The Idaho Spending Index serves to provide a fiscally conservative perspective on state budgeting while providing an unbiased measurement of how Idaho lawmakers apply these values to their voting behavior on appropriations bills. Each bill is analyzed within the context of the metrics below. They receive one (+1) point for each metric that is satisfied by freedom-focused policymaking and lose one (-1) point for each instance in which the inverse is true. The sum of these points composes the score for the bill.
Rating: (-3)
Bill Description: Senate Bill 1208 is an enhancement of $21,245,700 and 63.00 new full-time positions for the Department of Health and Welfare, Child Welfare (Youth Safety and Permanency) for fiscal year 2026. This legislation appropriates a total of $136,307,700 and 523.68 full-time positions to the agency.
Is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending, if any, inappropriate for the changes in circumstances, scope of the agency, or current economic environment? Conversely, is the continuation or growth in ongoing spending appropriate given any change in circumstances or economic pressures?
This legislation funds ongoing spending for the Child Welfare (Youth Safety and Permanency) Division at $124 million, growing from the base by over 50% in the last three years. This rate is much faster than what would be prescribed by inflationary pressures and growth.
Because of the accelerated growth in this budget the last three years, a truly fiscally responsible enhancement budget for FY2026 would reverse the growth with a negative appropriation — a reduction to the base budget.
(-1)
Does this budget perpetuate or expand state dependence on federal dollars, thereby violating principles of federalism? Conversely, does this budget actively reduce the amount of federal dollars used to balance this budget?
Senate Bill 1208 would bring the total amount of federal funding for the Child Welfare Division to $73,391,100, or 54% of the division’s total budget. This budget demonstrates significant dependence on federal spending. Of note, this budget adds more than $7 million of new federal spending in the enhancement piece.
(-1)
Does the budget grow government through the addition of new permanent FTPs or through funding unlegislated efforts to create new or expanded entitlement programs? Conversely, does this budget reduce the size of government staff and programs except where compelled by new legislation?
This budget substantially increases the number of FTPs within the division, with 63 new positions in this request. The breakdown is as follows:
The former agency director, Alex Adams. has said these positions are needed to reduce the cost of a currently dysfunctional and costly foster care system. But in an agency of nearly 2,800 employees, there was likely room to reprioritize services by cutting mission creep and taking other steps to avoid adding so many new personnel.
(-1)
Does this budget contain hidden fund transfers or supplemental expenditures that work to enact new policy or are not valid emergency expenditures? Conversely, are fund transfers only made to stabilization funds or are supplemental requests only made in the interest of resolving valid fiscal emergencies?
This legislation contains two supplemental requests. The first is for $14,126,900 to cover costs already incurred for congregate care services. Since these costs were incurred in the previous IDHW administration, this constitutes a valid use of an emergency supplemental.
(0)
