PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2451-2455)
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 7, 2017
Disability Integration Act of 2017
This bill prohibits states or local governments that provide institutional placements for individuals with disabilities who need long-term assistance with daily living activities or health-related tasks, and prohibits insurance providers that fund such long-term services, from denying community-based services that would enable such individuals to live in the community and lead an independent life.
States, local governments, or insurance providers may not discriminate against such individuals in the provision of community-based services by: (1) imposing prohibited eligibility criteria, cost caps, waiting lists, or payment structures; (2) failing to provide a specific community-based service; or (3) requiring an individual to receive a service in a congregate or disability-specific setting.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Community-based services must be offered to individuals with such disabilities prior to institutionalization. Institutionalized individuals must be notified regularly of community-based alternatives.
States, local governments, and public insurance providers must assess: (1) transportation barriers that prevent individuals from receiving services in integrated settings, and (2) the availability of integrated employment opportunities.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) must issue regulations requiring states, local governments, or insurance providers to offer community-based long-term services to individuals with such disabilities who would otherwise qualify for institutional placement. State and local governments, in conjunction with housing agencies, must ensure sufficient availability of affordable, accessible, and integrated housing that is not a disability-specific residential setting or a setting where services are tied to tenancy.
Such regulations must also require states and local governments to begin implementing a transition plan to achieve the requirements of this bill within 12 years after its enactment. For 10 years after issuance of the regulations, HHS must determine annually whether each state is complying with the transition plan. If a state is complying, HHS must increase by five percentage points the federal medical assistance percentage for a state requesting an increase for expenditures on home and community-based services furnished under the state Medicaid plan under title XIX (Medicaid) of the Social Security Act, or a waiver of such plan, that are identified as: (1) improvements to ensure accessibility or self-directed receipt of such services, (2) funding shifts from institutional settings to integrated community-based services, or (3) environmental modifications for housing targeted toward the lowest income individuals.
The bill provides for DOJ enforcement and allows civil actions by individuals subjected to, or about to be subjected to, a violation of this bill.
People & committees
Sen. Schumer, Charles E. [D-NY] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. (text of measure as introduced: CR S2451-2455)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 5, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.910 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.910 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.910 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.910 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.