A gap that changes with the comparison
Kern Regional Center reported $30,794 in annual purchased services per white client and $11,691 per Hispanic client in fiscal 2024–25. The white figure was 2.63 times the Hispanic figure. But comparing the totals alone cannot establish how much of the difference reflects unequal access: the two populations had sharply different age profiles.
A recalculation using the center’s age tables shows why. Applying the white population’s spending averages within each age group to the Hispanic population’s age distribution produces approximately $18,776 per person. That is still 1.61 times Hispanic spending, but considerably below the unadjusted white average. This is a descriptive comparison, not a finding that ethnicity caused the difference or that either group should receive a fixed dollar entitlement.
The distinction matters for oversight of the Bakersfield-based center, whose report covers Kern, Inyo and Mono counties. An aggregate gap deserves examination. So do the factors behind it. The public data support both conclusions, rather than a single explanation for every family’s experience.
| Age | Hispanic clients | White clients | Hispanic count used as weight |
|---|---|---|---|
| Birth–2 | $5,250 | $5,702 | 2,455 |
| 3–21 | $7,067 | $11,246 | 6,139 |
| 22+ | $32,021 | $54,803 | 2,174 |
More money, uneven spending patterns
Total reported expenditures increased from $249.9 million in 2023–24 to $311.0 million in 2024–25, a calculated increase of $61.1 million, or 24.5%. Hispanic per-person spending rose from $10,000 to $11,691; white per-person spending rose from $27,467 to $30,794. The relative gap narrowed even as the dollar difference widened from $17,467 to $19,103.
The age tables reveal a major compositional difference. About 46% of the white clients in the expenditure table were at least 22 years old, compared with about 20% of Hispanic clients. Spending per person was much higher in that oldest category than among children. A comparison that combines the groups consequently gives much greater weight to adult services for white clients.
Age does not erase the pattern. For children through age two, white per-person spending was $5,702 against $5,250 for Hispanic children. Among people ages three through 21, the figures were $11,246 and $7,067. For adults 22 and older, they were $54,803 and $32,021. These are broad categories; people within them can have substantially different support needs.
Authorization and use tell different stories
The spending difference cannot simply be described as Hispanic families using a smaller fraction of approved services in every age group. Among children through age two, reported utilization was 59.4% for Hispanic clients and 55.3% for white clients. For ages three through 21, it was 60.4% and 59.4%, respectively. Hispanic utilization was higher in both groups, despite lower expenditures per person.
That juxtaposition points toward the amount and mix of authorized services as well as their eventual use. It does not identify which requests were denied, whether a provider was available, or whether a family declined a service. The tables contain no case-by-case evidence answering those questions.
KRC’s 2025 equity report acknowledges language barriers and mistrust of perceived governmental entities among Latino families. Its public-meeting summary also identifies transportation, caseloads, unmet needs and knowledge of service options as major concerns. Those accounts give administrators specific issues to investigate, but they are participant feedback, not a statistical explanation of the spending gap.
What the numbers leave unresolved
The center reports staff training and continuing work with families and community organizations. These are documented responses to access concerns. They are not evidence that the observed differences have been eliminated or that a particular intervention changed spending.
The annual reports exclude services financed by schools, Medi-Cal and other generic agencies, and some contracted services cannot be assigned to individual clients in the fiscal system. Payments for 2024–25 services may continue through March 2027. The comparison therefore uses published snapshots, not final lifetime costs or a complete accounting of support.
Our age adjustment uses the published rounded averages and three broad age bands. It does not adjust for disability, residence, intensity of need, service prices or time enrolled. Those limitations make a causal verdict inappropriate. They also identify the next accountability test: whether KRC can explain differences among people with comparable needs and show that approved support actually reaches them. The calculation is (2,455 × $5,702 + 6,139 × $11,246 + 2,174 × $54,803) ÷ 10,768. We examined the published reports and response packet; no interviews or individual case-file reviews were conducted.
Sources and further reading
KRC 2023–24 POS report — PDF page 9: same table; PDF pages 3–4: limitations ↗