STATE AGENCY BUDGETS The Executive Budget FISCAL YEARS 2010 AND 2011 Janet Napolitano GOVERNOR Provisions for Individuals with Disabilities Individuals who have a disability and require reasonable accommodation in order to use this document are encouraged to contact the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting at 602‐542‐5381. STATE OF ARIZONA OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR JANET NAPOLITANO GOVERNOR 1700 WEST WASHINGTON STREET, PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85007 MAIN PHONE: 602-542-4331 FACSIMILE: 602-542-7601 January 2009 To the Honorable Members of the Forty-Ninth Arizona Legislature: As the first regular session of the Forty-Ninth Legislature convenes, we face economic conditions that will test the mettle of elected officials in every state, in Washington, D.C., and throughout the world. The global recession has wreaked havoc on our economy, moved Congress and President Bush to provide billions of dollars to the financial industry and private companies, and inflicted unprecedented state budgetary shortfalls across the country. The causes of the downturn in Arizona mirror those in other states: depressed real estate markets, scarcity of credit, and low consumer confidence. The consensus among economists is that the economic situation will not improve until, at the earliest, the second half of 2009. We can expect that, by that time, State government will begin to feel fiscal relief brought by federal economic stimulus programs and the benefits of our own budget management efforts. As the Legislative and Executive branches work together to resolve the Fiscal Year 2009 General Fund shortfall and consider State agency budgets for FY 2010, it is essential that the solutions to the State’s immediate fiscal challenges respect the need to safeguard and provide for Arizona’s future. We must continue to pursue these critical objectives: • Improve our education system, from early childhood education through the highest degree levels of our colleges and universities. • Protect, to the maximum extent possible, our most vulnerable citizens. • Maintain public safety throughout the state. • Promote the long-term health of Arizona’s economy. In order to meet these requirements for Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010, I propose a Budget Management Plan that will maximize our support of K-12 classroom education, minimize harmful impacts on the State’s universities and community colleges, and preserve health and care services for needy children and adults. Further, we will ensure our citizens’ safety by maintaining the strength of the Department of Public Safety and the Department of Corrections. It is also essential that we honor our commitment to support development of Arizona’s bioresearch industry and make other key enhancements to our economic system. January 2009 Page 2 This future-oriented perspective will be achieved without a general tax increase. As described in the Budget Management Plan for Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010, we can cut budgets, transfer non-General Fund revenues to the General Fund, and securitize Lottery and Tobacco Settlement revenue streams to benefit the General Fund. We should also count on the planned arrival, in the spring of this year, of federal economic stimulus funds that will provide an immediate and noticeable jump-start to Arizona’s economy. The stimulus funds will reflect both the recession-related impacts on state government budgets and the need for investment in education, transportation and other infrastructure. While this is not the time to fund new initiatives, it is a time for State government to position itself to move quickly and decisively as Arizona and the nation inevitably emerge from the current recessionary cycle. As revenue streams improve, we should use “trigger” protocols to restore suspended funding in programs critical to our future, including education and health and human services. The Executive Budget Recommendation for Fiscal Years 2009, 2010 and 2011 provides a roadmap for navigating these very difficult economic times, and I encourage you to follow it as our branches develop sound solutions to meet the fiscal challenges of the next two fiscal years. Yours very truly, Janet Napolitano Governor JN/neh TABLE OF CONTENTS Assumptions & Methodology in Building a Budget ..........1 AGENCY OPERATING BUDGET DETAIL Accountancy Board, State Board of ......................................5 Acupuncture Board of Examiners ........................................6 Administration, Arizona Department of .............................7 Administrative Hearings, Office of ......................................9 Agriculture, Arizona Department of .................................. 10 Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System .............. 12 Appraisal, State Board of ..................................................... 16 Arts, Commission on the ..................................................... 17 Attorney General ‐ Department of Law ............................. 18 Automobile Theft Authority................................................ 20 Barbers Examiners, Board of ............................................... 21 Behavioral Health Examiners, Board of ............................. 22 Biomedical Research Commission...................................... 23 Capital Post‐Conviction Public Defender Office............... 24 Charter Schools, State Board for ......................................... 25 Chiropractic Examiners, State Board of ............................. 26 Commerce, Department of .................................................. 27 Community Colleges, Arizona............................................ 29 Contractors, Registrar of ...................................................... 30 Corporation Commission..................................................... 31 Corrections, Department of ................................................. 32 Cosmetology, Board of......................................................... 36 Criminal Justice Commission, Arizona.............................. 38 Deaf and Blind, State Schools for the.................................. 39 Deaf and Hard of Hearing, Commission for the............... 40 Dental Examiners, State Board of ....................................... 41 Drug and Gang Prevention Resource Center, Arizona.... 42 Economic Security, Department of ..................................... 43 Education, Department of.................................................... 50 Emergency and Military Affairs, Department of .............. 53 Environmental Quality, Department of ............................ 54 Equal Opportunity, Governor’s Office for......................... 56 Equalization, State Board of ............................................... 57 Executive Clemency, Department of .................................. 58 Exposition and State Fair, Arizona ..................................... 59 Financial Institutions, State Department of ....................... 60 Fire, Building and Life Safety, Department of................... 61 Forester, Arizona State ......................................................... 62 Funeral Directors and Embalmers, State Board of............ 63 Game and Fish Department................................................. 64 Gaming, Department of ....................................................... 68 Geological Survey, Arizona ................................................. 70 Government Information Technology Agency ................. 71 Governor’s Office.................................................................. 72 Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting.. 73 Health Services, Department of...........................................74 Historical Society, Arizona...................................................78 Historical Society, Prescott...................................................79 Homeopathic Medical Examiners, Board of ......................80 Housing, Arizona Department of........................................81 Indian Affairs, Arizona Commission of .............................82 Industrial Commission of Arizona......................................83 Insurance, Department of.....................................................84 Judiciary .................................................................................86 Juvenile Corrections, Department of ..................................88 Land, State Department........................................................89 Law Enforcement Merit System Council............................90 Legislature Auditor General .................................................................91 House of Representatives .................................................92 Joint Legislative Budget Committee................................93 Legislative Council ............................................................94 Library, Archives, and Public Records............................95 Senate ..................................................................................96 Liquor Licenses and Control, Department of ....................97 Lottery Commission, Arizona State ....................................98 Medical Board, Arizona........................................................99 Medical Student Loans, Board of ......................................100 Mine Inspector, State ..........................................................101 Mines and Mineral Resources, Department of ................102 Naturopathic Physicians, Medical Examiners Board of .103 Navigable Stream Adjudication Commission .................104 Nursing, State Board of ......................................................105 Nursing Care Institution Administration Examiners .....107 Occupational Therapy Examiners, Board of ....................108 Opticians, State Board of Dispensing ...............................109 Optometry, State Board of..................................................110 Osteopathic Examiners, Board of ......................................111 Parks Board, State................................................................112 Personnel Board ..................................................................113 Pest Management, Office of ...............................................114 Pharmacy, Arizona State Board of ....................................115 Physical Therapy Examiners, Board of.............................116 Pioneers’ Home, Arizona ...................................................117 Podiatry Examiners, State Board of .................................118 Postsecondary Education, Commission for .....................119 Private Post Secondary Education, State Board of ..........120 Psychologist Examiners, State Board of ...........................121 Public Safety, Department of .............................................122 Racing, Arizona Department of.........................................125 Radiation Regulatory Agency............................................126 Rangers’ Pension, Arizona .................................................127 Real Estate, Department of.................................................128 Residential Utility Consumer Office................................. 129 Respiratory Care Examiners, Board of ............................. 130 Retirement System, Arizona State ................................... 131 Revenue, Department of .................................................... 133 School Facilities Board........................................................ 134 Secretary of State ‐ Department of State........................... 136 State Boards Office.............................................................. 138 Tax Appeals, State Board of............................................... 139 Technical Registration, State Board of ............................. 140 Tourism, Office of ............................................................... 141 Transportation, Department of ......................................... 142 Treasurer, State.................................................................... 144 Universities Regents, Arizona Board of.............................................. 145 Arizona State University – Tempe................................. 146 Arizona State University – Polytechnic ........................ 147 Arizona State University – West.................................... 149 Northern Arizona University......................................... 150 University of Arizona – Main Campus......................... 152 University of Arizona – Health Sciences Center.......... 154 Veterans’ Services, Department of.................................... 155 Veterinary Medical Examining, State Board of .............. 156 Water Resources, Department of ...................................... 157 Weights and Measures, Department of ........................... 159 PROPOSED AGENCY EXPENDITURE SUSPENSIONS Executive Recommended FY 2009 and FY 2010 Agency Expenditure Suspensions ............................................... 161 EFFICIENCY REVIEW .......................................................... 169 GLOSSARY Budget Terms ...................................................................... 207 Acronyms............................................................................. 212 Government Organization Chart ...................................... 215 Resources ............................................................................. 216 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DEDICATION Agency Operating Budget Detail ASSUMPTIONS & METHODOLOGY Building a Budget Preparing the State’s budget is a year‐‘round process that determines the size and scope of government A In accordance with the statutory definitions the Executive Recommendation provides funding on a bifurcated basis. adopt a budget containing elements of both or entirely new elements. Before July 1, the Legislature adopts the budget through the passage of a General Appropriations Act, a Capital Outlay Bill, and any Legislative changes necessary for the implementation of the adopted budget. Once adopted, the bills are then pre‐ sented to the Governor for signature. Upon presentation, the Governor has five days to sign the bills into law, veto them in their entirety, line‐item veto indi‐ vidual items of appropriations, or allow the bills to become law without a signature. The Legislature may, with a two‐thirds vote, override a veto or line‐item veto. The operating budget is prepared and enacted using a cash basis of accounting, which recognizes expenditures when paid, and revenues when received, by the Treasurer. Budgetary control is maintained through the Legislative appropriation and the Executive Branch allotment process. The allotment process allocates appropriations across the four quar‐ ters of the fiscal year. The State also maintains an encumbrance accounting system to enhance budgetary control. With the exception of capital outlay items, encumbrances outstanding at the end of the fiscal year can be liquidated during a four‐week administrative period known as the “13th month.” Capital outlay appropriations and their encumbrances continue until the project is completed or abandoned. BUDGET PROCESS BUDGET REQUEST GUIDELINES The budget process begins on or before June 1, when the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning & Budgeting (OSPB) issues instructions and electronic forms required for agencies to submit their budget requests. Agency requests must be submit‐ ted to OSPB by September 1 unless an extension is granted for up to an additional 30 days. Annually, between September 1 and no later than five days from the opening of the Legislative session, the Executive re‐ views budget submissions and prepares the Executive Budget Recommendation. The recommendation contains operating and capital outlay expenditure plans, estimated revenues, and any Legislative changes necessary for implementation. Simultaneously, the Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) Staff reviews the agency requests and prepares the Leg‐ islative budget recommendation, the Analysis and Recommen‐ dations Book. Included in the publication is an analysis of the Executive Recommendation. Legislative review and deliberation of the two budgets pre‐ sented typically begins shortly after the regular session con‐ venes. Public hearings occur before both the Senate and House appropriation committees. The committees may adopt the Executive budget or the JLBC Staff budget, or they may elect to Budget requests in excess of $25,000 that were related to in‐ formation technology were required to be accompanied by an approved Project Investment Justification (PIJ). The PIJ went through a separate review conducted by the Government In‐ formation Technology Agency (GITA). Budget requests in excess of $500,000 that were related to substance abuse were required to be accompanied by an ap‐ proved Project Investment Justification for Substance Abuse Programs (PIJ‐SAP). The PIJ‐SAP went through a separate review conducted by the Arizona Substance Abuse Partnership (ASAP). .R.S. § 35‐101 ESTABLISHES a bifurcated budget process by defining 16 agencies as “annual budget units” and the remaining agencies as “biennial budget units.” Those agencies identified as annual budget units include the following: • Department of Education • Board of Regents • Arizona State University, including the West and East campuses • University of Arizona • Northern Arizona University • School Facilities Board • Department of Economic Security • State Department of Corrections • Department of Juvenile Corrections • Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System • Department of Health Services • Department of Administration • Department of Transportation • The judiciary, including the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals, and Superior Court. State Agency Budgets BUDGET BOUNDARIES The starting point in building the upcoming years’ budgets is to establish agencies’ base budgets. In order to calculate an agency’s base budget, the following adjustments are made: • annualization of programs partially funded; • lease and rent rate adjustments; and • elimination of one‐time expenditures. The adjustments are then added to the agency’s most recent fiscal year appropriation to calculate the base budget on which the upcoming year(s) budget is built. 1 ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS To comply with A.R.S. § 35‐115, each agency reports admin‐ istrative costs with their budget submission. The calculation is based on administrative costs as a percent of total funds, which may include General Fund, Other Appropriated Funds, and Non‐Appropriated funds. BUDGET FORMAT The Executive Budget contains agency mission statements, descriptions, and budget performance measures. Budget Performance Measures. In accordance with A.R.S. § 35‐115, the Executive Budget Recommendation includes se‐ lected performance measures for the budget unit for the previ‐ ous fiscal year and for the budget years. Beginning with the FY 2006 and FY 2007 Executive Recom‐ mendation, the process for selecting agency performance meas‐ ures has been modified. The OSPB, in consultation with the agencies, has selected a series or “family” of performance measures that will most accurately communicate both what the agency is doing, as well as how well the agency is doing it. The hope is that this change will offer decision makers and citizens a better understanding of agencies and their operations. In addition, stakeholders will be provided improved continuity of data, as the performance measures published will remain largely consistent from year to year. In addition to the performance measures, OSPB publishes the MASTER LIST OF STATE GOVERNMENT PROGRAMS every even‐ numbered year. The FY 2007‐2009 MASTER LIST is available at www.ospb.state.az.us. This reference document contains a more comprehensive listing of performance measures for every program and subprogram within a budget unit. TECHNICAL ADJUSTMENTS The FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Recommendation contains a series of technical adjustments, including: • Employee‐Related Expenditures for newly‐recommended employees and/or personal services changes; • Risk Management; • State‐owned, private, COP and PLTO rental rate charges; and • elimination of one‐time equipment purchases. The general guidelines used in building the Executive Rec‐ ommendation are discussed below. Employee‐Related Expenditures. Two separate rates are used in calculating ERE funding requirements for newly rec‐ ommended employees and/or personal services changes: • An HDL rate calculates the health, dental and life insurance costs per individual FTE based on specific rates of participa‐ tion in the three insurance programs (health, dental, and life) to which the State contributes. • A marginal rate is calculated by adding the rates of FICA, workers’ compensation, unemployment insurance, a pro rata charge for personnel costs, a pro rata charge assessed for GITA, long‐term disability insurance, retirement sick leave pro rata, and retirement. 2 The sum of the rates is multiplied by the total Personal Ser‐ vices amount, excluding Boards and Commissions when ap‐ propriate. The following rates are used for the development of each of the various ERE components: FICA. The rate is comprised of a 6.2% social security tax on the first $102,000 of an employee’s Personal Services and a 1.45% Medicare tax on the full amount of an employee’s Per‐ sonal Services. Workers’ Compensation. The Department of Administration’s Risk Management Division developed rates that remain flat over FY 2010 and FY 2011. The Executive Recommendation provides full funding for this ERE component in FY 2010, and the General Fund requirement is reflected on the Sources and Uses statement. The agency detail on the General Fund and Other Fund allocations are available at OSPB. Unemployment Insurance. The rate of 0.15% of Personal Ser‐ vices is used for FY 2010. Any additional funding issues rec‐ ommended beyond agencies’ base budgets contain the com‐ mensurate unemployment insurance funding. Personnel Division Pro Rata. The rate of 1.07% of Personal Services is assessed on the payroll of the majority of State ser‐ vice agencies, pursuant to A.R.S. § 41‐764, to fund the opera‐ tions of the Personnel Division of the Department of Admini‐ stration. GITA Pro Rata. The rate of 0.2% of Personal Services is as‐ sessed on all agencies (except the universities and community colleges) to fund the operations of the Government Information Technology Agency. Disability Insurance. The rate of 0.36% of Personal Services is used for employees not covered by the State Retirement System. The State Retirement System provides disability insurance to active employees. Retirement. The following rates were used for FY 2010: Retirement Group Rate State Retirement...........................................9.00 Correctional Service Officers ........................9.19 NAU Police .................................................25.36 UA Police....................................................20.01 ASU Police .................................................19.96 Parks ..........................................................17.51 Game and Fish ...........................................37.09 DEMA Fire Fighters ....................................16.46 Attorney General Investigators ...................46.39 Liquor Commission Investigators................19.02 Juvenile Corrections .....................................8.41 Public Safety...............................................31.95 Capitol Police..............................................11.00 University Optional Retirement .....................7.00 Elected Officials Retirement Plan (State)....14.25 The General Fund portion of the decreased costs is reflected on the Sources and Uses statement. The agency detail on the General Fund and Other Fund allocations is available at OSPB. Life Insurance. The rate of $40 per authorized FTE is used. Health and Dental Insurance. The FY 2010 Executive Recom‐ mendation provides funding for an estimated $42.0 million General Fund increase in health insurance costs, which is re‐ FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget flected on the Sources and Uses statement. The agency detail on the General Fund and Other Fund allocations is available at OSPB. Retirement Accumulated Sick Leave Fund. Laws 1997, Chapter 291, created the Retirement Accumulated Sick Leave Fund. The FY 2010 Executive Recommendation provides for a 0.4% pro rata assessment against Personal Services. The money in this Fund will be used to compensate retiring employees for unused sick leave in a three‐tiered system. Risk management. The Department of Administration’s Risk Management Division developed rates that are the same in FY 2010 and FY 2011. Rent. Rent amounts for State agencies occupying ADOA space are unchanged from FY 2009. The square footage calcula‐ tion is based on documentation prepared by the Department of Administration’s Facilities Management Division detailing actual and planned occupancy as of August 31, 2008. The amounts required to cover Certificate of Participation (COP) and Privatized Lease to Own (PLTO) payments are based on data distributed by the Department of Administration General Accounting Office and General Services Division. State Agency Budgets All rent amounts for agencies occupying private space are based on estimated rent charges as specified in the lease agree‐ ments. Equipment. The amount recommended for equipment – whether capitalized or non‐capitalized – was based on the agency’s needs and generally determined on a zero‐based ap‐ proach. Reductions were taken to reflect annualization of one‐ time equipment purchases approved in the FY 2009 appropria‐ tion. OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS Judiciary and Legislature. The Executive does not make recommendations for the Judiciary and Legislative agencies. Appropriation Format and Legislative Changes. Each Ex‐ ecutive recommendation for an agency’s appropriation format is located at the end of the agency’s recommendation. Some recommendations require Legislative changes that are neces‐ sary to implement the Executive Budget. These required changes are addressed in a separate listing as part of the Execu‐ tive Budget Summary. • 3 4 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget ABA FY 2010 State Board of Accountancy Mission: To protect the public’s welfare by ensuring that only qualified persons and firms are licensed or registered to practice public accountancy and that appropriate standards of competency and practice are established and enforced. Description: The Arizona State Board of Accountancy consists of five Certified Public Accountants (CPAs) and two public members, all of whom are residents of the state and are appointed by the Governor. The Board qualifies candidates for the Uniform CPA Examination, certifies individuals to practice as CPAs, registers accounting firms owned by CPAs, and biennially renews certificates for CPAs and registered accounting firms. The Board also receives and investigates complaints, takes enforcement action against licensees for violation of statutes and regulations, monitors compliance with continuing education requirements, and reviews the work products of CPAs to ensure adherence to professional standards through the Boardʹs peer review program. The Board currently regulates approximately 10,300 licensees and 3,000 firms. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Certification, Registration, and Regulation 1,488.4 2,350.1 1,892.1 1,892.1 Agency Total 1,488.4 2,350.1 1,892.1 1,892.1 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total 13.0 566.8 222.0 447.0 2.8 10.1 0.0 213.4 21.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.4 13.0 642.0 251.5 555.9 3.4 13.0 0.0 874.3 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 642.0 251.5 555.9 3.4 13.0 0.0 416.3 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.0 642.0 251.5 555.9 3.4 13.0 0.0 416.3 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,488.4 2,350.1 1,892.1 1,892.1 1,488.4 2,350.1 1,892.1 1,892.1 1,488.4 2,350.1 1,892.1 1,892.1 FY 2011 Accountancy Board Fund for FY 2010 and FY 2011. (458.0) Accountancy Board Fund (458.0) FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 (458.0) Reduce Appropriation In order to maintain an adequate fund balance to meet the Boardʹs needs in FY 2010 and FY 2011, a decrease of ($458,000) in expenditure authority for the Accountancy Board Fund is recommended for FY 2009. Accountancy Board Fund (458.0) Performance Measures Number of complaint files established FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 94 120 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 120 120 Number of exam candidates approved by Board to sit for the Uniform CPA exam Number of certificates issued 534 550 550 550 449 400 400 400 Number of firms registered 100 100 100 100 80 85 85 85 Percent of applicants reporting very good or excellent service Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 152.2 2,350.0 152.2 2,350.0 6.48% 6.48% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Accountancy Board Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Reduce Appropriation (458.0) (458.0) In order to maintain a positive fund balance through FY 2011, the Board must reduce its expenditures. To better align the fund with Board needs and revenues, the recommendation includes a decrease of ($458,000) in expenditure authority for the State Agency Budgets State Board of Accountancy 5 ANA Acupuncture Board of Examiners Mission: To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Arizona by regulating and maintaining standards of practice in the field of acupuncture. Description: The Board licenses and regulates acupuncturists and certifies auricular (ear) acupuncturists for detoxification or substance abuse programs. The Board also oversees the licensing and certification of acupuncture training and preceptorship training programs, continuing education programs and visiting professors. The Board evaluates professional competency, investigates complaints, and enforces the standards of practice for the acupuncture profession. The Board regulates the educational, clinical and clean needle technique programs approved to teach the practice of acupuncture in the State. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 120.1 129.2 129.2 142.1 120.1 129.2 129.2 142.1 1.0 69.5 14.6 25.8 1.5 1.2 0.0 7.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 69.5 14.6 24.0 1.0 0.1 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 69.5 14.6 24.0 1.0 0.1 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 80.2 16.8 24.0 1.0 0.1 0.0 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 120.1 129.2 129.2 142.1 120.1 129.2 129.2 142.1 120.1 129.2 129.2 142.1 FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 12.9 Board of Examiners Fund. Acupuncture Board of Examiners Fund Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 76 80 Number of applications received Number of renewals issued Number of investigations conducted Total number of licensees Total number of auricular acupuncture certificate holders 491 500 520 5 10 10 10 468 475 480 480 63 65 65 65 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 85 85 520 FY 2010 FY 2011 5.0 129.0 6.0 142.0 3.88% 4.23% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund Acupuncture Board of Examiners Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Annual Leave Payout 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.9 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Annual Leave Pay Out 0.0 12.9 The Board anticipates that its 1.0 FTE will leave in FY 2011, and the Executive recommends a $12,900 special line appropriation for FY 2011 for an annual leave payout. If the appropriation is not used for the final leave payout, it will revert to the Acupuncture 6 Acupuncture Board of Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget ADA Arizona Department of Administration Mission: To provide effective and efficient support services to enable government agencies, state employees, and the public to achieve their goals. Description: The Agency provides leadership, direction, financial and management information and support; financial and procurement support services; facility planning, design, development, construction, operations and maintenance; timely, customer‐ driven professional human resources services; business‐enhancing information services to ADOA, state agencies, and Arizona citizens; customer service to small licensing agencies in general accounting and centralized office support; distribution of surplus state and federal personal property through a system that maximizes the dollar return to the state on property sold; clean, safe, and environmentally friendly vehicles; an orderly, secure and safe environment where visitors, employees, and other persons conducting business with the State will be safe and secure; and services to agency customers and the public for the stateʹs property and liability exposures and to state employee customers who have work‐related injuries. The agency has three goals: to maintain the continuity of State Government operations to ensure the safe and efficient delivery of government services, to attract and retain a high‐performance team of employees, and to aggressively pursue innovative solutions and opportunities. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Administration Financial Services Facilities Management Human Resources Information Technology Services Support Services Capitol Police Risk Management Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 1,639.2 22,368.8 20,745.9 22,499.3 28,216.8 1,347.5 14,135.3 21,343.0 23,822.0 32,831.1 1,347.5 19,165.4 22,245.9 24,756.0 36,099.7 1,347.5 14,135.3 21,343.0 22,704.0 32,831.1 15,800.4 2,962.9 72,150.6 19,150.3 2,913.7 92,959.5 19,150.3 3,194.2 100,222.6 19,150.3 2,913.7 99,681.6 186,383.9 208,502.4 226,181.6 214,106.5 863.7 32,990.9 12,075.1 24,526.1 297.1 31.1 500.0 97,729.3 11,816.3 71.6 1,699.9 4,646.5 863.7 37,483.1 13,847.0 33,528.6 424.9 49.2 500.0 109,957.3 10,010.2 0.0 1,646.9 1,055.2 888.7 38,629.4 14,224.9 39,613.3 436.9 49.2 500.0 116,435.2 13,340.6 0.0 1,646.9 1,305.2 876.7 36,390.0 13,645.0 34,897.5 427.9 49.2 500.0 115,232.1 10,012.7 0.0 1,646.9 1,305.2 186,383.9 208,502.4 226,181.6 214,106.5 General Fund Personnel Division Fund Capital Outlay Stabilization Corrections Fund Air Quality Fund Special Employee Health Highway User Revenue Fund Motor Pool Revolving State Surplus Property Federal Surplus Materials Property Risk Management Fund Automation Operations Fund Telecommunications Fund Agency Total 35,359.3 17,798.6 11,975.9 700.4 573.9 4,784.4 145.0 27,109.6 18,418.0 13,000.6 732.3 850.1 5,487.3 0.0 32,139.7 18,880.8 13,902.2 733.6 850.1 5,958.5 0.0 27,109.6 17,300.0 13,000.6 732.3 850.1 5,487.3 0.0 11,575.1 2,709.5 151.0 12,726.8 4,258.0 449.3 12,726.8 4,258.0 449.3 12,726.8 4,258.0 449.3 73,245.7 23,261.8 93,491.1 24,087.5 101,034.7 24,090.4 100,213.2 24,087.5 4,103.3 7,891.8 11,157.5 7,891.8 186,383.9 208,502.4 226,181.6 214,106.5 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI ENSCO COP 7,289.4 2,867.3 2,868.2 2,867.3 SLI AFIS Program and 1,039.6 1,120.5 1,120.5 1,120.5 Support SLI Fair and Legal 2,430.0 2,430.0 2,430.0 2,430.0 Employment Act SLI Relocation 0.1 60.0 60.0 60.0 SLI Utilities 7,705.8 7,975.6 7,975.6 7,975.6 SLI Human Resource 4,239.1 4,354.0 4,599.8 4,599.8 Information System SLI Empoyee Wellness 300.0 300.0 300.0 300.0 Program SLI Health Savings Account 17.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 Plan Design SLI Statewide 851.7 851.8 851.8 851.8 Telecommunications Management Contract Lease Payment SLI State Surplus Property 1,556.4 3,000.0 3,000.0 3,000.0 Sales Proceeds SLI Risk Management 36,450.3 45,371.3 51,314.9 51,314.9 Losses SLI Workers Compensation 23,463.7 30,112.3 29,148.2 29,148.2 Losses SLI External Legal Services 2,480.5 5,592.2 6,585.3 6,585.3 SLI Nonlegal Related 2,220.5 3,153.9 3,608.2 3,608.2 Expenditures SLI Highway Hazards 145.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Assessments SLI Burke Settlement 0.0 532.0 532.0 0.0 SLI Large Loss Support Unit 0.0 0.0 0.0 827.2 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Fund State Agency Budgets Arizona Department of Administration 7 FY 2010 0.0 AFIS Replacement State government should begin planning for the replacement of its aging financial systems. For FY 2010, the Executive recommendation includes $3.8 million from the non‐appropriated AFIS II Collections Fund for replacement of the Arizona Financial Information System (AFIS). This recommendation requires approval from the Government Information Technology Agency and the Information Technology Authorization Committee. State government has a number of unique exposures that have caused significant losses and have the potential for more. For FY 2010, the recommendation includes $827,200 and 1.0 FTE position from the Risk Management Fund for a Large Loss Support Unit that would reduce the liability attributable to these unique exposures. The recommendation includes $500,000 for professional and outside services. 827.2 Risk Management Fund 6,426.9 The Executive recommends an increase of $6.4 million from the Risk Management Fund for actuarially determined claims. The recommendation includes increases of $993,100 for the External Legal Services special line item, $454,300 for the Nonlegal Related Expenditures special line item, $5.9 million for the Risk Management Losses special line item, and a decrease of ($964,100) from the Workers Compensation Losses special line item. 6,426.9 245.8 Human Resources Information Solution COP Payment The Executive Recommendation includes $245,800 from the Personnel Division Fund to cover a scheduled increase in the Certificate of Participation (COP) payment for the Human Resources Information Solution. Personnel Division Fund Personnel Division Fund 245.8 Burke Settlement (1,363.8) (532.0) For FY 2010, the recommendation includes a reduction of ($532,000) from the Risk Management Fund for one‐time expenses related to attorney fees for the Burke lawsuit. Risk Management Fund 8 0.0 Risk Management Fund Performance Measures Percentage of ADOA's services with a minimum customer satisfaction rating of 6.0, based on annual survey (scale 1-8) Customer satisfaction rating with building maintenance (scale 1-8) Customer satisfaction rating with benefit plans (scale 1-8) Customer satisfaction rating with mainframe processing (scale 1-8) Customer satisfaction rating with administration of payroll process (scale 1-8) Customer satisfaction rating with tenant improvement process (scale 18) Customer satisfaction rating with voice telecommunications services (scale 1-8) Percentage of enterprise application development work completed within negotiated timeframe Customer satisfaction rating with information and data security services (scale 1-8) Average response time to Capitol Police emergency calls (minutes:seconds) Statewide incident rate per 100 Full Time Equivalent (FTE) positions (accepted Risk Management claims) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 Actual Actual Expected Expected 83 n/a 80 80 5.95 7.70 6.80 6.80 6.61 n/a 6.70 6.80 6.93 n/a 6.00 6.00 6.8 n/a 6.5 6.5 7.42 7.70 7.00 7.00 6.31 6.70 6.70 6.70 100 100 90 90 5.58 n/a 6.0 6.0 2:27 1:52 2:00 2:00 4.4 4.5 5.4 5.4 Administrative Costs (1,363.8) For FY 2010, the recommendation includes a reduction of ($1.4 million) from the Personnel Division Fund. This reduction is required because of projected decreases in revenue in the Fund. Personnel Division Fund During the FY 2008 appropriation process, $515,100 was provided for Capitol Police Security enhancements, but no additional FTE positions were provided. The Executive Recommendation includes an increase of 12.0 FTE positions, but no additional funding from the Risk Management Fund, for officers providing security in Phoenix and Tucson. 827.2 Large Loss Support Unit Risk Management Fund 0.0 Security in Phoenix & Tucson 0.0 General Fund Risk Management/Workersʹ Compensation Adjustment FY 2010 FY 2010 3,910.6 Administrative Costs Agency Request 1,324,547.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 0.30% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by fund with special line items. (532.0) Arizona Department of Administration FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget HGA Office of Administrative Hearings Administrative Costs Mission: To contribute to the quality of life in the State of Arizona by fairly and impartially hearing the contested matters of our fellow citizens arising out of state regulation. Description: The Agency commenced operation January 1, 1996. Previously, administrative hearings were conducted ʺin‐houseʺ in each respective state agency or occupational board. The creation of the Office of Administrative Hearings as a separate agency charged with providing administrative law judges has interjected increased professional detachment and physical distance to ensure confidence in the independence and fairness of administrative hearings. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 188.5 188.5 2,883.0 2,883.0 6.54% 6.54% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Hearings Agency Total FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,299.1 1,299.2 1,299.2 1,299.2 1,299.1 1,299.2 1,299.2 1,299.2 14.0 776.1 282.4 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 237.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 779.3 281.1 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 236.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 779.3 281.1 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 236.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 779.3 281.1 2.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 236.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,299.1 1,299.2 1,299.2 1,299.2 1,284.7 14.4 1,284.7 14.5 1,284.7 14.5 1,284.7 14.5 1,299.1 1,299.2 1,299.2 1,299.2 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. Fund General Fund Healthcare Group Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Percent of evaluations rating the administrative law judge excellent or good in impartiality Average days from request for hearing to first date of hearing Average number of days from the conclusion of the hearing to transmission of the decision to the agency Number of hearings held State Agency Budgets FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 97.72 97.72 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 97.72 97.72 58.84 58.84 58.84 58.84 17.57 17.57 17.57 17.57 3298 3298 3298 3298 Office of Administrative Hearings 9 AHA Arizona Department of Agriculture Mission: To regulate and support Arizona agriculture in a manner that encourages farming, ranching, and agribusiness while protecting consumers and natural resources. Description: The Department has ten programs designed to regulate all aspects of agricultural production and processing within the State, educate industry to foster compliance with applicable regulations, promote the general welfare of the agricultural community, inform the consumer, and protect the public health and safety. The Food Safety and Quality Assurance program protects against the distribution of unsafe, unwholesome, and improperly labeled meat, poultry, ratites, milk, and eggs. The Non‐Food Product Quality Assurance program protects the public’s interest by ensuring the quality of feeds, fertilizers, pesticides and seed. The Animal Disease Ownership and Welfare Protection program protects agricultural animals from disease and abuse, livestock owners against theft, and the public from harmful livestock interactions. The Pest Exclusion and Management program ensures the provision of pest‐free agricultural products and protects the public from plant pests through prevention, control, and eradication. The Native Plant and Cultural Resources Protection program protects and conserves Arizonaʹs native plants, historical sites, and other natural resources for present and future generations to enjoy and appreciate. The Pesticide Compliance and Worker Safety program protects public health, agricultural workers, and the environment by ensuring the proper use of crop protection products. The State Agricultural Laboratory supports the Department of Agriculture and other regulatory agencies in protecting consumers and natural resources through the provision of quality laboratory services. The Agricultural Consultation and Training program is an innovative compliance assistance program that guides the agricultural community in a non‐enforcement posture on regulatory matters, and administers the Livestock and Crop Conservation and Specialty Crop Block Grant Programs. The limited Commodity Development and Promotion program primarily reflects the funding of the industry councils, which is provided through self‐assessed fees paid by growers/producers. Finally, the Administrative Services program provides leadership to ensure timely and efficient support services to all Department of Agriculture programs. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Food Safety and Quality Assurance Non-Food Product Quality Assurance Animal Disease, Ownership and Welfare Protection Pest Exclusion and Management Native Plant and Cultural Resources Protection 10 FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,975.0 3,454.9 3,598.4 3,557.8 897.7 847.8 1,000.4 1,000.4 2,762.0 2,748.7 2,748.7 2,789.3 4,025.5 3,470.7 3,530.7 3,530.7 110.4 194.7 164.0 164.0 Pesticide Compliance and Worker safety Administrative Services State Agricultural Laboratory Agricultural Consultation and Training Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total 364.1 288.0 288.0 288.0 1,588.9 1,771.8 259.5 1,667.4 2,160.0 269.9 1,667.4 2,245.9 269.9 1,667.4 2,245.9 269.9 14,754.9 15,102.1 15,513.4 15,513.4 249.2 8,045.8 3,607.6 337.8 677.4 21.5 0.0 0.0 1,900.6 158.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 249.2 7,801.7 3,565.1 380.2 859.3 17.1 163.3 0.0 2,016.5 298.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 251.2 7,937.4 3,608.0 532.8 942.6 18.6 132.6 0.0 2,039.5 301.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 251.2 7,937.4 3,608.0 592.8 882.6 18.6 132.6 0.0 2,039.5 301.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14,754.9 15,102.1 15,513.4 15,513.4 11,903.8 104.8 11,640.4 106.7 11,640.4 106.7 11,640.4 106.7 298.7 300.3 300.3 300.3 671.1 897.8 1,000.7 1,000.7 371.6 0.0 386.2 40.0 407.0 100.0 407.0 100.0 54.7 52.2 307.7 873.1 54.3 79.4 306.1 1,087.0 89.8 120.0 488.3 1,087.0 89.8 120.0 488.3 1,087.0 6.8 110.4 9.2 194.7 9.2 164.0 9.2 164.0 14,754.9 15,102.1 15,513.4 15,513.4 Fund General Fund Agricultural Consulting/Training Program Agriculture Commercial Feed Egg & Egg Product Control Fund Pesticide Fund Agriculture Dangerous Plants Agriculture Seed Law Livestock Custody Fund Fertilizer Materials Fund Citrus, Fruit, & Vegetable Revolving Aquaculture Fund AZ Protected Native Plant Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Animal Damage Control 81.3 65.0 65.0 65.0 SLI Red Imported Fire Ant 23.2 23.2 23.2 23.2 SLI Agriculture 17.0 23.3 23.3 23.3 Employment Relations Board Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 356.1 356.1 Executive Issues Spending Authority for Other Appropriated Funds The Executive recommends extending the expenditure authority Arizona Department of Agriculture FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 102.9 102.9 Pesticide Fund 20.8 20.8 Agriculture Dangerous Plants Fund 60.0 60.0 Livestock Custody Fund 40.6 40.6 Fertilizer Materials Fund 131.8 131.8 85.9 85.9 Egg and Egg Product Control Fund Position Adjustment at the State Agricultural Laboratory For the benefit of public safety and the security of Arizonaʹs food supply, the Executive recommends an increase of $85,900 in other appropriated funds to remedy compensation inequality at the State Agricultural Lab, as identified by the Department of Administration. Agriculture Seed Law Fund 35.5 35.5 Fertilizer Materials Fund 50.4 50.4 (30.7) (30.7) Temporary Reduction in Expenditure Authority The Executive recommends a temporary reduction in the expenditure authority in FY 2009, FY 2010 and FY 2011 of the Arizona Protected Native Plant Fund fund to ensure it does become insolvent. To support this, the Executive supports a decrease in authority of $29,300 in FY 2009 and $30,700 in FY 2010 and FY 2011. AZ Protected Native Plant Fund Performance Measures FY 2011 of the Departmentʹs other appropriated funds by $356,100 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to respond to increasing demands on associated programs. These adjustments would align with the anticipated revenues generated from the fee structure. (30.7) (30.7) Number of federal-state and citrus, fruit, and vegetable produce inspections Percent of meat and poultry product tests in compliance with bacteria, drug and chemical residue requirements Number of feed, fertilizer, pesticide and seed labels inspected in the market place USDA disease status for Arizona for bovine brucellosis and tuberculosis, and swine pseudorabies Number of pest interceptions within the state interior Percent of agency staff turnover Percent of overall customer satisfaction rating for laboratory services Number of agricultural consultation and training compliance issues addressed Number of native plant cases with successful compliance Percent of inspected trucks rejected at ports FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 47,761 51,000 99.49 99 99 99 21,981 22,000 22,000 22,000 Free Free Free Free 16,119 20,000 20,000 20,000 28.81 25 25 25 95 92 80 88 558 600 630 660 15 15 15 15 3 0 0 0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 51,000 51,000 FY 2010 FY 2011 2,044.6 2,044.6 29,170.0 29,150.0 7.01% 7.01% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 Temporary Reduction in Expenditure Authority AZ Protected Native Plant Fund State Agency Budgets (29.3) (29.3) Arizona Department of Agriculture 11 HCA Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Mission: To provide comprehensive, quality health care for those in need. Description: The Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS), which serves as the state’s Medicaid agency, is a health care program primarily targeted to serve low‐income Arizonans. AHCCCS is a partnership that includes the state, its counties, the federal government, program contractors and health plans from the public and private sector, and AHCCCS members. The AHCCCS Administration’s main responsibility is to plan, develop, implement, and administer health care programs for low income Arizonans, based on competitively bid prepaid capitated contracts designed to provide quality health care while containing costs. The Administrationʹs additional responsibilities are setting policy and controls for eligibility administration, member enrollment, quality assurance of medical care, provider and plan oversight, and procurement of contract providers. Major medical programs are acute care, behavioral health services, long term care, and a premium‐based program known as Healthcare Group (HCG). The AHCCCS Administration determines eligibility for the Arizona Long Term Care System (ALTCS), Childrenʹs Health Insurance Program (KidsCare), Qualified Medicare Beneficiaries, and for other Supplemental Security Income (SSI) related Medical Assistance Only programs. Federal funding through Title XIX and Title XXI of the Social Security Act is provided to AHCCCS by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), which is under the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Administration Long Term Care Acute Care Proposition 204 Healthcare Group Children's Health Insurance Program Agency Total Agency Total 12 Agency Total 1,219,660.1 60,727.2 1,425,272.3 62,886.2 1,789,395.9 62,886.2 1,773,699.5 52,399.1 24,205.2 25,716.5 25,716.5 21,960.0 133,887.4 145,970.9 154,040.5 138,807.9 9,709.9 48,634.3 2,841.0 2,962.5 5,088.1 1,975.4 6,526.8 3,247.2 6,526.8 0.0 6,526.8 0.0 1,455,253.3 1,718,254.2 2,041,406.9 1,996,355.8 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI 211 System 1,260.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 SLI DES Eligibility System 94.9 1,300.0 1,300.0 1,300.0 Upgrade SLI Long Term Care 9,947.5 11,307.2 9,240.1 9,648.8 Clawback Payments SLI LTC Part D 870.4 470.3 1,275.2 1,230.2 Copayments SLI Rural Hospital 4,100.9 4,148.6 4,164.2 4,164.1 Reimbursement SLI Acute Care Clawback 26,734.6 28,844.6 31,312.4 32,378.0 Payments SLI Acute Care Part D 2,602.1 1,029.7 3,824.6 3,697.2 Copayments SLI SSDI Temporary 9,922.0 3,247.2 0.0 0.0 Medical Coverage Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues 287,396.7 Caseload and Inflation FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 62,894.2 144,872.2 787,388.7 276,781.7 12,338.1 170,978.4 58,323.5 162,030.8 916,350.8 380,491.6 11,526.8 189,530.7 61,471.6 191,653.6 1,031,499.5 547,397.4 11,526.8 197,858.0 58,809.7 197,448.0 1,015,824.0 534,115.7 11,526.8 178,631.6 1,455,253.3 1,718,254.2 2,041,406.9 1,996,355.8 1,629.6 27,968.1 17,459.1 3,416.8 52.7 32.5 1,305,466.4 9,987.6 229.0 90,641.1 1,635.8 27,158.0 16,899.9 2,890.3 77.0 26.6 1,586,963.1 9,739.3 208.0 74,292.0 1,644.6 27,600.3 17,067.4 3,520.2 85.4 37.6 1,905,591.1 11,350.9 1,862.0 74,292.0 1,635.8 27,158.0 16,899.9 2,890.3 77.0 26.6 1,864,252.8 10,429.7 208.0 74,413.5 1,455,253.3 1,718,254.2 2,041,406.9 1,996,355.8 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Transfers Out Fund General Fund Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund Tobacco Products Tax Fund Children's Health Insurance Program Budget Neutrality Compliance Fund Healthcare Group Fund Temporary Medical Coverage Fund The Executive recommends a total increase of $287.4 million for forecast caseload and inflation growth in AHCCCS programs, which includes a General Fund increase of $294.8 million and a Childrenʹs Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Fund reduction of ($7.4 million). The recommended expenditure changes are driven by the growth in the number of members (caseload), rate inflation, and changes in the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP). For AHCCCS’s largest program – Capitation – the Executive forecasts a caseload increase of 9.1% in June 2009 over June 2008, and 6.1% in June 2010 over June 2009. This reflects a continuation of the growth trend over the most recent 12‐month period, from December 2007 to November 2008. This trend is applied in addition to a one‐month increase of 1.8% in December 2008 over November 2008, based on agency‐reported preliminary actual expenditures for December. Capitation rate growth is forecast at 6% for contract year 2010. The forecast also includes an FMAP of 65.75% for contract year 2010. 294,807.4 General Fund Childrenʹs Health Insurance Program Fund Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (7,410.7) FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 Tobacco Tax Offset 7,888.7 Tobacco Tax collections are utilized in the AHCCCS Acute Care and Proposition 204 programs. For every additional dollar collected, one less dollar of General Fund money is required. For FY 2010, the Executive forecasts a reduction of ($22.1 million) in total Tobacco Tax collections. This amount includes reductions of ($10.5 million) in the Medically Needy account of the Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund and ($3.8 million) in the Emergency Health Services account of the Tobacco Products Tax Fund. Additionally, the Executive forecasts a reduction of ($7.9 million) in the non‐ appropriated Proposition 204 Protection Account of the Tobacco Products Tax Fund. As this fund is non‐appropriated, this amount is not included here. The forecast revenue losses result in an Executive recommendation for corresponding expenditure reductions from these funds. These reductions are offset by an increased General Fund recommendation of $22.1 million. General Fund Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund 22,132.3 (10,487.1) Tobacco Products Tax Fund (3,756.5) Tobacco Settlement Offset (4,276.1) The Executive recommends a General Fund reduction of ($4.3 million) as a result of the preliminary forecast increase of $4.3 million in tobacco settlement receipts in FY 2009 over the FY 2009 appropriation. The Tobacco Litigation Settlement Fund is non‐ appropriated, so this increase is not reflected here. Given the variability in tobacco settlement receipts, the FY 2009 forecast is also used as the FY 2010 forecast pending further information. General Fund Eliminate Increased County Contributions (4,276.1) 0.0 The Executive recommends the elimination in FY 2010 of appropriation authority for the expenditure of two FY 2009 deposits of county money, totaling $45.8 million, in the Budget Neutrality Compliance Fund (BNCF). The first deposit is $17.8 million of prior‐year reversions from the Arizona Long Term Care System Fund that, rather than being refunded to counties per A.R.S. § 11‐292(M), is mandated in session law to be deposited in the BNCF. The second is a BNCF deposit of $24.2 million from Maricopa County and $3.8 million from Pima County, also mandated in session law. Note that, as part of the statewide FY 2010 Budget Management Plan, the Executive recommends the continuation of these payments from Maricopa and Pima Counties, but proposes transferring the money from the BNCF to the General Fund. Because this $45.8 million in BNCF expenditures offsets General Fund State Match for AHCCCS programs in FY 2009, its elimination in FY 2010 requires an increased appropriation of $45.8 million General Fund. General Fund Budget Neutrality Compliance Fund 45,793.3 (45,793.3) FY 2010 Outlier Methodology Change ‐ Year 3 (10,800.0) The Executive recommends a ($10.8 million) General Fund reduction for the increased savings in the third year of the three‐ year implementation of an outlier methodology change that was first adopted for FY 2008. This change represented a shift of payment methodology for extraordinarily expensive billings from a single statewide ratio of costs to hospital charges (the Cost‐to‐ Charge ratio, or CCR) to the most recent, and annually updated, Medicare‐calculated statewide urban and statewide rural CCRs. Given that hospital charges were estimated to have grown more rapidly than costs, and the CCRs had not been updated since 1998, this change is estimated to save $25.6 million in State match in FY 2010. This amount is $10.8 million more than the outlier methodology change savings estimated for FY 2009. General Fund (10,800.0) 811.9 ADOA Data Center and Rent Obligations The Executive recommends a total increase for Data Center and rent charges of $811,900, of which $564,200 is General Fund and $247,700 is the Childrenʹs Health Insurance Program (CHIP) Fund. The General Fund figure includes $59,800 for private sector rent and $504,400 for the AHCCCS usage of the ADOA Data Center. Both of these costs represent obligations that, if not funded, will have to be paid from the AHCCCS base budget. General Fund 564.2 Childrenʹs Health Insurance Program Fund 247.7 0.0 BNCF Inflationary Adjustment The Executive recommends a reduction in the General Fund appropriation and an increase in the Budget Neutrality Compliance Fund appropriation for the inflationary adjustment required by A.R.S. § 11‐292(O). General Fund (121.5) Budget Neutrality Compliance Fund 121.5 Maricopa County Contribution Inflationary Adjustment 327.6 The Executive recommends $327,600 from the General Fund to replace an inflationary reduction to the Maricopa County contribution for Acute Care costs, as mandated by A.R.S. § 11‐292. 327.6 General Fund Acute Care SSDI ‐ TMC (3,247.2) The Executive recommends the continued suspension of the Temporary Medical Coverage Program. Accordingly, the Executive continues the ($8.4 million) FY 2009 General Fund suspension into FY 2010 and recommends a reduction of ($3.2 million) in FY 2010 to eliminate the appropriation from the Temporary Medical Coverage Fund. Temporary Medical Coverage Fund (3,247.2) FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 State Agency Budgets Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System 13 68,915.3 Caseload and Inflation The Executive recommends a General Fund increase of $85.4 million for caseload expenditures that are forecast to exceed the current appropriation in FY 2009. General Fund 85,400.4 Childrenʹs Health Insurance Program Fund Tobacco Tax Offset (16,485.1) 5,633.1 Tobacco Tax collections are utilized within the AHCCCS Acute Care and Proposition 204 programs. For every additional dollar collected, one less dollar of General Fund money is required. For FY 2009, the Executive forecasts a reduction of ($15.7 million) in total Tobacco Tax collections. This includes a reduction of ($7.4 million) in the Medically Needy account of the Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund and ($2.7 million) in the Emergency Health Services account of the Tobacco Products Tax Fund. Additionally, the Executive forecasts a reduction of ($5.6 million) in revenue to the non‐appropriated Proposition 204 Protection Account of the Tobacco Products Tax Fund. As this fund is non‐appropriated this amount does not appear here. These forecast revenue losses result in an Executive recommendation for corresponding expenditure reductions from these funds. These reductions are offset by an increased General Fund recommendation of $15.7 million. General Fund 15,710.2 Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund (7,394.7) Tobacco Products Tax Fund (2,682.4) Tobacco Settlement Offset Eliminate Increased County Contributions 0.0 In current law, $24.2 million from Maricopa County and $3.8 million from Pima County is transferred to the Budget Neutrality Compliance Fund (BNCF). Additionally, $17.8 million of prior‐ year reversions from the Arizona Long Term Care System Fund, rather than being refunded to counties per A.R.S. § 11‐292(M), is mandated in session law to be deposited in the BNCF. These monies are appropriated to AHCCCS as state match for the Arizona Long‐Term Care System in place of General Fund. In past fiscal relief bills, the federal government has required that, as a condition of the receipt of federal relief by the states, the proportion of state match expenses incurred by local governments be no higher than it was in the year preceding the current year. Assuming that this language is also included in the current year fiscal relief billl, this shift of expenses from the General Fund to the BNCF would likely put Arizona in violation of that requirement. Accordingly, the Executive proposes changing the session law so that the transfer is deposited directly into the State General Fund. In the AHCCCS appropriation, the Executive recommends that the BNCF appropriation be reduced by ($45.8 million) and the General Fund appropriation be increased by $45.8 million. The transfer from the counties will be implemented, but it will be reflected as a revenue increase to the General Fund. General Fund 45,793.3 Budget Neutrality Compliance Fund (45,793.3) (4,276.1) The Executive recommends a General Fund reduction of $4.3 million as a result of the preliminary forecast increase of $4.3 million in tobacco settlement receipts in FY 2009 over the FY 2009 appropriation. The Tobacco Litigation Settlement Fund is non‐ appropriated, so this increase is not reflected in this publication. General Fund 14 (4,276.1) Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Percent of invoices paid within 30 days Percent of total programmatic payments completed electronically Percent of enrollees filing a grievance Member satisfaction: percent of choice exercised in moving from current health plan Percent of applications processed on time Cost avoidance from Predetermination Quality Control Program (in millions) Percent of members utilizing home and community based services Percent of well child visits in the first 15 months of life - Early Periodic Screening, Diagnosis and Treatment FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 96 94 95 95 96.6 96.8 90 90 .28 .15 .5 .5 3.5 2.1 3.5 3.5 91 89 97 97 16.61 19.39 19.39 19.39 64 64.09 65.3 65.3 57 57 58 60 ¾ The current national mean for Medicaid managed care plans is 47%, so AHCCCS is performing well above the comparable national average. Percent of women receiving cervical screening within a three year period KidsCare monthly enrollment 57 60 62 64 64,446 65,832 71,624 78,429 76 77 80 83 Percent of children with access to primary care provider ¾ Changed measurement to rate by age group. Projections revised based on data obtained from AHCCCS Data Decision Support System (ADDS), with projected rates by specific age group. The above rates are for members ages 1-19 enrolled under KidsCare. Percent of employee turnover 18.93 13.03 16 16 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 47,309.3 9,751,623.0 0.49% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program with special line items. State Agency Budgets Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System 15 APA State Board of Appraisal Administrative Costs Mission: To promote quality real estate appraisal in Arizona that protects the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage Description: The State Board of Appraisal processes the applications of those applying for real estate appraiser licensure, certification, or tax agent registration, assuring that all candidates meet the education and experience requirements as set forth by the Appraisal Qualification Board of the Appraisal Foundation. The Board acts as a disciplinary body to ensure conformity to the statutes, rules, and regulations governing the Board. In addition to protecting the interests of the general public, the Board provides services for appraisers, course providers, property tax agents, other state appraisal boards, and lending institutions. FY 2010 FY 2011 1.5 1.5 622.0 622.0 0.24% 0.24% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. The State Board of Appraisal is mandated by federal Title XI. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensure/Certification/Reg ulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 607.5 621.8 621.8 621.8 607.5 621.8 621.8 621.8 4.5 232.7 88.2 185.3 7.7 4.5 0.0 84.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 4.5 284.1 80.8 159.9 7.6 4.0 0.0 80.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 4.5 284.1 80.8 159.9 7.6 4.0 0.0 80.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 4.5 284.1 80.8 159.9 7.6 4.0 0.0 80.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.8 607.5 621.8 621.8 621.8 607.5 621.8 621.8 621.8 607.5 621.8 621.8 621.8 Fund Board of Appraisal Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Number of new and existing licensees Number of complaints received against appraisers Average days from receipt of complaint to resolution 16 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 3,317 2,745 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 2,745 2,745 247 250 275 275 123 130 130 130 State Board of Appraisal FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget HUA Performance Measures Arizona Commission on the Arts Mission: To ensure Arizona is a place where people broaden, deepen and diversify their engagement with the arts, as creators, audiences and supporters, in ways that are satisfying and integral to their lives. Description: The Arizona Commission on the Arts (ACA) supports a statewide arts industry that serves Arizona residents and visitors. Through education, economic development and citizen engagement, the arts help build communities that are healthy, vital and creative. The Commission provides Arizonans and Arizona communities with direct training, technical assistance, resources and grants to build and stabilize an arts industry that can serve Arizona citizens into the future. The Commission maximizes resources in four key areas: Partnerships, Leadership Activities, Services and Strategic Funding. The 15 Governor‐appointed Commissioners and agency staff work in partnership with arts organizations, artists, schools and communities to deliver meaningful arts experiences, enhance academic performance in schools and celebrate our collective heritage. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Arts Support Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,023.4 1,930.8 1,930.8 1,930.8 2,023.4 1,930.8 1,930.8 1,930.8 11.5 468.0 117.2 24.4 8.8 3.4 1,344.4 27.4 29.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 420.5 123.0 25.2 6.1 10.0 1,245.5 95.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 420.5 123.0 25.2 6.1 10.0 1,245.5 95.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.5 420.5 123.0 25.2 6.1 10.0 1,245.5 95.0 5.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,023.4 1,930.8 1,930.8 1,930.8 2,023.4 1,930.8 1,930.8 1,930.8 2,023.4 1,930.8 1,930.8 1,930.8 Individuals benefiting from programs sponsored by agency (in thousands) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 7,141.0 7,200.0 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 7,250.0 7,300.0 ¾ Figures for this measure are compiled in our online grants program (EGOR) and reflect the total number of persons benefitting from programs supported by ACA grants; figures provided by grantees as a part of their annual final reports. Constituent satisfaction ratings (scale of 0-8) 7.20 7.00 7.00 7.00 ¾ Figures for this measure are compiled by Commission staff and reflect ratings from the agency's annual satisfaction survey as well as evaluations from all presentations, convenings, workshops and review panels. Though the Commission has enjoyed superior constituent satisfaction ratings for several fiscal years, we are not projecting an increase given the fact that our rating is already so high. The cumulative contributions to Arizona ArtShare increase in both non-designated funds and contributions to arts organization endowments (in thousands) 43,289.0 44,000.0 44,500.0 45,000.0 ¾ Figures for this measure reflect the cumulative contributions to statewide arts endowments since the inception of ArtShare. Each year Arizona arts organizations that maintain endowments are asked to send data detailing their endowment totals to the Commission. Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 253.1 253.1 5,644.0 5,644.0 4.48% 4.48% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund General Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Community Service 1,360.3 1,263.1 1,263.1 1,263.1 Project State Agency Budgets Arizona Commission on the Arts 17 AGA Attorney General ‐ Department of Law Mission: To provide comprehensive legal protection to the citizens of Arizona and quality legal services to the state agencies of Arizona. Description: The Office of the Attorney General was created by Article V, Section I of the Arizona Constitution. The Attorney General is an elected position and holds office for a four‐year term. Powers of the Attorney General are conferred by the Arizona Constitution and by statute. The fundamental obligation of the Attorney General is to act as legal advisor to all state agencies except those few exempted by law. Additionally, primary responsibilities include prosecuting and defending proceedings in which the State has an interest and rendering written opinions upon questions of law. To fulfill these responsibilities, the Department of Law is comprised of eight divisions. These divisions are the Child and Family Protection Division, the Civil Division, the Civil Rights Division, the Criminal Division, the Finance Division, the Public Advocacy Division, the Administrative Operations Division, and Executive Administration. Each division is further organized into sections which specialize in a particular area of practice. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Legal Services Central Administration Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 54,622.2 7,438.8 59,005.1 6,317.8 59,673.4 6,317.8 59,673.4 6,317.8 62,061.0 65,322.9 65,991.2 65,991.2 644.9 36,352.4 11,496.1 1,557.6 243.8 125.9 2,663.1 7,897.2 607.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,117.6 644.9 38,412.6 11,992.6 3,395.5 236.1 94.5 2,693.9 7,493.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,004.1 644.9 38,976.4 12,097.1 3,395.5 236.1 94.5 2,693.9 7,493.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,004.1 644.9 38,976.4 12,097.1 3,395.5 236.1 94.5 2,693.9 7,493.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,004.1 62,061.0 65,322.9 65,991.2 65,991.2 23,964.8 2,134.8 23,107.4 3,948.7 23,775.7 3,948.7 23,775.7 3,948.7 142.6 239.9 239.9 239.9 3,640.0 4,916.3 4,916.3 4,916.3 Attorney General Agency Services Fund Victims Rights Fund Risk Management Fund Attorney General Legal Services Cost Allocation Fund Agency Total 13,127.6 13,378.8 13,378.8 13,378.8 3,242.9 9,138.5 6,669.8 3,277.4 9,771.5 6,682.9 3,277.4 9,771.5 6,682.9 3,277.4 9,771.5 6,682.9 62,061.0 65,322.9 65,991.2 65,991.2 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Grand Jury 177.6 179.0 179.0 179.0 SLI Victims' Rights 3,242.9 3,277.4 3,277.4 3,277.4 SLI Crane Lawsuit 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 SLI Military Airport 67.6 100.0 100.0 100.0 Planning Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Continuation of Vital CERF Funding 0.0 0.0 In FY 2004, the Attorney Generalʹs Office was appropriated a $1.5 million increase from the Collection Enforcement Revolving Fund (CERF) to fund 23.0 FTE positions. The FY 2005 appropriation continued the increase and included an additional $200,000 for expert witness fees. The appropriations for FYs 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009 have continued the $1.7 million increase. The Criminal Justice Budget Reconciliation Bills have, beginning in FY 2005, included language that allows the Attorney Generalʹs Office to use CERF monies for operating expenses. The Executive recommends giving permanent authority to the Attorney General to use CERF monies for operating expenses. The $1.7 million appropriation would remain unchanged from FY 2009. Attorney General Collection Enforcement Fund 0.0 0.0 Fund General Fund Consumer Protection/Fraud Revolving Fund Attorney General Antitrust Revolving Attorney General Collection Enforcement 18 Attorney General ‐ Department of Law FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement Arbitration FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 0.0 In 1998, 46 states, including Arizona, signed an agreement with the five largest tobacco manufacturers that gives the states billions of dollars and requires the states to ʺdiligently enforceʺ the tobacco master settlement agreement (MSA). Arizona and the other states are involved in a legal action brought by the participating tobacco companies, which are challenging whether the states have diligently enforced the MSA. The challenge is being arbitrated. If the State of Arizona prevails, the tobacco companies will owe the State $11.1 million; if the State loses, the tobacco companies could withhold up to $91.6 million in future payments. Laws 2008, Chapter 286 authorized the Attorney Generalʹs Office to use $1.7 million from the Consumer Fraud Revolving Fund to fund arbitration expenses. The Executive recommends that the Attorney Generalʹs Office be given authority for the continued use of $1.7 million from the Consumer Fraud Revolving Fund for arbitration costs, as the legal action is likely to extend past June 30, 2009. Consumer Protection/Fraud Revolving Fund 0.0 0.0 Legal Services Cost Allocation Fund 668.3 668.3 The Legal Services Cost Allocation Fund was established by A.R.S. § 41‐191.09 to provide reimbursement to the Department of Law for general agency counsel. All state appropriated and non‐ appropriated funds contribute a pro rata share of 0.675 percent of total payroll for each fund. Due to the fluctuations in the Stateʹs payroll every two weeks, the amount deposited in the Fund for the Department of Lawʹs use is inconsistent. To provide stability for the Department, the Executive recommends an increase of $668,300 to the Attorney Generalʹs General Fund appropriation. General Fund 668.3 Performance Measures Percentage of cases resolved using voluntary settlement agreements FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 15.0 12.0 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 12.0 13.0 ¾ The Division has an experienced and well-staffed Conflict Resolution Program that was very successful in increasing the number of cases resolved using voluntary settlement agreements during FY2008. In addition, our experienced litigation attorneys resolved numerous administrative cases through voluntary settlement agreements. Percentage of death penalty sentences affirmed by the Arizona Supreme Court Customer satisfaction rating for client agencies (scale of 1 to 8, with 8 the highest) Days to respond to a request for a legal opinion 100 90 90 90 7.17 7.20 7.20 7.20 42 60 60 60 ¾ FY2008 Actual was less than expected due to a decrease in opinion requests and a higher number of same day and/or one-day turnarounds. Percent of agency staff turnover 18.70 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 18.70 18.70 18.70 FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 98,602.0 0.0 97,017.0 0.00% 0.00% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. 668.3 FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 Interagency Service Agreements 1,337.9 The Attorney Generalʹs Office provides contracted legal services for state agencies, boards and commissions through interagency service agreements. However, as state agencies are implementing budget reductions, the Attorney Generalʹs Office is experiencing a reduction of funding through interagency service agreements due to cancellation or reduction of contracted legal services by state agencies. The Executive recommends a General Fund increase to provide stability for the Attorney Generalʹs Office due to the cancellation and reduction of interagency service agreements. General Fund State Agency Budgets 1,337.9 Attorney General ‐ Department of Law 19 ATA Performance Measures Automobile Theft Authority Mission: To deter vehicle theft through a statewide cooperative effort by supporting law enforcement activities, vertical prosecution, and public awareness/community education programs. Description: The Arizona Automobile Theft Authority (AATA) analyzes the crime of vehicle theft, develops deterrence strategies, and promotes successful methods to address the problem. Funding is used to support law enforcement activities, vertical prosecution, and public awareness/ community education programs designed to combat and deter vehicle theft statewide. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Automobile Theft Authority Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 5,435.3 6,016.7 6,016.7 6,016.7 5,435.3 6,016.7 6,016.7 6,016.7 6.0 337.5 122.3 9.4 4.8 11.9 4,807.7 138.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 339.3 144.2 16.1 4.8 11.9 5,343.4 141.7 15.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 339.3 144.2 16.1 4.8 11.9 5,343.4 141.7 15.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 339.3 144.2 16.1 4.8 11.9 5,343.4 141.7 15.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5,435.3 6,016.7 6,016.7 6,016.7 5,435.3 6,016.7 6,016.7 6,016.7 5,435.3 6,016.7 6,016.7 6,016.7 Number of vehicle theft rate statewide (# per 100,000 population) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected n/a 930 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 920 910 ¾ FY 2007 actual is not available because data is collected on a calendar year basis using data provided by the FBI Unified Crime Report and is not available until October of the following calendar year. Customer satisfaction rating (scale of 1-3, 1 highest rating) Number of felony arrests by Task Force Number of "chop shops" investigated by Task Force Return on investment (for every dollar funded by the Arizona Auto Theft Authority amount recovered by Task Force) 1 1 1 1 326 300 300 300 27 30 30 30 14.03 12.00 12.00 12.00 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 373.7 FY 2011 373.7 6,017.0 6,017.0 6.21% 6.21% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund Automobile Theft Authority Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Auto Theft Authority 4,807.7 5,293.4 5,293.4 5,293.4 Grants SLI Reimbursable Programs 0.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 20 Automobile Theft Authority FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget BBA Performance Measures Board of Barber Examiners Mission: To preserve the public welfare and health through the development and enforcement of adequate sanitation procedures, rules, and laws governing barbers and barbering establishments. Description: The Arizona Board of Barbers communicates with licensees regarding proper sanitation methods and changes in the law; administers barbering examinations; grants and renews licenses; inspects barbering establishments; investigates consumer complaints regarding unlawful activities; and takes effective measures to resolve complaints, including holding hearings, levying fines, and suspending or revoking licenses. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 272.1 328.2 328.2 349.2 272.1 328.2 328.2 349.2 3.6 152.8 57.7 2.7 16.3 3.9 0.0 32.4 6.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 162.6 57.7 20.4 44.0 2.6 0.0 39.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 162.6 57.7 20.4 44.0 2.6 0.0 39.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 180.1 61.2 20.4 44.0 2.6 0.0 39.9 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 272.1 328.2 328.2 349.2 272.1 328.2 328.2 349.2 272.1 328.2 328.2 349.2 Number of barber/instructor and shop/school licenses Number of complaints received Average number of calendar days from receipt of application to issuance or denial Number of inspections conducted FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 6,891 7,000 350 330 340 350 2 3 3 3 1,619 3,200 3,200 3,200 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 7,200 7,400 FY 2010 21.2 FY 2011 21.2 328.0 378.0 6.46% 5.61% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund Barber Examiners Board Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Annual Leave Payout 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.0 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Annual Leave Payout 0.0 21.0 The Executive recommends a $21,000 special line appropriation for the annual leave payouts for three employees eligible for retirement in FY 2011. If the funding is not used for annual leave payout, it will revert to the Board of Barbers Fund. Barber Examiners Board Fund State Agency Budgets 0.0 21.0 Board of Barber Examiners 21 BHA Mission: To establish and maintain standards of qualifications and performance for licensed behavioral health professionals in the fields of counseling, marriage and family therapy, social work, and substance abuse counseling and to regulate the practice of licensed behavioral health professionals for the protection of the public. Description: The Board licenses and biennially renews licensure for approximately 8,000 behavioral health professionals, which requires that these professionals meet minimum standards of education, experience, and competency as measured by examination. The Board also receives and investigates complaints, takes necessary disciplinary action, and responds to inquiries from consumers regarding the licensure status and complaint history of individual behavioral health professionals. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,342.4 1,367.2 1,440.1 1,446.1 1,342.4 1,367.2 1,440.1 1,446.1 17.0 659.3 260.7 224.6 2.9 1.2 0.0 178.7 9.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 17.0 700.1 322.5 158.7 10.0 8.3 0.0 164.5 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 700.1 322.5 231.6 10.0 8.3 0.0 164.5 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 700.1 322.5 237.6 10.0 8.3 0.0 164.5 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,342.4 1,367.2 1,440.1 1,446.1 1,342.4 1,367.2 1,440.1 1,446.1 1,342.4 1,367.2 1,440.1 1,446.1 Fund Behavioral Health Examiner Fund Agency Total cost is $150,700. In FY 2010 and FY 2011, the AAG’s expenses will increase by $6,000 each year, as stipulated in cost projections by the Office of the Attorney General. Because of the increase in the Board’s cost for the AAG services, in FY 2009 the Board has contracted for only 80% of its AAG’s time, which has required the Board to delay hearings. Due to a large backlog of cases and the increased expense of contracting for an Assistant Attorney General (AAG), the Executive recommends increases, from the Behavioral Health Fund, of $36,800 in FY 2010 and $42,800 in FY 2011, which will allow the Board to hear cases throughout FY 2010 and FY 2011. Executive Recommendations 36.1 36.1 The Board has not received a funding increase since FY 2006. Since that time, fees paid to the Office of Administrative Hearings, court reporter fees and expert witness fees increased by $10,600 between FY 2006 and FY 2007 and by $15,500 between FY 2007 and FY 2008 and are expected to increase by $10,000 in FY 2009. The Board is delaying formal hearings due to a lack of appropriation. The Executive recommends an increase of $36,100 in FY 2010 and $36,100 in FY 2011 from the Behavioral Health Fund in order to pay for increased expenses without inhibiting the Board’s ability to operate and process complaints. The Board raised renewal fees in the beginning of FY 2009 to support increased appropriations. If the Board lacks adequate resources to prosecute complaints, it will be forced to settle without going into formal hearings, seriously compromising its ability to impose adequate sanctions to protect the public from incompetent or predatory licensees. 22 36.1 Behavioral Health Examiners Fund 36.1 Performance Measures Number of new and existing licenses issued Average number of days to renew a license from receipt of application to issuance Average days to resolve a complaint FY 2011 36.8 42.8 On average, the Board has suspended or revoked the licenses of 20 licensees annually since 2007. Typical complaints resulting in revocation include billing fraud, taking financial advantage of a client, drug or alcohol addiction problems, engaging in sexual activity with current or former clients, and failure to comply with Board regulations. The current FY 2009 budget to employ an Assistant Attorney General (AAG) is $119,900, while the actual 42.8 Increase in Formal Hearing Expenses FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 8,241 7,861 17 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 7,960 8,087 20 20 20 570 500 300 180 118 150 150 150 Administrative Costs Executive Issues Increase In Legal Services Expenses 36.8 Behavioral Health Examiners Fund Number of complaints received about licensees FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2010 Board of Behavioral Health Examiners FY 2010 FY 2011 115.0 115.0 1,473.0 1,476.0 7.79% 7.81% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Board of Behavioral Health Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget DIA Arizona Biomedical Research Commission Mission: To advance medical research within the state of Arizona. Description: The Biomedical Research Commission awards contracts for medical research projects studying the causes of disease, epidemiology and diagnosis of disease; the formulation of cures; medically accepted treatment; and prevention of diseases. The Commission oversees the projects to ensure contract compliance and serves as the technology transfer agent for discoveries made using state funding. The Commission also awards and manages additional contracts designed to advance biotechnology in the academic, non‐profit and for‐profit sectors in Arizona. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Arizona Biomedical Research Commission Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 Fund Health Research Fund Agency Total Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 629.0 629.0 15,719.0 15,719.0 4.00% 4.00% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. State Agency Budgets Arizona Biomedical Research Commission 23 PDA State Capital Post‐Conviction Public Defender Office Mission: To provide representation to capital defendants in post conviction proceedings, as assigned by the Supreme Court, in accordance with guidelines established by the American Bar Association. Description: The State Capital Post‐Conviction Public Defender Office was established by Laws 2006, Chapter 369, and began accepting cases in September 2007. All capital convictions are automatically appealed to the State Supreme Court. If the sentence is affirmed on appeal, the Supreme Court appoints counsel to represent the inmate in state post conviction relief proceedings. The agency will accept appointments from the Supreme Court to the extent resources allow. Counties are responsible for reimbursing the state for one‐half of the resources expended, limited to $30,000 per case. Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 168.8 FY 2011 169.0 1,821.0 1,777.0 9.27% 9.51% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. The Agency is bound by the Arizona Rules of Criminal Procedure, specifically, Rule 6.8, which provides that counsel shall be guided by the performance standards in the 2003 American Bar Association Guidelines for the Appointment and Performance of Defense Counsel in Death Penalty Cases. The Guidelines, require, among other things, the formation of a defense team consisting of two lawyers, a mitigation specialist, and an investigator for each case. At least one member of the team must be qualified by training and experience to screen individuals for the presence of mental or psychological disorders or impairments. Expert witnesses will be frequently utilized by the Agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Capital Post-Conviction Public Defender Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 779.2 870.9 870.9 870.9 779.2 870.9 870.9 870.9 7.0 397.4 132.8 59.8 2.0 10.8 0.0 109.9 66.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 498.6 152.7 87.5 3.5 20.0 0.0 101.6 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 498.6 152.7 87.5 3.5 20.0 0.0 101.6 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 498.6 152.7 87.5 3.5 20.0 0.0 101.6 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 779.2 870.9 870.9 870.9 779.2 870.9 870.9 870.9 779.2 870.9 870.9 870.9 Fund General Fund Agency Total 24 State Capital Post‐Conviction Public Defender Office FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget CSA Performance Measures State Board for Charter Schools Mission: To foster accountability in charter schools, which will improve student achievement through market choice. Description: The Arizona State Board of Charter Schools reviews new and renewal applications and grants charters to qualified applicants and oversees all aspects of the charter schools it sponsors, which includes academic, financial and statutory compliance as well as adherence to the terms and conditions in the charter contract. State Board for Charter Schools Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 811.3 828.7 828.7 828.7 811.3 828.7 828.7 828.7 8.0 447.3 185.1 27.8 7.2 2.8 0.1 138.3 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 455.2 185.1 43.1 13.3 3.0 0.0 129.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 455.2 185.1 43.1 13.3 3.0 0.0 129.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 455.2 185.1 43.1 13.3 3.0 0.0 129.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 811.3 828.7 828.7 828.7 811.3 828.7 828.7 828.7 811.3 828.7 828.7 828.7 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 34 34 ¾ This number reflects the total number of unique applications received. Number of sponsorship applications approved Number of sponsored charters with one or more sites in operation 13 15 15 15 341 351 361 371 ¾ The numbers include all State Board of Education sponsored schools since the Charter School Board has agreed to provide oversight for these schools. Number of sponsored charter school sites in operation Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Number of sponsorship applications received FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 34 34 439 443 447 451 ¾ The numbers include all State Board of Education sponsored schools since the Charter School Board has agreed to provide oversight for these schools. Number of annual on-site monitoring visits Customer satisfaction survey (Scale 18) Number of annual complaints regarding sponsored schools 141 104 145 168 6.4 6.6 6.8 7 104 100 95 90 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 34.6 FY 2011 34.6 1,056.0 1,045.0 3.28% 3.31% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets State Board for Charter Schools 25 CEA Performance Measures State Board of Chiropractic Examiners Mission: To protect the health, welfare, and safety of Arizona citizens who seek and use chiropractic care. Description: The Board of Chiropractic Examiners conducts examinations and evaluates applications from chiropractors seeking initial or renewal of licensure, as well as from persons seeking participation in Board‐approved preceptorship or chiropractic assistant programs. The Board investigates backgrounds of applicants for licensure and complaints made against chiropractors and conducts administrative hearings as required. The Board provides information to the public concerning applicants, licensees, and regulatory actions taken. These functions are accomplished through a fees‐financed program of examination, licensure, and regulation. Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. Number of licenses eligible for renewal Percent of license renewal applications processed within 15 business days Total number of investigations conducted 94 95 95 95 224 200 150 150 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 2,620 2,620 FY 2010 70.1 FY 2011 70.1 475.0 465.0 14.76% 15.08% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 2,619 2,700 FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 617.1 520.4 474.8 464.8 617.1 520.4 474.8 464.8 5.0 254.7 84.3 84.3 7.8 2.1 0.0 73.2 1.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 109.2 5.0 254.6 84.3 88.5 8.3 0.0 0.0 84.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 254.6 84.3 42.9 8.3 0.0 0.0 84.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 254.6 84.3 32.9 8.3 0.0 0.0 84.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 617.1 520.4 474.8 464.8 617.1 520.4 474.8 464.8 617.1 520.4 474.8 464.8 Fund Chiropractic Examiners Board Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Appropriation Reduction (45.6) (55.6) The Boardʹs appropriation has historically been higher than revenues, and it seeks to align its expenditures with anticipated revenues. The Executive recommends reductions from the Chiropractic Examiners Board Fund of ($45,600) in FY 2010 and ($55,600) in FY 2011. Chiropractic Examiners Board Fund 26 (45.6) (55.6) State Board of Chiropractic Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget EPA Department of Commerce Mission: To provide state leadership to create and retain quality jobs and strengthen Arizonaʹs economic base. Description: As the State’s principal economic development agency, the Department develops and implements the state’s economic development plan directed at creating and retaining quality jobs statewide. Accordingly, the Department implements strategies that promote Arizona’s global competitiveness; collects and disseminates economic and business‐related information; supports community infrastructure and economic planning in rural areas; facilitates the coordination of the state’s workforce development system; supports the expansion of existing businesses, including small and minority‐owned businesses; conducts targeted business attraction to enhance economic diversification; and promotes international trade and investment. SLI Small Business Advocate SLI International Trade Offices SLI CEDC Commission SLI Nation Law Center SLI Advertising and Promotion SLI Sonora Trade Office SLI Rural Economic Development SLI Economic Development Matching Funds SLI Main Street SLI Rural Economic Development Initiative (REDI) Matching Grants SLI Military Airport Planning 110.7 1,491.4 127.0 1,716.6 127.0 1,716.6 127.0 1,716.6 250.9 200.0 414.0 196.5 200.0 659.2 196.5 200.0 659.2 196.5 200.0 659.2 25.0 319.4 25.0 340.1 25.0 340.1 25.0 340.1 33.7 104.0 104.0 104.0 112.5 33.1 130.0 45.0 130.0 45.0 130.0 45.0 4,608.2 100.0 2,100.0 2,100.0 Executive Recommendations Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Administration and Finance Business Development Workforce Development Community Development FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,659.7 2,987.4 2,941.3 7,183.2 2,773.2 3,673.2 2,821.9 1,801.4 2,955.0 3,673.2 2,821.9 3,801.4 2,955.0 3,673.2 2,821.9 3,801.4 15,771.6 11,069.7 13,251.5 13,251.5 79.9 3,528.0 1,147.1 1,347.4 74.5 49.6 203.9 1,216.6 72.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 8,132.3 73.9 3,682.5 1,268.8 1,418.7 85.3 60.0 297.0 1,516.2 59.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,682.0 74.9 3,817.5 1,302.6 1,418.7 85.3 60.0 297.0 3,524.2 64.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,682.0 74.9 3,817.5 1,302.6 1,418.7 85.3 60.0 297.0 3,524.2 64.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,682.0 Agency Total 15,771.6 11,069.7 13,251.5 13,251.5 General Fund Lottery Fund Commerce Development Bond Fund Commerce and Economic Development Oil Overcharge Fund 13,470.4 279.0 140.4 7,385.2 286.2 144.7 9,817.0 286.2 144.7 9,817.0 286.2 144.7 1,881.8 3,068.7 2,818.7 2,818.7 0.0 184.9 184.9 184.9 Agency Total 15,771.6 11,069.7 13,251.5 13,251.5 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Fund FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Population Statistics Unit Requirements 181.8 181.8 Consistent with the findings and enhancement recommendations by the Arizona Data Estimates and Population Task Force (ADEPT), the Executive recommends additional resources to strengthen the Department’s research capabilities in order to meet State and local government needs. The ADEPT recommendations call for creating a State Demographer position and strengthening labor market information analysis. The recommendation provides $116,300 to establish 1.0 FTE State Demographer position that will focus on removing the programʹs shortcomings and lead the Population Statistics Unit to work on active and applied research. Also included in the recommendation is $65,500 for 1.0 unfunded vacant research position to support rural and small Arizona communities. General Fund 181.8 181.8 Military Installation Planning 2,000.0 2,000.0 Laws 2004, Chapter 235, appropriates $4.8 million annually from the General Fund to the Military Installation Fund. Due to a revenue shortfall, in FY 2009 this amount was temporarily eliminated. For FY 2010 and FY 2011, the recommendation would include session law to suspend the amount provided in Chapter 235 and appropriate $2 million from the General Fund to the Military Installation Fund. General Fund 2,000.0 2,000.0 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Women & Minority94.6 129.6 129.6 129.6 Owned Business State Agency Budgets Department of Commerce 27 CEDC Fund ‐ Funding Shift and GF Restoration FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 0.0 The Commerce and Economic Development Commission (CEDC) Fund provides funding for business retention, expansion and relocation and the creation and expansion of economic activities in Arizona’s disadvantaged areas. Funding for the CEDC Fund is derived from two special instant lottery games each fiscal year. Statutes require that no more than 21.5% of the revenues from those games be transferred to the CEDC Fund. The instability and limitations of that funding mechanism significantly impede the Department’s business development and retention efforts, creating a competitive disadvantage when recruiting new companies. Rather than providing funding from the General Fund or other funding sources, the Legislature has appropriated a large portion of the CEDC Fund ($3.0 million) in FY 2009. The relatively high ongoing obligations imposed through the appropriation process have restricted the CEDCʹs efforts to meet its statutory mandate as intended in the enabling legislation. In 2007, the Legislature approved this fund shift but, due to the FY 2009 projected revenue shortfall, the funding was suspended. The recommendation shifts $250,000 and 3.0 FTE from the CEDC Fund to the General Fund, and will help free up $250,000 for the CEDC program to provide financial assistance to small business and strengthen the State’s efforts for job creation and business investment. General Fund Commerce and Economic Development Fund 250.0 250.0 (250.0) (250.0) Performance Measures Percent of surveys marked "very good" or "excellent" from annual survey of Administration Division's internal customers Total number of jobs created by companies participating in the Enterprise Zone program Capital investment made by companies participating in Enterprise Zone program (property tax and income tax programs) (in millions) Potential foreign investors attracted to Arizona for site visits Number of companies recruited to rural locations Average hourly wage rate per job ¾ FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 78 78 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 78 80 5,248 4,700 4,200 4,200 796.9 717 645 645 13 6 6 14 10 10 11 11 19.78 19.00 21.00 21.00 Based on companies receiving business development assistance. Jobs created by companies utilizing Commerce Business Development programs Number of new company relocations, expansions Number of companies assisted 7,156 8,000 8,000 8,000 40 50 42 42 87 75 75 75 Number of workers under contract to be trained 18,270 15,000 15,000 15,000 32 32 ¾ Forecasted to go through training to increase their job skills. Number of projects attracted or facilitated 36 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 32 FY 2010 FY 2011 1,866.4 1,866.4 86,049.0 86,049.0 2.17% 2.17% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. 28 Department of Commerce FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget CMA Arizona Community Colleges Mission: To provide quality, affordable higher‐educational opportunities at local, community campuses. Description: The Arizona community college system is comprised of 10 community college districts and 1 provisional district. Arizonaʹs community colleges provide programs and training in the arts, sciences and humanities, and vocational education leading to an Associates degree, Certificate of Completion, or transfer to a Baccalaureate degree‐granting college or university. SLI Capital Outlay Maricopa SLI Capital Outlay Mohave SLI Capital Outlay Navajo SLI Capital Outlay Pima SLI Capital Outlay Pinal SLI Capital Outlay Yavapai SLI Capital Outlay Yuma/La Paz SLI Equalization Cochise SLI Equalization Graham SLI Equalization Navajo SLI Equalization Yuma/La Paz Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Operating State Aid Capital Outlay State Aid Equalization Aid Gila Provisional Community College Dine College Rural County Reimbursement Subsidy Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 120,053.0 21,054.0 23,493.8 194.0 116,308.8 500.0 27,927.0 194.0 121,723.4 19,932.8 35,926.9 194.0 117,574.6 0.0 27,927.0 194.0 1,750.0 1,200.0 1,750.0 1,000.0 1,750.0 1,000.0 1,750.0 1,000.0 167,744.8 147,679.8 180,527.1 148,445.6 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Agency Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 167,744.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 147,679.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 180,527.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 148,445.6 0.0 0.0 167,744.8 147,679.8 180,527.1 148,445.6 167,744.8 147,679.8 180,527.1 148,445.6 167,744.8 147,679.8 180,527.1 148,445.6 Fund General Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Operating Cochise 8,401.4 8,303.1 8,836.0 8,836.0 SLI Operating Coconino 3,334.6 3,245.4 3,369.1 3,245.4 SLI Operating Gila 620.5 713.0 798.7 775.9 SLI Operating Graham 5,370.4 5,173.2 5,370.4 5,173.2 SLI Operating Maricopa 57,528.3 55,416.1 57,528.3 55,416.1 SLI Operating Mohave 4,196.9 4,063.3 4,344.5 4,344.5 SLI Operating Navajo 4,412.3 4,250.3 4,250.3 4,250.3 SLI Operating Pima 19,593.5 18,874.1 19,986.3 18,874.1 SLI Operating Pinal 6,052.0 5,854.3 6,077.4 5,879.7 SLI Operating Yavapai 4,820.4 4,903.4 5,158.3 4,964.3 SLI Operating Yuma/La Paz 5,722.7 5,512.6 6,004.1 5,815.1 SLI Capital Outlay Cochise 1,060.6 0.0 1,095.0 0.0 SLI Capital Outlay Coconino 423.8 0.0 420.8 0.0 SLI Capital Outlay Gila 133.4 0.0 171.2 0.0 SLI Capital Outlay Graham 510.1 0.0 477.3 0.0 State Agency Budgets 11,204.0 591.2 1,505.7 3,198.9 797.6 703.9 924.8 0.0 0.0 500.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 10,910.7 601.9 483.8 3,235.5 800.5 774.9 961.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,669.7 13,146.5 4,305.2 1,372.4 5,833.4 14,775.7 5,386.5 1,931.4 8,062.6 18,027.1 6,826.8 3,010.4 5,833.4 14,775.7 5,386.5 1,931.4 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Increase in State Aid 1,265.8 The Executive recommends $1.3 million for increased State aid pursuant to A.R.S. § 15‐1466. The most recent audited Full‐time Student Equivalent (FTSE) number is 118,434. Six districts reported enrollment growth eligible for increased State aid, and four districts reported enrollment declines from the previous year. The formula adjusts State aid for districts in which growth exceeds the highest audited FTSE count recorded from and after FY 2004. Adjustments are calculated by multiplying the difference between the most recent audited FTSE number and the second‐ highest count from FY 2004 onward by the most recent appropriated average State aid amount per FTSE. Statute prohibits an automatic adjustment for enrollment declines. General Fund Capital Outlay 1,265.8 (500.0) The Executive recommends suspending capital outlay assistance for FY 2010 due to the ongoing State budget shortfall. A.R.S. § 15‐ 1464 requires State capital outlay assistance per FTSE on a graduated scale based on district size. Statute provides automatic adjustment for both FTSE count increases and decreases. This recommendation reduces statutory funding by $19.4 million General Fund, continuing the suspension from FY 2009. General Fund (500.0) Equalization Aid 0.0 The Executive recommends suspending equalization aid increases for FY 2010. A.R.S. § 15‐1468 requires additional State funding assistance to community college districts with property tax bases below a statutory threshold. Four districts receive this funding adjustment annually: Cochise, Graham, Navajo and Yuma/La Paz. Equalization funding would remain at FY 2009 levels. General Fund 0.0 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Arizona Community Colleges 29 RGA Performance Measures Registrar of Contractors Mission: To promote quality construction by Arizona contractors through a licensing and regulatory system designed to protect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. Description: The agency licenses and regulates residential and commercial contractors and investigates and resolves complaints against licensed and unlicensed contractors. It administers the Residential Contractors Recovery Fund, designed to reimburse residential property owners for improper workmanship by licensed residential contractors. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Regulatory Affairs Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 11,671.1 12,147.0 12,163.8 12,223.5 11,671.1 12,147.0 12,163.8 12,223.5 144.8 5,274.3 1,983.2 461.8 351.0 2.5 0.0 1,300.8 1,295.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,002.3 144.8 5,819.0 2,241.5 354.8 505.1 11.8 0.0 2,134.9 210.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 869.1 144.8 5,819.0 2,241.5 354.8 505.1 11.8 0.0 2,151.7 210.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 869.1 144.8 5,819.0 2,241.5 354.8 505.1 11.8 0.0 2,211.4 210.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 869.1 11,671.1 12,147.0 12,163.8 12,223.5 11,671.1 12,147.0 12,163.8 12,223.5 11,671.1 12,147.0 12,163.8 12,223.5 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected NA NA Total inspections conducted Total number of contractors licensed in state Number of complaints received unlicensed contractors 60,164 62,579 64,947 67,315 2,243 2,069 2,021 1,973 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 17,000 17,000 FY 2010 FY 2011 1,351.6 18,917.0 1,351.6 18,977.0 7.14% 7.12% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund Registrar of Contractors Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Incentive Pay 51.2 113.7 113.7 113.7 SLI Office of 1,002.3 1,002.3 1,002.3 1,002.3 Administrative Hearings SLI Information 594.0 506.5 506.5 506.5 Management System Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Rent Contractual Increase 16.8 76.5 The recommendation includes $16,800 in FY 2010 and $76,500 in FY 2011 to cover rent charges. Registrar of Contractors Fund 30 16.8 76.5 Registrar of Contractors FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget CCA Corporation Commission Mission: To exercise exclusive state regulatory authority over public service corporations (public utilities) in the public interest; to grant corporate status and maintain public records; to ensure the integrity of the securities marketplace; and to foster the safe operations of railroads and gas pipelines in Arizona. Description: The Corporation Commission was established by Article 15 of the State Constitution and is composed of five elected commissioners. Commissioners are currently serving terms which expire in 2008 or 2010. The seats are staggered four year terms. Staffing is provided in seven divisions, each headed by a division director serving under the Commissionʹs Executive Director, who is the chief executive officer and responsible for the day‐to‐day operations of the divisions. The Commissionʹs primary responsibilities include reviewing and establishing public utility rates, regulating the sale of securities, and administering the Arizona Corporations Code. The Commission also serves as the repository of corporate annual reports and other publicly available documents filed by corporations in accordance with state law. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Administration Hearings Corporations Securities Railroad Safety Pipeline Safety Utilities Legal Information Technology Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 3,171.8 1,487.5 4,940.9 4,826.4 671.4 1,416.7 6,027.6 1,900.5 3,113.7 2,749.4 1,614.1 5,162.3 4,992.5 606.7 1,374.4 6,738.9 2,034.9 3,744.1 2,749.4 1,614.1 5,162.3 4,992.5 606.7 1,374.4 6,738.9 2,034.9 3,290.1 2,749.4 1,614.1 5,162.3 4,992.5 606.7 1,374.4 6,738.9 2,034.9 2,934.1 27,556.5 29,017.3 28,563.3 28,207.3 321.3 16,100.3 5,549.7 1,502.2 273.5 63.5 0.0 3,151.4 709.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 206.3 330.3 17,298.7 5,892.1 709.1 284.6 127.1 0.0 4,506.0 455.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 (255.8) 330.3 17,298.7 5,892.1 709.1 284.6 127.1 0.0 4,052.0 455.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 (255.8) 330.3 17,298.7 5,892.1 709.1 284.6 127.1 0.0 3,696.0 455.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 (255.8) 27,556.5 29,017.3 28,563.3 28,207.3 5,655.6 13,444.8 4,791.7 14,467.9 4,791.7 14,467.9 4,791.7 14,467.9 Pipeline Safety Revolving Securities Regulatory & Enforcement Public Access Fund Securities Investment Management Fund Arizona Arts Trust Fund Agency Total 47.4 3,652.6 0.0 3,946.0 0.0 3,946.0 0.0 3,946.0 3,783.4 924.8 4,832.0 928.6 4,378.0 928.6 4,022.0 928.6 47.9 51.1 51.1 51.1 27,556.5 29,017.3 28,563.3 28,207.3 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Same Day Service 0.0 270.6 270.6 270.6 SLI Utility Audits and 579.6 380.0 380.0 380.0 Studies SLI Same Day Service 0.0 129.8 129.8 129.8 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues STARPLUS Development (454.0) (810.0) In FY 2010, the Commission will complete the development phase of the STARPLUS project and begin the testing and implementation phases. The costs described in the original project investment justification are higher than the current estimates, but the current estimates are more realistic in light of the current economy. The recommendation provides a reduction of ($454,000) in FY 2010 and ($810,000) in FY 2011. (454.0) Public Access Fund (810.0) Performance Measures Range of days to process expedited requests - corporate filings Range of weeks to process regular requests - Corporate Filings Total active corporations and Limited Liability Corporations recorded Number of complaints FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 2-5 2-5 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 2-5 2-5 3-6 3-6 3-6 3-6 536,851 570,000 605,000 665,000 245 250 250 250 Number of grade crossing accidents 31 35 35 35 Total number of Interstate pipeline safety violations 3 0 0 0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 5,759.5 5,759.5 28,866.0 28,599.0 19.95% 20.14% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund General Fund Utility Regulation Revolving State Agency Budgets Corporation Commission 31 DCA State Charitable, Penal & Reformatory Land Earnings Department of Corrections Mission: To recruit and recognize a well‐trained, professional work force to serve and protect our communities and their crime victims by effectively employing the field’s best security practices and proven re‐entry programming to prepare offenders for their release and reintegration in the communities of Arizona as civil, productive citizens. Description: The Department serves and protects the people of the state of Arizona by incarcerating inmates in its correctional facilities and supervising released offenders in the community in keeping with the field’s best practices, periodically assessing their needs and risks and providing commensurate levels of supervision and program services that promote literacy, employability, sobriety and accountability to crime victims, thereby reducing the possibility of relapse, revocation and recidivism and increasing the likelihood the felon population will be law‐abiding and productive as they serve their sentences and later, when they are released. Agency Total 562.0 4,062.5 4,062.5 0.0 934,330.5 999,701.5 1,155,196.0 1,067,348.0 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI 19,351.0 23,831.4 24,645.5 23,831.4 Overtime/Compensatory Time SLI Private Prison Per Diem 80,206.3 82,952.7 104,798.0 96,814.4 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Prison Operations and Services Community Corrections Administration Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 885,782.1 950,744.1 1,059,793.9 1,016,390.6 12,546.1 36,002.3 12,997.1 35,960.3 14,126.7 81,275.4 12,997.1 37,960.3 934,330.5 999,701.5 1,155,196.0 1,067,348.0 9,755.9 422,579.0 172,130.3 175,019.6 147.4 110.7 36,678.1 298.7 79,033.3 5,230.8 1,442.6 41,660.0 9,932.5 421,922.8 167,790.5 228,104.6 165.6 154.0 39,662.2 330.9 88,109.9 3,661.9 1,605.3 48,193.8 10,876.8 446,551.6 177,548.4 271,345.5 172.2 154.0 42,759.5 330.9 114,992.7 51,542.1 1,605.3 48,193.8 10,328.5 427,324.1 170,195.6 270,666.8 165.6 154.0 39,662.2 330.9 95,793.4 11,256.3 1,605.3 50,193.8 934,330.5 999,701.5 1,155,196.0 1,067,348.0 884,274.5 27,799.1 451.5 947,476.0 29,054.8 424.0 1,102,970.5 29,054.8 424.0 1,024,285.0 29,054.8 424.0 555.4 599.3 599.3 599.3 180.0 387.3 180.0 600.0 180.0 600.0 180.0 600.0 17,535.3 15,050.0 15,050.0 11,450.0 2,585.4 2,254.9 2,254.9 754.9 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Transfers Out Agency Total Fund General Fund Corrections Fund State Education Fund for Correctional Education DOC - Alcohol Abuse Treatment Transition Office Fund Transition Program Drug Treatment Fund Prison Construction and Operations Fund Penitentiary Land Earnings 32 Department of Corrections FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 0.0 State Prisons Bed Plan On November 30, 2008, the State Prison System held 39,499 inmates, exceeding by 12% the existing facilities’ design capacity of 35,286. The additional 4,213 inmates are temporarily accommodated in emergency, makeshift beds until more permanent facilities are available. During FY 2010, barring any changes to the criminal code or the criminal justice system, the inmate population is expected to grow at the rate of 150 per month, for a net increase of 2,700 inmates. During the 2007 session, the Legislature authorized 6,000 new permanent prison beds: a 2,000‐bed expansion of the Management and Training Corporation (MTC) private prison in Kingman and expansions of state‐operated prisons at Perryville (1,000 beds), Tucson (1,000 beds) and Yuma (2,000 beds). The Kingman beds are scheduled to be available by January 2010. MTC has experienced substantial delays in securing financing but has assured the State that the new beds will be available by January 2010. The 4,000 beds at the public prisons will be available in March 2010 and are on schedule. If there are no other changes to the prison capacity, the bed deficit on January 1, 2010, is estimated to be 5,411. Currently, the prisons can reasonably accommodate 3,500 inmates in temporary beds without making substantial infrastructure upgrades (e.g., fresh water and waste water capacity, electrical and plumbing lines, and expanded structures). During the 2008 session, $14.3 million was appropriated to provide more capacity (presumably provisional out‐of‐state rental beds), and that funding would have been sufficient to provide about 800 beds. However, part of the Executive Budget Management Plan to balance the FY 2009 State General Fund budget is a $6 million reduction, decreasing the $14.3 million appropriation to just $8.3 million. The Executive recommends a short‐term increase of 1,000 provisional beds in early FY 2010 until the new 6,000 beds are available in the spring of 2010. The recommendation will result in a 4,500‐bed deficit by January 1, 2010, when the Kingman beds are scheduled to open, but it will substantially reduce the problems and risks of severe overcrowding. Long term, there is a projected need for additional beds in late‐ spring of 2012. General Fund FY 2010 Executive Recommendation Bed Plan Assumes No Criminal Code Changes 0.0 Capacity Changes No. Type Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 300 New Provisional Beds 35,586 400 New Provisional Beds 35,986 52 New Provisional Beds 36,038 Jul-09 Aug-09 Sep-09 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 Apr-10 Apr-10 May-10 May-10 Jun-10 400 400 200 400 400 500 500 400 (500) 400 300 (500) 500 Oct-10 Dec-10 Mar-11 Jun-11 400 400 500 400 Sep-11 Dec-11 40,099 (4,513) 40,249 (4,263) 40,399 (4,361) of 1,000 Provisional of 1,000 Provisional of 1,000 Provisional of 2,000 New Private of 2,000 New Private of 4,000 New Public of 2,000 New Private of 4,000 New Public Provisional of 2,000 New Private of 2,000 New Private Provisional of 4,000 New Public 36,438 36,838 37,038 37,438 37,838 38,338 38,838 39,238 38,738 39,138 39,438 38,938 39,438 40,699 40,849 40,999 41,599 41,749 41,899 41,899 42,049 42,049 42,049 42,199 42,199 42,349 (4,261) (4,011) (3,961) (4,161) (3,911) (3,561) (3,061) (2,811) (3,311) (2,911) (2,761) (3,261) (2,911) of 4,000 New of 4,000 New of 4,000 New of 4,000 New Public Public Public Public 39,838 40,238 40,738 41,138 42,949 43,249 43,699 44,149 (3,111) (3,011) (2,961) (3,011) 400 of 4,000 New Public 500 of 4,000 New Public 41,538 42,038 44,599 (3,061) 45,049 (3,011) TOTALS 752 Total Provisional Beds 2,000 Total Private Beds 4,000 Total Public Beds 6,752 Annualize Cost of Beds Opened in FY 2009 5,258.7 A portion of the $14.3 million in increased funding appropriated for FY 2009 is for prison capacity expansion. The additional capacity includes 200 inmates on an emergency makeshift basis at the privately operated Central Arizona Correctional Facility in Florence, at a per‐diem rate of $31.50 or $2.3 million. The additional capacity also includes 752 new provisional beds, with an estimated per‐diem rate of $63.00, or $17.3 million per year. The Executive recommends $5.3 million to annualize these expenditures. General Fund State Agency Budgets Projected Bed Capacity Population Deficit Department of Corrections 5,258.7 33 FY 2010 2,000 New Private Prison Beds 13,992.7 During the 2007 session, the Legislature authorized 2,000 new private prison beds. The estimated date to begin opening these beds was originally January 2009, but multiple delays have pushed that back to January 2010. The Executive recommends $14.0 million to open these beds beginning January 4, 2010, based on loading 100 inmates per week at the rate of $60.25 per day per bed. Included in this amount is $131,100 for 4.0 FTE positions beginning in January 2010. These positions are responsible for inmate discipline, the determination of good‐time credits required by truth‐in‐sentencing, and the monitoring of the private vendor contract. The judgment of inmate discipline, which affects the amount of time an inmate must serve in prison, cannot be delegated to the private vendor. General Fund 13,992.7 4,000 New State Beds 16,877.0 In the 2007 session, the Legislature authorized a 4,000‐bed expansion of existing State‐operated prisons. The beds, which will begin opening in March 2010, are located at Perryville (1,000 beds), Tucson (1,000) and Yuma (2,000). For FY 2010 the Executive recommends $3.9 million for training 392 new staff, $7.6 million for start‐up equipment, and $5.4 million for operating costs for the first 1,400 beds. The Executive recommendation provides for 500 beds in March 2010, 400 beds in April 2010, and 500 in June 2010. All of the new units will be minimum‐ to medium‐security facilities. General Fund 16,877.0 1,000 Additional Provisional Beds 18,293.5 By the time the 2,000 private and 4,000 public beds open in late FY 2010 and throughout FY 2011, the bed deficit is expected to reach 5,411. The Executive recommends $18.3 million to address, in part, that degree of overcrowding, which poses serious safety risks to inmates and correction officers. If provisional beds are available, the Executive recommendation is to purchase 1,000 provisional beds beginning July 6, 2009. After the 6,000 new permanent beds currently being constructed have started to open, the provisional beds will be eliminated starting in April and May of 2010. If provisional beds are not available in July 2009, the Executive plan would be to upgrade the infrastructure in existing prisons to accommodate the expected influx of inmates. In the absence of this funding, the prisons will have approximately 2,000 more inmates than can safely be housed in existing facilities. General Fund 34 18,293.5 FY 2010 Population Growth, Inmate Marginal Costs 6,355.8 When new prisons are opened, funding is appropriated for staffing and equipping the facilities. Expenses directly related to individual inmates (e.g., food, clothing and minor medical) are funded each year as the number of inmates increases. For over a decade, the amount funded for these marginal costs has been set at $3,531 per inmate in a State prison. The Executive projects net population growth at the prisons in the near future to average 150 new inmates each month, or 1,800 additional inmates during FY 2010. The Executive recommends $6.4 million for marginal cost expenditures. General Fund 6,355.8 Medical Inflation 4,868.8 For FY 2009, the Department is appropriated $81.1 million for outside medical expenditures. The Executive recommends a 6% inflationary increase for those costs, matching the increase provided to long‐term, acute‐care expenditures paid by AHCCCS. Outside medical expenses include hospitals, special use of outside physicians or medical specialists, pharmaceuticals, transportation, laboratory services, and medical and dental supplies. 4,868.8 General Fund Other Funds Expenditure Adjustments 0.0 In the spring of 2008, it appeared that large balances in some appropriated funds would allow the Department to cover expenditures of $4.7 million from other funds rather than the General Fund. Actual revenues in FY 2009 are $5.3 million below the spring expectations and will require the Department to reduce operational expenditures by that amount during FY 2009. For FY 2010, those other funds have been depleted and many other funds are experiencing reduced revenue deposits. This requires that some of the Departmentʹs expenditures again be funded from the General Fund, and the Executive recommends $9.2 million for this purpose. Expenditure shifts are recommended from the Penitentiary Land Fund ($1.5 million), the Prison Construction and Operating Fund ($3.6 million), and the State Charitable, Penal and Reformatory Institutions Fund ($4.1 million). 9,162.5 General Fund Prison Construction and Operations Fund (3,600.0) Penitentiary Land Earnings Fund (1,500.0) State Charitable, Penal & Reformatory Land Earnings Fund (4,062.5) Department of Corrections FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 2,000.0 Future Prison Sites Evaluation The State prison system has exhausted the available space for future expansion, and the Executive recommends $2.0 million to evaluate potential future sites. The process of siting new prisons must be legislatively completed before design and construction can proceed. The evaluation process includes finding an appropriate site for the area’s population, staffing the facilities, addressing environmental and archeological concerns, and achieving operational efficiency with the rest of the prison system. Recommendations and options would be presented to the Legislature during the 2010 session. 2,000.0 General Fund Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Number of escapes of inmates from any location Average daily inmate population Average daily bed deficit FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 2 2 0 0 35,798 37,919 40,079 42,239 2,942 6,159 2,319 4,479 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 11,321.0 1,217,782.0 0.93% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets Department of Corrections 35 CBA Agency Total Board of Cosmetology Mission: To ensure the public health, welfare, and safety through education and enforcement of cosmetology laws and rules by efficient regulation of salons, schools, and individuals who practice cosmetology. Description: The Board of Cosmetology is mandated to protect the public in Arizona. It issues 12 categories of licenses to salons, schools, and individuals who qualify by reciprocity or through the administration of a written and practical examination. The Board enforces regulation by routine health and safety inspections of salons and schools, investigates consumer complaints, conducts hearings and imposes enforcement action when appropriate. The Board establishes health and safety standards, as well as educational and curriculum standards and oversight. The Board provides monthly classes on infection control and law and regulation practices for the general licensing population by registration. The Board also uses the educational classes for remediation and regulatory rehabilitation of violators by Board Order as terms of probation. Electronic service convenience is available to the Board’s customers, along with other strategic uses of technology to provide efficient government and reduce the overall costs and demands on full‐time employees and other resources. 1,827.3 1,747.8 1,794.1 1,815.8 1,827.3 1,747.8 1,794.1 1,815.8 1,827.3 1,747.8 1,794.1 1,815.8 Fund Cosmetology Board Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Operating Expenses 29.6 61.5 Between FY 2007 and FY 2008, the number of applicants and services increased by 5%. That growth rate is expected to continue during the current fiscal year and into the future. To help offset the Agencyʹs increasing operational costs, the Executive recommends increases of $29,600 in FY 2010 and $61,500 in FY 2011 from the Board of Cosmetology Fund. 29.6 Cosmetology Board Fund The Board is recognized by national industry entities as being progressive, insightful, and a leader in cosmetology regulation. 6.5 6.5 Per Laws 2008, Chapter 152, the Board must spend more time processing applications and resubmissions to verify each applicantʹs lawful presence in the United States. Accordingly, the Executive recommends an increase of $6,500 from the Board of Cosmetology Fund to cover the necessary increase in personnel expenditures. 6.5 Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out 36 FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,827.3 1,747.8 1,794.1 1,815.8 1,827.3 1,747.8 1,794.1 1,815.8 24.5 856.0 336.2 94.0 50.7 17.5 0.0 400.1 72.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.5 722.4 320.8 128.1 51.4 5.1 0.0 481.7 38.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.5 722.4 320.8 151.0 51.4 5.1 0.0 494.9 48.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 24.5 722.4 320.8 168.6 51.4 5.1 0.0 509.2 38.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.5 Protect IT Equipment 10.2 0.0 The Executive recommends a one‐time increase of $10,200 from the Board of Cosmetology Fund for the purchase of a server cabinet to protect the Boardʹs five servers. 10.2 Cosmetology Board Fund 0.0 FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual 61.5 Lawful Presence Cosmetology Board Fund The Board has experienced an explosion of growth during the past decade. Through efficient use of technology and careful monitoring of resources, the Board has systematically provided enhanced systems, additional full‐time employees (FTEʹs) or additional facilities. FY 2011 Executive Issues FY 2009 Cosmetology Fund Adjustment 350.0 Laws 2008, Chapter 285, included a $1.8 million transfer from the Boardʹs fund to the General Fund which has left the Board with insufficient funds to cover its FY 2009 appropriation. The Executive recommends a transfer of $350,000 from the General Fund to allow the Board of Cosmetology Fund to remain solvent through FY 2009. General Fund Board of Cosmetology 350.0 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures Average calendar days from receipt of completed application to issuance of license Total individuals and establishments licensed Total inspections conducted Total complaints and application denials FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 15 20 101,094 106,000 Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 111,000 116,000 5,828 9,600 9,600 9,600 2,165 2,500 2,500 2,500 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 10 5 FY 2010 FY 2011 182.0 182.0 1,903.0 1,903.0 9.56% 9.56% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. State Agency Budgets Board of Cosmetology 37 JCA Transfers Out Arizona Criminal Justice Commission Mission: To sustain and enhance the cohesiveness, the effectiveness, and the coordination of the criminal justice system in Arizona; to monitor the criminal justice system and identify needed revisions to the system; to monitor existing criminal justice statutes and proposed or new criminal justice statutes and identify needed revisions in the statutes or proposed legislation; to acquire and administer designated funds for the enhancement of specified criminal justice programs and activities in the State of Arizona; and to make reports on these activities and functions. Description: The Arizona Criminal Justice Commission is a nineteen‐member, statutorily‐authorized entity which is mandated to carry out various coordinating, administrative, management, monitoring, and reporting functions regarding the criminal justice system in Arizona. The nineteen Commission members are appointed by the Governor, according to statutory guidelines, and represent the various elements of the criminal justice system in the State. Ten of the nineteen are county or local elected officials and the remainder are appointed criminal justice agency heads. In addition to its statutorily‐mandated duties, the Commission is the state agency responsible for the acquisition of several formula criminal justice grants each year and for the management, administration, and reporting on these federal grants. The Commission generates reports regarding the Criminal Justice Records Improvement Program and State Identification Program grants to the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance and the National Criminal History Improvement Program to the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The Commission also develops and publishes an annual records improvement plan. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Agency Management Crime Victims Statistical Analysis Center Crime Control Criminal Justice System Improvement 484.5 4,368.3 25.0 3,141.2 6.5 296.2 4,265.6 0.0 3,245.5 1.6 296.2 4,265.6 25.0 3,245.5 1.6 296.2 4,265.6 0.0 3,245.5 1.6 Agency Total 8,025.5 7,808.9 7,833.9 7,808.9 8.0 398.5 133.7 250.9 10.0 6.9 7,129.3 83.3 12.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 406.2 139.3 119.5 10.9 5.0 7,023.7 104.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 406.2 139.3 144.5 10.9 5.0 7,023.7 104.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 406.2 139.3 119.5 10.9 5.0 7,023.7 104.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation 38 Agency Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8,025.5 7,808.9 7,833.9 7,808.9 1,067.7 896.2 1,172.0 785.2 1,172.0 810.2 1,172.0 785.2 4,011.3 3,800.0 3,800.0 3,800.0 1,052.5 1,052.5 1,052.5 1,052.5 997.8 999.2 999.2 999.2 8,025.5 7,808.9 7,833.9 7,808.9 Fund General Fund Criminal Justice Enhancement Fund Victims Compensation and Assistance Fund State Aid to County Attorneys Fund State Aid to Indigent Defense Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Victim Compensation 4,011.3 3,800.0 3,800.0 3,800.0 and Assistance SLI State Aid to County 1,052.5 1,052.5 1,052.5 1,052.5 Attorneys SLI State Aid to Indigent 997.8 999.2 999.2 999.2 Defense SLI Rural State Aid to 157.7 157.7 157.7 157.7 County Attorneys SLI Rural State Aid to 149.9 150.1 150.1 150.1 Indigent Defense Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Arizona Youth Survey 25.0 0.0 Per A.R.S. § 41‐2416, the Commission administers the Arizona Youth Survey every two years to gather data from students on the prevalence of drug use, gang activity, and risk and protective factors. The Executive recommends a one‐time increase of $25,000 in FY 2010 to administer the survey. 25.0 Criminal Justice Enhancement Fund 0.0 Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 47 50 Applicants requesting funds Number of arrests made by grantfunded task forces Number of studies/reports completed and published 7,707 5,000 5,000 5,000 8 30 15 15 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 50 50 FY 2010 FY 2011 733.4 733.4 38,575.0 36,324.0 1.90% 2.02% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Arizona Criminal Justice Commission FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget SDA Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind Mission: To work together with the parents, school districts, advocacy organizations, business and community members to create nurturing environments in which children with sensory impairments feel valued, develop their unique abilities, strive to achieve academic excellence, and develop skills to help them become productive and responsible members of society. This mission is based upon the belief that all children with sensory impairments can learn and that every effort must be made to ensure that students are provided with a thorough and efficient education in a safe environment where students can fulfill their academic potential. Description: The Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind (ASDB) consists of a variety of programs that provide education and evaluation to sensory‐impaired children and youth from birth to 22 years of age. School‐aged children are served in one of the site based schools located in Tucson or Phoenix or in their home school district through one of the five Regional Cooperative programs. In addition to educational and evaluation services, the ASDB Tucson campus provides a residential program. Sensory impaired preschool children are served in both Tucson and Phoenix. Infants and toddlers with vision or hearing loss receive services in their homes throughout the State. ASDB also provides comprehensive evaluation services for a limited number of referred sensory impaired children with multiple disabilities. General Fund Schools for the Deaf & Blind Fund Agency Total 20,226.8 14,299.5 22,011.7 14,695.4 22,011.7 14,695.4 22,011.7 14,695.4 34,526.3 36,707.1 36,707.1 36,707.1 Performance Measures Percent of parents rating overall qualify of services as good or excellent based on annual survey PDS Percent of Phoenix students successful in transition settings three years after graduation Percent of parents satisfied with the quality of the program in Phoenix Percent of Tucson students successful in transition settings three years after graduation Percent of parents satisfied with the quality of the program in Tucson FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 98 95 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 95 95 0 90 0 0 95 95 95 95 0 90 0 0 98 90 95 95 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 3,772.8 FY 2011 3,772.8 Agency Request 64,280.0 63,984.0 5.87% 5.90% Administrative Cost Percentage The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Phoenix Day School Tucson Campus Regional Cooperatives Preschool Administration Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 8,403.3 16,921.9 1,541.8 4,003.6 3,655.7 9,159.5 17,274.3 1,447.6 4,118.0 4,707.7 9,159.5 17,274.3 1,447.6 4,118.0 4,707.7 9,159.5 17,274.3 1,447.6 4,118.0 4,707.7 34,526.3 36,707.1 36,707.1 36,707.1 587.2 19,368.5 7,631.2 1,005.4 56.5 8.9 111.4 0.0 5,083.1 1,274.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 (13.3) 587.2 20,861.4 7,953.0 733.8 22.0 18.7 180.1 0.0 5,968.0 970.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 587.2 20,861.4 7,953.0 733.8 22.0 18.7 180.1 0.0 5,968.0 970.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 587.2 20,861.4 7,953.0 733.8 22.0 18.7 180.1 0.0 5,968.0 970.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34,526.3 36,707.1 36,707.1 36,707.1 Fund State Agency Budgets Arizona State Schools for the Deaf and the Blind 39 DFA Commission for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing Mission: To ensure, in partnership with the public and private sectors, accessibility for the Deaf, Hard of Hearing, DeafBlind and persons with speech difficulties to improve their quality of life. Description: The Arizona Commission for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing (ACDHH) acts as an information bureau for the Deaf, Hard of Hearing, DeafBlind, and individuals with speech difficulties, as well as for State agencies and institutions providing services to those consumers. Local government and other public or private community agencies benefit also from ACDHH information, programs and activities. An excellent example of services benefiting the community: ACDHH Deaf and Hard of Hearing Specialists provide sensitivity training for State agencies or other organizations and groups that work with Deaf, Hard of Hearing, DeafBlind, and individuals who have speech difficulties. ACDHH also administers a telecommunications equipment distribution voucher program that loans equipment to qualifying Arizona State residents. The Arizona Relay Service (7‐1‐1), which allows equal accessibility of public telephone service, is available through ACDHH as well. The service is administered by ACDHH and is required by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). ACDHH is also mandated to provide licensing of American Sign Language interpreters and certification of American Sign Language teachers. Agency Total 4,472.5 5,441.1 5,441.1 5,441.1 Performance Measures Annual call minutes for the telecommunications relay service Number of equipment distributed to consumers Percent of customer satisfaction with equipment distribution voucher program Number of applications distributed to consumers regarding the equipment distribution program FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Actual Expected Expected Expected 1,160,411 1,300,000 1,276,767 1,622,782 1,766 1,500 1,500 1,500 97.87 97 90 90 2,000 1,500 1,500 1,500 ¾ AZTEDP applications are primarily available at demonstration sites. Number of licensed general interpreters ¾ Legal & Provisional Percent of telecommunication relay service calls completed without a complaint 26 28 31 36 99.98 98 99.90 99.90 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 300.9 300.9 5,441.0 5,441.0 5.53% 5.53% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Council Activities TDD (Telecommunication Device for the Deaf) 1,800.2 2,672.3 2,675.5 2,765.6 2,675.5 2,765.6 2,675.5 2,765.6 Agency Total 4,472.5 5,441.1 5,441.1 5,441.1 16.0 795.9 295.6 801.7 40.9 27.0 0.0 1,987.9 523.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 795.8 295.7 1,622.9 47.0 26.2 0.0 2,001.2 596.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.0 16.0 795.8 295.7 1,622.9 47.0 26.2 0.0 2,001.2 596.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.0 16.0 795.8 295.7 1,622.9 47.0 26.2 0.0 2,001.2 596.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 56.0 4,472.5 5,441.1 5,441.1 5,441.1 4,472.5 5,441.1 5,441.1 5,441.1 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund Telecommunication for the Deaf 40 Commission for the Deaf and the Hard of Hearing FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget DXA Performance Measures State Board of Dental Examiners Mission: To provide professional, courteous service and information to the dental profession and the general public through examination, licensing, complaint adjudication and enforcement processes to protect the oral health, safety, and welfare of Arizona citizens through a fair and impartial system. Description: The State Board of Dental Examiners examines, licenses, and certifies professionals to practice in the field of dentistry. The Board also accepts complaints against licensees and certificate holders, investigates allegations, and administratively adjudicates complaints. The Board serves approximately 8,000 professionals licensed or certified to practice in the state, as well as all Arizona citizens who receive their professional services. FY 2008 Actual Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. Average number of calendar days from receipt of complaint to resolution of complaint Total number of investigations conducted Total number of complaints received annually Average calendar days to renew a license (from receipt of application to issuance) FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,097.8 1,102.8 1,106.6 1,114.8 1,097.8 1,102.8 1,106.6 1,114.8 11.0 480.2 160.2 230.8 4.0 8.9 0.0 203.8 8.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.1 11.0 536.5 143.9 259.7 3.2 5.5 0.0 130.3 23.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 536.5 143.9 259.7 3.2 5.5 0.0 134.1 23.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 11.0 536.5 143.9 259.7 3.2 5.5 0.0 142.3 23.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,097.8 1,102.8 1,106.6 1,114.8 1,097.8 1,102.8 1,106.6 1,114.8 1,097.8 1,102.8 1,106.6 1,114.8 Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 8401 8653 5 4 4 4 124 150 150 150 536 503 520 520 529 453 482 482 10 10 10 10 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Total number of individuals or facilities licensed Customer satisfaction rating (scale 1-5) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 7913 8637 FY 2010 FY 2011 56.9 56.9 1,190.0 1,176.0 4.84% 4.78% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Dental Board Fund Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Private Rent Increase 3.8 12.0 The Executive recommends $3,800 in FY 2010 and $12,000 in FY 2011 for increasing costs in private rent. Dental Board Fund State Agency Budgets 3.8 12.0 State Board of Dental Examiners 41 Performance Measures DPA Arizona Drug and Gang Prevention Resource Center Mission: To help organizations, individuals, neighborhoods, and communities decrease drug and gang related problems and other destructive behaviors. To help Arizonans encourage and develop healthy and successful families and communities. Description: The Arizona Drug and Gang Prevention Resource Center is a statewide resource system that assists agencies, organizations, and coalitions in their communityʹs drug and gang prevention activities. The Center manages an information clearinghouse (exhibits; literature distribution; video, book, curricula, visual learning aids & games and material loans), addresses evaluation of prevention programs, provides training and technical assistance in utilizing programs designated as Model, Effective or Promising. The Center collaborates with state and local government agencies, school districts, and social service organizations in the submission of grant proposals to enhance funding for prevention and to improve the lives of Arizonans. Prevention service requests completed (in thousands) Prevention materials disseminated (in thousands) Number of people directly and indirectly impacted (in thousands) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 2.6 2.5 133.5 30.0 35.0 35.0 28.6 35.0 25.0 25.0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 2.5 2.5 FY 2010 FY 2011 170.0 2,032.0 170.0 2,032.0 8.37% 8.37% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Drug and Gang Prevention Center Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 500.6 639.0 639.0 639.0 500.6 639.0 639.0 639.0 6.3 287.2 108.3 4.4 2.4 2.0 0.0 89.6 2.3 0.0 0.0 4.4 0.0 6.3 358.9 107.5 28.0 5.5 8.2 0.0 124.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 6.3 358.9 107.5 28.0 5.5 8.2 0.0 124.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 6.3 358.9 107.5 28.0 5.5 8.2 0.0 124.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 0.0 500.6 639.0 639.0 639.0 257.3 302.4 302.4 302.4 243.3 336.6 336.6 336.6 500.6 639.0 639.0 639.0 Fund Drug and Gang Prevention Fund Intergovernmental Agreements and Grant Funds Agency Total 42 Arizona Drug and Gang Prevention Resource Center FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget DEA Department of Economic Security Mission: To promote the safety, well‐being and self‐sufficiency of children, adults, and families. Description: The Department of Economic Security (DES) is an integrated human services agency that provides critical protective and assistance services each month to more than one million of Arizonaʹs children, adults and families. Administration Developmental Disabilities Benefits and Medical Eligibility Child Support Enforcement Aging and Community Services Children, Youth and Families Employment and Rehabilitation Services Agency Total Together, DES’ programs impact the safety, well‐being and self‐ sufficiency of Arizonans. Some of these programs include: Child Protective Services; Children Services to provide families the tools they need to care for their children; child care assistance for working parents; Adult Protective Services; domestic violence shelter and supports; early intervention services for infants and toddlers at risk of developmental delays; home and community‐ based services for individuals with developmental disabilities and the aged; independent living programs for both seniors and young adults; unemployment insurance; employment assistance including vocational rehabilitation and job training; and child support enforcement. The Department’s objective is to move beyond simply delivering services to ensuring that these services are offered to improve outcomes and are integrated to best meet the clientsʹ needs in the most effective and efficient manner possible. Emphasis is on assisting individuals and families to gain the tools they need to effectively and permanently escape the hardships of poverty and other barriers that currently prevent them from being self‐ sufficient. The following overarching, interrelated goals have been established for DES: Strengthen individuals and families Increase self‐sufficiency Develop the capacity of communities These goals serve as the framework and foundation for the DES vision that every child, adult, and family in the state of Arizona will be safe and economically secure. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center State Agency Budgets FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 46,114.7 372,007.5 174,203.0 38,754.9 424,074.6 180,714.1 35,781.0 417,474.6 177,684.3 23,339.4 49,446.7 24,094.9 52,490.1 25,088.2 57,085.5 25,088.2 55,435.5 302,094.3 329,863.3 373,948.8 370,800.9 274,935.0 314,073.3 331,767.5 331,589.0 1,203,822.8 1,312,846.8 1,431,433.6 1,413,853.5 4,062.1 153,702.6 62,712.7 29,209.4 3,418.1 51.0 356.9 905,387.1 41,658.3 7,316.9 9.8 4,201.0 169,306.7 66,221.4 33,059.5 3,882.4 50.6 376.6 989,676.0 43,775.6 6,479.9 18.1 4,545.3 181,436.7 71,496.4 33,275.3 5,022.2 50.6 376.6 1,077,853.5 53,639.4 8,264.8 18.1 4,316.9 173,320.0 67,800.2 33,069.5 4,336.1 50.6 376.6 1,072,250.2 55,543.2 7,089.0 18.1 1,203,822.8 1,312,846.8 1,431,433.6 1,413,853.5 785,264.1 119.0 808,328.1 200.0 936,076.4 200.0 917,296.3 200.0 35,758.4 55,938.3 55,938.3 55,938.3 229,260.3 281,716.1 269,969.9 269,969.9 109,494.7 112,159.0 110,420.6 110,420.6 1,466.4 14,679.4 1,574.4 15,126.4 1,735.4 16,030.6 1,735.4 16,030.6 1,700.0 1,700.0 1,700.0 1,700.0 39.4 1,576.9 1,576.9 1,576.9 83.1 209.6 209.6 209.6 268.2 516.6 516.6 516.6 22,064.5 26,468.5 29,726.4 30,926.4 2,337.3 2,565.7 2,565.7 2,565.7 500.0 271.5 0.0 0.0 271.5 1,000.0 0.0 271.5 1,000.0 0.0 271.5 1,000.0 516.5 3,495.7 3,495.7 3,495.7 1,203,822.8 1,312,846.8 1,431,433.6 1,413,853.5 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Agency Total DES and its services are an integral part of the Arizona community. Recognizing the interconnectedness and interdependence between DES services and community resources, the Department works closely with a network of community organizations and providers, as well as federal agencies that oversee Department programs, other state agencies, and Native American tribes in the delivery of services to the people of Arizona. 42,193.2 348,313.2 163,501.0 Fund General Fund Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund Workforce Investment Grant Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Child Care and Development Fund Special Administration Fund Child Support Enforcement Administration Fund Domestic Violence Shelter Fund Child Abuse Prevention Fund Children and Family Services Training Program Fund Public Assistance Collections Fund Department Long-Term Care System Fund Spinal and Head Injuries Trust Fund Utility Assistance Fund Risk Management Fund Indirect Cost Recovery Fund Reed Act Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. Department of Economic Security 43 SLI Finger Imaging SLI Attorney General Legal Services SLI Tri-Agency Disaster Recovery SLI Document Management SLI Case Management Title XIX SLI Case Management StateOnly SLI Home and Community Based Services Title XIX SLI Home and Community Based Services State-Only SLI Institutional Services Title XIX SLI Institutional Services State-Only SLI Medical Services SLI ATP-Coolidge Title XIX SLI ATP-Coolidge StateOnly SLI State-Funded Long Term Care Services SLI Autism Training and Oversight SLI Medicare Clawback Payments SLI Children’s Autism Intensive Behavioral Treatment Services SLI Children’s Autism Intensive Early Intervention Services for Toddlers SLI Arizona Early Intervention Program SLI TANF Cash Benefits SLI Tribal Pass-Thru Funding SLI General Assistance SLI Tuberculosis Control Payments SLI Eligibility System Upgrade SLI Document Management SLI Genetic Testing SLI CSE Attorney General Legal Services SLI County Participation SLI Adult Services SLI Community and Emergency Services SLI Coordinated Hunger Program SLI Coordinated Homeless Program SLI Domestic Violence Prevention SLI Community-Based Marriage and Communication Skills Program Fund Deposit SLI Lifespan Respite Care 44 561.0 932.7 738.8 1,042.0 738.8 1,142.1 738.8 1,042.0 271.5 271.5 271.5 271.5 0.0 13,261.3 494.5 14,419.2 494.5 15,872.8 494.5 15,792.1 4,531.1 4,496.0 8,832.8 4,496.0 203,268.9 207,289.9 245,306.0 245,282.9 34,451.3 36,697.5 39,328.7 36,697.5 4,486.4 5,167.6 5,167.6 5,167.6 153.7 294.9 294.9 294.9 38,585.1 5,690.7 77.5 46,098.4 5,762.3 566.4 46,460.8 5,947.4 566.4 46,456.7 5,945.2 566.4 24,986.2 26,383.3 26,383.3 26,383.3 119.0 200.0 200.0 200.0 2,184.4 2,206.6 2,206.6 2,206.6 0.0 1,800.0 1,800.0 1,800.0 205.3 500.0 500.0 500.0 0.0 3,500.0 3,500.0 3,500.0 118,953.3 3,859.9 123,220.0 4,288.7 122,426.4 5,192.3 122,426.4 5,192.3 1,979.9 14.8 2,060.8 32.2 2,060.8 32.2 2,060.8 32.2 0.0 6,431.3 6,431.3 6,431.3 494.5 122.4 3,243.2 0.0 122.4 3,314.0 0.0 122.4 3,314.0 0.0 122.4 3,314.0 553.3 16,772.0 5,336.8 1,384.1 18,977.7 5,424.9 1,384.1 18,977.7 5,424.9 1,384.1 18,977.7 5,424.9 1,857.2 2,014.6 2,014.6 2,014.6 2,626.2 2,804.9 2,804.9 2,804.9 14,812.3 15,947.4 19,247.4 17,597.4 950.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 51.2 500.0 500.0 500.0 SLI Grandparent Kinship Care SLI Children Support Services SLI CPS Emergency Placement SLI CPS Residential Placement SLI Foster Care Placement SLI Education and Training Vouchers SLI Healthy Families SLI Family Builders Program SLI Intensive Family Services SLI Child Abuse Prevention SLI Homeless Youth Intervention SLI Comprehensive Medical and Dental Program SLI Joint Substance Abuse AZ Familes (FIRST) SLI Permanent Guardianship Subsidy SLI Adoption Services SLI Adoption Services Family Preservation Projects SLI CPS Appeals SLI CYF Attorney General Legal Services SLI Independent Living Maintenance SLI JOBS SLI Day Care Subsidy SLI Transitional Child Care SLI Vocational Rehabilitation Services SLI Independent Living Rehabilitation Services SLI Summer Youth Employment and Training SLI Workforce Investment Act - Discretionary SLI Workforce Investment Act - Local Governments 0.0 0.0 1,000.0 1,000.0 62,311.3 76,082.4 82,070.4 83,564.1 5,158.3 5,186.5 7,035.5 6,967.3 17,678.7 17,710.0 22,520.7 21,876.2 28,460.8 329.2 23,362.6 700.0 27,771.1 700.0 27,384.3 700.0 10,750.0 5,181.5 1,985.6 10,750.0 5,200.0 1,985.6 10,750.0 5,200.0 1,985.6 10,750.0 5,200.0 1,985.6 39.4 367.7 826.9 400.0 826.9 400.0 826.9 400.0 2,057.0 2,057.0 2,057.0 2,057.0 6,077.6 7,224.5 9,724.5 7,224.5 6,952.6 8,935.3 9,112.1 8,935.3 49,044.8 289.5 55,244.6 700.0 63,402.6 700.0 64,123.3 700.0 732.1 12,190.7 732.3 12,168.8 732.3 14,564.6 732.3 12,168.8 3,136.0 3,136.0 4,223.8 4,223.8 18,793.7 156,821.4 29,728.0 4,857.7 23,573.7 162,289.0 36,193.0 4,919.1 23,463.7 176,689.0 36,193.0 4,919.1 23,463.7 176,539.0 36,193.0 4,919.1 2,382.6 2,491.9 2,491.9 2,491.9 1,250.0 750.0 750.0 750.0 2,633.9 3,614.0 3,614.0 3,614.0 33,066.7 48,040.6 48,040.6 48,040.6 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Department of Economic Security FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 Child Protective Services Staffing ‐ Year 2 3,603.5 Arizona has developed caseload‐specific standards for CPS Workers and a plan to hire enough workers to meet those standards. The standards include a maximum caseload burden of 10 investigations per month, 16 out‐of‐home children, or 19 in‐ home cases per month. In FY 2007, caseloads were 19.2% above these standards. In FY 2009, the Executive and Legislature approved 61 new CPS Case Managers and support staff to combat the rising caseload ratios facing CPS workers. This was the first year of a three‐year initiative to meet the standards outlined above. Unfortunately, the State’s financial outlook will likely delay this three‐year plan and keep caseload ratios relatively high. The Executive recommends $3.6 million from the General Fund to hire an additional 36 caseworkers and 18 support staff. This will move the ratios from 14% above the standard to 10% and alleviate some of the excess caseloads of CPS workers. General Fund 3,603.5 Adoption Subsidy 8,878.7 When a child cannot be reunited with their parents, the Department looks at other options to place a child in a permanent home. Adoption is a lengthy legal process in which the birth parents’ rights are severed from the child. At the time this recommendation was prepared, there were 1,954 children in care with a case plan goal of adoption. It is anticipated that the adoption caseload will increase to an average of 13,731 children per month, and the average subsidy payment will be $710 per child. The Executive recommends $8.9 million from the General Fund for Adoption Subsidy caseload growth. General Fund 8,878.7 FY 2010 Children Services 19,626.5 The Executive recommends $19.6 million from the General Fund for Children Services. The majority of the necessary funding is to backfill an existing shortfall or cover rising costs, rather than to accommodate new caseload growth. The Executive projects the FY 2009 structural shortfall to be over $14.1 million General Fund. Since the 2003 Special Session, DES has focused on in‐home services for children in the CPS system. Those efforts have been successful, as in‐home cases have grown by 72% and out‐of‐home placements have been relatively flat over the last three years. Unfortunately, the federal government does not reimburse the Department for in‐home placements, and the Department has struggled to overcome that lack of reimbursement. The federal government does reimburse up to 50% of the cost to remove a child from their home. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 has forced the Department to license caretakers in order to qualify for federal funding. Unlicensed placements, despite being preferable to group homes or shelters, do not receive federal funding. Therefore, the Department has worked to move children into licensed foster homes, rather than unlicensed homes or group homes. The growth in foster care is the result of decreased placements of children in congregate and unlicensed settings. Increased funding is required in the Emergency Placement and Residential Placement special line items because new requests for proposals must be released for group homes and shelters over the next year. Those providers have not received an increase in funding for several years, so it is anticipated that costs will rise under the new contracts. The Independent Living Maintenance program accounts for nearly $1.1 million of the funding. The Executive anticipates an average monthly caseload of 443 clients at $795 per month. General Fund State Agency Budgets Department of Economic Security 19,626.5 45 FY 2010 Domestic Violence Intervention 1,650.0 In FY 2007 the Governor created a multi‐year plan to end the domestic violence (DV) turn away rate. The plan reflects the State’s commitment to the DV community to provide the operating costs for shelters and beds if funds for capital needs could be raised privately. While the number of people turned away has fallen, more than 10,000 victims of domestic violence were turned away in FY 2008 due to lack of available space. In FY 2009, the third year of the plan, additional funding for the shelters was suspended due to budget constraints. The Executive recommends $1.7 million from the General Fund to begin to address the remaining shortfall of available domestic violence shelter beds. This funding will provide operating dollars for over 60 new beds, which will serve an additional 800 to 900 battered women and children seeking shelter. General Fund Federal Block Grant Backfills 1,650.0 FY 2010 Technical Adjustments 5,523.1 The Executive recommends several budgetary changes to better reflect where actual costs occur. It also recommends changes in FTE levels and expenditure authority to correct omissions from previous years’ budgets. The recommendations have zero General Fund impact, and are all technical in nature. 1. Occupancy and Telecommunications: Beginning in FY 2009, occupancy and telecommunication costs will be charged to the benefiting programs’ budgets within DES, rather than to Administrative Support. When funds are spent out of the Child Support Enforcement Fund and the Long Term Care System Fund in the Administrative Division, they are considered non‐ appropriated; conversely, when they are spent out of the programs, the expenditures are considered appropriated. Therefore, the recommendation includes shifting the expenditures for these funds from non‐appropriated to appropriated. There is a net‐zero impact to each of the impacted funds. 0.0 The Executive recommends funding the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Federal Block Grant structural shortfall with $11.7 million from the General Fund. The Executive also recommends backfilling the Child Care and Development Fund (CCFD) Federal Block Grant with $1.7 million from the General Fund. The CCDF has historically been over‐appropriated to spend down the carry‐forward balance in the fund. That balance is nearly exhausted; if the funds are not replaced, it will result in a cut to child care program funding. Similarly, the existing TANF Block Grant had been over‐appropriated by $4.7 million in order to spend down the excess fund balance, which is now exhausted. An additional $7 million in one‐time TANF Contingency Funds was appropriated to ongoing programs in FY 2009. Thus, the entire TANF Block Grant offset totals $11.7 million. 2. San Carlos Apache Tribe: Effective May 1, 2008, the Tribe will be responsible for its own TANF program. To reflect this change, a transfer of $903,600 in General Fund support dollars should be transferred from the TANF Cash Benefits special line item (SLI) and Jobs SLI to the Tribal‐Pass‐Through Funding SLI. These funds have historically been used by DES to administer the Tribe’s TANF program. There is a net‐zero impact to the funding sources for this issue, as it represents a permanent allocation transfer. Child Care and Development Fund (1,738.4) Child Care 16,050.3 3. TANF Maintenance of Effort Shift: In order for the Department to draw down $40 million in TANF Contingency Funds, it must meet certain Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirements. A significant portion of MOE funds were historically located in the Day Care Subsidy SLI, which is allowable for the TANF Block Grant MOE but not for TANF Contingency Funds. In order to continue to receive those additional funds, the Department must swap $58 million General Fund in the Day Care Subsidy SLI with $58 million TANF in the TANF Cash Benefits SLI. There is a total fund net‐zero impact, as the fund swaps offset. Child care is a critical program for parents struggling to find work. The alternative to providing child care assistance is for the parents to either leave the child in an unsafe environment or quit their jobs to care for the children, which leads to more public assistance for the family. The Executive recommends $16.1 million from the General Fund for child care caseload growth. Of this amount, $4.7 million is carried forward from the supplemental need in FY 2009. A General Appropriation Act footnote states, “It is the intent of the Legislature to fully fund Child Care caseloads and not create a wait list.” 4. Family Assistance Administration FTE: In FY 2009, the Department was granted $3.1 million to hire 55.9 Eligibility Workers. The 55.9 positions were not appropriated, but the Department was permitted to transfer authorized FTE positions from within its budget. The Department requests a permanent transfer of 55.9 FTE positions from the Jobs SLI to the Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility operating budget to reflect this shift. There is no funding impact, as this recommendation represents a shift of FTE authority only. General Fund Temporary Assistance for Needy Families General Fund 46 13,484.6 (11,746.2) 16,050.3 5. Division of Child Support Enforcement FTE: The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 required states to review child support orders for cases receiving TANF Cash Benefits every three years. Funding for 24.8 additional FTE was authorized in the FY 2008 Department of Economic Security FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 FY 2010 budget, but the FTE authority was never appropriated. The Department requests that the FTE authority be appropriated to the Division of Child Support Enforcement’s operating budget. There is no funding impact, as this recommendation only adds FTE authority for which funding has already been appropriated. plans for non‐appropriated funds so that the agency may operate within decreased revenue projections. 6. Child Support County Participation: The Department contracts with counties to run their own child support enforcement programs. The funds provided by the counties are used to pull down federal Title IV‐D matching funds for local county expenditures. The expenditure authority for these federal funds has been constant since FY 2003, even though the county matching funds have increased significantly. The Department requests an increase of $1.8 million in federal expenditure authority in the County Participation SLI to pull down the maximum federal match. There is no impact to appropriated funds, but this recommendation would allow the Department to pull down an additional $1.8 million in matching Title IV‐D funds to be passed through to the counties to run their own child support enforcement programs. Special Administration Fund 161.0 Child Support Enforcement Administration Fund 904.2 7. Special Administration Fund: With the transfer of the Research Administration from the Department of Economic Security to the Department of Commerce, DES requests that $161,000 in Special Administration Funds be taken out of the administration budget and used to offset costs in the Jobs SLI. The Special Administration funding was eliminated from the Administrative Division in the FY 2009 budget, rather than transferred to the JOBS SLI, creating a shortfall in the DES budget. The Department requests that the Special Administrative Fund appropriation of $161,000 be reinstated and placed in the JOBS program, a more appropriate place for expenditures from this fund. They also request that an equivalent amount of General Fund dollars be sent to the Administrative Division from the JOBS program. This recommendation would increase the appropriation from the Special Administration Fund by $161,000 but would have no General Fund impact. 8. Grandparent Kinship Care: The Grandparent Kinship Care program was created two years ago with an appropriation of $1.0 million General Fund to the Foster Care Placement SLI in the Division of Children, Youth and Families. However, the program does not require contact with the child welfare system. A more appropriate place for these funds would be in the Division of Aging and Community Services (DACS), since the local Area Agencies on Aging are administering this program. DES is requesting the creation of a new special line item in DACS and placing the funding there. This recommendation has no funding impact, as it merely shifts a program from the Division of Children, Youth and Families to the Division on Aging and Community Service. General Fund 0.0 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 0.0 Child Care and Development Fund 0.0 Department Long‐Term Care System Fund Spinal and Head Injuries Trust Fund Developmental Disabilities 4,457.9 0.0 40,674.6 Arizona’s Developmentally Disabled population continues to grow steadily. The population receiving these services includes Arizona residents who have chronic developmental disabilities that manifest prior to age 18. Afflictions include but are not limited to cerebral palsy, epilepsy, autism or a cognitive disability. These disabilities must limit three or more areas of major life activities, including self‐care, language, learning, mobility, self‐direction, capacity for independent living, and economic self‐sufficiency. ALTCS eligibility also includes a requirement that the individual must have an income below 300% of the Supplemental Security Income eligibility limit of $1,869 per month. The Executive recommends $40.7 million from the General Fund for Developmentally Disabled capitation and population growth. It is anticipated that the Developmentally Disabled population will increase by 6.1% in FY 2010, and the capitation rate is expected to increase by 3.3% and the FMAP to move to 65.75%. The Executive also recommends 83 total FTE positions to manage the increased caseload. Of this request, approximately $8 million is a carry‐forward of an FY 2009 supplemental need in this program. Within this recommendation, $1.2 million is attributable to the under‐funding of the premium tax. Since it was implemented in FY 2004, the premium tax appropriation has grown to $17.2 million. The estimated premium tax payment for FY 2009 is $18.4 million. General Fund 40,674.6 9. The Executive also recommends reducing several expenditure State Agency Budgets Department of Economic Security 47 FY 2010 Division of Children, Youth, and Families Operating Shortfall 5,000.0 To ensure adequate funding for CPS staff, the Executive recommends that the FY 2009 $5.0 million supplemental recommendation from the General Fund be ongoing. The Department’s appropriation is not adequate to support full staffing in addition to the overtime that is necessary to manage the CPS workload. State and federal laws require that 100% of CPS reports be investigated; they also require regular visitation with children and families involved in the child welfare system. There are many more mandates on CPS, such as investigation timelines, guidelines to documentation, and court appearances. Without the continuation of the supplemental funding, the Department will have no choice but to hold CPS worker positions vacant to pay for underfunded operating costs. General Fund 5,000.0 FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 Adoption Subsidy 1,600.0 When a child cannot be safely returned to their home and the court has severed parental rights, the Department seeks to move that child to permanency. Individuals who adopt a child from the child welfare system are provided a subsidy to allow them to financially support that child. The Executive projects a funding shortfall of $2.7 million in the Adoption Services program in FY 2009. The shortfall is a function of an underestimation of the caseload. According to the JLBC Appropriations Report, the appropriation assumes an average monthly caseload of 11,950, while the Department is projecting 12,369. However, as a result of its success in increasing the number of children who achieve permanency through adoption, the Department recently received a federal bonus of $1.1 million. Applying these funds to the shortfall reduces the Executive Recommendation to approximately $1.6 million from the General Fund. General Fund 48 1,600.0 Children Services 14,133.9 Children Services provides for the placement costs of children who have been removed from their home as well as the supportive services designed to allow children to remain safely in their homes or to return home more quickly. Costs have grown, due primarily to the expansion and enhancement of in‐home services, though some of the increase is a result of caseloads and costs in out‐of‐home care. Increased investment in in‐home services has greatly slowed the growth in out‐of‐home care but has not resulted in declines that are as substantial as were projected. Additionally, though less expensive than out‐of‐home services, in‐home services generally are not eligible for federal Title IV‐E funding, which eliminates some of the savings. The Executive recommends $14.1 million from the General Fund for the Children Services shortfall in FY 2009. General Fund Child Care 14,133.9 4,700.0 A child care shortfall was expected when the FY 2009 budget was enacted. The shortfall is driven by growing caseloads across the program, including Cash Assistance‐related cases, families involved in the child welfare system, and low‐income working families. Based on current caseloads and costs, the estimated shortfall is $7.1 million. The Department, though, has identified $2.4 million in funding to mitigate this total. Specifically, Laws 1998, Chapter 208 appropriated $6.1 million from the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families block grant for child care eligibility and administration. The appropriation was exempted from lapsing and approximately $2.4 million remains. In recognition of the deficit, a footnote was included in the appropriations act that stated, “It is the intent of the Legislature to fully fund child care caseloads and not create a wait list.” Therefore, the Executive recommends $4.7 million from the General Fund to avoid the creation of a child care waiting list. Without this funding, it is estimated that the waiting list would grow to approximately 5,500 children by the end of the fiscal year. General Fund Department of Economic Security 4,700.0 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget The Arizona Long Term Care System (ALTCS) for individuals with developmental disabilities is an entitlement under Arizona’s Medicaid state plan. This Medicaid‐funded program must provide services to all eligible individuals. The shortfall results from an underestimation of the capitation rate in the development of the FY 2009 budget. Specifically, the budget assumed that the rate would be $3,424.52 per member per month, while it is actually $3,502.63. This actuarially established rate does not include any programmatic enhancements or expansions; it represents only the funding necessary to operate the program according to statutory and contractual requirements. Holding all other budget assumptions constant, the shortfall resulting from the under‐ funding of the capitation rate is $17.7 million in total funds. The General Fund requirement is $6.3 million. The entitlement nature of this program prevents the Department from arbitrarily reducing services to individuals with developmental disabilities. General Fund 6,300.0 Division of Children, Youth, and Families Operating Shortfall 5,000.0 The Department’s Division of Children, Youth and Families (DCYF) operates Child Protective Services (CPS). Increasing in‐ home and out‐of‐home caseloads and reports of abuse and neglect of children drives the operating budget of this Division. In FY 2008, workloads exceeded the Arizona‐specific caseload standards by 21 percent. The FY 2009 budget included funding for the first of a three‐year plan to achieve the standard. Even when the staff is hired, caseloads are estimated to exceed the standards by 14% this year. The Executive recommends $5.0 million General Fund to offset the existing shortfall in the Division of Children, Youth and Families. The work of CPS is, in many regards, dictated by State and federal laws, which makes it difficult to reduce its functions in order to reduce costs. For example, a State appropriations act footnote requires that 100% of CPS reports be investigated, and State and federal statutes require regular visitation with children and families involved in the child welfare system. There are many more mandates on CPS, such as investigation timelines, guidelines to documentation, and court appearances. The Department’s appropriation, however, is not adequate to support full staffing in addition to the overtime that is necessary to manage this workload. General Fund State Agency Budgets Performance Measures 6,300.0 Developmental Disabilities FY 2007 Actual Child protective services response rate (percent) Average number of consumers with developmental disabilities served Total Office of Accounts Receivable and Collections cost per dollar to administer, bill, and collect debts Adult Protective Services investigation percentage rate Average cash benefits caseload (unduplicated) Number of substantiated reports of child maltreatment Number of children with finalized adoptions Percent of children in out-of-home care who exit the child welfare system who achieve permanent placement through reunification, adoption, or legal guardianship Percent of refugee medical assistance program eligibility determinations made within 48 hours of receipt of a complete application Percent of total food stamp payments issued accurately Percent of child protective service reports that are substantiated Total average number of children in Day Care Subsidy program per month Ratio of current IV-D child support collected and distributed to current IV-D support due Average cost per participant Number of Cash Assistance employment placements Average number of consumers with developmental disabilities served FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 100 100 100 100 18,631 19,700 20,882 22,135 .0608 0.1 0.1 0.1 95.54 100 100 100 37,616 37,030 37,832 38,652 2,380 * 2,800 2,800 1,468 * 1,500 1,500 33 * 34 34 100 100 100 100 95 95.8 95.5 95.5 8.26 * 8.0 8.0 35,818 37,396 39,334 40,715 49.44 50.9 52.4 53.9 519 252 519 519 16,780 17,902 17,902 17,902 8,483 8,770 9,068 9,340 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 201,947.6 4,011,088.0 5.03% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program with special line items. 5,000.0 Department of Economic Security 49 EDA Department of Education Mission: To increase the quality of public education in the State of Arizona by raising expectations and providing support, resources, and assurances that enable schools and students to excel. Description: The Arizona Department of Education is administered by the Superintendent of Public Instruction, an elected official under the Arizona State Constitution. The Superintendent leads the State of Arizona in developing and implementing educational guidelines. Through the various programs within the Arizona Department of Education, the Superintendent oversees direct services to 237 locally governed school districts and 364 Charter Holders operating at over 478 Charter sites. The Department executes the educational guidelines through evaluation, training, school improvement assistance, dissemination of information, and administration and allocation of funds. The Department also serves as the primary source for current, reliable, and accurate information on the status and needs of the public school system. The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Basic State Aid 3,496,825.2 3,614,397.9 3,857,739.0 3,842,811.9 SLI Additional State Aid 366,134.8 404,880.5 418,380.5 418,380.5 SLI Other State Aid to 700.5 983.9 983.9 983.9 Districts SLI AIMS Intervention and 5,601.1 5,050.0 5,050.0 5,050.0 Dropout Prevention SLI Special Education 25,237.7 35,237.7 41,861.3 35,237.7 Vouchers SLI Extended School Year (2.4) 500.0 500.0 500.0 SLI Early Childhood Block 18,372.1 19,438.1 19,438.1 19,438.1 Grant SLI Vocational Education 11,967.2 11,467.7 11,467.7 11,467.7 Block Grant SLI Chemical Abuse 717.7 817.1 817.1 817.1 SLI School Safety 6,294.8 6,786.5 6,786.5 6,786.5 SLI Teacher Certification 1,783.2 1,971.4 1,971.4 1,971.4 SLI Parental Choice for 975.0 1,000.0 1,000.0 1,000.0 Reading Success Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Agency Summary Program/Cost Center State Board of Education/Vocational and Technological Education School Finance - Payment and Financial Compliance School Accountability and Improvement Education Services Professional Development Administration Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 517.1 3,573.0 3,573.0 3,573.0 3,865,636.2 4,022,359.1 4,279,200.2 4,264,273.1 21,183.5 19,936.3 63,420.7 24,936.3 93,881.1 6,966.2 9,784.2 139,682.3 3,309.1 7,134.7 147,115.0 3,309.1 8,968.1 139,682.3 3,309.1 7,134.7 3,997,968.3 4,195,994.5 4,505,586.1 4,442,908.5 258.2 12,821.9 3,730.1 16,857.3 257.8 6.2 3,925,633.6 5,371.2 1,790.0 31,500.2 255.8 13,929.0 4,097.3 14,914.1 184.3 4.7 4,158,941.8 3,905.3 18.0 0.0 284.3 15,764.0 4,691.7 48,646.1 304.3 4.7 4,422,406.5 13,742.8 26.0 0.0 255.8 13,929.0 4,097.3 19,914.1 184.3 4.7 4,400,855.8 3,905.3 18.0 0.0 3,997,968.3 4,195,994.5 4,505,586.1 4,442,908.5 3,943,009.3 2,084.0 7,626.2 4,141,201.0 2,572.8 7,000.0 4,450,792.6 2,572.8 7,000.0 4,388,115.0 2,572.8 7,000.0 28.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 45,220.7 45,220.7 45,220.7 45,220.7 3,997,968.3 4,195,994.5 4,505,586.1 4,442,908.5 Executive Issues AIMS Assessment Section, Achievement Testing 5,000.0 Pursuant to A.R.S. § 15‐741, achievement testing is required for K‐ 12 students in grades selected by the Superintendent of Public Instruction using a norm‐referenced test (grades 2 & 9) and AIMS testing in at least 4 grades, selected by the State Board (grades 3 through 8, 10 and retakes for high school students). The Executive recommends $5.0 million from the General Fund in FY 2010 for AIMS testing. General Fund 5,000.0 Fund General Fund Teacher Certification Fund School Accountability Fund Prop 301 Golden Rule Special Plate Fund Public Institutions Permanent School Earnings Agency Total 50 Department of Education FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 Basic State Aid FY 2010 228,414.0 Basic State Aid constitutes the Stateʹs financial obligation for funding K‐12 public schools. A component of Basic State Aid is Equalization Assistance, or formula funding, for traditional public schools. The average daily membership (ADM) of each school district from the prior year is multiplied by a weighted factor (which varies with the grade and special needs of individual students) and then multiplied by a statutorily determined support, or per pupil, amount. Since the formula is based on prior academic year ADM, it may be increased to account for growth during the current academic year. In determining the equalization base, or spending limit, the formula incorporates Transportation and Capital funding as well. School districts receive Basic State Aid when their local share, funded through property taxes, does not meet or exceed their equalization base amount. Districts that are able to raise the amount of their equalization base through their local share do not receive this funding. This equalization assistance represents the Stateʹs portion of the K‐12 funding, referred to as Basic State Aid. The concept of equalization ensures that all school districts receive an equal share of the education dollar while taking into account the financial capacity of each school district. FY 2010 Additional State Aid 13,500.0 A.R.S. § 15‐972 requires the State to pay 37% of each homeowner’s primary property tax rate as a “rebate,” up to a maximum of $540. Laws 2007, Chapter 258, accelerates the enacted reduction in business property tax rates. This increased cost to the State was offset by the elimination of excess utilities in FY 2009. Additionally, Article IX, Section 18 of the Arizona Constitution limits residential tax obligations to 1% of the home’s cash value. All Class 3 properties are eligible for both the “homeowner’s rebate” and the 1% cap. The Executive recommends a net increase of approximately $13.5 million General Fund in FY 2010 for Additional State Aid for ongoing property value growth and tax rate changes. This assumes the extension of the desegregation “soft cap” pursuant to Laws 2006, Chapter 53, § 18. General Fund 13,500.0 Traditional school districts are one component of Basic State Aid. Charter Schools (which are funded using a current year funding formula), juvenile correctional facilities, and adult correctional facilities that accommodate minors also receive assistance through formulas different from those employed by traditional school districts. As required by Laws 2000, Fifth Special Session, Chapter 1, the formula used to calculate Basic State Aid includes an inflation factor. Pursuant to A.R.S. § 15‐901.01, beginning in FY 2007 the inflation factor is the lesser of (a) 2% or (b) the change in the GDP price deflator from the second preceding calendar year to the calendar year immediately preceding the budget year. The Executive recommends $228.4 million in FY 2010 from the General Fund to fully fund the K‐12 school finance formula, using the following assumptions: (a) 2% enrollment growth, (b) 8% net assessed valuation (NAV), (c) 2% deflator, (d) truth in taxation, (e) 50% for rapid‐decline districts, (f) phase‐in for excess utilities, and (g) an offset for the reinstatement of the Statewide Equalization Tax Rate. General Fund State Agency Budgets 228,414.0 Department of Education 51 Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Percent of Arizona high school students who enter 9th grade and graduate within four years FY 2008 Actual 69 FY 2009 Expected 73 FY 2010 Expected 74 75 ¾ Fiscal Year data represents class cohort from 2 years previously (i.e. FY 2005 = Class of 2003). Number of investigative cases closed Number of days to process budget analysis from July 18 287 226 290 290 68 *102 102 102 ¾ *System related difficulities/legislature session has been closing later, causing September revisions which pushes back distribution of Budg-25 letters. Percent of Instructional Improvement Fund (IIP) payments made on a quarterly basis Percent of Classroom Site Fund payments made on a monthly basis Percent of public education agencies demonstrating compliance with monitoring deficiencies within two years Percent of students with disabilities with proficient performance in reading in grade 3 Percent of students with disabilities with proficient performance in reading in grade 5 Percent of students with disabilities with proficient performance in reading in grade 8 Percent of students with disabilities with proficient performance in reading in grade 10 Percent of local education agencies (with ELL students receiving state/federal funding) in full compliance with federal, state and ADE policy issues Percent of calls that are resolved by the Support Center Number of schools participating in department special initiatives Maximum number of days to process complete certification applications 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 99 99 100 39 36 39 40 30 31 33 34 21 22 23 24 27 28 30 31 55 58 58 59 91 89 92 85 341 376 380 400 8 21 18 14 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 11,294.3 6,374,601.0 0.18% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program with special line items. 52 Department of Education FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget MAA Executive Recommendations Department of Emergency and Military Affairs Mission: To promote, protect, and defend the health, safety, peace, and quality of life of the citizens of our communities, state, and nation. Description: The Department of Emergency and Military Affairs is divided into three programs: Administration, Emergency Management, and Military Affairs. The Administration program coordinates the activities of the other programs. It provides overall financial, contracting, personnel, and property management actions. The Emergency Services program prepares and coordinates emergency response plans for the State. The Military Affairs program contains the Army National Guard and Air National Guard programs each of which develop, train, and sustain a military force for the protection of life and property, preservation of peace, maintenance of order, and public safety. It also administers Project Challenge for training at‐risk youth and the Joint Counter Narcotics Task Force. Administration Military Affairs Emergency Management Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,979.1 6,545.3 2,345.2 2,252.3 6,235.7 5,565.0 2,252.3 6,622.7 5,565.0 2,252.3 6,672.7 6,477.2 10,869.6 14,053.0 14,440.0 15,402.2 71.4 3,430.4 1,112.8 125.3 83.5 41.4 59.3 562.3 3,155.4 251.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,047.3 72.4 3,203.0 1,150.8 232.3 105.1 63.9 120.3 3,054.1 3,486.3 263.1 175.0 0.0 0.0 2,199.1 72.4 3,203.0 1,150.8 232.3 105.1 63.9 120.3 3,054.1 3,873.3 263.1 175.0 0.0 0.0 2,199.1 72.4 3,203.0 1,150.8 232.3 105.1 63.9 120.3 3,054.1 4,835.5 263.1 175.0 0.0 0.0 2,199.1 10,869.6 14,053.0 14,440.0 15,402.2 10,814.0 55.6 13,920.3 132.7 14,307.3 132.7 15,269.5 132.7 10,869.6 14,053.0 14,440.0 15,402.2 Fund General Fund Emergency Response Fund Agency Total FY 2011 Executive Issues State Land lease 387.0 437.0 The Executive recommendation provides for State Land lease increases. Previously, federal monies were used to pay for these leases, but DEMA has been advised that federal monies may not be used for that purpose. General Fund Emergency Operation Center Lease Purchase 387.0 437.0 0.0 912.2 In 2008, the Legislature authorized the Department of Administration to issue a Certificate of Participation to expand the State Emergency Operations Center, with debt service starting in FY 2011. The Executive recommends $912,200 from the General Fund for the first debt service payment. 0.0 General Fund Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2010 912.2 Performance Measures Percent of Air National Guard soldiers re-enlisted Percent of Army National Guard soldiers re-enlisted Number of communities with sustained Disaster Resistant Community Programs Percent of requests for contingency exercise assistance supported Average number of months of community recovery time from declaration of emergency to termination of emergency Number of Project Challenge graduates annually FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 90 90 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 89 88 73 82 82 82 106 109 112 115 0 100 0 0 16.4 15.0 15.0 15.0 114 200 200 200 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 1,993.8 FY 2011 1,993.8 Agency Request 82,428.0 82,338.0 2.42% 2.42% Administrative Cost Percentage The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program with special line items. The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Guardsmen Tuition 1,317.3 1,446.0 1,446.0 1,446.0 Reimbursement SLI Civil Air Patrol 27.1 54.7 54.7 54.7 SLI Governor's Emergency 541.9 3,500.0 3,500.0 3,500.0 Funds State Agency Budgets Department of Emergency and Military Affairs 53 EVA Department of Environmental Quality Mission: To protect and enhance public health and the environment in Arizona. Description: The Arizona Department of Environmental Quality protects public health and the environment by establishing and ensuring compliance with standards of quality for Arizonaʹs air, land, and water; advancing public policy; and encouraging participation through statewide outreach. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Administration Air Quality Waste Program Water Quality Program Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 17,715.9 46,711.1 4,771.9 11,841.9 15,880.3 50,748.8 21,521.7 13,038.8 15,880.3 50,748.8 21,835.3 13,038.8 15,880.3 50,748.8 21,835.3 13,038.8 81,040.9 101,189.6 101,503.2 101,503.2 473.4 19,662.4 6,880.5 35,207.8 498.8 20.2 3,299.6 8,315.2 589.4 0.0 0.0 4,464.8 2,102.2 473.4 22,320.2 7,618.1 39,885.8 545.3 40.3 1,856.9 6,736.0 479.0 0.0 0.0 5,721.4 15,986.6 476.4 22,459.7 7,667.2 39,885.8 545.3 40.3 1,856.9 6,861.0 479.0 0.0 0.0 5,721.4 15,986.6 476.4 22,459.7 7,667.2 39,885.8 545.3 40.3 1,856.9 6,861.0 479.0 0.0 0.0 5,721.4 15,986.6 81,040.9 101,189.6 101,503.2 101,503.2 17,323.1 33,375.3 189.1 24,080.2 37,470.7 795.0 29,080.2 37,470.7 795.0 29,080.2 37,470.7 795.0 5,567.4 0.0 5,227.5 5,000.0 5,227.5 0.0 5,227.5 0.0 3.3 22.0 22.0 22.0 1,939.6 5,710.6 928.6 10.4 3,763.3 12,230.1 2,325.8 5,992.3 1,503.1 137.8 5,887.0 12,748.2 2,325.8 6,305.9 1,503.1 137.8 5,887.0 12,748.2 2,325.8 6,305.9 1,503.1 137.8 5,887.0 12,748.2 81,040.9 101,189.6 101,503.2 101,503.2 SLI Emissions Control Contractor Payments SLI Waste Tire Program SLI WQARF Priority Site Remediation SLI Clean Water SLI Safe Drinking Water 30,707.8 33,239.6 33,239.6 33,239.6 47.7 0.0 53.6 15,000.0 53.6 15,000.0 53.6 15,000.0 1,425.2 669.9 0.0 845.1 0.0 845.1 0.0 845.1 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 0.0 Executive Issues Restoration of GF One Time Offsets and Reductions The Executive recommendation restores $5.0 million from the General Fund and reduces by the same amount the one‐time appropriation from the Clean Water Revolving Fund. Due to the projected FY 2009 budget shortfall, Laws 2008, Chapter 285, (General Appropriation Act) included a fund shift of $5.0 million to use monies from the Clean Water Revolving Fund and reduced General Fund expenses by the same amount. Based on federal and adopted state laws relating to the Revolving Fund, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has indicated that monies in the Clean Water Revolving cannot be used for operating purposes. General Fund Clean Water Revolving Fund Air Permits Admin Fund Expenditure Authority 5,000.0 5,000.0 (5,000.0) (5,000.0) 313.6 313.6 The recommendation increases the expenditure authority from the Air Permit Administration by $313,600 and 3.0 FTE inspectors. This increase is needed to enable the Department to meet statutory requirements and access the non‐General Fund monies that are available in the Fund. Permit Administration Fund 313.6 313.6 Fund General Fund DEQ Emissions Inspection Hazardous Waste Management Air Quality Fund Clean Water Revolving Fund Underground Storage Tank Revolving Recycling Fund Permit Administration Solid Waste Fee Fund Used Oil Fund Water Quality Fee Fund Indirect Cost Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Transfer to Counties 1,841.8 1,841.9 1,841.9 1,841.9 54 Department of Environmental Quality FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures Number of non-attainment areas exceeding national ambient air quality standards. Percentage of facilities from Drinking Water Priority Log assigned to enforcement staff. Percent reduction in drinking water plan review processing time. Percent reduction in Arizona pollutant discharge elimination system (AZDPDES) permit processing time. Percent reduction in Aquifer protection permit processing time. ¾ Measure effective FY2009. Percentage of statutorily set permit timelines met through License Time Frame rule. Customer satisfaction rating for citizens (scale of 1-8) Number of days per year exceeding National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for Ozone (O3), Carbon Monoxide (CO), or Particulates (PM10). Percent of contaminated sites in Waste Programs Division closed requiring no further action (cumulative) versus known universe of contaminated sites in the Waste Programs Division (cumulative) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 5 5 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 24.7 10.0 10.0 10.0 25.02 N/A N/A N/A N/A 15.0 15.0 15.0 99.47 99.0 99.0 99.0 7.7 7.4 7.4 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 84.5 82.0 82.0 82.0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 5 5 FY 2010 FY 2011 16,230.5 16,230.5 334,042.0 334,042.0 4.86% 4.86% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets Department of Environmental Quality 55 AFA Performance Measures Governorʹs Office for Equal Opportunity Mission: To administer and enforce state and federal laws prohibiting discrimination for over 44,000 state employees to ensure there are not any discriminatory practices in State government. Description: The GOEO provides information and technical assistance to state agencies to ensure nondiscrimination and equal opportunity access to employment, state contracts, and appointments. The GOEO assists state agencies/divisions in promoting equal opportunity in employment, appointments, and procurement practices conducted on behalf of the State. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Equal Opportunity Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 249.2 249.3 249.3 249.3 249.2 249.3 249.3 249.3 3.0 156.6 53.1 3.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 36.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 143.3 48.8 5.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 45.8 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 143.3 48.8 5.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 45.8 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 143.3 48.8 5.1 2.0 0.0 0.0 45.8 4.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 249.2 249.3 249.3 249.3 249.2 249.3 249.3 249.3 249.2 249.3 249.3 249.3 Number of calls answered providing information and assistance regarding Equal Opportunity rules and regulations Total training hours provided to state employees Number of community organizations contacted by the Governor's Office for Equal Opportunity to help facilitate the dissemination of information regarding employment opportunities Number of minority/women-owned businesses contacted and provided with information regarding state contracting opportunities Number of persons trained in mediation FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 702 655 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 700 700 818 1,159 900 900 276 357 250 250 2,767 3,155 2,500 2,500 0 0 0 0 Administrative Costs FY 2010 FY 2011 Administrative Costs 191.2 191.2 Agency Request 317.0 317.0 60.32% Administrative Cost Percentage 60.32% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Agency Total 56 Governorʹs Office for Equal Opportunity FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget EQA State Board of Equalization Administrative Costs Mission: To provide an independent appeal process for taxpayers, the county assessors, and the Department of Revenue in disputes relating to the valuation and classification of property for ad valorem tax purposes. FY 2010 FY 2011 Administrative Costs 120.4 120.4 Agency Request 656.0 656.0 18.35% Administrative Cost Percentage Description: The State Board of Equalization (SBOE) is comprised of thirty‐ three members, thirteen appointed by the Governor, including the Chairman, and ten members from both Maricopa and Pima counties. The Boardʹs jurisdiction is primarily over locally assessed real and personal property in Maricopa and Pima counties. Under A.R.S. §§ 42‐14001 et al, the Board’s authority extends to centrally assessed property statewide. The State Board of Equalization also can provide hearing officer services for outlying counties. Currently, the SBOE provides services to La Paz, Mohave, Navajo, Pinal and Yavapai counties. The Board, formerly Division I of the State Board of Tax Appeals, was created on August 1, 1995 through a consolidation of the appeals process. 18.35% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center State Board of Equalization Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 638.9 656.2 656.2 656.2 638.9 656.2 656.2 656.2 7.0 375.0 129.3 12.0 2.6 0.0 0.0 101.6 18.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 419.5 113.3 15.3 3.5 0.0 0.0 96.6 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 419.5 113.3 15.3 3.5 0.0 0.0 96.6 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 419.5 113.3 15.3 3.5 0.0 0.0 96.6 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 638.9 656.2 656.2 656.2 638.9 656.2 656.2 656.2 638.9 656.2 656.2 656.2 Fund General Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Cost per parcel (in dollars) Parcels appeals received State Agency Budgets FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 13 12 51,200 52,500 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 12 12 55,000 56,000 State Board of Equalization 57 PPA Board of Executive Clemency Administrative Costs Mission: To ensure public safety by considering and granting parole, work furlough, home arrest, and absolute discharge to inmates certified eligible by the Department of Corrections and who appear not to pose a threat to society, and by recommending to the Governor only those executive clemency actions which are in the best interest and safety of the citizens of Arizona. Description: Each month the Board conducts parole hearings for inmates who have committed offenses prior to January 1994. Hearings include consideration for home arrest, work furlough, parole release, absolute discharge, rescission, modification, revocation (of both parole and community supervision), and absolute discharge from parole supervision. The Board also conducts clemency hearings which include commutation, pardon, and reprieve. FY 2010 FY 2011 166.5 158.0 Agency Request 1,404.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 11.86% 1,334.0 11.84% Administrative Costs The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Board of Executive Clemency Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,097.2 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.2 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.6 14.0 635.7 260.7 11.6 5.9 0.0 0.0 176.0 7.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 633.1 266.4 4.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 180.1 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 633.1 266.4 4.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 180.1 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17.0 633.1 266.4 4.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 180.1 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,097.2 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.2 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.2 1,097.6 1,097.6 1,097.6 Fund General Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Number of parole hearings scheduled FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 725 800 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 800 800 Percent of parole grants 18 37 37 37 Number of revocations 2,443 3,220 3,220 3,220 Number of victims notified 2,743 3,900 3,900 3,900 58 Board of Executive Clemency FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget CLA Arizona Exposition & State Fair Administrative Costs Mission: To provide unlimited opportunity to celebrate Arizonaʹs heritage, youth, industry, traditions, and future by bringing the entire community together. Description: The Arizona Exposition and State Fair (AESF) is a 96‐acre entertainment facility that showcases a variety of events, including one of the preeminent state fairs in the country. The AESF, which owns the property and buildings it occupies, rents its facilities to a variety of tenants and promoters, such as the Arizona National Livestock Show and the Maricopa County Fair. The AESF provides a location to showcase industry, agriculture, education, and entertainment for the enjoyment of Arizona citizens. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 1,303.2 1,340.0 16,700.0 16,700.0 8.02% 7.80% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Interim Events State Fair Operations Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 4,309.3 10,439.0 7,674.0 8,625.6 7,674.0 8,625.6 7,674.0 8,625.6 14,748.3 16,299.6 16,299.6 16,299.6 182.7 4,326.0 1,171.9 2,990.9 2.2 7.0 3.0 3,503.6 222.4 2,521.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 186.0 4,615.4 1,258.9 3,132.0 13.1 19.4 8.0 4,652.8 0.0 2,600.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 186.0 4,615.4 1,258.9 3,132.0 13.1 19.4 8.0 4,652.8 0.0 2,600.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 186.0 4,615.4 1,258.9 3,132.0 13.1 19.4 8.0 4,652.8 0.0 2,600.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14,748.3 16,299.6 16,299.6 16,299.6 14,748.3 16,299.6 16,299.6 16,299.6 14,748.3 16,299.6 16,299.6 16,299.6 Fund Coliseum & Exposition Center Agency Total Performance Measures Fair attendance (in thousands) New revenue received from alternative sources (in dollars) Number of guest service contacts State Agency Budgets FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 1,214.4 1,300.0 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 1,300.0 1,300.0 52,700 100,000 15,000 15,000 157 170 184 199 Arizona Exposition & State Fair 59 BDA FY 2010 State Department of Financial Institutions FY 2011 Mission: To regulate the Financial Industry to promote integrity within the industry and to foster economic growth, while providing outstanding consumer support. faith effort to comply with new state and federal regulations regarding loan originator licensing. Description: The Arizona Department of Financial Institutions is charged with the licensing, supervision, and regulation of state chartered financial institutions and enterprises. The supervisory role is twofold: 1) ensuring the safety and soundness of state chartered financial entities and 2) verifying compliance with applicable state and federal laws. The Department also investigates complaints that are filed by consumers against licensed entities where violations of state law or rules have been alleged and directs appropriate remedial action if the violations are substantiated. The Department serves nearly 4,200 entities licensed to conduct business in the State as well as all Arizona citizens receiving services from these regulated companies. IT Budget and 3 IT Specialists Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Office of Supervision Office of Regulatory Affairs Receiverships Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,520.7 1,314.3 47.7 2,465.5 1,320.8 23.0 2,794.7 3,378.6 23.0 2,610.2 2,522.1 23.0 3,882.7 3,809.3 6,196.3 5,155.3 57.1 2,501.8 828.1 41.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 510.8 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 57.1 2,481.3 826.0 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 498.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 73.1 3,051.7 1,050.0 878.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 616.1 199.6 400.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.1 3,092.8 1,065.2 287.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 595.1 45.1 70.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,882.7 3,809.3 6,196.3 5,155.3 3,882.7 0.0 3,809.3 0.0 3,809.3 2,387.0 3,809.3 1,346.0 3,882.7 3,809.3 6,196.3 5,155.3 1,728.6 Banking Department Revolving Fund 1,056.8 658.4 289.2 To help ensure compliance with both new and existing statute and federal law, the Executive recommends $658,400 and 2 FTE in FY 2010. In addition 1 FTE and $289,200 should be added in FY 2011. Banking Department Revolving Fund 289.2 658.4 Performance Measures Average number of calendar days from receipt to resolution of regular complaint Percent of complainants indicating they receive good or better overall service from the Department Open receiverships (at any point in fiscal year) Percent of examinations receiving a satisfactory composite rating Percent of examination reports mailed within 25 days of completion of all examination procedures Percent of licensees indicating they receive good or better service from the Department Percent of license applications approved within 45 days of receipt (excluding Banks and Credit Unions) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 160 250 80 75 75 75 0 1 2 2 85 85 85 85 21 20 20 20 100 98 98 98 52.8 55 55 55 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 200 200 FY 2010 FY 2011 547.7 547.7 9,983.0 8,939.0 6.13% 5.49% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Banking Department Revolving Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 1,728.6 1,056.8 Executive Issues Loan Originator Licensing Budget and 16 FTE The Executive recommends $1,728,600 and 14 FTE in FY 2010 and $1,056,800 and 2 FTE in FY 2011 respectively as part of a good 60 State Department of Financial Institutions FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures MMA Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety Mission: To provide consumer protection and ensure the public safety by maintaining and enforcing standards of quality and safety for manufactured/mobile homes, factory‐built buildings, and by reducing hazards to life and property through enforcement and training related to the State Fire Code. Description: The Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety enforces safety standards for public buildings, manufactured homes, mobile homes, and factory‐built buildings. The Department is comprised of the Office of Administration, the Office of Manufactured Housing, and the Office of the State Fire Marshal. The latter enforces the State Fire Code and provides training and education for fire personnel and the general public. The Office of Manufactured Housing licenses and regulates the production and ownership of manufactured housing; administers funds paid by manufacturers, mobile home park owners and residents; and administers funds reserved for claims filed against the payers or for involuntary relocation. Average days from receipt of complete application to granting of license Number of enforcement inspections for new construction Total individuals or facilities licensed Number of persons trained in fire and life safety issues FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 2 2 452 600 800 1,000 1,721 1,800 1,825 1,850 33 30 300 500 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 2 2 FY 2010 FY 2011 322.0 329.0 6,098.0 6,176.0 5.33% 5.28% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Administration Manufactured Housing State Fire Marshal Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,672.5 963.8 973.5 1,621.3 990.6 974.9 1,621.3 990.6 974.9 1,621.3 990.6 974.9 3,609.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 43.1 2,005.3 766.1 46.9 219.1 2.7 0.0 484.9 84.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.1 2,005.1 766.3 47.2 287.6 2.6 0.0 478.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.1 2,005.1 766.3 47.2 287.6 2.6 0.0 478.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.1 2,005.1 766.3 47.2 287.6 2.6 0.0 478.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,609.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 3,609.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 3,609.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 3,586.8 Fund General Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety 61 FOA Arizona State Forester Administrative Costs Mission: To provide for the prevention and suppression of wildfires on state and private lands, located outside incorporated municipalities, primarily through the use of cooperative agreements with local fire departments, other state and federal agencies and persons organized to prevent and suppress wildfires. Description: The Forestry Division provides for the prevention and suppression of wildfires on state and private lands, located outside incorporated municipalities, through the use of cooperative agreements with local fire departments, other state and federal agencies and persons organized to prevent and suppress wildfires. The division also maintains in‐house overhead and firefighting capabilities through the qualifications of its own employees. Through the divisionʹs programs 22,400,000 acres of state and private land are protected. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 879.5 879.5 34,630.0 34,148.0 2.58% 2.54% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center State Forester Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 8,227.5 6,921.9 6,921.9 6,921.9 8,227.5 6,921.9 6,921.9 6,921.9 60.0 2,137.9 749.8 4.0 78.2 0.0 200.0 530.6 509.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,017.4 60.0 2,599.1 876.3 0.0 34.9 0.0 0.0 206.6 205.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,000.0 60.0 2,599.1 876.3 0.0 34.9 0.0 0.0 206.6 205.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,000.0 60.0 2,599.1 876.3 0.0 34.9 0.0 0.0 206.6 205.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,000.0 8,227.5 6,921.9 6,921.9 6,921.9 8,227.5 6,921.9 6,921.9 6,921.9 8,227.5 6,921.9 6,921.9 6,921.9 Fund General Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Inmate Fire Crews 1,189.9 1,208.7 1,208.7 1,208.7 SLI Fire Suppression 2,844.4 2,713.2 2,713.2 2,713.2 Operating Expenses 62 Arizona State Forester FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FDA FY 2010 State Board of Funeral Directors & Embalmers Mission: To maintain and enforce a set of standards that provides protection for the health, safety, and welfare of Arizona citizens by educating the consumer and by actively and impartially regulating those licensed to provide funeral goods and services. Description: The Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers examines and licenses individuals that provide funeral goods and services. The Board also receives complaints against licensees, investigates allegations, and administratively adjudicates complaints. The Board oversees approximately 1,800 licensees practicing in the state and serves all Arizona citizens who receive funeral goods and services. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 349.8 350.0 350.0 350.0 349.8 350.0 350.0 350.0 4.0 216.4 47.7 57.4 10.8 0.0 0.0 16.8 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 216.4 47.6 24.8 10.0 0.0 0.0 51.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 216.4 47.6 24.8 10.0 0.0 0.0 51.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 216.4 47.6 24.8 10.0 0.0 0.0 51.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 349.8 350.0 350.0 350.0 349.8 350.0 350.0 350.0 349.8 350.0 350.0 350.0 Fund FY 2011 and renewal fees to $240 per retort for a crematory license and $100 for a cremationist license. The Executive recommends increasing license and registration issuance fees to $100 for a funeral director license, $100 for an embalmer license, $100 for an embalmerʹs assistant registration, $100 for an intern license, $100 for a prearranged funeral salesperson registration and $100 for a cremationist license. The Executive recommends increasing renewal fees to $100 for a funeral director license, $100 for an embalmer license, $100 for an embalmerʹs assistant registration, $100 for an intern license, $100 for an apprentice embalmer registration, $100 for an assistant funeral director registration and $100 for a prearranged funeral salesperson registration. The Executive recommends increasing the fee for an establishment license to $6 for each disposition performed by the establishment. The Executive recommends increasing the fee for an interim funeral establishment permit to $50. The current fee structure has been in place since May 1998. 0.0 Funeral Directors and Embalmers Fund 0.0 Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 170 100 Number of inspections Number of complaints received Number of licenses 48 50 50 50 1,779 1,800 1,830 1,860 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 100 100 FY 2010 FY 2011 49.2 48.2 350.0 364.0 13.24% 14.06% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Funeral Directors & Embalmers Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Fee Increases 0.0 0.0 The Executive recommends increasing licensing and renewal fees to replace lost interest income due to FY 2009’s Legislative Fund Transfer of $496,000. The Executive recommends increasing fees to $100 for a funeral director license, $100 for an embalmer license, $100 for an embalmerʹs assistant registration, $100 for an intern license, $100 for a funeral director or embalmer license for a person who does not reside in this state, $100 for a prearranged funeral salesperson registration, $100 for a funeral establishment license, and $100 for a prearranged funeral sales establishment endorsement. The Executive recommends increasing the licensing State Agency Budgets State Board of Funeral Directors & Embalmers 63 GFA Arizona Game & Fish Department Mission: To conserve, enhance, and restore Arizonaʹs diverse wildlife resources and habitats through aggressive protection and management programs; and to provide wildlife resources and safe watercraft and off‐highway vehicle recreation for the enjoyment, appreciation, and use by present and future generations. Description: The Arizona Game and Fish Department (AGFD) operates pursuant to A.R.S. Titles 5, 17 and 28. Accordingly, the AGFD has statutory authorities related to wildlife, watercraft, and off‐ highway vehicles (OHV). In short, the AGFD manages Arizona’s wildlife resources, regulates watercraft use and enforces wildlife, watercraft and OHV laws under the control of the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, a 5‐member panel appointed by the Governor. Under provisions of A.R.S. § 17‐231, the Arizona Game and Fish Commission establishes policy for the management, preservation, and harvest of wildlife. The Commission makes rules and regulations for managing, conserving, and protecting wildlife and fisheries resources, and for safe and regulated watercraft and off‐highway vehicle operations. When managing wildlife resources, the Department considers historical, current and projected biological needs and constraints, social science (public input and opinions), and economic impacts of the resource to Arizona communities. The Department ensures the diversity of wildlife that resides in Arizona is maintained, and has been working diligently to reintroduce once extirpated (native) species such as the black‐ footed ferret, California condor, Mexican gray wolf, and Gila trout. Efforts at restoring threatened and endangered species have enabled a few species, such as the peregrine falcon to be delisted (removed from the federal Endangered Species List). The Department also plays a key role in environmental education and promoting safe outdoor recreational opportunities, including shooting ranges and watchable wildlife. Hunting, fishing, shooting sports, and watchable wildlife contribute more than a billion dollars annually to the State of Arizona, and AGFD works to ensure that our wildlife resources and natural heritage is preserved for current and future generations. Off‐highway vehicle and watercraft use also contribute significantly to Arizona’s economy and enjoyment of the outdoors. The Department has four divisions that, along with the Director’s Office, work to accomplish the Department’s mission. Field Operations Division is comprised of six Regional Offices, and the Law Enforcement Branch. The division implements program objectives that pertain to wildlife resource management and enforcement, watercraft and OHV activities, including enforcement and education. The regional offices are located in Pinetop, Flagstaff, Kingman, Yuma, Tucson and Mesa, and include remote duty post wildlife managers (enforcement officers). 64 Wildlife Management Division is comprised of the Fisheries, Game, Habitat, Nongame and Research branches. This division gives program direction and provides assistance for the Department’s wildlife programs. The Information and Education Division has two branches. The Information Branch is responsible for most public communication, license sales, media relations and one‐to‐one customer communication. Communication vehicles include a magazine, television series and the AGFD’s Web site, azgfd.gov. The Education Branch conducts and coordinate courses in environmental education, including hunting, fishing, shooting sports and boating safety. They also guide AGFD’s hunter recruitment and retention efforts. The Division operates and assists shooting ranges statewide as part of its responsibility to promote the safe and responsible use of firearms. The Special Services Division is comprised of four branches: Development, Finance and Accounting, Information Systems and Support Services. The Development Branch is primarily responsible for managing programs for wildlife water development, habitat enhancement and maintenance, boating access and improving public access to state, federal, and private lands for recreational opportunities. The Finance and Accounting Branch provides finance and accounting support, provides financial and cost statements, and oversees watercraft registration, license dealers and big‐game draws. The Information Systems Branch provides data processing capabilities, including systems analysis and design. In addition, they also provide support for AGFD computers, phone systems, and network connections to a variety of agencies on a statewide basis. The Support Services Branch is responsible for procuring goods and services, coordinating maintenance of Department vehicles, disposing of surplus property and providing warehousing and mail and courier services. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Central Administrative Services Off-Highway Vehicle/Watercraft Nongame and Endangered Wildlife Game Management Sportfish Management Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Arizona Game & Fish Department FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 3,549.2 3,077.5 3,077.5 3,077.5 5,583.0 3,927.6 5,977.4 5,998.3 5,832.1 1,381.0 1,885.8 1,702.7 13,436.9 7,587.3 16,366.6 10,789.5 18,269.2 12,003.0 18,316.1 12,039.2 35,988.5 35,542.2 41,212.9 41,133.8 273.5 13,678.9 6,326.2 2,950.3 248.2 273.5 13,277.0 7,225.0 534.0 312.1 273.5 13,866.2 7,388.5 519.0 312.1 273.5 14,455.2 7,551.9 519.0 312.1 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out 90.0 663.6 6,211.2 2,008.8 680.4 0.0 0.0 3,130.9 30.7 0.0 9,436.0 1,556.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,170.8 30.7 0.0 13,591.2 1,334.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,170.8 30.7 0.0 13,168.5 925.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,170.8 Agency Total 35,988.5 35,542.2 41,212.9 41,133.8 FY 2010 Statewide Restoration Projects 1,005.0 1,005.0 The recommendation provides $1.0 million in FY 2010 and FY 2011 for five restoration projects: the North Kaibab Deer Project ($203,500); restoration of pronghorn habitat ($375,000); stream rehabilitation ($299,000); restoration on the Kofa National Wildlife Refuge ($78,000); and predation management activities in the Black Mountains in Mohave County ($49,500). Game and Fish Fund Fund Game & Fish Fund Game & Fish Watercraft License Game/Non-Game Fund Waterfowl Conservation Wildlife Endowment Fund Wildlife Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Fund Agency Total 28,211.4 5,629.8 31,178.5 3,974.4 34,799.4 6,024.2 34,699.4 6,045.1 234.5 21.1 0.0 1,891.7 329.9 43.4 16.0 0.0 329.9 43.4 16.0 0.0 329.9 43.4 16.0 0.0 35,988.5 35,542.2 41,212.9 41,133.8 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Dingell1,404.0 1,404.0 1,404.0 1,404.0 Johnson/PittmanRobertson Federal Matching SLI Dingell1,404.0 1,404.0 2,404.0 2,404.0 Johnson/PittmanRobertson Federal Matching Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Field Vehicle Replacements 837.0 528.2 The Executive recommendation includes $837,000 for FY 2010 to replace 27 vehicles and $528,200 for FY 2011 to replace 17 vehicles. This would allow the Department to utilize the statewide contract and replace vehicles whose warranties have expired and that have been driven over 100,000 miles. Game and Fish Fund 837.0 528.2 DJ/PR State Match Increase 1,000.0 1,000.0 The federal allocation is expected to increase in FY 2010 and FY 2011 by approximately $3.0 million. The Commission is required to provide the State match in order to access the available federal funds. The recommendation includes $1.0 million in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to enable the Commission to meet the match requirement. Game and Fish Fund 1,000.0 1,000.0 Commission Shooting Range Safety Projects 1,005.0 1,005.0 730.0 680.0 The recommendation provides $730,000 in FY 2010 and $680,000 in FY 2011 to upgrade and improve the safety of shooting range facilities. Game and Fish Fund 730.0 680.0 License Sale Technology System 105.0 105.0 The recommendation provides $105,000 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to enable the Department to expand and upgrade its distribution points of license sales and improve customer services at license dealers and its public office locations. The recommended funding allows for the purchase of computer hardware and required software. This investment will allow the Commission to improve sales, better track sales data and enhance its marketing and management decisions. Game and Fish Fund 105.0 105.0 Arizona Urban Fishing Program 135.9 135.9 The recommendation includes $135,900 from the Game and Fish Fund to cover inflationary costs of purchasing over 232 pounds of fish annually, acquiring new lakes, and improving customer services. Game and Fish Fund Position Classification Review ‐ Wildlife Series 135.9 135.9 752.7 1,505.1 In 2008, the Department of Administration reviewed the Game and Fish Department’s Wildlife series job classifications and recommended that they be adjusted to higher pay grades. Employee salaries in these positions are typically 20% less than market averages and are significantly less than their counterparts in many other municipal and county public agencies. The Executive Recommendation includes $732,600 from the Game and Fish Fund and $20,100 from the Watercraft Licensing Fund for market salary adjustments for employees occupying Wildlife series job classification, effective January 2010. For FY 2011, the Recommendation provides annual funding for this classification issue, including $1.5 million from the Game and Fish Fund and $40,000 from the Watercraft Licensing Fund. Game and Fish Fund Watercraft Licensing Fund State Agency Budgets FY 2011 Arizona Game & Fish Department 732.6 1,465.1 20.1 40.0 65 Personal Computer and Software Replacement FY 2010 FY 2011 687.8 323.4 The recommendation includes $687,800 in FY 2010 and $323,400 in FY 2011 to replace outdated personal computers and software. Game and Fish Fund 587.8 223.4 Watercraft Licensing Fund 100.0 100.0 75.0 75.0 Lower Gila River Wildlife Area ‐ Game Management 75.0 75.0 157.5 Funding Support for Field Operations 92.5 84.2 The recommendation includes an increase of $92,500 in FY 2010 and $84,200 in FY 2011 to allow the Commission to meet increased operational costs and maintain adequate support for its statewide field operations. Game and Fish Fund Watercraft Licensing Fund 75.0 250.0 250.0 The Executive recommends $250,000 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 for the purchase of radio towers in the lower and upper regions of the Colorado River. Establishing radio communication will enhance the Departmentʹs field operations network and support the Stateʹs enforcement and monitoring with other entities. 257.5 157.5 The recommendation includes $257,500 in FY 2010 and $157,500 in FY 2011 to enable the Commission to replace and upgrade various communication equipment and licensing software. The recommended funding provides $30,000 for remote internet connections to improve connectivity and productivity at the field offices; $37,500 for the software maintenance for the Departmentʹs geographic information system; $90,000 for web hosting and technical support; $100,000 for the replacement of obsolete video production equipment. 257.5 75.0 Radio Towers ‐ Communication and Safety Communication Equipment and Software Game and Fish Fund FY 2011 Hunting and Fishing Resources ‐ Marketing 75.0 75.0 The recommendation provides $75,000 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to increase awareness, promote and market hunting and fishing activities in Arizona. In FY 2010, the Department will allocate $50,000 in FY 2010 and $50,000 in FY 2011 to direct its marketing efforts on anglers who had previously purchased licenses but failed to renew them annually. The recommended funding will provide an increase of $25,000 for public awareness and appreciation of Arizonaʹs hunting resources and opportunities. Game and Fish Fund The Executive recommends $75,000 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to continue the Commissionʹs efforts to enhance the wildlife resources near the Lower Gila Wildlife Area. The Department plans to improve the irrigation capabilities and increase the acreage of croplands planted for wildlife food crops. Target species would include small game such as white‐winged and mourning dove, quail, and rabbits. Big game would include javelina, and mule deer. Game and Fish Fund FY 2010 87.1 77.8 5.4 6.4 Watercraft Licensing Fund 250.0 250.0 One‐Time Equipment Funding (2,767.7) (2,767.7) The recommendation includes a decrease of ($2.8 million) in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to reflect one‐time funding that was appropriated for equipment in FY 2009. Game and Fish Fund Watercraft Licensing Fund (2,007.0) (2,007.0) (760.7) (760.7) Restore the Legislative Fund Transfers 2,000.0 2,000.0 The recommendation restores the expenditure authority in the Watercraft Licensing Fund. Laws 2008, Chapter 285, (General Appropriation Act) provided a temporary adjustment in the appropriated spending authority for the Watercraft Licensing Fund in order to allow a fund transfer to the General Fund in FY 2009. The recommendation makes this adjustment to align the programʹs operating base with the expenditure plans for FY 2010 and FY 2011. Watercraft Licensing Fund 2,000.0 2,000.0 Life Jacket Loaner Program 50.0 50.0 The recommendation includes $50,000 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to continue funding for a life jacket program. Watercraft Licensing Fund Boating Safety Education and OUI Reduction 50.0 50.0 385.0 385.0 The recommendation provides $385,000 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to improve boating safety education and strengthen operating‐ under‐the‐influence (OUI) activities. Watercraft Licensing Fund 385.0 66 Arizona Game & Fish Department 385.0 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures Number of Arizona Game and Fish Department watercraft enforcement hours FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 17,205 17,500 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 17,500 17,500 ¾ Decrease may be due to vacant positions and fewer recreation days (economy). Number of observed watercraft violations 598 1,000 1,000 ¾ Decrease may be due to vacant positions and fewer recreation days (economy). Number of watercraft registered in Arizona Watercraft registration renewal processing time by mail (in days) Number of watercraft user contacts made by field officers 1,000 147,066 145,000 145,000 145,000 4 4 4 4 5,323 11,000 11,000 11,000 ¾ Decrease may be due to vacant positions and fewer recreation days (economy). Number of students completing Arizona Game and Fish Department sponsored watercraft safety classes Number of off-highway user contacts by Arizona Game and Fish Department field officers 794 850 900 1000 6,084 10,000 10,000 10,000 ¾ Decrease may be due to vacant positions and fewer recreation days (economy). Ratio of number of big game permit tags to the number of people applying Number of off-highway vehicle violations observed .42 .42 .40 .40 243 900 900 900 ¾ Decrease may be due to vacant positions and fewer recreation days (economy). Number of urban fishing licenses sold ¾ 41,923 42,000 42,500 43,500 Total urban fishing related licenses sold. Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 5,520.1 5,520.1 104,102.0 102,558.0 5.38% 5.30% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets Arizona Game & Fish Department 67 GMA FY 2010 Department of Gaming Joint Monitoring System Mission: To protect the public, ensure compliance with the gaming compacts, and regulate the gaming industry. Description: The Department of Gaming is responsible for carrying out the stateʹs responsibilities under the Tribal‐State gaming compacts. The Department monitors compliance by the Tribal gaming operations with all compact requirements, including those governing the nature, extent, and conduct of gaming activities; public health, safety, and welfare; and other operational requirements. It also conducts background investigations of all prospective gaming employees, management contractors, providers of gaming services, and manufacturers and distributors of gaming devices in order to ensure that unsuitable individuals or companies are not involved in Arizonaʹs gaming industry. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Enforcement Certification Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 10,578.1 1,887.2 14,313.8 2,247.2 11,175.8 1,959.7 12,249.2 1,959.7 12,465.3 16,561.0 13,135.5 14,208.9 Agency Total (2,208.8) (1,748.1) For FY 2010, the recommendation eliminates ($2.2 million) of one‐ time equipment funding from the Arizona Benefits Fund for the joint monitoring system. The Department believes that the systems will be fully implemented in FY 2010. In FY 2011, the ongoing costs for the joint monitoring system will be combined with the operating budget. The projected ongoing costs of the systems in FY 2011, including network carrier charges, network equipment maintenance, end‐of‐life server and end‐of‐life network equipment replacement charges, security consulting services for required system security audits, and other ongoing costs are approximately $694,000. Of that amount, $233,300 will remain in the base budget in FY 2010. The recommended net increase for FY 2011 is $460,700. (2,208.8) Arizona Benefits Fund 123.0 6,127.9 2,140.1 2,068.2 293.3 126.3 0.0 1,430.9 273.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.3 123.0 5,575.4 1,829.7 3,850.5 594.4 250.2 0.0 1,440.5 3,019.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 123.0 5,575.4 1,829.7 2,668.3 594.4 250.2 0.0 1,451.7 764.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 123.0 5,575.4 1,829.7 3,148.7 594.4 250.2 0.0 1,623.7 1,185.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.2 12,465.3 16,561.0 13,135.5 14,208.9 300.0 1,887.2 300.0 2,247.2 300.0 1,959.7 300.0 1,959.7 10,278.1 14,013.8 10,875.8 11,949.2 12,465.3 16,561.0 13,135.5 14,208.9 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Problem Gambling 2,159.9 3,185.1 2,277.4 2,472.6 SLI Joint Monitoring System 206.8 2,442.1 233.3 0.0 SLI Casino Operations 1,887.2 2,247.2 1,959.7 1,959.7 Certification (1,748.1) Problem Gambling (907.7) (712.5) For FY 2010, the appropriation for problem gambling would be reduced by ($907,700) from the Arizona Benefits Fund. For FY 2011, as revenues begin to increase, the Department would spend an additional $195,200 for treatment provider costs. (907.7) Arizona Benefits Fund Fund Lottery Fund Permanent Tribal-State Compact Fund Arizona Benefits Fund FY 2011 (712.5) Certification Reductions (287.5) (287.5) The Department anticipates a declining need for expert assistance during the State certification process. For FY 2010 and for FY 2011, the recommendation reduces funding from the Tribal‐State Compact Fund for expert assistance ($274,500) and one‐time equipment ($13,000). Permanent Tribal‐State Compact Fund (287.5) (287.5) Information Technology (32.7) 373.5 For FY 2010 and for FY 2011, the recommendation includes a ($32,700) reduction from the Arizona Benefits Fund for one‐time equipment. In FY 2011, the recommendation includes $406,200 from the Arizona Benefits Fund. The Department would replace end‐of‐life equipment such as servers, desktops, laptops and network devices and purchase desktop software licenses and maintenance agreements. Arizona Benefits Fund (32.7) 373.5 Private Rent Increase 11.2 22.5 For FY 2010, the recommendation includes an increase of $11,200 from the Arizona Benefits Fund for private rent increases. The recommendation also includes $22,500 in FY 2011. The Department will see 2% and 3% annual rent increases for, respectively, its Phoenix and Flagstaff offices. Arizona Benefits Fund 11.2 22.5 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues 68 Department of Gaming FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures Percentage of facilities reviewed for compact compliance reviews Percent of all gaming devices certified Percent of temporary certifications issued within 20 days Total number of individual applications received Total number of days elapsed from receipt of completed application to the issuance of temporary certification FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 100 100 100 100 100 100 95 95 95 95 9,709 12,100 12,000 12,000 12 12 12 12 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 100 100 FY 2010 FY 2011 1,884.2 13,135.0 1,884.2 14,233.0 14.34% 13.24% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets Department of Gaming 69 GSA Performance Measures Arizona Geological Survey Mission: To inform and advise the public about the geologic character of Arizona to help meet societal needs for water, energy, and mineral resources and assist in prudently managing the stateʹs land and natural resources. Description: Arizona Geological Survey (AZGS) staff perform several important functions for their customers who include governmental agencies, elected officials and staff, environmental and engineering geology firms, hydrologists, energy and mineral resource exploration and production companies, consultants, planners, property owners and potential buyers, attorneys, realtors, insurance companies, tourists, teachers, students, book dealers, professional societies, citizen groups, and interested individuals. First, they inform and advise the public by answering questions, selling maps and reports, maintaining a geology library and databases, giving talks, and leading field trips. Second, they map and characterize rock formations, surficial materials, and mineral and energy resources. Third, they describe and monitor potential hazards and limitations to land and resource management (e.g. earthquakes, flooding, land subsidence and earth fissures, landslides, debris flows, and rock solution). Fourth, they provide support for the Arizona Oil and Gas Conservation Commission. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Arizona Geological Survey 1,101.3 1,102.5 1,102.5 1,102.5 Agency Total 1,101.3 1,102.5 1,102.5 1,102.5 9.5 596.9 169.6 0.0 51.5 0.4 0.0 280.6 2.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 590.6 211.0 1.0 51.5 0.0 0.0 246.4 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 590.6 211.0 1.0 51.5 0.0 0.0 246.4 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.5 590.6 211.0 1.0 51.5 0.0 0.0 246.4 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,101.3 1,102.5 1,102.5 1,102.5 1,101.3 1,102.5 1,102.5 1,102.5 1,101.3 1,102.5 1,102.5 1,102.5 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Number of talks given or fieldtrips led Percent increase (decrease) in number of publications sold FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 126 40 -.15 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 40 40 -.10 2 2 ¾ More info is available via the internet and, less of the technical and topographic maps are needed in hard copy. We will adjust to this change in the market. Percent increase (decrease) in sales of technical maps and reports -6.3 0 ¾ The market is changing as more things are available to be downloaded. Percent increase (decrease) in sales of non-technical reports 8 8 ¾ Less technical things are selling, more interest in general use/recreation Quality of products sold, 1-5 (highest) scale Satisfaction with mail order service provided, 1-5 (highest) scale Average days to issue a permit Compliance and safety inspections made Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 0 8 8 5 4.8 4.8 4.8 4.9 4.9 4.9 4.9 3 5 5 5 28 28 28 28 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs 0 FY 2010 259.7 FY 2011 259.7 3,238.0 3,162.0 8.02% 8.21% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Agency Total 70 Arizona Geological Survey FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget GTA FY 2010 Government Information Technology Agency Mission: To maximize information technology coordination and connectivity within the state of Arizona ensuring that its information technology infrastructure efficiently and effectively supports state business. Description: The Government Information Technology Agency (GITA) is responsible for statewide information technology (IT) planning, coordination and consulting for executive agencies. The GITA Director serves as the Chief Information Officer for the State of Arizona administering the stateʹs IT resources through the establishment of statewide IT policies and standards and serves as a primary focal point for coordination of all IT projects across the state. The agency provides strategic IT planning to establish an effective harmonized IT direction for both infrastructure and security and privacy concerns. In addition, under ARS 41‐3541, the agency is responsible for the design and development of real‐ time interoperable communications between local, county, state, tribal and federal public safety organizations through the Public Safety Communications Commission. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Government Information Technology Agency Public Safety Communications Commission 4,497.0 11,257.7 6,407.7 6,407.7 893.4 880.6 880.6 880.6 Agency Total 5,390.4 12,138.3 7,288.3 7,288.3 33.0 2,332.7 678.0 1,197.0 3.1 9.9 147.1 770.9 219.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 32.0 33.0 2,766.5 801.3 1,550.3 20.8 24.5 935.0 1,713.7 59.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,266.8 33.0 2,766.5 801.3 1,550.3 20.8 24.5 935.0 1,130.5 59.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 33.0 2,766.5 801.3 1,550.3 20.8 24.5 935.0 1,130.5 59.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5,390.4 12,138.3 7,288.3 7,288.3 1,744.9 3,296.9 3,455.7 3,682.6 3,455.7 3,682.6 3,455.7 3,682.6 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2011 Executive Issues Web Portal Fund (4,850.0) (4,850.0) For FY 2010 and for FY 2011, the recommendation includes a reduction of ($4.9 million) from the Web Portal Fund to more accurately reflect the Agencyʹs expenditures from the Fund. (4,850.0) State Web Portal Fund (4,850.0) Performance Measures Number of transactions accessible through the web portal Average number of calendar days to review information technology projects FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 81 85 4 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 90 90 12 FY 2010 12 12 FY 2011 720.8 720.8 17,360.0 20,983.0 3.44% 4.15% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Information Technology Fund State Web Portal Fund Agency Total 348.6 5,000.0 150.0 150.0 5,390.4 12,138.3 7,288.3 7,288.3 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 State Agency Budgets FY 2011 Government Information Technology Agency 71 GVA Office of the Governor Mission: To provide leadership for the State of Arizona and to manage the Executive branch of state government to ensure that it efficiently and effectively serves Arizonaʹs citizens. Description: The Governor serves as the Chief Executive Officer of Arizona state government. The Constitution provides that the Governor shall be the Commander‐in‐Chief of Arizonaʹs military forces and authorizes the Governor to grant reprieves, commutations and pardons, pursuant to law. The Governor is also responsible for making appointments to positions in state government pursuant to law, representing Arizona in official dealings with other governmental entities, taking action on bills approved by the Legislature, and informing the public on issues affecting the state. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Governor's Office Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 6,621.1 7,136.0 7,136.0 7,136.0 6,621.1 7,136.0 7,136.0 7,136.0 6,621.1 7,136.0 7,136.0 7,136.0 6,621.1 7,136.0 7,136.0 7,136.0 Fund General Fund Agency Total The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 72 Office of the Governor FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget OSP Governorʹs Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting Mission: To facilitate the effective and efficient allocation of resources in accordance with fiscally sound principles that will enable the Governor and state government to provide quality services to the citizens of Arizona. Description: This office provides a central Executive branch resource for the compilation, analysis, and investigation of state fiscal matters. It advises the Governor in preparation of the Executive budget and advocates for that budget through the legislative process. The office assists and advises all entities of state government in budget development and execution. It also coordinates the process of defining state government programs, developing strategic plans, and measuring program performance to achieve desired results. The office is also responsible for fulfilling constitutionally and legislatively mandated reporting requirements related to the state budget. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,230.7 2,198.5 2,198.5 2,198.5 2,230.7 2,198.5 2,198.5 2,198.5 2,230.7 2,198.5 2,198.5 2,198.5 2,230.7 2,198.5 2,198.5 2,198.5 Fund General Fund Agency Total Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 54.3 FY 2011 54.3 2,198.0 2,198.0 2.47% 2.47% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. State Agency Budgets Governorʹs Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting 73 HSA Department of Health Services Mission: To set the standard for personal and community health through direct care delivery, science, public policy, and leadership. Description: The Arizona Department of Health Services is responsible for Public Health Services, including the Arizona State Laboratory, epidemiology & disease control, emergency medical services/trauma, public health emergency preparedness & response, public health statistics, vital records, border health, children with special health care needs, health systems development, minority health, chronic disease prevention & nutrition, oral health, tobacco education, and womenʹs & childrenʹs health; Behavioral Health Services, including general mental health services, substance abuse & prevention services, services for the seriously mentally ill, title XIX adults and children, non‐Title XIX adults and children, Regional Behavioral Health Authorities contract compliance, consumer rights, and quality management; the Arizona State Hospital, including adolescent services, adult civil services, adult forensic services, and the Arizona Community & Protection Treatment Center; and the licensing and certification of health and child care facilities. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. Administration Public Health Family Health Behavioral Health Arizona State Hospital 37,392.9 54,987.2 43,945.4 431,499.4 73,781.3 36,390.3 45,398.1 50,404.8 477,642.4 74,397.9 36,390.3 46,148.1 54,341.5 538,794.1 74,397.9 39,502.0 45,660.6 53,188.4 541,117.9 73,397.9 641,606.2 684,233.5 750,071.9 752,866.8 1,709.7 66,794.1 24,768.0 11,421.3 482.7 98.7 153,913.7 34,262.7 1,354.2 348,510.8 1,706.7 67,327.6 24,549.2 11,256.2 701.9 103.9 151,169.3 31,097.5 1,211.8 396,816.1 1,706.7 67,327.6 24,549.2 11,256.2 701.9 103.9 217,007.7 31,097.5 1,211.8 396,816.1 1,706.7 67,327.6 24,549.2 10,256.2 701.9 103.9 217,690.9 34,209.2 1,211.8 396,816.1 641,606.2 684,233.5 750,071.9 752,866.8 577,756.1 30,666.6 611,507.2 35,824.8 712,070.4 4,900.0 686,744.6 30,620.7 1,558.8 811.7 1,578.0 829.2 1,578.0 829.2 1,578.0 829.2 1,000.0 4,949.2 1,000.0 5,983.1 1,000.0 5,983.1 1,000.0 5,983.1 5,238.2 6,805.3 6,805.3 6,805.3 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Transfers Out Agency Total Fund General Fund Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund Capital Outlay Stabilization Child Care and Development Fund Health Research Fund Emergency Medical Operating Services Newborn Screening Program Fund 74 Substance Abuse Services Fund Nursing Care Institution Resident Protection Revolving Fund Environmental Laboratory Licensure Revolving Child Fatality Review Fund Vital Records Electronic Systems Fund Hearing and Speech Professionals Fund The Arizona State Hospital Fund DHS State Hospital Land Earnings DHS - Indirect Cost Fund Agency Total 2,500.0 2,500.0 2,500.0 2,500.0 360.0 38.0 38.0 38.0 752.6 970.6 970.6 970.6 99.1 471.1 99.1 499.7 99.1 499.7 99.1 499.7 339.8 340.2 340.2 340.2 5,660.9 6,032.6 3,032.6 5,032.6 276.2 1,150.0 350.0 750.0 9,165.9 9,075.7 9,075.7 9,075.7 641,606.2 684,233.5 750,071.9 752,866.8 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Assurance and Licensure 10,662.6 10,011.9 10,011.9 10,011.9 SLI Newborn Screening 0.0 478.6 478.6 478.6 Program SLI Indirect Fund 8,165.9 8,075.7 8,075.7 8,075.7 SLI Hearing and Speech 339.8 340.2 340.2 340.2 Professionals SLI Nursing Care 360.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Institution Incentive Grants SLI Tuberculosis Provider 1,035.5 1,210.5 1,210.5 1,210.5 Care and Control SLI Direct Grants 460.3 460.3 460.3 460.3 SLI Vaccines 8,848.8 5,382.9 5,382.9 5,382.9 SLI Reimbursement to 67.9 67.9 67.9 67.9 Counties SLI Loan Repayment 114.1 750.0 750.0 750.0 Services SLI Kidney Program 46.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 SLI STD Control 23.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Subventions SLI AIDS Reporting & 1,089.3 1,125.0 1,125.0 1,125.0 Surveillance SLI Laboratory Services 4,877.6 5,059.2 5,059.2 5,059.2 SLI Alzheimer's Disease 4,000.0 4,000.0 4,000.0 4,000.0 Research SLI EMS Operations 3,114.7 3,233.8 3,233.8 3,233.8 SLI Trauma Advisory Board 391.5 405.4 405.4 405.4 SLI University of Arizona 1,275.0 1,275.0 1,275.0 1,275.0 Poison Center SLI Community Health 14,828.3 13,481.4 13,481.4 13,481.4 Centers SLI Vital Records (Ch. 176) 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 SLI Vital Records 471.1 499.7 499.7 499.7 Maintenance SLI Hepatitis C Surveillance 249.9 309.4 309.4 309.4 SLI Arizona Statewide 496.0 477.6 477.6 477.6 Immunization Information System SLI County Public Health 200.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 SLI Telemedicine 192.0 260.0 260.0 260.0 SLI Renal/Nonrenal 393.5 198.0 198.0 198.0 Disease Management Department of Health Services FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget SLI Diabetes Prevention and Control SLI Scorpion Antivenom SLI Poison Control Centers SLI Statewide Emergency Trauma System SLI Osteoporosis Outreach SLI Autism Services SLI Primary Trauma Centers - Southern Arizona SLI Teratogen Program SLI Valley Fever SLI Children's Rehabilitative Services SLI AHCCCS - CRS SLI Adult Cystic Fibrosis SLI Adult Sickle Cell Anemia SLI High Risk Perinatal Services SLI Nutrition Services SLI County Prenatal Services Grant SLI Health Start SLI Child Fatality Review Team SLI Newborn Screening Program SLI Medicaid Special Exemption Payments SLI Breast and Cervical Cancer Screening SLI Abstinence Funding SLI Folic Acid SLI Mobile Dental Units SLI Women's Services SLI Senior Food Programs SLI Children's Behavioral Health SLI Children's Behavioral Health - State Match (TXIX) SLI Seriously Emotionally Handicapped Children SLI Seriously Mentally Ill (TXIX) SLI Seriously Mentally Ill (non-TXIX) SLI Title XIX Administration SLI Court Monitoring SLI Mental Health (NonTXIX) SLI Substance Abuse (NonTXIX) SLI Mental Health & Substance Abuse State Match (TXIX) SLI Arnold v. Sarn SLI Medicaid Special Exemption Payments SLI Prop 204 Administration 347.8 100.0 100.0 100.0 125.7 693.8 13.5 150.0 675.0 0.0 150.0 675.0 0.0 150.0 675.0 0.0 172.1 4,464.0 177.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 60.0 261.6 3,587.0 60.0 0.0 3,587.0 60.0 0.0 3,587.0 60.0 0.0 3,587.0 21,517.0 105.2 30.7 4,506.1 27,688.8 105.2 33.0 5,230.6 31,625.5 105.2 33.0 5,230.6 30,519.4 105.2 33.0 5,230.6 321.8 988.9 0.0 1,033.6 0.0 1,033.6 0.0 1,033.6 162.2 99.1 0.0 246.3 0.0 246.3 0.0 246.3 5,238.2 6,326.7 6,326.7 6,326.7 459.3 615.3 615.3 615.3 1,045.8 1,015.8 1,015.8 1,015.8 1,109.1 290.6 168.2 385.5 297.5 9,133.3 0.0 400.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 8,851.8 0.0 400.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 8,851.8 0.0 353.0 0.0 0.0 500.0 8,851.8 116,973.1 122,432.7 136,543.3 143,230.6 7.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 57,425.7 68,585.4 80,568.6 88,608.4 57,055.1 61,116.7 71,616.7 55,959.6 3,038.6 2,029.8 2,029.8 2,379.9 197.5 2,444.1 197.5 2,447.3 197.5 2,447.3 197.5 2,447.3 14,553.7 13,635.4 13,635.4 13,635.4 31,879.1 36,133.3 42,114.5 43,537.1 27,400.6 6,257.2 27,500.0 6,969.1 27,500.0 7,956.6 27,500.0 8,176.6 2,130.2 2,130.2 2,903.4 2,337.9 SLI Prop 204 Seriously Mentally Ill SLI Prop 204 General Mental Health and Substance Abuse SLI Prop 204 Children's Behavioral Health SLI Medicare Clawback Payments SLI Dual Eligible Part D Copay Subsidy SLI Contract Compliance SLI Youth Methamphetamine Prevention Programs SLI Community Placement Treatment SLI Community Protection & Treatment Center SLI Electronic Medical Records 71,300.6 82,796.6 81,204.8 29,575.9 36,964.9 42,284.9 43,091.2 1,550.3 1,546.5 1,546.5 4,158.6 9,771.9 10,718.1 10,718.1 10,718.1 802.6 802.6 802.6 802.6 1,961.1 285.8 1,856.1 0.0 1,856.1 0.0 1,856.1 0.0 6,671.2 6,704.8 6,704.8 6,704.8 10,880.3 10,630.2 10,630.2 10,630.2 168.3 300.0 300.0 300.0 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Behavioral Health Services‐ Title XIX State Match 68,632.6 The Department of Health Services is responsible for providing behavioral health services to Title XIX‐eligible clients from the Seriously Mentally Ill (SMI), General Mental Health/Substance Abuse, Children’s Behavioral Health populations, and the DES‐ Developmentally Disabled populations. Caseloads and capitation rates continue to rise, while the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP) continues to change. The Executive recommends $68.6 million General Fund for Behavioral Health Services caseload growth. Of this amount, $15.7 million is a carry‐ forward of the FY 2009 supplemental for this population. The Executive estimates that, consistent with historical increases, the capitation rate will increase by 6% in FY 2010. The FMAP will be at 65.75% in FY 2010. General Fund CRS Title XIX State Match Requirement 68,632.6 2,830.6 The Children’s Rehabilitative Services (CRS) program is responsible for providing specialty care for Title XIX‐eligible children who are medically fragile or physically disabled and require complex care. Without access to age‐appropriate interventions, this extremely vulnerable population will have life‐ long impacts on their quality of life. For FY 2010, the Executive recommends $2.8 million for CRS caseload growth. Population growth has slowed substantially from FYs 2004 to 2008; in the last two complete fiscal years this rate has stabilized below 2.5% and is anticipated to be 1.8% in FY 2009. Therefore, the Executive assumes a 2% growth rate in FY 2010. This equates to a caseload increase of approximately 324 new clients per month over FY 2009 levels. Capitation rates are estimated to grow by 6%, and the FMAP will be 65.75%. General Fund State Agency Budgets 54,532.0 Department of Health Services 2,830.6 75 FY 2010 Public Health Preparedness State Match 262.5 Beginning in FY 2010, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services will require a state match to receive funding from the CDC Public Health Emergency Preparedness Cooperative Agreement. The current award level to Arizona is $15 million per year. The new federal mandate would require a 5% public or private state match. In FY 2011 and beyond, the match rate for the State will be 10%. In FY 2010, a total of $750,000 will be necessary to meet the federal match requirement. Approximately 65% of these funds are passed‐ through to local or tribal governments. The Executive recommends appropriating $262,500 from the General Fund in order to pull down the State portion of the $15 million. The Executive also recommends that, as a condition of receiving the pass‐though dollars, the local and tribal governments must provide a 5% match for their portions of the grant in FY 2010 and a 10% match in FY 2011 and beyond. The local and tribal governments would be responsible for $487,500 in FY 2010 and $975,000 in FY 2011. The State would be responsible for the remainder. General Fund Charge Rural Counties for RTC Costs 262.5 (1,000.0) The Arizona State Hospital Fund was established to reduce General Fund obligations from the State Hospital. Revenues come from Title XIX collections and Restoration to Competency (RTC) billings. Currently, the Hospital is authorized to bill only Maricopa County, Pima County and the cities for 86% of the cost RTC referrals; the Hospital cannot bill rural counties for RTC referrals. This has led to an ASH funding shortfall of approximately $4.0 million annually. The Hospital implemented efficiencies to offset $1.0 million in costs, leaving a $3.0 million shortfall. The Executive recommends charging the rural counties for 86% of the cost of care for RTC patients that are sent to the State Hospital, which is the same cost charged to the cities. With the current cost of care at an average of $598 per patient per day, this reimbursement would cost the counties $514.28 per patient per day. The Executive projects that this will increase revenues to the fund by approximately $3.0 million annually, eliminating the need for a General Fund offset to lost revenues. Furthermore, the appropriation from the Arizona State Hospital Fund should be reduced by $1.0 million to reflect the efficiencies currently implemented by the Hospital. The Arizona State Hospital Fund FY 2010 0.0 ASH‐ State Land Earnings The Executive recommends offsetting $400,000 in appropriation authority from the Arizona State Hospital Land Fund with General Fund monies. In FY 2009, the ASH Land Fund’s expenditure authority was increased by $800,000 in order to reduce General Fund obligations to the State Hospital. The Arizona Enabling Act requires that the ASH Land Fund be utilized only for the State Hospital. This fund shift was meant to be one‐time in nature, because the Fund’s balance could sustain this increased spending for only one fiscal year. Approximately 25% of the Fund’s revenue comes from Treasurer interest income from investments in stocks, bonds and other interest‐bearing securities. Given the current condition of the markets, it is highly unlikely that this source of revenue will approach FY 2008 levels. Because of this, the Fund cannot sustain a second year at the higher expenditure authority level. The Executive anticipates Fund revenues to be approximately $400,000 in FY 2009 and in FY 2010. If that occurs, at the current appropriated levels there would be an FY 2010 funding shortfall of $300,000 to $400,000. Thus, at least a portion of the appropriation must be offset with General Fund monies to avoid cuts to the State Hospitalʹs operating budget. 400.0 General Fund DHS State Hospital Land Earnings Fund Tobacco Tax Revenue Decrease (400.0) (5,204.1) The FY 2010 Tobacco Tax revenues are projected to be 5.5% lower than those collected in FY 2009. As a result the capped programs funded by the Medically Needy Account and the Health Education Account must be reduced to accommodate the lower revenues. The Executive recommends reducing the appropriation from the Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund by ($5.2 million). This includes a ($47,000) decrease from the Folic Acid program and a ($5.2 million) decrease to the Seriously Mentally Ill Program. Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund New Forensic Unit at the Arizona State Hospital (5,204.1) 3,111.7 In FY 2008, the Legislature approved $32.2 million in lease‐ purchase financing for the demolition and construction of a new Forensic Building at the Arizona State Hospital. The debt‐service payment due in FY 2010 is for $3.1 million. The Executive recommends funding the first COP payment with $3.1 million from the General Fund. 3,111.7 General Fund FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations (1,000.0) FY 2009 Behavioral Health Services‐ Title XIX State Match 76 Department of Health Services 15,664.3 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget The Department of Health Services is responsible for behavioral health services to Title XIX‐eligible clients from the Seriously Mentally Ill (SMI), General Mental Health / Substance Abuse, and Children’s Behavioral Health populations. The Executive recommends $15.7 million from the General Fund for a supplemental in FY 2009 for the Behavioral Health Services Title XIX state match. General Fund 15,664.3 (3,683.4) Tobacco Tax Revenue Decrease The FY 2009 Tobacco Tax revenues are projected to be 3.2% lower than those collected in FY 2008. As a result the capped programs funded by the Medically Needy Account and the Health Education Account must be reduced to accommodate the lower revenues. The Executive recommends reducing the appropriation from the Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund by ($3.7 million). This includes a ($47,000) decrease from the Folic Acid program and a ($3.6 million) decrease to the Seriously Mentally Ill Program. Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund (3,683.4) Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Percent of staff turnover during the first 12 months of employment Percent of child care license renewals granted within licensing timeframes Percent of child care complaint investigations initiated within investigative guidelines Percent of health care licensure renewals granted within licensing timeframes Percent of health care complaint investigations initiated within investigative guidelines Percent of agency staff turnover Percent of eligible Title XIX population enrolled in behavioral health treatment programs Number of public health and emergency response professionals on Health Alert Network Immunization rate among 2-year old children FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 3 6.3 6 7 97 99 99 100 99 99 95 95 74 77 85 85 68 71 80 80 16.7 22.4 11.5 17.5 11.0 11.4 11.5 11.5 3,226 1,592 3,400 5,600 82 78 84 84 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request 26,156.2 2,383,078.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 1.10% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a modified lump‐sum appropriation by program with special line items. State Agency Budgets Department of Health Services 77 HIA Arizona Historical Society Mission: To collect, preserve, interpret, and disseminate the history of Arizona, the West, and northern Mexico, as it pertains to Arizona. Description: The Arizona Historical Society (AHS) is a membership supported, nonprofit, state trust agency. It is governed by a policy‐making board, comprised of 31 individual members, elected from the membership and representing each county in the state. The board‐ designated organizational structure consists of seven divisions, four of which have museums that directly support the mission of the Society by collecting, preserving, interpreting, and disseminating historical materials. These museums are located in Flagstaff, Tempe, Tucson, and Yuma. The Society museums maintain extensive library and archival collections used by a diverse general audience. The Publications Division supports the mission by producing the Journal of Arizona History, various historical books, and by maintaining the general editorial standards of written materials for the Society. The AHS Board develops the biennial budget and authorizes and approves all expenditures. The Administrative Division provides finance, budget, personnel, and management support to each of the divisions. The Community Outreach Program certifies and supports 63 local historical societies in preserving and disseminating Arizona history. The Society also supports other board‐approved community activities that relate to its mission. FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Arizona Historical Society 4,623.4 4,625.1 4,625.1 4,625.1 Agency Total 4,623.4 4,625.1 4,625.1 4,625.1 52.2 1,695.9 708.1 70.8 0.0 0.0 54.0 2,018.0 70.0 6.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 59.9 1,789.5 715.4 77.8 3.6 0.0 44.2 1,994.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 59.9 1,789.5 715.4 77.8 3.6 0.0 44.2 1,994.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 59.9 1,789.5 715.4 77.8 3.6 0.0 44.2 1,800.4 0.0 194.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,623.4 4,625.1 4,625.1 4,625.1 4,430.2 193.2 4,430.9 194.2 4,430.9 194.2 4,430.9 194.2 4,623.4 4,625.1 4,625.1 4,625.1 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total 71.4 65.0 0.0 0.0 2,194.3 2,130.3 0.0 0.0 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 0.0 Executive Issues Removal of Special Line Items (SLI) Designation The Executive recommends removing the line items a) Papago Park Museum and b) Field Services and Grants. This will give the agency the ability to reallocate scarce resources where needed, particularly during periods of reduced budgets. General Fund 0.0 0.0 Capital Outlay Stabilization Fund 0.0 0.0 Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 189,242 200,000 Public program attendance Number of museum visitors and researchers Number of volunteer hours Administrative Costs Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 200,000 200,000 96,892 100,000 100,000 100,000 48,231 50,000 50,000 55,000 Administrative Costs Agency Request Agency Summary Program/Cost Center SLI Field Services and Grants SLI Papago Park FY 2010 FY 2011 1,206.9 1,206.9 30,882.0 37,195.0 3.24% 3.91% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Capital Outlay Stabilization Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. 78 Arizona Historical Society FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget PHA Prescott Historical Society of Arizona Mission: To: serve as an educational and cultural center, which fosters public and community understanding and appreciation of historical, social, and natural aspects of Arizona, with emphasis on the Central Highlands, and which promotes involvement in and support for research, collections, conservation, exhibits, and related programs. Description: The Prescott Historical Society operates the Sharlot Hall Museum, which was founded in 1928 and is located on the grounds of the first territorial governorʹs residence and offices. The nearly 4 acre landscaped campus includes seven restored historic structures, featuring the territorial Governorʹs Mansion (1864) and the Victorian‐era Bashford House (1877). A modern Museum Center (1977) hosts changing exhibits, historic theater, artifacts storage of extensive historic and prehistoric objects,. A large Archive‐ Library, in an adjacent state of the art structure built in 1993 houses approximately 100,000 images and documents. A branch museum at the VA Center interprets the history of Ft. Whipple. Public programs include the Folk Arts Fair, Prescott Indian Art Market, Folk Music Festival, Day of the Dead (dia de los muertos), Territorial Christmas, Blue Rose Theater historical productions, historical reenactments in both indoor and outdoor settings, heritage gardens, lecture series, and education tour as well as outreach opportunities for children and adults. All these activities contribute significantly to cultural tourism enhancing the quality of life for the local community and contributing to the economic well being of the local area and the sate. Performance Measures Number of people served (includes museum, festival, and theatre attendees; and researchers) Percent of museum clients pleased with service Number of volunteer hours Capital campaign dollars raised to build new square footage (in thousands) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 29,925 30,200 97.5 98 98 37,538 38,000 39,000 39,500 110.0 190.0 100.0 2,000.0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 31,000 33,000 98 FY 2010 FY 2011 166.7 1,833.0 166.7 2,010.0 9.09% 8.29% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Sharlot Hall Museum Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 762.6 762.8 762.8 762.8 762.6 762.8 762.8 762.8 11.0 459.4 226.8 1.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 75.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 470.5 223.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 470.5 223.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 470.5 223.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 762.6 762.8 762.8 762.8 762.6 762.8 762.8 762.8 762.6 762.8 762.8 762.8 Fund General Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Prescott Historical Society of Arizona 79 HEA Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners Executive Recommendations Mission: To protect the public health, safety, and welfare by regulating Allopathic and Osteopathic physicians who apply for a homeopathic medical license and registering homeopathic medical assistants that work under the supervision of licensed homeopathic physicians that practice within the State of Arizona. Description: The Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners regulates the practice of homeopathic medicine in Arizona. Homeopathy is a form of alternative medicine in which the fundamental premise for treatment is the belief that diseases are cured by medicines, given in tiny doses, that create symptoms similar to those the patient is experiencing, triggering the body’s natural immune reactions. The Board reviews and examines the education, experience, and background of applicants to determine if they possess the qualifications required by law to practice homeopathic medicine and any of the subspecialties within the scope of practice. Licensees renew their licenses and dispensing permits annually and provide updated information about the nature of their practices. Upon receipt of complaints against licensed homeopathic physicians, the Board conducts investigations and holds hearings, taking disciplinary action as necessary to protect the public safety. The Board also registers homeopathic medical assistants that work under the supervision of licensed homeopathic physicians within Arizona. Homeopathic medical assistants renew their registrations annually every December. Physician licenses are renewed every year on the initial month of licensure. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Adjust Employee Hours 8.6 8.6 In 2007, the Auditor General conducted a performance audit and sunset review of the Board. Addressing the concerns raised in the audit will require the Executive Director, who currently works 35 hours per week, to work a full 40‐hour week. The Executive recommends $8,600 for the additional five hours per week. Homeopathic Medical Examiners Fund 8.6 8.6 One time funding Computer replacement FY 2009 (0.8) (0.8) The Executive recommends a decrease of ($800) for one‐time equipment purchased in FY 2009. (0.8) Homeopathic Medical Examiners Fund (0.8) Rule Writer 2.7 0.0 The Executive recommends a one year $2,700 increase from the Board’s fund for additional rule‐making costs in FY 2010. This is in addition to the monies provided by Laws 2008, Chapter 285. 2.7 Homeopathic Medical Examiners Fund 0.0 Performance Measures Number of complaints or inquiries received Percent of complaints resolved within 180 days. FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 20 18 47 ¾ 8 out of 17 complaints closed in less than 120 days 95.1 117.3 127.8 125.1 Number of licenses renewed 95.1 117.3 127.8 125.1 ¾ Total includes number of 1.0 45.8 22.4 21.2 1.0 0.0 0.0 4.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 54.8 21.3 35.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 62.0 22.7 37.7 1.3 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 62.0 22.7 35.0 1.3 0.0 0.0 4.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 95.1 117.3 127.8 125.1 95.1 117.3 127.8 125.1 95.1 117.3 127.8 125.1 permits renewed. 206 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 22 23 55 60 62 210 213 215 physicians, dispensing permits, assistants, and chelation Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 5.6 FY 2011 5.0 129.0 126.0 4.34% 3.97% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Homeopathic Medical Examiners Agency Total 80 Board of Homeopathic Medical Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget HDA Performance Measures Arizona Department of Housing Mission: To provide housing and community revitalization to benefit the people of Arizona. Description: The Agency provides housing and community revitalization to benefit the people of Arizona by addressing the unique and changing housing needs in this state. As Arizona grows and the economic and special needs of its population change, the Agency is in a position to recognize those unique and changing needs and to respond throughout the state. Creative solutions are developed to be responsive to rural and urban areas as well as to special populations. The Agency is working toward sustaining current initiatives and simultaneously maintaining the flexibility to respond to new demands for affordable housing and smart growth efforts. The department provides both state and federal funding to promote housing and community development activities as well as expertise and technical assistance to address these issues. The agency works closely with local governments, nonprofit and for‐profit housing developers, social service agencies, tribal entities, public housing authorities and others to achieve its mission. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Department of Housing Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual 886.5 FY 2009 Approp. 944.8 FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 944.8 944.8 886.5 944.8 944.8 944.8 12.0 606.3 219.0 11.6 16.6 1.6 0.0 24.2 7.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 666.4 229.0 12.1 15.8 4.3 0.0 16.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 666.4 229.0 12.1 15.8 4.3 0.0 16.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 666.4 229.0 12.1 15.8 4.3 0.0 16.0 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 886.5 944.8 944.8 944.8 886.5 944.8 944.8 944.8 886.5 944.8 944.8 944.8 Total number of affordable rental units assisted/produced Total number of individuals assisted with information on available affordable rental units through the agency's website Total number of publicly funded rental units monitored for health and safety issues FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 3,266 3,397 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 3,533 3,638 155,237 159,894 164,690 169,632 13,372 15,092 21,329 24,603 ¾ The number of units required to be monitored is expected to increase annually due to addition of new units being created through ADOH's rental programs. Results of customer satisfaction survey (7=excellent; 4=satisfactory; 1=poor) Total number of low-income households assisted into homeownership through the homeownership program Total number of households assisted with eviction or foreclosure in order to prevent homelessness ¾ Due to the foreclosure crisis, in FY2008 this program. 5.19 5.29 5.4 5.5 645 664 684 704 12,348 12,471 12,596 9,447 the agency allocated additional dollars to Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 1,499.8 122,818.0 1,544.7 126,371.0 1.22% 1.22% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Housing Trust Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Arizona Department of Housing 81 IAA Arizona Commission of Indian Affairs Administrative Costs Mission: To build partnerships, improve intergovernmental relations, and enhance social and economic prosperity for the 22 Tribes/Nations of Arizona. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage Description: The Arizona Commission of Indian Affairs (ACIA) has a legislative mandate (A.R.S. § 41‐541 to 41‐545) to assist and support state and federal agencies in assisting Indians and Tribal councils to develop mutual goals, to design projects for achieving goals and to implement their plans. The Commission also has the following responsibilities: collect and provide facts needed by Tribal, State and Federal agencies to work together effectively, advise the Governor and the Legislature in Tribal issues, confer and coordinate with other governmental entities and legislative committees regarding Indian needs and goals, improve relationships between Indians and non‐Indians, raise awareness of the needs of Indians in the state, promote increased participation by Indians in local and state affairs, assist Tribal groups in self‐ government, and assist urban Indians. FY 2010 FY 2011 6.7 6.7 307.0 302.0 2.22% 2.18% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Indian Affairs Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 212.2 234.4 234.4 234.4 212.2 234.4 234.4 234.4 3.0 138.0 35.0 3.5 7.8 3.2 0.0 24.0 0.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 140.5 35.2 3.7 5.7 3.6 0.0 44.9 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 140.5 35.2 3.7 5.7 3.6 0.0 44.9 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 140.5 35.2 3.7 5.7 3.6 0.0 44.9 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 212.2 234.4 234.4 234.4 212.2 234.4 234.4 234.4 212.2 234.4 234.4 234.4 Fund General Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Percent of customer surveys rating overall satisfaction as good, better or excellent Holding at least two post Town Hall meeting/Legislative workshops 82 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 73 75 1 2 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 75 75 2 2 Arizona Commission of Indian Affairs FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget ICA Performance Measures Industrial Commission of Arizona Mission: To efficiently administer and effectively enforce all applicable laws, rules, and regulations not specifically delegated to others relative to the protection of life, health, safety, and welfare of employees within the State. Description: The Industrial Commission is a regulatory agency that was created in 1925 to oversee the state workersʹ compensation system. While the Commission is still responsible for its original charge, its role over the years has expanded to cover other labor‐related issues, including minimum wage laws; occupational safety and health; youth employment laws; resolution of wage related disputes; licensing of employment counseling and talent agencies; vocational rehabilitation; and provision of workersʹ compensation benefits for claimants of uninsured employers, insolvent carriers, and bankrupt self‐insured employers. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Administration Claims Administrative Law Judge Labor ADOSH Special Fund Legal Counsel 3,759.3 3,522.4 5,099.0 737.1 2,904.9 788.5 1,628.8 4,108.3 3,846.7 5,545.9 881.4 2,713.1 1,029.7 1,734.6 4,108.3 3,846.7 5,545.9 881.4 2,713.1 1,029.7 1,734.6 4,108.3 3,846.7 5,545.9 881.4 2,713.1 1,029.7 1,734.6 Agency Total 18,440.0 19,859.7 19,859.7 19,859.7 294.0 8,953.2 3,387.6 1,312.8 181.6 2.5 0.0 2,552.8 27.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,021.8 294.0 10,524.8 3,767.6 1,318.0 191.5 6.5 0.0 2,409.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,641.5 294.0 10,524.8 3,767.6 1,318.0 191.5 6.5 0.0 2,409.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,641.5 294.0 10,524.8 3,767.6 1,318.0 191.5 6.5 0.0 2,409.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,641.5 18,440.0 19,859.7 19,859.7 19,859.7 18,440.0 19,859.7 19,859.7 19,859.7 18,440.0 19,859.7 19,859.7 19,859.7 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Number of wage determinations issued Number of claims for workers' compensation processed Number of petitions for hearing received: workers compensation Number of hearings conducted by the administrative law judge division Number of injury reports reviewed Number of claims filed FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 19,123 16,000 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 16,000 16,000 122,101 150,000 150,000 150,000 6,783 6,750 6,750 6,800 5,157 5,150 5,200 5,200 1,128 1,200 1,200 1,200 3,295 3,000 3,000 3,000 Number of health compliance inspections Number of safety compliance inspections Number of compliance referrals 392 500 500 500 1,020 1,250 1,300 1,300 2,037 2,100 2,100 2,100 Number of claimants contacted 2,665 5,000 5,000 5,000 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 2,333.0 2,333.0 24,824.0 24,824.0 9.40% 9.40% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Industrial Commission Administration Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Industrial Commission of Arizona 83 IDA The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Managed Care Oversight 627.3 638.0 0.0 0.0 Department of Insurance Mission: To faithfully execute the state insurance laws in a manner that protects insurance consumers and encourages economic development. Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Description: The Department of Insurance licenses and authorizes the transaction of insurance business by insurers, producers, and other insurance‐related entities regulated under A.R.S. § 20; monitors and promotes the financial safety and soundness of insurers transacting business in Arizona; oversees the rehabilitation, liquidation and performance of claims obligations of insolvent insurers; develops and makes insurance‐related information publicly available; protects insurance consumers against unfair and illegal market practices; assists consumers with insurance‐related questions and problems; investigates cases involving fraudulent insurance claims; oversees the development of the captive insurance industry; and annually collects over $400 million in insurance premium taxes and other revenues that benefit the General Fund. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Policy and Administration Solvency Regulation Consumer Support Fraud Investigation and Deterrence Licensing Premium Tax Collections and Analysis 1,360.9 422.5 3,245.6 1,310.8 1,369.2 522.8 3,212.4 1,381.9 1,341.0 522.8 3,250.1 1,381.9 1,341.0 522.8 3,250.1 1,381.9 749.2 246.2 663.6 219.8 679.5 219.8 679.5 219.8 Agency Total 7,335.2 7,369.7 7,395.1 7,395.1 99.0 4,359.9 1,630.5 335.7 55.5 4.6 0.0 908.8 40.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 106.5 4,338.7 1,629.9 313.0 55.9 4.9 0.0 1,000.0 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.8 4,415.8 1,578.2 313.0 55.9 4.9 0.0 1,000.0 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 97.8 4,415.8 1,578.2 313.0 55.9 4.9 0.0 1,000.0 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7,335.2 7,369.7 7,395.1 7,395.1 7,233.1 102.1 7,369.7 0.0 7,395.1 0.0 7,395.1 0.0 7,335.2 7,369.7 7,395.1 7,395.1 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund General Fund Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund Agency Total 84 FY 2011 Executive Issues Increase Legislative Assessment Cap 0.0 0.0 The Assessment Fund for Voluntary Plans was established to help businesses find liability insurance. To fund this service, Arizona liability insurers pay annual assessments of $200, the maximum allowed by statute. However, due to rising operating costs, the $200 assessment is no longer adequate to fund current services. To enable the Department to carry out its responsibilities, the Executive recommends the annual assessment limit be increased in statute to $400 per insurer. 0.0 General Fund 0.0 Fill Vacant Licensing Position 31.2 31.2 The Executive recommends an increase of $31,200 to fund one vacant Examiner Technician II position. Filling the position is necessary to enforce Laws 2008, Chapter 152, designed to prevent the hiring of illegal immigrants. General Fund Fill Vacant Life and Health Analyst Position 31.2 31.2 60.6 60.6 The Executive recommends an increase of $60,600 to fill the Life and Health Insurance Analyst Supervisor position. Filling the position would enhance consumer protection by significantly reducing the automatic approval of forms and rates the Department would otherwise be unable to review within statutory timeframes. 60.6 General Fund Adjust FTE Count (66.4) As requested by the Agency, the Executive recommends a decrease of 8.7 currently unfunded FTE positions and the associated ERE costs of ($66,400). (66.4) General Fund Appropriate Managed Care Oversight SLI in Lump Sum 0.0 60.6 (66.4) (66.4) 0.0 The Executive recommends that the Managed Care and Dental Plan Oversight special line item be included in the Agencyʹs lump sum appropriation. This would provide needed flexibility, allowing the Agency to integrate managed care oversight into its Consumer Support program and to focus resources on the Departmentʹs most critical functions. General Fund Department of Insurance 0.0 0.0 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures Percent of survey respondents indicating satisfied or better Percent of survey respondents indicating satisfied or better with assistance rendered Average calendar days to complete an investigation for investigations completed during the year Average Licensing Time Frames days required to render a decision on a producer license application from the date it was received FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 97.5 80.0 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 80.0 80.0 71.6 70.0 70.0 70.0 191.5 180.0 180.0 180.0 1.5 15.0 30.0 45.0 ¾ Licensing time frame days are the overall time frame days, as defined in A.R.S. § 41-1072(2), minus the days that the overall time frame is suspended in accordance with A.R.S. § 41-1074(B). Percentage of agency staff turnover Number of new domestic receiverships 9.7 10.0 12.0 15.0 0 N/A N/A N/A ¾ No one can predict the number or timing of insurance company receiverships. Average calendar days to complete an investigation after receipt of complaint warranting an investigation Average calendar days to complete substantive review of Property and Casualty form filings Average calendar days to complete substantive review of file-and-use rate filings. 72.6 120.0 120.0 120.0 6.3 20.0 20.0 20.0 12.4 15.0 15.0 15.0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 1,536.2 FY 2011 1,536.2 Agency Request 21,386.0 21,408.0 7.18% 7.18% Administrative Cost Percentage The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. State Agency Budgets Department of Insurance 85 COU Judiciary Mission: To provide Arizona citizens with an independent, accessible, and integrated judicial system that maintains a high degree of public trust and confidence; serves as an asset by dispensing justice, resolving human disputes, and conducting its administrative functions in a fair, equitable, and just manner; and operates efficiently and expeditiously. Description: The Arizona Judicial Branch is an integrated, but decentralized, judicial system implementing its constitutional and statutory responsibilities throughout all levels of government ‐ state, county, and city. The Judicial Branch consists of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals, Superior Court, and limited jurisdiction (municipal and justice of peace) courts. The Arizona Constitution provides for the administrative supervision over all courts to rest with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The Administrative Office of the Courts is charged with assisting the Chief Justice in discharging his/her administrative duties. The Arizona Judicial Council, created in 1990, assists the Supreme Court and the Chief Justice in developing and implementing policies and procedures designed to accomplish the integration of the court system pursuant to the Courtʹs constitutional mandate. Special Note: The Executive does not make a recommendation for the Judiciary. As required under A.R.S. § 35‐116(C), the Judiciaryʹs request for appropriations is hereby transmitted to the Legislature in the FY 2010 Agency Request table in the Appendix of this document. The FY 2010 Executive Recommendation is shown for computational purposes only. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Justices and Support Supreme Administrative Supervision Supreme Regulatory Activities Supreme Court Assistance - Supreme Family Services - Supreme Judicial Nominations & Performance Review Commission on Judicial Conduct State Aid County Reimbursement Automation Court of Appeals - Division I Court of Appeals - Division II Judicial Compensation Superior Adult Probation Services Superior 86 FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 4,277.7 4,348.1 4,437.2 4,348.1 8,411.6 8,150.7 8,150.7 8,150.7 993.4 1,187.5 1,187.5 1,187.5 2,279.3 6,253.7 322.4 3,095.7 7,065.4 323.3 3,095.7 7,065.4 323.3 3,095.7 7,065.4 323.3 458.3 436.9 436.9 436.9 8,588.2 238.4 12,699.4 9,761.2 10,095.6 208.8 13,833.0 9,637.0 14,039.0 208.8 18,333.0 9,873.8 10,095.6 208.8 13,833.0 9,637.0 4,319.1 4,288.2 4,377.0 4,288.2 17,640.9 18,073.6 19,298.6 18,073.6 28,839.9 30,333.7 32,519.4 30,333.7 Juvenile Probation Services - Superior Special Master - Superior Adult and Juvenile Drug Court JCEF Probation 53,992.9 53,118.1 54,274.5 53,118.1 0.0 992.8 20.0 1,013.6 20.0 1,056.7 20.0 1,013.6 3,425.2 3,421.5 3,421.5 3,421.5 163,494.4 168,650.7 182,119.0 168,650.7 578.8 34,531.8 9,109.0 2,569.6 334.4 54.9 73,294.6 10,989.6 497.9 32,112.6 578.8 35,730.4 10,437.5 354.1 361.6 60.1 79,996.4 9,813.6 36.4 31,860.6 579.8 36,898.3 10,909.3 354.1 361.6 60.1 91,825.0 9,813.6 36.4 31,860.6 578.8 35,730.4 10,437.5 354.1 361.6 60.1 79,996.4 9,813.6 36.4 31,860.6 Agency Total 163,494.4 168,650.7 182,119.0 168,650.7 General Fund Supreme Court CJEF Disbursements Judicial Collection Enhancement Defensive Driving Fund Court Appointed Special Advocate Fund Confidential Intermediary Fund Drug Treatment and Education Fund State Aid to Courts Fund Photo Enforcement 126,611.4 10,604.2 126,324.4 10,071.7 130,849.3 11,571.7 126,324.4 10,071.7 15,140.7 15,425.3 19,925.3 15,425.3 3,614.4 2,675.7 5,393.6 3,449.2 5,393.6 3,449.2 5,393.6 3,449.2 428.3 484.6 484.6 484.6 500.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 3,919.7 0.0 2,945.3 4,056.6 2,945.3 7,000.0 2,945.3 4,056.6 Agency Total 163,494.4 168,650.7 182,119.0 168,650.7 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Transfers Out Fund The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Adult Standard 13,961.1 15,051.1 16,508.9 15,051.1 Probation SLI Adult Intensive 11,606.3 11,330.5 11,252.3 11,330.5 Probation SLI Community Punishment 1,990.4 2,861.3 3,134.5 2,861.3 SLI Interstate Compact 639.9 654.2 687.1 654.2 Adult Probation SLI Juvenile Standard 5,152.1 4,724.2 4,724.2 4,724.2 Probation SLI Juvenile Intensive 10,250.2 9,882.1 9,882.1 9,882.1 Probation SLI Juvenile Treatment 22,470.5 22,493.3 23,649.7 22,493.3 Services SLI Family Counseling 656.1 660.4 660.4 660.4 SLI Progressively Increasing 10,334.3 10,160.3 10,160.3 10,160.3 Consequences (PIC-Act) SLI Juvenile Crime 5,129.7 5,197.8 5,197.8 5,197.8 Reduction Fund Judiciary FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Internal and external users connected to the Arizona Judicial Information Network Percent of all of the courts that have automated case and cash management systems Average days drug case processing FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 7,449 7,477 7,500 7,500 100 100 100 100 148 130.5 180 180 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 9,858.9 206,005.0 4.79% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. State Agency Budgets Judiciary 87 DJA Department of Juvenile Corrections Mission: To enhance public protection by changing the delinquent thinking and behavior of juvenile offenders committed to the Department. Description: The Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections (ADJC) is the state agency responsible for juveniles adjudicated delinquent and committed to its jurisdiction by the county juvenile courts. The ADJC is accountable to the citizens of Arizona for the promotion of public safety through the management of the stateʹs secure juvenile facilities and the development and provision of a continuum of services to juvenile offenders, including rehabilitation, treatment, and education. Performance Measures Percent of juveniles incarcerated within 12 months of release Number of escapes 0 0 0 0 Average yearly cost per bed in secure care. Annual staff turnover rate 119,536 125,174 100,000 100,000 28.0 27.0 26.0 27.0 Percent of staff indicating satisfaction with their jobs Percent of youth passing the GED test. Percent of youth showing progress in their primary treatment problem area 75 75 75 75 54 56 56 56 30 61 70 70 Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Rehabilitation Housing Administration FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. 36,179.3 36,788.6 9,402.5 36,996.6 38,109.3 9,402.5 36,179.3 36,788.6 9,402.5 84,833.6 82,370.4 84,508.4 82,370.4 1,163.7 50,535.1 16,604.0 4,152.5 845.3 24.0 710.5 0.0 9,583.4 2,130.4 252.0 (3.6) 1,163.7 51,661.9 17,276.0 3,203.4 919.4 29.8 725.0 0.0 8,114.9 240.0 0.0 200.0 1,183.7 52,542.3 17,628.2 4,003.1 921.9 29.8 746.0 0.0 8,197.1 240.0 0.0 200.0 1,163.7 51,668.2 17,269.7 3,203.4 919.4 29.8 725.0 0.0 8,114.9 240.0 0.0 200.0 Agency Total 84,833.6 82,370.4 84,508.4 82,370.4 General Fund Juvenile Corrections CJEF Distribution Juvenile Education Fund Endowments/Land Earnings 80,019.3 686.5 74,700.4 686.6 80,038.4 686.6 78,400.4 686.6 2,337.4 1,790.4 2,684.8 4,298.6 2,684.8 1,098.6 2,684.8 598.6 Agency Total 84,833.6 82,370.4 84,508.4 82,370.4 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Transfers Out Administrative Costs FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 35,976.9 37,856.8 10,999.9 FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 Actual Actual Expected Expected 36 33 35 35 FY 2010 Administrative Costs 6,107.9 Agency Request 87,874.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 6.95% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Fund Shift ‐ Land Fund 0.0 For FY 2009, $3,700,000 was shifted from the General Fund to the State Charitable, Penal and Reformatory Land Fund to offset expenses at the Department. The Executive recommends reversing this fund shift. General Fund Endowments/Land Earnings Fund 88 3,700.0 (3,700.0) Department of Juvenile Corrections FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget LDA Transfers Out State Land Department Mission: To manage State Trust lands and resources to enhance value and optimize economic return for the Trust beneficiaries, consistent with sound stewardship, conservation, and business management principles supporting socio‐economic goals for citizens here today and generations yet to come. To manage and provide support for resource conservation programs for the well‐being of the public and the stateʹs natural environment. Description: The State Land Department was established in 1915 to manage the State Trust lands on behalf of the thirteen beneficiaries of that Trust, as established by the State Enabling Act and State Constitution. Each of the approximately 9.3 million acres of land is assigned to one of the beneficiaries, the largest of which is the stateʹs common schools. The Department works to sustain the long‐term value for the Trustʹs beneficiaries by administering, selling, and leasing the Stateʹs Trust lands and natural products. The Department also administers the Stateʹs Natural Resource Conservation District Program, which involves funding and technical assistance for 32 districts across the State. The Department provides navigability studies to the Stateʹs Navigable Streambed Adjudication Commission and staffs the Governor‐ appointed State Land Board of Appeals. The Commissioner serves as the State Cartographer and the Surveyor‐General and the Department provides statewide geological information system services including development and sharing of data layers through the Arizona Land Resources Information System program. The Department also contains the Arizona State Forestry Division managed by the Governor‐appointed State Forester, which operates the Stateʹs Wildland Fire Prevention and Suppression Programs on state and private lands outside incorporated areas. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Trust Management and Revenue Generation Outside Assistance and Grants Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation State Agency Budgets FY 2008 Actual 17,273.1 815.6 FY 2009 Approp. 16,406.0 792.5 FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 16,431.0 16,431.0 792.5 792.5 18,088.7 17,198.5 17,223.5 17,223.5 172.9 7,049.4 2,368.0 3,702.9 207.3 11.9 650.0 3,417.6 549.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 174.9 7,718.6 2,520.3 2,460.0 293.5 1.5 638.4 3,335.2 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 174.9 7,718.6 2,520.3 2,485.0 293.5 1.5 638.4 3,335.2 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 174.9 7,718.6 2,520.3 2,485.0 293.5 1.5 638.4 3,335.2 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Agency Total 132.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 18,088.7 17,198.5 17,223.5 17,223.5 17,828.7 260.0 16,438.5 260.0 16,463.5 260.0 16,463.5 260.0 Fund General Fund Environmental Special Plate Fund Due Diligence Fund Agency Total 0.0 500.0 500.0 500.0 18,088.7 17,198.5 17,223.5 17,223.5 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI CAP User Fees 1,143.6 1,263.3 1,263.3 1,263.3 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues New ADWR Rules 25.0 25.0 To assist in compliance with new regulations for the transportation of groundwater by the Arizona Department of Water Resources, the Executive recommends $25,000 in FY 2010 and FY 2011. 25.0 General Fund 25.0 Performance Measures Percent of agency staff turnover Total expendable receipts, excluding interest on permanent fund and school leases (millions) Total annual revenue to permanent fund (millions) Percent increase in commercial leasing revenue In-house appraisal turnaround time (days from administrator request to receipt by section manager) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 11.8 8.0 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 8.0 8.0 114.2 96.1 158.2 265.6 255.9 180.7 174.0 183.2 20.0 1.9 8.3 7.7 40 70 60 60 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 1,283.2 FY 2011 1,283.2 Agency Request 21,651.0 22,401.0 5.93% 5.73% Administrative Cost Percentage The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Land Department 89 LWA Mission: To establish and administer an equitable compensation plan while providing oversight for the selection, retention, and disciplinary proceedings affecting employees of those agencies under the Councilʹs jurisdiction. Description: The Law Enforcement Merit System Council (LEMSC) consists of three members appointed by the Governor for six‐year terms. Members are chosen on the basis of experience in and sympathy with merit principles of public employment. Members shall not have held elective public office within one year before appointment and shall not hold any other political office while serving on the LEMSC. The LEMSC shall adopt rules it deems necessary for establishing: 1) a classification and compensation plan for all covered positions under the jurisdiction of the LEMSC and establishing standards and qualifications for all classified positions; 2) a plan for fair and impartial selection, appointment, probation, promotion, retention, and separation or removal from service by resignation, retirement, reduction in force or dismissal of all classified employees; 3) a performance appraisal system for evaluating the work performance of Department of Public Safety (DPS) and Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training Board (AZPOST) employees; 4) procedures for the conduct of hearings of employee grievances brought before the LEMSC relating to classification, compensation, and the employee appraisal system; 5) procedures for the conduct of hearings on appeals from an order of the director of DPS in connection with suspension, demotion, reduction in pay, loss of accrued leave time, or dismissal of a classified employee. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Law Enforcement Merit System Council Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. 76.8 Agency Total Law Enforcement Merit System Council FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 76.8 76.9 78.3 78.3 76.8 76.9 78.3 78.3 1.0 57.6 11.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 57.2 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 58.4 16.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 58.4 16.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 76.8 76.9 78.3 78.3 76.8 76.9 78.3 78.3 76.9 78.3 78.3 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Personal Services and ERE 1.4 1.4 In January 2007, the Council’s sole FTE received a scheduled base salary increase and performance pay. Funding was requested for, but not included in, the FY 2009 budget to fully fund the incumbentʹs current salary and ERE. The Executive recommends $1,400 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to fully fund the Councilʹs personal services and ERE costs. 1.4 General Fund 1.4 Performance Measures Number of appeals/grievances filed Number of appeal hearings conducted Percent of employees receiving discipline who file an appeal Average days from receipt of an appeal/grievance until the Council issues a final order Average cost of an appeal/grievance hearing (in dollars) Number of rehearing requests filed Number of classifications reviewed to determine proper job description and market value Number of position audits conducted to determine proper classification Number of job descriptions reviewed to determine suitability to classification Number of test plans reviewed for selection and promotional processes Number of covered employees dismissed FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 6 7 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 5 5 1 5 5 5 16 10 10 10 139 120 120 120 781 781 781 890 0 0 0 0 58 20 20 20 7 6 6 6 1 5 5 5 57 50 50 50 5 5 5 5 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund 90 Law Enforcement Merit System Council FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget AUA Performance Measures Auditor General Mission: To improve state and local government operations and accountability by independently providing the Legislature, government decision‐makers, and the public with timely, accurate, and impartial information; relevant recommendations; and technical assistance. Description: The Auditor General is appointed by the Joint Legislative Audit Committee and approved by a concurrent resolution of the Legislature. By law, the Auditor General is required to express an opinion on the financial statements of audited entities, and determine compliance with applicable federal and Arizona laws and conduct comprehensive performance evaluations of state agencies and the programs they administer. In addition, the Auditor General is required to conduct performance audits of school districts and monitor the percentage of dollars spent in the classroom. Beginning in fiscal year 2006‐2007, the Legislature appropriated monies for the Auditor General to conduct performance and financial audits of English Language Learner programs. Percentage of single audit reports accepted by cognizant agency Percentage of administrative recommendations implemented or adopted within two years for performance audits Percentage of single audit recommendations implemented or adopted within one year for financial audits Percentage of legislative recommendations implemented or adopted within two years Percentage of staff turnover FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 100 100 99 90 90 90 50 65 65 65 NA 60 60 60 18 20 20 20 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 100 100 FY 2010 FY 2011 1,215.4 19,202.0 1,215.4 19,271.0 6.33% 6.31% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. Special Note: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 35‐116(B), the Executive does not make a recommendation on Legislative agencies. For the purposes of developing the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Recommendations, the FY 2009 Appropriations were used for the Legislative branch recommendations. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Auditor General Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 17,480.1 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,480.1 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,502.6 209.4 11,647.6 3,329.2 632.5 122.1 21.4 0.0 1,166.9 560.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 209.4 11,515.7 3,369.5 499.1 290.8 4.5 0.0 1,255.7 567.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 209.4 11,515.7 3,369.5 499.1 290.8 4.5 0.0 1,255.7 567.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 209.4 11,515.7 3,369.5 499.1 290.8 4.5 0.0 1,255.7 567.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 17,480.1 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,480.1 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,480.1 17,502.6 17,502.6 17,502.6 Fund General Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Auditor General 91 HOA House of Representatives Mission: To serve the public by enacting laws that protect the public safety and welfare, to provide information to the public and to assist members of the public who contact their legislative representatives with questions, problems, or concerns. Description: The House of Representatives consists of 60 members elected by the public. Two members are elected from each of the 30 legislative districts in biennial elections. Members of the Legislature participate in activities related to the review and adoption of a wide range of topics that affect the citizens of Arizona. Members serve on standing committees, participate in interim projects and handle constituent concerns. Special Note: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 35‐116(B), the Executive does not make a recommendation on Legislative agencies. For the purposes of developing the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Recommendations, the FY 2009 Appropriations were used for the Legislative branch recommendations. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center House of Representatives Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 12,152.1 13,653.4 13,653.4 13,653.4 12,152.1 13,653.4 13,653.4 13,653.4 12,152.1 13,653.4 13,653.4 13,653.4 12,152.1 13,653.4 13,653.4 13,653.4 Fund General Fund Agency Total 92 House of Representatives FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget JLA Joint Legislative Budget Committee Mission: To provide the Arizona Legislature with sound research, analysis, forecasts, and recommendations on state government finances and public policies; to provide the members with high quality work that is factually‐based and delivered in a timely and professional manner, so they can make informed public policy decisions that are in the best interests of the citizens of Arizona. Description: The Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) Staff is a statutory agency in the legislative branch of Arizona State Government. The Governing Board is the 16‐member Joint Legislative Budget Committee who appoints a Legislative Budget Analyst [Director] who is responsible for hiring other staff as authorized through the appropriations process. The office was established pursuant to A.R.S. § 41‐1272 in 1966. Special Note: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 35‐116(B), the Executive does not make a recommendation on Legislative agencies. For the purposes of developing the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Recommendations, the FY 2009 Appropriations were used for the Legislative branch recommendations. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Joint Legislative Budget Committee Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 727.8 2,877.0 2,877.0 2,877.0 727.8 2,877.0 2,877.0 2,877.0 727.8 2,877.0 2,877.0 2,877.0 727.8 2,877.0 2,877.0 2,877.0 Fund General Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Joint Legislative Budget Committee 93 LCA Legislative Council Mission: To provide quality legal, research, computer and administrative services to the Arizona Legislature. Description: The Legislative Council staff performs the following core functions: drafting of legislative bills, memorials, resolutions, and amendments; review and possible revision of each legislative enactment for technical corrections prior to publication of the Arizona Revised Statutes; enrolling and engrossing of bills and processing of legislative journals; conducting legal research; and operating the legislative computer system. Special Note: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 35‐116(B), the Executive does not make a recommendation on Legislative agencies. For the purposes of developing the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Recommendations, the FY 2009 Appropriations were used for the Legislative branch recommendations. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Legislative Council Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 5,299.1 5,414.7 5,414.7 5,414.7 5,299.1 5,414.7 5,414.7 5,414.7 5,299.1 5,414.7 5,414.7 5,414.7 5,299.1 5,414.7 5,414.7 5,414.7 Fund General Fund Agency Total 94 Legislative Council FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget LAA Arizona State Library, Archives & Public Records Mission: To serve the Arizona Legislature and Arizonans by providing public access to public information, fostering historical/cultural collaborative research and information projects, and ensuring that Arizonaʹs history is documented and preserved. Description: The Arizona State Library, Archives and Public Records provides information services as authorized by law. Research and reference services are provided in the subject areas of law, government, public policy, genealogy, and Arizoniana. Consultant services are offered to public libraries to strengthen county and local library services and to government agencies of the cities, counties, and state to assist them in the management of official records. State and federal grants for public libraries and other authorized services are administered and monitored. Special library and information services are offered for anyone who is unable to read or use standard printed materials as a result of temporary or permanent visual or physical limitations. Public records are identified, preserved, and when appropriate disposed of through archival retention programs. Exhibits are created to educate the public regarding governmental and Arizona history and the legislative process. These services are provided through the divisions of the Agency: History and Archives, Braille and Talking Book Library, Library Development, Museum, Records Management, and Research and Law Library. The Agency also has responsibility for the Board of the Library, Archives and Public Records; the Arizona Board of Library Examiners; the Arizona County Librarians; Arizona Historical Records Advisory Board; the Arizona State Board on Geographic and Historic Names; and the Arizona Historical Advisory Commission, including the Arizona Centennial planning efforts. Special Note: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 35‐116(B), the Executive does not make a recommendation on Legislative agencies. For the purposes of developing the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Recommendations, the FY 2009 Appropriations were used for the Legislative branch recommendations. Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out 1,396.6 21.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 1,371.7 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.8 1,371.7 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.8 1,371.7 22.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 19.8 Agency Total 8,042.1 8,054.8 8,054.8 8,054.8 7,445.9 596.2 7,378.9 675.9 7,378.9 675.9 7,378.9 675.9 8,042.1 8,054.8 8,054.8 8,054.8 Fund General Fund Records Services Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Library, Archives and 596.2 675.9 675.9 675.9 Public Records SLI Grants-in-aid 570.4 651.4 651.4 651.4 SLI Radio Reading for the 97.0 97.0 97.0 97.0 Blind Performance Measures Collaboration - Total activities/contacts. Leg info services - Total activities/contacts. Public access - Total contacts (In thousands). Customer satisfaction. Preservation - Total items/contacts(In thousands). FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 105,054 78,300 21,484 19,762 20,560 21,905 45,030.2 34,640.4 35,692.9 35,710.8 7.5 7.6 7.6 7.6 79,281.1 72,220.0 77,305.0 77,365.0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 86,950 98,100 FY 2010 FY 2011 447.7 447.7 11,704.0 11,704.0 3.83% 3.83% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Library, Archives and Public Records Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others State Agency Budgets FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 8,042.1 8,054.8 8,054.8 8,054.8 8,042.1 8,054.8 8,054.8 8,054.8 115.8 4,280.5 1,563.7 88.1 4.8 15.5 656.1 115.8 4,250.5 1,543.7 65.2 4.8 15.5 761.4 115.8 4,250.5 1,543.7 65.2 4.8 15.5 761.4 115.8 4,250.5 1,543.7 65.2 4.8 15.5 761.4 Arizona State Library, Archives & Public Records 95 SNA Senate Mission: To serve the Arizona constituency through policy development and enactment of legislation in support of the public health, safety and welfare. Description: The Arizona Senate consists of 30 elected members, one from each legislative district. Members are appointed to serve on Senate standing committees, as well as statutory and interim committees. They consider a variety of issues for the purpose of enacting legislation deemed necessary for the public interest. Special Note: Pursuant to A.R.S. § 35‐116(B), the Executive does not make a recommendation on Legislative agencies. For the purposes of developing the FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Recommendations, the FY 2009 Appropriations were used for the Legislative branch recommendations. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Senate Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 7,531.5 9,036.2 9,036.2 9,036.2 7,531.5 9,036.2 9,036.2 9,036.2 7,531.5 9,036.2 9,036.2 9,036.2 7,531.5 9,036.2 9,036.2 9,036.2 Fund General Fund Agency Total 96 Senate FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures LLA Department of Liquor Licenses and Control Mission: To license the liquor industry and assure compliance of liquor laws in the State of Arizona using education, knowledge, communication, collaboration, adjudication and enforcement that result in better health, safety and welfare of Arizonaʹs citizens and their community. Description: The Department of Liquor Licenses and Control regulates all businesses dealing with spirituous liquor. The Department processes complaints, police reports, and civil violations regarding licensees. The Department investigates all allegations against licensees, whether criminal or civil, and in collaboration with the Attorney Generalʹs Office prosecutes before civil and criminal courts within the State. Further, the Department interacts with the Governorʹs Office of Highway Safety and the Driving Under the Influence Abatement Council to educate underage youth and reduce underage drinking. The Department meets on a regular basis with the Arizona Licensed Beverage Association, Arizona Beer and Wine Association, Arizona Grocers Association, Arizona Hotel and Motel Association, and Arizona Restaurant Association and various civic organizations statewide. Finally, the Department is responsive to all Arizona citizens who are served and affected by the licensees. Percentage of liquor law compliance cases processed in less than 90 calendar days Average number of calendar days to complete an investigative complaint Number of new licenses, transferred licenses, and renewals issued Percent of surveyed licensees reporting very good or excellent service Number of investigations completed resulting in compliance actions Number of random liquor inspections completed FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 85 95 24 35 35 35 13,260 13,500 13,500 13,500 85.00 80.00 80.00 80.00 334 500 500 500 4660 4700 4700 4700 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 95 95 FY 2010 FY 2011 433.3 4,443.0 433.3 4,443.0 9.75% 9.75% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Administration Investigations Licensing Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,351.8 1,456.5 655.8 1,417.0 1,428.4 629.4 1,417.0 1,428.4 629.4 1,417.0 1,428.4 629.4 3,464.1 3,474.8 3,474.8 3,474.8 47.2 1,860.0 750.4 59.1 207.5 5.9 0.0 481.1 100.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.2 1,918.5 823.9 55.5 206.5 4.5 0.0 465.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.2 1,918.5 823.9 55.5 206.5 4.5 0.0 465.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 47.2 1,918.5 823.9 55.5 206.5 4.5 0.0 465.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,464.1 3,474.8 3,474.8 3,474.8 3,464.1 3,474.8 3,474.8 3,474.8 3,464.1 3,474.8 3,474.8 3,474.8 Fund General Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Department of Liquor Licenses and Control 97 LOA FY 2010 Arizona State Lottery Commission Personnel Funding Mission: To support Arizona programs for the public benefit by maximizing revenue in a responsible manner. Description: The Arizona Lottery was established to maximize revenue dedicated to various beneficiaries through statutory formulas pursuant to A.R.S. § 5‐501. With an advisory commission and an Executive Director appointed by the Governor overseeing operations, the Lottery works with a retailer network to provide players with innovative, entertaining, and rewarding games. 304.7 235.7 The Executive recommends $304,700 in FY 2010 and $235,700 in FY 2011 for an additional sales team of 5.0 FTE sales representatives and 1.0 FTE product assistant. The new sales team is expected to generate over $4.0 million in additional revenue annually. 304.7 Lottery Fund FY 2008 Actual Lottery 67,114.5 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. 80,257.3 FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 80,492.9 80,423.9 Agency Total Percent of retailers expressing overall satisfaction with Lottery services Percent of agency staff turnover Dollar amount of instant ticket sales (in millions) Dollar amount of on-line sales (in millions) Average dollar amount of sales per ticket vending machine. Percent of lottery ticket sales distributed to state beneficiaries Percent of active retailer accounts in good standing FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 94 95 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 95 96 13.6 7.0 7.0 7.0 252.4 315.5 361.4 395.8 220.5 260.6 277.0 299.0 125,900 143,100 163,000 200,000 30.6 27.4 24.1 24.1 99.6 99.1 99.2 99.3 67,114.5 80,257.3 80,492.9 80,423.9 110.0 4,421.6 1,660.1 11,341.5 306.6 15.9 0.0 49,034.1 248.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 86.0 110.0 4,972.1 1,724.9 11,624.1 269.8 16.7 50.0 61,526.6 73.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.0 5,136.7 1,796.0 11,624.1 269.8 16.7 50.0 61,526.6 73.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.0 5,136.7 1,796.0 11,624.1 269.8 16.7 50.0 61,526.6 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 67,114.5 80,257.3 80,492.9 80,423.9 The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. 67,114.5 80,257.3 80,492.9 80,423.9 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. 67,114.5 80,257.3 80,492.9 80,423.9 Fund Lottery Fund 235.7 Performance Measures Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2011 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 5,489.8 741,181.0 5,476.8 741,040.0 0.74% 0.74% The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Tickets 7,424.5 9,283.7 9,283.7 9,283.7 SLI Advertising 10,786.4 20,162.7 20,162.7 20,162.7 SLI On-Line Vendor Fees 8,975.0 9,031.2 9,031.2 9,031.2 SLI Retailer Commissions 32,000.7 32,284.6 32,284.6 32,284.6 SLI Telecommunications 376.4 629.4 629.4 629.4 SLI Sales Incentive Program 45.4 50.0 50.0 50.0 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Equipment (69.1) (69.1) For FY 2010 and FY 2011, the recommendation eliminates ($69,100) for one‐time equipment in FY 2009 associated with the Lotteryʹs technology replacement schedule. Lottery Fund (69.1) 98 Arizona State Lottery Commission (69.1) FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget MEA FY 2010 Arizona Medical Board Mission: To protect public safety through the judicious licensing, regulation, and education of physicians and physician assistants. Description: The Agency staff supports two Boards – the Arizona Medical Board which licenses and regulates allopathic physicians, and the Arizona Regulatory Board of Physician Assistants which licenses and regulates physician assistants. The Agency processes applications for licenses, handles public complaints against licensees, and disseminates information pertaining to licensees and the regulatory process. The two Boards determine and administer disciplinary action in the event of proven violations of their respective practice acts. Together, the two Boards regulate over 20,000 licensees. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing, Regulation, & Rehabilitation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 5,650.6 5,822.6 5,968.7 5,968.7 5,650.6 5,822.6 5,968.7 5,968.7 58.5 2,704.9 937.6 898.1 23.7 7.6 4.8 0.0 830.2 209.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.5 58.5 2,866.4 990.1 1,141.5 23.0 14.0 5.0 0.0 675.1 64.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.3 58.5 2,866.4 990.1 1,141.5 23.0 14.0 5.0 0.0 821.2 64.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.3 58.5 2,866.4 990.1 1,141.5 23.0 14.0 5.0 0.0 821.2 64.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 43.3 5,650.6 5,822.6 5,968.7 5,968.7 Medical Examiners Board 5,650.6 5,822.6 5,968.7 5,968.7 Agency Total 5,650.6 5,822.6 5,968.7 5,968.7 Agency Total FY 2011 appropriation for this repayment will effectively cut the Board’s budget by 2.4% in FY 2010 and in FY 2011, thus increasing processing times and delaying investigations. The Executive recommends $146,100 in FY 2010 and $146,100 in FY 2011 from the Medical Board Fund to fund the repayment to Risk Management. 146.1 Medical Examiners Board Fund 146.1 Performance Measures Average number of days to process an initial medical doctor license upon receipt of completed application Average number of days to process a medical doctor renewal upon receipt of completed application Average number of days to complete an medical doctor investigation Average number of days to complete an physician assistant investigation Medical doctor cases referred to formal hearing Average number of days to resolve a medical doctor case Average number of days to resolve a physician assistant case Average score of agency-wide customer service satisfaction surveys (scale of 1-8) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 2 2 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 2 2 2 2 2 2 115 120 120 120 101 120 120 120 69 45 45 45 164 180 180 180 144 180 180 180 7.9 7.5 7.5 7.5 ¾ Methodology for calculating survey results changed starting FY08 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 675.4 FY 2011 675.4 Agency Request 6,006.0 6,006.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 11.25% 11.25% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Reimbursement Costs to Risk Management 146.1 146.1 In July 2007 the Arizona Medical Board suspended one of its licensees, based on evidence that he posed a threat to public health and safety. The suspended licensee initiated a successful legal action against the Board, and in June 2008 the court awarded him fees and costs in the amount of $292,200. Risk Management requires the Board to fully reimburse the Risk Management Fund in the next budget cycle, 50% in FY 2010 and 50% in FY 2011. The Board did not anticipate this cost, and failure to increase the State Agency Budgets Arizona Medical Board 99 MSA Board of Medical Student Loans Mission: To recruit physicians to provide service to rural and other medically underserved areas, medically underserved populations, and Indian reservations in Arizona and to increase the number of physicians practicing in these areas by providing educational loans to students at colleges of medicine in Arizona. Description: The Board of Medical Student Loans provides financial assistance to medical students in Arizona, including tuition and a living allowance, through the Arizona Medical Student Loan Program. Participating schools include Midwestern Universityʹs AZ College of Osteopathic Medicine (AZCOM), the University of Arizona (UA) College of Medicine, and A. T. Still Universityʹs School of Osteopathic Medicine in Arizona (SOMA) which opened in the Fall 2007 and increased the applicant pool. The Board consists of eight members who review student applications and make decisions necessary for the operation of the program. Students must be Arizona residents. The Medical Student Loan Program gives preference to medical students who have financial need and who sign contracts to provide primary care in eligible service areas; the Board may approve service in other specialties of recognized need in Arizona. For each year of funding received, recipients must provide one year of service in a designated area, with a minimum two‐year service commitment. For 30 years, UA has provided staff at no charge to the Board to arrange Board meetings, prepare Board reports, collect repayments, coordinate service placement with the Arizona Department of Health Services (ADHS) and the Board, and prepare state budget requests. Since the program was opened to private colleges of medicine in 1999, Midwestern and now A. T. Still University have joined the UA College of Medicine and provide services at no cost to publicize and coordinate the student application and interview process, coordinate the funding process, and track the participants. Vital to the success of the program is the cooperation and assistance provided by ADHS, which assists the Board in the selection of loan recipients and the coordination of service sites, as well as by providing one employee to serve on the Medical Student Loans Board. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Medical Student Loan Program Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses 100 FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,618.5 1,430.8 1,128.7 1,128.7 1,618.5 1,430.8 1,128.7 1,128.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,618.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,430.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,128.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,128.7 0.0 Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,618.5 1,430.8 1,128.7 1,128.7 1,500.0 118.5 1,121.0 309.8 1,121.0 7.7 1,121.0 7.7 1,618.5 1,430.8 1,128.7 1,128.7 Fund General Fund Medical Student Loan Fund Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Technical Adjustment (302.1) (302.1) The Executive recommends a reduction in appropriation of ($302,100) for FY 2010 and FY 2011, as the Medical Student Loan Fund will have expended its balance by the end of FY 2009. The recommendation will reduce the appropriation authority for the Fund to $7,700, equal to expected annual revenues. (302.1) Med Student Loan Fund (302.1) Performance Measures Loan provided to each public medical school student (in thousands of dollars) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 36.9 38.5 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 39.2 40.0 ¾ Tuition varies with graduating class at UA College of Medicine but most students funded received $36,867 in FY 2008. Loan as a percent of average annual cost of public medical education Administration as a per cent of total cost 100 94 92 90 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 ¾ All appropriated funds are used to assist medical students; no funds are used for the administration of the program. The UA College of Medicine, Midwestern University, and A.T. Still University provide support services at no cost to the Board. Vital to the success of the program are the cooperation and assistance provided by the Arizona Department of Health Services. Board members serve with no compensation. Students funded per year ¾ 40 31 25 24 Medical students sign contracts with the State of Arizona to serve as physicians in eligible service areas. The decrease in available funding will lead to fewer students in the program. The number of students funded will depend upon State appropriations and the number of public and private medical school students included. Due to the tuition differential, the loan amounts at private schools will fund fewer students. Physicians in service 13 12 16 13 Physicians practicing in eligible service areas after service requirement is met 33 33 33 33 ¾ FY 2008: Two additional physicians were continuing to practice at the same location as previously, but the areas were no longer designated as Health Professional Shortage Areas this last year, which is the ultimate goal. Percent of physicians who have provided service in eligible sites 90 91 92 93 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Board of Medical Student Loans FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget MIA Executive Recommendations State Mine Inspector Mission: To administer and enforce the Mining Code of the State of Arizona for the protection of the life, health and safety of mine employees and the public in Arizonaʹs active, inactive and abandoned mines. Description: The State Mine Inspector is a state‐wide elected constitutional officer and the director of the Office of the State Mine Inspector. This agency enforces statutes, rules and regulations applicable to mine safety, health, explosives and land reclamation. The Agency inspects the health and safety conditions and practices at active mining operations; investigates mine accidents, employee and public complaints; and conducts federally‐certified miner and instructor safety training. In 2007 the Agency administered $14.5 million in reclamation financial assurance and enforces the Mined Land Reclamation laws, rules and regulations for the restoration of disturbed lands to a safe and stable environmental condition. The Agency promotes public safety regarding abandoned mines by ʺStay Out Stay Aliveʺ promotions, presentations and publications; complaint investigations; mine owner compliance notifications; and identification, hazard assessment, prioritization, posting and securing of safety hazards. The agency issues permits, licenses and certificates for elevators and electrical connections, and monitors the manufacturing, storing, selling, transferring and disposal of all explosives or blasting agents. FY 2010 Executive Issues Aggregate Mine Land Reclamation Issue 155.8 7.5 Laws 2005, Chapter 322, established the legislatively appropriated Aggregate Mining Reclamation Fund. Aggregate mining operations must submit reclamation plans at a fee of $3,800 per plan. Two‐thirds of the fee is used to pay the consultants who conduct the compliance review and approval portions of the reclamation plan process, while the Mine Inspector uses the remaining one‐third to pay for the administrative costs of reviewing the reclamation plans and notifying adjacent property owners of the aggregate mining unit. The Executive recommends $155,800 in FY 2010 and $7,500 in FY 2011 from the Aggregate Mining Reclamation Fund to pay for the administrative and public notification costs of the reclamation process. Mining Safety Enforcement Mined Land Reclamation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,635.1 278.9 1,568.4 0.0 1,568.4 155.8 1,568.4 7.5 1,914.0 1,568.4 1,724.2 1,575.9 17.0 683.0 244.8 320.6 169.8 2.2 0.0 259.8 183.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 50.0 1,914.0 17.0 824.3 304.4 75.0 190.0 2.0 0.0 172.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,568.4 17.0 824.3 304.4 198.1 196.0 2.0 0.0 199.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,724.2 17.0 824.3 304.4 80.5 190.5 2.0 0.0 174.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,575.9 Fund General Fund Aggregate Mining Reclamation Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets 1,635.1 278.9 1,568.4 0.0 1,568.4 155.8 1,568.4 7.5 1,914.0 1,568.4 1,724.2 1,575.9 155.8 Aggregate Mining Reclamation Fund 7.5 FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 Aggregate Mine Land Reclamation Issue 177.7 Aggregate Mining Reclamation Fund 177.7 Performance Measures Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2011 Percent mandated inspections completed Number of reportable (lost time) mine accidents FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 72.6 80 174 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 80 80 150 160 160 ¾ The number of reportable (lost time) mine accident reflects " only" what is reported to the Arizona State Mine Inspector. Number of safety inspections completed Customer satisfaction rating for Mines (scale 1-8) Number of abandoned mine openings secured ¾ Secured on State Lands Number of Arizona miners and contractors trained Number of annual mined land reclamation compliance reviews 656 632 600 610 6 6 6 6 70 70 70 70 6098 7783 7000 7000 40 210 230 250 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 294.0 FY 2011 294.0 Agency Request 2,514.0 2,356.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 11.69% 12.48% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. State Mine Inspector 101 Agency Total MNA Department of Mines and Mineral Resources Mission: To promote and advocate the responsible development of mineral resources, in accordance with accepted principles of sustainable development, and provide pertinent data and support to those seeking to explore and develop mineral resources in the State of Arizona. In addition, the Department of Mines and Mineral Resources of the State of Arizona (DMMR) maintains a world‐ class mining and mineral museum that portrays the economic and aesthetic value of minerals and educates the public with regard to the critical role of minerals and mineral resources in our society. Description: The Department of Mines and Mineral Resources (DMMR) of the State of Arizona is a non‐regulatory agency. The primary duties of the Department are to promote and advocate for the development of the mineral resources and industry in the state. This is accomplished by participating in conferences, seminars, news media, and other appropriate mechanisms. DMMR conducts studies of properties and claims to assist in the exploration and development of minerals and maintains a repository of mining and mineral information in various formats, so that it is protected from destruction. The Department provides evaluation and assistance to government agencies and the public and performs surveys of potential economic mineral resources. It monitors current mining and exploration activities and serves as a source of information for mineral information, which it publishes and disseminates. DMMR cooperates with the Arizona Corporation Commission and other agencies in the administration of state laws, and assists various agencies in the identification of mineral resources and educating them relating thereto. The Department maintains a mineral museum which serves to educate the children and the public of the importance of minerals in our society and their aesthetic value. It holds classes in lapidary, silversmithing, and related activities. 924.5 947.8 947.8 947.8 924.5 947.8 947.8 947.8 924.5 947.8 947.8 947.8 Fund General Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Number of student museum visitors (in thousands) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 25 15 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 15 15 ¾ Price of gasoline is up dramatically, so the number of school willing to send students on field trip may be limited in future. Number of museum visitors, including students (in thousands) Number of customers provided with mining and mineral information 48 40 40 40 360 300 250 250 ¾ Depends on the strength of mineral prices. With new mines opening up these may fall which, in turn, will decrease in the number of customers requesting information. Department customer satisfaction survey rating (on a scale of 1 to 5 with five being the highest) 4.9 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 4.9 FY 2010 4.9 4.9 FY 2011 107.0 107.0 1,455.0 1,455.0 7.35% 7.35% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Mineral Development and Promotion 924.5 947.8 947.8 947.8 Agency Total 924.5 947.8 947.8 947.8 7.0 350.7 96.4 2.7 3.5 5.5 0.0 464.0 1.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 349.5 96.3 2.9 0.0 7.0 0.0 491.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 349.5 96.3 2.9 0.0 7.0 0.0 491.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.0 349.5 96.3 2.9 0.0 7.0 0.0 491.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out 102 Department of Mines and Mineral Resources FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget NBA Naturopathic Physicians Board of Medical Examiners Fund Naturopathic Board Agency Total Mission: To protect the health, safety and welfare of the public by regulating the practice of naturopathic medicine and massage therapy. 591.5 604.3 604.3 604.3 591.5 604.3 604.3 604.3 Performance Measures Description: The Agency regulates both naturopathic physicians and massage therapists, each of which is governed by a governor‐appointed board. The Naturopathic Physicians Medical Board is responsible for ensuring public safety and well‐being through the regulation of the naturopathic field of medicine, which uses various methods to treat patients including nutritional supplements, herbal medicine, homeopathy, pharmaceuticals and lifestyle counseling. The Board regulates physicians who engage in the practice of naturopathic medicine, including certification of those in specialty practice. Further, the Board certifies graduates and medical students to engage in internship, preceptorship, and postdoctoral training programs and certifies medical assistants and approves clinical training programs for medical students. Finally, the Naturopathic Board certifies naturopathic physicians to dispense natural substances, drugs, and devices from their offices and conducts investigations and hearings into allegations of medical incompetence and unprofessional conduct. Massage therapy applications received for initial licensure and biennial renewal. ¾ Licensing began in FY05 Average number of days to resolve a massage therapy complaint FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 4,005 4,000 218 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 4,000 4,000 210 210 210 ¾ Hiring freeze has resulted in understaffing investigations which has lengthened adjudication time frames. Active physician licenses Complaints received against licensed or certified persons Complaints resolved in same fiscal year 562 550 575 575 30 32 32 32 24 26 26 26 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 65.0 FY 2011 63.3 687.0 666.0 9.46% 9.50% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. The Board of Massage Therapy regulates and licenses massage therapists by approving training requirements, recognizing a national examination, establishing rules, and conducting investigations and hearings into allegations of incompetence and unprofessional conduct. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Naturopathic Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total State Agency Budgets FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 591.5 604.3 604.3 604.3 591.5 604.3 604.3 604.3 6.0 328.3 95.9 98.6 3.0 1.0 0.0 63.3 1.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 330.1 96.0 101.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 67.1 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 330.1 96.0 101.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 67.1 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.0 330.1 96.0 101.0 3.7 0.0 0.0 67.1 6.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 591.5 604.3 604.3 604.3 Naturopathic Physicians Board of Medical Examiners 103 NSA General Fund Arizona Navigable Stream Adjudication Commission Agency Total Mission: To determine which of Arizonaʹs 39,039 rivers and streams were and were not navigable at the time of statehood, February 14, 1912 and to determine the public trust values of those rivers and streams that were navigable. In addition, the Commission must defend appeals and other legal actions that are filed in State Court, and complete Commission reports to be recorded in each appropriate county following appeals processes. NOTE: All evidentiary navigability hearings have been completed and the Commission is in the report writing phase, report ratification phase, 9 month appeal time and appeals processes. The Commission Sunset date is June 30, 2012. Description: The Navigable Stream Adjudication Commission (ANSAC) is a five‐member commission appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. Title to the beds of Arizona rivers and streams that were navigable as of statehood are subject to state ownership, and title to the beds of Arizona rivers and streams that were not navigable as of statehood are subject to private ownership. Arizona did determine ownership of any of the 39,039 rivers and streams at the time of statehood and as a result, as many as 100,000 property titles will continue to remain clouded until ANSAC completes its work . The Commission is charged with gathering evidence, holding hearings, and making final determinations regarding navigability of the 39,039 streams and rivers in Arizona as of February 14, 1912. The Colorado River is excluded from the Commission process based on established ownership by the federal government. Barring court mandates for further action, the Commissionʹs work is presently scheduled to be completed by June 30, 2012. 217.6 180.8 180.8 180.8 217.6 180.8 180.8 180.8 Performance Measures Number of Arizona rivers and streams adjudicated Number of hearings under 2001/current statutes Cost per hearing to study watercourses (in thousands of dollars) Customer satisfaction rating for hearing attendees (scale 1-8) Number of final reports approved by Commission FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.5 7.5 7.5 7.5 5 7 7 1 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 7 1 FY 2010 FY 2011 16.0 181.0 16.0 181.0 8.84% 8.84% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Stream Adjudication Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 217.6 180.8 180.8 180.8 217.6 180.8 180.8 180.8 1.0 52.1 26.4 123.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 52.1 26.2 80.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 52.1 26.2 80.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 52.1 26.2 80.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 217.6 180.8 180.8 180.8 Fund 104 Arizona Navigable Stream Adjudication Commission FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget BNA FY 2010 State Board of Nursing Mission: To protect the public health, safety, and welfare through the safe and competent practice of nurses and nursing assistants. Description: The State Board of Nursing protects the public by assuring that standards of practice are defined and that persons engaged in the practice of nursing are competent. It approves individuals for licensure, registration, and certification; approves educational programs for nurses and nursing assistants; investigates complaints concerning licensee and certificate holder compliance with the law; and determines and administers disciplinary actions in the event of proven violations of the Nurse Practice Act. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Nursing Assistant Licensing and Regulation RN/LPN 125.4 3,871.2 167.3 4,134.9 167.3 4,134.9 167.3 4,134.9 Agency Total 3,996.6 4,302.2 4,302.2 4,302.2 40.7 1,945.9 653.6 482.7 8.6 9.7 0.1 0.0 527.6 368.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.2 2,196.6 871.2 544.7 9.9 10.9 0.0 0.0 558.6 82.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 41.2 2,196.6 871.2 544.7 9.9 10.9 0.0 0.0 558.6 82.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 41.2 2,196.6 871.2 544.7 9.9 10.9 0.0 0.0 558.6 82.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 28.2 3,996.6 4,302.2 4,302.2 4,302.2 125.4 3,871.2 167.3 4,134.9 167.3 4,134.9 167.3 4,134.9 3,996.6 4,302.2 4,302.2 4,302.2 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund General Fund Nursing Board Agency Total 0.0 Performance Measures FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues 0.0 0.0 The Executive recommends raising fee caps to ensure the Board’s fiscal solvency. The Executive recommends raising fee caps to the following amounts: $75 for a nursing assistant certification examination with documentation, $75 for a nursing assistant endorsement with documentation, $200 for an RN/LPN examination and licensure, $125 for an RN/LPN second examination, and $60 for processing fingerprint cards. The Executive recommends raising fee caps for initial certifications to State Agency Budgets 0.0 Nursing Board Fund Executive Recommendations Increase Fee Caps FY 2011 the following amounts: $115 for an initial school nurse application, $200 for an initial nurse practitioner application, $200 for an application to prescribe medication, $200 for an application to prescribe and dispense medication, $200 for a clinical nursing specialist certification and $200 for initial certification of an RN anesthetist with prescribing privileges. The Executive recommends raising temporary licensure/certification fee caps to the following amounts: $60 for an RN/LPN temporary license, $60 for a nursing assistant temporary certification, $60 for an NP temporary certification, and $60 for a clinical nursing specialist temporary certification. The Executive recommends raising renewal fee caps to the following amounts: $75 for a nursing assistant license renewal, $180 for renewal of an RN/LPN license offline, $180 for renewal of an RN/LPN license online, $75 for renewal of a school nurse certificate, $200 for renewal of an RN/LPN expired license and $35 for renewal of a nursing assistant expired license. The Executive recommends raising late fee caps to the following amounts: $35 for late renewal of nursing assistant certification per each year since last renewed (capping at $100), $75 for late renewal of an RN/LPN license per each year since last renewed (capping at $250). The Executive recommends raising reinstatement fee caps to $200 for a RN/LPN reinstatement. The Executive recommends raising public information fee caps to the following: $75 for publications prepared by the board, $35 for copying a nursing program transcript, $60 for providing verification to another state or country of licensure for endorsement, certification for advanced practice or for nursing assistant certification. The Executive recommends raising other processing fee caps to the following: $40 for failing to notify the board of a change of residence address pursuant to section 32‐1609, $40 for issuing a duplicate license or name change (RN/LPN), $35 for issuing a duplicate license or name change for a nursing assistant, $5 for providing notary services and $300 for registration for board seminars and workshops. The Executive recommends granting the Board of Nursing emergency authority to bypass rulemaking to allow immediate fee increases. Total licensees Registered Nurses and Licensed Practical Nurses Total complaints received Total individuals certified as nursing assistants Average calendar days from receipt of complaint to resolution State Board of Nursing FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 78,948 84,000 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 86,000 88,000 875 900 925 950 21,903 22,000 22,500 22,500 206 175 200 200 105 Administrative Costs FY 2010 FY 2011 519.6 519.6 Agency Request 4,717.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 11.02% 4,717.0 11.02% Administrative Costs The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 106 State Board of Nursing FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget NCA FY 2010 Nursing Care Ins. Admin. Examiners Mission: To protect the health, welfare, and safety of Arizona citizens who seek and use the services of nursing care institution administrators and assisted living facility managers. Description: The Board evaluates applications from individuals seeking nursing home administrator licenses and assisted living facility manager certificates. The Board investigates the credentials and backgrounds of applicants, conducts examinations, and processes the applications. The Board also evaluates and processes applications for renewal of administrator licenses and manager certificates. Both administrators and managers are required by law to meet continuing education requirements. The Board approves continuing education programs and ensures that the requirements are met. The Board investigates complaints against administrators and managers received from citizens or the Department of Health Services. The Board imposes appropriate disciplinary action and enforces compliance with such discipline. The Board provides information to the public concerning applicants, licensees and certificate holders, and regulatory actions taken. All of these Board functions are accomplished through a fees‐financed program of examination, licensure, and regulation. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 315.3 377.7 377.7 377.7 315.3 377.7 377.7 377.7 5.0 164.4 53.0 26.4 5.8 2.4 0.0 62.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 5.0 218.7 65.8 24.4 6.0 4.1 0.0 58.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 218.7 65.8 24.4 6.0 4.1 0.0 58.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.0 218.7 65.8 24.4 6.0 4.1 0.0 58.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 315.3 377.7 377.7 377.7 315.3 377.7 377.7 377.7 315.3 377.7 377.7 377.7 FY 2011 fiscal solvency. The Executive recommends raising fee caps to the following amounts for Administrators: $200 for initial application, $400 for a license as a nursing care institution administrator, $600 for renewing an active biennial license, $200 for renewing an inactive biennial license, $200 for readministering the state examination, $100 for a duplicate License, $100 for a late renewal penalty, and $25 for certifying licensure status. The Executive recommends raising fee caps to the following amounts for Managers: $200 for initial application, $200 for examination, $200 for issuance of certificate, $300 for renewing an active license, $200 for renewing an inactive license, $150 for issuing a temporary license, $100 for a duplicate license, and $100 for a late renewal penalty. The Executive recommends granting the Board of Examiners of Nursing Care Institution Administrators and Assisted Living Facility Managers emergency authority to bypass rulemaking to allow immediate fee increases. 0.0 Nursing Care Institution Admin/ACHMC Fund 0.0 Performance Measures Number of complaint and application investigations conducted Number of new and existing licenses Average calendar days to renew a license Customer satisfaction (scale of 1-8) ¾ FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 144 182 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 190 200 3,045 3,430 3,128 3,485 2 4 4 4 7.8 7.0 7.0 7.0 4.2 4.2 In FY 2006, a survey of customer satisfaction was not conducted. Administration as percent of total cost 4.3 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 4.3 FY 2010 FY 2011 16.0 378.0 16.0 378.0 4.23% 4.23% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Nursing Care Institution Administrators/ACHMC Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Fee Increase 0.0 0.0 The Executive recommends raising fee caps to ensure the Board’s State Agency Budgets Nursing Care Ins. Admin. Examiners 107 OTA Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners Administrative Costs Mission: To ensure the publicʹs health, safety, and welfare by licensing and regulating individuals who provide occupational therapy services or athletic training. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage Description: The Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners is a regulatory board, which issues and renews bi‐annually approximately 2,247 licenses for the occupational therapy profession and 463 licenses for the athletic training profession. By law, the Board requires that each applicant meet minimum standards of education, experience, and competency. The Board also receives and investigates complaints, takes appropriate disciplinary action, and responds to inquires from consumers as to the license status of individual occupational therapy professionals and athletic trainers. FY 2010 FY 2011 4.0 4.0 245.0 245.0 1.63% 1.63% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Licensing and Regulation Athletic Trainers Licensing and Regulation 163.2 62.1 175.8 69.1 175.8 69.1 175.8 69.1 Agency Total 225.3 244.9 244.9 244.9 3.3 121.2 43.3 22.7 2.0 0.6 0.0 33.6 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 131.4 47.7 10.5 9.0 5.0 0.0 41.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 131.4 47.7 10.5 9.0 5.0 0.0 41.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.3 131.4 47.7 10.5 9.0 5.0 0.0 41.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 225.3 244.9 244.9 244.9 225.3 244.9 244.9 244.9 225.3 244.9 244.9 244.9 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund Occupational Therapy Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Number of occupational therapy complaints received Number of individuals licensed as occupational therapists Number of athletic training licenses issued Number of athletic training complaints received 108 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 13 15 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 17 17 2,247 2,328 2,416 2,515 67 70 75 80 3 5 5 6 Board of Occupational Therapy Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget DOA State Board of Dispensing Opticians Administrative Costs Mission: To protect the visual health of the citizens of Arizona by regulating and maintaining standards of practice in the field of opticianry. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage Description: The Board of Dispensing Opticians examines and licenses professionals to practice in the field of opticianry and licenses optical establishments. This Board is distinguished from the Board of Optometry, which regulates optometrists, whereas dispensing opticians fill orders for and fit persons with corrective eyewear. The Board of Dispensing Opticians accepts complaints against licensees, investigates allegations, and administratively adjudicates complaints. The Board serves 624 opticians and 263 optical establishments licensed to practice in the state, as well as all Arizona citizens who receive these professional services. FY 2010 FY 2011 6.5 6.5 130.0 130.0 5.00% 5.00% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 121.4 124.3 124.3 124.3 121.4 124.3 124.3 124.3 1.0 58.1 22.6 29.2 4.5 0.0 0.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 58.9 22.6 28.7 5.5 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 58.9 22.6 28.7 5.5 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 58.9 22.6 28.7 5.5 0.0 0.0 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 121.4 124.3 124.3 124.3 121.4 124.3 124.3 124.3 121.4 124.3 124.3 124.3 Fund Dispensing Opticians Board Agency Total Performance Measures Optician licenses issued FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 70 50 Establishment renewal applications processed 207 350 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 50 50 300 ¾ establishments are renewed June 30 so total carries over to next fiscal year Complaints about licensees received and investigated Number of days from receipt of complaint until completion 300 13 15 20 20 69 80 80 80 ¾ number of days is average of all complaints State Agency Budgets State Board of Dispensing Opticians 109 OBA State Board of Optometry Mission: To protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arizona citizens by regulating and achieving the highest standards in the optometry profession. Description: The Arizona State Board of Optometry examines, licenses, and regulates the profession of Optometric Doctors (O.D.). In addition, the Board registers out‐of‐state replacement contact lens dispensers. The Board investigates complaints alleging violations of the Optometric Practice Act and takes administrative regulatory action when required. Currently there are approximately 988 professionals licensed to practice in the State. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 187.7 202.2 202.2 202.2 187.7 202.2 202.2 202.2 2.0 104.0 36.5 27.6 0.6 0.8 0.0 18.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 97.6 33.7 37.9 0.5 8.0 0.0 24.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 97.6 33.7 37.9 0.5 8.0 0.0 24.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 97.6 33.7 37.9 0.5 8.0 0.0 24.3 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 187.7 202.2 202.2 202.2 Board of Optometry Fund 187.7 202.2 202.2 202.2 Agency Total 187.7 202.2 202.2 202.2 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 988 1,000 Active licensees FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 1,000 1,000 Total number of complaints received 57 55 50 50 Total number of disciplinary actions 0 5 3 3 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 8.0 8.0 202.0 202.0 3.96% 3.96% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 110 State Board of Optometry FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget OSA FY 2010 Arizona Board of Osteopathic Examiners Mission: To protect the public health and safety of people in the State of Arizona through the regulation of physicians licensed to practice osteopathic medicine and surgery in the State. Description: The Board of Osteopathic Examiners licenses and regulates osteopathic physicians in the State of Arizona, which is distinguished from traditional medicine in that it focuses on preventive care with a special emphasis on the musculo‐skeletal system. The system of hands‐on techniques helps alleviate pain, restores motion, supports the body’s natural functions and influences the body’s structure to help it function more efficiently. There are approximately 2,200 licensed osteopathic doctors in Arizona. The Board is comprised of five doctors and two members of the public, which are all appointed by the Governor to five‐year terms. The Board is responsible for the licensure and regulation of members of the Osteopathic medical community, the enforcement of standards of practice, and the review and adjudication of complaints. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 698.4 698.7 1,110.6 698.7 698.4 698.7 1,110.6 698.7 6.7 352.3 107.6 113.7 1.0 2.6 0.0 101.1 12.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.9 6.7 352.2 107.6 78.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 100.9 54.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 6.7 543.0 144.7 141.8 1.6 4.0 0.0 190.0 84.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 6.7 352.2 107.6 78.5 1.0 3.0 0.0 100.9 54.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.5 698.4 698.7 1,110.6 698.7 0.0 698.4 0.0 698.7 411.9 698.7 0.0 698.7 698.4 698.7 1,110.6 698.7 FY 2011 recommends $411,900 from the General Fund to provide stability for the Boardʹs fund at the beginning of the fiscal year. Without the additional support from the General Fund, the Board will not have sufficient funds to operate. 411.9 General Fund 0.0 Performance Measures Administration as percent of total cost FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 0 10 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 10 15 Customer satisfaction rating (1-8) 7.1 7.2 7.3 Average days to issue new license 51 45 43 40 2,262 2,390 2,350 2,432 Number of new and existing licenses 7.3 Complaints investigated 191 225 225 225 Average calendar days to resolve a complaint 360 225 200 180 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 118.0 1,199.0 118.0 786.0 9.84% 15.01% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Osteopathic Examiners Board Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues General Fund Backfill 411.9 0.0 Laws 2008, Chapter 285, included a $541,100 transfer from the Boardʹs fund to the General Fund, which leaves the Fund with cash flow issues at the beginning of FY 2010. The Executive State Agency Budgets Arizona Board of Osteopathic Examiners 111 PRA State Parks Board Mission: To manage and conserve Arizonaʹs natural, cultural, and recreational resources for the benefit of the people, both in our parks and through our partners. Description: Under the direction of the Arizona State Parks Board, the agency develops and manages thirty State parks and natural areas and provides safe and enjoyable facilities and programs for over two million visitors annually. The Board also, upon recommendation of several advisory committees, provides approximately $40 million in financial incentives annually to government and nongovernment entities through eight different grant programs. Through the State Historic Preservation Office, the Agency preserves Arizonaʹs prehistoric and historic resources. The Agency also coordinates two Recreational Trails programs, one for motorized and one for non‐motorized trail activities. The Agency coordinates statewide resource planning, public involvement and educational opportunities through partnerships for public purposes. State Parks is comprised of the Directorʹs Office and three divisions: Parks, Partnerships, and Administration. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Park Development and Operation Partnerships and Grants Administration Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 12,254.8 12,684.0 12,748.7 12,748.7 22,755.0 2,725.0 21,656.4 3,022.5 21,656.4 3,022.5 21,656.4 3,022.5 37,734.8 37,362.9 37,427.6 37,427.6 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Arizona Trail 125.0 125.0 125.0 125.0 SLI Growing Smarter 20,000.0 20,000.0 20,000.0 20,000.0 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Loss of City and Private Participation 64.7 64.7 To ensure the protection of critically endangered environmental areas, the Executive recommends $64,700 in additional expenditure authority from the State Park Enhancement Fund for the Sonoita Creek Natural Area. 249.3 8,970.0 4,258.4 6.2 115.2 0.0 1,092.7 2,710.4 85.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20,125.0 249.3 9,022.8 4,270.3 6.2 115.2 0.0 1,092.7 2,710.4 85.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20,125.0 249.3 9,022.8 4,270.3 6.2 115.2 0.0 1,092.7 2,710.4 85.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20,125.0 37,734.8 37,362.9 37,427.6 37,427.6 27,784.5 347.5 28,463.2 548.0 28,463.2 548.0 28,463.2 548.0 0.5 2,274.3 7,328.0 0.0 1,092.7 7,259.0 0.0 1,092.7 7,323.7 0.0 1,092.7 7,323.7 37,734.8 37,362.9 37,427.6 37,427.6 64.7 State Parks Enhancement Fund 64.7 Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 17.9 15 Percentage of employee turnover Annual park attendance (in thousands) Percent of park visitors that are satisfied Number of new acres of open space and parkland space purchased by State Parks or facilitated through its grant programs Average cost per state park visitor (in dollars) Administrative Costs Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 15 15 2,348.3 2,400.0 2,450 2,500 97 95 95 95 1,815 2,000 2,000 2,000 0.98 1.20 1.20 1.20 Administrative Costs Agency Request 249.3 8,277.4 3,983.1 75.1 104.2 0.0 2,274.3 2,745.5 149.7 0.5 0.0 0.0 20,125.0 FY 2011 FY 2010 FY 2011 3,453.1 3,453.1 110,444.0 110,444.0 3.13% 3.13% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund General Fund Reservation Surcharge Revolving Fund Capital Outlay Stabilization Boating Safety Fund State Parks Enhancement Agency Total 112 State Parks Board FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget PBA Performance Measures Personnel Board Mission: To provide an efficient and impartial hearing process while carrying out its statutory mandate to hear and review disciplinary appeals and whistleblower complaints filed by state employees, former state employees, and other individuals referenced in statute. Description: The Personnel Board is responsible for hearing and reviewing, via an administrative hearing process, appeals filed by state employees who have been dismissed from state service, suspended for more than 40 working hours, or demoted resulting from disciplinary action. The Board also hears and reviews complaints filed under the whistleblower statute. Under the direction of the presiding hearing officer, the proceedings are conducted on an informal basis through the taking of direct testimony, the cross examination of witnesses, and the admission of evidence. A record of the proceedings is taken and made available, upon request, to hearing officers, board members, and parties to the appeal. The hearing officer determines the facts based on the evidence presented and makes a recommendation regarding discipline to the Board. Board members are subsequently provided with case information so they may determine proper discipline. Number of appeals/complaints filed Average days from receipt of an appeal/complaint until the board issues a final order Average cost of an appeal/complaint (dollars) Percent of customers rating overall hearing process as good to excellent FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 76 84 113 115 115 115 1,216 1,550 1,625 1,690 90 90 90 90 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 84 84 FY 2010 FY 2011 30.3 30.3 422.0 430.0 7.05% 7.18% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Appeals/Complaints Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 349.0 372.4 372.4 372.4 349.0 372.4 372.4 372.4 3.0 103.0 41.0 153.7 0.6 0.0 0.0 43.3 7.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 122.2 42.1 155.4 2.2 0.0 0.0 49.7 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 122.2 42.1 155.4 2.2 0.0 0.0 49.7 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 122.2 42.1 155.4 2.2 0.0 0.0 49.7 0.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 349.0 372.4 372.4 372.4 349.0 372.4 372.4 372.4 349.0 372.4 372.4 372.4 Fund General Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Personnel Board 113 SBA Performance Measures Office of Pest Management Mission: To advocate and promote, through education, training and enforcement, the safe application of pest control technologies, which will result in the maximization of the health and safety of the residents of Arizona, and the protection of their property and the environment. Description: The Office of Pest Management (OPM) licenses and regulates pest control companies, qualifying parties, and applicators; provides education and training to applicants and licensees; and provides education and information to the public regarding pest control activities in non‐agricultural settings. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,518.0 2,774.3 2,645.3 2,645.3 2,518.0 2,774.3 2,645.3 2,645.3 38.0 1,378.5 568.4 90.2 128.2 1.2 0.0 290.0 36.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 25.5 34.0 1,446.5 618.4 178.5 106.1 10.0 0.0 351.2 55.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 33.0 1,374.5 595.9 144.0 106.1 10.0 0.0 351.2 55.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 33.0 1,374.5 595.9 144.0 106.1 10.0 0.0 351.2 55.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.0 2,518.0 2,774.3 2,645.3 2,645.3 2,518.0 2,774.3 2,645.3 2,645.3 2,518.0 2,774.3 2,645.3 2,645.3 Total inspections conducted (use and non-use). Average calendar days from receipt of completed application to ruling on application for Applicator testing. Total of all licenses issued. Total consumer and agency generated complaints. Average calendar days from receipt of complaint to resolution FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 5,485 5,000 20 20 20 20 9,864 10,300 10,300 10,300 33 40 40 40 216 220 220 220 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 5,000 5,000 FY 2010 FY 2011 172.2 2,751.0 172.2 2,644.0 6.26% 6.51% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Structural Pest Control Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Appropriation Reduction (129.0) (129.0) The Executive recommends a decrease of ($129,000) and 1.0 FTE Executive Consultant position to align the agencyʹs expenditures with anticipated revenues. Structural Pest Control Fund 114 (129.0) (129.0) Office of Pest Management FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget PMA Performance Measures Arizona State Board of Pharmacy Mission: To protect the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Arizona by regulating the practice of pharmacy and the distribution, sale and storage of prescription medications and devices and non‐ prescription medications. Description: The Board of Pharmacy has four primary functions. The first is to issue licenses to pharmacists, pharmacy interns and pharmacy technicians. Additionally, it is responsible for issuing permits to pharmacies, manufacturers, wholesalers and distributors. The Board also conducts compliance inspections of permitted facilities, and investigates complaints and adjudicates violations of applicable state and federal laws and rules. Lastly, the agency promulgates and reviews state rules and regulations in regard to the industry. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,664.7 1,920.9 1,920.9 1,920.9 2,664.7 1,920.9 1,920.9 1,920.9 14.0 1,019.8 307.9 118.7 49.7 4.4 542.6 220.7 1.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 399.0 14.0 1,053.3 307.6 152.0 10.0 0.0 131.5 266.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 1,053.3 307.6 152.0 10.0 0.0 131.5 266.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 1,053.3 307.6 152.0 10.0 0.0 131.5 266.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,664.7 1,920.9 1,920.9 1,920.9 2,664.7 1,920.9 1,920.9 1,920.9 2,664.7 1,920.9 1,920.9 1,920.9 Total number of complaints received Total number of inspections conducted Total number licenses/renewals issued ¾ FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 163 175 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 190 200 2,866 2,907 2,962 3,049 17,122 19,072 21,059 23,009 Total number licenses/renewals issued in FY Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 100.0 2,099.0 100.0 2,099.0 4.76% 4.76% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a modified lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Pharmacy Board Agency Total FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 Pharmacy Fund Adjustment 300.0 Laws 2008, Chapter 285, included a $549,700 transfer from the Boardʹs fund to the General Fund, which has left the Board with insufficient cash flow to meet its FY 2009 appropriation. The Executive recommends a transfer of $300,000 from the General Fund to allow the Pharmacy Fund to remain solvent through FY 2009. General Fund State Agency Budgets 300.0 Arizona State Board of Pharmacy 115 PTA Performance Measures Board of Physical Therapy Examiners Mission: To process applications for licensure as a physical therapist and certification as a physical therapist assistant, and to enforce the statutory provisions of the Arizona Physical Therapy Practice Act for purposes of protecting the health, safety and well‐being of the public from the incompetent, unethical and/or illegal practice of physical therapy. Description: The State Board of Physical Therapy licenses qualified physical therapists and certifies qualified physical therapist assistants; investigates and adjudicates complaints; assesses continuing competence; and enforces the standards of practice for the physical therapy profession. The Board regulates approximately 4,000 professionals licensed and certified to practice in the State. The Board serves all citizens of and visitors to the state who receive physical therapy care by an Arizona licensed physical therapist or a certified physical therapist assistant. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 466.8 360.2 360.2 360.2 466.8 360.2 360.2 360.2 3.6 184.5 47.4 36.3 6.0 2.2 0.0 56.5 29.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 104.5 3.6 188.3 47.7 48.9 7.6 0.9 0.0 59.3 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.6 188.3 47.7 48.9 7.6 0.9 0.0 59.3 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 3.6 188.3 47.7 48.9 7.6 0.9 0.0 59.3 4.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 466.8 360.2 360.2 360.2 466.8 360.2 360.2 360.2 466.8 360.2 360.2 360.2 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 11 3,600 Number of licenses/certificates renewed FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 25 3700 ¾ FY 2005 estimate reflects renewals processed from July 1 through August 31, which represents the majority of renewals. Total number of complaints received ¾ 47 60 65 70 303 310 310 310 Total number of complaints received. Number of new licenses or certificates issued ¾ Number of new licenses and certificates issued Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 29.8 360.0 29.8 360.0 8.28% 8.28% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Physical Therapy Fund Agency Total 116 Board of Physical Therapy Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget PIA Arizona Pioneersʹ Home FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 0.0 Mission: To provide long‐term health care services to Arizona pioneers and disabled miners who meet statutory admission criteria. Executive Issues Description: The Arizona Pioneersʹ Home was established in 1909 by the Territorial government of Arizona as a home for the aged and infirm to repay the faithful and longtime Arizona residents who helped pioneer and build the state. It opened its doors in 1911. In 1929, the scope of the home was broadened to also be Arizonaʹs hospital for disabled miners. The Arizona Pioneersʹ Home is a continuing care retirement home presently serving 120 Arizona pioneers and disabled miners. The Pioneersʹ Home employees provide direct nursing care, food service, activities, social services, housekeeping, laundry, maintenance, business and administrative services and support to the residents, and strive to meet state and federal nursing facility standards through modeling best practices. The Home is surveyed each year by the Arizona Department of Health Serviceʹs Office of Long Term Care. In recent years, the Pioneers’ Home has been over‐appropriated for Personal Services and under‐appropriated for Employee Related Expenses (ERE). As the Home has a modified lump‐sum budget, it has had to obtain JLBC permission to move these monies in FY 2007 and FY 2008. Accordingly, the Executive recommends a base modification in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to realign the budget, with no net increase. This recommended base modification includes an increase of $414,200 in appropriation to ERE to align the Home’s appropriation with anticipated expenditures and an increase of $2,800 in Food due to an expected annual census increase of four residents per year. A reduction of ($308,600) from the Pioneers’ Home State Charitable Earning Fund from Personal Services partially offsets these increases. Additionally, the Executive recommends a reduction of ($18,000) from the Prescription Drug SLI and a reduction of ($90,400) from the Miners’ Hospital Fund to pay for the rest of the recommended ERE and Food increases. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Arizona Pioneers' Home Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 6,278.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 6,278.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 115.8 3,442.4 1,801.8 121.6 24.5 0.0 192.7 0.0 682.1 13.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.8 3,883.6 1,494.8 131.7 25.0 0.0 202.2 0.0 912.8 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.8 3,575.0 1,909.0 130.0 25.0 0.0 205.0 0.0 806.1 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 115.8 3,575.0 1,909.0 130.0 25.0 0.0 205.0 0.0 806.1 25.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Agency Total General Fund Pioneersʹ Home State Charitable Earnings Fund Pioneersʹ Home Minersʹ Hospital Fund 6,278.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 Fund General Fund Pioneers' Home State Charitable Earnings Pioneers' Home Miners' Hospital Budget Realignment/RN‐LPN Wage Standardization 1,123.9 3,483.7 24.0 3,663.5 24.0 3,753.9 24.0 3,753.9 1,670.5 2,987.6 2,897.2 2,897.2 6,278.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 6,675.1 0.0 0.0 90.4 90.4 (90.4) (90.4) Performance Measures Residents rating of good or excellent (percent) Average census FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 97 98 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 98 98 123 127 130 Number of citations from inspections 2 3 3 3 Monthly cost per resident (in dollars) 4,196 4,380 4,336 4,175 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 135 FY 2010 365.6 FY 2011 365.6 6,764.0 6,764.0 5.41% 5.41% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a modified lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Prescription Drugs 190.9 258.0 240.0 240.0 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 State Agency Budgets FY 2011 Arizona Pioneersʹ Home 117 POA State Board of Podiatry Examiners Administrative Costs Mission: To protect the health, safety, and welfare of the citizens of Arizona by regulating and maintaining standards of practice in the field of podiatric medicine. Description: The Board licenses and regulates doctors of podiatric medicine, which specialize in the diagnosis and treatment of the foot, ankle, and lower leg. The Board evaluates the professional competency of podiatrists seeking to be licensed in the State of Arizona. Further, the Board promotes continued competency and fitness by investigating complaints made against practitioners, holding hearings, monitoring the activities of its licensees, and enforcing the standards of practice for the podiatric profession as set forth by law. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 6.6 6.6 144.0 144.0 4.58% 4.58% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 108.3 143.6 143.6 143.6 108.3 143.6 143.6 143.6 1.0 49.8 10.8 37.1 0.6 0.0 0.0 9.8 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 64.1 23.4 11.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 41.5 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 64.1 23.4 11.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 41.5 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 64.1 23.4 11.5 1.0 0.0 0.0 41.5 2.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 108.3 143.6 143.6 143.6 Podiatry Examiners Board 108.3 143.6 143.6 143.6 Agency Total 108.3 143.6 143.6 143.6 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund Performance Measures Number of complaints received Number of investigations concluded Number of licensees 118 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 55 60 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 55 50 48 50 50 50 352 365 370 370 State Board of Podiatry Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget PEA Commission for Postsecondary Education Mission: To expand access and increase success in postsecondary education for Arizona citizens. Description: The Arizona Commission for Postsecondary Education is comprised of 16 Commissioners representing all sectors of postsecondary education including public universities, private colleges, proprietary degree‐granting institutions, independent colleges, career schools, and public community colleges. In addition, K‐12, charter schools, and the general public are represented. The Commission provides a forum for all sectors of higher education to dialogue, partner, and problem solve issues of mutual interest. Administrative responsibilities of the ACPE include: the Arizona Family College Savings Program, Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership, Private Postsecondary Student Financial Assistance Program PFAP, Postsecondary Education Grant Program, and grant repayment programs. In addition, the Commission provides information to students and families to plan for, transition into, and succeed in postsecondary education through a variety of educational programs and publications. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Postsecondary Commission Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 6,411.4 8,230.1 7,830.1 7,830.1 6,411.4 8,230.1 7,830.1 7,830.1 7.0 147.5 79.0 199.3 2.0 3.4 3,489.5 79.6 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,406.5 7.0 305.6 90.4 309.0 3.3 5.6 4,269.5 185.1 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,056.6 5.0 301.7 89.3 214.8 3.0 5.6 4,269.5 184.6 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,756.6 5.0 301.7 89.3 214.8 3.0 5.6 4,269.5 184.6 5.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2,756.6 6,411.4 8,230.1 7,830.1 7,830.1 Fund General Fund Postsecondary Education Fund Agency Total 3,725.3 2,686.1 6,411.4 4,377.4 3,852.7 8,230.1 3,977.4 3,852.7 7,830.1 3,977.4 3,852.7 7,830.1 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Family College Savings 111.5 152.6 152.6 152.6 Program SLI Minority Education 13.6 100.3 100.3 100.3 Policy Analysis Center State Agency Budgets SLI College and Career Guide SLI College Goal Sunday (Twelve Plus Partnership) SLI PPE Financial Assistance Program (PFAP) SLI Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership (LEAP) SLI Postsecondary Education Grant Program SLI Case Managers 1.7 21.2 21.2 21.2 102.5 130.8 130.8 130.8 800.0 400.0 400.0 400.0 3,486.5 4,264.5 4,264.5 4,264.5 1,605.2 2,656.6 2,356.6 2,356.6 99.3 100.0 0.0 0.0 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues One‐Time Adjustment (300.0) (300.0) The Executive recommends a decrease of ($300,000) for FY 2010 and FY 2011. The Commission received appropriations of $300,000 for both FY 2008 and FY 2009 for a one‐time IT database project. (300.0) General Fund (300.0) Eliminate Case Managers (100.0) (100.0) The Executive recommends removing funding for new and unfilled case manager positions for a total savings of ($100,000). (100.0) General Fund (100.0) Performance Measures Number of LEAP student awardees Percent of good or excellent service via evaluation surveys Number of Arizona Education Loan Program student borrowers Number of Postsecondary Education Financial Assistance Program student awards Number of Arizona Family College Savings Program accounts Number of Arizona College & Career Guides distributed Attendees at College Goal Sunday FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 4,823 3700 91 91 90 90 196,944 236,727 286,168 0 50 120 120 120 46,999 50,000 53,000 56,000 0 14,000 14,000 14,000 3,421 2,800 2,800 2,800 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 3700 3700 FY 2010 FY 2011 489.8 14,608.0 489.9 14,608.0 3.35% 3.35% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program with special line items. Commission for Postsecondary Education 119 Performance Measures PVA State Board for Private Postsecondary Education Mission: To protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arizona citizens by regulating private postsecondary educational institutions and providing services to their students. Description: The Board licenses and regulates approximately 192 private postsecondary educational institutions, serving approximately 343,800 students annually. The Board acts on license applications, determines compliance, investigates complaints and violations, and takes disciplinary action. The Board also administers the Student Tuition Recovery Fund, which provides financial restitution to students injured by private postsecondary institutional closures and provides students access to their educational records. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Average number of calendar days to pay claims Customer Satisfaction Survey (scale of 1-8) Number of non-student complaints investigated Total number of institutions licensed Total number of renewal licenses approved Number of annual inspections conducted Number of students enrolled Number of annual student complaints investigated FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 28 60 7.9 7.8 7.9 7.9 10 20 20 20 192 200 210 220 306 314 324 334 44 35 35 35 343,779 350,000 355,000 360,000 24 20 20 20 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 60 60 FY 2010 FY 2011 20.3 680.0 20.3 680.0 2.99% 2.99% 304.4 334.7 334.7 334.7 Administrative Cost Percentage 304.4 334.7 334.7 334.7 3.5 169.1 61.7 16.9 0.9 0.9 0.0 48.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.1 3.5 189.6 67.3 27.2 2.0 0.0 0.0 46.3 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 (3.5) 3.5 189.6 67.3 27.2 2.0 0.0 0.0 46.3 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 (3.5) 3.5 189.6 67.3 27.2 2.0 0.0 0.0 46.3 5.8 0.0 0.0 0.0 (3.5) The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. 304.4 334.7 334.7 334.7 304.4 334.7 334.7 334.7 304.4 334.7 334.7 334.7 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Private Postsecondary Education Agency Total 120 State Board for Private Postsecondary Education FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget SYA Performance Measures State Board of Psychologist Examiners Mission: To protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arizona citizens by regulating the psychology profession. Number of licensees (active/inactive) Description: The State Board of Psychologist Examiners licenses and regulates professionals to practice in the field of psychology. The Board accepts complaints against licensees, investigates allegations, and administratively adjudicates complaints. The Board serves psychologists licensed to practice in the State, as well as all Arizona citizens who receive these professional services. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 367.6 407.9 870.9 407.9 367.6 407.9 870.9 407.9 4.0 226.4 64.6 15.9 7.4 4.9 0.0 47.9 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 226.4 64.6 24.9 8.3 5.0 0.0 65.5 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 4.0 226.4 64.6 24.9 8.3 5.0 0.0 65.5 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 467.6 4.0 226.4 64.6 24.9 8.3 5.0 0.0 65.5 8.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.6 367.6 407.9 870.9 407.9 0.0 367.6 0.0 407.9 463.0 407.9 0.0 407.9 367.6 407.9 870.9 407.9 ¾ Assuming a 2% attrition rate each year Number of investigations Customer satisfaction rating (scale 1-8) FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 1,831 1,805 49 49 49 49 7.64 7.5 7.5 7.5 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 1,805 1,805 FY 2010 FY 2011 37.1 484.0 37.1 460.0 7.67% 8.07% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Psychologist Examiners Board Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Psychology Fund Adjustment 463.0 0.0 Laws 2008, Chapter 285, included a $563,000 transfer from the Boardʹs Fund to the General Fund. The transfer leaves the Board with insufficient funds to cover its FY 2010 expenditures. The Executive recommends a transfer of $463,000 from the General Fund to allow the Psychology Fund to remain solvent through FY 2010. General Fund State Agency Budgets 463.0 0.0 State Board of Psychologist Examiners 121 PSA Department of Public Safety Mission: To protect human life and property by enforcing state laws, deterring criminal activity, assuring highway and public safety, and providing vital scientific, technical, and operational support to other criminal justice agencies. Description: The Arizona Department of Public Safety enforces state law with primary responsibility in the areas of traffic safety, criminal interdiction, narcotics, organized crime, auto theft, and specific regulatory functions. Services include homeland security, criminal intelligence, scientific analysis, aviation support, emergency first care, criminal information systems, training, and statewide communications. Operational and technical assistance is provided to local and state agencies and other components of the criminal justice community. The department also promotes and enhances the quality of public safety through cooperative enforcement and community awareness programs. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Agency Support Highway Patrol Criminal Investigations Criminal Justice Support Public Safety Communications Commission Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 29,672.1 101,614.3 43,143.2 47,535.9 0.0 31,406.4 127,102.0 58,030.5 40,372.7 0.0 31,406.4 125,572.6 55,246.9 39,521.2 (358.5) 31,406.4 127,954.9 55,246.9 43,064.7 (358.5) 221,965.5 256,911.6 251,388.6 257,314.4 2,095.8 116,263.9 52,417.4 1,605.2 853.6 290.3 1,924.5 28,598.7 15,775.6 1.0 0.0 0.0 4,235.3 2,121.8 115,413.8 60,118.8 22,368.9 1,122.1 237.4 9,896.4 29,263.8 17,119.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,370.5 2,133.8 113,359.2 59,389.8 21,616.5 1,122.1 237.4 9,896.4 28,053.8 16,342.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,370.5 2,133.8 115,044.4 60,086.9 21,616.5 1,122.1 237.4 9,896.4 31,597.3 16,342.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,370.5 221,965.5 256,911.6 251,388.6 257,314.4 118,648.7 51,770.0 19,917.1 63,459.7 41,050.5 22,223.3 63,101.2 41,050.5 18,662.7 65,483.5 41,050.5 18,662.7 1,557.2 1,615.6 1,615.6 1,615.6 5,857.8 5,847.9 5,847.9 5,847.9 122 Agency Total 2,714.4 3,293.4 3,421.9 3,481.4 4,557.7 4,604.6 3,624.6 7,108.6 0.0 3,398.3 9,955.8 205.0 3,539.5 84,949.5 205.0 3,539.5 84,949.5 205.0 3,539.5 84,949.5 3,275.7 3,292.1 3,292.1 3,292.1 312.8 0.0 296.2 22,534.3 296.2 21,781.9 296.2 21,781.9 221,965.5 256,911.6 251,388.6 257,314.4 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI GITEM 17,340.7 32,306.2 32,306.2 32,306.2 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 0.0 0.0 Executive Issues FTE Authority for Photo Enforcement Program The Executive recommendation includes 12.0 FTE positions for the Photo Enforcement program. Laws 2008, Chapter 286, established and appropriated funding for the program, and funding for the positions is already in the base. 0.0 Highway Photo Radar 0.0 End Helicopter Lease Purchase Fund General Fund State Highway Fund Arizona Highway Patrol Fund Safety Enforcement and Transportation Infrastructure Crime Laboratory Assessment Auto Fingerprint Identification DNA Identification System Fund Motorcycle Safety Fund Parity Compensation Fund Highway User Revenue Fund Criminal Justice Enhancement Fund Risk Management Fund Highway Photo Radar (777.0) (777.0) The Executive recommends a ($777,000) Highway Patrol Fund reduction to eliminate replacement helicopter lease‐purchase financing funding. DPS purchased a replacement helicopter using lease‐purchase financing at a cost of $777,000 per year over three years. The final payment was made in FY 2009. Arizona Highway Patrol Fund Annualize Photo Enforcement Vendor Payments (777.0) (777.0) (752.4) (752.4) Laws 2008, Chapter 286, appropriated $20.4 million to DPS for vendor payments at an estimated cost of $47.48 per paid citation. The actual contracted cost for vendor payments is $29.70 per paid citation. For FY 2010 and FY 2011, it is estimated there will be 660,234 paid citations at a cost of $29.70 per paid citation for a total of $19.6 million to be paid to the vendor. The Executive recommends a ($752,400) Photo Enforcement Fund reduction for payments to the vendor. Highway Photo Radar Department of Public Safety (752.4) (752.4) FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2010 FY 2011 Highway Patrol Fund Revenue Deficit (2,783.6) (2,783.6) Highway Patrol Fund expenditures have increased in recent years, while revenue has declined, forcing DPS to absorb increasing deficits. The problem has increased significantly over the past few years, due to declining revenues from the Insurance Premium Tax, the main source of Fund revenue. The Executive recommends a reduction of ($2.8 million) to the Highway Patrol Fund appropriation. Arizona Highway Patrol Fund (2,783.6) (2,783.6) Public Safety Communications Commission (358.5) (358.5) Laws 2004, Chapter 275, appropriated $3.0 million in non‐lapsing monies to DPS for the development and implementation of interoperability by the Public Safety Communications Commission. Laws 2008, Chapter 285, transferred $880,600 and operation of the Public Safety Communications Commission from DPS to GITA. The Executive recommends a ($358,500) General Fund reduction to transfer the remaining FY 2005 non‐lapsing monies to GITA for the Public Safety Communications Commission. General Fund Automated Fingerprint System Maintenance (358.5) (358.5) 128.5 188.0 In FY 2007, the Arizona Automated Fingerprint Identification System was upgraded and paid for with lease‐purchase financing over five years. The new system has been under warranty since it was purchased, which covered annual maintenance costs, but beginning in FY 2009 DPS must pay those costs. The Executive recommends $128,500 in FY 2010 and $188,000 in FY 2011 to pay the annual maintenance costs for the Automated Fingerprint Identification System. Auto Fingerprint Identification Fund 128.5 188.0 Sworn Salary Adjustments 0.0 1,274.0 In 2005, a $15.0 million multi‐year plan was adopted for officer salaries over the course of five years, at $3.0 million per year. FY 2009 was to be the final year of the plan. Laws 2008, Chapter 285, funded only part of the final $3.0 million in FY 2009, with intent language stating that the remaining amount would be funded in FY 2010. The Executive recommends a one‐year delay in funding for sworn salary adjustments and recommends $1.3 million in FY 2011 to complete the five‐year plan. General Fund State Agency Budgets 0.0 FY 2010 FY 2011 Officer Pay Plan 0.0 1,108.3 The Executive recommends $1.1 million in FY 2011 to fund the normal salary progression for 49 officer positions authorized in FY 2005 and FY 2007, which is a one‐year delay in funding. New officer salary progression is set up on a three‐step plan. The first step is the minimum pay level of $45,955. After three years, officers move to the second step, or mid‐point pay level, which is $55,169. The third step is the maximum level at $64,383. The pay plan will move 35 newly authorized officers in FY 2007 from the minimum to the mid‐point level in FY 2010 and 14 officers authorized in FY 2005 from the mid‐point to the maximum level in FY 2011. General Fund 0.0 1,108.3 DNA Testing (980.0) 2,504.0 The Executive recommends a one‐year delay of the appropriations from the Arizona DNA Identification System Fund for the expanded DNA testing program. To fund the operating costs for expanded DNA testing provisions, as well as the design and construction of an expanded crime lab in Phoenix, Laws 2007, Chapter 261, originally appropriated $2.0 million in FY 2008, $3.0 million in FY 2009, $3.5 million in FY 2010, $3.4 million in FY 2011 and $3.5 million in FY 2012 from the Arizona DNA Identification System Fund. Laws 2008, Chapter 285, reduced the FY 2009 appropriation by $2.0 million to delay the construction of the lab. DNA Identification System Fund (980.0) 2,504.0 FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 GIITEM Non‐Lapsing Date Correction 0.0 Laws 2008, Chapter 285, authorized $10.0 million from the General Fund in the GIITEM special line item for immigration enforcement grants and included language that the $10.0 million appropriation was exempt from A.R.S. 35‐190 relating to the lapsing of appropriations. However, the language included a lapsing date of June 30, 2009, which was a drafting error. The Executive recommends that the lapsing date be corrected to June 30, 2010. General Fund 0.0 1,274.0 Department of Public Safety 123 0.0 Photo Enforcement Statutory Correction Laws 2008, Chapter 286, established the photo enforcement program and included language that the Department of Transportation would not consider a photo enforcement violation for the purpose of determining whether a person’s driver license should be suspended or revoked. This conflicts with federal regulations which require all violations of those holding Commercial Driver’s Licenses to be reported and without a correction the State is subject to having federal highway dollars withheld. The Executive recommends amending the statutory language to authorize the reporting of violations for drivers holding commercial drivers licenses. Highway Photo Radar 0.0 Performance Measures Percent of Automated Fingerprint Id System (AFIS) reliability Percent of employees terminating employment (excludes nonDepartment of Public Safety task force members and retirements) Number of clandestine labs dismantled and distribution networks disrupted Percent of crime lab cases over 30 days old FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 99.6 98 5.2 5.0 5.0 5.0 27 30 30 30 4.7 4.0 4.0 4.0 289 304 294 275 3.96 4.32 4.27 4.23 ¾ 7 positions held vacant due to budget shortfalls. Fatal highway collisions on Department of Public Safety patrolled roads Percent of total Department of Public Safety investigated highway collisions related to alcohol Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 98 98 FY 2010 FY 2011 46,262.3 348,592.0 46,262.3 347,804.0 13.27% 13.30% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. 124 Department of Public Safety FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget RCA Performance Measures Arizona Department of Racing Mission: To regulate and supervise pari‐mutuel racing and wagering conducted in Arizona in order to protect racing participants and the wagering public. To regulate and supervise boxing events conducted in Arizona to protect all participants in these events. Description: The Department of Racing regulates the Arizona pari‐mutuel horse and greyhound racing industries. The Department oversees and supervises all commercial horse, greyhound and county fair racing meetings, including all live and simulcast racing; issues permits for all approved commercial horse, greyhound and county fair racing meetings; supervises operation of off‐track betting sites; conducts background checks and licenses all racing participants; collects state revenues generated by race meetings; promotes and encourages the breeding of horses and greyhounds in the state; promotes and encourages the adoption of retired racehorses and retired greyhounds; and enforces laws and rules related to racing and wagering to protect the industry participants and the public. The Department also regulates and supervises all boxing, kickboxing, tough man, unarmed combat, and mixed martial arts events in Arizona to ensure that all events under Boxing Commission jurisdiction held in the state are sanctioned by the Arizona State Boxing Commission and that all participants are duly licensed. Number of greyhound racing investigations conducted regarding compliance with rules Percent of greyhound racing licensees with disciplinary action Number of county fair racing investigations resulting in disciplinary action Number of horse racing investigations conducted regarding compliance with rules Number of boxing licenses issued Percent of total horse racing licensees with disciplinary action FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 1,210 800 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.0 61 65 65 60 2, 022 1,005 750 450 458 850 900 950 5.73 3.15 2.00 4.00 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 400 1,000 FY 2010 FY 2011 186.0 5,566.0 186.0 5,566.0 3.34% 3.34% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Commercial Racing County Fair Racing Boxing Commission Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 2,613.5 466.1 97.0 2,580.1 460.1 96.7 2,580.1 460.1 96.7 2,580.1 460.1 96.7 3,176.6 3,136.9 3,136.9 3,136.9 46.5 1,838.0 583.3 207.2 161.0 3.2 0.0 331.9 52.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.5 1,841.2 491.9 274.9 116.2 4.0 0.0 392.7 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.5 1,841.2 491.9 274.9 116.2 4.0 0.0 392.7 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 46.5 1,841.2 491.9 274.9 116.2 4.0 0.0 392.7 16.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,176.6 3,136.9 3,136.9 3,136.9 2,673.7 62.7 440.2 2,623.3 66.8 446.8 2,623.3 66.8 446.8 2,623.3 66.8 446.8 3,176.6 3,136.9 3,136.9 3,136.9 Fund General Fund Racing Administration Fund County Fair Racing Agency Total State Agency Budgets Arizona Department of Racing 125 AEA FY 2010 Radiation Regulatory Agency Mission: To protect the health and safety of Arizonans from unnecessary radiation exposure from all natural and man‐made sources. Description: The Arizona Radiation Regulatory Agency provides protection from unnecessary radiation exposure through inspection of radiation sources and their uses, effective response to radiological incidents, environmental sampling, and the certification of those using nuclear medicine technology and those operating X‐ray equipment. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Radioactive Materials/NonIonizing Radiation X-Ray Compliance Emergency Response Radiation Measurement Laboratory Medical Radiation Technology Board FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 506.3 636.5 616.5 616.5 429.8 169.0 443.5 531.8 164.7 442.3 531.8 164.7 442.3 531.8 164.7 442.3 288.0 288.8 288.8 288.8 1,836.6 2,064.1 2,044.1 2,044.1 27.5 1,194.5 434.7 8.6 15.5 6.6 0.0 149.4 20.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 6.8 30.5 1,289.6 473.3 8.6 27.8 11.3 0.0 226.2 27.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.5 1,289.6 473.3 8.6 27.8 11.3 0.0 208.2 25.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 30.5 1,289.6 473.3 8.6 27.8 11.3 0.0 208.2 25.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Agency Total 1,836.6 2,064.1 2,044.1 2,044.1 General Fund State Radiologic Technologist Certification 1,548.6 288.0 1,775.3 288.8 1,755.3 288.8 1,755.3 288.8 Agency Total 1,836.6 2,064.1 2,044.1 2,044.1 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out General Fund FY 2011 (20.0) (20.0) Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 155 160 Number of radioactive materials inspections FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 160 161 ¾ Estimates assume that budget request for additional staffing is approved. Number of environmental sample analyses Number of active medical radiologic technologist certificates Percent of x-ray tubes overdue for inspection 6,509 6,500 6,500 6,500 8,385 8,550 8,700 9,100 39.60 29.0 25.0 25.0 ¾ Staffing shortages will force the percentage overdue for inspection to increase. Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 408.8 FY 2011 408.8 3,087.0 3,082.0 13.24% 13.26% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues One‐time Equipment and Training Expenses (20.0) (20.0) The Executive recommends a decrease of ($20,000) in one‐time monies appropriated from the General Fund in FY 2009 for training and equipment expenses related to improving radioactive materials compliance. 126 Radiation Regulatory Agency FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget RPA Arizona Rangersʹ Pension Mission: To provide compensation for time spent as an Arizona Ranger. Description: The Arizona Rangersʹ Pension provides monthly benefits for the last surviving spouse of a retired Arizona Ranger. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. Arizona Rangers' Pensions 13.4 13.7 14.0 14.3 Agency Total 13.4 13.7 14.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 14.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.4 13.7 14.0 14.3 13.4 13.7 14.0 14.3 13.4 13.7 14.0 14.3 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund General Fund Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Inflation Adjustment 0.3 0.6 A.R.S. § 41‐951(B) requires that the Rangersʹ Pension receive an annual inflation adjustment based on the annual change in the gross domestic product (GDP) price deflator. A.R.S. § 41‐563 defines the GDP price deflator as the average of the four implicit price deflators for the GDP reported by the U.S. Department of Commerce for the four quarters of the calendar year. The Executive recommends an inflation increase of $300 in FY 2010 and $600 in FY 2011. General Fund 0.3 0.6 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. State Agency Budgets Arizona Rangersʹ Pension 127 REA Department of Real Estate Mission: To protect the public interest through licensure, regulation, and education of the real estate profession in the State of Arizona. Description: The Department regulates real estate licensees (including residential sales, brokers, companies, property managers, business brokers, and commercial brokers), private cemeteries, and membership camping licensees. The Department also regulates real estate educators and schools, monitoring pre‐licensing and continuing education courses to ensure the quality content of courses and the competence of instructors, as well as the quality and timeliness of materials being taught. The Department oversees the activities of licensees, investigates complaints against licensees and land developers, and participates in administrative hearings pertaining to their conduct. The Department regulates the sale of subdivided and certain unsubdivided lands, timeshares, condominiums, membership campgrounds, and cemeteries. The Department also administers two recovery fund programs‐‐one is available to persons who have sustained out‐of‐ pocket losses and have obtained an otherwise uncollectible money judgment against a licensee for conduct violating statutory duty; the other is available to persons who have sustained out‐of‐pocket losses and have obtained an otherwise uncollectible money judgment against a developer for an unfinished condominium project. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 4,365.5 4,236.5 4,276.5 4,276.5 4,365.5 4,236.5 4,276.5 4,276.5 72.4 2,486.5 992.2 65.3 31.8 2.2 0.0 630.0 154.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.9 74.4 2,534.8 1,037.4 94.6 30.0 0.0 0.0 539.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.4 2,568.3 1,043.9 94.6 30.0 0.0 0.0 539.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 74.4 2,568.3 1,043.9 94.6 30.0 0.0 0.0 539.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4,365.5 4,236.5 4,276.5 4,276.5 4,365.5 4,236.5 4,276.5 4,276.5 4,365.5 4,236.5 4,276.5 4,276.5 FY 2010 FY 2011 40.0 40.0 Restore Funding for Mission Critical Position The Executive recommends an increase of $40,000 from the General Fund to restore funding for one subdivision investigator. This would enable the Department to complete more investigations, providing better protection for real estate consumers while effectively offsetting the cost to the General Fund through collection of civil penalties. 40.0 General Fund 40.0 Performance Measures FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 96,508 97,000 Number of real estate licensees FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 98,000 99,000 ¾ Number reflects actual count of licensees. This includes individuals, brokers, and entities. Number of subdivision filings received ¾ Includes amendments Percent of department customer service surveys indicating good to excellent service Average days from receipt of application to issuance of real estate license Total real estate applications received Average calendar days from receipt of real estate or subdivision complaint to resolution Average number of calendar days to issue deficiency letter on subdivision applications received Total real estate or subdivision complaints investigated 1,172 1,200 1,200 1,200 99 99 99 99 1 1 1 1 87,332 80,000 20,000 20,000 224 180 180 180 31.8 40 40 40 1,391 1,500 1,500 1,500 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 607.6 FY 2011 607.6 4,758.0 4,797.0 12.77% 12.67% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues 128 Department of Real Estate FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget UOA Residential Utility Consumer Office Administrative Costs Mission: To obtain the lowest reasonable utility rates for residential consumers by advocating on their behalf in regulatory proceedings involving public service corporations, except member‐ owned nonprofit cooperative corporations, before the Corporation Commission. Description: The Residential Utility Consumer Office (RUCO) examines primarily rate cases presented to the Corporation Commission and applies accounting, legal and other criteria for determining in which cases to intervene. The technical and legal staff researches and analyzes these cases and, with the targeted use of specialized consultants, determines an appropriate position for residential ratepayers. RUCO then advocates that position before Commission proceedings. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 40.8 40.6 1,319.0 1,310.0 3.10% 3.09% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Ratepayer Representation Agency Total FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,141.5 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,141.5 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,302.0 12.0 742.5 225.5 17.4 1.3 5.8 0.0 144.4 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 745.6 230.5 147.4 8.6 7.0 0.0 162.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 745.6 230.5 147.4 8.6 7.0 0.0 162.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 745.6 230.5 147.4 8.6 7.0 0.0 162.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,141.5 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,141.5 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,141.5 1,302.0 1,302.0 1,302.0 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. Fund Residential Utility Consumer Office Revolving Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Professional Witnesses 16.7 145.0 145.0 145.0 Appropriation Performance Measures Number of cases analyzed FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 70 75 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 75 75 RUCO interventions in rate making 6 8 8 8 Customer satisfaction rating for residential utility customers (scale 1-8) 7 7 7 7 State Agency Budgets Residential Utility Consumer Office 129 RBA Board of Respiratory Care Examiners Administrative Costs Mission: To exercise state regulatory authority over respiratory care practitioners by granting licenses; maintaining public records for all practitioners within Arizona; and enforcing rules and statutes to ensure the public health, welfare, and safety. Description: Respiratory Care Practitioners work in therapeutic, surgical, and/or clinical settings to monitor respiration and lung health, as well as to diagnose and treat disorders. The Board of Respiratory Care Examiners regulates the practice of respiratory care in Arizona. The Board examines and licenses respiratory care practitioners based on minimum competency standards set by the Legislature. Additionally, the Board enforces state laws, rules, and regulations set forth to ensure public safety and investigates complaints filed against a member of the professional community. Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 1.0 1.0 289.0 286.0 0.35% 0.35% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 229.0 261.6 261.6 261.6 229.0 261.6 261.6 261.6 3.5 149.3 51.3 4.4 1.9 0.0 0.0 18.2 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 170.5 50.9 4.5 1.8 0.0 0.0 33.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 170.5 50.9 4.5 1.8 0.0 0.0 33.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.5 170.5 50.9 4.5 1.8 0.0 0.0 33.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Agency Total 229.0 261.6 261.6 261.6 Board of Respiratory Care Examiners 229.0 261.6 261.6 261.6 Agency Total 229.0 261.6 261.6 261.6 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Fund Performance Measures Total number of practitioners investigated Average days from receipt of complaint to resolution Total number of applications for permanent licenses 130 FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 97 100 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 105 110 120 150 155 160 1,843 1,843 1,900 1,900 Board of Respiratory Care Examiners FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget RTA FY 2010 Arizona State Retirement System Mission: To benefit our members, the Arizona State Retirement System (ASRS) will be a leading state benefit plan administrator in the areas of core member services, funded status, investment performance, and operational effectiveness, while keeping program benefits and associated costs relatively aligned and maintaining actuarial and fiscal integrity. Description: The Arizona State Retirement System provides pension, survivor, disability, health insurance, and educational services for most public sector employers in Arizona, including state universities and colleges, public school districts, local and county governments, and the State of Arizona. As of June 30, 2008, the ASRS had a market value of approximately $25.6 billion dollars and had a total membership of approximately 540,000 members (actively contributing, inactive, retired, and disabled members). Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Member Services Administration and Support Investment Management Information Technology Plan Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total 11,826.5 6,968.8 1,251.9 2,818.5 FY 2009 Approp. 12,906.0 7,014.4 1,307.6 2,819.0 FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 14,898.4 7,255.0 1,307.6 0.0 14,650.9 7,327.4 1,307.6 0.0 Agency Total Retirement System Appropriated Fund Budget Control and Development Specialist 339.3 417.1 0.0 72.4 For FY 2011, the recommendation includes $72,400 and 1.0 FTE position from the State Retirement System Administration Account for a budget control and development specialist. The agency has only one position to manage and monitor its budget. This limits the resources that are available to conduct research, manage project expenditures, monitor spending, and work with the divisions. Retirement System Appropriated Fund 0.0 72.4 Technology Enhancements 22,865.7 24,047.0 23,461.0 23,285.9 235.0 11,241.4 4,153.2 4,103.6 59.4 51.0 0.0 2,232.1 1,019.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.1 236.0 12,094.8 4,192.2 3,694.1 53.6 25.0 0.0 2,754.0 1,223.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 240.0 12,283.5 4,250.5 3,586.5 53.6 25.0 0.0 2,788.3 463.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 242.5 12,380.3 4,288.0 3,586.5 53.6 25.0 0.0 2,530.9 411.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 10.0 22,865.7 24,047.0 23,461.0 23,285.9 20,115.9 21,247.0 20,661.0 20,485.9 Fund Retirement System Appropriated LTD Trust Fund FY 2011 2011 from the State Retirement System Administration Account for the agencyʹs member services program. Additional part‐time positions would assist during times when service levels deteriorate due to insufficient staffing levels. Resources are required for review of pending requests. The agency also needs a position for accounting support. Another T‐1 line would increase bandwidth, allowing for more incoming and outgoing transactions without degradation of speed. Additional funding would also allow ASRS to locate lost members and cover increases for postage. 2,749.8 2,800.0 2,800.0 2,800.0 22,865.7 24,047.0 23,461.0 23,285.9 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 (787.7) (1,113.0) The recommendation reduces funding available for technology enhancements by ($787,700) in FY 2010 and ($1.1 million) in FY 2011 from the State Retirement System Administration Account. This is a scheduled reduction. The recommended funding completes the enhancements to the network environment and creates a more comprehensive, interoperable and adaptive IT framework. Retirement System Appropriated Fund (787.7) (1,113.0) Divestment and Administration Procedures (137.6) (137.6) During the 2008 legislative session, H.B. 2151 and S.B. 1489 included appropriations to the agency totaling $90,000 and 1.0 FTE position from the State Retirement System Administration Account. The Executive recommendation continues funding for these issues and moves those funds to the investment management program. H.B. 2151 requires divestment from businesses associated with Iran, and S.B. 1489 requires divestment from countries designated by the state department as state sponsors of terrorism. The recommendation also includes a reduction of ($137,600) from the State Retirement System Administration Account for one‐time costs related to administration procedures. Retirement System Appropriated Fund (137.6) (137.6) Executive Issues Member Services 339.3 417.1 The recommendation includes an increase of $339,300 and 4.0 FTE positions in FY 2010 and $417,100 and 5.5 FTE positions in FY State Agency Budgets Arizona State Retirement System 131 FY 2010 FY 2011 Information Technology Plan 0.0 0.0 In September 2008, the agencyʹs information technology plan was 100% complete. The Executive recommendation transfers these funds from the IT plan special line item to the operating budget. There is no net change in funding for this issue. 0.0 Retirement System Appropriated Fund 0.0 Performance Measures Percent of overall member satisfaction with the service purchase process (objective 90%) Percentage of overall member satisfaction with Telephone Service at the Arizona State Retirement System (objective 90%) Percentage of investment returns FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 87 90 Percentage of liability funded ¾ FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 90 90 95 90 90 90 -7.6 8.0 8.0 8.0 82.8 n/a n/a n/a Estimate provided by actuary on 8/19/08. Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 9,087.1 73,398.0 9,189.6 77,198.0 12.38% 11.90% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 132 Arizona State Retirement System FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget RVA FY 2010 Department of Revenue Mission: To administer tax laws fairly and efficiently for the people of Arizona. Description: Pursuant to Arizona Revised Statutes Title 42, the Department of Revenue (the Department) administers and enforces the collection of individual and corporate income, transaction privilege, withholding and luxury taxes. The Department oversees the fifteen county assessors in the administration of state property tax laws. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Service Processing Education and Compliance Agency Support Agency Total 15,459.5 8,560.0 28,973.3 29,753.9 FY 2009 Approp. 13,491.6 8,738.9 28,274.5 27,902.4 FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 13,491.6 8,738.9 28,274.5 28,024.8 13,491.6 8,738.9 28,274.5 28,024.8 82,746.7 78,407.4 78,529.8 78,529.8 1,164.0 40,976.5 15,911.7 8,529.5 370.6 315.0 0.0 14,608.1 887.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,148.0 1,164.0 43,374.8 16,285.5 5,281.7 435.3 413.5 0.0 11,320.0 1,293.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 1,164.0 43,374.8 16,285.5 5,281.7 435.3 413.5 0.0 11,442.4 1,293.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 1,164.0 43,374.8 16,285.5 5,281.7 435.3 413.5 0.0 11,442.4 1,293.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.1 Agency Total 82,746.7 78,407.4 78,529.8 78,529.8 General Fund Tobacco Tax and Health Care Fund DOR Unclaimed Property DOR Liability Setoff Fund Risk Management Fund 74,391.8 628.2 73,918.6 662.8 74,041.0 662.8 74,041.0 662.8 5,555.9 284.4 1,886.4 3,404.0 422.0 0.0 3,404.0 422.0 0.0 3,404.0 422.0 0.0 Agency Total 82,746.7 78,407.4 78,529.8 78,529.8 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Fund The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Attorney General Legal 121.5 123.3 123.3 123.3 Services Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 at the East Valley office. The Department has operated this field office for the last twenty years to provide services with easy access for individual and business taxpayers in Chandler, Gilbert, Mesa, Tempe and Queen Creek. 122.4 General Fund 122.4 Performance Measures Average annual turnover rate for employees FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 18.27 18.00 ¾ Level performance estimates are based on current year's rate. indicator. Customer satisfaction rating for Taxpayer Information and Assistance section (scale 1-5) 4.75 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 18.00 18.00 Turnover is an 4.70 4.65 4.60 ¾ It is anticipated that taxpayer calls and contacts will increase over the next few years but a growth in the workforce is not anticipated. Percent of accounts that collector contacts within 30 calendar days of that account being assigned a delinquent account 100 100 100 100 ¾ With BRITS automation, letters are sent to every taxpayer upon being assigned as a delinquent account. Percentage of delinquent accounts collected ¾ The measure includes TPT collections only. Average calendar days to refund total Individual Income tax checks (paper warrants and electronic deposits) 60.14 60.00 60.00 65.00 7.59 8.00 8.00 8.00 ¾ We plan on maintaining future service levels with no anticipated increase in staff. Percent of non-audit revenue to total revenue 98.00 97.90 97.80 97.70 ¾ The FY08 actual result is calculated using a preliminary gross revenue number which was not available at the time of this report. Percent of written inquiries answered within 30 calendar days in Taxpayer Information and Assistance section 54 55 55 55 ¾ Level performance estimates are based on assumptions of similar workforce with future increased volume of inquiries. Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 4,298.1 4,298.1 179,844.0 179,844.0 2.39% 2.39% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. FY 2011 Executive Issues East Valley Office Rental Costs 122.4 122.4 The recommendation includes an increase of $122,400 to cover contractual rent cost increases required in the Departmentʹs lease State Agency Budgets Department of Revenue 133 SFA School Facilities Board Executive Recommendations Mission: To provide financial and technical assistance to help ensure that school districts maintain buildings and equipment at minimum adequacy standards so that students can achieve academic success. FY 2010 Executive Issues 0.0 New School Construction Description: The School Facilities Board was created by Laws 1998, 5th Special Session, Chapter 1 through legislation commonly known as Students First. The School Facilities Board consists of nine governor‐appointed voting members and the Superintendent of Public Instruction who serves as a non‐voting member. The Board is charged with administration of three capital programs: (a) New School Facilities, (b) Building Renewal, and (c) Emergency Deficiencies Corrections. The Executive recommends $200.0 million in lease‐to‐own financing for new school construction for FY 2010. The FY 2009 budget included a one‐year moratorium on new school construction, preventing the Board from awarding funds for the design and construction of new schools. The FY 2010 recommendation provides funding for projects already in construction and new space to be awarded in FY 2010. In order to effectively evaluate the Stateʹs school capital needs, the Board maintains a facilities database consisting of information reported by each school district that aids the Board in determining the funding level for building renewal and the construction of new facilities. Through periodic inspections, the Board is mandated to ensure compliance with building adequacy standards and routine preventative maintenance guidelines with respect to the new construction of buildings and maintenance of existing buildings. The Board also administers an Emergency Deficiencies program in the event that a school district has a serious need for materials, services, construction, or expenses in excess of the districtʹs adopted budget that seriously threatens the functioning of the school district, the preservation or protection of property or public health, safety, and welfare. New school construction was funded with lease‐to‐own financing in FYs 2003, 2004 and 2005, resulting in an annual debt service payment. The FY 2009 budget included authority to fund new school construction with lease‐to‐own financing as well. The Executive recommends $36.7 million from the General Fund in FY 2010 to adjust for the increase in debt service costs. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center School Facilities Board Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 73,789.5 101,217.2 373,931.5 204,237.5 73,789.5 101,217.2 373,931.5 204,237.5 20.0 1,031.3 327.4 227.3 23.3 0.0 0.0 194.5 17.6 71,968.1 20.0 1,140.6 333.6 220.1 39.3 0.0 0.0 217.7 3.8 99,262.1 20.0 1,140.6 333.6 220.1 39.3 0.0 0.0 217.7 3.8 371,976.4 20.0 1,140.6 333.6 220.1 39.3 0.0 (20,000.0) 217.7 3.8 222,282.4 73,789.5 101,217.2 373,931.5 204,237.5 73,789.5 101,217.2 373,931.5 204,237.5 73,789.5 101,217.2 373,931.5 204,237.5 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Transfers Out Agency Total 0.0 General Fund New Construction Lease‐to‐Own Debt Service 36,736.8 General Fund 36,736.8 Building Renewal 86,283.5 The School Facilities Board distributes Building Renewal funds for maintenance and refurbishing projects in order to help districts maintain minimally adequate facilities as set forth in A.R.S. § 15‐ 2031. The Executive recommends an increase of $86.3 million for Building Renewal in FY 2010. No funding was provided for the Building Renewal formula in FY 2009. General Fund Building Renewal Grants 86,283.5 (20,000.0) The FY 2009 budget did not provide funding for the Building Renewal formula; instead, it included $20.0 million in one‐time funding to provide grant funding for Building Renewal projects. The Executive recommends removing the $20.0 million from the Boardʹs budget, since traditional Building Renewal funding is being recommended for FY 2010. General Fund (20,000.0) Fund General Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Building Renewal 0.0 0.0 235,977.5 66,283.5 SLI New School Facilities 71,967.2 0.0 36,736.8 36,736.8 134 School Facilities Board FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Percent of all school districts rating the Boards' services as satisfactory, good, or excellent in annual survey Percent of all school district schools inspected to ensure minimum adequacy guidelines FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 98 98 98 98 5 9 22 21 ¾ The staff of the School Facilities Board was unable to meet its performance target due to lack of staff coupled with prioritizing new construction efforts. Thanks to the help of the Governor and the Legislature, the agency received two new liaison positions in the FY 2008 budget, which enabled some resources to be dedicated toward the school inspection process. Percent of inspected schools determined to have an adequate preventative maintenance program Number of new school construction projects completed 58 58 58 58 26 29 25 4 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 269.7 1,136,748.0 0.02% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets School Facilities Board 135 STA Department of State ‐ Secretary of State Mission: To serve the people of the State of Arizona, to execute with integrity the duties required by the Arizona Constitution, and to provide accurate and timely information while ensuring that public dollars are well spent. The mission of the Secretary of Stateʹs office is also to provide stewardship of public resources by facilitating access and efficiently maintaining the filing of government records and information; encouraging participation and demanding honesty in the state’s election process; effectively working with counties to implement a uniform, statewide voter registration system; expeditiously and efficiently upgrading State voting devices; offering registration and certification services of business transactions; fulfilling publishing requirements of all official acts of the State of Arizona including its chapter laws, rules and regulations; appointing notaries public and maintaining their filing information; attesting to all official acts of the Governor; and acting as an ambassador for the State of Arizona, its people, and its way of life. Description: The Department of State was created by the Arizona Constitution and is headed by a publicly elected Secretary of State, who serves as Acting Governor in the absence of the Governor and succeeds the Governor should a vacancy occur. The Secretary of State is the keeper of the Great Seal of the State of Arizona. The Secretary of Stateʹs office receives and records various filings, including Uniform Commercial Code transactions, trademark and trade name registrations, and limited partnership and limited liability partnership filings. The Secretary of State is also the ʺChief State Election Officerʺ who administers election functions, including canvass and certification of statewide elections, and coordinates statewide voter registration as pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. The office is also responsible for registration of lobbyists and acceptance of periodic lobbyist filings and campaign finance filings; publishes all official acts of the State of Arizona including laws, the Arizona Administrative Code, and the Arizona Administrative Register; files the notices of the Governorʹs appointments to the Stateʹs boards and commissions; appoints notaries public; and applies apostilles to all international transactions. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Constitution and Administration Business Services Public Services Election Services Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount 136 FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 935.3 987.7 987.7 987.7 1,180.8 489.6 7,090.1 1,157.2 573.0 8,363.0 1,139.0 573.0 5,013.0 1,157.2 573.0 8,963.0 9,695.8 11,080.9 7,712.7 11,680.9 48.3 1,886.4 377.9 48.3 2,119.0 626.3 46.3 2,054.0 603.1 48.3 2,119.0 626.3 Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total 1,651.5 10.9 14.1 4,631.3 1,028.1 95.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 612.4 15.9 18.2 6,900.0 789.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 612.4 15.9 18.2 3,550.0 859.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 612.4 15.9 18.2 7,500.0 789.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9,695.8 11,080.9 7,712.7 11,680.9 7,047.4 2,648.4 6,980.7 4,002.0 3,710.7 4,002.0 7,580.7 4,002.0 0.0 98.2 0.0 98.2 9,695.8 11,080.9 7,712.7 11,680.9 Fund General Fund Election Systems Improvement Fund Professional Employer Organization Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Help America Vote Act 2,648.4 4,002.0 4,002.0 4,002.0 (HAVA) Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Primary & General Election (3,350.0) 600.0 For FY 2010 the Executive recommends a decrease of ($3.4 million) for one‐time funding associated with elections occurring during FY 2009. This decrease would leave the agency with $50,000 to fund preparations for the calendar year 2010 elections. For FY 2011 the Executive recommends an increase of $600,000 to defray rising costs associated with the 2010 Primary and General elections. General Fund Professional Employer Organization Registry Start‐up Funding (3,350.0) 600.0 80.0 0.0 The Executive recommends a one‐time increase of $80,000 from the General Fund for the creation of the Professional Employer Organization database required by A.R.S. § 23‐563. General Fund Suspension of Professional Employer Registration 80.0 0.0 (98.2) 0.0 Laws of 2008, Chapter 291, suspended the requirement that the Secretary of State register Professional Employer Organizations until July 1, 2010. This recommendation implements this legislation. Professional Employer Organization Fund (98.2) 0.0 FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations Department of State ‐ Secretary of State FY 2009 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget (98.2) Suspension of Professional Employer Registration Laws of 2008, Chapter 291, suspended the requirement that the Secretary of State register Professional Employer Organizations until July 1, 2010. This recommendation implements this legislation. Professional Employer Organization Fund (98.2) Performance Measures Percent of votes cast on provisional ballots compared to total voter registration Total voter registration FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 1.23 2.5 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 0 1.5 2,734,000 2,775,000 2,825,000 2,900,000 Percent of delinquent campaign finance filings Percent of delinquent elected official financial disclosure statement Percent of delinquent lobbyist reports 12.0 12.0 14.0 14.0 3.61 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.6 3.5 3.5 3.5 Percent of staff indicating that they feel they have the necessary resources to effectively perform their job Average number of business days to process charitable organizations registrations Average number of business days to process trade name applications Average number of business days to process trademark applications Average number of business days to process Uniform Commercial Code filings Average number of business days to process athlete agents registrations Average number of business days to process telephone solicitors registrations Average number of business days to process notary commissions Average number of business days to process limited/limited liability partnerships and foreign limited liability partnerships filings Percent of customers indicating they found the public information they were seeking Percent of statutory publications provided 75 80 85 90 12 10 5 3 10 10 3 3 10 10 3 3 5 5 3 3 5 5 3 3 10 7 3 3 15 7 5 3 5 5 3 3 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 304.8 304.8 8,122.0 11,992.0 2.54% 3.75% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets Department of State ‐ Secretary of State 137 SBO State Boards Office Mission: To provide effective and efficient accounting and office support services to small licensing agencies to enable them to service the public. Description: The program provides support services to small licensing agencies in the areas of reception services, budgeting, personnel, accounting, payroll and agency liaison among a variety of state programs. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Support Services Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 263.9 284.7 284.7 284.7 263.9 284.7 284.7 284.7 3.0 130.6 50.6 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 80.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 143.2 45.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 143.2 45.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 143.2 45.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 96.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 263.9 284.7 284.7 284.7 263.9 284.7 284.7 284.7 263.9 284.7 284.7 284.7 Fund Admin - Special Services Agency Total The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 138 State Boards Office FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget TXA The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. State Board of Tax Appeals Mission: To provide an independent appeals process for taxpayers with adverse decisions from the Department of Revenue and Office of Administrative Hearings, and to resolve jurisdictional disputes between municipalities regarding the imposition of transaction privilege and use taxes. Description: The State Board of Tax Appeals hears and decides appeals filed by taxpayers and Arizona municipalities concerning income, transaction privilege, use, luxury, and estate taxes. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center State Board of Tax Appeals Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 269.4 310.6 310.6 310.6 269.4 310.6 310.6 310.6 4.0 170.1 43.7 0.6 0.9 0.0 0.0 52.9 1.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 216.8 48.8 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 43.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 216.8 48.8 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 43.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 216.8 48.8 0.9 0.9 0.0 0.0 43.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 269.4 310.6 310.6 310.6 269.4 310.6 310.6 310.6 269.4 310.6 310.6 310.6 Fund General Fund Agency Total Performance Measures Caseload processing (and number of issues) Number of tax appeals resolved Number backlogged requiring written decision Number of months to process appeal FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 17(35) 70(120) 10 50 60 70 0 10 15 20 4.5 5.0 5.5 5.5 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 80(135) 90(150) FY 2010 FY 2011 38.5 311.0 39.0 311.0 12.38% 12.54% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. State Agency Budgets State Board of Tax Appeals 139 TEA Performance Measures State Board of Technical Registration Mission: To protect the public by setting appropriate registration qualifications and enforcing State Statutes relating to the practice of all Board regulated professions and occupations. Description: The Agencyʹs duties are to screen applicants; adopt and administer qualifying examinations as needed to determine whether minimum standards for registration or certification have been satisfied; to enforce professional practice standards for registrants and certificate holders; and to enforce statutes relating to unlicensed practice. Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. Percent of persons grading response to request for information as good or better Percent of complaints resolved by informal methods Number of complaints received Administrative Costs Agency Request FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 32,122 32,122 100 100 100 100 100 99 100 100 191 191 191 191 Administrative Costs Administrative Cost Percentage Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Total number of professional licensees FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 32,122 32,122 FY 2010 144.5 FY 2011 144.5 2,067.0 2,140.0 6.99% 6.75% 1,476.1 1,745.2 1,827.2 1,852.7 The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. 1,476.1 1,745.2 1,827.2 1,852.7 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 23.0 746.8 270.0 95.6 9.1 16.5 0.0 314.2 8.9 0.0 0.0 0.0 15.0 23.0 847.8 323.1 152.3 12.4 16.0 0.0 371.1 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 847.8 323.1 234.3 12.4 16.0 0.0 371.1 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 23.0 847.8 323.1 259.8 12.4 16.0 0.0 371.1 22.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,476.1 1,745.2 1,827.2 1,852.7 1,476.1 1,745.2 1,827.2 1,852.7 1,476.1 1,745.2 1,827.2 1,852.7 Fund Technical Registration Board Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues ADOA ‐ Information Services Division 72.0 95.0 To ensure system integrity of the Boardʹs software system, the Executive recommends $72,000 in FY 2010 and $95,000 in FY 2011 for critical database maintenance costs. Technical Registration Board Fund 72.0 95.0 Attorney General Contract 10.0 12.5 The Executive recommends $10,000 and $12,500 in FY 2010 and FY 2011 to address the growing cost of Attorney General services. Technical Registration Board Fund 140 10.0 12.5 State Board of Technical Registration FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget TOA FY 2010 Arizona Office of Tourism Mission: To enhance the state economy and the quality of life for all Arizonans by expanding travel activity and increasing related revenues through tourism promotion and development. Description: The Office of Tourism (AOT) employs a marketing and customer‐ service orientation in performing its statutory duties as follows: planning and developing a comprehensive in‐state, national, and international marketing plan that includes advertising campaigns; travel sales and marketing programs; media and public communications; promoting and developing tourism‐related business in Arizona; undertaking research to guide tourism development plans for the State and to establish the Office as a central clearinghouse for tourism‐related data; and providing information and assistance as needed by citizens, business enterprises, industry organizations, and governmental agencies on matters related to the mission of the Office. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Office of Tourism Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 tax, 3% of amusement tax, and 2% of restaurant tax collections from the previous year. The statutory transfer amount is estimated at $16.0 million in FY 2010 and $16.8 million in FY 2011. The Executive recommendation includes this increase as required in statutes. 982.0 General Fund 1,800.0 Performance Measures Number of domestic tourists (in millions) Number of visitors to the Welcome Center FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 33.2 30 119,689 110,000 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 30 30 115,000 ¾ Higher gas prices and a faltering economy have impacted the drive market. anticipate a rebound in FY10. Cost per inquiry for advertisinggenerated requests for Arizona travel planning information (in dollars) 30.05 28.68 120,000 We 27.8 26.8 ¾ As traffic to our web site grows, more inquiries are spread across a finite advertising budget, so cost per inquiry decreases. 15,488.0 15,022.9 16,004.9 16,822.9 Number of inquiries for Arizona travel packet (in thousands) 257 244 251 261 15,488.0 15,022.9 16,004.9 16,822.9 ¾ The combination of the Arizona Official State Visitors' Guide being available 36.0 2,035.3 613.6 3,975.4 35.8 144.9 1,349.0 6,230.0 56.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 1,047.4 36.0 2,022.8 592.1 2,087.7 18.8 76.1 708.4 3,350.1 29.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 6,137.3 36.0 2,022.8 592.1 2,087.7 18.8 76.1 708.4 4,332.1 29.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 6,137.3 36.0 2,022.8 592.1 2,087.7 18.8 76.1 708.4 5,150.1 29.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 6,137.3 15,488.0 15,022.9 16,004.9 16,822.9 15,488.0 15,022.9 16,004.9 16,822.9 15,488.0 15,022.9 16,004.9 16,822.9 online and a faltering economy have driven down the demand for hard copies in the short term, but we anticipate a rebound starting in FY10. Even with online availabiliy, many people see the book online and order a hard copy anyway. Customer satisfaction rating for travel kits program (scale 1-5, 5=very satisfied) 4.54 Administrative Costs 4.5 4.5 4.5 Administrative Costs FY 2010 668.0 FY 2011 668.0 Agency Request 27,675.0 27,675.0 2.41% 2.41% Administrative Cost Percentage The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund General Fund Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 FY 2011 Executive Issues Statutory Funding Increase 982.0 1,800.0 The Executive recommendation includes a biennium increase of $1.9 million above the FY 2009 appropriation, per A.R.S. §§ 41‐ 2306 and 45‐5029. In the November 2000 general election, Maricopa County voters approved Proposition 302 to provide additional resources to promote Arizona tourism. Prop. 302 provided that the Office of Tourism would receive 3.5% of bed State Agency Budgets Arizona Office of Tourism 141 DTA Department of Transportation Mission: To provide products and services for a safe, efficient, cost‐effective transportation system that links Arizona to the global economy, promotes economic prosperity and demonstrates respect for Arizonaʹs environment and quality of life. Description: The Arizona Department of Transportation was established in 1974. It is the state agency charged with planning, developing, maintaining and operating facilities for the efficient movement of people and products by surface and air throughout Arizona. The Department is also the statewide agency that registers motor vehicles and aircraft, licenses drivers, collects revenues, and investigates new transportation systems. It serves its customer base through geographically dispersed facilities. Most administrative activities are housed in the headquarters facilities in Phoenix. Field activities include ten district offices that oversee roadway construction and maintenance, twenty‐two ports of entry that check commercial vehicles for compliance with size and weight laws, and sixty‐seven Motor Vehicle Division Field Offices that provide title and registration and driver license services. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. Administration Intermodal Transportation Motor Vehicle Division Aeronautics Division 45,461.9 294,271.1 110,080.0 2,586.0 45,470.0 309,977.6 110,725.2 2,337.0 45,970.0 331,844.9 114,725.2 2,337.0 45,470.0 311,455.8 110,918.6 2,447.0 Agency Total 452,399.0 468,509.8 494,877.1 470,291.4 4,755.0 190,704.0 83,043.3 9,751.6 2,547.3 156.6 1.1 143,365.0 21,594.3 107.3 0.0 1,128.5 4,748.0 193,648.2 84,433.2 9,838.4 3,341.3 181.1 0.0 153,801.7 22,511.8 98.8 0.0 655.3 4,835.0 198,281.9 86,257.8 14,338.4 3,341.3 181.1 0.0 169,210.7 22,511.8 98.8 0.0 655.3 4,754.0 193,919.2 84,540.6 9,838.4 3,356.3 181.1 0.0 153,809.7 17,658.8 98.8 5,288.3 1,600.2 452,399.0 468,509.8 494,877.1 470,291.4 75.7 2,586.0 408,356.9 34,554.1 84.6 2,337.0 420,035.8 38,960.4 84.6 2,337.0 446,403.1 38,960.4 84.6 2,447.0 426,870.4 33,797.4 2,108.1 2,158.0 2,158.0 2,158.0 71.8 1,665.3 71.7 1,682.5 71.7 1,682.5 71.7 1,682.5 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total Fund General Fund State Aviation Fund State Highway Fund Transportation Department Equipment Fund Safety Enforcement and Transportation Infrastructure Air Quality Fund Vehicle Inspection & Title Enforcement 142 Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance Enforcement Driving Under Influence Abatement Fund Highway User Revenue Fund Agency Total 2,254.1 2,419.5 2,419.5 2,419.5 143.3 143.3 143.3 143.3 583.7 617.0 617.0 617.0 452,399.0 468,509.8 494,877.1 470,291.4 The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Attorney General Legal 3,052.6 3,052.6 3,052.6 3,052.6 Services SLI New Third Party 689.5 960.3 960.3 960.3 Funding SLI Abandoned Vehicle 978.0 1,039.8 1,039.8 1,039.8 Administration SLI Fraud Investigation 360.3 788.3 788.3 788.3 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues Highway Maintenance and Safety 5,010.1 The Department is required to maintain and operate newly completed roadway miles that are added to the inventory through new highway construction. The recommendation provides $711,400 and 6.0 FTE Traffic Signal Technician positions to operate and repair roadway lighting and variable signs in various areas of the state; $3.3 million to meet the incremental cost of adding 330 new lane miles; and $1 million to cover increasing maintenance and repair costs such as cable barriers, drainage, signals etc. The additional funding is needed to help maintain the State’s transportation infrastructure, improve roadway conditions and ensure the safety of highway users. State Highway Fund 5,010.1 Equipment Maintenance and Machinery Replacement 1,934.5 ADOTʹs fleet totals about 4700 pieces of equipment and is valued at $143 million. Nearly 40% of those assets, with a replacement value of $55.3 million, are old or obsolete based on economic retention criteria. The Executive recommends $1.9 million to maintain and replace outdated equipment. State Aviation Fund 110.0 State Highway Fund 1,824.5 Expenditure Authority Adjustment (5,163.0) The recommendation includes a ($5.2 million) reduction in the expenditure authority to reflect the level of project revenues. Transportation Department Equipment Fund (5,163.0) FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 Expenditure Authority Adjustment (3,800.0) The recommendation includes a ($3.8 million) reduction in the expenditure authority to reflect the level of available revenues. Department of Transportation FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Transportation Department Equipment Fund (3,800.0) Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Percent of highway construction projects completed on schedule Percent of all vehicle registration renewals completed through alternate methods Total Internet transactions and activities (in thousands) Percent projects completed on schedule Percent of dollars awarded vs. planned Administrative expenses as percentage of operating budget Agency turnover rate (percentage) Highway User Revenue Fund revenue forecast range (percent) Regional Area Revolving Fund revenue forecast range (percent) FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 96.5 96.6 97 97 79.1 79.4 79.4 79.4 7,100 8,425 8,500 9,100 85 92 90 90 100 100 100 100 7.7 2.5 5.0 5.0 17.0 13.0 14.0 14.0 -1.2 -6.6 +2.0/-1.0 +2.0/-1.0 -1.2 -7.0 +2.0/-1.0 +2.0/-1.0 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 16,500.0 3,098,211.0 0.53% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program with special line items. State Agency Budgets Department of Transportation 143 TRA Performance Measures State Treasurer Mission: To protect taxpayer money by serving as the Stateʹs Bank and fiduciary agent, providing investment management, financial information and services. Description: The primary responsibilities of the elected State Treasurer are to receive and keep custody over all monies belonging to the State that are not required to be kept by some other entity; to pay warrants of the Department of Administration; and to keep an account of all monies received and disbursed. The Office also invests state monies and operates the local government investment pool (LGIP) for public entities throughout the State. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Treasurer's Office Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. Customer satisfaction rating for State Agency depositors (scale 1-8). Customer satisfaction rating for distribution recipients (scale 1-8). Percent of distributions sent successfully and accurately. Percent of outgoing wires sent successfully and accurately. Number of non-compliant trades. Average days to correct noncompliant trades. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 21,034.1 5,076.6 5,076.6 5,076.6 21,034.1 5,076.6 5,076.6 5,076.6 34.4 1,750.6 595.1 509.6 3.7 4.5 1,905.9 305.1 85.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 15,874.6 34.4 1,644.0 582.8 308.6 1.8 1.2 2,230.1 308.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.4 1,644.0 582.8 308.6 1.8 1.2 2,230.1 308.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 34.4 1,644.0 582.8 308.6 1.8 1.2 2,230.1 308.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21,034.1 5,076.6 5,076.6 5,076.6 21,000.3 33.8 5,075.3 1.3 5,075.3 1.3 5,075.3 1.3 21,034.1 5,076.6 5,076.6 5,076.6 Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 7.10 7.10 7.01 7.10 7.10 7.10 100 98 98 98 100 99 99 99 0 5 5 5 0 1 1 1 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 7.03 7.10 FY 2010 393.2 FY 2011 393.2 5,277.0 5,197.0 7.45% 7.57% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund General Fund State Treasurer's Management Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Justice of the Peace 1,905.9 2,230.1 2,230.1 2,230.1 Salaries 144 State Treasurer FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget BRA SLI Math and Science Teacher Initiative Arizona Board of Regents Mission: To increase the educational attainment of Arizona citizens by producing enough high‐quality university degrees for the State to be nationally competitive by the year 2020; to increase the prominence of the systemʹs research enterprise so that it can contribute to the knowledge economy and improve the quality of life in Arizona; and to provide the educated workforce needed to fill shortages and to stimulate demand for higher paying jobs in Arizona. Description: The Arizona Board of Regents is the governing body for Arizona’s three state universities. Consistent with its constitutional authorities, the Board makes planning and policy decisions regarding the state universities. The Board hires the university presidents and the executive director for the Board, to whom the Board assigns the responsibility of management. The Board acts as the legal entity responsible for the universities and accounts to the legislative and executive branches of government for the resources appropriated to the universities and the Board. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Governance Student Assistance Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 2,398.0 17,308.2 2,398.5 17,943.9 2,423.6 20,515.3 2,398.5 17,943.9 19,706.2 20,342.4 22,938.9 20,342.4 27.9 1,497.7 488.9 135.7 1.1 0.0 17,192.2 390.6 0.0 27.9 1,635.2 448.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 17,823.9 435.1 0.0 27.9 1,635.2 448.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 20,390.3 465.2 0.0 27.9 1,635.2 448.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 17,823.9 435.1 0.0 19,706.2 20,342.4 22,938.9 20,342.4 19,706.2 20,342.4 22,938.9 20,342.4 19,706.2 20,342.4 22,938.9 20,342.4 1,375.0 2,000.0 2,250.0 2,000.0 Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Number of first year Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education awards Percent of action plan objectives substantially completed Audits performed on universities Total number of Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education awards FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 68 63 41 60 100 n/a n/a n/a 7 3 4 4 182 193 186 203 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 1,381.1 133,884.0 1.03% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Agency Total Fund General Fund Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI WICHE Office 116.0 120.0 125.0 120.0 SLI WICHE Student 4,104.3 4,111.0 4,430.0 4,111.0 Subsidies SLI Arizona Financial Aid 10,041.2 10,041.2 12,033.6 10,041.2 Trust - AFAT SLI Arizona Teachers 90.0 90.0 95.0 90.0 Incentive Program - ATIP SLI Arizona Transfer 213.7 213.7 213.7 213.7 Articulation Support System - ATASS SLI Nursing Education 1,368.0 1,368.0 1,368.0 1,368.0 State Agency Budgets Arizona Board of Regents 145 ASA FY 2010 ASU ‐ Tempe Mission: To provide outstanding programs of undergraduate and graduate education, cutting‐edge research, and public service for the citizens of the State of Arizona with special emphasis on the Phoenix metropolitan area. Description: Arizona State University at the Tempe Campus, which includes the Downtown Phoenix campus, is a major public research university offering programs from the baccalaureate through the doctorate to over 50,000 full‐time and part‐time students and applying the strongest features of the traditional major research university to the rapidly evolving needs of the metropolitan Phoenix area and Arizona. The Tempe campus plays an extensive role within Arizona State University by providing high quality graduate training at the doctoral level and serving as the only Carnegie Foundation‐designated Doctoral/Research‐Extensive campus in the metropolitan Phoenix area. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. Instruction Organized Research Public Service Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support 386,037.3 16,152.3 940.6 57,952.9 30,436.5 124,645.7 408,127.5 16,126.4 958.5 63,736.2 31,407.8 136,751.3 428,081.2 16,126.4 958.5 65,140.2 31,407.8 138,584.8 411,263.1 16,126.4 958.5 63,736.2 31,407.8 136,751.3 616,165.3 657,107.7 680,298.9 660,243.3 6,968.9 388,765.9 102,574.4 33,068.6 280.6 4,120.9 9,733.9 0.0 58,758.2 18,862.8 7,073.0 406,145.5 109,513.1 37,577.0 310.7 4,643.4 10,389.3 0.0 67,162.4 21,366.3 7,316.8 421,600.9 113,822.0 38,277.0 320.9 4,704.6 10,889.3 0.0 68,255.0 22,429.2 7,105.0 408,384.8 109,989.2 37,577.0 310.7 4,643.4 10,389.3 0.0 67,467.6 21,481.3 616,165.3 657,107.7 680,298.9 660,243.3 404,668.4 211,496.9 396,428.7 260,679.0 419,034.2 261,264.7 399,564.3 260,679.0 616,165.3 657,107.7 680,298.9 660,243.3 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Library Acquisitions Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Agency Total Fund General Fund ASU Collections Appropriated Agency Total The Executive recommends using a new degree production funding formula amount of $3.1 million General Fund and 32.0 FTE for FY 2010. The degree production formula links some State funding for growth to degree production and economic impact, rather than strictly to enrollment growth. This method aligns funding with universitiesʹ unique ability to provide Arizona with a better educated workforce and citizenry, with all of the associated positive social and economic benefits. The degree production formula is as follows: the increase in undergraduate degrees projected for FY 2010 multiplied by the aggregate expected economic impact of the degrees, measured as the average salary difference between a bachelor’s degree holder and a high school graduate as provided by U.S. Census data. The resultant total is then funded at 25%, representing the State support level. The same formula applies for graduate degrees but with a commensurate increase reflecting the higher economic impact of graduate degrees versus high school diplomas as measured by the U.S. Census. 3,135.6 General Fund Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual First professional degrees granted Percent of graduating seniors who rate their overall university experience as good or excellent Percent of full-time undergraduate students enrolled per semester in three or more primary courses with ranked faculty Number of Bachelors degrees granted Percent of agency staff turnover (classified staff only) Doctorate degrees granted Masters degrees granted FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 193 238 249 261 95 93 95 95 69 70 70 70 7,847 8,303 8,653 9,018 12.9 18.2 18.5 18.5 400 415 446 479 2,768 2,515 2,554 2,594 ¾ Reflects Tempe campus and Downtown campus. Previously reported all campuses. Average years taken by freshman students to complete a baccalaureate degree program External dollars received for research and creative activity (in millions of dollars) 4.7 4.7 4.6 4.6 192 202 226 252 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Executive Recommendations Administrative Costs FY 2010 Executive Issues 3,135.6 Degree Production Funding 9,869.5 Agency Request 1,645,010.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 0.60% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 146 ASU ‐ Tempe FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget AXA Agency Total 48,795.3 59,609.4 66,886.8 60,174.8 General Fund ASU Collections Appropriated Technology and Research Initiative Fund 25,471.1 21,324.2 30,489.2 27,120.2 37,150.9 27,735.9 31,054.6 27,120.2 2,000.0 2,000.0 2,000.0 2,000.0 Agency Total 48,795.3 59,609.4 66,886.8 60,174.8 ASU ‐ Polytechnic Mission: To emphasize professional and technological programs based in the liberal arts and sciences and engage in intellectual inquiry focused on addressing societal needs by offering undergraduate and graduate programs primarily in professional and technological fields and in selected areas of the liberal arts and sciences; engaging in forms of scholarship involved with discovering, integrating, applying, and transmitting knowledge to address the conditions and concerns of society; and working with community partners in accomplishing all aspects of this mission. Description: ASU at the Polytechnic campus serves students and the metropolitan area through baccalaureate and graduate degree programs as well as through applied research and service. Currently, programs are offered in aeronautical management technology, agribusiness, applied biological sciences, applied psychology, applied science, business administration, computing studies, education, electronics engineering technology, exercise and wellness, human health studies, industrial management technology, interdisciplinary studies, manufacturing engineering technology, mechanical engineering technology, multimedia writing and technical communication, and nutrition. All programs at ASU at the Polytechnic campus provide students with the knowledge and extensive technological competence to succeed in their chosen professions and further learning. ASU at the Polytechnic campus offers a campus environment that places students at the center, embraces diversity and interdisciplinary inquiry, and strives to integrate the academic and social lives of students. ASU at the Polytechnic campus offers programs with outcomes directly relevant to the needs of society and the community, emphasizing collaboration and partnership to foster the educational, economic, and cultural development of local communities, the metropolitan area, the state, and the nation. Fund Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues The Executive recommends using a new degree production funding formula amount of $565,400 General Fund and 8.0 FTE for FY 2010. The degree production formula links some State funding for growth to degree production and economic impact, rather than strictly to enrollment growth. This method aligns funding with universitiesʹ unique ability to provide Arizona with a better educated workforce and citizenry, with all of the associated positive social and economic benefits. The degree production formula is as follows: the increase in undergraduate degrees projected for FY 2010 multiplied by the aggregate expected economic impact of the degrees, measured as the average salary difference between a bachelor’s degree holder and a high school graduate as provided by U.S. Census data. The resultant total is then funded at 25%, representing the State support level. The same formula applies for graduate degrees but with a commensurate increase reflecting the higher economic impact of graduate degrees versus high school diplomas as measured by the U.S. Census. Program/Cost Center Instruction Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. Performance Measures FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 34,275.9 3,455.3 1,045.7 10,018.4 34,109.5 7,243.1 2,498.3 15,758.5 41,386.9 7,243.1 2,498.3 15,758.5 34,674.9 7,243.1 2,498.3 15,758.5 48,795.3 59,609.4 66,886.8 60,174.8 546.0 25,678.5 7,249.8 7,146.8 31.8 205.1 163.7 0.0 5,629.3 690.3 2,000.0 580.1 31,225.5 8,545.1 4,123.5 69.8 133.6 502.6 0.0 11,684.1 1,325.2 2,000.0 653.6 36,381.0 10,030.7 4,123.5 69.8 133.6 502.6 0.0 11,938.2 1,707.4 2,000.0 586.1 31,645.4 8,638.1 4,123.5 69.8 133.6 502.6 0.0 11,715.9 1,345.9 2,000.0 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Library Acquisitions Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Transfers Out State Agency Budgets 565.4 General Fund Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual 565.4 Degree Production Funding Percent of graduating students who rate their overall experience at ASU Polytechnic as good or excellent Fall semester enrollment (headcount) FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 Actual Actual Expected Expected 97 94 95 95 6,545 8,752 10,050 12,056 66 67 68 68 849 863 914 987 710 724 758 819 Number of Masters degrees granted 139 139 156 168 Average number of years taken to graduate for student who began as freshmen Percent of agency staff turnover (classified staff only) 5.3 5.1 5.0 5.0 8.0 12 12.3 12.3 Percent of full-time undergraduate students enrolled per semester in three or more primary courses with ranked faculty Number of degrees granted Number of Bachelors degrees granted ASU ‐ Polytechnic 147 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 1,755.4 97,661.0 1.80% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 148 ASU ‐ Polytechnic FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget AWA FY 2010 ASU ‐ West Mission: To become a comprehensive campus that balances the traditions of liberal arts education with responsiveness to the dynamics of workforce requirements. The West campus colleges and schools are committed to teaching and research that are innovative, interdisciplinary, collaborative and problem‐solving oriented. Description: ASU at the West campus is located in Phoenix and serves more than 8,600 residential and commuter students of diverse ages, ethnicity, and experiences through baccalaureate programs, master’s programs, doctoral programs and certificate programs. The West campus focuses on developing a learning community that addresses the needs of a diverse metropolitan environment. It does this by offering learner‐centered academic programs that enhance learning through teaching, service and enrichment opportunities; promoting discovery and innovation; pursuing new knowledge; introducing insights and creative ideas through instruction; encouraging direct involvement in new fields of inquiry; investigating important community‐based issues; and integrating with the community through service based on scholarship. 738.5 Degree Production Funding The Executive recommends using a new degree production funding formula amount of $738,500 General Fund and 10.0 FTE for FY 2010. The degree production formula links some State funding for growth to degree production and economic impact, rather than strictly to enrollment growth. This method aligns funding with universitiesʹ unique ability to provide Arizona with a better educated workforce and citizenry, with all of the associated positive social and economic benefits. The degree production formula is as follows: the increase in undergraduate degrees projected for FY 2010 multiplied by the aggregate expected economic impact of the degrees, measured as the average salary difference between a bachelor’s degree holder and a high school graduate as provided by U.S. Census data. The resultant total is then funded at 25%, representing the State support level. The same formula applies for graduate degrees but with a commensurate increase reflecting the higher economic impact of graduate degrees versus high school diplomas as measured by the U.S. Census. 738.5 General Fund Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Instruction Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 42,368.3 11,949.1 6,281.2 17,066.3 42,233.6 13,876.4 7,988.1 18,354.8 47,728.9 13,876.4 7,988.1 18,354.8 42,972.1 13,876.4 7,988.1 18,354.8 77,664.9 82,452.9 87,948.2 83,191.4 814.0 41,475.5 11,655.0 14,261.4 52.5 352.1 1,270.3 0.0 5,826.0 1,172.1 1,600.0 868.0 44,296.4 12,103.8 16,833.3 5.0 25.9 1,231.0 0.0 6,190.0 167.5 1,600.0 924.0 48,224.4 13,186.3 16,833.3 5.0 25.9 1,231.0 0.0 6,383.6 458.7 1,600.0 875.0 44,786.3 12,214.9 16,833.3 5.0 25.9 1,231.0 0.0 6,271.2 223.8 1,600.0 Agency Total 77,664.9 82,452.9 87,948.2 83,191.4 General Fund ASU Collections Appropriated Technology and Research Initiative Fund 52,739.0 23,325.9 53,279.7 27,573.2 58,768.8 27,579.4 54,018.2 27,573.2 1,600.0 1,600.0 1,600.0 1,600.0 Agency Total 77,664.9 82,452.9 87,948.2 83,191.4 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Library Acquisitions Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Transfers Out Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Percent of graduating seniors who rate their overall university experience as good or excellent Percent of full-time undergraduate students enrolled per semester in three or more primary courses with ranked faculty Number of degrees granted Number of Bachelors degrees granted Number of Masters degrees granted Fall semester enrollment (full-time equivalent) Percent of agency staff turnover (classified staff only) FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 95 97 97 97 56 60 62 62 1,850 2,015 2,117 2,223 1,574 1,651 1,732 1,818 276 364 384 406 6,529 6,964 7,700 8,500 15.0 11.7 13.0 13.0 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage Fund FY 2008 Actual FY 2010 1,451.1 125,069.0 1.16% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues State Agency Budgets ASU ‐ West 149 NAA FY 2010 Northern Arizona University Mission: To provide an outstanding undergraduate residential education strengthened by research, graduate, and professional programs and sophisticated methods of distance delivery. Description: Founded in 1899, Northern Arizona University has a rich history of delivering top‐quality undergraduate education. Today that mission is enhanced by innovative graduate programs, research, distance learning, and service to communities throughout the state of Arizona. NAU is classified as a public higher research university with its main campus in Flagstaff. NAU‐Yuma, recently designated as a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI), by the Department of Education shares a campus with Arizona Western College in Yuma, Arizona. NAU‐Distance Learning is located at 38 other campuses or sites throughout Arizona serving more than 7,000 students. Northern Arizona University recorded the largest enrollment in the institutionʹs 109‐year history, with a student population of 22,507, with 1,155 students over last fallʹs enrollment, with 5,720 graduate students and 16,787 undergraduate students. Winter and spring enrollment set records as well. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. Instruction Organized Research Public Service Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support 114,102.7 3,637.4 2,433.9 19,455.1 16,477.4 51,181.8 116,833.6 3,837.3 4,447.7 19,622.7 17,647.1 51,793.0 127,648.6 3,837.3 4,447.7 21,911.8 17,717.6 51,793.0 122,546.0 3,837.3 4,447.7 19,622.7 17,647.1 51,793.0 207,288.3 214,181.4 227,356.0 219,893.8 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Library Acquisitions Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Agency Total Executive Issues NAU has experienced a sharp increase in undergraduate enrollment over the past four years, rising from over 14,500 students to more than 17,000 for FY 2010. The university does not have enough resources to accommodate these additional students. Because of the State’s fiscal situation, the Executive recommends $4.8 million and 48.0 FTE, which represents funding 50% of the statutory 22:1 enrollment growth formula. 2,238.8 134,099.3 43,172.0 1,999.7 701.7 37.1 1,902.9 0.0 30,803.4 1,465.3 2,366.0 142,251.3 46,269.1 2,599.7 762.3 90.8 1,930.9 0.0 31,375.1 2,076.8 2,295.8 138,094.8 44,222.3 1,999.7 701.7 37.1 1,902.9 0.0 31,173.9 1,761.4 207,288.3 214,181.4 227,356.0 219,893.8 159,465.1 47,823.2 161,560.9 52,620.5 174,735.5 52,620.5 167,273.3 52,620.5 207,288.3 214,181.4 227,356.0 219,893.8 4,792.9 General Fund Degree Production Funding 919.5 The Executive recommends using a new degree production funding formula amount of $919,500 General Fund and 9.0 FTE for FY 2010. The degree production formula links some State funding for growth to degree production and economic impact, rather than strictly to enrollment growth. This method aligns funding with universitiesʹ unique ability to provide Arizona with a better educated workforce and citizenry, with all of the associated positive social and economic benefits. The degree production formula is as follows: the increase in undergraduate degrees projected for FY 2010 multiplied by the aggregate expected economic impact of the degrees, measured as the average salary difference between a bachelor’s degree holder and a high school graduate as provided by U.S. Census data. The resultant total is then funded at 25%, representing the State support level. The same formula applies for graduate degrees but with a commensurate increase reflecting the higher economic impact of graduate degrees versus high school diplomas as measured by the U.S. Census. General Fund 2,170.8 124,384.9 39,999.7 5,676.3 725.3 890.4 1,915.2 0.0 31,998.9 1,697.6 4,792.9 Enrollment Growth 919.5 Fund General Fund NAU Collections Appropriated Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI NAU Yuma 2,853.7 2,993.5 2,993.5 2,993.5 Executive Recommendations 150 Northern Arizona University FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Performance Measures FY 2007 Actual Percent of graduating seniors who rate their overall university experience as good or excellent Graduate degrees awarded-first professional category Average number of years taken to graduate for students who began as freshmen Total degrees and certificates granted. Bachelor degrees granted to statewide students Graduate degrees granted (Statewide and Online only) Graduate degrees awarded at the master's level Graduate degrees awarded at the doctoral level Percentage of full-time, undergraduate students enrolled per semester in three or more primary courses with ranked faculty Number of Bachelor degrees granted Percent of agency staff turnover FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Expected FY 2010 Expected 96 96 96 96 41 52 50 50 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 5,037 5,014 5,025 5,025 775 700 725 725 1,361 1,295 1,350 1,350 1,896 1,747 1825 1830 47 35 40 40 81 81 83 83 2,851 2,849 2975 3195 15 15 15 15 Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 4,765.3 447,944.0 1.06% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets Northern Arizona University 151 UAA University of Arizona ‐ Main Campus Mission: To improve life for the people of Arizona and beyond through education, research, creative expression, and community engagement. Description: The University of Arizona in Tucson, including its branch‐ campuses in Sierra Vista and downtown Phoenix, is a land‐grant, doctoral research university ranking among the nation’s best public universities. Its research and development expenditures place it among the nation’s top public universities and it is a member of the Association of American Universities. It offers a broad array of programs leading to degrees from baccalaureate through the doctorate for a total student body enrollment of 38,052 full‐time and part‐time students. As a land‐grant university, it maintains programs in production agriculture and mining and serves the State through its cooperative extension services, technology transfer, economic development assistance, and cultural programming. The University provides distinguished undergraduate, graduate, and professional education; excels in basic and applied research and creative achievement; and promotes the integration of the product of these activities and achievements of regional, national, and international significance into everyday life. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. Instruction Organized Research Public Service Academic Support Student Services Instruction Institutional Support Agriculture 200,452.5 25,273.6 4,473.6 61,678.2 13,822.8 14,253.0 120,840.8 56,380.5 215,026.0 25,159.2 4,302.4 56,856.5 14,721.1 14,253.0 110,347.1 53,624.3 227,178.9 25,159.2 4,302.4 57,835.3 15,121.3 14,253.0 110,347.1 53,868.7 216,523.0 25,159.2 4,302.4 56,856.5 14,721.1 14,253.0 110,347.1 53,624.3 497,175.0 494,289.6 508,065.9 495,786.6 Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Library Acquisitions Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Sierra Vista Campus 5,207.1 5,434.8 5,770.4 5,434.8 SLI Research Infrastructure 14,253.0 14,253.0 14,253.0 14,253.0 Lease-Purchase Payment Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Executive Issues The Executive recommends using a new degree production funding formula amount of $1.5 million General Fund and 14.0 FTE for FY 2010. The degree production formula links some State funding for growth to degree production and economic impact, rather than strictly to enrollment growth. This method aligns funding with universitiesʹ unique ability to provide Arizona with a better educated workforce and citizenry, with all of the associated positive social and economic benefits. The degree production formula is as follows: the increase in undergraduate degrees projected for FY 2010 multiplied by the aggregate expected economic impact of the degrees, measured as the average salary difference between a bachelor’s degree holder and a high school graduate as provided by U.S. Census data. The resultant total is then funded at 25%, representing the State support level. The same formula applies for graduate degrees but with a commensurate increase reflecting the higher economic impact of graduate degrees versus high school diplomas as measured by the U.S. Census. 1,497.0 General Fund Performance Measures Average number of years taken to graduate for students who began as freshmen Agency staff turnover (percent) Gifts, grants, and contracts (millions) 5,667.8 303,564.7 91,332.9 4,443.8 321.5 736.7 8,796.4 0.0 85,226.3 2,752.7 5,679.5 308,684.6 97,403.1 4,034.4 724.4 158.3 8,228.7 0.0 72,494.4 2,561.7 5,759.0 317,858.2 100,240.1 4,034.4 979.9 190.0 8,228.7 0.0 73,684.8 2,849.8 5,693.5 309,667.7 97,633.5 4,034.4 724.4 158.3 8,228.7 0.0 72,705.0 2,634.6 Agency Total 497,175.0 494,289.6 508,065.9 495,786.6 General Fund U of A Main Campus Collections - Appropriated 351,637.2 145,537.8 340,316.6 153,973.0 354,092.9 153,973.0 341,813.6 153,973.0 Agency Total 497,175.0 494,289.6 508,065.9 495,786.6 1,497.0 Degree Production Funding FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 Actual Actual Expected Expected 4.6 4.6 4.6 4.5 14.9 13.9 14.5 14.5 450 345 359 373 95 95 95 95 75 68 71 75 Graduating seniors who rate their overall experience as good or excellent (percent) Full-time undergraduate students enrolled per semester in three or more primary courses with ranked faculty (percentage) Total number of degrees granted 7,777 7,098 7,253 7,393 Bachelors degrees granted 5,564 5,241 5,350 5,450 Masters degrees granted 1,373 1,399 1,313 1,343 First Professional degrees granted 354 146 150 150 Doctorate degrees granted 460 398 410 420 Fund 152 University of Arizona ‐ Main Campus FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Administrative Costs FY 2010 Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage 9,498.1 1,465,290.0 0.65% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. State Agency Budgets University of Arizona ‐ Main Campus 153 UHA University of Arizona ‐ Health Sciences Center Mission: To provide distinguished undergraduate, graduate, and professional health sciences education; to engage in basic and applied research of regional, national, and international significance; to create and disseminate knowledge; and to seek to integrate creative achievement into everyday life. Description: The Arizona Health Sciences Center (AHSC) in Tucson is the State’s only academic health sciences center. It provides the State and its people education, research, patient care, and services through its Colleges of Medicine, Nursing, Pharmacy, Public Health, Phoenix Medical Campus, University Medical Center, and university physicians. AHSC serves as the core of a broad network of State‐wide health services, health education, health restoration, health promotion, and illness prevention. Performance Measures Number of Degrees Granted BA/BS and MA/MS Number of degrees granted-PhD Percent of students passing Step I of the United States Medical Licensing Exam on the first try Percent of students passing Step II of the United States Medical Licensing Exam on the first try Percent of students indicating satisfied or very satisfied with their medical education on the Association of American Medical Colleges graduation questionnaire Instruction Organized Research Public Service Public Service Academic Support Student Services Institutional Support College of Medicine Phoenix Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Library Acquisitions Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. 14 54 55 56 97 N/A 98 N/A 94 N/A 95 N/A 97 N/A 95 N/A Administrative Costs FY 2010 Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 Actual Actual Expected Expected 166 475 488 497 FY 2010 Agency Req. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. 48,166.6 3,895.5 3,239.1 9,969.7 16,767.0 1,952.0 806.1 9,820.2 49,082.9 3,306.7 3,076.9 9,521.1 14,043.7 1,643.2 642.7 12,782.0 52,396.3 3,306.7 3,091.9 9,521.1 14,068.7 1,643.2 642.7 24,782.0 49,082.9 3,306.7 3,076.9 9,521.1 14,043.7 1,643.2 642.7 12,782.0 94,616.2 94,099.2 109,452.6 94,099.2 967.1 57,538.3 15,417.2 11,797.2 115.3 260.8 1,218.8 0.0 7,078.4 1,190.2 966.1 69,815.8 15,256.7 1,037.8 118.5 11.6 1,018.5 0.0 6,126.9 713.4 1,073.9 77,901.1 17,581.2 2,304.7 144.1 42.4 1,518.5 0.0 9,145.3 815.3 966.1 69,815.8 15,256.7 1,037.8 118.5 11.6 1,018.5 0.0 6,126.9 713.4 94,616.2 94,099.2 109,452.6 94,099.2 80,548.0 14,068.2 77,996.6 16,102.6 93,350.0 16,102.6 77,996.6 16,102.6 94,616.2 94,099.2 109,452.6 94,099.2 Administrative Costs 0.0 Agency Request 309,015.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 0.00% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund General Fund U of A College of Medical Collections - Appropriated Agency Total The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Liver Research Institute 526.7 522.4 522.4 522.4 SLI Telemedicine Network 2,230.8 2,132.2 2,132.2 2,132.2 SLI Clinical Rural Rotations 437.4 414.6 414.6 414.6 SLI Clinical Teaching 9,969.7 9,521.1 9,521.1 9,521.1 Support 154 University of Arizona ‐ Health Sciences Center FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget VSA Department of Veteransʹ Services Mission: To enrich and honor Arizonaʹs veterans and their families through education, advocacy, and service. Description: The Arizona Department of Veteransʹ Services assists veterans, their dependents, and/or survivors in developing and filing claims through the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs to obtain federal entitlements in the areas of disability, pension, insurance, burial, etc. The Department also provides fiduciary services to incapacitated veterans, surviving spouses, or minor children. In addition, the Department operates the Arizona State Veteran Home, a 200‐bed skilled nursing facility that provides long‐term care services to veterans and their spouses. The Department operates a state veteran cemetery in Sierra Vista and will be opening a second in the northern part of the state. The ADVS is designated as the ʺState Approving Agency,ʺ and is responsible for approving and supervising all institutions and establishments in Arizona that offer education and training to veterans. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. The following is a list of Special Line Items (SLI) which are included in the numbers above but are reflected here for specific disclosure. SLI Veterans' Organizations 29.2 29.2 29.2 29.2 Contracts Performance Measures Human service specialist to client ratio Monetary awards reported on claims and appeals filed by the state veterans' benefits counselors on behalf of Arizona veterans (expressed in millions of dollars for award the Department expects to receive) Percentage of customers rating the overall delivery of services as 1 to 3, using a 1-5 scale where 1 represents "Extremely Satisfied" and 5 represents "Extremely Dissatisfied." Expenditures of federal dollars in Arizona by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (in millions of dollars) 1,598.2 1,285.5 1,598.2 1,285.5 The number of federal dollars per veteran entering the Arizona economy (expressed as dollars per Veteran per year) 2,997.6 3,129.2 3,129.2 3,129.2 ¾ 16,814.4 277.5 16,598.8 279.1 16,598.8 279.1 16,598.8 279.1 23,012.7 22,890.8 22,890.8 22,890.8 342.0 12,617.0 5,094.9 1,566.4 92.1 13.6 472.9 29.2 2,564.5 562.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 359.0 11,243.0 5,623.6 1,400.6 143.0 2.0 500.0 29.2 2,393.8 653.0 902.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 359.0 11,243.0 5,623.6 1,400.6 143.0 2.0 500.0 29.2 2,393.8 653.0 902.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 359.0 11,243.0 5,623.6 1,400.6 143.0 2.0 500.0 29.2 2,393.8 653.0 902.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 Agency Total 23,012.7 22,890.8 22,890.8 22,890.8 General Fund Veterans' Conservatorship Fund State Home for Veterans Trust 8,758.1 677.3 8,399.5 747.5 8,399.5 747.5 8,399.5 747.5 13,577.3 13,743.8 13,743.8 13,743.8 23,012.7 22,890.8 22,890.8 22,890.8 Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Food Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out 140.4 144.6 148.94 92 93 94 95 1,726 1,760 1,796 5,352 5,513 1,692 ¾ VA expenditures are reported as of 9/30 of the previous year. 1,598.2 1,285.5 Agency Total FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 1:45 1:45 136.3 ¾ The survey has been redesigned with a numeric score. 1,780.2 1,143.0 Administration Veterans' Conservatorship/ Guardianship Veterans' Benefits Counseling Services State Veterans' Home Arizona Veterans' Cemeteries FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 1:35 1:45 5,045 5,196 Expressed in terms of actual dollars; no "multiplier effect" has been included in the reported figure. Percent of agency staff turnover (covered positions) as reported by the Arizona Department of Administration Average annual occupancy rate (in percent) Active caseload at end of fiscal year 41.95 40 40 40 87.5 90 92.5 93.5 363 370 380 390 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 1,370.0 1,404.3 29,052.0 29,052.0 4.83% 4.72% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency with special line items. Fund Agency Total State Agency Budgets Department of Veteransʹ Services 155 Performance Measures VTA State Veterinary Medical Examining Board Mission: To protect the health, safety, and welfare of Arizona citizens as well as the welfare of animals by the regulation of veterinarians, veterinary technicians, veterinary premises, and animal crematories. Description: The Board consists of nine members appointed by the Governor for five‐year terms. The Board is responsible for licensing veterinarians, certifying veterinary technicians, licensing veterinary medical premises, and licensing animal crematories. The Board administers examinations for veterinarians and veterinary technicians, inspects all fixed locations for veterinary medical premises and animal crematories, investigates complaints and violations, and takes appropriate regulatory disciplinary action to ensure the publicʹs protection. Agency Summary Program/Cost Center Licensing and Regulation Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2008 Actual FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 449.5 468.3 468.3 468.3 449.5 468.3 468.3 468.3 5.5 235.3 85.7 58.3 4.7 0.0 0.0 60.9 4.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 247.7 73.2 68.2 9.1 1.0 0.0 68.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 247.7 73.2 68.2 9.1 1.0 0.0 68.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.5 247.7 73.2 68.2 9.1 1.0 0.0 68.9 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 449.5 468.3 468.3 468.3 449.5 468.3 468.3 468.3 449.5 468.3 468.3 468.3 Percent of customers responding excellent or good on customer satisfaction survey Number of annual investigations conducted Total number of veterinarians licensed annually, including renewals Average number of calendar days from receipt to granting of license Number of complaints docketed FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 95 90 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 90 90 135 150 120 120 1,968 1,800 1,800 1,800 60 60 60 60 74 85 80 80 Number of complaints resolved 73 80 60 60 Average number of calendar days from receipt of complaint to resolution 70 80 90 120 Administrative Costs Administrative Costs Agency Request Administrative Cost Percentage FY 2010 FY 2011 32.2 468.0 33.5 468.0 6.88% 7.16% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. Fund Veterinary Medical Examiners Board Agency Total FY 2009 Supplemental Recommendations FY 2009 Veterinary Fund Adjustment 300.0 Laws 2008, Chapter 285, included a $609,500 transfer from the Boardʹs Fund to the General Fund. The transfer leaves the Board with insufficient funds to cover its FY 2009 appropriation. The Executive recommends a transfer of $300,000 from the General Fund to allow the Veterinary Fund to remain solvent through FY 2010. General Fund 156 300.0 State Veterinary Medical Examining Board FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget WCA FY 2010 Department of Water Resources Mission: To ensure a long‐term, safe, sufficient, and secure water supply for the State; to develop public policies which promote the efficient use and equitable distribution of water in an environmentally and economically sound manner; and to promote the management of floodplains and dams to reduce loss of life and damage to property. Description: The Department of Water Resources (DWR) was established in 1980 to administer all state water laws except those laws relating to water quality. Primary responsibilities include implementing the Groundwater Code, supporting the adjudication of water rights, ensuring the safety of dams, managing floods, implementing surface water laws, surveying water resources statewide, and assessing water quality in conjunction with the Department of Environmental Quality. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center Agency Support Water Management and Statewide Planning Dam Safety and Flood Warning Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 5,919.2 15,490.3 5,032.6 19,800.7 5,032.6 18,800.7 5,715.2 17,800.7 926.0 1,043.9 1,043.9 1,043.9 22,335.5 25,877.2 24,877.2 24,559.8 198.1 11,323.3 3,857.2 2,546.8 401.0 41.7 0.0 3,474.5 691.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 231.7 11,955.5 4,075.8 5,319.2 441.0 39.0 0.0 3,107.1 528.4 0.0 0.0 411.2 0.0 231.7 11,955.5 4,075.8 4,419.2 471.0 39.0 0.0 2,877.1 628.4 0.0 0.0 411.2 0.0 231.7 11,955.5 4,075.8 3,419.2 471.0 39.0 0.0 (1,440.3) 628.4 0.0 0.0 5,411.2 0.0 22,335.5 25,877.2 24,877.2 24,559.8 22,330.8 0.0 17,858.1 6,900.0 20,308.1 3,450.0 25,440.7 (2,000.0) 4.7 1,119.1 1,119.1 1,119.1 Fund General Fund Arizona Water Banking Fund Assured and Adequate Water Supply Administration Fund Agency Total 22,335.5 25,877.2 24,877.2 24,559.8 Executive Recommendations FY 2010 Restore Funding for Water Programs State Agency Budgets General Fund Arizona Water Banking Fund FY 2011 0.0 2,450.0 2,450.0 (2,450.0) (6,900.0) Statutory Funding ‐ Water Protection Fund (1,000.0) 3,000.0 A.R.S. § 45‐2112 appropriates $5.0 million annually from the State General Fund to the Water Protection Fund for projects benefiting rivers and riparian habitat. The primary purpose of the WPF is to provide grants for projects that are designed to maintain, enhance and restore rivers and streams and riparian resources, including fish and wildlife that are dependent on these habitats. The recommendation transfers $1.0 million in FY 2010 from the Water Banking Fund and $5.0 million in FY 2011 from the General Fund to the Water Protection Fund. For FY 2010, the Executive recommends that a session law provision be added to suspend A.R.S. § 45‐2112 to state that thetransfer amount to the Water Protection Fund be specified in the General Appropriation Act. 0.0 General Fund Arizona Water Banking Fund 5,000.0 (2,000.0) (1,000.0) Contractual Rent 0.0 132.6 The recommendation includes $132,600 in FY 2011 to cover rent payment obligations. 0.0 General Fund 132.6 Performance Measures Percent of Arizona's annual entitlement to Colorado River water beneficially used Number of dams classified in a nonemergency unsafe condition Per capita water use in the Active Management Areas (in acre feet) Percent of unused entitlement recharged FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 100 100 Administrative Costs Agency Request FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 100 100 13 13 13 13 2.74 2.74 2.74 2.74 95 95 95 95 Administrative Costs Administrative Cost Percentage Executive Issues FY 2011 Laws 2008, Chapter 285, (General Appropriations Act) reduced the Department’s operating budget by $4.9 million and authorized it to temporarily use the Water Banking Fund. The Executive recommends reductions of ($2.5 million) in FY 2010 and ($6.9 million) in FY 2011 to eliminate the Departmentʹs reliance on the Water Banking Fund. To partially offset this reduction, the recommendation also includes $2.5 million in FY 2010 and in FY 2011 from the General Fund. FY 2010 FY 2011 2,994.6 55,941.0 2,994.6 56,068.0 5.35% 5.34% The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. (4,450.0) Department of Water Resources 157 The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation to the agency. 158 Department of Water Resources FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget WMA FY 2010 Department of Weights and Measures Mission: To ensure equity and accuracy and the effective communication of weight and measurement standards and to promote clean air through regulation of petroleum products and dispensing systems within the Arizona marketplace. Description: The Department of Weights and Measures ensures that commercial devices used for the sale or use of items by weight or measure are correct and accurate for their intended use, houses and maintains the stateʹs primary standards, prevents unfair dealing by weight or measure in commodities sold and purchased in this state, ensures proper labeling of products sold by weight or measure, ensures pricing of all commodities is in conformance with state law and rules, and licenses weighmasters and registered service agencies and their employees who are responsible for weight certification and calibration of devices in the marketplace. The Department also regulates two petroleum‐ related environmental programs: Oxygenated Fuel and Vapor Recovery. The major stakeholders of the Agency are all people who buy, sell, service, or receive items, commodities, or services by weight, measure, or count within Arizona. Agency Summary FY 2008 Actual Program/Cost Center General Services Air Quality Oxygenated Fuel Vapor Recovery Agency Total Category FTE Personal Services ERE Amount Prof. And Outside Services Travel - In State Travel - Out of State Aid to Others Other Operating Expenses Equipment Capital Outlay Debt Service Cost Allocation Transfers Out Agency Total FY 2009 Approp. FY 2010 Exec. Rec. FY 2011 Exec. Rec. 1,736.6 892.3 595.7 1,917.6 885.4 657.5 1,907.5 866.3 657.5 1,907.5 866.3 657.5 3,224.6 3,460.5 3,431.3 3,431.3 41.9 1,573.7 613.3 270.5 181.2 14.9 0.0 437.8 133.2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.9 1,679.0 619.5 310.5 225.3 20.1 0.0 525.5 80.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.9 1,679.0 619.5 310.5 225.3 20.1 0.0 525.5 51.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 41.9 1,679.0 619.5 310.5 225.3 20.1 0.0 525.5 51.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3,224.6 3,460.5 3,431.3 3,431.3 1,603.4 1,488.0 133.2 1,593.6 1,542.9 324.0 1,584.6 1,523.8 322.9 1,584.6 1,523.8 322.9 3,224.6 3,460.5 3,431.3 3,431.3 FY 2011 Executive Issues Accreditation & One‐Time Equipment (29.2) (29.2) In FY 2009, the Department received one‐time equipment funding of $42,200. For FY 2010 and FY 2011, the Executive recommends a ($29,200) decrease, leaving $13,000 to cover annual recalibration costs for the State Metrology Lab. This appropriation would help ensure the integrity and continued use of laboratory equipment, enabling the Metrology Lab to maintain accreditation and carry out its statutory responsibilities. General Fund Air Quality Fund Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance Enforcement Fund (9.0) (9.0) (19.1) (19.1) (1.1) (1.1) Performance Measures Percent of Arizona Clean Burning Gasoline (AzCBG's) in compliance. Percent of facilities inspected annually that are in compliance. Percent of new facilities in compliance with vapor recovery standards. Percent of UPC (price scanning) devices in compliance. FY 2008 FY 2009 Actual Expected 98 100 FY 2010 FY 2011 Expected Expected 100 100 88 87 89 90 88 87 89 90 76 79 77 78 Administrative Costs FY 2010 FY 2011 697.0 697.0 Agency Request 3,484.0 Administrative Cost Percentage 20.01% 3,478.0 20.04% Administrative Costs The agency request represents all funds, not just appropriated funds. These administrative costs are estimated for the express purpose of satisfying A.R.S. § 35‐115.5 and should not be used for any other purpose. The Executive recommends a lump‐sum appropriation by program. Fund General Fund Air Quality Fund Motor Vehicle Liability Insurance Enforcement Agency Total Executive Recommendations FY 2010 State Agency Budgets FY 2011 Department of Weights and Measures 159 160 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2009 and FY 2010 Agency Expenditure Suspensions FY 2009 AND FY 2010 BUDGET MANAGEMENT PLAN DETAIL FY 2009 and FY 2010 Recommended Expenditure Suspensions FY 2009 Agency General Fund Accountancy Board Board Modernization - Board Fund Acupuncture Board Unpaid Leave - Board Fund Department of Administration Operating Suspension Utilities Reduce Telecommunications Program Office Spending - Telecomm's Fund Residual Fund Balance - ERE Benefits Eliminate FY 2009 Rate Reduction to Agencies - Automation Fund Eliminate Remaining Wellness Funding & Reduce Spending - Special Employee Health Insurance Trust Eliminate Transparency Initiative - AFIS II Collection Reduce Vehicle Purchases - Motor Pool Revolving Office of Administrative Hearings Operating Suspension Dismiss Admin Law Judge - IGA/ISA Fund Department of Agriculture Operating Suspension Utilize Fund Balance - Indirect Cost CDFA Agreement - Designated Funds Pesticide Recycling - Pesticide Beef Council Admin Fee - Designated Funds Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Eliminate Prop 204 County Hold Harmless Appropriation HealthCare Group Subsidy Administration/Operating Suspension Reduce Disproportionate Share Private Hospital Payments Unspent GME Reduce Physician Reimbursement Rate General Fund 0 9,044 9,044 1,400,422 105,500 250,000 500,000 1,100,000 600,000 250,000 0 1,100,000 600,000 500,000 700,000 0 0 140,000 140,000 111,870 600,000 111,870 600,000 300,000 70,000 50,000 26,957 4,825,600 1,000,000 1,000,000 3,495,000 600,000 1,000,000 200,000 Attorney General - Department of Law Lump Sum Suspension Expenditure Suspensions - OF 606,790 Other Funds 164,507 1,347,700 69,500 Commission on the Arts Operating Suspension Spending Suspension - Arts Trust Auditor General Expenditure Suspensions Expenditure Suspensions - OF FY 2010 Other Funds 300,000 70,000 50,000 26,957 4,825,600 1,000,000 1,000,000 3,495,000 0 0 180,000 115,948 0 606,790 950,973 927,600 950,973 927,600 118,993 118,993 Barber Examiners Operating Expenses - Barber Board 28,280 28,280 Behavioral Health Examiners Vacancy Savings - Behavioral Health Examiners Formal Hearing Suspension - Behavioral Health Examiners 89,450 6,300 89,450 6,300 Chiropractic Board Operating Suspension - Chiropractic Board 36,428 36,428 Capital Post Conviction Public Defender Office Operating Suspension 50,000 50,100 41,100 41,100 State Board for Charter Schools State Agency Budgets Operating Suspension 161 FY 2009 Agency Department of Commerce Operating Suspension Interest - 21 Century Fund Less Training Dollars - Workforce Job Training Community Colleges Operating Suspension Corporation Commission Lump Sum Suspension Expenditure Suspension Department of Corrections Provisional Beds Delay Startup Costs - State Charitable Penal and Reformatory Land Stop Payment of Criminal Justice Enhancement Funding - CJEF General Fund 400,000 0 6,000,000 400,000 0 2,822,000 3,462,670 0 5,000,000 1,134,413 1,134,413 369,000 Drug and Gang Prevention Resource Center 162 1,000,000 24,000,000 400,000 Dispensing Opticians Suspension of Expenditures - Dispensing Opticians Board Department of Emergency and Military Affairs Civil Air Patrol AZ 211 Statutory Appropriation for Emergencies Operating Suspension Local Emergency Planning Grants - Emergency Response 331,356 16,000,000 Dental Examiners Operating Budget - Dental Board Department of Education Voucher Funds Operating Budget Suspensions Soft Capital Suspension Expenditure Suspensions - OF Other Funds 480,600 1,836,034 Deaf and the Hard of Hearing Operating Suspension - Telecom Fund Department of Economic Security Eliminate Eligibility System Upgrade Operating Suspension Eliminate Autism Appropriations Suspend Lottery Transfer to Homeless Programs Eliminate AAA's FY 2007 Capacity Building/Adult Services Rollback FY 2008 DD Provider Rate Increase New LIHEAP to Backfill GF Additional Budget Reductions IT Services - Risk Management Fund Contract Suspension - Marriage and Communication Skills Fund Balance Transfer - Domestic Violence Shelter General Fund 319,400 Criminal Justice Commission No Agency Response Attainable - OF Schools for the Deaf and the Blind School Bus Replacement FY 2010 Other Funds 369,000 210,739 460,000 77,667 10,000 5,888 5,888 44,730 44,730 7,000,000 6,900,000 900,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 2,624,700 1,290,000 610,000 7,731,300 6,900,000 1,800,000 1,000,000 2,000,000 0 0 0 135,500 271,000 320,000 2,000,000 4,108,400 20,665,300 271,000 0 0 4,108,400 0 797,174 54,700 73,200 1,000,000 261,100 54,700 73,200 1,000,000 1,500,700 22,379 22,379 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2009 Agency Department of Environmental Quality County Travel Suspension Deferral of Fee Schedule Change for Vehicle Emission Inspections Reduce CIT Funding of WQARF - Water Quality Assurance Revolving Eliminate Payment to Policy Commission and Technical Appeals Panel Underground Storage Tank Revolving Fund Suspend Entire Program - Used Oil Reduce Contract commitments - Centralized Monitoring Fund Reduce Contract commitments - Voluntary Remediation Reduce Grants - Recycling Reduce Appropriation Authority - Hazardous Waste Management Reduce Repair and Retrofits - Retrofit Restrict data collection contract - Air Permits Administration General Fund FY 2010 Other Funds 1,500,000 General Fund Other Funds 1,500,000 5,600,000 2,588,300 0 2,588,300 22,000 22,000 137,800 100,000 75,000 100,000 300,000 200,000 50,000 137,200 100,000 0 400,000 300,000 0 50,000 Governor's Office for Equal Opportunity Operating Suspension 30,000 30,000 Board of Executive Clemency Reduce Operating Expenses Staff Reduction Operating Suspension 40,900 40,900 Department of Financial Institutions Operating Budget Suspensions Receivership Expenses - Receivership Mortgage Fraud Investigations - Special Revolving 200,000 Department of Fire, Building and Life Safety Operating Suspension Reduced Operating - Building and Fire Safety 400,000 Office of the State Forester Community Protection Initiative Fund Vacancy Savings Fire Suppression Fund 40,000 152,600 Game and Fish Watercraft Patrols - Watercraft Law Enforcement OHV Patrols - OHV Law Enforcement Habitat Restoration and Enhancement Projects - Wildlife Habitat OHV Enforcement and Rider Education Program Government Information Technology Agency E-Health No Agency Response Attainable Governor's Office Operating Budget Suspensions Governor's Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting Lump Sum Suspension State Agency Budgets 30,000 71,031 400,000 44,860 Funeral Directors & Embalmers Professional and Outside Services Non Capital Equipment In-State Travel Arizona Geological Survey Operating Suspensions 0 30,000 71,031 0 0 152,600 1,653,813 1,653,813 7,500 1,000 3,500 7,500 1,000 3,500 350,000 400,000 145,000 507,900 350,000 400,000 145,000 507,900 120,000 120,000 250,000 250,000 349,124 349,124 475,000 475,000 75,000 75,000 163 FY 2009 Agency Department of Health Services Administration Operating Budget Family Health Services - Operating Budget Public Health Operating Budget Behavioral Health Operating Budget, Prop. 204 Administration - State Match, Contract Compliance Laboratory Services Hepatitis C Surveillance Teratogen County TB Provider Care and Control Direct Grants to Counties Loan Repayment Alzheimer's Disease Research Crisis Intervention Training Grants Eliminate All State Poison Control Center Funding Reduce Disease Control Programs Assurance & Licensure Non-Title XIX Substance Abuse Lump Sum Reduction Newborn Screening Indirect Costs - Newborn Screening Newborn Screening Program - Newborn Screening High Risk Perinatal Program - EMS EMS Operating Budget Suspension - EMS Public Health Operating Budget - EMS General Fund 700,000 580,000 720,000 400,000 400,000 320,000 226,000 60,000 242,000 200,000 20,000 750,000 250,000 0 174,700 150,000 1,190,000 320,000 226,000 60,000 242,000 200,000 20,000 750,000 250,000 0 174,700 150,000 1,190,000 478,600 100,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 400,000 House of Representatives 723,600 400,000 40,782 723,600 200,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 29,499 24,000 Industrial Commission Operating Suspension - OF 200,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 29,499 24,000 1,404,137 2,808,274 Department of Insurance Operating Suspension Change funding for Senior Legal Analyst 222,600 Joint Legislative Budget Committee 152,500 152,500 10,000,000 10,000,000 Judiciary Department of Juvenile Corrections Operating Suspension Education Grants - Indirect Cost Recovery Land Department Fund Shift to Fee Account End Colorado River Study 264,000 30,622 2,500,000 40,000 3,000,000 37,002 150,000 60,000 Other Funds 478,600 100,000 150,000 100,000 50,000 40,782 Housing Owner-Occupied Housing Rehabilitation Program - Housing Trust Down Payment Closing Cost Assistance - Urban Housing Trust Land Trust Incentive - Housing Trust Rental Development/Recapitalization Set-aside - Housing Trust 164 General Fund 700,000 580,000 720,000 Arizona Historical Society Operating Suspension Operating Suspension - OF Commission of Indian Affairs Operating Suspension FY 2010 Other Funds 37,002 150,000 FY 2010 and FY60,000 2011 Executive Budget FY 2009 Agency Eliminate FTE Reduce Planning and Engineering End NRCD Support Administrative Efficiencies Fire Suppression Trust Management Self-Funding Program Trust Land Management Funding Reduction Operating Reduction NRCDs - Environmental Special Plate General Fund 200,000 300,000 283,800 6,200 3,000,000 6,000,000 287,000 Library, Archives and Public Records Expenditure Suspension - Elected Official 351,400 Mine Inspector Operating Budget Suspensions Nursing Further Delay Mandated Website Changes Delay in Hiring Database Programmer Software/Hardware Office Supplies Office of Administrative Hearings Fees Court Reporting 351,400 13,300 387,000 25,207 23,457 43,700 40,700 5,300 7,000 5,000 6,900 8,000 135,600 5,300 7,000 5,000 6,900 8,000 135,600 12,800 37,300 11,900 29,000 10,300 147,917 12,800 37,300 11,900 29,000 10,300 147,917 120,000 120,000 54,000 54,000 Naturopathic Board Attorney General Fees Travel Operating Costs Navigable Streams Adjudication Commission Outside Professional Services 18,200 287,000 335,900 Continue Vacancies: Investigator, Part-Time Medical Consultant Positions Eliminate Membership Dues, Conferences/Training, Subscriptions Release Licensees Currently in the Monitored Aftercare Program Transfer National Practioner Data Bank Costs to Licensee Reduce OMC Clinical Reviews Conducted by Outside Medical Consultants Reduce Expert Witness Costs Eliminate 3 FTE - Medical Board Fund Other Funds 200,000 300,000 283,800 6,200 3,000,000 11,000,000 13,300 Medical Board Eliminate Use of Temporary Position in Licensing Reduce In-State Travel Administrative Hearing Costs to Licensees Reduce Printing, Long Distance & Postage Reduce Intra-Agency Agreement with Central Board of Medical Student Loans Reduce Loans to Students General Fund 18,200 Legislative Council Department of Liquor Licenses and Control Operating Suspension Eliminate Special Investigator - Surcharge K Eliminate Special Investigator - Surcharge L FY 2010 Other Funds 7,167 2,833 10,000 20,000 7,167 2,833 10,000 20,000 152,198 53,245 45,000 15,000 12,000 12,000 0 0 45,000 15,000 10,922 10,921 Nursing Care Administrators Board Non-Capital Equipment 11,839 11,839 Occupational Therapy Examiners Operating Expenses - OF 17,143 17,143 194,373 194,373 Office of Pest Management Vacancy Savings - Structural Pest Control State Parks Board State Agency Budgets 165 FY 2009 Agency General Fund General Fund Other Funds Operating Suspensions - OF 6,283,054 3,200,000 Power Authority Operating Suspensions - OF 2,189,747 2,189,747 Personnel Board Software Upgrades In-State Travel Vacancy Savings Hearing Officers & Outside Counsel Other Suspensions Operating Suspension Commission for Postsecondary Education Unobligated Grant Funding Eliminate Travel, Implement ER Items - Private Postsecondary Education Fund Balance Transfer - Private Postsecondary Education Prescott Historical Society Operating Suspension Department of Public Safety GIITEM Grants for County Attorneys GIITEM Local Immigration Enforcement Grants GIITEM DPS Immigration Personnel Photo Enforcement Vendor Payments Operating Budget GangNet/Crime Analysts - SLI County Gang Prosecution - SLI Sex Offender Fee Sweep - Sex Offender Notification CCW Fee Sweep - Highway Patrol Impound Fee Sweep - Highway Patrol AFIT Western Union Settlement - Administration Operating Suspension - Joint Fund Reduce Overtime by 5% and Highway Patrol Vehicles - HURF Department of Racing Operating Suspension Award Suspension - Breeders Award Award Suspension - County Fair Betterment Radiation Regulatory Agency Operating Suspension Department of Real Estate Operating Suspension Private Industry to Fund Part of COE - Real Estate Ed. Revolving Fund Board of Regents FY 2008 Math & Science 40,100 40,100 1,000,000 1,000,000 3,000 100,000 6,000 0 50,000 50,000 300,000 7,000,000 700,000 5,000,000 1,000,000 400,000 350,000 300,000 4,000,000 700,000 752,400 1,000,000 400,000 700,000 50,000 500,000 500,000 685,400 1,489,000 1,521,600 250,000 0 0 0 0 2,131,596 1,521,600 300,000 100,000 86,462 200,000 100,000 86,462 180,000 320,000 350,000 3,850 1,500,000 5,000 1,500,000 Registrar of Contractors FY08 ROCIMS SLI - Registrar of Contractors FY09 ROCIMS SLI - Registrar of Contractors 300,000 306,500 400,000 0 Residential Utility Consumer Office Operating Suspension - RUCO Revolving 122,003 0 18,312 18,312 Respiratory Care Examiners Delay Payments to ADOA, Other Agencies Department of Revenue Operating Suspension Operating Suspension - Unclaimed Property School Facilities Board Operating Budget Building Renewal Grants 166 FY 2010 Other Funds 1,000,000 1,000,000 42,500 200,000 12,555,899 60,000 200,000 0 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget FY 2009 General Fund Agency FY 2010 Other Funds General Fund Other Funds Secretary of State - Department of State Operating Suspensions 70,000 70,000 Senate 478,900 478,900 30,000 30,000 Board of Tax Appeals Operating Expenditures Technical Registration RIF 1 Investigator Position - OF Office of Tourism Reduce Marketing and Promotion Department of Transportation Operating Suspension Project Cancellations - Economic Strength Project FY 2008 Capital Outlay - GCA H20 Tank Refurb - Aviation Operating Suspension - Transportation Equipment Revolving Operating Suspension - Vehicle Inspection Enforcement Operating Suspension - Safety Enforcement & Trans. Infrastructure Operating Suspension - Liability Insurance Enforcement Defer Federal Grant Reimbursement - Aviation State Treasurer Operating Suspension Universities 22,164 2,000,000 Operating Reduction Capital Outlay Appropriations Miscellaneous Projects Reduce ADOA Building Renewal TOTALS 2,000,000 10,000 0 950,000 559,900 1,500,000 300,000 275,000 600,000 2,904,200 1,000,000 0 500,000 300,000 150,000 200,000 1,000,000 70,000 70,000 50,000,000 50,000,000 Veterans' Services Various Military Installation Property Acquisitions - Military Installation Department of Water Resources Rural Water Studies Suspension Water Program/Fund Operating Suspension Operating Suspension - Flood Warning System Operating Suspension - Water Protection Operating Suspension - Adjudication Operating Suspension - Dam Repair Operating Suspension - Purchase and Retirement Operating Suspensions - OF 40,000 1,729,126 500,000 3,000,000 500,000 1,729,126 500,000 3,000,000 500,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 420,000 10,000 30,000 10,000 10,000 20,000 0 160,000 160,000 2,000,000 0 0 214,621,189 60,378,811 174,731,868 41,823,188 SUMMARY - TOTAL SPENDING SUSPENSIONS TOTAL AGENCY GF SUSPENSIONS OTHER HUMAN RESOURCE SUSPENSIONS SUSPENSIONS FROM OTHER FUNDS TOTAL - ALL FUNDS FY 2009 FY 2010 214,621,189 174,731,868 25,000,000 12,600,000 60,378,811 300,000,000 60,378,811 41,823,188 229,155,056 *These proposed cut figures were originally based on one half of a year’s appropriation. Beginning January 1, for each month that passes without a legislative mandate to reduce or eliminate these programs, 1/6 of the proposed cut amount will no longer be available. These programs cannot be reduced or eliminated without legislation. State Agency Budgets 167 168 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Efficiency Review Arizona Department of Administration FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 1,545.7 1,402.4 143.3 244,782.6 220,065.6 24,717.0 37,538.4 36,570.4 968.0 Administration Financial Services Facilities Management Human Resources Fleet Consolidation 930,648.0 869,327.4 61,320.6 Information Technology Services 65,314.9 65,124.9 190.0 Support Services 25,543.2 24,613.3 929.9 4,607.8 4,607.8 0.0 102,835.6 102,835.6 0.0 1,412,816.2 1,324,547.4 88,268.8 Agency Total (All Funds) Other 929.9 The savings accumulate to several agencies. Capitol Police Risk Management A 1994 Auditor General study, which found that more than ten agencies managed their own fleets, recommended that fleet management be consolidated under one entity. Considering the number of State‐owned vehicles, consolidation could result in considerable savings. There may also be opportunities for State agencies to use fleet vehicles more efficiently, as some State agencies may be underutilizing vehicles that are leased from the Department of Administration. ADOA standards provide that such vehicles should be used between 10,000 and 15,000 miles each year. In cases where vehicle usage falls below that standard, redeploying vehicles could result in efficiencies. Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 226,181.6 1,098,365.8 Other New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 87,893.2 Employee Benefits State Government will reduce year‐to‐year growth in employee health insurance costs through its conversion to a self‐insurance program. The new benefit options program was implemented effective October 1, 2004, and 60,000 employees and retirees are enrolled in the self‐insured medical plan, surpassing the 59,000 prior enrollment under the CIGNA fully insured medical plan. 59,000.0 Agencies cost avoidance will be determined by the specific agency Energy Conservation Opportunities exist to lower the State’s utility expenditures. Changing existing lighting, installing occupancy sensors and programmable thermostats, replacing standard motors with energy efficient models, establishing energy conservation programs, and other strategies have proven effective in saving energy and reducing utility bills. While some changes have been performed in ADOA‐run buildings, more can be done. In addition, buildings that are not managed by ADOA ‐ such as AHCCCS, ADOT, DES, Corrections, and Juvenile Corrections ‐ have not taken full advantage of these energy efficiencies. To save energy, State agencies should consider developing energy efficiency plans rolling savings into new technologies that would help them realize even greater cost savings. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 2,320.6 The savings will accumulate to several agencies. FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Other Hiring Gateway The hiring gateway is the new paperless recruiting and hiring system, which was deployed to all agencies in April 2005. A preliminary efficiency assessment suggested that there has been a 10% savings due to improved staff productivity and a 50% savings as a result of eliminating paper résumé processing. Reduced advertising costs resulted in a 35% savings. The program was fully implemented in FY 2006. 568.0 Savings accumulate in the COSF Utilities SLI; monies in the SLI are avaliable for purchasing utilities services. Leasing/Space Utilization The Department of Administration (ADOA) Capitol Mall Master Plan for facility development offers the potential for savings in the leasing program. Through the Privatized Lease to Own (PLTO) program, ADOA has been developing lease‐purchase office space on the Capitol Mall through the reversion of private sector leases. If another PLTO project were to be constructed, annual lease savings significantly greater than 1% could be achieved on the leases reverted into that building. Unfortunately, ADOA does not have the authority to negotiate leases for other agencies or to direct other agencies to renegotiate their leases; such action requires an Executive order. Other 400.0 The savings accumulate to the agencies. SCIFI Agency Server Hosting ADOA will host servers for large agencies in lieu of large agencies building their own secure data centers. The savings accrue as cost avoidance for the data center construction costs. Other 190.0 The savings accumulate to other agencies. Statewide E‐Procurement State Government is modernizing and integrating its procurement system to reduce the cost of goods and services it purchases. The Value in Procurement (VIP) program will identify and document savings over the next three years by re‐engineering procurement business processes and relationships among State agencies to effectively leverage the Stateʹs purchasing power. All agencies are expected to achieve savings through participation in VIP. Savings are used for unfunded employee‐related expenditure increases. Other 24,717.0 The savings accumulate to the agenices. State Agency Budgets 169 Arizona Department of Agriculture Training Consolidation Many agencies provide training similar to that offered by many other State agencies. Such training could be consolidated under and provided by Arizona Government University (AzGU) at a reduced cost. AzGU has developed the infrastructure to streamline these administrative functions across agencies, thus eliminating redundancies in curriculum development, scheduling, registration and record keeping; using trainers more efficiently; and reducing costs of materials and outside vendors. Other 143.3 The savings accumulate with the agencies. 88,268.8 FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Food Safety and Quality Assurance 7,709.3 7,690.0 19.3 Non‐Food Product Quality Assurance 1,004.7 1,004.5 0.2 Animal Disease, Ownership and Welfare Protection 3,787.9 3,687.0 100.9 Pest Exclusion and Management 5,471.6 4,542.3 929.3 Native Plant and Cultural Resources Protection 325.3 325.3 0.0 Pesticide Compliance and Worker safety 782.5 741.8 40.7 Administrative Services 2,092.8 2,067.9 24.9 State Agricultural Laboratory 2,590.8 2,579.3 11.5 Agricultural Consultation and Training 3,499.4 3,488.4 11.0 Commodity Development and Promotion 3,043.8 3,043.7 0.1 Agency Total (All Funds) 30,308.1 29,170.2 1,137.9 Appropriated Funds 15,719.5 Non‐appropriated Funds 13,450.7 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 197.9 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations AZNet Early Pay Discount The Department began paying AZNET charges early resulting in savings of $2,500 for FY 2006. AZNET provides a 2% early pay credit if payments are received within 15 days of invoice. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 2.5 Offset increased costs. Closure of Ports of Entry to Agricultural Inspections The Department of Agriculture discontinued its inspections at the port of entry at the start of FY 2009. Personnel costs associated with this were eliminated, thus reducing the overall size of the agencyʹs expenditures. 928.0 Other $1.1 million General Fund appropriation reduction 170 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System Electronic communications The Department achieved savings from enhanced use of electronic communications instead of traditional mailing of such items as reports, council member communications, and licensing applicant communications. 1.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Offset the General Fund reduction in the Agencyʹs budget since FY 2002 as well as increased health and retirement benefit and gasoline costs. FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 163,395.5 159,642.9 3,752.6 Long Term Care 2,354,845.1 2,312,635.7 42,209.4 Administration Acute Care 4,591,358.0 4,463,582.3 127,775.7 Fleet Proposition 204 2,604,757.3 2,525,523.9 79,233.4 The Department reduced its motor pool fleet by 22 vehicles by combining travel when possible, by cross‐training employees so that fewer employees need to travel in order to provide service, and by reimbursing employees for use of their own vehicles when that is more cost effective than utilizing a motor pool vehicle. Healthcare Group 65,721.5 65,717.3 4.2 205,503.2 197,930.8 7,572.4 29,389.8 26,589.8 2,800.0 10,014,970.4 9,751,622.7 263,347.7 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 148.3 Offset the General Fund reduction in the Agencyʹs budget since FY 2002 as well as increased health and retirement benefit and gasoline costs. Purchasing In an effort to reduce costs, the Department has reduced cell phone and desk phone services and pagers. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Medicaid in the Public Schools Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds 2,041,406.9 Non‐appropriated Funds 7,710,215.8 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 154,258.1 16.6 Offset the General Fund reduction in the Agencyʹs budget since FY 2002 as well as increased health and retirement benefit and gasoline costs. Yuma Office Relocation The Departmentʹs Yuma office moved to a smaller, older facility. The savings represent a reduction of $1,000 in utility costs in the smaller facility. The Department also saved $28,500 in rent. Previously, commercial office space was leased at a cost of $2,575 per month. The current office space consists of several prefabricated units from the State Hospital. The office is located on the University of Arizona Extension Farm at a cost of $200 per month. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Childrenʹs Health Insurance Program 29.5 Offset the General Fund reduction in the Agencyʹs budget since FY 2002 as well as increased health and retirement benefit and gasoline costs. 1,125.9 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations 340B Prescription Pricing Opportunities AHCCCS is seeking a single‐source contract to take advantage of 340B drug pricing (which is about 20% lower than average Medicaid pricing) for anti‐hemolytic blood factors. The agency is also assessing models and pricing opportunities to allow other State entities to take advantage of 340B drug pricing. Implementing these procedures will help to reduce overall medical inflation costs, effectively reducing future requests for the Acute Care program. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 8,126.1 Savings resulting from this initiative will be used to support member growth and increases in medical and drug costs to Medicaid. Actuarial Services Prior to 2004, AHCCCS contracted with an external actuarial firm for the provision of actuarial services. The primary assistance provided by the actuaries was the development of capitation rates for the Acute, ALTCS, and CMDP programs. In 2004 AHCCCS established an Actuarial Unit in the Division of Health Care Management. The use of in‐house staff has resulted in a number of significant advantages for AHCCCS including, but not limited to: reduced costs, the building of institutional knowledge about capitation rate development, greater ability to respond to questions by contractors and others about capitation rates, and the availability of highly‐trained analysts for expanded fiscal analyses. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 395.2 Savings are being used to offset the increased costs of ongoing operations and reduced administrative funding resulting from budget cuts. State Agency Budgets 171 Claims Validator Energy Initiative AHCCCS purchased a software program that will electronically and systematically analyze all data transactions uploaded from AHCCCS’ partners and automatically filter out invalid data. This software program will automate a currently manual process. The agency will realize savings in productivity of approximately $900,000 per year. However, the cost of the Automated software will exceed productivity savings in the first year, with savings expected to be realized in SFY09. Staff used to manually identify invalid data will be redeployed to work on projects that have been previously placed on hold. This initiative is an energy objective pursuant to Executive Order Number 2001‐08 to reduce energy consumption by 10% in year 2008 and 15% in the year 2010. AHCCCS will control energy usage through developing and implementing cost effective programs and promote and encourage employee awareness and training through an established Energy Awareness Team. A formal plan has been developed and tracking costs will be implemented and reported when available. Additional energy savings are being realized with the implementation of programs such as Virtual Office. Other 762.5 Copier Maintenance Reduction During FY 2008 AHCCCS reviewed the IKON Copier Maintenance Contract to implement cost savings for FY 2009 and beyond. Several changes were made to the contract to create a substantial savings to the Agency. Other 684.0 Savings are being used to offset the increased costs of ongoing operations and reduced administrative funding resulting from budget cuts. E‐Learning AHCCCS implemented the following opportunities identified for cost reduction and avoidance: adoption of step therapy guidelines to encourage prescribing generic or low‐cost brand drugs (cost reduction); diagnosis and age‐appropriate criteria for use of selected drugs (cost avoidance); and quantity limits per prescription of selected drugs (cost avoidance). The formulary enhancements were applied to new prescriptions for these drugs, and fee‐for‐service members on established therapies were continued. 214.2 Cost savings from implementing this initiative will help to reduce overall medical cost of inflation. 210.4 The savings will be reallocated to additional E‐Learning efforts. Electronic Claims Submission (ECS) AHCCCS has increased the number of providers submitting claims electronically by conducting outreach to hospital providers and making necessary enhancements to internet features that allow providers to submit claims electronically. Electronic claims eliminate the manual process of opening mail, batching claims, scanning claims, and data entry of claims. Other 96.0 This issue allows AHCCCS to redeploy one staff person from data entry to work on other claims related projects. Eliminate Direct Deposit Remittances Fleet Management The agency sold or salvaged 32 vehicles in FY 2003, which provides ongoing savings in vehicle maintenance. Maintenance costs increase by approximately 10% annually, which is reflected in the savings for these 32 vehicles. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 139.0 The amount continues to be used to cover the increasing costs of maintenance and fuel. Medicaid School‐Based Claiming AHCCCS previously contracted with two third‐party administrators to claim funds for administrative outreach and direct medical services provided by schools. These contracts were combined into a single contract with a single entity, resulting in reduced costs to schools. 2,800.0 Other During FY 2008 the Agency implemented a change to the payroll process by eliminating the paper direct deposit remittance. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Fee‐For‐Service (FFS) Prescription Benefit Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations AHCCCS is using E‐Learning to support Virtual Office and save time and money over the classroom alternative. Savings will be gained by avoiding both travel costs and trainer salaries and benefits. Technology 32.5 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings are being used to offset the increased costs of ongoing operations and reduced administrative funding resulting from budget cuts. Savings will be reinvested to work on projects that have been previously placed on hold. This issue created savings for the schools. 12.9 Savings are being used to offset the increased costs of ongoing operations and reduced administrative funding resulting from budget cuts. 172 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Outlier Payment Methodology Virtual Office (VO) Outlier claims are done for inpatient hospital stays for which the operating costs per day are significantly higher than average (extraordinary). AHCCCS Virtual Office (VO) allows individuals to work at home or at a remote location for the entire workweek. No designated individual workspace is provided at the office. AHCCCS conducted a pilot project that included four employees sent to work from home. Studies of this pilot group showed a number of savings, including space savings, productivity improvements, and employee retention. AHCCCS has expanded this program to include 43 employees and continues to examine options for development of this program. Hospital Outlier claims increased from 2% of all inpatient hospital claims in 2001 to 11.5% in 2005. Payments totaled $9.8 million in 2001 and jumped to $112 million in 2005. Pursuant to Statute, AHCCCS provided a recommendation to the Legislature for updating outlier qualification and payment methodologies. The recommendation was signed into law by Governor Napolitano in the 2007 Session; the new methodology went into effect on October 1, 2007.Those that qualify for outlier were re‐priced using the revised methodology and those that do not qualify were re‐priced at the AHCCCS per diem rates. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Technology 1,728.6 Savings are being used to offset the increased costs of ongoing operations and reduced administrative funding resulting from budget cuts. 204,498.5 43,200.0 Savings from this project will help to reduce the overall medical liability placed on General and Federal Funds. Outpatient Hospital Payment Methodology The agency has obtained statutory authority to establish a published fee schedule for laboratory, radiology, emergency room and outpatient surgery services. In the past, the agency paid a percentage of hospitalsʹ billed charges. If the legislation had not passed, AHCCCS would have faced double‐digit cost pressures in outpatient expenditures. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 145,622.9 This issue is a cost avoidance for the agency that will help reduce the effect of inflation on AHCCCS programs. Postage Reduction During FY 2008 AHCCCS reviewed its use of postage to implement cost savings for FY 2008 and beyond. Several changes were made that will not dramatically impact services and will create an ongoing savings to AHCCCSʹ ongoing operations. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 414.2 Savings are being used to offset the increased costs of ongoing operations and reduced administrative funding resulting from budget cuts. Training The agency has eliminated the training manager position by consolidating training within the agency and using on‐line and computer‐based training. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 60.0 Savings are being used to offset the increased costs of ongoing operations and reduced administrative funding resulting from budget cuts. State Agency Budgets 173 Department of Commerce Vacancy Savings FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 32,604.9 32,462.7 142.2 4,646.3 4,523.3 123.0 29,982.4 29,976.5 5.9 Administration and Finance Business Development Workforce Development Community Development 19,194.0 19,086.8 107.2 Agency Total (All Funds) 86,427.6 86,049.3 378.3 Appropriated Funds 18,674.0 Non‐appropriated Funds 67,375.3 In an effort to achieve savings, the Department has not filled three vacant positions. Other 309.6 Agency budget reduction. 437.2 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 389.4 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Fleet Management ‐ Cost Reduction In an effort to fully comply with Executive Order 2003‐14, which called for more efficient travel, the Department has sought to prioritize all requests for travel and to limit approval to those trips that are mission critical. The Department has also reduced the size of the fleet by returning vehicles to the State Motor Pool. Other 8.1 Agency budget reduction. Maintenance The Department has reduced and centralized various computer equipment such as laptops, projectors, copiers, and faxes. The remaining equipment will be replaced with new technology which will result in lower maintenance expenses. Other 11.8 Agency Budget Reduction Organization Changes The Agency changed process, reviewed archives, purged controlled ordering and reduced space requirements by 1,400 sq ft @ $19.50 per sq ft ‐ new annual expense will be $27,300 less. Agency increased staff by 30% utilizing the same amount of square footage as in previous years. Other 49.3 Agency budget reduction. Reduce Cost for Trade Memberships In an effort to achieve savings, the Department has reduced the number of duplicative memberships in professional and business organizations. Other 31.3 Agency budget reduction. Reduce Telecommunication Costs The Department eliminated the number of mobile telephones used by its employees and placed all remaining contracts on shared‐minute plans. Other 27.1 Agency budget reduction. 174 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Corrections Halfway‐Back Process FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 1,124,187.2 1,119,153.3 5,033.9 Community Corrections 16,737.4 16,737.4 0.0 Administration 82,606.5 81,891.5 715.0 1,223,531.1 1,217,782.2 5,748.9 Prison Operations and Services Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds 1,155,196.0 Non‐appropriated Funds 62,586.2 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 7,633.0 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations 81.5 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations ICE‐ADC Interagency Agreement FY 06 Cost Avoidance (12/05‐6/06): $3,280,555 (53,135 bed savings days x $61.74) FY 07 Cost Avoidance: $6,594,696 (106,814 bed savings days x $61.74) FY 08 Cost Avoidance: $11,434,186 (185,199 bed savings day x $61.74) Cost Savings Since ICE Trained ADC Staff Deployed (12/05‐6/08): $21,309,438 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 11,000.0 Lethal Fence Consolidated Purchasing and Warehousing Based on current usage, product standardization and vendor discounts, ADC expects to realize a $235,120 spending reduction in FY 2009. Waxie Sanitary Supply Estimated Spending Reductions by Category: Product Changes $64,070 Account Discounts $28,000 Transactional Discounts $21,000 Scheduled Delivery $ 6,000 = $119,070 Direct Savings + $116,050 Supply Chain Management Savings (Discounts for electronic payment, electronic ordering, volume ordering and educational institutions) = $235,120 Total Estimated Annual Reduction Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The Department has been focusing on reducing the number of parolees whose parole is revoked and returned to prison. Since implementing this approach, the Department has been able to reduce the number of parolees returning to prison by one inmate for every three that are released to parole. During FY 2005 the Department installed a lethal fence at the central unit of the Florence prison, which allowed for the reduction of 21 Correctional Officer positions that worked in guard towers. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 111.9 Lower Custody Bed Savings In early FY 2005 the Department constructed its first level‐one beds rather than the traditional level‐two beds. By constructing 1,000 level‐ one beds rather than level‐two beds, the annual lease‐purchase payments are reduced by $1.2 million and annual operating costs are reduced by $3.6 million. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 4,840.5 235.1 Prevent Turnover through Labor Relations Retention Officer Elective Crime Victim Notification by E‐mail When it is practical to do so, the Department is notifying crime victims by e‐mail rather than by postal service. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 120.0 Electronic communications The Department changed the connecting line for its inmate information database from an old analog line to a newer connection of local area networks, which has improved the performance of the system and reduced operating costs by $12,000 per year. In addition, the Department eliminated hard copy newsletters, daily and weekly reports, and calendars. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Retention Officer annual salary + ERE = $52,800 In FY07, 36 resignations were averted statewide (36 x $32,883 = $1,183,788, minus $52,800 (RO salary + ERE) = $1,130,988) FY07 Cost Avoidance = $1,130,988 FY08 Cost Avoidance = $3,103,968 96 rescinded resignations x $32,883 = $3,156,768 – $52,800 = $3,103,968 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 3,104.0 32.4 Privatization of Inmate Stores Offset increased utility costs. Energy Lower energy costs at the central office buildings due to the installation of individual light switches and motion detectors in January 2004. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations ADC spends at least $32,883 to hire and train one Correctional Officer: Recruitment ‐ $2,267 Training ‐ $8,088 Post Coverage ‐ $22,528 Total: $32,883 5.6 The privatization and consolidation of inmate stores throughout prison system allowed the security staff assigned to store operations to be redeployed. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 558.0 Offset increased utility costs. State Agency Budgets 175 Department of Economic Security Purchasing Emphasis is on early and on‐time payment discounts. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 112,841.9 104,098.1 8,743.8 Developmental Disabilities 1,088,003.3 1,086,972.7 1,030.6 Benefits and Medical Eligibility 1,203,723.5 1,155,593.6 48,129.9 68,016.1 70,437.4 (2,421.3) Aging and Community Services 120,693.6 120,741.4 (47.8) Children, Youth and Families 616,680.9 587,022.7 29,658.2 Employment and Rehabilitation Services 886,662.3 886,222.4 439.9 4,096,621.6 4,011,088.3 85,533.3 6.6 20,095.6 Administration Child Support Enforcement Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds 1,431,433.6 Non‐appropriated Funds 2,579,654.7 New Efficiency Review Issues FAA Centralized Communication Center By processing customer information changes through a centralized Communication Center, DES will save approximately 5 minutes per change. The Communication Center utilizes an Integrated Voice Response System, which allows staff to work on other claims, rather than manually enter personal information. 96,000 changes are received each month, which translates into 46 FTE positions per year. DES will use the time savings to offset future FAA staffing increases in future years. All Funds Savings 994.9 2010 Savings Previously Published 77,254.1 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Copier/Fax Service Agreements The Department reduced copier and fax costs through multiple strategies that included directing all offices to scrutinize the amounts paid for copier and fax service agreements and expanding the sharing of copy equipment. The reduced cost of purchasing fax equipment contributed to the practicality of reducing fax maintenance costs. However it is anticipated that the Department will have additional equipment and equipment maintenance needs as it seeks to rebuild its capacity to meet the service needs of a growing client population. Cost savings should remain flat in the near future, however, due to the fact that newer equipment is less prone to breakage, and warranty agreements will cover any unforeseen costs in the years immediately following a new purchase. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 807.0 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. 176 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Electronic Pay Card Limit Purchases Rather than issue paper warrants for payment, the Department implemented electronic fund disbursement processes for unemployment insurance benefit recipients. By utilizing electronic transactions, the Department reduces the number of paper warrants used in a year. This generates savings of $0.06 per transaction. By limiting capital and non‐capital equipment expenditures, purchasing generic products instead of brand names, and limiting purchases of data processing supplies and furniture under $5,000, the Department will save over $4.5 million annually. Other 602.2 Savings offset a reduction in available federal grant funds for the UI program. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 556.1 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. FAA Centralized Communication Center By processing customer information changes through a centralized Communication Center, DES will save approximately 5 minutes per change. The Communication Center utilizes an Integrated Voice Response System, which allows staff to work on other claims, rather than manually enter personal information. 96,000 changes are received each month, which translates into 46 FTE positions per year. DES will use the time savings to offset future FAA staffing increases in future years. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 941.7 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. Foster Care The Department has increased its recruitment of foster homes. In addition to providing a more familial environment for children in the Stateʹs care, foster homes are significantly less expensive than congregate care settings such as shelters and group homes. The State pays about $600 per month for a foster home, compared with congregate settings that range from $1,000 to $4,000 per month. Other 27,620.2 This cost avoidance has reduced the cost of the Childrenʹs Services program. Integrated Services As the Department moves more families off of TANF Cash Assistance and into self‐sufficiency, the amount of TANF money needed to support this population is decreased. In FY 2006, the Department moved over 4,000 families off of TANF Cash Assistance and into permanent jobs. While caseloads are on the upswing due to the economy, they are still well below FY 2002 levels. Other 44,173.0 These funds have been expropriated. Leverage IT Resources Using existing funding, the Department established an internal enterprise application development group to eliminate the need for application development consultants on limited projects. The fees charged by these consultants were thus eliminated, which will save the Department approximately $370,900 per year going forward. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 370.9 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. State Agency Budgets Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 2,665.3 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. Limit Repairs DES limits the time and money spent on repairs of office furniture and equipment. The Department now coordinates equipment needs and equipment surpluses in order to reduce the amount of necessary repairs. DES is also relying on the Department of Administration repair unit, which is cheaper than an outside vendor, for fax machine service in the Phoenix metro area. By limiting the volume of repairs of office furniture, DES expects to save $2.2 million annually. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1,348.4 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. P‐Cards P‐cards streamline purchasing by shortening the budget cycle, facilitating purchases, and tracking transactions. They also provide the vendor with a single lump‐sum payment at the end of the month. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 720.9 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. Streamline Licensing The Department streamlined the foster home licensing process by consolidating forms in a manner that eliminated duplicative questions, training contracted service providers, amending standard operating procedures until foster home licensing rules can be updated, and transferring DHS foster home inspection responsibility to DES. The Department processed an average of 297 foster home applications per month at an average cost of $421.23 during FY 2004. In FY 2006, DES processed 423.3 applications a month at an average cost of $295.30. This is a cost avoidance of $125.93 per application. In FY 2009, the number of applications per month rose to over 700. Service Delivery 1,135.6 Savings have allowed the Department to handle increased applications while improving processing time. Travel DES has instituted a number of policies to reduce its travel expenses, including a greater utilization of teleconferencing and videoconferencing, the restriction of most out‐of‐state travel to one FTE position per trip, and the implementation of a new tracking system for out‐of‐state travel to identify opportunities for added efficiency. Savings were calculated by comparisons to the base year of FY 2002 for in‐state and out‐of‐state travel, excluding motor pool costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 362.9 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. 177 Department of Emergency and Military Affairs Virtual Office The Department began to research virtual office as a business practice in December 2006 with the formation of a Steering Committee. The Steering Committee established a process to research and implement a virtual office pilot within DES. This research, which included AHCCCS and DOA’s Office of Telework, developed an organizational readiness assessment to determine the appropriateness of virtual office opportunities. Four proposals were received and assessed by the Steering Committee. Due to their compatible work processes, Unemployment Insurance adjudication staff in Tucson and Yuma were selected for the pilot transition to a virtual office setting. The total projected cost avoidance was calculated based upon the number of staff at each location and the total square footage that will be saved through the implementation of this initiative. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 24.0 Savings will be applied to shortfalls resulting from lump sum reductions and unfunded insurance, retirement, and rental increases. FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Administration 2,260.3 2,252.3 8.0 Military Affairs 51,934.8 51,786.9 147.9 Emergency Management 28,388.7 28,388.7 0.0 Agency Total (All Funds) 82,583.8 82,427.9 155.9 Appropriated Funds 16,352.2 Non‐appropriated Funds 66,075.7 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 106.0 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations 81,328.2 Ecological Building (Eco‐Building) Through the use of a solar power system at the National Guardʹs Eco‐ Building, the Departmentʹs utility costs have been reduced. 5.2 Work Environment Enhancement Funds were used for the maintenance and repair of the Arizona National Guard facilities. Electronic Communications The Department publishes its annual report to its website instead of printing it. 8.0 Other The savings will be utilized to help offset increased health and retirement benefit costs. Qualified Recycling Program (QRP) The Agency has established a Qualified Recycling Program that produces revenues from the sale of recyclable commodities to support the Program and other allowed programs. The Program promotes cost‐ effective waste prevention and recycling of reusable materials in all of its facilities. Work Environment Enhancement 11.0 Funds were used for the maintenance and repair of the Arizona National Guard facilities. WAATS Solar Farm The Department uses a solar farm to supplement power usage, which has resulted in a decrease of 31% in utility costs for the Western Army Aviation Training Site. Work Environment Enhancement 41.0 Funds were used for the maintenance and repair of the Arizona National Guard facilities. 65.2 178 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Environmental Quality P‐Card Savings FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Administration 16,431.3 16,241.4 189.9 Air Quality 57,608.3 57,597.3 11.0 Waste Program 87,829.0 87,813.1 15.9 Water Quality Program 172,397.2 172,389.9 7.3 Agency Total (All Funds) 334,265.8 334,041.7 224.1 Appropriated Funds 104,294.7 Non‐appropriated Funds 229,747.0 As a cost savings initiative, the Department has increased its use of electronic transactions as a method of payment for collecting fees and licensures. This has allowed the Department to avoid costs associated with paper transactions. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 88.5 Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. Printer & Copier Replacement The Department replaced printers with multi‐functional devices that reduce the price per print/copy impression, and the contractor factors in support costs with the individual cost per impression. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 34.1 Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. New Efficiency Review Issues Reduce Transportation Cost ‐ Fleet Management Request To Fill Process Improvement Staff has estimated that the time spent on every approved request to fill takes approximately 3 cumulative hours across agency program divisions. It is estimated that the average hourly cost incurred is approximately $30 per hour. In 2007 there were 149 requests to fill. Our savings is estimated at approximately $13,500 per year (3hr x $30hr x 149). The hourly salary is based on a combination of executive staff, mid‐level managers and business staff salaries. (No savings were realized in 2008 as a result of the statewide hiring freeze.) The Department has been able to accrue savings by returning vehicles to the ADOA fleet and bringing a consultant in‐house as an employee instead of paying higher contract costs. All Funds Savings Staff has estimated that the time spent on every approved request to fill takes approximately 3 cumulative hours across agency program divisions. It is estimated that the average hourly cost incurred is approximately $30 per hour. In 2007 there were 149 requests to fill. Our savings is estimated at approximately $13,500 per year (3hr x $30hr x 149). The hourly salary is based on a combination of executive staff, mid‐level managers and business staff salaries. (No savings were realized in 2008 as a result of the statewide hiring freeze.) 2010 Savings Previously Published 13.5 217.4 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations ADOT Postage Contract The Department contracted postage and mailing services with ADOT. By using ADOTʹs substantial mailing resources, the Department has accrued savings by avoiding direct postage costs and from not leasing postage equipment. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 13.8 13.5 Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. Web Conferencing FAX Machine Replacement The Department replaced fax machines with multi‐functional devices. Cost savings will be realized through lower support costs in purchasing separate toner and paper. 5.0 Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. Out of State Travel The Department saved $9,100 from the reduction of out‐of‐state travel expenditures. This reduction was accomplished by a change in approval process. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 56.8 Request To Fill Process Improvement Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. 9.1 Staff prepared a document that estimated the following components: Fuel saved; mileage costs avoided; and the hourly wages of productivity lost in transit to and from statewide meetings from Flagstaff and Tucson. Fuel is currently estimated at $3.62/gallon saved; ADOA Fleet usage charge is 5 cents per mile; and hours saved is 2 hours en route to and from each regional office multiplied by hourly salary costs of 2 staff members from each region multiplied by 50 weeks per year. Currently, the calculation includes costs for other web conferencing licenses, but estimated savings for additional employees using the web conferencing technology is not available at this time. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 3.3 Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. 224.1 Savings will be allocated across all ADEQ programs to offset unfunded salary and ERE increases. State Agency Budgets 179 Governorʹs Office for Equal Opportunity State Department of Financial Institutions FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Equal Opportunity 320.5 317.3 3.2 Agency Total (All Funds) 320.5 317.3 3.2 Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Office of Supervision 6,445.8 6,441.8 4.0 Office of Regulatory Affairs 3,498.5 3,474.6 23.9 66.3 66.3 0.0 10,010.6 9,982.7 27.9 Receiverships 249.3 68.0 Agency Total (All Funds) New Efficiency Review Issues Appropriated Funds 8,459.4 Training Non‐appropriated Funds 1,523.3 By developing diversity management and cultural competency plans for large state agencies in‐house, the Office can avoid the cost of contracting this out to a professional outside service. All Funds Savings 2010 Savings Previously Published New Efficiency Review Issues Conversion to Web Portal and State Common Licensing System 0.0 3.2 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Electronic Communications The Office is using electronic communications to reduce printing and mailing costs. During 2004, the GOEO launched a functioning informational website to aid the public in self‐assistance. This reduced the amount of paper reproduction and mailing costs and increased efficiency in the use of employeesʹ time. Other All Funds Savings 10.0 2010 Savings Previously Published 5.3 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations 0.9 The savings were applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Officeʹs contribution to retirement and health benefits. Purchasing Electronic Distribution of Department Newsletter The Department of Financial Institutions issues an annual newsletter. When last published in FY 2007, the cost associated with this was $4,600. The agency will eliminate these costs in future years by distributing the update through email. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The Office is taking advantage of early payment discounts. Other The Department is initiating a project to allow for on‐line license renewal. The net savings are projected at $10,000 in FY 2009 and $20,000 in FY 2010. The Departmentʹs estimate for savings is based on managementʹs belief that on‐line licensing and renewal will result in the avoidance of approximately 750 hours of processing time by the Licensing and Administrative Divisions combined in FY 2009 and 1,500 hours of processing time if the project is fully implemented in FY 2010. 2.3 The savings were applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Officeʹs contribution to retirement and health benefits. 3.2 4.6 The Departmentʹs budget was reduced by $200K (5%) in FY08. The 5% lump sum reduction remains in place for FY09. The savings from these efforts will be used to help osffset the impact of the recent budget cut. Executive order response In an effort to accrue savings, the Department has curtailed out‐of‐state travel expenditures and has ensured that all vendor discounts are taken. In addition, the use of electronic communications has been promoted more aggressively, resulting in savings from the use of less paper and postage. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 3.3 The Departmentʹs budget was reduced by $200K (5%) in FY08. The 5% lump sum reduction remains in place for FY09. The savings from these efforts will be used to help osffset the impact of the recent budget cut. 7.9 180 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Arizona Game & Fish Department FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Central Administrative Services 3,395.2 3,395.2 0.0 Off‐Highway Vehicle/Watercraft 9,814.3 9,814.3 0.0 21,246.4 21,224.4 22.0 Nongame and Endangered Wildlife The Department is working on an initiative to standardize, develop and maintain electronic application forms of all agency‐related information that can be posted and sent electronically via email. 4.4 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used to cover increased gas prices and sampling costs. Expand Discount and Incentives from Vendors Game Management 39,313.4 39,291.4 22.0 Sportfish Management 30,398.5 30,376.5 22.0 104,167.8 104,101.8 66.0 Agency Total (All Funds) Electronic Forms, Renewal notices, Renewal notices/Report reminders for all special licenses, mailing lists, meeting reminders, letters, wildlife and recreation information, training and meeting calendars, etc, that can be posted and sent electronically Appropriated Funds 41,809.5 Non‐appropriated Funds 62,292.3 30.2 Other Savings are used to offset increased expenditures associated with improvements made to enhance customer service. Green Building Energy Efficiency New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published The Department strengthened its policies to pay all invoices within the terms established with existing vendors but also to pursue available discounts by reaching out to vendors and seeking discounts as an incentive for furthering business. 2,500.1 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations In an effort to accrue savings, the Agency has implemented an energy efficiency program that allows for utilities savings. By installing energy‐ efficient lighting, air conditioning, motors, the Agency is able to lower operating costs and redirect resources to other areas. Other Conference Rooms Savings/Efficiencies Off site meetings no longer required for large group meetings estimated at $250.00 per room rental per meeting (based on cost figures from hotel venues paid for off‐site room space while at our old office location). Eagle Room ‐ 114 meetings @ $200.00 total cost avoidance $22,800. External agency use of conference rooms ‐ (5 occurrences @ $250.00 ) $1,250.00 cost avoidance for other agencies. Phoenix area Arizona Game and Fish Commission meetings in 2008. Cost avoidance dues to no longer having to rent hotel space for monthly Commission meetings. Two meetings @ $7,000. Total cost avoidance $14,000.00. (note: travel costs avoidance ‐ estimate based on 2008 average costs for all meetings). 94.9 Savings are used to offset increased expenditures associated with improvements made to enhance customer service. PC Bulk Buy Replacement Working with the Western States Contracting Alliance and the State of Arizona’s Enterprise Procurement Service, the Department joined with participating states in cooperative multi‐State contracting to achieve cost‐ effective and efficient acquisition of quality products and services. 18.9 Other Savings are used to offset increased expenditures associated with improvements made to enhance customer service. Personal Watercraft Loaner Program Bunk‐house savings. (137 overnight stays by employees/volunteers Xʹs multiplier of $80..) ‐ total cost avoidance $10,960.00. Outside non‐governmental organization use of rooms. 12 meetings Xʹs $200.00 ‐ Total cost avoidance $2,400.00. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 76.8 Savings passed onto work unit budgets 32.0 Other The Department will use these savings to cover expenses associated with technology updates. Streamline Procurement Process for Small Purchase Order Electronic communications The Department achieved savings from enhanced utilization of electronic communications instead of traditional mailings for items such as printed newsletters and various documents and reports. The Departmentʹs website was improved to allow several newsletters and communication with employees, commissioners and stakeholders to be distributed electronically. On‐line and electronic versions for rules and regulations, including certain reference books provided to Officers, replaced costly paper‐printed copies. Other Cost Savings are realized by obtaining the use of four @ $8000.00 Personal Watercrafts (P.W.C.) at no cost. The Department is only required to purchase fuel for the P.W.C.ʹs. 283.9 The savings are utilized to offset budgetary constraints due to modest revenue growth. The Department streamlined the procurement process, allowing items costing $1,000 or less to be acquired without preparing a requisition or purchase order, thus eliminating unnecessary processing costs. 248.6 Other Savings are being redirected to cover the increase in gas prices. Volunteer Program ‐ Increase Effectiveness and Participation The Department was able to accrue savings by utilizing volunteer trainers to educate volunteers on how to educate the public on wildlife and related outdoor issues. Other 3,000.0 Savings are used to absorb ongoing costs of unfunded programs. 3,789.7 State Agency Budgets 181 Department of Gaming Fleet (2) FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Enforcement 11,553.1 11,175.4 377.7 Certification 1,959.7 1,959.7 0.0 13,512.8 13,135.1 377.7 Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 13,135.1 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 13.3 The efficiency savings will be applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Departmentʹs contribution to State retirement and health benefits. Information technology 0.0 New Efficiency Review Issues Information Technology (4) In FY 2008, the agency will complete its conversion of server computers from physical to virtual, by hosting multiple servers on a single physical platform using virtualization software. This will reduce the total number of physical servers we use, which will result in significant cost savings in server replacements. All Funds Savings 2010 Savings Previously Published In FY 2005, as a result of the agencyʹs efforts to use its vehicles more efficiently and to reduce vehicle maintenance costs, the agency was able to return to ADOA Fleet Management two vehicles that had been obtained in FY 2004 at no cost. The agency was also able to save the monthly maintenance cost of these vehicles. 35.3 307.6 The Department implemented a new electronic licensing and regulatory system (IDPoint) that integrated databases and decreased the need to create and maintain paper documents. Using IDPoint, the Department automated the printing of individual certification documents. The Department obtains credit reports electronically for vendor certification applicants rather than through a dial‐up method in which the reports were printed manually, and their gaming device technicians use laptop computers in the casinos to input device information. In the past, they manually completed a worksheet with this information and later entered it into a database in the office. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 60.0 The efficiency savings will be applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Departmentʹs contribution to State retirement and health benefits. FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Electronic communications The agency converted its annual report from hard copy format to electronic format, which is available on its website. Additionally, the agency is coordinating with DPS to receive criminal history information from DPS electronically. 5.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The efficiency savings will be applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increase in the Departmentʹs contribution to health benefits. Information Technology (2) In FY 2008, the department will be implementing an audit software program to be used by both the field auditors who perform compact compliance reviews and the tribal contribution auditors who perform reviews on the contributions reported and received from the tribes. Currently, the department has been performing these functions using a data base that is not designed for audits. It is anticipated that the audit software program will be far more efficient for the auditors. 151.9 Electronic Imaging/Document Management Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations In FY 2006 the agency implemented an electronic imaging system that will store the remainder of business records that cannot be stored in IDPoint, the agencyʹs electronic licensing and regulatory system. This will make it easier and more efficient to locate and retrieve necessary records. The efficiency savings in FY 2009 will be applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Departmentʹs contribution to State retirement, health benefits, and general salary increases. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 37.1 The efficiency savings will be applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Departmentʹs contribution to health benefits. Fleet Because other agencies reverted vehicles to ADOA, the agency obtained two vehicles at no cost. Additionally, the agency reduced by two the number of vehicles it was appropriated funds to purchase, which saved the cost of purchasing the vehicles and the monthly maintenance cost for the vehicles. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 13.3 The efficiency savings will be applied to the unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Departmentʹs contribution to State retirement and health benefits. 182 Information Technology (3) Using the system, the Office of Problem Gambling will receive billing electronically from its treatment providers via this web‐based system, which will automatically populate the systemʹs data base with information contained on intake forms, surveys, and the actual billing. This information is currently input manually into different data bases. The OPG will also be able to perform financial tracking electronically rather than manually. The system will enable OPG to significantly reduce the time it takes to prepare for auditing treatment providers. The system will also enable OPG to generate reports electronically rather than manually, significantly reducing the time that it takes to perform these tasks. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 28.1 The efficiency savings in FY 2009 will be applied to unfunded additional cost of employee‐related expenditures, including the increases in the Departmentʹs contributions to health benefits. FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Health Services Information Technology (4) In FY 2008, the agency will complete its conversion of server computers from physical to virtual, by hosting multiple servers on a single physical platform using virtualization software. This will reduce the total number of physical servers we use, which will result in significant cost savings in server replacements. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 35.3 This efficiency savings will be applied to the unfunded additional AZNET costs. FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 42,566.9 42,443.1 123.8 Public Health 137,725.8 137,725.8 0.0 Family Health 332,951.0 332,351.0 600.0 1,807,617.7 1,796,028.6 11,589.1 74,673.0 74,529.5 143.5 2,395,534.4 2,383,078.0 12,456.4 Administration Telecommunication Behavioral Health Beginning in FY 2007, in an effort to minimize the projected increase in telecommunication costs relating to the statewide Accenture contract, the agency is planning to eliminate landline phones for approximately 25 FTEs who work primarily in the field and/or who already have other available modes of communication. Arizona State Hospital Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 19.3 Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 750,071.9 1,633,006.1 New Efficiency Review Issues The efficiency savings in FY 2009 will be applied to the additional unfunded AZNET costs. 2010 Savings Previously Published Telecommunications (2) In late FY 2006, in an effort to reduce cell phone costs, the agency performed an audit of its cell phone plans and compared them to plans that were, at that time, available on state contract. The Department was able to negotiate a much better rate for more hours, which resulted in a savings to the department. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Agency Total (All Funds) 7.7 The efficiency savings in FY 2009 will be applied to unfunded and additional AZNET costs. 371.0 8,789.4 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Behavioral Health Service Contractor Cost Reductions The Department reduced by 1% contractors’ allowed administrative costs and profit within Title XIX Medicaid capitation rates. This was possible in part by streamlining the client intake and assessment process for persons receiving behavioral health services. The new process requires contractors to complete 3.3 million fewer sheets of paper and saves contractors approximately 99,000 staff hours devoted to paperwork annually. The same processes are planned for future years, although savings in FYs 2009 and 2010 will vary according to the capitation rates set by the actuaries, as well as on growth in member months. Service Delivery 10,068.7 Reduce future year requests by the Department Learning Management Systems Savings based on the number of employees who will train on the internet‐based e‐learning system and the number of programs offered by the system. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 600.0 Savings will be used to offset lump sum reductions and increased maintenance, improvement, and operating costs. Patient/Resident Damage The Arizona State Hospital is allowed to recover costs from a patient who intentionally damages the facility. For FY 2005, $541 was collected for intentional patient damage; this amount serves as the benchmark for future year savings. The implementation of this policy appears to serve as a deterrent to destructive behavior, and reduced incidents translate directly to facility maintenance savings. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.0 Savings will be used to offset lump sum reductions and increased maintenance, improvement, and operating costs. State Agency Budgets 183 Department of Homeland Security Personnel Advertising Personnel advertising for the Arizona State Hospital has been consolidated, with primary ads being run bi‐weekly. This should create more savings to the Department than in past years. FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Department of Homeland Security 48,867.6 48,797.9 69.7 Agency Total (All Funds) 48,867.6 48,797.9 69.7 40.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used to offset lump sum reductions and increased maintenance, improvement, and operating costs. Restoration to Competency Medical Care At the inception of the Restoration to Competency (RTC) program, the Arizona State Hospital paid for 100% of medical care for RTC patients, including outpatient care required after discharge from the State Hospital, even though outside medical care was not included in the hospitalʹs rate structure. Effective in FY 2006, counties are billed for a portion of outpatient medical care for RTC patients, generating ongoing savings for the hospital. 5.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 2,099.9 Non‐appropriated Funds 46,698.0 New Efficiency Review Issues Out of State Travel Savings The department reduced out of state travel to only the most mission‐ critical travel. All Funds Savings Savings will be used to offset lump sum reductions and increased maintenance, improvement, and operating costs. 10.0 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Telecommuting Services The savings are based on the number of employees who will telecommute each fiscal year and the reduced PC usage. Savings for FY 2008 is based on 450 employees using ʺGo To My PCʺ at $120 per license. VPN is a flat fee of $35,000 per year. The estimated savings for FY 2009 and FY 2010 is based on a growth of 5% each year in the number of VPN users verses an individual license through ʺGo To My PCʺ. 116.2 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Appropriated Funds Mobile Communications Provider The Department changed mobile communication providers resulting in approximately $250.00 per month saved. 2.8 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Reallocated to fund increases in rent and other operating expenditures. Utilization of Interns The Department developed an internship program resulting in the equivalent of approximately 1 full‐time employee. Savings will be used to offset lump sum reductions and increased maintenance, improvement, and operating costs. Title XIX Coverage for Department of Juvenile Corrections Youth in the State Hospital The medical costs are now covered under Title XIX for youth under the custody of the Department of Juvenile Corrections who are hospitalized at the Arizona State Hospital. As a result, the Department will encounter a cost avoidance of $100,000 per year. Service Delivery 53.6 Reallocated to produce improved customer service for stakeholders. 56.4 100.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used to offset lump sum reductions and increased maintenance, improvement, and operating costs. 10,930.9 184 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Arizona Department of Housing Department of Housing FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 117,935.0 117,688.8 246.2 5,129.7 5,129.7 0.0 123,064.7 122,818.5 246.2 Housing Finance Authority Agency Total (All Funds) Purchasing Discounts Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 1,136.4 121,682.1 New Efficiency Review Issues Information Technology The Department of Housing entered into an ISA with the Department of Commerce, rather than hiring additional in‐house IT FTE positions. The difference between the contracted ISA ($51,000) versus the cost of the FTE ($131,000) provides an annual cost avoidance of $80,000. The Department also makes use of excess space in the ADEQ server room to reduce electrical costs within its own location. The vast majority of these costs come from cooling the room where the IT equipment is located. Since the ADEQ space is already cooled, it is less expensive to house equipment in that environment rather than creating a new cooled environment. The avoidance of supplemental air conditioning units saves the Department $27,000 annually. All Funds Savings 2010 Savings Previously Published 81.1 123.5 The Department of Housing has utilized two vendors that offer discounts for early payments. The savings in FY 2006 was $400. Contract disputes limited the Department from realizing the full savings from early payments. Moving forward, the Department anticipates those full savings will be $1000 annually. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.5 Savings are rolled foward for use in future year budgeting. Training The Department of Housing has not changed any business practices for efficiency but has been efficient since implementation by not sending staff to out‐of‐state training and instead utilizing free in‐state training offered by HUD. Since out‐of‐state travel has never been budgeted for these training trips, these funds can be used to offset other operating costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 32.3 Cost avoidances will allow the agency to address other operating costs. Travel expenses The Department of Housing reviewed all requests for in‐state and out‐of‐ state travel budgets prior to the beginning of the year, with the agency approving travel considered crucial for the fulfillment of its mission. Any travel requests not approved by the Director prior to the beginning of the fiscal year are considered to be a cost avoidance. The number of denied requests has fallen in the last year due to the fact that staff have requested fewer travel plans in response the Directorʹs denials. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 47.9 Savings carried over to future year budgets. FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations 239.2 Electronic communications The Department made materials available to the public on its website and distributed its newsletter electronically. The Department uses a common database across programs, which has reduced duplication with federal systems. When the Department was part of the Department of Commerce, it provided paper documents. The electronic format has been the business practice since the Department of Housing split from Commerce, and no actual money has been saved. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 74.0 Cost avoidances will allow the Agency to address other operating costs. Information Technology The Department of Housing entered into an ISA with the Department of Commerce, rather than hiring additional in‐house IT FTE positions. The difference between the contracted ISA ($51,000) versus the cost of the FTE ($131,000) provides an annual cost avoidance of $80,000. The Department also makes use of excess space in the ADEQ server room to reduce electrical costs within its own location. The vast majority of these costs come from cooling the room where the IT equipment is located. Since the ADEQ space is already cooled, it is less expensive to house equipment in that environment rather than creating a new cooled environment. The avoidance of supplemental air conditioning units saves the Department $27,000 annually. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 83.5 Cost avoidances will allow the agency to address other operating costs State Agency Budgets 185 Department of Insurance Lengthened License Term The license term for insurance professionals was extended from two years to four. Consequently, as of FY 2007, the Department processes half as many license renewals each year. While the Department continues to capture the same amount of revenue from renewal fees, there are lower costs related to the processing of license renewal applications. FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 1,481.8 1,467.7 14.1 11,344.0 11,344.0 0.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Help achieve required budget reductions. Policy and Administration Solvency Regulation Consumer Support 5,736.9 5,736.9 0.0 Fraud Investigation and Deterrence 1,522.5 1,522.5 0.0 Licensing 1,183.4 834.5 348.9 Premium Tax Collections and Analysis 223.3 219.1 4.2 Captive Insurer Program 261.5 261.5 0.0 21,753.4 21,386.2 367.2 Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 7,691.8 13,694.4 348.3 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations 33.6 The Department has created a system to accept insurance premium tax installment payments online. For the end of FY 2009, this is expected to save the Department 92 hours of processing time, or $2000. 2.0 Other Allow revenue auditors to audit more tax returns, potentially increasing audit recoveries deposited to the General Fund. Automated License Application Processing The Department utilizes the National Insurance Producer Registry to electronically determine whether an insurance licensee has had disciplinary action taken against him or her in another state. While decreasing labor costs for the Department, the system also generates more fee revenue because it is now easier for non‐resident licensees to apply in multiple states. Paperless Licensing The Department of Insurance no longer issues physical license certificates on costly counterfeit‐resistant stock that must be sent in costly customized envelopes. Instead, up‐to‐date license information is available on the Departmentʹs web site. 108.0 Increase license fee revenues for General Fund by making licensing easier. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 26.1 Absorb increases in other operating costs. 103.7 Help achieve required budget reductions. Directory Assistance Listing Shared Courier Trips The Department shares courier responsibilities with the Department of Financial Institutions and the Department of Real Estate to decrease trips to the Capitol Mall. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The Department has reduced the number of its directory assistance listings at DexOnline from 189 to 24. This will save $667 each month. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Online Premium Tax Filing and Payment 2010 Savings Previously Published Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations License Record Self‐service The Department recently developed an online license information update and renewal system which enabled currently licensed insurance professionals to update their own demographic information and renew licenses online. Although 58.3% of renewal applications were processed through the online system in FY 2008, the Department expects to process only 30% online this year due to the new immigration law requiring the verification of lawful presence. Help achieve required budget reductions. New Efficiency Review Issues Other 70.8 3.9 Help achieve required budget reductions. 8.0 Help achieve required budget reductions. 358.5 Electronic communications The Department shifted its production of newsletters and press releases from paper publishing to electronic publishing. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 2.4 Absorb some unfunded office space rent costs. 186 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Juvenile Corrections Electronic Communication FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Rehabilitation 39,471.0 39,272.8 198.2 Housing 39,138.8 39,098.5 40.3 9,574.0 9,502.8 71.2 88,183.8 87,874.1 309.7 Administration Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 84,508.4 3,365.7 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 1,932.0 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations During FY 2004 the Department began publishing its newsletters in‐ house, transmitting common forms and documents electronically rather than using hard copies. The Department also makes many documents available electronically on the internet rather than distributing paper copies. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 8.1 Savings will be used to offset increased utility, fuel and food costs. Eliminate Contracted Parole Officers Prior to FY 2003 the Department contracted with private vendors to provide outreach and tracking services in Pima County. During 2004 the Department eliminated this contract and hired two parole officers to perform the services previously provided by the contract. This saves the Department approximately $218,900 per year. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 18.0 Savings will be used to offset increased utility, food and fuel costs. Equipment maintenance ASH Federal Participation In FY 2006, the Department pursued greater cooperation with the Department of Health Services (DHS) and the Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS). The purpose of this endeavor was to increase federal participation for Department costs when youths are committed to the Arizona State Hospital (ASH). These services are reimbursable under the federal Title XIX program. The Department needed to increase the awareness of its youth and their eligibility to DHS and AHCCCS and delineated an operating process to utilize federal funds for these services. During FY 2004 the Department incorporated digital copiers into its computer network, thereby eliminating 14 stand‐alone laser printers along with maintenance costs for each printer. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.4 Savings will be used to offset increase utility, food and fuel costs. In‐state Travel Reductions The Department reduced its vehicle fleet by three vehicles. This will save the Department $22,600. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 6.7 Savings will be used to offset increased utility, fuel and food costs. In recent years the Department has expended approximately $250,000 for civil commitment services for at‐risk youth. Under this new operating procedure, the Department anticipates saving $125,000 annually. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 109.9 FY 2009 savings will be used to offset increased utility, food and fuel costs Cell Phone Reviews The Department has aggressively reviewed the need for cell phones, implemented ways to use them more efficiently, and started to reduce the number of cell phones used by the Administration and Community Care programs. Some of the reductions were offset by a U.S. Department of Justice investigation, which recommended additional cell phones, largely for the Investigations and Inspections staff in the Administration program. Review of cell phone usage in other areas of the Department will continue. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 45.6 Savings will be used to offset increased utility, food and fuel costs. Classroom Phones Historically teachers have had both a radio and phone in their classrooms. These communication devices were used to contact security staff in the event of a disruption by a youth. In April, 2007 teachers were re‐trained on the proper use of the radio and in most cases were given new equipment including ear buds. In May 2007, 66 telephones were removed from classrooms with an estimated annual savings of $46,000. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Lexan Glass Replacement A majority of existing AMS housing unit windows are 3/8 inch lexan that need to be frequently replaced due to damage. Rather than replacing the 3/8 inch lexan with another 3/8 inch, the agency is using a combination of 1/4 inch and 1/8 inch lexan. The 1/8 inch piece of lexan is placed on top of the 1/4 inch piece of lexan. When damage occurs the cheaper 1/8 inch piece of lexan is replaced rather than the more expensive 3/8 inch piece. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 18.6 Savings will be used to offset increased utility, food and fuel costs. Meal Receipt Requirement FY 2009 Estimate: $4,139 (meal reimbursements from 2/1/07‐5/8/07) ‐ $450 (meal reimbursements from 2/1/08‐5/8/08) =$3,689/3*12=$14,756 Less 12% increase in utility, food and fuel costs = $38,896 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 38.9 Savings will be used to offset increased utilitiy, fuel and food costs. 42.1 Savings will be used to offsest increased utility, food and fuel costs. State Agency Budgets 187 State Land Department Rural Parole Virtual Office The involvement of a youthʹs family in their treatment is important to their success. Due to the extreme rural location of many families, it is difficult and expensive for them to travel to the safe schools to attend MDT meetings and to meet with their assigned Case Manager. Rural Parole Officers are also a vital member of the youthʹs MDT. MDT meetings are held for each youth once per month at the safe school. In May 2007 Rural Parole Officers were issued laptops with wireless internet capability and webcams. This reduces the travel time/cost of the Rural Parole Officers and families by allowing them to attend the MDT via the webcams. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 12.7 FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Trust Management and Revenue Generation 20,008.7 19,853.7 155.0 Outside Assistance and Grants 1,797.8 1,797.6 0.2 21,806.5 21,651.3 155.2 Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds Savings will be used to offset increased utility, fuel and food costs. 20,662.8 T‐ 8 Lighting Conversion Non‐appropriated Funds In FY 2005, the Department installed energy‐saving fluorescent lighting in the Catalina Mountain School in Tucson. As a result, the Department has realized $1,800 per year in lower utility costs. New Efficiency Review Issues Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.5 Savings will be used to offset utility, fuel and food cost increases. 988.5 2010 Savings Previously Published 41.3 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations ADWR Well Testing Video Conferencing Solution In FY 2006, the Department, as part of a federal Re‐Entry pilot program, implemented a video conferencing solution to improve Department communications. This solution connected all of the Department’s facilities, Central Office and the Tucson parole office via video conferencing equipment. The use of this equipment has quickly spread throughout the Department’s operations. From parole hearings, to training classes, video conferencing is connecting the Department without the expense of travel or excess time. Department employees do not need to travel as much for meetings saving both time and travel expenses. The Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR) tests about 200 wells on State Trust land each year. To do this, the ADWR obtains a right‐of‐entry to test the well and requests the lesseeʹs contact information. The Land Department recently worked with ADWR to issue one encompassing right‐of‐entry for testing wells and provided them a copy of a GIS database with lessee information. This will save ADWR and Land Department staff time. 1.0 Service Delivery The staff time is reallocated to the other water issues on State Trust land. E‐Certified Mail The Department estimates the net savings to be approximately 12,000 annually. Although, this amount may appear marginal, the impact video conferencing has made upon the Department is unmistakable. The savings consist of $35,000 less in travel costs; less for meals, private vehicle reimbursement, and fuel costs. With an additional $27,000 of staff time savings, time they don’t have to waste in transit. Although this savings is in productivity and not tangible dollars, the Department recognizes the productivity impact. This $62,000 of savings is offset by a $50,000 increase in costs to maintain the system‐ primarily due to the AZNet MPLS data connections for the system Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 55.1 Savings will be used to offset increases budget reductions. 358.6 The Department replaced its mail machine at the end of FY 2006. One of the features of the new machine is the ability to send ʺe‐certifiedʺ mail instead of the traditional certified ʺgreen cardsʺ. Instead of receiving physical signature cards for certified letters sent, the U.S. Post Office either retains the signature for two years, for access when needed for a fee, or sends it to a third party for download by the Department. The cost for sending ʺe‐certifiedʺ mail is less expensive than the traditional certified mail. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.3 The savings helps pay for the additional maintenance costs of the new mail machine. Electronic communications Before FY 2004 the State Parks Department funded the sale of recreational permits. That funding no longer exists, but the Land Department must still provide permits. In an effort to absorb the elimination of that funding, the Department is discontinuing the printing and mailing of renewal reminder cards. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.5 The savings are used to minimize the cost of the unfunded program. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.6 The savings were and are used to help offset the unfunded health insurance increases. 188 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Fleet Travel Reimbursement Policy Beginning in FY 2004, the Department returned three vehicles to the motor pool and saved the monthly replacement expense of $411 per vehicle. The Department has provided to the employees more education on statewide travel reimbursement policies. This education effort is especially important for the temporary firefighters, as they do most of the traveling and have the greatest turnover rate, and has resulted in savings for the Department. 14.8 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The savings were and are used to help offset the unfunded health insurance increases. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 0.2 The savings help pay for the increased costs of fire suppression. Office leasing The consolidation of files has freed up 769 square feet of storage space rented by the Land Department from the Department of Administration. The Department is in need of additional land management staff, and the newly available space mitigates the need to rent more space for the additional staff. 156.2 5.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The additional space required for the new positions appropriated to the Department was limited. Office Supplies The Department is limiting its purchase of office supplies to the most economical choices available, thus allowing the Department to achieve some savings. 2.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The savings were and are used to help offset the unfunded health insurance increases. Personal Vehicle Use In an effort to accrue savings, the Department is allowing employees to use personal vehicles for State business only when no State vehicle is available. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.0 These savings will help offset the rising fuel costs. Prepaid Appraisals The Land Department have presided over an increase in pre‐paid appraisal by applicants. This reduces costs to the General Fund, which must otherwise underwrite the procedure. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 116.1 Additional funds are not required to fund increases in volume and price of appraisals. Printing The Department is severely restricting color printing on internal printers. Through this initiative, the Department has been able to accrue some savings by using fewer ink cartridges and less special paper. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 0.3 The savings were and are used to help offset the unfunded health insurance increases. Travel Rather than holding quarterly annual meetings of all Department staff, the all‐inclusive meetings occur twice a year, saving both travel costs and staff time. The amount saved from staff time not spent at meetings is still being paid, but staff is using its time for more productive uses. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 11.4 The savings were and are used to help offset the unfunded health insurance increases. State Agency Budgets 189 Department of Liquor Licenses and Control Arizona State Lottery Commission FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Administration 1,452.1 1,443.0 9.1 Investigations 2,347.8 2,333.2 14.6 667.1 667.1 0.0 4,467.0 4,443.3 23.7 Licensing Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 3,583.1 FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Lottery 744,552.1 741,181.1 3,371.0 Agency Total (All Funds) 744,552.1 741,181.1 3,371.0 Appropriated Funds 80,881.1 Non‐appropriated Funds 660,300.0 By advertising The Pick, Pick 5, and Pick 3 as a family of games, the Commission is able to maximize marketing of three games for minimal cost. Operating Costs Previously, cases to be heard before the State Liquor Board were copied and mailed to each Board Member. The Board secretary now scans the documents and saves them to a flash drive, which is then sent to the seven Board Members. 4.4 Office Remodel After receiving quotes from a vendor for the purchase and labor to configure office units in the Tucson office, the Department utilized a current employee to reconfigure the offices by using existing office units. This resulted in no additional costs to the Department. 2010 Savings Previously Published Request Post Efficiency Initiatives Family of games New Efficiency Review Issues All Funds Savings FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives New Efficiency Review Issues 860.2 All Funds Savings FY 2010 Agency 2.0 9.0 All Funds Savings 107.5 Enterprise Solution Multi‐Media The Lottery has about 2600 retailers, each with an online terminal to sell and validate tickets. As part of the online contract, the Lottery has added the ESMM player displays (17ʺ LCD screens) to each online terminal. On these point‐of‐sale displays, the Lottery can load and rotate messages to: advertise products, do Amber Alerts, remind player age requirements, discuss ʹWhere the Money Goesʹ, advertise jackpots, etc. This is high‐impact, very flexible communication, usually to a captive audience (customers waiting in a queue to complete their purchases.) All Funds Savings 75.0 Sales Staffʹs wrapped vehicles advertise Lottery FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Lotteryʹs sales staff use wrapped vehicles (about 20 vehicles in the field) which advertise the Lottery with eye‐catching graphics. These mobile billboards cover the entire state of Arizona and represent a low‐cost form of advertising. Digital Recorder The Liquor Boardʹs hearings require transcription and previously a court reporter was hired to provide that service. To save on costs, a digital recorder was purchased and the Boardʹs secretary now transcribes the hearings. This will generate on‐going savings for the Department. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations All Funds Savings 60.0 Discontinue printing/distribution of game flyers to retailers 4.2 Savings realized from the purchase of the digital recorder were reallocated to the salary of the Liquor Board secretary. The board secretaryʹs salary was raised because of the high turnover for that position. The Lottery prints over 50 instant ticket games a year. The Lottery used to provide flyers to retailers as part of distribution of the new games however upon surveying the retailers the Lottery learned that they did not see any benefit to receiving these flyers. The Lottery has discontinued the printing and distribution of these game flyers. All Funds Savings 4.2 25.0 In house record retention and destruction The Lottery has moved from outsourcing the storing and ultimate destruction of its archived records to managing those functions on‐site, using existing warehouse space and its own industrial shredder. All Funds Savings 2.3 Single commercial targeting both general and Hispanic markets The Lottery produced one commercial designed to reach both the general market and the Hispanic market, thereby saving the cost of producing a second commercial. All Funds Savings 190 0.0 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Negotiated bonus air time‐Jubilee ticket Enterprise Solution Multi‐Media A promotional opportunity was developed with ABC 15 in connection with an instant ticket game, $250,000 Jubilee. The end result, mutually beneficial to ABC TV and the Lottery, culminated in a promotion that included a seven‐minutes TV broadcast of prize awards to eligible Jubilee ticket purchasers. All Funds Savings 2010 Savings Previously Published 0.0 4,056.6 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Other ʺWinning Numbersʺ Hotline The call center industry is very competitive and offers technological advances. The new vendor contract allows the Lottery to take advantage of associated cost savings. Other 40.0 All savings realized will pass through to the beneficiary distributions. Chain retailer billing The Commission has implemented an initiative to electronically transmit billing statements to chain retailers. The Commission realizes savings in paper, labor, and postage costs. Work Environment Enhancement The Lottery has about 2600 retailers, each with an online terminal to sell and validate tickets. As part of the online contract, the Lottery has added the ESMM player displays (17ʺ LCD screens) to each online terminal. On these point‐of‐sale displays, the Lottery can load and rotate messages to: advertise products, do Amber Alerts, remind player age requirements, discuss ʹWhere the Money Goesʹ, advertise jackpots, etc. This is high‐impact, very flexible communication, usually to a captive audience (customers waiting in a queue to complete their purchases.) 17.0 FY07‐08 ‐ Expanded winning numbers broadcast coverage The use of a Digital Draw System (DDS), rather than a ball‐drawing at a television partner site, enables the Commission to produce a drawing visual that can be provided to, and used by, broadcasters in different parts of the state. By going to the new DDS process, the Commission is now able to get drawings beyond the Phoenix market area by entering into agreements with broadcasters in other areas of the state. This provides greater exposure in television markets and produces efficiencies in the Commissionʹs advertising and marketing. Other Savings used to offset operating costs increases; remainder flows down to beneficiaries. 75.0 Any marketing savings is redirected to new marketing outreach efforts. 2,025.0 Costs are available for other marketing outreach. Discontinue printing/distribution of game flyers to retailers FY08 ‐ Retailer Relicensing Initiative The Lottery prints over 50 instant ticket games a year. The Lottery used to provide flyers to retailers as part of distribution of the new games however upon surveying the retailers the Lottery learned that they did not see any benefit to receiving these flyers. The Lottery has discontinued the printing and distribution of these game flyers. The Commission is implemented an initiative that produces savings in labor and postage costs. Instead of mailing applications to prospective retailers, the Commission is making the application packet available online for download. Other 25.0 Savings in marketing is redirected to other marketing outreach efforts. Drawing ‐ Auditors The Commission switched to a digital draw system that eliminated the need for audits at each drawing. There is a net savings on an annual basis as a result of the change to the digital draw system. Other In house record retention and destruction The Lottery has moved from outsourcing the storing and ultimate destruction of its archived records to managing those functions on‐site, using existing warehouse space and its own industrial shredder. 2.3 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 55.0 All savings realized will pass through to the beneficiary distribution. Electronic communications The Commission is utilizing electronic distribution of the Commissioner packets prior to the Lottery Commission meetings. This permits late packet content changes since the delivery time is virtually eliminated. Other 1.0 Technology For Web project 5.0 All savings realized will pass through to the beneficiary distributions. Money balancing time reduced In FY 2005, the Commission purchased money counting machines for the Phoenix and Tucson Lottery claim stores. The machines reduced the time to perform cash balancing activities by one‐half. Other 15.3 All savings realized will pass through to the beneficiary distributions. Office Supply Centralization By centralizing office supply sourcing this year, the lottery will be able to realize new savings of over $20,000 each year. Other 11.0 All savings realized will pass through to the beneficiary distributions. State Agency Budgets 191 State Parks Board Outsourcing promotion team The Lottery had 2.5 FTE staff positions dedicated to manning promotional events for the Lottery. The work of these staff members was supplemented by hourly temp workers. The Lottery has eliminated these staff positions, outsourcing the responsibilities through our marketing partner and paying hourly for only the actual staff and actual time required to man the events. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 128.1 FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Park Development and Operation 33,539.3 29,226.8 4,312.5 Partnerships and Grants 75,255.6 75,232.3 23.3 Paper Reduction Administration The Commission has implemented an initiative that produces savings in paper costs. Nightly IT reports are now available online and the Commission is encouraging employees to print on both sides of a piece of paper. Agency Total (All Funds) Technology 4.3 Savings will be used to invest in software technology. 5,988.4 5,984.7 3.7 114,783.3 110,443.8 4,339.5 Appropriated Funds 41,089.2 Non‐appropriated Funds 69,354.6 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 4,380.5 Sales Staffʹs wrapped vehicles advertise Lottery Lotteryʹs sales staff use wrapped vehicles (about 20 vehicles in the field) which advertise the Lottery with eye‐catching graphics. These mobile billboards cover the entire state of Arizona and represent a low‐cost form of advertising. Other 10.0 All marketing savings are redirected to other marketing efforts. FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Getting National Training to be Conducted in Arizona State Parks was able to evince savings by convincing national‐level training to be held in the state, thereby eliminating most travel costs associated with the event. 30.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Winner Claim Forms Prior to this functionality, the Lottery printed multi‐part forms, which were required to be available at every retailer location. In addition to the cost of the forms, estimated to be $1,000 annually, forms had to be delivered to approximately 2600 retailers. The Lottery was responsible for maintaining adequate quantities at retailer locations. Single‐page forms print by retailer request. Forms are smaller, making them easier for the Lottery to store (we are required to retain winner forms for seven years). Although not a direct savings for the Lottery, it is less expensive for players to mail in forms. Other 1.0 All savings realized will pass through to the beneficiary distributions. 2,415.0 Increased volunteer hours In an effort to handle an increase in parks visits, the Department has decided to increase the number of volunteer hours by 5% per year instead of hiring additional Park Rangers. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 3,970.0 Available resources will be used to absorb costs for ongoing operations. Individual Printer Tracking System The State Parks Board has acquired software that will track and manage employeeʹs printer usage. It will identify areas in which the agency can use less and as a result, save money. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 2.4 Offset the increase in paper costs. Kartchner Internet Reservation System The Department has implemented an Internet reservation system. Savings accrued by the reduction of 2.0 FTE in FY 2009. 33.2 Service Delivery FTE used for expanded group tour operator service and administration. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 66.4 Funds used to offset cost of internet reservation system. Scientific Studies using Volunteers State Parks expects to conduct one or more biological studies on Parks land during the next two years. A large study can cost around $50,000 but the Board intends to seek assistance of retired biologists to volunteer for the studies. One or more should be completed during FY 2010. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 10.0 Enables Arizona State Parks to meet increasing need for studies without increasing the budget for such studies. 192 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Public Safety Using park facilities to reduce In State Travel Lodging Costs State Parks has implemented a program whereby employees use otherwise empty park space to stay overnight when required. This averts the cost of hotels estimated at an average of $60 per night. For FY 2009, this resulted in savings of $25,000. State Parks expects to continue the program with FY 2010 savings estimated at $25,000. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 25.0 Other increases in travel costs were offset by the reduction in lodging costs. Other increases in travel costs were offset by the reduction in lodging costs. 4,137.0 FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Agency Support 45,851.1 45,298.9 552.2 Highway Patrol 152,607.4 151,520.7 1,086.7 Criminal Investigations 74,485.4 72,735.2 1,750.2 Criminal Justice Support 71,180.9 70,953.9 227.0 Arizona Peace Officer Standards and Training 8,083.4 8,083.4 0.0 0.0 Public Safety Communications Commission Agency Total (All Funds) 352,208.2 Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 348,592.1 3,616.1 273,567.5 75,024.6 New Efficiency Review Issues Lateral Hiring Savings come from avoiding police academy training costs and cadet payroll costs while at the police academy. Savings are somewhat offset by the higher salary cost of a pre‐certified, ʺlateralʺ, officer compared to a new cadet. Net savings are estimated to be $27,400 per lateral hire. In FY 2007, DPS hired 39 lateral officers. All Funds Savings 2010 Savings Previously Published 822.0 2,794.1 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations ʺTan Dayʺ Patrols The department incurred savings by conducting ʺtan dayʺ patrols. On ʺtan daysʺ, sworn officers who hold management and administrative positions spend the day conducting patrols instead of working in the office. While serving to enhance public safety, ʺtan daysʺ also produce a savings to the department over utilizing patrol officers on overtime to do the same work. Service Delivery 33.2 Regular officer time freed up translates into better service to the public through more enforcement action. ACTIC Lease Negotiations The Department negotiated a lease for space for the Arizona Counter‐ Terrorism Intelligence Center that has the advantages of lower rental charges, lower cost for tenant improvements, and savings from buying used modular furniture. Other 1,600.0 ACTIC leases costs are unfunded. Savings reduce the costs that have to be absorbed elsewhere in the Departmentʹs budget. State Agency Budgets 193 Area Office Network Access Energy Until recently, the Department used long distance services to pay for mainframe computer connections to area offices around the state. The Department will now use faster, bundled data lines at a lower cost. The Department has instituted a number of energy‐saving measures, including installing programmable thermostats, adding insulated glass and window shading, reducing lighting levels, and installing efficient lighting. 65.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used for increased utility and building maintenance costs. Background Investigations Conducted by Retired Officers Lateral Hiring The Department saves money by hiring retired officers to conduct background investigations instead of non‐retired officers with higher benefit costs. This saves the Department about $500 per investigation. Service Delivery 37.3 Officers not having to do background checks can perform other public safety functions (e.g., patrolling the highways). The Department receives approximately 200,000 e‐mail messages from the FBI each year. The e‐mails were automatically printed on two pages; however, the new software allows for the printing of the same information on one page. This has cut paper costs in half as well as reduced toner costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 3.2 Offset operating supply cost increases. Contact Tracking System In FY 2004 the Department replaced its Scantron contact tracking system with an optical scanning system. Both systems capture critical information about the nature of each public contact, but the scanning system requires vastly less officer/employee time. Under the Scantron system, an officer or other employee had to complete a ʺbubble sheetʺ in addition to the normal contact documentation (citation, warning, repair order, etc.). The optical system instead reads the original documentation, thus eliminating a step. This saves the Department from hiring additional data entry staff. 231.5 Monies that would otherwise be used for data entry staff are instead used for direct service provision (e.g., Highway Patrol). Convert Sworn Positions to Civilian Status 822.0 Savings are used to pay higher salaries necessary to attract lateral officers. used to pay higher salarires necessary to attract lateral officers. License Plate Readers In FY 2007, LPRs generated 85 stolen vehicle recoveries. These recoveries equate to an increase of 2.8% compared to the number of vehicles recovered by the Departmentʹs Vehicle Theft Task Force in the prior year. The cost avoidance is calculated as 2.8% of the task forceʹs budget, under the theory that a similar increase in recoveries would have required a similar increase in funding. 125.0 Service Delivery Increases service delivery for the same cost. Reduce Fuel Consumption Numerous strategies are being employed to reduce consumption of fuel, including carpooling to meetings, ensuring proper tire inflation, encouraging good driving practices, telecommuting, alternative work schedules, purchasing more fuel‐efficient vehicles, and changing dispatching procedures. The Department expects to reduce the amount of fuel used by as much as 1% in FY 2006 and 2% in FYs 2007, 2008, and 2009. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Where appropriate, the department is converting sworn administrative positions to civilian status. This saves the department because civilians employees are less costly in terms of salary and benefit costs. Service Delivery Savings come from avoiding police academy training costs and cadet payroll costs while at the police academy. Savings are somewhat offset by the higher salary cost of a pre‐certified, ʺlateralʺ, officer compared to a new cadet. Net savings are estimated to be $27,400 per lateral hire. In FY 2007, DPS hired 39 lateral officers. Service Delivery CCW Paper Reduction Service Delivery 72.4 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings reallocated to budget shortfalls in telecommunications and mainframe computing. 209.3 Savings used in a variety of ways to imporove service delivery (e.g., filling additional positions, paying overtime, implementing technology projects). Electronic communications 242.2 Savings would be used offset increases in fuel prices. Windshield Replacement and Repair The Department has realized cost savings by, where appropriate, repairing windshields instead of replacing them. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 6.0 Savings used to offset increasing vehicle repair and maintenance costs. 3,521.1 The Department has converted a number of paper documents to an electronic format. For example, Crime Lab reports are now reproduced electronically rather than in hard‐copy format, and annual reports are posted to the agency website rather than distributed in paper form. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 74.0 Savings were used to cover operating cost increases. 194 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Arizona Department of Racing Greyhound Drug Testing The Department reduced the number of drug tests performed on greyhounds. In FY 2006, 0.0% of all greyhound tests and 1.33% of all horse drug tests resulted in a positive finding. The Department determined that it is more critical to its mission to perform other tests, test dogs in a different manner, or regulate the dog racing industry using alternate methods. FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Commercial Racing 3,922.5 3,922.5 0.0 County Fair Racing 1,460.1 1,460.1 0.0 Service Delivery The Department reallocates these savings for additional horse drug testing and other alternate methods of enforcement and regulation. The amount wagered on horse races is over 64% of the total, and a greater investment is made by each participant. Boxing Commission Agency Total (All Funds) 182.9 182.9 0.0 5,565.5 5,565.5 0.0 Appropriated Funds 3,415.5 Non‐appropriated Funds 2,150.0 New Website New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 142.0 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Electronic Communications The Department transferred a number of reports and documents, including its annual report, from hard copy to electronic format for transmission to the Racing Commission, Department employees and industry stakeholders. Additionally, the Department developed a new computer application that allows racetrack permittees to submit required reports through the Internet rather than hard copies. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations A new Department website has been developed to meet the ʺsame look ‐ same feelʺ requirements of the Governorʹs Office. The new website provides more detailed information about the Department’s services and requirements, provides customer forms, answers frequently asked questions, and provides links to various industry organizations and government agencies to assist customers in gathering information that otherwise would have to be obtained and transmitted by Department employees. 0.8 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The Department uses this savings to offset part of the unfunded cost of increased salaries. Overtime 1.3 These savings are used to pay for a portion of the unfunded employer cost of Health, Dental and Life insurance increases and the unfunded portion of increased employer retirement costs. False Application Processing The Department improved the processing of false applications in three ways: First, the Department updated its application to provide more clarity, better instructions and a list of criminal history that may result in license denial. Second, the processing of false applications is now centralized in the main office with the decision‐making function transferred from the Stewards to the Director, which allows the Stewards time to perform other regulatory functions. Lastly, the Department was able to reduce the number of cases and the number of false applications from racetrack employees by establishing a pre‐ employment screening policy. Racetracks perform drug screening on employment candidates and explain the Departmentʹs licensing requirements and reasons for denial. Service Delivery 25.0 13.5 The Department is able to reallocate staff to other regulatory responsibilities when the number of false applications is reduced. The Department developed a new policy to guide supervisors and employees on how to avoid overtime. The policy provides flexibility and alternatives, such as flexible schedules and reassignment of responsibilities. It also requires employees to receive approval from their supervisors and the Director prior to incurring overtime. This policy encourages cooperation and expands cross‐training opportunities for employees and supervisors by requiring continuous communication and planning. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 5.5 These savings are used to pay for a portion of the unfunded employer cost of Health, Dental and Life insurance increases and the unfunded portion of increased employer retirement costs. Procurement & Administrative Policies & Procedures The Department restructured its procurement and administrative process to obtain best available pricing; reduce purchase requisition processing time, order duplication, and errors; and ensure that calculation and payment errors are discovered and corrected in a timely fashion. Additionally, the Department reduced supplies inventory, developed a replacement schedule, and limited the types and quantities of supplies that can be ordered. Fleet Technology Four of the ten vehicles originally in use at the Department have been returned to the Arizona Department of Administration (ADOA) fleet management section, which reduced the Departmentʹs fleet permanently. The Department will continue to allocate part of its efficiency review savings towards acquisition of computer technology that had been delayed when the Departmentʹs budget was reduced in previous fiscal years. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 10.9 26.0 These savings are used to pay for a portion of the unfunded employer cost of Health, Dental and Life insurance increases and the unfunded portion of increased employer retirement costs. State Agency Budgets 195 Department of Real Estate Simplified Permit Renewal Application The Department initiated a new policy regarding racing permit renewals by racetrack owners. The Department has reduced the number of renewal application copies a racetrack owner has to submit from 10 hard copies to 1 hard copy and 1 electronic copy. Each application requires large amounts of supporting documentation. By reducing the number of required hard copies, the Department is saving storage space. In addition, the Department simplified the application form. This has produced efficiencies in staff time when evaluating the application forms. 1.2 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The Department pays for increased in‐state travel costs that were approved and not funded. 2.7 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations These savings are used to pay for a portion of the unfunded employer cost of Health, Dental and Life insurance increases and the unfunded portion of increased employer retirement costs. Travel ‐ Lodging The Department developed a new travel policy that the Department of Administration approved to better manage travel expenses and educate employees to encourage better expense practices when employees travel. 21.0 The Department reallocates these savings for additional horse drug testing and other alternate methods of enforcement and regulation. The amount wagered on horse races is over 64% of the total, and a greater investment is made by each participant. Travel ‐ Meals and Mileage The Department developed a new travel policy which the Department of Administration approved to better manage travel expenses and educate employees about better expense practices when employees travel. Employees are required to provide receipts for meal reimbursement if requesting the ADOA in‐state rate. Employees who do not provide receipts receive a reduced meals rate. Employees are allowed to use their private vehicles at a reduced mileage rate of 15 cents per mile when State vehicles are available. Additionally, employees are required to carpool if traveling to the same general location and their official business starts and ends within one‐half hour of each other. 10.5 The Department reallocates these savings for additional horse drug testing and other alternate methods of enforcement and regulation. The amount wagered on horse races is over 64% of the total, and a greater investment is made by each participant. 118.4 196 Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Licensing and Regulation 4,990.8 4,757.5 233.3 Agency Total (All Funds) 4,990.8 4,757.5 233.3 Appropriated Funds 4,476.2 Non‐appropriated Funds 281.3 New Travel Policy The Department replaced one full‐time Veterinarian Assistant position with two part‐time seasonal Veterinarian Assistant positions. This eliminated certain employee‐related and travel expenses because the employees are hired from the region where they work instead of traveling where one full‐time employee would be needed. Pursuant to personnel rules, the two part‐time seasonal positions are not eligible for benefits. Service Delivery FY 2010 Agency New Efficiency Review Issues Staff Positions Service Delivery FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives As of June 2007, the Department uses state‐owned vehicles to travel outside the office. Before they had individuals or groups take their own vehicles and receive reimbursement from the agency after the fact. All Funds Savings 12.0 2010 Savings Previously Published 103.5 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Accelerated Settlement Agreement Process (ASAP) To facilitate the processing of relatively minor violations, the Department developed the Accelerated Settlement Agreement Process (ASAP) in January 2006. A one‐page consent agreement is provided to licensees who 1) fail to disclose convictions, adverse judgments, or other issues to the Department within 10 days as required, 2) continue to conduct licensed activity after their license expires, or 3) conduct illegal advertising. Over 95% of the licensees presented with the opportunity to accept an ASAP do so. This enables the Department to close these cases quickly and focus on more serious cases in which the public has been harmed. Revertments 100.0 Will deposit 100% of penalties collected into the General Fund. Electronic License Certificates The Agency reduced licensing costs by making the process electronic. Other 35.0 Budget cuts New Travel Policy As of June 2007, the Department uses state‐owned vehicles to travel outside the office. Before they had individuals or groups take their own vehicles and receive reimbursement from the agency after the fact. Other 12.0 Budget cuts Require Licensees to Use Online System Licensees are now required to submit continuing education information online. The data is automatically updated in the licenseesʹ files and on the public database. Service Delivery 18.8 Focus staff on other duties as assigned. No real savings ‐ this is a cost avoidance. FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Registrar of Contractors Savings in Postage The Department now sends renewal notices via email, which saves paper, postage, and handling costs. The email also encourages licensees to use the new online renewal system. Other 13.5 Budget cuts Regulatory Affairs 179.3 FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 12,163.8 12,163.8 0.0 6,753.4 6,753.4 0.0 18,917.2 18,917.2 0.0 Recovery Fund Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 12,163.8 6,753.4 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 7.0 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Electronic communications The Registrar of Contractors’ newsletter was printed and mailed twice a year. The newsletter is now available online, which eliminates the printing and postage costs. Technology 193.6 Savings will be utilized in technology ehancements. Equipment maintenance contracts The Registrar has cancelled all maintenance contracts for fax machines. The machines have rarely malfunctioned, and the agency believes it will save money by paying for repairs only on an as‐needed basis. 7.6 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used to cover increased cost of paper and supplies. Mail Operations The Registrar has leased postage meters for its seven field offices, centralized the mailing of information requests, and utilized the use of postcard hearing notices. This has resulted in supply, postage, and efficiency savings for the agency. 7.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used to offset increases in postage. Printing costs Twice each year the Registrar prints a booklet of statutes and rules. Due to the booklet’s size, the agency had been unable to print it in‐house. By splitting the booklet into two smaller editions, the agency can print the booklet with its own equipment. Service Delivery 31.7 FTE was used to enhance service delivery in another department. Resource Utilization The agency has consolidated over 50 separate cell phone accounts into one pooled account and reconfigured the legal and accounting departments to promote better workflow and efficiency. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 11.0 Savings will be used to fund temporary services during staffing shortages. State Agency Budgets 197 Residential Utility Consumer Office Retiree Retention Initiative Program (RIPP) Amount carried forward from prior yearʹs. Service Delivery 36.0 Savings from this initiative will be used to fund additional training for staff to improve service levels. FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Server Hosting Ratepayer Representation 1,360.5 1,319.3 41.2 The cost avoidance savings were calculated from three main areas. First, annual maintenance contracts of $40,000 were eliminated. Second, the $30,000 required for maintaining the serverʹs independent power supply, heating/cooling equipment, and fire suppression devises were eliminated. Third, as the agency moved to a new location it was able to avoid the $9,400 that would have been required for additional floor space for the server environment. Agency Total (All Funds) 1,360.5 1,319.3 41.2 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 79.4 Savings were used to fund increased cost in other technology. Web‐Based Services The agency IT staff designed an internal survey card system automating the internal survey process. The IT personnel also designed an electronic agency IT Help Desk to capture and track work requests and implemented and required electronic calendaring agency‐wide. Also, in August 2005, the agency deployed an on‐licensing renewal process available to contractors. The savings from these initiatives are realized from reduced staff time, increased accuracy of the process, reduced paper use, and reduced, postage, and printing costs. Technology 15.0 Appropriated Funds 1,319.3 New Efficiency Review Issues Information Technology Maintenance RUCO currently contracts with an outside vendor at a rate of $120 per hour for computer and network maintenance. Over the last two years, the agency has used an outside vendor at an average of $2,000 per year. The agency will use in‐house staff for approximately half of these services, at a cost of $50 per hour in personal services and employee related expenses. All Funds Savings 1.2 Administrative Savings By maximizing the use of two‐sided copying and printing and by instituting controls on the purchase of office supplies and other equipment, RUCO expects to save approximately $1000 per year in administrative costs. All Funds Savings 1.0 2010 Savings Previously Published Savings will be used to implement additional new technology. 36.7 381.3 198 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Revenue Property Tax Publishing and Training FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives Service 112,646.5 112,069.0 577.5 8,882.5 8,738.9 143.6 28,509.8 28,509.8 0.0 Processing Education and Compliance Agency Support Agency Total (All Funds) FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 30,634.0 30,525.8 108.2 180,672.8 179,843.5 829.3 Appropriated Funds 81,029.8 Non‐appropriated Funds 98,813.7 The Department uses CDs and the Internet for the publishing and distribution of property tax forms and studies. The Department had previously used hard copies. 16.6 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations All savings are dedicated to backfill underfunded baseline expenditures. Unclaimed Property Efficiencies The Department implemented the use of a BRITS tool to locate hard‐to‐ find property owners. The Department also moved the disposal of mutual funds in‐house, which resulted in savings from no longer using an outside vendor. 84.4 Service Delivery These savings will allow the Unclaimed Property Unit (Non‐GF) to provide a better level of service in attempting to locate property owners. New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 728.9 806.9 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Copier Maintenance In FY 2007, the Department had 35 copiers (some as old as 10 years) that would have cost at least $109,091 to maintain in FY 2008 under the new statewide copier maintenance contract. The decision was made to make a capital investment in 24 new copiers, and to remove the 35 old, more expensive copiers. The maintenance cost for FY 08 was $31,132, resulting in a savings of $77,959. 78.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations These savings will be used to help offset other cost increases. E‐file income tax returns The Department has encouraged taxpayers to e‐file their tax returns. Savings are accrued through reduced data entry, postage, temporary workers, and supplies. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 476.5 All savings are dedicated to backfill underfunded baseline expenditures. Fax Machine Maintenance The Department converted fax machine maintenance from annual contracts to a per service call charge basis. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 7.8 All savings are dedicated to backfill underfunded baseline expenditures. Microfilming of Tax Returns The Department contracted out the microfilming of tax returns to a private vendor, saving $14.11 per box for microfilming. In addition, no temporary employees were required, and permanent FTE positions were reassigned to other jobs in the Department. Service Delivery 143.6 The agency reallocated these saving to redeploy FTE positions to help with the keying of individual tax returns. State Agency Budgets 199 School Facilities Board Land Trust Refunding Debt service is reduced by approximately: FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative School Facilities Board 1,136,747.5 1,136,747.5 0.0 Agency Total (All Funds) 1,136,747.5 1,136,747.5 0.0 FY 08 $6,133,120 FY 09 $1,185,200 FY 10 $1,185,200 1,185.2 Revertments Savings produced by the refunding are expendable earnings of the State Land Trust and serve as an offset to General Fund expenditures. Appropriated Funds 373,931.5 Refunding Prop 301 Revenue Bonds Non‐appropriated Funds 762,816.0 Debt service is reduced by approximately $1.6 million per year for a total nominal savings of $24.5 million over 16 years. New Efficiency Review Issues Estimation is based on SFB calculation of savings due to constraints placed on construction projects. SFB expects savings to decrease by 30% per year as construction managers adjust methods for pricing according to SFB standards, thus resulting in more difficult to quantify cost avoidance. All Funds Savings 2010 Savings Previously Published 1,576.5 Other Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) Review 6,600.0 2,558.0 The debt service was reduced. The savings flow to other recipients of Prop 301 monies, notably the Classroom Site Fund. Travel Savings were estimated for relocation of annual study session at $2,000 (15 attendees x $67/night X 2 nights) + $3,000 reduction in motor pool (employee) and personal car mileage (board members) through increased use of local venues for board meetings. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 5.0 Savings are used to absorb underfunded health insurance and COSF rent increases. FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Electronic communications This estimate is an internal goal not completely verified through AFIS as there is not a separate comp object for paper. SFB is assuming the balance of the FY 04 savings are through reductions in paper (copier) costs. SFB is committed to these savings FY 05‐FY 08. For internal printing, expenditures decreased from $2,045 in FY ʹ03 to $1,026 in FY ʹ04, for a difference of $1,019. For postage and delivery, expenditures decreased from $7,135 in FY ʹ03 to $6,483 in FY ʹ04, for a difference of $652. The total savings is $1,671. 6.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings are used to offset unfunded increases in health insurance, retirement increase, and COSF rent. Waterless Urinals Each urinal is estimated to save 40,000 gallons of water per year. According to DOA, the average cost of water for the state is .005176 per gallon. For FY 2008, we assumed 25 percent of the estimated 80,000 gallons per year savings, but the savings ($104) were offset by the cost of the urinals ($920). Out year savings assume a 2 percent inflation rate on water costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 0.4 Savings are used to absorb unfunded health insurance and COSF rent increases. 3,760.2 Employee Sharing The arrangement began May 27, 2008 and is ongoing. This analysis assumes the arrangement will end on October 1, 2008. SFB savings is based on the estimated hourly cost of a temporary receptionist. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 5.6 Savings are used to absorb unfunded health insurance and COSF rent increases. Interest savings Refinancing the Qualified Zone Academy Bonds is estimated to save $10,765,260 over the 15 year life of the bonds. While there will be savings in the area of $1 million in FY 2005 and FY 2008, the repayment schedule contains higher payments in FY 2006 and FY 2007 amounting to an additional $400,000 each year. Other 981.5 The savings is a cost comparision between a bond issue versus a QZAB issue. Because the SFB never issued the bonds there was never a true savings to the operating budget. However, if the bonds were issued in lieu of the QZABs the debt service would have b 200 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Arizona Office of Tourism Motor Pool FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Office of Tourism 15,022.9 15,022.9 0.0 Tourism Promotion 12,651.9 12,651.9 0.0 Agency Total (All Funds) 27,674.8 27,674.8 0.0 Appropriated Funds 15,022.9 Non‐appropriated Funds 12,651.9 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 3.8 Savings allocated to project costs by various divisions within AOT. 0.7 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings allocated to offset increased administrative and operational services. Office Equipment In an effort to find savings and increase efficiency throughout the agency’s internal printing activities, AOT plans to convert existing and/or purchase new printers with duplexing features and to set all staff workstations to default to that process. 1.0 Technology 439.1 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Savings allocated to offset the administrative cost of office supplies and maintenance contracts. Purchasing Electronic Communications The Office achieved savings from enhanced utilization of electronic communications instead of traditional mailings for items such as printed newsletters and various documents and reports. The department’s website was improved to allow several newsletters and communication with employees and stakeholders to be distributed electronically. Online and electronic services have improved to provide timely information to consumers and prospective visitors to Arizona, thus reducing costs for printing and fulfillment materials. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Service Delivery 454.5 Under a revised process for purchasing administrative and office supplies, supplies are ordered no more than once per month to encourage better coordination of needs and inventory. This measure has enabled the Office to reduce purchasing costs. 2.7 Work Environment Enhancement Funds allocated to offset increased administrative expenses, such as rent, phone, operational services. 508.5 Savings allocated to marketing dollars to offset increased costs, enhance current activities and participate in new opportunities to promote tourism in Arizona. Fleet Management ‐ Cost Reduction After reassessing its needs for transportation, the Office decided to return two vehicles to the State Motor Pool, thus reducing its operating costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 10.3 Savings allocated to increase costs of rent and telecommunication charges. Fulfillment OSVG online is estimated by number of guides ordered online times bulk class postage cost. RSL processing is estimated by number of leads processed in‐house times cost per lead of data entry out of house. International Postcard distribution is estimated by number of postcards sent times postage cost. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 26.2 Funds allocated to improve current fulfillment activities and also expand data analysis to increase reach and efficiency of target marketing. Fulfillment Services In an effort to efficiently administer resources, the Office has contracted with a single vendor for mailing services, warehousing and inventory. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 9.3 Funds allocated to improve current fulfillment activities and also expand data analysis to increase reach and efficiency of target marketing. State Agency Budgets 201 Department of Transportation Administration Intermodal Transportation Motor Vehicle Division Aeronautics Division Agency Total (All Funds) Reduce/Consolidate Phones FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 53,237.8 52,497.8 740.0 2,880,921.8 2,880,371.8 550.0 117,069.3 116,954.3 115.0 48,387.0 48,387.0 0.0 3,099,615.9 3,098,210.9 1,405.0 Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 2,603,333.8 New Efficiency Review Issues 1,596.0 560.0 Savings to be used to absorb cost increases. A savings is realized by purchasing 150 1/2 to trucks over the next three years rather than spending funds to upgrade 3/4 ton trucks. Also there is a difference in operating costs between a 3/4 ton truck and a 1/2 ton truck, including fuel costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations 500.0 Savings will be used to pay for increased costs. Air Filter Regeneration Compare the costs of purchasing new filters with that of the regenerated filters. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Truck Class Downsizing 494,877.1 2010 Savings Previously Published ADOT has partnered with AZNet to review its circuit inventory, land lines, long‐distance charges, eliminate 800 numbers, and circuit re‐ engineering. Furthermore, ADOT does a routine review of cell phone and Blackberry usage to ensure calling plans are appropriate to the business purpose and inactive phones are disconnected in a timely manner. ADOT, by disconnecting desk phones in vacant cubicles, save approximately $700 per phone per year. The savings estimate is $1,310,000 based on a one –time savings of $750K and an annual savings of $560K. 1,405.0 50.0 Savings will be used to pay for increased vehicle maintenance costs. APS/SRP Rebate Program By replacing non‐programmable thermostats with programmable ones ADOT has been able to take advantage of rebate programs offered by APS and SRP. To date ADOT has realized a savings of $40,000 form APS and $8,200 from the SRP program that was recently reintroduced. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 50.0 Savings will be used to pay for building maintenance. Electronic Direct Deposit Analysis the cost of the previous method where it took staff time to prepare and distribute the pay stubs as well as the cost of postage. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 130.0 MVD Enforcement Personnel Web‐Based Training Take the cost to send the officers around the state to attend formal classroom training. These cost include vehicle usage, per diem, class fees, and lost productivity, with the computer based training flat rate of $150.00 per year per officer. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 115.0 Savings will be used to off‐set higher operating costs. 202 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Veteransʹ Services Fleet Management FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative Administration 7,497.2 7,497.2 0.0 Veteransʹ Conservatorship/ Guardianship 1,285.5 1,285.5 0.0 Veteransʹ Benefits Counseling Services 3,129.2 3,129.2 0.0 State Veteransʹ Home 16,932.4 16,676.8 255.6 680.6 463.6 217.0 Arizona Veteransʹ Cemeteries Agency Total (All Funds) 29,524.9 Appropriated Funds Non‐appropriated Funds 29,052.3 472.6 22,890.8 The Department cut back on approximately 1,000 travel miles during the summer months of July through September. Gift Shop Operations Volunteer staffing of the Gift Shop enable the personal service and employee related expense savings. Savings will lower operating costs for the Home (a self‐funding program) Historical Soldier Memorial Cemetery Project The cemetery is responsible to bury the 70 historical soldiers and Veteransʹ Services is completing this project solely using donations. Uniforms The Department discontinued stipends to employees called ʺUniform Allowanceʺ and instituted uniform leasing. All Funds Savings Replacing the Chaplain Program with Volunteers 20.7 2010 Savings Previously Published 7.7 The paid position of Chaplain has been eliminated and replaced by local volunteers who carry out the Chaplainʹs duties. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 120.0 Savings will reduce costs to operate the Home (a self‐funding program) FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Cemetery Beautification Projects Telemedicine The cemetery relied upon landscaping services provided by non‐paid staff and expects to receive the benefits of non‐paid staff labor in FY 2009 and FY 2010. The telemedicine project was determined to be inefficient for the Arizona State Veterans Home due to the close proximity of the VA Medical Center and ease of transport. 116.8 Supporting salaries and ERE for paid staff at the cemetery plus landscaping equipment and materials. Contracting for Laundry Services Savings of $70,196 are expected for a full fiscal year of contracted laundry services when the average daily resident census is 181. The savings for FY 2009 has been adjusted to reflect a lower census and a six‐ month delay in the new vendor being awarded the contract. 27.3 Savings will lower operating costs for the Home (a self‐funding program) 10.0 Other The program will be discontinued and funds will no longer be encumbered from the Veterans Donation Fund. It is essentially reverting funds back to that program for use in other activities which benefit Arizona veterans. Uniforms The Department discontinued stipends to employees called ʺUniform Allowanceʺ and instituted uniform leasing. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 22.1 Reabsorb expenses which are paid by the residents of ASVH. ASVH is self‐funded & no taxpayer funds are used to cover operating expenses. Elimination of the Veterans Business Advocacy Group The Administrative Assistant position and the Assistant Deputy Director position were both eliminated. The Assistant Deputy Director position was reassigned to manage the Veterans Service Division, which supplies veteran benefit counseling; the core business of the agency. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 105.0 The cemetery did not inter the historical soldiers in the ʺmodernʺ portion of the cemetery, thereby avoiding the costs to bury soldiers from that time. Cost avoidance will result in more money available for operations and supplies. New Efficiency Review Issues Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 42.3 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 6,161.5 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 1.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will result in a lower operating cost for the Arizona State Veteran Home, a self‐funded program. 574.5 130.0 Reduction in administrative operating costs ‐ Salaries and ERE State Agency Budgets 203 Department of Water Resources Eliminate Distribution of Payroll Direct Deposit Notices FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative 6,689.7 6,689.7 0.0 47,765.3 47,765.3 0.0 1,485.6 1,485.6 0.0 Agency Support Water Management and Statewide Planning Dam Safety and Flood Warning Agency Total (All Funds) 55,940.6 55,940.6 Appropriated Funds 23,881.2 Non‐appropriated Funds 32,059.4 0.0 New Efficiency Review Issues 2010 Savings Previously Published 120.5 FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Manually sorting, folding, stuffing and distributing paychecks on a biweekly basis accounts for approximately one man‐day per month of labor in the Accounting department. In addition, window envelopes are used for each paycheck and notice. This will be eliminated as a result of the discontinuance of direct deposit notices. Eliminating direct deposit notices will save the Agency approximately $2.2 thousand per year in labor and materials charges. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used to offset the increased cost of paper to the Agency. Postage Meter Rentals By purchasing stamps for outlying offices instead of paying rent on postage meters we expect to reduce postage costs for the Agency. We plan to use the stamps by mail program. Postage stamps can be ordered online and delivered to outlying offices for a one dollar per transaction fee. This fee is less than the cost of agency personnel driving to the post office and waiting in line. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Discontinue Purchase of Preprinted Return Address Envelopes 2.2 2.0 Savings will be used to absorb postage cost increases. The cost differential between preprinted and blank envelopes on State contract is approximately $3.0 thousand per year for quantity used by the Agency. Since recipient addresses are currently printed on envelopes using printers, negligible additional expense would be incurred for printing the return address at the same time. 127.7 Additional savings would be realized due to the fact that preprinted envelopes must be purchased by the box and some areas of the Agency use very few envelopes. We could purchase generic, plain envelopes and they could be shared by all areas. 3.0 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The savings will be used to offset the increases in cost of recycled paper used for printers and copiers throughout the Agency. Document Imaging Project The Department is currently working on a document imaging process. With this new system, the Department will save time and staff needed to process requests for information and reduction of space needed for paper files. The cost of imaging documents will absorb any savings generated by a reduction in staff time and storage space. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 120.0 Ssavings are used to absorb the cost of imaging and storing the documents. Electronic Communications The Department achieved savings from enhanced utilization of electronic communications instead of traditional mailings for items such as printed newsletters and various documents and reports. The Departmentʹs website was also improved to allow several newsletters and communication with employees and stakeholders to be distributed electronically. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 0.5 Savings realized will be used to partially offset higher fuel costs for fleet services charges. 204 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Department of Weights and Measures FY 2010 Agency FY 2010 Agency Request Prior to Efficiency Initiatives Request Post Efficiency Initiatives Electronic Communications ‐ Online entry of CBG batch data FY 2010 Efficiency Initiative General Services 2,041.0 1,940.7 100.3 Air Quality Oxygenated Fuel 1,013.4 885.4 128.0 659.7 657.5 2.2 3,714.1 3,483.6 230.5 Vapor Recovery Agency Total (All Funds) Appropriated Funds 2010 Savings Previously Published 70.3 Audit and Reduce Underused Telecommunication Service Department has eliminated underused telecommunication services. Electronic Communications ‐ Online scheduling 2.2 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 18.3 Apply savings to existing program needs Savings will be used to cover expenditures to operate the program Gravimetric Lab in Metrology Change in Terminal Audit Protocol The Department has changed its protocol, reducing the amount of travel necessary to complete audits. 29.0 The construction of an in‐house gravimetric lab has allowed the Department to avoid biannual testing fees and shipping expenses for 5 volumetric units. Service Delivery 16.7 Savings will be used to cover expenditures to operate the program The savings will be used to purchase needed equipment for the program Reduce Mailing and Postage Cost Decrease Transportation Cost ‐ Fleet Management The Department has instituted a take home vehicle policy. This allows investigators in the Phoenix area to start and end their workday from home rather than returning vehicles to the Glendale office. This saves the Department an average of 467 miles of unnecessary travel each day. 18.2 Savings will continue to be used to absorb costs of ongoing operations. Direct Deposit Paycheck The Department has realized travel and personnel savings by implementing direct deposit. Service Delivery 1.6 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The savings will be used to cover increased operating expenditures Reverse Osmosis and De‐ionized Water Systems for Metrology The Department installed a reverse osmosis water system for the Metrology lab. This initiative has reduced costs in water usage and maintenance. 4.4 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 2.9 Rural Investigators The Agency has hired rural investigators to reduce the time and travel costs of servicing rural areas from Phoenix. Electronic Communications The Department now has a program that automatically notifies a licensee when the license is past due. This allows the Department to save time spent on initial calls and follow‐up calls. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The Department has reduced printing and postage costs by emailing quarterly newsletters to stakeholders. Savings was used to pay for equipment. Reallocate to fund ongoing programs 5.8 Savings will continue to be used to cover increased operating costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 13.0 Helps pay rising gasoline prices and increases the number of inspections that can be done statewide. Streamline Civil Penalty Process To increase efficiency, the Department changed the way in which civil penalties are issued. As a result of this initiative, copies of civil penalty letters are no longer sent through certified mail, thus avoiding postage and labor costs. Electronic communications ‐ Online data entry of complaints The Departmentʹs website allows citizens to file complaints and check inspection results online. This reduces the labor costs of registering complaints and eliminates the need for inspectors to call with investigation results. Service Delivery 2.0 The Departmentʹs website now allows Vapor Recovery inspections to be scheduled online. This initiative creates savings by reducing the amount of time staff spends scheduling these inspections. FY 2009 Efficiency Review Savings Allocations Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Electronic Communications ‐ Online payment/licensing The Department now accepts licensing and civil penalty payments online, allowing the Department to save postage and time. Savings will be used to cover programming expenses associated with running the Departmentʹs website. New Efficiency Review Issues Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 3.7 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations Savings will be used to cover computer programming expenditures associated with ma Technology 3,483.6 Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations The Department has created a new computer program for the industry to enter Cleaner Burning Gasoline (CBG) data. This initiative saves Department staff approximately 20 hours per month in data entry time. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 10.6 Savings will be used for equipment upgrade and maintenance 2.2 Savings will be used to cover for programming expenditures needed for the online complaint process. State Agency Budgets 205 Streamline Licensing Procedures The Department saves 14.5 hours each month by using a folder/inserter and postage machine to prepare licensing billing. Technology 2.9 Savings will pay for equipment/maintenance and programing. Zeltex Fuel Analyzer With 6 Zeltex analyzers, the Department can now analyze most motor fuel samples in the field, decreasing transportation and laboratory costs. Absorb Cost Increases of Ongoing Operations 95.3 Cover cost of equipment and offset expenses 228.8 206 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Glossary and Acronyms GLOSSARY, PART 1 Budget Terms 90/10 Professional and occupational regulatory agencies funded through the collection of fees and the issuance of licenses. These agencies retain 90% of the fees collected annually in separate agency fund accounts and deposit 10% of the fees collected into the General Fund.1 accountability Monitoring, measuring and evaluating the performance and progress of policies, plans and programs to ensure that results are achieved. actual expenditures Expenditures made in the prior fiscal year as reported in the State of Arizona Annual Financial Report, including Personal Services, Employee‐Related Expenditures, All Other Operating Expenditures and all special line items as au‐ thorized by the Legislature. administrative adjustments Adjustments made to reflect ex‐ penditures made by an agency after the close of the fiscal year. Administrative adjustments include the time period from the close of the 13th month to June 30 of the next fiscal year. administrative costs Expenses associated with the support, management and oversight of services delivered pursuant to the agency or program mission. Typical administrative costs include those associated with accounting, human resources, budgeting, strategic planning, public information, auditing, executive management, etc. All Other Operating Expenditures (AOOE) Category of ex‐ penditure accounts that include Professional and Outside Services, In‐State Travel, Out‐of‐State Travel, Food, Other Op‐ erating Expenditures, and Equipment. Annual Budget Unit Agencies that are required, pursuant to Laws 2002, Chapter 210, to submit annual budget requests. There are 17 such agencies; the remaining State agencies are biennial budget units. annualization An adjustment, made to the current year funding base as part of the agency budget request, that will allow a partially funded program to operate for a full year. appropriated fund The Legislatively mandated segregation of funds. It is used and monitored by the General Accounting Of‐ fice as a separate self‐balancing set of accounts. Arizona Administrative Code State agency rules of practice setting forth the nature and requirements of all formal pro‐ cedures available to the public. Arizona Financial Information System (AFIS) The State‐wide accounting system maintained by the Department of Ad‐ ministration. 1 Italicized terms are defined in this Glossary. State Agency Budgets Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (AHCCCS) The State’s Medicaid program – designed to deliver quality managed health care to qualifying individuals. Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) The laws governing the State of Arizona. base budget An adjusted budget base that reflects the current year appropriation, amended to include changes for standard operating adjustments. below‐the‐line items Specific expenditure or budgetary ac‐ counts that have been singled out through the appropriation process to provide high visibility of expenditure. Also known as special line items. biennial budgeting A process that estimates revenues and expenditures for a two‐year period. block grant Allocations of federal money to a state or its subdi‐ visions in accordance with a distribution formula prescribed by law or administrative regulation, for activities of a con‐ tinuing nature within a restricted subject area (e.g., social ser‐ vices, maternal and child health, and childcare). budget A financial plan that estimates the revenues and expen‐ ditures for a given period of time. (SEE ALSO: capital outlay and operating budget). budget program Functions and activities of a budget unit or within a budget unit that are pre‐planned to fulfill a distinct mission. Budget Reform Legislation Refers to the provisions contained in Laws 1993, Chapter 252; Laws 1994, Chapter 218; Laws 1995, Chapter 283; Laws 1996, Chapter 339; Laws 1997, Chap‐ ter 210, and Laws 2002, Chapter 210. budget unit A department, commission, board, institution or other State organization receiving, expending, disbursing or incurring obligations against State funds. capital outlay Expenditures for upkeep, preservation, de‐ velopment, improvement or acquisition of lands, buildings or certain associated equipment. Capital Outlay Stabilization Fund (COSF) A fund into which rent monies collected from agencies occupying State‐owned rental space are deposited. The monies partially offset build‐ ing operating and maintenance costs. categorical eligibility Automatic eligibility for certain federal‐ State matched public assistance programs, based on criteria established in federal law. Admission to a program (e.g., Medicaid) is mandatory to certain groups of beneficiaries 207 who meet the legal criteria for eligibility to the specified pro‐ gram. categorical programs A broad category of joint federal‐State public assistance programs that provide financial assistance to individuals or that may subsidize a particular activity (e.g., Medicaid pays for medical services on behalf of certain groups of low‐income persons). certificate of participation (COP) A financing tool used by the State for the acquisition and construction of State facilities. classification salary adjustment (CSA) The review of positions within a specific class to determine whether a change in class or salary is warranted. A CSA is conducted by the Personnel Division of the Department of Administration. comptroller object code A four‐digit code used within the State‐wide accounting system to identify the detailed revenue or expenditure account affected by a transaction; the lowest level in the object structure. continuing appropriation An appropriation that is auto‐ matically renewed without further Legislative action, period after period, until altered or revoked or liquidated by expen‐ diture. cost center The allocation of resources by functional area within an agency. current services budget A financial plan that incorporates the base budget needs of an agency and the addition of funding to support demographic growth in client caseloads and work‐ load functions. decision package A funding request made by State agencies. detail fund A fund designation used in the State‐wide ac‐ counting system to segregate agency‐specific activity. The balance of an appropriated fund is comprised of the sum of all of its detail funds. Disproportionate Share Hospital A hospital that serves a disproportionate share of low‐income and Medicaid patients, thereby qualifying for federal aid pursuant to Section 1923 of the Social Security Act. The federal basis for payments is ei‐ ther a reflection of a hospital’s number of Title XIX in‐patient days or a “low‐income” utilization rate. States may also es‐ tablish optional payment categories. Arizona has established optional groups that include county, State and private hospi‐ tals. efficiency A performance measure that reflects productivity or the cost of providing a good or service. Employee‐Related Expenditures (ERE) The State’s contribution to an employee’s benefit package. ERE include FICA; retire‐ ment; Worker’s Compensation; health, dental, and life insur‐ ance; unemployment insurance; Personnel Division charges; 208 Government Information Technology Agency charges; and uniforms for certain classes of employees. entitlement programs A broad category of categorical public assistance programs that provide services (e.g., cash assis‐ tance, medical services, etc.) to certain population groups (e.g., low‐income families with minor children). Admission is often mandatory for qualified individuals who meet the legal eligibility criteria (e.g., individuals who are low‐income and aged, blind or disabled), hence the reference “entitlement.” Equipment In the operating budget, a specific item of expendi‐ ture divided into capitalized equipment (purchased for $5,000 or more) and non‐capitalized equipment (usually be‐ tween $300 and $4,999). ERE rate The quotient of Employee‐Related Expenditures and Personal Services expressed as a percentage. expansion populations Persons who have annual incomes of not more than 100% of the Federal Poverty Level and that qual‐ ify for AHCCCS benefits due to the expansion of eligibility as a result of Proposition 204. Executive Issue An adjustment to the prior‐year appropriation to change the scope of current programs or service levels. Expenditures See Actual expenditures. federal budget neutrality A concept intended to ensure that a waiver cannot be expected to cost the federal government more that it would have cost without the waiver. Arizona is subject to “federal budget neutrality” as part of its 100% of FPL waiver. The waiver is for a five‐year period that began on October 1, 2006, and expires September 30, 2011. federal funds Amounts collected and made available to the State by the federal government, usually in the form of cate‐ gorical or block grants and entitlements. Federal Insurance Contribution Act (FICA) Requires employ‐ ees and employers to make matching contributions into the Social Security fund. Federal Poverty Level Refers to the poverty guidelines, in relation to income standards, as updated annually in the FEDERAL REGISTER by the U.S. Department of Health and Hu‐ man Services. Federal Waiver Program Experimental, pilot or demonstration projects that, in the judgment of the Secretary of the U.S. De‐ partment of Health and Human Services, are likely to assist in promoting the objectives of the Medicaid Statute. Projects approved under this authority are referred to as “waiver” programs. fiscal year The State’s yearly accounting period beginning July 1 and ending June 30. (The federal fiscal year begins October 1 and ends September 30.) FPL SEE Federal Poverty Level FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget full‐time equivalent (FTE) position A position budgeted at 2,080 hours per year. fund An independent fiscal and accounting entity with a self‐ balancing set of accounts recording cash and/or other re‐ sources together with all related liabilities, obligations, re‐ serves and equities, which are segregated for the purpose of carrying on specific activities in accordance with limitations, restrictions or regulations. fund balance The excess of the assets of a fund over its li‐ abilities and reserves. General Accounting Office (GAO) A division of the De‐ partment of Administration that provides diverse State‐wide financial services and ensures compliance with related stat‐ utes and rules. General Fund The primary State account into which monies are collected for the general purposes of government. The pri‐ mary sources of revenues for the General Fund include sales taxes, income taxes and property taxes. The General Fund is also the major expenditure source from which agencies make payments for specified purposes. grant anticipation note (GAN) A federal finance tool involving bonding that can be issued by the State Transportation Board. The issuance of a GAN allows the State to fund and acceler‐ ate highway construction projects with anticipated federal monies. inflation An allowance made for an increase in price levels of operating expenditures from one fiscal year to the next. input A performance measure that identifies the amount of re‐ sources needed to provide particular products or services. Joint Committee on Capital Review (JCCR) Created by Laws 1986, Chapter 85, to establish the Building Renewal Formula, approve the creation of Building Systems, and review the State Capital Improvement Plan. The JCCR is also responsible for reviewing all construction projects before commencement of the project. The JCCR consists of the following 14 members of the Legislature: Chairs of the House and Senate Appro‐ priations Committees, majority and minority leaders from the House and Senate, four members of the House Appro‐ priations Committee, and four members of the Senate Ap‐ propriations Committee. Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC) A Legislative committee consisting of the following 16 members of the Leg‐ islature: Majority Leaders of both the House and Senate; Chairs of both the House and Senate Appropriations Com‐ mittees; Chair of the Senate Finance Committee; Chair of the House Ways and Means Committee; five members of the House Appropriations Committee; and five members of the State Agency Budgets Senate Appropriations Committee. The JLBC meets as often as is necessary to transact business related to fiscal manage‐ ment of the State’s resources. Joint Legislative Budget Committee Staff The Legislative counterpart to the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting (OSPB). The Joint Legislative Budget Committee staff is often referred to as the JLBC but should not be con‐ fused with the Legislative committee of the same name. The JLBC Staff prepares an analysis of the Executive Budget as soon as it is presented to the Legislature. The analysis in‐ cludes the JLBC Staff’s recommendations for revisions in ex‐ penditures. Joint Substance Abuse Treatment Program (JSAT) Also known as “Arizona Families First,” JSAT is a substance abuse program jointly administered by the Department of Eco‐ nomic Security and the Department of Health Services. The program pays for services to parents, guardians or custodians whose substance abuse is a significant barrier to preserving the family. Services can also be provided to federal TANF Block Grant recipients whose substance abuse is a significant barrier to obtaining or maintaining employment. KidsCare The State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), created by the passage of the Federal Balanced Budget Act of 1997 and intended to reduce the number of un‐ insured low‐income children nationwide. Administered by AHCCCS, KidsCare is Arizona’s response to SCHIP. Kid‐ sCare, which was implemented November 1, 1998, is for children up to age 18 whose household incomes exceed the Title XIX eligibility limits but are below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). lapsing appropriation An appropriation that terminates auto‐ matically. Except for a continuing appropriation, an appropria‐ tion is made for a certain period of time, generally one year. At the end of this period (including an administrative ad‐ justment period), unexpended or unencumbered balances re‐ vert to the fund from which the appropriation was made. Also known as a “reverting appropriation.” line item appropriation A method of appropriation that sepa‐ rates the budget into specific objects of expenditure. The spe‐ cific items include Personal Services, ERE, Professional and Outside Services, In‐State Travel, Out‐of‐State Travel, Food, Other Operating Expenditures, and Equipment. lump‐sum appropriation An appropriation made for a stated purpose, or for a named department, without specifying fur‐ ther the amounts that may be spent for specific activities or for particular objects of expenditure. Master List The “Master List of State Government Programs.” Budget reform legislation requires OSPB to publish a list of programs run by or overseen by State government. Laws 209 2002, Chapter 210 slightly changed the format of the Master List and designated this annual submittal as the operational plan for State agencies and conformed to the budget cycles. Required information for each agency, program and subpro‐ gram includes the agency description, mission statement, stra‐ tegic issues, and financial and FTE position information, as well as the description, mission statements, goals, and per‐ formance measures for all programs and subprograms. OSPB still publishes the hard copy report biennially. means‐tested program Eligibility to a public assistance pro‐ gram restricted by an applicant’s income or other resources specified by law. Resources include bank accounts and simi‐ lar liquid assets as well as real estate, automobiles and other personal property whose value exceeds specified financial limits. mission A brief, comprehensive statement of purpose of an agency, program, or subprogram. modified lump‐sum appropriation A method of appropriation in which Personal Services, Employee‐Related Expenditures, All Other Operating Expenditures and below‐the‐line items are speci‐ fied in the appropriations bill. modified standard adjustment The difference, as calculated by the agency, between the actual Personal Services base and the amount allocated for Personal Services by the agency in its expenditure plan. Any amount identified as a modified stan‐ dard adjustment must be explained by the agency requesting the adjustment. non‐appropriated funds Generally, funds set up as Enterprise or revolving funds. These funds are considered statutorily appropriated and are not subject to the annual or biennial appropriation process. non‐lapsing appropriation An appropriation that does not revert to the fund from which it was appropriated at the end of the fiscal year, as provided by law. (SEE continuing appropria‐ tion). object code Refers to the accounting code structure of the Ari‐ zona Accounting Manual. objectives Specific and measurable targets for accomplishing goals. Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting (OSPB) A State agency charged with preparing the Governor’s budget guide‐ lines and the Executive Budget recommendation for review by the Governor. The Office also facilitates a strategic plan‐ ning process for State government and is responsible for im‐ plementing many of the provisions of budget reform legislation. The OSPB staff is the Executive counterpart to the JLBC Staff. one‐time adjustments Budget adjustments that must be made because of a one‐time circumstance that is not continued 210 through the next fiscal year. The end of a project would bring about a one‐time decrease the following year. operating budget A plan of all proposed expenditures other than capital expenditures (SEE capital outlay). An operating budget is composed of various objects of expenditure, such as Personal Services, ERE, In‐State Travel, etc. operational plan A practical action‐oriented guide that directs goal‐setting to achieve meaningful results with the existing resources through the shorter budget cycle period. The op‐ erational plan should provide incremental steps towards achieving the strategic long‐range plan. SEE ALSO: Master List of State Government Programs. Other Appropriated Funds All amounts, excluding General Fund amounts, appropriated by the Legislature for prede‐ termined uses. These are also called Special Revenue Funds, revolving funds, etc. Other Operating Expenditures According to the ARIZONA ACCOUNTING MANUAL, everything using a comptroller object code of 7000. This refers to operating expenditures necessary to operate a budget unit, e.g., office supplies, utilities, com‐ munication, etc. outcome A performance measure that reflects the actual results achieved, as well as the impact or benefit, of a program. output A performance measure that focuses on the level of activity in a particular program or subprogram. per diem compensation Compensation paid to board or com‐ mission members for their work. Compensation per diem is a daily rate set statutorily. per diem travel Cost of meals and incidentals reimbursed to employees and board or commission members. performance accountability A means of judging policies and programs by measuring their progress toward achieving agreed‐on performance targets. Performance accountability sys‐ tems are composed of three components: defining per‐ formance measures (including outcomes), measuring per‐ formance and reporting results. performance measures Used to measure results and ensure accountability. (SEE ALSO: input, output, efficiency, outcome, and quality). performance targets Quantifiable estimates of results expected for a given period of time. Personal Services Line item of expenditure for salaries and wages paid to employees, elected officials and board or commission members. Payments for leave categories, over‐ time and other miscellaneous earnings are also recorded in this line item. privately owned vehicle (POV) Those miles to be used in calculating reimbursement of staff for use of private vehicles on State business. FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget privatization The opening of government markets allowing for equitable competition between the private and public sectors for the privilege of delivering services to the public. program budgeting A budget system that focuses on program missions, program achievements, and program cost effective‐ ness. Pursuant to statute, the program structure for program budgeting is governed by The Master List of State Government Programs structure. Program budgeting is linked to planning and accountability through alignment of the structures and merging of the planning and budget information. The statu‐ tory deadline for completion of the phase‐in for all State agencies is State fiscal year 2006. program enhancement An upward revision in the funding level of a specific program in order to enhance the level of services being provided by that program. program structure An orderly, logical arrangement of an or‐ ganization’s programs and subprograms. This structure pro‐ vides the framework for planning, budgeting and strategic program authorization review. Proposition 204 Medical Program A voter‐approved AHCCCS program that expands eligibility to include individuals whose annual incomes are at or below 100% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL). The program is funded through monies received by the State from the tobacco litigation settlement tobacco tax funds, and state General Fund. budget. Examples of standard adjustments include annualiza‐ tion of programs partially funded during the current year, annualization of the pay package, restoration of vacancy sav‐ ings, and one‐time increases and decreases. standard operating adjustments Adjustments to the base budget that include annualization of programs partially funded by the Legislative appropriation during the current year; annu‐ alization of Legislatively authorized pay packages; restora‐ tion of vacancy savings; and one‐time increases or decreases to the operating budget. State service All offices and positions of employment in State government except offices and positions specifically ex‐ empted by law from the State personnel system. statute A written law, either new or revised, enacted by the Legislature and signed by the Governor. strategic management Process of positioning an organization so it can prosper in the future. The overall framework within which policy development, strategic, operational, quality planning, budgeting, capital outlay planning, information technology planning, program implementation, and evalua‐ tion and accountability take place. strategic plan A visionary guide, based on an examination of internal and external environmental and political factors, that directs goal‐setting and future resource requirements to achieve meaningful results over time. Strategic projections are long‐range and usually cover a five‐year period. quality A performance measure that reflects the effectiveness in meeting the expectations of customers and stakeholders. Strategic Program Authorization Review (SPAR) A formal review of selected State government programs, subprograms or crosscutting functions. The SPARs determine if programs are retained, eliminated or modified. receipts Unless otherwise defined, cash received. There are five general categories of receipts: taxes; licenses and permits; charges for services; fines and forfeitures; and other receipts that do not fall into another category. subprogram Two or more integral components of a program that can be separately analyzed to gain a better un‐ derstanding of the larger program. resource allocation Determination and allotment of resources or assets necessary to carry out strategies within the priority framework established in the goal‐setting process. revenue Additions to assets that do not increase any liability, do not represent the recovery of an expenditure, do not repre‐ sent the cancellation of certain liabilities without a corre‐ sponding increase in other liabilities or a decrease in assets, or do not represent contributions of fund capital in Enterprise and Intergovernmental Service Funds. Risk Management The charges assessed by the Department of Administration to guard against the risk of loss by an em‐ ployee or agency acting on behalf of the State of Arizona. special line items See below‐the‐line items standard adjustments Changes that must be made to the cur‐ rent year’s appropriation to arrive at the new year’s base State Agency Budgets tracking systems Systems that monitor progress, compile man‐ agement information and keep goals on track. uniform allowance An amount budgeted for specific agencies for the cost of uniforms required by the agency. vacancy savings Savings generated by not filling vacant posi‐ tions, by not filling newly authorized positions, or by filling a vacant position at a lower grade or step. Vacancy savings cannot be expended for any of the following purposes with‐ out the approval of the Director of the Department of Ad‐ ministration: merit increases for State employees; funding for reclassified positions; and creation of new positions that ex‐ ceed the total number of authorized FTE, as approved by the Legislature. 211 GLOSSARY, PART 2 Acronyms A.R.S. Arizona Revised Statutes AOOE All Other‐Operating Expenditures CJEF Criminal Justice Enhancement Fund AAC Arizona Administrative Code APP Aquifer Protection Permit CLIA Clinical Lab Inspections Act ABOR Arizona Board of Regents APS Adult Protective Services ACJC Arizona Criminal Justice Commis‐ sion ARF Automation Revolving Fund CMDP Comprehensive Medical and Dental Plan ACJIS Arizona Criminal Justice Informa‐ tion System CMR Classification Maintenance Review COP Certificate of Participation COSF Capital Outlay Stabilization Fund ACW Arizona Center for Women ASDB Arizona School for the Deaf and the Blind ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ASH Arizona State Hospital ADC Arizona Department of Corrections ASPC Arizona State Prison Complex CRIPA Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act ADE Arizona Department of Education ASRS Arizona State Retirement System CRS Children’s Rehabilitative Services ADJC Arizona Department of Juvenile Corrections ASU Arizona State University CSMS Combined Support Maintenance Shop ADM Average Daily Membership ADMIN Administration ASUE Arizona State University East ASUMC Arizona State University Main Campus CPS Child Protective Services CSO Correctional Service Officer CWA Clean Water Act ATA Automobile Theft Authority CWRF Clean Water Revolving Fund ATDA Arizona Technology Development Authority DACS Division of Aging and Community Services ADP Average Daily Population AVSC Arizona Veterans’ Service Commis‐ sion DBME Division of Benefits and Medical Eligibility AERB Agriculture Employment Relations Board AZAFIS Arizona Automated Fingerprint Identification System DCFS Division of Children and Family Services AFDC Aid for Families with Dependent Children AZGS Arizona Geological Survey DD Dually Diagnosed or Developmentally Disabled ADOA Arizona Department of Admini‐ stration ADOT Arizona Department of Transpor‐ tation AFIN Arizona Fingerprint Identification Network BIFO Border Infrastructure Finance Office CAE Commission on the Arizona Envi‐ ronment DDD Division of Developmental Disabili‐ ties AFIS Arizona Financial Information Sys‐ tem CAP Child Abuse Prevention DDSA Disability Determination Services Administration AFUND Appropriated Fund CBHS Children’s Behavioral Health Ser‐ vices DEA Drug Enforcement Account CCDF Child Care Development Fund DEMA Department of Emergency and Military Affairs AG Attorney General AGFD Arizona Game and Fish Depart‐ ment AHCCCS Arizona Health Care Cost Con‐ tainment System AHS Arizona Historical Society AIDA Arizona International Development Authority ALTCS Arizona Long‐Term Care System 212 ARRT American Registry of Radiological Technologists CEDC Commerce and Economic De‐ velopment Commission CERF Collection Enforcement Revolving Fund CHC Community Health Center CHILDS Children’s Information Library and Data Source CIS Client Information System DEQ Department of Environmental Qual‐ ity DERS Division of Employment and Reha‐ bilitative Services DES Department of Economic Security DHS Department of Health Services DJC Department of Juvenile Corrections FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget DOA Department of Administration DOI Department of Insurance DOR Department of Revenue DPS Department of Public Safety DSH Disproportionate Share Hospital (payments) See Glossary DWI Driving While Intoxicated DWR Department of Water Resources EAC Eligible Assistance Children EDP Electronic Data Processing EEO Equal Employment Opportunity ELIC Eligible Low‐Income Children EMS Emergency Medical Services EMSCOM Emergency Medical Services Communications EMSOF Emergency Medical Services Operating Fund EPA Environmental Protection Agency EPSDT Early Periodic Screening, Diagnos‐ tic, and Testing ERE Employee‐Related Expenditures FES Federal Emergency Services FFP Federal Financial Participation FHAMIS Family Health Administration Management Information System FICA Federal Insurance Contribution Act FMAP Federal Matching Assistance Pay‐ ments FMCS Financial Management Control System FPL Federal Poverty Level FTE Full‐Time Equivalent GITA Government Information Technol‐ ogy Agency MDSSI Multiply Disabled Severely Sen‐ sory Impaired H.B. House Bill MEDICS Medical Eligibility Determina‐ tions and Information Control System HAP Hazardous Air Pollutant HCBS Home and Community Based Services HI Hearing Impaired MIPS Million Instructions Per Second or Medicaid in the Public Schools MIS Management Information System HMO Health Maintenance Organization MNMI Medically Needy Medically Indi‐ gent HRMS Human Resource Management System MVD Motor Vehicle Division HURF Highway User Revenue Fund NADB North American Development Bank IGA Intergovernmental Agreement IHS Indian Health Service NAFTA North American Free Trade Agreement IM 240 Inspection and Maintenance 240 Second Emission Test NAIC National Association of Insurance Commissioners IOCC Inter‐State Oil Compact Commis‐ sion NAU Northern Arizona University IRM Information Resource Management NLCIFT National Law Center for Inter‐ American Free Trade IRMG Information Resource Management Group NRCD Natural Resource Conservation District ISD Information Services Division OAH Office of Administrative Hearings ISP Institutional Support Payments OGCC Oil and Gas Conservation Com‐ mission IT Information Technology ITAC Information Technology Authoriza‐ tion Committee JCCR Joint Committee on Capital Review JCEF Judicial Collection Enhancement Fund JLBC Joint Legislative Budget Committee JOBS Job Opportunity and Basic Skills LAN Local Area Network LES Licensing and Enforcement Section LGIP Local Government Investment Pool OPM Office of Pest Management OSHA Occupation Safety and Health OSPB Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting PAS Prior Authorization Screening PASARR Pre‐admission Screening and Annual Resident Review PDSD Phoenix Day School for the Deaf PERIS Public Employee Retirement In‐ formation System POV Privately Owned Vehicle GAAP Generally Accepted Accounting Principles LTC Long Term Care GADA Greater Arizona Development Authority MAG Maricopa Association of Govern‐ ments PRWORA Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1986 GAO General Accounting Office MAO Medical Assistance Only PS Personal Services GDP Gross Domestic Product MARS Management and Reporting Sys‐ tem PSPRS Public Safety Personnel Retirement System MD Multiply Disabled QMB Qualified Medicare Beneficiary GIITEM Gang Intelligence and Immigra‐ tion Team Enforcement Mission RARF Regional Area Road Fund State Agency Budgets 213 SLI Special Line Item REDI Rural Economic Development Initia‐ tive SLIAG State Legalization Impact Assis‐ tance Grant REM Retain, Eliminate or Modify SMI Serious Mental Illness or Seriously Mentally Ill USGS United States Geological Survey SOBRA Sixth Omnibus Reconciliation Act UST Underground Storage Tank SPAR Strategic Program Authorization Review VA Veterans Affairs RIF Reduction‐in‐Force RMIS Risk Management Information System RTC Residential Treatment Center or Return to Custody RUCO Residential Utility Consumer Office S.B. Senate Bill SAMHC Southern Arizona Mental Health Center SAVE Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements SBAC Small Business Assistance Center SBCS State Board for Charter Schools SBE State Board of Education SBIR Small Business Innovative Research SBOE State Board of Equalization SCHIP State Children’s Health Insurance Program SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act SDWRF Safe Drinking Water Revolving Fund SES State Emergency Services 214 UAHSC University of Arizona Health Sciences Center RCF Registrar of Contractors Fund SPO State Purchasing Office SPU Special Population Unit SR&E Securities Regulation and Enforce‐ ment SSI Supplemental Security Income SSIG State Student Incentive Grant SSRE State Share of Retained Earnings SWCAP State‐wide Cost Allocation Plan T&R Title and Registration TANF Temporary Assistance for Needy Families TB Tuberculosis TCC Transitional Child Care TDD Telecommunication Devices for the Deaf TIFS Tourism Investment Fund Sharing TPO Telecommunications Policy Office USAS Uniform State‐wide Accounting System VEI Vehicle Emission Inspections VI Visually Impaired VR Vocational Rehabilitation VRIRF Victims’ Rights Implementation Revolving fund WAN Wide Area Network WATS Wide Area Telephone System WFRJT Work Force Recruitment and Job Training WICHE Western Inter‐State Commission on Higher Education WIFA Water Infrastructure Finance Au‐ thority WIPP Work Incentive Pay Plan WPF Water Protection Fund WQAB Water Quality Appeals Board WQARF Water Quality Assurance Revolv‐ ing Fund UA University of Arizona FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget State Agency Budgets 215 RESOURCES BUDGET The following budget resources are available at www.ospb.state.az.us • Governor’s Budget Management Plan for Fiscal Years 2009 and 2010 • FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget ‐ Summary • FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget – State Agency Budgets • FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget ‐ Appendix • Statement of Federal Funds for Fiscal Years 2007 through 2009 • Calculation of the Appropriation Limit for Fiscal Years 2007 through 2009 STRATEGIC PLANNING The following planning resources are available at www.ospb.state.az.us • Master List of State Government Programs for Fiscal Years 2007 through 2009 • Five‐Year Strategic Plans for Annual Budget Units • Managing for Results, 1998 Strategic Planning and Performance Measurement Handbook (recognized by the Council of State Governments as an Exemplary State Management Program) 216 FY 2010 and FY 2011 Executive Budget Acknowledgement Governor Napolitano gratefully acknowledges the skilled and dedicated efforts of the staff of the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting ************* Director James J. Apperson Assistant Directors Marcel Benberou Bret Cloninger Bill Greeney Chief Economist Norm Selover Team Leader Stacey Morley Budget Analysts Matt Gottheiner Chris Hall Melissa Harto Patrick Makin Brandon Nee Kris Okazaki Illya Riske Thomas Soteros‐McNamara Jennifer Uharriet Economist Duong Nguyen Senior Systems Analyst Richard Sietz Systems Analyst Joy Su Office Manager Pamela Ray IN MEMORY OF JON K. HOBERG The Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting dedicates this budget book to the memory of Jon Hoberg. Jon joined the OSPB staff in 1997. During his years as a systems analyst he served with a passion to automate State Government’s budget and planning functions, and much of his work was focused on improving data collection processes for OSPB and all State agencies. Jon was instrumental in the evolution of the budget development tool known as BUDDIES, as well as the AZIPS strategic planning tool. Jon will be remembered as an inspirational and tireless man who spent long hours finding the right solution to data management issues. Jon brought a wonderful sense of humor and intellectual curiosity that endeared him to his colleagues. Jon’s contributions and strength of character enriched many lives. He will be greatly missed.