Skip to main content
Evergreen Ledger

SSB 5992

In Committee

Senate

Youth development fund

Creating the youth development fund account to increase access to positive youth development programs.

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: February 2, 2026
Last Action: March 12, 2026
Status: S Rules 3
View Bill Text (HTML) (opens in new tab)View Bill Text (PDF) (opens in new tab)

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

This bill establishes the youth development fund account to support expanded access to positive youth development programs across Washington, especially for underserved young people. It creates a dedicated funding mechanism—receiving public and private contributions—and sets rules for awarding grants to community-based providers, with an emphasis on equity and geographic reach.

  • Creates the youth development fund account in the state treasury to centralize and increase transparency of public and private investments in youth programs.
  • Authorizes the superintendent of public instruction to award grants to nonprofits, tribes, and parks departments to support youth development programs serving ages 5–24.
  • Lists eligible program types, including social-emotional learning, mentorship, career pathways, STEM/arts/sports, outdoor education, and civic engagement.
  • Requires grant recipients to report annual impact data to the office of the superintendent of public instruction.
  • Directs the superintendent to prioritize equitable geographic distribution and support for youth facing systemic barriers—including those in foster care, experiencing homelessness, or living in poverty.
  • Includes the youth development fund in the state’s investment income distribution formula, ensuring it receives a share of investment earnings based on its average daily balance.

Who is affected

  • Community-based youth program providers — Nonprofit organizations, tribes, and city/county parks and recreation departments can apply for grants to run youth development programs, with priority given to those partnering with community-based groups or serving areas with limited access.
  • Youth and young adults (ages 5–24) — Young people ages 5–24, especially those from historically underserved communities, in foster care, experiencing homelessness, or living in poverty, gain access to expanded learning and support opportunities.
  • Public school districts and educational service districts — School districts and educational service districts may apply for grants only when partnering with community organizations or if no such programs exist locally, helping them expand services without duplicating efforts.
  • State agencies (Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction and State Treasurer) — The state treasurer manages the new fund and invests its assets, while the office of the superintendent of public instruction administers grants and tracks program outcomes.
Effective: July 1, 2026Fiscal impact: The bill creates a new fund that accepts gifts, grants, federal funds, and legislative appropriations. Investment earnings from the fund will be distributed annually to the fund itself and other state accounts per existing rules; no new ongoing appropriation is required for grants, but future legislative funding will determine the scale of support.Sunset: July 1, 2030
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 20, 2026 at 3:08 AM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (5)

  • The bill prioritizes support for youth in foster care, experiencing homelessness, living in poverty, and from historically underserved groups—populations with high rates of academic disengagement and system involvement. Evidence from similar programs (e.g., 21st Century Community Learning Centers) shows such targeted investments improve school attendance, reduce disciplinary incidents, and increase graduation rates.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(c)(ii); Sec. 2(1)(a)

  • By requiring equitable geographic distribution and prioritizing areas with limited access to youth development opportunities, the bill helps prevent youth disengagement and reduces risk factors for juvenile justice involvement. Research from the CDC and Washington’s own Juvenile Justice Association shows access to structured, supportive out-of-school time programming lowers rates of delinquency and arrest.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(c)(i); Sec. 2(1)(a)

  • Mandatory civic engagement and arts/STEM programming expands holistic development beyond academics, fostering critical thinking, collaboration, and community participation. These competencies are increasingly valued in higher education and the modern workforce, improving long-term economic mobility for participating youth.

    EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)(viii); Sec. 2(1)(b)(vi)

  • The fund accepts gifts, grants, federal funds, and legislative appropriations—creating a flexible, scalable funding vehicle that leverages public and private investment. This structure encourages philanthropic partnerships (e.g., with the Gates Foundation or local community foundations) and could attract federal grants (e.g., 21st CCLC), amplifying state dollars.

    FinancialPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)

  • Social-emotional learning and mentorship components directly support youth mental health, a growing crisis in Washington. Data from the 2024 Washington State Healthy Youth Survey shows 42% of high school students felt sad or hopeless almost every day for at least two weeks in the past year; structured, supportive programs have been shown to reduce symptoms of depression and anxiety.

    HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)(ii); Sec. 2(1)(b)(iii)
Potential Concerns (5)

  • The bill adds the youth development fund account to the state’s investment income distribution formula, ensuring it receives a share of investment earnings based on its average daily balance. This provides a stable, ongoing source of funding without requiring annual legislative appropriations. However, because investment earnings are finite and shared across many accounts, growth in this fund necessarily reduces the share available to other accounts—potentially constraining other public services over time.

    FinancialRef: Sec. 3(3); Sec. 4(4)(b)

  • While school districts may apply for grants only when partnering with community organizations or when no such programs exist locally, this restriction may limit flexibility for districts in rural or underserved areas where capacity to form partnerships is already strained. Smaller districts may lack staff or infrastructure to meet reporting or application requirements, potentially widening service gaps rather than closing them.

    Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 2(1)(a); Sec. 3(2)

  • Grant recipients must report annual impact data to the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction. While this improves accountability and program evaluation, it imposes administrative burdens—particularly on small, under-resourced nonprofits—requiring staff time and data collection infrastructure that may divert resources from direct service delivery.

    Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(2)

  • The bill includes a 2030 sunset date for Section 4 (investment income distribution rules), meaning the youth development fund’s access to investment earnings is not permanently secured. This creates uncertainty for long-term planning and may discourage large-scale private philanthropy that seeks permanence in funding mechanisms.

    FinancialRef: Sec. 6 (sunset date: July 1, 2030)

  • Only the superintendent of public instruction may authorize expenditures from the fund, centralizing decision-making at the state level. While this ensures consistency, it may reduce local control and responsiveness to community-specific needs, especially in regions where youth development priorities differ from state-level assumptions.

    Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 3(2)

Who Is Most Affected

Community-based youth program providersMixed Impact

Community-based providers—especially small nonprofits and tribal organizations—gain new funding opportunities, but must navigate competitive grant processes and new reporting requirements. Those already experienced in grant compliance may benefit significantly, while newer or smaller groups may struggle to compete or absorb administrative costs.

Youth and young adults (ages 5–24)Positive Impact

Youth in foster care, experiencing homelessness, or in poverty are explicitly prioritized, increasing access to wraparound supports. However, geographic disparities may persist if local capacity to deliver services is limited in rural or high-need areas, potentially leaving the most vulnerable behind.

Public school districts and educational service districtsMixed Impact

School districts gain a new funding stream but are restricted to partnering with community organizations or only acting as last-resort applicants. This may reduce duplication and strengthen community alignment, but could also displace existing district-led programs or create bureaucratic friction.

State agencies (OSPI and State Treasurer)Mixed Impact

The Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction gains expanded authority and responsibility, increasing its role in youth development policy. The State Treasurer gains a new account to manage, but no new operational burden beyond standard investment procedures.