The Medicaid asymmetry at the heart of the care crisis: nursing home care is a mandatory entitlement. Home & community-based care is optional. The cheaper, preferred option has weaker legal footing than the expensive institutional alternative.
Medicaid was designed in 1965 around institutional care. Nursing home coverage is a mandatory benefit that every state must provide. Home and community-based services are optional — offered through waivers, state plan amendments, and programs that states can expand, restrict, or eliminate.
The system guarantees access to the more expensive, less preferred option while treating the cheaper, preferred option as discretionary. Most people who need long-term care prefer to stay home. Most state budgets would benefit from keeping them there. Yet the legal architecture of Medicaid makes the institutional path the only guaranteed one. This asymmetry doesn’t just affect budgets — it affects fundamental rights to community living.
The entire HCBS system depends on a workforce that earns poverty-level wages, receives minimal labor protections, and reflects the demographics of historical exclusion.
The FLSA companionship exemption traces directly to the New Deal–era exclusion of domestic workers from labor protections — an exclusion designed to maintain the racial caste system of the Jim Crow South. The 1974 FLSA amendments that created the companionship exemption preserved this exclusion for home care workers. The workforce that is 85% female and 67% people of color is not coincidentally excluded from overtime protections. It is excluded because of who does this work.
In self-directed care programs, 50–78% of paid caregivers are family members of the care recipient — spouses, parents, adult children. These are the people most motivated to provide care, most knowledgeable about the recipient’s needs, and most available to provide it. They are also the people least protected by labor law. The FLSA companionship exemption was explicitly designed to exclude them. The paradox: the person most likely to provide care is the person the system most fails to protect.
The Supreme Court held in Olmstead v. L.C. (1999) that unjustified institutional isolation of people with disabilities violates the Americans with Disabilities Act. States must provide community-based services to individuals with disabilities when: (1) the state’s treatment professionals determine community placement is appropriate; (2) the individual does not oppose community placement; and (3) the placement can be reasonably accommodated.
HCBS is the infrastructure that makes Olmstead compliance possible. Without home care workers, there is no community-based alternative to institutional placement. The workforce crisis creates a de facto violation of Olmstead principles:
Approved but unfilled: Beneficiaries are approved for HCBS but cannot find workers to provide it. Their authorized hours go unfilled. The “reasonable accommodation” standard becomes meaningless when there is no workforce to accommodate with.
Waiting lists: Thousands of individuals sit on HCBS waiver waiting lists — approved for community-based care but unable to access it. Many end up in nursing homes while waiting.
Forced institutionalization: People without HCBS access are 5× more likely to enter nursing homes. This is not a choice — it is a system failure that produces the unjustified institutionalization Olmstead was designed to prevent.
The workforce is the right. The right to community living is only as real as the workforce that delivers it. A home care worker shortage is, in practice, an Olmstead violation at scale.
Several legal scholars and disability rights organizations have argued that systemic home care workforce failures constitute Olmstead violations. While no court has ruled directly on this theory, the connection between workforce adequacy and community integration rights is increasingly recognized in ADA enforcement and Medicaid policy discussions. The DOJ’s Olmstead enforcement guidance emphasizes that states must demonstrate progress toward community integration, including adequate community-based service capacity.
The home care workforce crisis is a disability rights issue, an aging issue, and a civil rights issue. Here’s how advocacy organizations can act.
1. Frame workforce investment as an Olmstead compliance tool. When legislators ask why the state should invest in home care workers, the answer is: because the ADA requires community-based alternatives, and those alternatives require workers.
2. Document unfilled hours. Collect data on HCBS beneficiaries whose authorized hours go unfilled due to workforce shortages. This is the evidence base for both legislative advocacy and potential legal action.
3. Support wage pass-through legislation. The Medicaid Wage Pass-Through Act ensures rate increases reach workers — the workforce that delivers community integration.
4. File FOIA requests. Use the State DHS Data Request Package to obtain county-level HCBS data, waiting list numbers, and unfilled service hours.
1. Lead with member stories. AARP members are the families navigating the home care workforce crisis — searching for workers, managing turnover, filling gaps with unpaid family caregiving. Their stories make the crisis tangible.
2. Build cross-ideological coalitions. The Fiscal Conservative Framing Guide provides the cost-avoidance argument for reaching across the aisle. This issue has natural allies on both sides.
3. Submit DOL public comments. The DOL Public Comment Template provides a pre-drafted comment opposing the rescission of the 2013 overtime rule. Personalize it with member experiences.
4. Support state overtime protections. The State Overtime Protection Act provides a model bill that 14 states have already proven works.
Cross-ideological framing guides, campaign strategy resources, and state evidence base for building legislative support.
→ Coalition resourcesCaregiver and care recipient stories published alongside the data they illustrate. Powerful testimony for advocacy campaigns.
→ Share your story10 pre-drafted FOIA request templates for county-level data, waiting lists, workforce demographics, and MCO contracts.
→ View templates16+ state profiles with 89 metrics each. Find your state’s HCBS data, workforce demographics, and policy status.
→ Browse state data