dashboards to show how insurance companies are spending policyholder premiums, and that show their record on claims.
• Expand eligibility for a program that provides low-cost insurance to drivers who make less than $38,000 a year. 
• Tie a company’s ability to sell auto insurance in the state to its willingness to write homeowner policies.
• Make the FAIR Plan more transparent by requiring that its list of board members be public, and that its board meetings be public.
• Freeze rates when policyholders file claims.

The former San Francisco elected official, an attorney, touts among her accomplishments free community college for the city’s residents; the first $15 minimum wage ordinance in the state; and a tenant-protection ordinance to avoid unjust evictions. She worked as the California director for Sen. Bernie Sanders’ 2020 U.S. presidential campaign and most recently as California Director for the Working Families Party.

Kim has a long list of endorsers, including many unions such as SEIU California. Besides Sanders, another U.S. lawmaker, Rep. Ro Khanna of Silicon Valley, has also endorsed her.

Ben Allen

The state senator, who will be termed out of the Legislature, wants to bring together the state, insurers, builders, local governments and firefighters to work on risk-reduction strategies.

“I think that's ultimately going to be the way that we get ourselves out of this mess,” he told CalMatters.

What he calls a comprehensive approach includes thinking about where people live and build: “We shouldn't be building new construction that is irresponsible in high-risk areas. We should be looking for ways to carefully and sensitively encourage people to pull back from high-risk areas.”

If he wins, Allen’s other plans include:

• Create a consumer advocate position within the insurance department, and increase staff to handle customer service. 
• Require insurers to explain claim denials and provide real-time reports of delays and outstanding claims after a disaster.
• Increase oversight of the FAIR Plan and make sure it complies with commissioner orders.
• Ban the insurance commissioner and staff from working for the industry immediately after they leave the department.

Allen has played up his experience as a legislator, including writing and passing bills related to holding insurance companies accountable. For example, a law he wrote now requires insurers to pay 60% of policyholders’ contents coverage without a detailed inventory, and gives consumers more time to provide that inventory. He also touts writing Proposition 4, the bond measure approved by the state’s voters in 2024 “for safe drinking water, wildfire prevention and protecting communities and natural lands from climate risks.”

Other pending bills authored by him include one that would require insurers to give homeowners 90 days notice before they intend not to renew their policies, along with a clear explanation. Another would penalize insurance companies that fail to correct their practices after the insurance department finds that they have violated laws and regulations.

Allen also has many endorsements, including the two leaders of the state Legislature, Senate Pro Tem Monique Limon and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas. U.S. Sens. Adam Schiff and Alex Padilla, both from California, unions and the Consumer Federation of California also endorse him.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Children and teens across Long Beach will have access to free meals this summer through programs run by the city and Long Beach Unified School District.

Beginning June 12, the first day of LBUSD’s summer break, more than 60 locations across Long Beach will begin offering free meals through a federal program administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The sites were selected to serve communities with the greatest need, in accordance with state guidelines.

The Department of Parks, Recreation and Marine will host lunch at 23 park and library locations. Children and teens ages 1 to 18 can receive lunches on a first-come, first-served basis and must eat them on site. No registration or proof of income is required. A full list of park locations and their service times and dates is available here.

Long Beach Unified will provide breakfast and lunch to more than 8,000 students enrolled in the district’s Expanded Learning Opportunities Program and school-age care programs. Those students can receive their meals at the site where they attend programming. Dates, times and locations of service at LBUSD sites are available here.

During the school year, Long Beach Unified participates in California’s Universal Meals Program and offers free breakfast and lunch to all students — regardless of family income. But options during the summer months are more limited. Offerings through the city’s Parks Department and LBUSD aim to fill that gap in a district where 61% of students are classified as socioeconomically disadvantaged, according to LBUSD’s most recent Local Control Accountability Plan.

The city’s arm of the program distributed nearly 27,000 meals last summer and may serve even more this year, after adding a location in Signal Hill. The program has served millions of children since launching in Long Beach in 1979.

Meals, which are all vended from Long Beach Unified, rotate on a biweekly menu schedule and include chicken tenders, hamburgers, mini corn dogs, bean burritos and pizza sticks. Meals will also include milk, juice, fruits and vegetables.

Meal service will be available from June 12 through Aug. 24, though dates and times vary by location. There will be no meal service on June 19 and July 3. Additional information on the city’s program is available here, and information on the school district’s program here.

Do you need food? See our guide to resources across Long Beach and L.A. County.