Skip to main content

HB 1661

In Committee

House

Future fund pilot project

Concerning the Washington future fund pilot project.

This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: January 27, 2025
Last Action: January 12, 2026
Status: H EL & Human Svc
Companion Bill:

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

The bill launches a pilot program that gives up to 200 low-income young adults in Washington a one-time $25,000 grant to invest in education, homeownership, or small business development—aimed at reducing racial and economic disparities. The program targets people who grew up in poverty (as indicated by early-life Medicaid enrollment) and evaluates whether such grants improve long-term financial stability.

  • Establishes the Washington Future Fund Pilot Project to test whether a one-time $25,000 grant helps low-income young adults build economic stability.
  • Eligibility requires being born in Washington, currently enrolled in Apple Health (Medicaid) or the Children’s Health Insurance Program before age 1 and at time of application, age 18–35, and a Washington resident.
  • Grants are randomly selected from eligible applicants, with priority given to ensure representation across 20 regions defined by the state’s health equity initiative.
  • Grant funds must be used only for education/training, home purchase in Washington, or starting/buying a business in Washington, and are paid directly to the relevant institution (e.g., school, bank, lender).
  • Participants must complete financial coaching and two evaluation interviews, and the University of Washington evaluates the program’s impact and reports findings to the legislature by June 30, 2027.

Who is affected

  • Eligible young adults (ages 18–35) enrolled in Apple HealthYoung adults (ages 18–35) in Washington who were born in the state, currently enrolled in Apple Health (Medicaid) or the Children's Health Insurance Program before age 1 and at time of application, and live in Washington. If selected, they receive a $25,000 grant for education, homeownership, or starting a business, plus financial coaching and evaluation interviews.
  • Designated institutions (e.g., colleges, banks, lenders)Educational institutions, mortgage lenders, and business lenders that receive grants on behalf of participants for approved uses (e.g., tuition, home purchases, business loans). They must verify and apply grant funds only to eligible expenditures.
  • University of Washington (evaluation partner)The University of Washington, which evaluates the pilot’s impact through interviews and analysis, and helps design and report on the program.
  • State health and human services agenciesState agencies (e.g., Department of Health, Health Care Authority) that help verify applicants’ eligibility by sharing confidential data under a new information-sharing agreement.
Effective: July 1, 2025Fiscal impact: The bill creates a $25,000 grant per participant, with up to 200 grants allocated (based on the random selection and regional allocation plan). Funding comes from the State Treasury’s earnings, not the general fund. Administrative costs (e.g., vendor contracts, University of Washington evaluation) are covered by the State Treasurer’s Service Fund, which is funded by up to 1% of investment earnings on state cash balances.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 7:10 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)
  • The $25,000 grant—paid directly to institutions for education, homeownership, or business development—provides direct, unrestricted capital to low-income young adults who lack access to generational wealth, with no asset or income clawbacks, and is excluded from public assistance calculations, maximizing net benefit to participants.

    FinancialPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(e), Sec. 3(2)(f)
  • By funding education/training and requiring financial coaching, the program directly supports human capital development for a population historically excluded from higher education due to financial barriers, with evaluation designed to assess long-term educational attainment and earnings gains.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(iii)
  • The grant enables down payment and closing cost support for first-time homebuyers in high-cost Washington markets, directly targeting a key driver of racial wealth gaps—homeownership—while ensuring funds go to verified institutions to reduce fraud risk.

    HousingPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(iii)
  • By allowing use of funds for business creation or purchase, the program supports micro-entrepreneurship among low-income residents, potentially increasing local economic activity and self-employment opportunities in underserved communities.

    Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(iii)
  • The program’s focus on reducing intergenerational poverty through direct capital transfer—targeting those who grew up in Medicaid-eligible households—addresses root causes of economic insecurity, potentially reducing crime, emergency service use, and long-term public assistance dependency.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(b)(iii)
Potential Concerns (5)
  • The random selection process and limited sample size (200 grants) mean most eligible applicants will not receive support, potentially increasing frustration or distrust in government programs among low-income communities who see peers selected while others are not.

    Public SafetyRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(a)(iii)
  • The pilot does not guarantee long-term business success or job creation; many recipients may use the grant for education or homeownership without generating measurable employment impact, limiting broader economic benefits.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(a)(iii)
  • While the grant supports home purchase, rising Washington housing prices may render $25,000 insufficient for meaningful down payment assistance in most markets, limiting real housing stability gains for participants.

    HousingRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(a)(iii)
  • The evaluation and reporting timeline (final report due June 30, 2027) means legislative action or policy changes based on results will likely not occur until 2028 at the earliest—delaying potential scaling or improvement of the program.

    EducationRef: Sec. 3(2)(d), Sec. 3(2)(b)(iii)
  • The $25,000 grant is non-recurring and may not be sufficient to overcome systemic barriers to wealth accumulation, especially for participants facing ongoing income volatility or high living costs.

    FinancialRef: Sec. 3(1)(a)(ii), Sec. 3(2)(a)(iii)

Who Is Most Affected

Eligible young adults (ages 18–35) enrolled in Apple HealthPositive Impact

Young adults (18–35) enrolled in Apple Health or CHIP before age 1 and at application are the direct beneficiaries. If selected, they receive $25,000 for education, homeownership, or business development—potentially transformative for those without generational wealth. However, only ~200 of an estimated 200,000+ eligible young adults will be selected, so most will see no direct benefit.

Designated institutions (e.g., colleges, banks, lenders)Mixed Impact

Educational institutions, mortgage lenders, and business lenders receive grant funds directly for approved expenditures. They benefit from guaranteed payments and may gain new customers (e.g., students, homebuyers, small business owners), but face administrative burdens verifying eligibility and applying funds only to permitted uses.

University of Washington (evaluation partner)Positive Impact

The University of Washington receives funding to evaluate the program’s impact. This strengthens its research capacity and public policy influence, but the evaluation is time-bound and tied to legislative reporting deadlines—limiting long-term institutional benefit beyond the 2027 report.

State health and human services agenciesMixed Impact

State agencies (e.g., Health Care Authority, Department of Health) must share confidential data under new MOUs to verify eligibility. This increases administrative burden and requires new data governance protocols, but aligns with existing Medicaid data infrastructure and supports cross-agency equity goals.

State Treasury / Office of the State TreasurerPositive Impact

The State Treasury benefits from expanded authority over the State Treasurer’s Service Fund and increased visibility in equity-focused economic development. However, the program’s success is not tied to revenue generation—it’s funded from investment earnings, so the state’s fiscal position is unaffected beyond minimal administrative cost.

Sponsors

Representative Stonier(Democrat)District 49Primary
Representative Waters(Republican)District 17Secondary
Representative Goodman(Democrat)District 45Secondary
Representative Reeves(Democrat)District 30Secondary
Representative Fosse(Democrat)District 38Secondary
Representative Bronoske(Democrat)District 28Secondary
Representative Paul(Democrat)District 10Secondary
Representative Salahuddin(Democrat)District 48Secondary
Representative Leavitt(Democrat)District 28Secondary
Representative Doglio(Democrat)District 22Secondary
Representative Obras(Democrat)District 33Secondary
Representative Street(Democrat)District 37Secondary
Representative Reed(Democrat)District 36Secondary
Representative Cortes(Democrat)District 38Secondary
Representative Ramel(Democrat)District 40Secondary
Representative Thomas(Democrat)District 34Secondary
Representative Parshley(Democrat)District 22Secondary
Representative Simmons(Democrat)District 23Secondary
Representative Timmons(Democrat)District 42Secondary
Representative Shavers(Democrat)District 10Secondary