Advocates say paying DSPs living wages could reduce state spending elsewhere

Lindsay (speaker 3) told the subcommittee that some states are working with health economists to model the fiscal impacts of raising direct support professional (DSP) wages. She said those models suggest that "if you don't pay people living wages, you end up having to take your state resources for supplemental nutrition programs, your state resources for housing vouchers" to make up for inadequate pay.

Lindsay described using state workforce data in collaboration with a colleague at NCI to estimate the percent of people who will need additional public supports given current wages. "Based on these wages, this is the percent of people that a state is gonna have to provide food stamps to… or housing vouchers," she said, framing the argument as a way to persuade budget-focused policymakers.

Participants characterized this as a persuasive framing that could find common ground with leaders balancing fiscal responsibilities. No formal budget proposal or dollar figures were discussed during the meeting; Lindsay referenced at least one state conducting this work but did not specify which state by name.

The subcommittee agreed that this fiscal framing could be pursued in a peer-state exchange the panelists planned to organize.