Idaho corrections seeks ongoing funding for Recidiviz tools, transparency and training in management services budget

The Idaho Department of Correction asked the Joint Finance Preparations Committee on Feb. 4 to fund ongoing costs for a data‑integration partnership, public‑access and legal research subscriptions, and training equipment inside its Management Services Division.

The request centers on a continuing appropriation for Recidiviz, a nonprofit technology partner the department says has already built case‑triage and analytical tools for probation and parole. The department also requested ongoing subscriptions for GovQA (public records management) and LexisNexis (legal research), plus modest one‑time purchases for training mannequins and desktop replacements.

The management division oversees agency administration, fiscal and budget staff, facility and inmate placement functions. Noah Peterson, budget and policy analyst with the Legislative Services Office, told the committee the management services division has 37 FTP and that roughly 60% of its expenditures are operating costs and 40% personnel. He outlined the agency’s request for an appropriation of $910,000 from the general fund to continue work with Recidiviz and $668,100 for transparency software and related items.

Director Josh Tewalt described Recidiviz to the committee as “probably the most transformative partnership we’ve entered into as an agency in my entire tenure.” He said the nonprofit aggregates data from disparate, outdated correctional systems to produce overlays and dashboards that help probation officers prioritize caseloads and supervisors identify outliers. “They create overlays, not necessarily a software differently, not just structured data that's in a spreadsheet,” Tewalt said, adding the platform reduces manual back‑end casework and allows the department to “account for that in a more real time and dynamic way.”

Senators and representatives asked for evidence of return on investment and whether Recidiviz constrains the department’s ownership or control of data. Peterson said he did not have hard ROI figures at the hearing; Tewalt said the department controls its data through data‑sharing agreements and that Recidiviz pulls data from the department’s systems rather than recreating it. Tewalt also said every dollar the state spends on Recidiviz is leveraged with private philanthropic matching dollars.

Committee members asked whether the agency compared Recidiviz with other vendors. Tewalt answered that Recidiviz’s approach—pulling existing operational data with minimal new data entry and working directly with staff—was distinct from off‑the‑shelf systems that require process changes to fit the product. He said the department would provide dashboards and comparative information to the committee.

On transparency and access, Tewalt outlined a $58,700 ongoing cost for GovQA to manage more than 6,000 public records requests annually, and a $69,700 ongoing LexisNexis subscription to provide inmates digital access to court materials. He also described an ongoing $250,000 request for customization and upgrades to the department’s offender management system (Atlas) and $90,000 for an Access to Courts (ATC) database to help residents navigate filings and packet preparation.

Peterson and the director said some requests were recommended by the governor; one additional requested item the governor added was $85,000 one‑time to pilot a special assistant U.S. attorney position for North Idaho focused on drug trafficking.

The committee did not take a vote on these requests during the session. Several members asked the analysts and the department for follow‑up materials: hard data on Recidiviz outcomes and dashboards the department uses for supervision and officer‑level analysis.

The discussion on Recidiviz, transparency subscriptions and training equipment will move to staff follow‑up and possible appropriation decisions later in the budget process.