Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Education Scholarships topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
State Board of Education outlines scholarship spending, requests funds for educator incentive and systems work
Summary
The Office of the State Board of Education and LSO staff briefed the committee on scholarship and grant programs, including a $1.375 million FY2026 request for the Bridging and Underserved Educator Incentive program and a $124,000 request for a software engineer to maintain scholarship databases.
Legislative Services Office and the Office of the State Board of Education briefed the Joint Finance‑Appropriations Committee on the Scholarships and Grants program Wednesday and described stable staffing, timing‑sensitive spending and requests for targeted enhancements.
Kevin Campbell, LSO analyst, said Scholarships and Grants administers the Opportunity Scholarship, the Bridging and Underserved Educator Incentive Program, the Armed Forces and Public Safety Officer Scholarship, GEAR‑UP related grants, and Idaho Work Study. The program is authorized for 1.35 FTP with no vacancies and roughly 99.5% of its spending is trustee and benefit payments; personnel is about 0.5% of expenditures.
Josh Whitworth, executive director of the State Board of Education, said the board relies on other office resources to manage customer service and some system support, and noted the program maintains public databases and user interfaces for students and parents. The board requested $1,375,000 for the Bridging and Underserved Educator Incentive program in FY2026 and a $124,000 enhancement for a software engineer to address an existing backlog of system maintenance.
Committee members asked about performance measurement and whether the programs are meeting recruitment and retention goals for rural and underserved school districts. Whitworth said some outcome information is available — cohorts and counts exist for the educator incentive program — and that the board will supply more detailed district‑level and retention data as requested.
No formal action was taken at the hearing; committee members requested follow‑up reports that disaggregate recipients and show retention outcomes in rural and underserved districts.
