Hamilton County JFS outlines deepening strain on children services levy and proposes cuts and fund shifts
Loading...
Summary
Interim JFS director John Nelson reported rising placement and staffing costs and the loss of pandemic-era state support have sharply reduced the children's services levy balance; Nelson proposed clinical, programmatic and fund-shift measures to avoid a projected negative balance, prompting commissioners to ask for more detail before finalizing budget transfers.
John Nelson, interim director of Hamilton County Job and Family Services, gave a detailed update on Jan. 13 about the county's children services levy balance and drivers of a deteriorating reserve. Nelson said that since the 2021 plan created after consultant recommendations, the levy's cash balance has been drawn down by a combination of investments in prevention and workforce stabilization and by unexpected, large increases in the cost of care and placements.
Nelson presented the levy's current fiscal picture: levy-generated revenue (about $78 million) plus federal reimbursements (estimated $35—3M) are not covering two large expense categories he highlighted ' the cost of care (about $91M in the most recent year) and payroll for children-services staff (about $30M). He said some federal/state pandemic supports ended (for example, the Protect Ohio waiver that previously provided roughly $20M), and that the agency has absorbed negotiated wage increases, placement cost inflation and higher demand. Nelson said the agency spent approximately an additional $40M in cost-of-care over recent years compared with earlier projections.
To avoid a projected $16M negative balance in 2026 if no changes are made, Nelson proposed a package of reductions, reassignments and program adjustments totaling roughly $30M in effect (a mix of reductions to prevention grants, reduced county stipends when state stipends are available, targeted reductions to youth-employment funding and a hiring slowdown), plus moving some expenses to the general fund and other levies. Examples included a proposed 50% reduction ($8M) in independent-living supports for ages 18—21 (targeted reductions guided by case reviews), a hiring-slowdown target to reduce costs about $5M, and shifting approximately $9.6M of levy-funded items to the general fund (TANF match, juvenile court placement costs and guardians ad litem support were cited).
Commissioners and staff probed the timing and downstream impacts. Vice President Reese and others emphasized concern about cutting youth employment and prevention programs because they serve a broad demographic and can prevent downstream juvenile justice costs. Multiple commissioners asked for an audit or closer review of prior spending and consultant assumptions because the levy balance fell much faster than earlier projections despite the original plan to "draw down" reserve during early years. Assistant County Administrator Webb confirmed staff will draft legislation to transfer eligible expenses to the general fund if the board approves and that more detailed procurement and contract timing information will be provided to affected providers.
Nelson said his team attempted to minimize program eliminations and targeted reductions to limit any single program's cuts to 25% where possible, and to "grandfather" existing recipients of county stipends. He warned the proposals assume cost-of-care does not spike further; large new placement needs would require additional action. Commissioners asked staff to return with final recommendations, legislative language for transfers, and an outreach plan to service providers and funders. No final board vote on levy reassignments or cuts occurred at the meeting.
