House committee hears ACES overview of evaluations on suicide prevention, corrections and education

The House committee heard a presentation from the Alabama Commission on Evaluation of Services (ACES) about the agency's work evaluating state programs and recommending changes to improve outcomes and efficiency.

ACES leaders framed the office as a small, nonpartisan oversight body that uses data and performance metrics to guide recommendations. Chairman Orr, who traced the effort’s origins to his time as a general-fund chair during the 2011 recession, said the office was intended to replace ‘‘meat‑cleaver’’ budget decisions with targeted reviews. ‘‘We were crawling for several years... now I truly believe... we're walking. We're not running, but we're walking,’’ he said.

Marcus, ACES’s director, told the committee the office relies on methodical evaluations and stakeholder review. ‘‘We use a scalpel, not a chainsaw,’’ Marcus said, describing ACES’s approach to studying programs before making recommendations.

Why it matters: ACES’s evaluations have prompted administrative changes and legislative attention in several program areas and can affect how state funds are allocated or restricted. Committee members pressed the office for data they could use in budgeting decisions and legislative oversight.

Key findings and work described - Office size and funding: ACES reported a staff of about five and annual funding ‘‘around $500,000–$600,000.’’ The commission includes legislative and executive appointees; ACES said the full commission totals 14 members including three House and three Senate legislative appointees, six gubernatorial appointees and two ex‑officio members (the finance director and a deputy fiscal officer). - Suicide prevention: ACES recommended structure and sustained funding for suicide prevention, including a statewide coordinator. The commission said it proposed a dedicated revenue mechanism tied to 988 support in its recommendations. - Corrections and correctional education: ACES evaluated community corrections and correctional education. The commission reported community corrections funding appeared ‘‘continuously overfunded by about 33% year over year’’ in some measures and that, following evaluation work, Ingram State Technical College became the sole statewide provider of correctional education in 2021. - Rural health scholarships: ACES found scholarship and loan‑forgiveness programs had accumulated roughly $6 million that was unused or held outside the state treasury for a period, limiting program reinvestment and effectiveness. Some programs produced high placement rates; others had low placement and a high cash‑out rate by participants. - Teacher workforce and K‑12 programs: ACES reported that turnover is concentrated among early‑career teachers and recommended targeting pay increases. ACES found teacher shortages are often localized by subject or region rather than statewide, with special education an exception. It also identified inefficiencies in the rollout of the TEAMS program, including a multiyear delay in automating applications that placed data entry burdens on local school districts. - Truancy: ACES evaluated a state truancy program that sought expanded funding and recommended pausing expansion until more accountability and outcome measures were in place; the office said it added budget language limiting administrative spending and requiring follow‑up reporting.

Process and engagement: ACES described a collaborative method: staff share draft findings with agencies under review, engage stakeholders and work with agencies on recommendations before publishing. The commission noted COVID‑era delays in hiring and staff growth and said it aims to expand staffing to increase capacity.

Next steps and public access: ACES staff encouraged committee members to review published reports and dashboards and said the commission would consider broader distribution to budget chairs and legislators. ACES’s reports and comparative dashboards are available on evidence.alabama.gov, the presentation noted.

Ending: Committee members asked for follow‑up materials on specific evaluations, and ACES staff said they would provide reports and data to interested legislators and local officials.