Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Corrections Finance Medical topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DOC describes population‑driven per‑diem costs and warns of steep medical contract risk
Summary
Analysts told lawmakers the Department of Correction’s county and out‑of‑state placement and medical services costs are rising because of population changes and medical utilization; DOC warned that a failed contract negotiation could increase medical costs 30–40%.
The Department of Correction told the committee Feb. 4 that a significant portion of near‑term budget pressure comes from population shifts and higher medical utilization for people in custody housed in county jails and out‑of‑state facilities.
Analyst Noah Peterson said the county and out‑of‑state placement and medical services divisions have no FTP and consist entirely of operating costs tied to per‑diem charges and a contracted medical services provider. He summarized recent movements: a population‑driven cost increase of about $2.96 million in a prior year offset by a supplemental reduction, then a $1.92 million increase in FY25; a medical utilization supplemental of $5.96 million to cover higher than expected usage; and an FY26 ongoing population adjustment request of $4.03 million to reset the base for projected populations.
Per‑diem structure and cause: The committee discussed per‑diem rates for county housing, which the director said are set in Idaho code to encourage timely state pickup from county jails. Noah Peterson explained typical county per‑diems are $57.50 for stays of seven days or fewer and $77.50 for day eight and beyond; out‑of‑state per‑diems were listed at about $84.45. Peterson said the primary driver of year‑to‑year cost swings is the length and volume of stays, not changing per‑diem rates.
Medical contract negotiating risk: Peterson told lawmakers DOC is negotiating with its current medical contractor; if negotiations succeed the agency projects roughly a 10% increase to the contract cost. If negotiations fail and the agency must rebid, DOC projected a potential 30%–40% increase in the medical contract price.
How DOC explained the quantities: ‘‘The difference . . . is to account for the difference between what was originally projected and what the agency is now currently projecting,’’ Peterson said, describing why the supplemental asks reflect updated population forecasts. He emphasized the daily per‑diem charge assumptions have not changed; the cost increases stem from higher utilization and population mix.
Ending: DOC said it will continue contract negotiations and provide updated projections. Lawmakers sought details about how per‑diems are set and asked for supporting documentation; analysts offered to supply that information. No formal appropriation action occurred during the hearing.
