This bill amends RCW 43.20C.020 to require the Washington State Institute for Public Policy (WSIPP) together with the University of Washington evidence-based practice institute to prepare and periodically update an inventory of practices labeled evidence-based, research-based, or promising for prevention and intervention. When identifying services, WSIPP and the UW institute must consider any available systemic evidence about a program’s efficacy and cost-effectiveness and attempt to identify assessments that use valid and reliable evidence. The Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) and the Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) are required, using state, federal, or private funds, to prioritize assessment of promising practices from that inventory to increase the number that meet evidence-based or research-based standards. WSIPP must also conduct biennial outcome evaluations of juvenile justice programs that are identified as evidence-based and approved for funding by the block grant oversight committee (per RCW 13.40.511), prioritizing evaluations based on how long it has been since a program was last evaluated and the number of juveniles participating. Required outcome evaluations must focus on recidivism and include a benefit-cost analysis. The text provided does not include formal definitions for the terms evidence-based, research-based, or promising practices, does not specify the schedule for the inventory beyond “periodically updated,” and does not give details about the block grant oversight committee or the bill’s referenced juvenile diversion provisions. These gaps make some specifics unclear from the extracted material alone.

If enacted, the Washington State Institute for Public Policy and the University of Washington evidence-based practice institute will have to build and keep an updated list of prevention and intervention practices and use existing evidence and cost-effectiveness assessments when labeling services as evidence-based or research-based. The Department of Social and Health Services and the Department of Children, Youth, and Families will be expected to direct state, federal, or private funds toward assessing promising practices so more can reach evidence-based status, and juvenile justice programs approved for block grant funding will face required outcome reviews every two years that focus on recidivism and include benefit-cost analysis. The practical result is more evaluation work and likely added costs or reallocated funding for WSIPP, the UW institute, DSHS, and DCYF to build the inventory and run assessments, and juvenile justice programs may see funding decisions influenced by these evaluations. Key details are unclear from the text provided—how the terms “evidence-based,” “research-based,” and “promising” are defined, the exact update schedule for the inventory, and the block grant oversight committee’s role—so how much funding and administrative burden will actually change is not fully specified.