Transcript Highlights:

• We'll hear a second evaluation update on November 1, and then a final evaluation report is due on September
• the reliability of the evaluation process.
• Evaluations is that you're all sensing. Great.
• So the teacher evaluations are critical.
• our teacher evaluation system.

Transcript Highlights:

• Um um as as good program evaluations.
• just done as a um a program evaluation just done as a um a program evaluation in<00:15:28.800>
• staff for broader evaluations.
• Um you for uh broader um evaluations.
• can you evaluate can you evaluate if<00:37:50.160> we're<00:37:50.400> if<00:37:50.640

Keywords: 919, house, all

Summary: The Legislative Audit Commission Evaluation Subcommittee met on October 6, 2025, to choose additional program evaluation topics for the Office of the Legislative Auditor. Deputy Legislative Auditor Jody Mson Rodriguez explained that the commission had previously selected seven topics from an initial list of 11, with background papers already prepared on five of those items, and that the subcommittee was now being asked to select five more topics for background papers before narrowing the full set to four recommendations later in the fall or early spring. Members discussed several possible topics, especially emergency medical services, non-emergency medical transportation, MinnesotaCare eligibility, child care assistance, medical assistance fraud prevention, and U.S. Bank Stadium. David Kersner of OLA said emergency medical services and non-emergency medical transportation are distinct programs, and noted the EMS topic was evaluated in 2022 while non-emergency medical transportation had not been reviewed since 2011. Auditor Judy Randall said MinnesotaCare eligibility, child care assistance, and medical assistance fraud prevention are better suited to OLA’s financial audit division or special review unit rather than program evaluation, and that financial audits and special reviews do not require Legislative Audit Commission nomination. On process, Mson Rodriguez said the subcommittee had already met its minimum required selections under the commission’s policy and was free to choose additional topics. The discussion also covered whether to broaden the stadium topic beyond U.S. Bank Stadium; staff said the U.S. Bank financing structure alone would be a major undertaking, but they could help craft a future topic focused on maintenance across multiple facilities. No final vote or motion was taken in the portion of the meeting provided, and the chair indicated the committee would continue nominations and discussion.

Transcript Highlights:

• are evaluated for special education services.
• On the evaluation, I think you said your evaluation is currently running $3,000? $2,000-$3,000.
• evaluations to make sure we get our evaluations done in a timely manner.
• That full initial individual evaluation, but we do re-evaluations every three years on students.
• So this funding proposal is only looking at reimbursing that initial evaluation, but we do many evaluations

Bills: SB568, SCR5, SB57, SB1447, SB27, SB24

Keywords: special education, funding, individualized education program, visual impairments, accessibility, support services, state education code, SCR 5, Senate Concurrent Resolution 5, Texas School for the Deaf, TSD, Robert Rives, gymnasium naming, building naming, honorary resolution, commemorative resolution, deaf education, hard of hearing, Gallaudet University, alumni hall of fame

Transcript Highlights:

• And then the evaluation of fitness—these are the folks that really haven't been evaluated for unfit or
• <00:29:52.000> of<00:29:52.240> fitness evaluation of fitness evaluation of fitness um<
• evaluation of fitness. evaluation of fitness. >> That's<00:33:56.399> correct.
• So I need a 704 evaluation.’ Why can’t they stay in DCR while they are being evaluated?”
• the people who need to be evaluated. the people who need to be evaluated.

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The briefing focused on the Hawaii State Hospital’s overcrowding, construction defects in the new addition, and how Act 26 and related court-ordered processes are affecting admissions and discharges. The chair said the hospital has become increasingly forensic-focused, has lost beds after the closure of Kahimohala, and may face further costs and possible litigation over the defective addition. Hospital and Department of Health officials said they are working with the attorney general and contractors on repairs, and that the hospital is currently using all 292 licensed beds, including 13 waiver beds, while average daily census last fiscal year was 376. Officials explained that the high census is driven by both increased admissions and discharge barriers. They said the loss of Kahimohala returned patients to the state hospital, and that Act 26-related petty misdemeanor cases are contributing to admissions. They also said limited lower-level placement options delay discharges. Hospital staff reported that many patients are repeat admissions, about 22% were unhoused before admission, and a significant share are in categories such as fitness-to-proceed evaluations and conditional-release violations. They said these groups could potentially be reduced if evaluations were done elsewhere and if more community or supportive housing were available. The chair and senators questioned whether some fitness-to-proceed detainees need to be held at the state hospital at all, and whether the Clark consent order requires transfer to the hospital. The attorney general’s office said the Clark injunction does not govern unfitness-to-proceed cases; instead, the requirement comes from state statute, and the statute could be changed. Director Johnson said DCR cannot keep such detainees because the court orders them into the custody of the Department of Health, and the department cannot provide the needed therapeutic level of care in a correctional setting. The discussion also emphasized co-occurring substance use and mental illness, especially among petty misdemeanor defendants, and the need for supportive housing and a decompression plan to reduce readmissions and free beds for civil commitments.

Transcript Highlights:

• criteria and proposals are evaluated against that.
• We don't have a program evaluation division.
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which?
• We may not be able to evaluate every program, but how do we select which programs we're going to evaluate
• But it seems like they're evaluating programs in that section.

Summary: The task force approved the March 25, 2026 minutes as amended, striking language about contracting with a security vendor. Members then reviewed a draft bill on concessions procurement (LC 27.0161), which would raise the competitive solicitation threshold from $25,000 to $50,000, allow requests for proposals in addition to bids, update language for vending and merchandising machines, and clarify where concession proceeds are deposited. OMB explained the bill and said it was open to further changes, including language to address artificial fragmentation, clarify which government entities are covered, and possibly set contract-length limits. Members raised questions about whether the bill would apply to school districts, park districts, airports, and other political subdivisions, and about whether concession agreements could direct proceeds to nonprofits or other secondary recipients; OMB said the statute is intended to require proceeds to go to the government entity’s operating fund or general fund. OMB also reported on other survey suggestions. It said a proposed general authority for agencies to create pre-qualified architect/engineering vendor pools would not move forward, because the existing authority is best limited to high-volume agencies. On legal notices, OMB said it had made progress with the North Dakota Newspaper Association on modernizing online notices, improving ADA compliance, and discussing rate and definition changes. On click-through agreements, OMB and the Attorney General’s office concluded no statutory change was needed after revising internal guidance; the $20,000 threshold was described as a practical cutoff for adhesive, nonnegotiable software terms. OMB also said issues raised by the Center for Distance Education on alternate procurements and food/beverage expenditures had been resolved through policy clarification. The University System gave a brief update on its collaboration with OMB and said it was continuing to review concessions, surplus property, and capital project statutes with all institutions involved. The task force then discussed a draft bill on requirements for new or expanded spending, intended to require agencies to identify program purpose, needs, alternatives, success measures, and budget details, and to report on outcomes over time. Members and staff debated whether OMB or Legislative Council should collect and report the information, how much should be real-time versus periodic, and whether the bill should include full implementation costs for pilot programs. Legislative Council staff said the new program evaluation division is still being built out, that staffing remains limited, and that the office plans to continue working with OMB and the executive branch to refine the proposal before the next meeting. No final action was taken on the draft bills beyond directing further work and follow-up for the next meeting.

Transcript Highlights:

• So to evaluate these mechanisms, we developed five evaluative criteria that are really intended to address
• Program evaluation study that is currently underway.
• In terms of the evaluation phase, the evaluation is underway.
• In terms of the evaluation phase, where the evaluation is underway, our draft and final report will be
• We're still evaluating it. So far, this has worked out pretty good. We're still evaluating it.

Keywords: 904, all

Transcript Highlights:

• We do not independently verify or evaluate the data. In 2024, 213 municipalities.
• We do not independently verify or evaluate the data.
• apply to each evaluation.
• How are we evaluating this?
• And that's what we'll evaluate using tax data to the extent that we can.

Summary: The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee met on September 17, 2025, in hybrid format. After roll call, the committee initially lacked a quorum and deferred approval of the July 15 minutes until Representative Berg arrived; the minutes were then adopted. Members also discussed the proposed 2026 JLARC meeting schedule, including possible changes to address crowded July meetings and the annual tax exemption review workload. Staff presented the annual lodging tax expenditures report, noting that 213 municipalities received distributions in 2024, with 91% reporting compliance, $114 million awarded for more than 1,700 activities, and no independent verification of the self-reported data. Several members questioned the value and usefulness of the report, and the executive committee indicated it may recommend removing the statutory reporting requirement. The committee then heard the preliminary performance audit of the Office of Privacy and Data Protection, which found the office meets its statutory responsibilities and has high user satisfaction, but recommended updating the statute to better match the office’s current capacity and focus and improving performance measures to reflect long-term privacy outcomes rather than outputs. Members asked about FERPA and other federal privacy laws, and OPDP staff said they provide general privacy training and consultation but not law-specific training unless requested. The committee adopted the final report on Washington State recreational boating programs without recommendation, after staff reported that boating revenues support both general government and boating activities and that no participating agencies submitted formal comments. Members asked about boater safety education and possible overlap among the six agencies involved; Parks staff said education has reached more than 500,000 boaters and that fatalities and incidents have declined. The committee also reviewed planned study questions for a JLARC review of Labor and Industries’ enforcement of farm worker laws, with members raising scope questions about the term “farm worker” versus “agricultural worker,” and for DNR’s Eastern Washington sustainable harvest calculation, which JLARC will review as DNR completes its recalculation. Finally, staff outlined the 2026 tax preference performance reviews covering seven preferences, and members asked about racial equity, environmental impacts, disclosure of beneficiary savings, and how the reviews will measure effectiveness; the meeting adjourned before noon.

Transcript Highlights:

• then a little bit about the evaluation then a little bit about the evaluation process<00:08:59.720
• familiar um that Commerce uh evaluates familiar um that Commerce uh evaluates the<00:09:04.519><
• at this point, and so we weren't able to do an evaluation or quantitative evaluation of that benefit
• <00:37:44.119> as to the evaluations as to the evaluations as such<00:37:47.160> um
• Commerce and then once the evaluations Commerce and then once the evaluations are<00:40:47.640><

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• evaluations, neurocognitive evaluations, or psychological evaluations.
• <00:07:28.120> to letter to professional evaluations to letter to professional evaluations
• It's just defining the types of evaluations. Evaluations are testing.
• So there's some mix-up about evaluations, what constitutes as an evaluation.
• neurocognitive or functional evaluation neurocognitive or functional evaluation would<00:12:58.079

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Summary: The Judiciary Committee continued hearing several bills. HB 399 would create an additional district court judgeship in the First Circuit; it drew support from the Judiciary, Public Defender, State Bar, Financial Services Association, and others, and there was no opposition. HB 560 would appropriate funds for Judiciary contracts with community-based organizations; many service providers and coalition representatives testified in support, emphasizing the growing gap between contract payments and the actual cost of services, especially for domestic violence, youth, legal aid, and other vulnerable populations. HB 648 would establish a two-year pilot program in the First Circuit probate and family court for guardianship and conservatorship-related resources; the Office of the Public Guardian and disability advocates supported it, while suggesting amendments to clarify that the bill refers to professional evaluations, including psychological, neurocognitive, or functional evaluations, rather than just physicians’ letters. The committee also heard HB 990, which appropriates funds for claims against the state, with the Attorney General noting 21 claims totaling about $6.5 million plus two additional resolved claims and requesting corrections to identify two matters as judgments rather than settlements. HB 991 would clarify that the Attorney General may conduct FBI fingerprint-based background checks on contractors and employees; it was supported by the Hawaii Criminal Justice Data Center and others, with an amendment to include subcontractors. HB 998 would provide that omissions or errors in citations do not require dismissal or reversal if they do not prejudice the defendant; the Attorney General and Honolulu Prosecutor supported it, while one testifier opposed it, and members discussed whether the language adequately protects due process and how it would apply when identifying information is unavailable. Finally, HB 1174 would address payment-under-protest lawsuits by allowing interest earned on certain funds to be paid in non-taxation cases if the claimant prevails and by setting procedures for premature filings. After testimony, the committee moved into decision-making and recommended passage of HB 399, HB 560, HB 648, HB 990, HB 991, HB 998, and HB 1174, generally with amendments where noted, including effective-date changes and the requested clarifications. The measures were adopted, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Figure out which ones made the most sense for us to evaluate.
• So to evaluate these mechanisms, we developed five evaluative criteria that are really intended to address
• We are currently underway with the evaluation process.
• In terms of the evaluation phase, the evaluation is underway.
• We're still evaluating it. So far, this has worked out pretty good. We're still evaluating it.

Summary: The committee began with member introductions, then heard a presentation on a draft final report studying alternative funding mechanisms for sidewalks and related pedestrian infrastructure. Consultants said current local funding sources are insufficient, with most jurisdictions unable to complete planned sidewalk networks within 50 years. They evaluated four options: a sidewalk utility fee, a modified transportation benefit district sales tax, a new real estate excise tax option, and expanded stormwater fee use for ADA sidewalk ramps. The consultants recommended authorizing the modified TBD sales tax and new REET option, considering a sidewalk utility despite legal uncertainty, broadening any authorization to all pedestrian improvements, and not pursuing the stormwater fee option. Members asked about legal authority, fairness, revenue adequacy, and whether jurisdictions had been consulted; the presenters said state enabling legislation would likely be needed for a sidewalk utility and that fairness could be defined either by direct benefit or by need. The committee then received an update on the 2025 assessment of city transportation funding needs. The consultants reported that city transportation revenues have grown in some local and federal categories since 2019, but state revenues have remained relatively flat and smaller cities are especially affected by declining fuel tax revenues and limited tax bases. They estimated annual city transportation needs at $4.25 billion, average annual spending at $1.89 billion, and a funding gap of $2.37 billion, larger than in the prior study because of updated data, inclusion of system improvements, and higher preservation costs. Draft recommendations focused on reducing costs and improving efficiency, preserving and increasing state support, and expanding local funding options, including preservation-first spending, a permanent federal fund exchange program, streamlined review processes, better coordination with WSDOT, possible property tax flexibility, and exploration of new local tools. Members raised questions about design standards, the role of density and transit, federal compliance, and whether the report would identify specific consolidation or process changes. The committee also heard a project update on evaluating zero-emission vehicle and electrification programs funded by the Climate Commitment Act. Consultants said they had reviewed roughly 23 programs and projects across seven agencies and were now evaluating options to improve delivery, including process improvements, reorganizing programs, or consolidating governance and administrative functions. Early findings highlighted staffing shortages, duplication and variation across agencies, differing levels of risk, and the challenge of coordinating climate priorities across agencies with other core missions. Members asked about program outcomes, administrative costs, whether some programs should have exit strategies, and how to strengthen the EV Coordinating Council. Finally, WSDOT provided an implementation update on its new public-private partnership authority under SB 5801, saying work is underway to prepare governance, legal, policy, and organizational structures ahead of the January 1, 2027 effective date.

Transcript Highlights:

• He was very interested in the evaluation.
• We saw this in our first evaluation of suicide prevention. evaluation of suicide prevention programs
• Um, last year we evaluated the truancy program.
• We got to evaluate that, and we finished the evaluation before the budget process was completed.
• who conducted the evaluation and what the baseline was.

Bills: SB197, HB140, SB214, HB214, HB147, HB270, SB73

Keywords: business regulation, nonprofit entities, electronic filing, merger agreements, limited liability companies, partnerships, property transfer, termination fees, HB140, private sewer systems, wastewater utilities, Public Service Commission, PSC jurisdiction, utility regulation, rate setting, rate consolidation, affiliated systems, common ownership, private utilities, sewer rates

Transcript Highlights:

• My family was subject to a child custody evaluation.
• The parents, the parents can agree to an evaluator or the judge can appoint an evaluator.
• 10 evaluations under supervision to be fully qualified to conduct child custody evaluations.
• And does the county pay for the child custody evaluator?
• Who had the, uh, corrupted child custody evaluator, Alyssa Sherry, do an evaluation on him and basically

Bills: HB116

Keywords: film industry, incentives, economic development, state funding, media production

Transcript Highlights:

• able to evaluate their outcomes.
• evaluations?
• In evaluation, is there a time limit on them?
• Legislatively mandated programs that are lacking evaluation.
• To my left is Josh Taffin, a Program Evaluator at the LFC.

Transcript Highlights:

• the pool to both do the full evaluation the pool to both do the full evaluation of<00:04:42.560>
• , >> So, once we've done the evaluation, >> So, once we've done the evaluation, determine
• Do you have an idea of what that evaluation will cost?
• that will be— >> Each building's evaluation, right?
• evaluation that will be >> each<00:10:01.760> building's<00:10:02.240> evaluation

Keywords: Call to Order: 00;15 Approval of Minutes: 01:22 Update on Generator replacement: 01:52 Update on Sheriff Fees: 13:28 Adjournment: 25:22, 958, all

Summary: The committee met for its fourth budget subreview session focused on personnel, public retirements, and finance. Members approved the minutes from the prior meeting and then heard from Finance Cabinet staff on two main items: a $7.5 million request related to generator systems and a sheriff’s fees budget request. The generator request was described as a preventive, life-cycle replacement and capacity-enhancement effort for 26 generators serving Frankfort-area state buildings, intended to protect continuity of government and expand beyond basic emergency power to support continuity of services. Members asked detailed questions about how many generators would be replaced, the cost per unit, the scope of the study, and whether the work could be phased. Staff said the $7.5 million would cover a full evaluation and any resulting engineering/replacement work, but the exact number of replacements was not yet known. They estimated the initial study would cost about $500,000 to $750,000, would take six to nine months once funded, and would produce building-by-building recommendations. Staff also said typical generator life cycles vary widely, often around 15 to 20 years but sometimes longer depending on run hours and usage. The committee then reviewed sheriff’s fees, with the Division of Local Government explaining that the state reimburses counties for several statutory sheriff-related costs, especially court security, which accounts for more than 90% of the claims. Staff said the current budget base is about $20 million, while actual spending has been running above $23 million, leading to a $3.5 million growth request to align the base with projected spending and reduce the need for non-general fund expenditure (NGE) adjustments. Members asked about claim volume, county participation, reimbursement controls, and whether the request reflected growth or underfunding; staff said all 120 counties submit claims, volumes have been fairly steady, and reimbursements are governed by statute and signed monthly certifications. No votes were taken on the requests, and the meeting adjourned after questions concluded.

Transcript Highlights:

• task force was charged with evaluating task force was charged with evaluating Kucky's<00:20:12.160
• We do the transcript evaluation.
• <01:00:04.960> The a re-evaluation is necessary. The a re-evaluation is necessary.
• adopted or if evaluation is necessary. adopted or if evaluation is necessary.
• child is having an initial evaluation. child is having an initial evaluation.

Keywords: 958, all

Summary: The committee heard presentations from the Family, Career and Community Leaders of America and the Governor Scholars Program. The FCCLA student speaker described how career and technical education helped her gain certifications, work in early childhood settings, and recognize a child who needed speech help, emphasizing support for CTE, FCCLA, and related student organizations. The Governor Scholars Program presentation, led by Dr. Jennifer Price with student speakers Max Corbett and Abigail Ziggler, focused on the program’s role in serving about 1,500 rising seniors each summer, its history since 1983, its statewide reach, and its impact on leadership development, college readiness, and keeping students connected to Kentucky. Members praised the students and program, and several shared personal stories about the program’s long-term benefits. Representative Camuel asked about funding, and Dr. Price said the program’s request was $2.1 million to maintain current enrollment levels of about 1,020 scholars for 2026; no vote was taken on that request during this segment. The committee then took up House Bill 498, sponsored by Representative Duvall, with Aaron Looper of Graduation Alliance testifying in support. A committee substitute was adopted after explanation. The substitute broadened eligibility for accredited providers to include public and nonprofit entities, allowed each county an opportunity to provide services with a $200,000 aggregate maximum per county, reduced the dollars per credit to serve more students, and made date corrections. Representative Duvall said the bill was a workforce measure developed from the Workforce Attraction and Retention Task Force and aimed at adults who lack a high school diploma but have two years or less remaining to graduate. Looper said the bill would create a pathway for adults to earn a regionally accredited high school diploma, paired with workforce and industry-recognized credentials, and stressed that it would not compete with GED programs, which are better suited for adults farther from graduation. He said the model is pay-for-performance, with providers paid only after milestones are completed, and that it would be available online, in person, or in hybrid form to improve rural access. In response to questions, he said students would not be charged fees, providers would handle transcript retrieval and remediation, and the program would include built-in accountability measures. He also said the budget request is $2 million per year, with the goal of maintaining the current level of service and eventually expanding if successful. Members asked about how the program differs from existing adult education options, access in all counties, and whether there are deserts in service availability; Looper said the online model and provider outreach are intended to address those gaps.

Transcript Highlights:

• To identify and evaluate children for special education services, the state follows federal and state
• consent is received, 35 more days to conduct the evaluation.
• the initial referral date for those evaluations, it does not The initial referral date for those evaluations
• , it does not track any information on referrals that did not result in an evaluation.
• and school districts are able to make that evaluation on their own for educational purposes.

Summary: The JLARC I-900 Subcommittee heard a State Auditor’s Office performance audit on special education services, focused on comparing student needs, district identification practices, and funding. Auditors said Washington does not appear to under-identify any particular population for special education, though districts face ongoing challenges with identification, documentation, staffing shortages, and inconsistent referral tracking. They explained that their analysis used statistical models because the true prevalence of disabilities is unknown, and found Washington districts generally clustered near the national average, with little evidence that any demographic group was systematically under-identified. The audit also found that special education funding has historically been insufficient, with districts collectively covering about $500 million in costs not paid by state or federal sources, and that districts spent about 26% more per student than they received in funding. Auditors noted recent legislative changes that removed the special education enrollment cap and changed the safety net process, but said it was too soon to assess their effects. Their recommendations to OSPI included clarifying what counts as an official special education referral, requiring districts to report referral data even when no evaluation follows, and ensuring the new statewide data system is developed with district input, training, and possibly a mandate for uniform use. OSPI staff said they concurred with the report and appreciated the work of the auditor’s office and JLARC. During member questions, Representative Paulette raised concerns that the audit did not directly examine prevalence of specific disabilities, such as autism and dyslexia, in vulnerable populations or compare Washington’s identification practices to medical and peer-reviewed prevalence data. Auditors responded that medical prevalence is not known in a systematic way, that educational eligibility differs from medical diagnosis, and that the report’s conclusions should not be read as proving no populations are under- or over-identified. No public testimony was offered, and the meeting adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Step four is evaluation and negotiation.
• Evaluation and negotiation, step four, which would be the evaluation and negotiation.
• And those evaluators have to have a comprehensive understanding of what they are evaluating.
• And those evaluators have to have a comprehensive understanding of what they are evaluating.
• honestly, I'm not sure who these evaluators are.

Summary: The subcommittee heard a panel on Florida’s IT procurement process from the Florida Digital Service, the Department of Management Services, and the Department of Financial Services. Witnesses walked through the procurement lifecycle, including planning, market research, solicitation, evaluation, award, implementation, and closeout, and emphasized the role of budget timing, contract managers, and subject matter experts. DMS described the state’s enterprise contracting system, noting more than 1,100 active vendor agreements, over 800 involving IT services, and the statutory requirement to request 25 quotes for certain IT purchases. DFS demonstrated the Florida Accountability Contract Tracking System (FACS), explaining how agencies upload contract and payment data and how the public can search contracts and related documents online. Members focused on accountability, transparency, and whether the state is getting the best products and vendors. Questions addressed how contracts are vetted, how technical evaluations are performed, how financial consequences are used for missed deliverables, how public records and confidential information are handled, and how the state screens vendors for foreign-concern or bad-actor issues. Witnesses said agencies rely on technical experts for evaluations, that contract terms should include measurable deliverables and meaningful financial consequences, and that agencies—not procurement staff—generally manage performance, though Florida Digital Service oversees large IT projects of $10 million or more. The committee then shifted to broader policy discussion, including Senate Bill 7026 and proposals to reorganize state IT governance. Several members argued for stronger centralization under a state CIO or similar enterprise authority, while others cautioned against abrupt restructuring and stressed the need for a transition plan. Members also raised concerns about workforce retention, consulting services, recurring project overruns, and the need for better planning and periodic monitoring. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with the chair thanking members and staff and adjourning the subcommittee.

Transcript Highlights:

• Uh, requests one evaluation specialist, and three in the first year, and three additional evaluation
• <00:20:57.400> unit evaluation unit evaluation unit right<00:20:59.559> now<00:20:59.720
• Did you evaluate programs? So is this person going to evaluate, or say—say you have this person.
• so that there is an ongoing evaluation so that there is an ongoing evaluation of<00:26:35.200>
• The self-evaluation, you know, who's going to evaluate yourself?

Keywords: 912, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• A formal evaluation is being conducted by Mathematica, as Dr.
• How does that evaluation process happen?
• So there will be a formal evaluation, and the interim evaluation report is just what came out.
• So there will be a formal evaluation, and the interim evaluation report is just what came out.
• So as evaluations are... Sure.

Summary: The hearing opened with remarks from the chair and members about recent federal cuts to public health, mental health, family planning, and Title X funding, with strong concern about the impact on California programs and providers. The committee then turned to the Department of State Hospitals, which presented its 2025-26 budget proposal of $3.4 billion, including new positions, capital improvements, and funding tied to increased patient costs and incompetent-to-stand-trial services. DSH reported major progress in reducing the IST waitlist and wait times, said it had met the court’s 28-day treatment benchmark for those without extenuating circumstances, and described workforce recruitment and retention efforts such as residency programs, fellowships, outreach, and hiring streamlining. Members asked about future IST referral trends, SB 1323’s effect on diversion and community treatment, and workforce lessons in high-cost regions; public comment urged reconsideration of county IST growth cap methodology in light of new criminal justice initiatives. The committee next received an informational overview of Proposition 1 and its changes to behavioral health funding and governance. The Legislative Analyst’s Office explained that Prop. 1 restructured county MHSA funding buckets, expanded the Commission for Behavioral Health, shifted prevention and early intervention responsibilities, and authorized a $6.4 billion bond, including $4.4 billion for behavioral health facilities through BHCIP. DHCS said it had released guidance for county integrated plans and was receiving extensive public comment. Members focused on BHCIP application requirements, especially letters of support and tribal projects, and raised concerns about whether DHCS’s implementation matched statutory intent. DHCS said it had authority to set application requirements and that tribal entities were treated differently because of sovereignty and funding structure. DHCS then updated the committee on BHCIP, the Behavioral Health Bridge Housing Program, and related bond implementation. The department said BHCIP had awarded about $1.7 billion across five rounds, with more than 130 projects and 223 distinct facilities funded, and that it was preparing to award the new bond funds after receiving nearly $8 billion in applications. The LAO’s assessment found that more than half of awards served at least 80% Medi-Cal enrollees, but also raised concerns that the regional allocation model could reinforce inequities, that the program had not sufficiently addressed the highest-need regions such as the southern San Joaquin Valley, and that smaller counties and less launch-ready applicants faced barriers. For bridge housing, DHCS said more than $1.1 billion had been awarded, serving over 5,000 people and supporting more than 2,000 operational beds, but the Governor’s budget proposes to eliminate Round 4 funding as the administration weighs other statewide investments and Proposition 1 implementation workload. Public commenters and members urged more accountability, better regional equity, stronger labor and community involvement, and caution about funding for for-profit psychiatric facilities. Finally, the committee heard on the Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. CalHHS and DHCS described CYBHI as a broad prevention- and equity-focused effort with more than 1,300 organizations funded, over $2.1 billion awarded, and multiple work streams spanning schools, community programs, workforce, and digital supports. DHCS highlighted school-based services, the fee schedule rollout, and digital platforms BrightLife Kids and Soluna, which it said are reaching users statewide and providing low-barrier access to coaching and support. Members and public commenters raised concerns about delays in school fee schedule implementation, the large share of funding going to digital tools, the need for more in-person services, and whether the initiative is sufficiently tracking outcomes and equity impacts. No formal votes were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• the Evaluation of Services. the Evaluation of Services. recognize<00:59:54.319> Representative
• <01:00:07.920> of Alabama Commission on Evaluation of Alabama Commission on Evaluation of
• evaluated. Is this correct? evaluated. Is this correct?
• evaluating for what?
• evaluate evaluate >> and<01:10:18.880> they're<01:10:19.199> evaluating<01:10:20.400

Keywords: 1136, house, all