Transcript Highlights:

• </c> schools um some of the performance schools um some of the performance evaluation<00:15:06.240><c
• So if you're looking at performance and you're actually evaluating, you can have training that you could
• >> It's performing.
• >> It's performing.
• >> It's performing.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The E.D. to designate schools based on their performance.
• It also allows us to evaluate those programs, right?
• Is on page 100 of Volume 1 of the policy and performance.
• A question: how do we evaluate innovation zones right now? Mr.
• success. evaluate success.

Transcript Highlights:

• energy efficiency programs overseen by the California Public Utilities Commission are budgeted and evaluated
• Our panelists have been asked to help us understand how program success is evaluated, what is working
• If there's still no substantial improvement, a performance improvement plan is initiated.
• So... ...how what I can do to my home and how I can make it high performance.
• So I think continuing to look at the statewide performance is important.

Summary: The Assembly Committee on Utilities and Energy held a hearing on how CPUC-overseen energy efficiency programs are budgeted and evaluated, with a focus on whether ratepayer-funded programs are delivering sufficient value. The chair framed the issue as not whether energy efficiency works, but how to measure success as programs have shifted from simple measures like lighting to more complex retrofits, electrification, and equity-oriented offerings. CPUC staff outlined the statutory framework, the four-year budget cycle, recent spending of about $795 million in 2025, and the use of the Total System Benefit (TSB) goal metric and the Total Resource Cost (TRC) test for cost-effectiveness, noting that some programs, such as equity and market-support offerings, are exempt from TRC requirements at the program level. Utility, regional network, implementer, and public-interest witnesses largely agreed that energy efficiency remains important for affordability, reliability, and decarbonization, but differed on how to evaluate it. PG&E and SoCal Regional Energy Network representatives emphasized portfolio-level management, the value of third-party implementers, and the need to keep cost-effectiveness at the portfolio or segment level rather than the individual program level. The Energy Coalition argued that the current TRC framework undervalues efficiency because it counts participant costs without fully capturing participant benefits, and urged changes to the metric and to how savings are credited. CalTF staff similarly said programs should receive credit for all savings they influence and that current rules can disadvantage efficiency relative to other demand-side resources. The Public Advocates Office countered that ratepayer-funded programs should produce benefits greater than costs, supported TRC as a useful check, and raised concerns about the growing share of budgets going to programs that have not demonstrated cost-effectiveness. Committee members repeatedly said the math was difficult to explain to constituents and pressed witnesses on whether participant costs should be included in TRC, how TSB is calculated, and whether a simpler or more consistent framework should be used across programs. CPUC staff said the relevant issues are already in two open proceedings, with the budget application proceeding expected to conclude in roughly Q2 or Q3 of the following year and broader policy questions remaining in a separate rulemaking. No votes were taken, and the hearing ended with general agreement that the portfolio should remain accountable, but continued disagreement over the best metric and how to balance affordability, equity, and grid benefits.

Transcript Highlights:

• as adults and for our children, what do we do to wrap our arms around our schools to improve the performance
• . of our lowest performing schools.
• And so for the last two years, no one has. had any sort of public accountability for performance and
• If they cut muster with our evaluation process, processes, then we make a recommendation to the state
• Evaluated. Evaluated. Thank you. I'm not a teacher. I'm a nurse. evaluated, and that's costs.

Keywords: 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We are seeing some really positive performance in terms of media.
• On the next slide, we will look at performance from New Pounds.
• Lastly, as we’ve seen some data from our nicotine evaluation survey, formerly called the Tobacco Evaluation
• Chair, Representative Tarasas, Josh Swantek, Policy and Performance Director.
• And from our nicotine evaluation...

Transcript Highlights:

• by the independent evaluator, other than just what the medical professionals stated.
• And Magali, who pays for that independent medical evaluator to come in?
• It just says it allows the guardian to request the patient be evaluated by an independent evaluator.
• It just says it allows the guardian to request the patient be evaluated by an independent evaluator.
• agency under a petition for court-ordered evaluation or treatment.

Keywords: 1182, all

Summary: The committee heard a long series of Senate bills, mostly on third-read consent, covering education, public safety, health, courts, labor, and water. Several bills were briefly explained and then pulled from consent for further discussion, including measures on public records review standards (SB 1078), sexually explicit materials in schools/libraries (SB 1435 and SB 1567), burial costs in death cases (SB 1135), military flags in HOAs/COAs (SB 1184), court-ordered treatment guardianship (SB 1243), standardized state hiring (SB 1665), released-time religious instruction (SB 1741), firearm safety instruction in schools (SB 1424), student participation in extracurriculars after certain convictions (SB 1475), Celebrate Freedom Week (SB 1572), federal scholarship-granting organizations/vouchers (SB 1142), immigration-related arrest notifications (SB 1055), defamation standards (SB 1099), peace officer certification for military police veterans (SB 1107), mandatory reporting of child abuse/neglect directly to DCS (SB 1127), attorney licensing and discipline issues (SB 1148 and SB 1039), concealed weapons on college campuses (SB 1068), and firearm muffling devices/silencers (SB 1069). Members also raised constitutional, policy, and school-safety concerns on several of these bills, while supporters emphasized alternative pathways for students, veterans, and workers, and tighter reporting or licensing rules. Other bills were described without extended debate, including claims against the state for unpaid contracted services (SB 1097), workers’ compensation death benefits for surviving spouses who remarry (SB 1136), burial expense increases (SB 1135), state agency web pages for internal guidance (SB 1586), court-ordered treatment procedures and service of process in mental health cases (SB 1113), medical examiner authorization (SB 1123), tribal MOUs with DCS (SB 1125), controlled-substance scheduling conformity with federal classifications (SB 1188), EMT personal information protections (SB 1193), mammography notice updates (SB 1318), assisted-living referral disclosures (SB 1477), accommodation school GED instruction for 11th graders and students over 16 (SB 1166), credit enhancement board continuation (SB 1422), school district and charter school obligations related to religious release time (SB 1741), school firearm safety instruction (SB 1424), and school civics/freedom-week instruction (SB 1572). The committee also heard bills on CPA certification pathways (SB 1181), insurance adjuster licensing (SB 1415), county voter-registration rules online (SB 1040), campaign address privacy (SB 1259), federal land acquisition notification (SB 1281), water supply/demand assessments (SB 1202), environmental compatibility for power plants and small modular reactors (SB 1418), and groundwater recovery rules (SB 1785). The meeting ended with announcements and a brief recognition of Rep. Stephanie Hamilton with an “Affordability Award.” No final votes are shown in the transcript excerpt; instead, many bills were either left on consent, pulled for later discussion, or flagged for closed caucus. The chair then asked guests to leave so members could hold a closed caucus.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's typically where the students show their best performance.
• as opposed to ELA performance.
• as opposed to ELA performance.
• Because what we're talking about is the art of human performance.
• Because what we're talking about is an art of human performance.

Summary: The Senate Committee on Pre-K through 12 Education received a Department of Education presentation from Deputy Commissioner Juan Copa on Florida’s K-12 assessment system, including FAST progress monitoring, end-of-course exams, science, writing, alternate assessments, English language acquisition testing, and VPK progress monitoring. Copa reported year-over-year gains in ELA and mathematics, noted that end-of-course and science results also improved, and explained how assessment data are used for school grades, third-grade promotion, graduation requirements, and other accountability measures. He also reviewed the independent study required by SB 1048, which recommended keeping PM3 as the primary accountability measure, proceeding cautiously on further test-length reductions and remote testing expansion, and using PM1/PM2 only as supplemental evidence in limited cases. Committee members focused on whether the new system is improving student outcomes enough, what supports teachers and schools need to use the data effectively, and how Florida compares nationally. Chancellor Dr. Burns said the department is emphasizing implementation of the new standards, high-quality instructional materials, coaching, professional learning, collaboration, and school improvement support, and also pointed to resiliency education standards and mental health supports. Copa said Florida’s latest NAEP results remain mixed but still generally outperform the nation in some grades, while members pressed for more information on best practices, other states’ approaches, and how districts are using the data. Several members requested follow-up information, including the independent review report, breakdowns of PM1/PM2/PM3 results by grade and subgroup, details on VPK outcomes by provider type and full-day versus half-day programs, and data on use of the CLT versus SAT/ACT for graduation concordant scores. The committee also discussed third-grade retention outcomes, computer-based testing, district assessment calendars, and whether some districts still administer additional local testing. No votes were taken on legislation, and the meeting adjourned after Senator Davis moved to adjourn.

Transcript Highlights:

• The only question I had is: I don't see any way—do we ever evaluate LFC?
• We haven't done evaluations in I don't know how long.
• I don't know if we should evaluate just the director, I don't know if we should evaluate just the director
• So, I mean, we're calling for evaluations of every department.
• And I do recall there being performance reviews.

Bills: SB190, HB247, HB8

Keywords: cancer treatment, revenue bonds, Gila Regional Medical Center, Nor-Lea General Hospital, healthcare funding, capital outlay, capital projects, appropriations, reversion, encumbrance, reauthorization, reappropriation, general fund, capital development and reserve fund, tribal infrastructure project fund, Department of Finance and Administration, DFA, state board of finance, severance tax bonds, tax-exempt bonds

Transcript Highlights:

• So I'll find out from my end what discretion... ...evaluated.
• So that evaluation is happening by the receiver's office, and as they complete that evaluation, we will
• Yeah, I believe there's been some mental health evaluations.
• Yeah, I believe there's been some mental health evaluations.
• Well, I'm not just talking about the evaluations.

Summary: The Senate Budget Subcommittee heard presentations from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG), California Correctional Health Care Services (CCHCS), the California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM) program, and the Coleman mental health receivership. The hearing focused on correctional health care, reentry, aging incarcerated populations, and the state’s progress toward compliance in the Plata and Coleman receiverships. Members also discussed the OIG’s intake complaint workload and medical inspection findings, as well as broader questions about staffing, vacancies, and the cost of court oversight. The OIG requested $275,000 General Fund for two permanent positions in its intake processing unit, citing a sharp rise in complaints from 3,200 in 2022 to 7,860 in 2025. OIG officials said complaints are categorized by issue and prison, prioritized by urgency, and generally responded to within 30 days, but they do not track complaint “validity” rates. The medical inspection unit reported that in cycle seven, case review performance was generally adequate while policy compliance was often inadequate; the lowest-scoring areas included emergency services, medication management, and health care environment. Members asked for more detailed reporting on complaint types, priority levels, and systemic issues. CCHCS described rising health care costs driven by an aging prison population, staffing vacancies, and contract medical expenses. Officials said more than 80% of the budget is personal services, and they are using hiring events, social media outreach, and expanded classifications to reduce vacancies. CalAIM officials reported early implementation success in pre-release and reentry services, including 89% Medi-Cal activation at release, 87% assigned managed care plans, 88% reentry care plans, and 59% warm handoffs, with about 169,000 claims submitted and $14.7 million reimbursed. The LAO noted that the Plata medical receivership has increased per-person costs and that the state should continue oversight while seeking ways to reduce vacancies and expand federal reimbursement opportunities. For the Coleman mental health receivership, the receiver’s office requested $33.9 million from the Mental Health Special Deposit Fund, including $8.2 million for receiver office staffing and $25.3 million to make court-ordered bonus payments permanent. The LAO supported continued oversight but recommended additional steps to address vacancies, including greater out-of-state recruitment, expanded telemental health, and possible consolidation of mental health services. The LAO also recommended reducing the telemental health staffing request and monitoring its effects. Members questioned the long-term cost of receiverships, the pace of compliance, and whether more detailed benchmarks and staffing data should be provided. No formal votes were taken during the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• So it performs in the lock approach.
• </c><01:10:15.679><c> the</c> components, but also uh evaluate the components, but also uh evaluate the
• </c> reports and closeout evaluations reports and closeout evaluations for<01:41:34.560><c> monitoring
• </c> performance were satisfactory. performance were satisfactory.
• </c> the evaluations were completed. the evaluations were completed.

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Lessard-Sams Outdoor Heritage Council met on May 27, 2026, approved the January 7 minutes and the day’s agenda, and reported no conflicts of interest. The executive director gave staff updates, including introductions of new staff member Cara Castanza and DNR liaison Jason Co., both of whom were welcomed by the council. Members were also informed about three minor easement/conveyance matters in the packet, including a small Bowser easement impact with about $1,600 returned to the Outdoor Heritage Fund, a Minnesota Land Trust easement request involving a DNR trout stream easement, and an access easement revision in Itasca County. The council also noted several upcoming dedication events and a June field tour in southeast Minnesota beginning in Winona on June 16, with visits to Whitewater WMA, bluff prairie and stream sites, and a river segment if a boat is secured. A major agenda item was a legislative session recap on the Outdoor Heritage Fund portion of Senate File 2077, the omnibus Outdoor Heritage Fund, Legacy, and Lands bill. Staff reported that all council recommendations were incorporated into the bill, which passed both chambers on May 17 and was expected to be signed by the governor. The fiscal year 2027 Outdoor Heritage Fund recommendations covered 53 programs totaling about $188.9 million, with the February forecast increasing the appropriation slightly so the final total was about $191.16 million; eligible programs were proportionately increased. Staff also highlighted a few changes made during the legislative process, including adjustments to the Roso Lake rehabilitation phase three project, the conservation partners legacy grant language, and statutory provisions affecting the council. The recap also covered policy changes in the bill: a public member term limit of eight years, with a short vacancy exception and transition rules for current members; a revised executive director hiring process allowing the Legislative Coordinating Commission to provide support while preserving the council’s final hiring authority and permitting closed meetings for candidate discussions; and an extension of the Upper Mississippi River invasive carp deterrent design deadline to June 30, 2027. Members discussed the Roso Lake amendment at length, with Senator Lang and Representative Burkel explaining that the added delay and injunction-related language were intended to address local concerns and preserve the council’s process while litigation proceeds. The meeting ended without any additional formal action beyond receiving the updates and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• We are in the process of evaluating alternatives now through that process.
• We are in the process of evaluating alternatives now through that process.
• So there is a California regulatory requirement that sets deadlines for our evaluation.
• Thank you. requirement that sets deadlines for our evaluation. Rep.
• . on the road and the effect on the environment have not yet been scientifically evaluated.

Bills: HB2421, HB1652, HB2367, HB2284

Keywords: 6PPD, tires, environmental impact, public health, chemical regulation, HB1652, Salish Sea Protection and Marine Clean Fuels Act, marine fuel, low-sulfur fuel, sulfur emissions, ocean-going vessels, shipping, maritime pollution, air quality, particulate matter, Department of Ecology, port visit, regulated waters, fuel switching, vessel emissions

Transcript Highlights:

• The development of the box and whisker plots was one of several analyses DBS&A performed to evaluate
• As I said, the federal agencies perform environmental analysis.
• That's the environmental evaluation. We would require financial assurance.
• It's also a portion of the... ...our federal partners through the NEPA evaluation.
• It's one of our performance measures to inspect all permits that we have issued.

Transcript Highlights:

• So finally, I just want to say that this requires a reporting mechanism by 2027 to evaluate the impact
• This bill requires that we revert back to normalcy and submit a report by 2027 to evaluate the impact
• But for those that didn't perform at that time, they will never have that opportunity.
• You know, regardless of... ...where the school may not be performing.
• But regardless of how that school is performing, if it is not performing well, you can be barred; it's

Bills: HB293, HB 1173, HB3753, HB4999, HB5696, SB2145, HB5689, HB5690, HB5694, HB5698, HB293

Keywords: HB 293, Texas housing tax credits, low-income housing, affordable housing, private activity bonds, PAB, qualified allocation plan, TDHCA, Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs, state representative objection, housing development approval, municipal notice, county commissioners court, extraterritorial jurisdiction, LIHTC, bond-financed housing, homelessness, housing services, Texas Department of Housing, municipal programs

Transcript Highlights:

• I'm not going to go over all the evaluation criteria.
• Unfortunately, LA RISE, which was evaluated by an external evaluator between 2015 and 2018, did not lead
• The independent evaluation, the Crow study, that was... ...25-26.
• Number one, as we said, perform an audit of that.
• There's no reason for us to have an audit of an audit performed.

Summary: The Assembly Budget Subcommittee 5 on State Administration heard presentations from Go-Biz and the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation on the Governor’s budget proposals. Go-Biz described California Jobs First, the state’s 10-year economic development strategy, and emphasized support for small businesses, workforce development, and targeted investment in sectors such as ag tech, life sciences, semiconductors, and advanced manufacturing. Members raised concerns about federal policy changes, tariffs, tourism, housing, child care, and whether state incentives are truly additive; Go-Biz responded that it tracks federal actions closely, works with chambers and advocates, and uses programs like California Competes to target jobs that would not otherwise come to California. The committee then reviewed the proposal to restore the California Competes grant program with $60 million. Go-Biz said the grant would help businesses that cannot use the nonrefundable tax credit, and explained the program’s five-year contracts, milestone-based awards, and recapture provisions. The Legislative Analyst’s Office said the grant could be effective but recommended stronger oversight and clearer eligibility criteria, while also noting the 30% cap in trailer bill language may be too restrictive given the smaller funding level. Public testimony supported the grant and suggested considering refundability or transferability for the tax credit to broaden access for smaller and startup businesses. Members also heard the CHIPS-related proposal for $25 million to support Natcast’s semiconductor design and collaboration facility in Sunnyvale. Go-Biz and public witnesses argued the state investment would help secure a major federal research facility, retain engineering talent, and leverage billions in broader investment, while the LAO recommended rejecting the item because of its dependence on uncertain federal funding and the state’s budget condition. The committee also considered a $17 million continuation of CA RISE, which supports employment social enterprises; Go-Biz and several grantees cited strong job placement and workforce outcomes, while the LAO recommended rejection absent a more rigorous evaluation, noting prior LA RISE evidence did not show long-term employment gains. Finally, the Department of Financial Protection and Innovation presented budget requests for IT security and rent increases, and a trailer bill to raise fees across several programs. DFPI said decades-old fee schedules, inflation, and new regulatory responsibilities have created a structural deficit and warned the department could face insolvency without adjustments. The LAO recommended approving the fee increases only on a three-year limited-term basis and asked for more detailed revenue plans for programs not covered by the proposal, so the Legislature can assess actual collections and market impacts before making the changes permanent.

Transcript Highlights:

• We're evaluating quality.
• tasks, we also use performance measures.
• They get paid and evaluated by the same person.
• Evaluate if some agencies need organic capabilities.
• Evaluate if some agencies need organic capability.

Keywords: 908, all

Transcript Highlights:

• evaluations evaluations and<00:04:18.799><c> conducted</c><00:04:19.359><c> survey</c><00:04:19.760>
• </c> to train employees on how to perform to train employees on how to perform grant<00:18:54.280><c>
• </c> the performance management process. the performance management process.
• </c> um and BHS while performing the audit. um and BHS while performing the audit.
• evaluation, Um a program evaluation, um<01:45:40.360><c> those</c><01:45:40.800><c> folks,</c><01:45:

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• First on the agenda is evaluating competency.
• In terms of evaluation services...
• I had to get them evaluated.
• An evaluation for competency is not a full evaluation for AOT.
• 90 days before the evaluations.

Transcript Highlights:

• Commission, the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, and the review of the Sports and Tourism Authority's performance
• the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology, and for the review of the Sports and Tourism Authority's performance
• Today I'll present key information from our September 2021 report that included the performance audit
• All right, in addition to the performance audit findings, the sunset review also evaluated the department
• This will be my sixth performance audit.

Keywords: 1182, all

Transcript Highlights:

• I think Washington State has had a performance-based regulation, but in some sense, every state has performance-based
• So putting a cap on rates is a form of performance-based regulation.
• DWP is going to evaluate whether or not there is existing capacity on the circuit.
• So we will evaluate undergrounding as an option to solve risk on particular circuits.
• Long-lived safety investments should be evaluated for low-cost public-interest financing.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Um, it would be supported by the Joint Legislative Committee and Performance Evaluation peer committee
• </c> legislative committee and performance legislative committee and performance evaluation evaluation
• evaluation um<00:04:21.199><c> peer</c><00:04:21.519><c> committee</c><00:04:22.720><c> and</c><00:04
• We've seen a lot of improved performance with our K-12 institutions over the last several years.
• </c><00:06:50.880><c> um</c><00:06:50.960><c> with</c> a lot of improved performance um with a lot of

Keywords: Universities and Colleges - Room 216, 2 February, 2026; 4:30 PM, 925, all