“A short-term budgetary link should be established between … CPI and total operational expenditures by agencies.” Efficiency Project, 2016

(November 2019) The Policy Foundation’s Efficiency Project (2015-16) examined multiple variables at state agencies including a Consumer Price Index analysis.1 Spending at nine agencies exceeded CPI from 2009 to 2015.2

Handful of State Agencies Drive Spending

The following chart shows “actual spending” since the Efficiency Project:

 

FY 2015 FY 2017
Human Services $7,129,762,956 $8,119,742,316
Education $3,457,588,679 $3,538,856,863
Finance and Administration $985,935,822 $936,111,805
Correction $375,658,284 $394,693,793
Health Department $370,387,770 $297,240,574
Workforce Services $460,258,462 $242,408,730
Career Education $136,641,334 $143,431,425
Parks and Tourism $98,584,451 $104,611,478
Community Correction $89,680,879 $103,470,371
Economic Development $45,589,380 $85,892,004
Information Systems $64,801,776 $67,400,063
Military $60,832,606 $62,251,106
Insurance $57,736,238 $55,334,248
Environmental Quality $51,888,439 $47,234,953
Agriculture $44,167,159 $44,993,424
Emergency Management $39,812,016 $27,905,617
Higher Education $13,066,990 $20,722,787
Veterans Affairs $11,605,581 $20,444,445
Heritage $18,165,321 $17,982,488
Assessment Coordination $17,430,818 $17,547,052
Aeronautics $9,597,094 $14,458,696
Bank Department $7,693,381 $8,129,524
Labor $6,486,450 $6,062,645

 

1 A CPI spending cap incentivizes officials to search for efficiencies in a low-inflation environment. The goal is not unrealistic: operational expenditures declined at 13 agencies between FY 2014 and FY 2015.

2 Community Correction, Correction, Econ. Dev., Education, Environmental Quality, Health, Insurance, Military, Veterans Affairs.

3 FY 2015, https://www.dfa.arkansas.gov/images/uploads/budgetOffice/fy2015ActualExpenditures.pdf (Total Op. Expenditures)

4 FY 2017, https://www.dfa.arkansas.gov/images/uploads/budgetOffice/fy2017ActualExpenditures.pdf (Total Op. Expenditures)

CPI increased 2.6% in the 2015-17 period.5 The following chart shows “actual spending” exceeded6 CPI at 11 state agencies:

 

2015-2017
Workforce Services -47.3%
Emergency Management -30.0%
Health Department -19.7%
Environmental Quality -9.0%
Labor -6.5%
Finance and Administration -5.1%
Insurance -4.2%
Heritage -1.0%
Assessment Coordination 0.7%
Agriculture 1.9%
Military 2.3%
Education 2.4%
CPI 2.6%7
Information Systems 4.0%
Career Education 5.0%
Correction 5.1%
Bank Department 5.7%
Parks and Tourism 6.1%
Human Services 13.9%
Community Correction 15.4%
Aeronautics 50.7%
Higher Education 58.6%8
Veterans Affairs 76.2%
Economic Development 88.4%
Role of Human Services
The most significant spending increase in the period was at the state

Department of Human Services, where actual spending was $8.1 billion in FY 2017. Actual Human Services spending increased 13.9% from FY 2015 to FY 2017. The savings to state taxpayers would have exceeded $800 million if Human Services spending had equaled CPI in the period.

 

5 https://www.bls.gov/cpi/

6 Spending at 12 agencies was less than CPI from 2015 to 2017. Spending was less than CPI at 11 agencies in the 2009-15 period: Aeronautics, Agriculture, Assessment Coordination, Career Education, Emergency Management, Finance and Administration, Higher Education, Heritage, Labor, Parks and Tourism, Workforce Services

7 https://www.bls.gov/cpi/

8 Spending at Institutions of Higher Education increased 3% in the 2-year period.

Effect of CPI Spending Cap

The following chart shows how a CPI spending cap would have saved tax dollars in the two-year period.

Savings

 

Human Services $804,605,523

Economic Development $39,117,300

Community Correction $11,457,789

Correction $9,268,394

Veterans Affairs $8,537,119

Higher Education $7,316,055

Aeronautics $4,612,078

Parks and Tourism $3,463,831

Career Education $3,237,416

Information Systems $913,441

Bank Department $236,115

 

Total Savings $892,765,061

 

Qualifications

Some agencies derive a significant percentage of their funding from the federal government.

The two-year period is a ‘snapshot in time.’ A review over a longer period such as a full business cycle would produce different results.

 

Conclusion

 

Arkansas taxpayers would have saved $900 million if CPI had been linked to actual spending from FY 2015 to FY 2017. Policymakers do not possess a time machine but they could generate savings in the future by establishing a CPI spending cap.

 

— Greg Kaza