Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fees It Sif topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Appropriators press DHHS on fee schedule, IT projects and opioid/SIF funding buckets
Summary
Senators asked DHHS to compile a full fee schedule, questioned IT project timelines and costs and clarified how the SIF and opioid settlement allocations flow into department spending and the larger state hospital funding package.
During the division's review, senators asked the Department of Health and Human Services to supply a comprehensive list of fees, detail two department IT projects and explain how opioid settlement and State Infrastructure Fund (SIF) dollars are shown in the draft bill.
Senator Matherin and others raised a recurring theme: many departmental fees are small and have not kept pace with costs. A committee member said he believed some fees had not been raised "since 1980." Donna Auckland responded that the department had compiled fee lists for prior studies and could provide an updated inventory showing where fees are charged and collected.
On IT, members said two major IT projects did not appear to have defined specifications, timelines or operational tails. One senator said he had emailed the state's information technology office (NDIT) and asked for more visible leadership to help the department define specifications, training and timelines. Committee members asked for a dedicated presentation on retiring legacy systems and on a $7.5 million item described as retiring technology from the mainframe; department staff agreed to provide a comprehensive IT briefing.
Committee members also discussed larger one-time funding lines in the bill. Donna Auckland explained section-level funding for the state hospital: "200,000,000 was coming from the fund and the section right below that section 16. There's 130,000,000 coming from a line of credit so between the two of them that makes up the $330,000,000." Senators asked whether that SIF bucket and ongoing costs for human-service zones might require adjusting the spending cap in future biennia; staff reminded the panel the bucket collects to $250 million per biennium and that the committee had adjusted the cap in a prior session.
Finally, the committee asked whether the opioid settlement funds flow through the attorney general and then to the department. The department confirmed the money passes through the attorney general and that a grant application process previously distributed funds; behavioral health staff can provide slides showing the recent distribution and grant recipients.
Ending: The department will provide a fee inventory, an IT project briefing (including retiring mainframe details), and additional slides showing opioid-settlement grant distributions and the SIF/line-of-credit accounting to help the committee evaluate ongoing and one-time spending assumptions.
