The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
H.R. 6137·119th Congress·Introduced Nov 19, 2025

Recognizing the Role of Direct Support Professionals Act

IntroducedLabor and EmploymentSubstantive
View bill text
Sponsor
Rep. Fitzpatrick, Brian K. [R-PA-1]
Committees
Education and Workforce Committee (primary)
Last action
Nov 19, 2025

Bottom line

The bill directs OMB to consider creating a distinct occupational classification for direct support professionals to improve data collection and recognition for this critical workforce.

What it actually does

This bill requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to consider establishing a separate occupational code for direct support professionals (DSPs) within the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system during its next revision. If OMB decides against creating this code, the bill mandates a report to Congress explaining the decision. The bill aims to improve data collection and recognition for DSPs, who provide critical care to individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities.

Proponents argue

Supporters argue that establishing a separate SOC code for direct support professionals is crucial for accurately recognizing their distinct and vital role in supporting individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. They contend that better data on this workforce, including shortages and high turnover rates, will enable more effective policy development and resource allocation to address the challenges faced by both DSPs and the individuals they serve. Proponents highlight that DSPs perform work different from home health aides or personal care aides, justifying a unique classification.

Opponents contend

Critics might argue that creating highly granular occupational classifications could lead to unnecessary administrative burdens for the Office of Management and Budget and other federal statistical agencies. They might contend that existing categories, while imperfect, are sufficient for broad statistical purposes and that further specialization could complicate data comparability across different sectors or over time. Some might also suggest that the 'consider' language in the bill does not guarantee the desired outcome and merely adds a procedural step without a firm commitment to change.

The bill is very short and clearly written, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core purpose and provisions within a few minutes.

Section 3

Revision of Standard Occupational Classification System

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section requires the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to officially consider, as part of the next scheduled revision of the Standard Occupational Classification (SOC) system, whether to create a new, distinct occupational code specifically for direct support professionals (DSPs). This new code would be categorized under 'healthcare support occupations' and aims to provide a more accurate statistical representation of this workforce.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupDirect Support Professionals (DSPs)ImpactIncreased recognition and potential for improved data collectionMechanismFormal classification within federal statistical systemScaleNational workforce of DSPs
GroupIndividuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (IDD)ImpactPotential for improved quality and stability of care through better workforce dataMechanismBetter understanding of DSP labor market challengesScaleNational population receiving IDD support
GroupFederal and State statistical agencies (e.g., OMB, BLS)ImpactPotential administrative burden for review and implementationMechanismRequirement to consider and potentially implement a new classificationScaleAgencies involved in occupational classification

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that a dedicated SOC code for DSPs is essential for accurately quantifying and understanding this critical workforce. They believe it will highlight the unique skills and responsibilities of DSPs, differentiate them from other care roles, and enable better data collection on workforce shortages and turnover, which are currently hindering the provision of stable care for individuals with disabilities.

Critics contend

Some might argue that while the intent is good, the 'consider' language does not guarantee the desired outcome and could lead to a bureaucratic exercise without a tangible change. Others might contend that the existing SOC framework is broad enough, and creating overly specific categories could complicate data analysis across different sectors or time periods, potentially leading to more fragmentation than clarity.

Tradeoffs

The bill balances the desire for greater recognition and data specificity for DSPs against the administrative complexities and potential for increased granularity within a broad statistical classification system. There's a tension between the need for detailed workforce insights and the practicalities of maintaining a streamlined, comprehensive occupational framework.

Section 4

Report to Congress

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This section mandates that if the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) decides not to establish a separate occupational code for direct support professionals (DSPs) after the required consideration, OMB must submit a report to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and the House Committee on Education and Workforce. This report must be submitted within 30 days of the first SOC system revision after the bill's enactment and must explain the rationale behind OMB's decision.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
Ask Ledger AI about this