2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB4129
HB4129 requires covered contracts between the Department of Family and Protective Services and its regional community-based-care contractors to make the department implement formal measures for high-quality service.
Official caption: Relating to the contract requirements for a contract between a single source continuum contractor and the Department of Family and Protective Services.
Official report lists House author(s): Davis, Aicha, Shaheen. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- HB4129 requires covered contracts between the Department of Family and Protective Services and its regional community-based-care contractors to make the department implement formal measures for high-quality service.
- Community-based care involves contracted child-welfare services, including direct case management, in a geographic service area.
- Existing required contract provisions remain, including implementation timelines, data access, caregiver coordination, diverse service-provider networks, community engagement and court-order compliance.
What does it do?
HB4129 requires covered contracts between the Department of Family and Protective Services and its regional community-based-care contractors to make the department implement formal measures for high-quality service. The named measures include quality-improvement plans, financial interventions and other appropriate interventions or restrictions. This is a contract oversight requirement, not a new cash benefit for families or a fixed fine for every contractor. Signed June 20, 2025, it took effect September 1, 2025. Final law · History
Community-based care involves contracted child-welfare services, including direct case management, in a geographic service area. The new provision applies to contracts entered into, amended, modified, renewed or extended on or after September 1, 2025. Earlier contract transactions remain governed by the law applicable when they occurred. The bill therefore does not automatically rewrite every untouched older contract on its effective date. Contract-date provision · Program definitions
Existing required contract provisions remain, including implementation timelines, data access, caregiver coordination, diverse service-provider networks, community engagement and court-order compliance. Existing language already allowed performance reviews beginning 18 months after the contractor had started providing case management and reunification support to all children and families in the area, followed by financial penalties or incentives based on contractual outcomes. HB4129 adds the formal quality-control requirement; it does not newly create all of those earlier powers or specify dollar amounts and triggers for each intervention. Family Code 264.155
What changed along the way?
The introduced and House committee versions would have required contract language that merely allowed the department to implement the measures. The House adopted Aicha Davis’s sole indexed amendment on April 29, replacing “allow” with “require.” That mandatory wording survived the House-passed, Senate committee and final versions. The engrossed text also corrected “on after” to “on or after” in the contract-date clause. No Senate floor amendment or conference stage appears in the official record. Introduced · Adopted amendment · Amendment index · Version index
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
Children, families and caregivers may benefit if formal oversight identifies and corrects poor service. Contractors may face improvement plans, financial measures or restrictions, while the department must implement the required controls. The law itself does not establish that services have improved, prescribe every quality metric or guarantee additional funding.
The latest fiscal note anticipated no significant state fiscal impact, assuming department costs could be absorbed with existing resources, and no local-government fiscal implication. Its wording reflects the final mandatory requirement; the introduced-version note described permission instead. Neither note quantifies a particular contractor’s financial exposure. May 19 fiscal note
Review boundary: This explains the added contract requirement, not an audit of any contractor or a determination of which intervention is required in an individual case.
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.