House Bill 917 would reestablish the North Carolina General Assembly’s Data Analytics, Transparency, and Accountability Division, replacing references to the former Program Evaluation Division throughout the General Statutes. The bill reenacts several prior statutory provisions tied to legislative oversight and information access, and it directs state agencies and institutions to provide requested records, database access, and facilities to legislative staff, subject to existing federal and state confidentiality limits.
The bill also updates reporting and information-sharing requirements for several state entities. It requires the Global TransPark Authority to submit annual reports and performance measures to the new division, allows the division to request aggregated health information analyses from the Health Information Exchange Authority with personal identifiers removed, and expands whistleblower protections to employees who report misconduct to the new division. It further revises Department of Administration reporting obligations to include the division in oversight of capital improvements and state real property reporting, and appropriates $2 million in recurring General Fund support for the division’s operation beginning in fiscal year 2025-2026.
HB917 would change state law by restoring a legislative oversight and analysis unit within the General Assembly and by updating numerous cross-references so the new division can receive information, reports, and data access previously tied to the Program Evaluation Division. It affects statutes governing legislative access to state records, whistleblower protections for state employees, reporting by the Global TransPark Authority and Department of Administration, and the handling of aggregated health data requests. The bill also creates a recurring General Fund appropriation to fund the division’s operations.
Based on the bill text and available legislative history, the measure appears to be framed as an administrative and oversight enhancement rather than a controversial policy shift. There is no recorded committee debate or vote history in the provided materials, so no formal opposition or support is documented here. The bill’s structure and funding provision suggest a generally favorable posture toward strengthening legislative data analysis and transparency functions.
The main points of possible contention are the restoration of a legislative division, the $2 million recurring appropriation, and the expanded access to state databases and records by legislative staff. Privacy and data-security concerns may arise from the bill’s provisions allowing access to sensitive information, including health-related aggregate data and payroll systems, although the bill includes redaction and confidentiality safeguards. Another potential issue is the administrative burden on state agencies required to furnish information and comply with expanded reporting obligations.