Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Social Services Block Grant topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House Appropriations Committee reviews $7.8 million plan for Social Services Block Grant

3117654 · April 25, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

House Appropriations Committee members on Thursday, April 24, 2025 heard an overview of the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) from Agency of Human Services Chief Financial Officer Rich Donahue and Financial Director Anna Swanson, who said planned spending for federal fiscal year 2025 totals $7,800,000, inclusive of a 10% transfer from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant.

House Appropriations Committee members on Thursday, April 24, 2025 heard an overview of the Social Services Block Grant (SSBG) from Agency of Human Services Chief Financial Officer Rich Donahue and Financial Director Anna Swanson, who said planned spending for federal fiscal year 2025 totals $7,800,000, inclusive of a 10% transfer from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant.

"SSBG is a flexible federal funding source," said Rich Donahue, the agency's chief financial officer, as he described the grant's purpose and the federal office that administers it. Anna Swanson told the committee her team manages approximately $2,000,000,000 in federal receipts for the agency.

The presenters said the breakdown for federal fiscal year 2025 reflects a $3,100,000 baseline in SSBG funds plus a $4,700,000 TANF transfer, producing a total planned expenditure of $7,800,000. Agency-provided allocations discussed at the hearing included roughly $5,700,000 for the Department for Children and Families (DCF); about $950,000 for the Department of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living (DAIL); $313,000 for the Department of Health; roughly $400,000 in the Agency central office for legal services; and about $409,000 for the Department of Mental Health.

Committee members pressed for more detail on line items. Donahue and Swanson described DCF allocations as covering three service categories, including counseling (about $279,000), daycare services for children, and foster care-related concrete supports (about $740,000) such as transportation to services, medical equipment not covered by Medicaid, and respite care. For DAIL, presenters said about $130,000 supports adult day services/personal care for people with permanent, severe physical disabilities, while roughly $817,000 supports protective services for older adults and helps fund guardianship when probate cannot appoint a private guardian.

Swanson said the Health Department allocation funds comprehensive family planning services that are granted to Planned Parenthood of Northern New England and that recipients must meet income restrictions and not be enrolled in Medicaid or the Medicaid Family Planning Initiative. The agency central office allocation was described as funding legal services delivered through Vermont Legal Aid. The Department of Mental Health allocation was described as supporting residential treatment provided through designated agencies.

Committee members asked whether the grant is applied for annually and how the agency measures program impact and accountability. Donahue said the agency submits SSBG expenditure plans annually to the federal cognizant agency, that a public hearing is held (typically in July), and that awards arrive quarterly based on the approved plan. He acknowledged that SSBG amounts have been largely level for years and said historical practice drives current distribution unless departments request change; staff offered to follow up with percentage breakdowns and additional impact metrics when available.

Members also asked about the TANF transfer. Agency staff said Vermont uses up to the allowed 10% TANF transfer to target daycare services within the SSBG plan. On the subject of potential federal reductions to Medicaid or other funding, AHS staff described currently speculative discussions in Congress and said there was no concrete federal action to which the state must yet respond.

The hearing concluded with the committee asking agency staff for follow-up information on program-level funding shares, measurement of outcomes, and the specific percentages that line items represent of program budgets.