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: (-4)
Bill Description: Senate Bill 1165 is an enhancement of $261,400 and 0.00 new full-time positions for the Department of Health and Welfare, Behavioral Health Services for fiscal year 2026. This legislation appropriates a total of $146,143,800 and 757.41 full-time positions to the agency.
This legislation includes appropriations for the Divisions of Mental Health Services, Psychiatric Hospitalization, and Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention.
Does this budget incur any wasteful spending among discretionary funds, including new line items? Conversely, does this budget contain any provisions that serve to reduce spending where possible (i.e. base reductions, debt reconciliation, etc.)?
In this legislation, the Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention division is conducting a fund shift from federal to dedicated funds from personnel cost to trustee and benefits payments, moving a net of $140,000. This is due to the agency overspending on personnel costs. Idaho spent more than the 5% cap on administration by using federal grant funding from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Service Administration (SAMHSA). This prompted the SAMHSA to place Idaho on a remediation plan.
Rather than right-sizing program administration, the agency is shifting funding around to depend more on state dollars for administration and federal dollars for trustee and benefit payments. It is particularly concerning when even the federal government deems an agency’s spending practices as wasteful.
(-1)
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 Behavioral Health at $146,143,800, growing from the base by 29.3% in the last three years, which is 15 points faster than inflation.
A single agency contained in this appropriation, Mental Health Services, will receive $51,916,100; growing from the base by 10.0%. This rate is about four points slower than what would be prescribed by inflationary pressures and growth. The remaining two agencies, Psychiatric Hospitalization and Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention, both exceed the rate of inflation with their budget growth, by 23 and 47 percentage points, respectively.
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 — for the agencies exceeding this limit.
(-1)
Does this budget create permanent programs or Full-Time Positions (FTPs) using temporary funding?
This legislation provides $6.7 million as a supplemental for the FY 2025 fiscal year to implement a contract for the Idaho Behavioral Health Plan (IBHP). A portion of these funds were unspent due to delays in implementing this plan — that is, only 11.2% of this item, according to the budget motion. The remainder are other substance abuse and mental health block grants from the federal government used to cover the first year costs of the IBHP. These funds are one-time, drawing on the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), but it is unclear if these funds would be used for one-time costs for implementation. Rather, the motion states these funds would be used to “support the first year Idaho Behavioral Health Plan,” an ongoing expense.
(-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?
These agencies heavily rely on federal funding. Senate Bill 1165, perpetuates this dependency, appropriating the following federal funds to the agencies:
These amounts include several new appropriations of federal dollars, too. Specifically, the Mental Health Services Division will receive a $6.7 million supplemental appropriation for the IBHP in FY 2025 and a $261,400 appropriation for a grant increase for FY 2026. The funds for the 2026 fiscal year will be used to expand services in the program.
(-1)
