Sunset is the regular assessment of the continuing need for a state agency or program to exist. The Sunset process works by setting an automatic termination (Sunset) date in state law on which an agency will be abolished unless the Legislature passes a bill to continue it, typically for another 12 years. This date determines when an agency is subject to Sunset review and provides the Legislature a unique opportunity and strong incentive to closely examine an agency’s mission, priorities, and performance and to take action to address problems identified.
Unlike other legislative oversight agencies that evaluate an agency’s financial accountability or compliance with state and federal laws, a Sunset review starts by asking a more fundamental question — is the state agency still needed? A Sunset review also evaluates the agency’s programs, rules, operations, and success in fulfilling its mission. As part of the review, Sunset also seeks public input to identify problems and opportunities for improving the agency. More detailed information on the sunset review process can be found at Sunset in Texas_2025_0.pdf
Health and Human Services Related Agencies Under Review for the 2026-27 Review Cycle, 90th Legislative Session
- Statewide Interagency Aging Services Coordinating Council
- Texas Civil Commitment Office
- Department of Family and Protective Services
- Health and Human Services Commission
- Texas Health Services Authority
- Department of State Health Services
- Maternal Mortality and Morbidity Review Committee, Texas
- Governor’s Committee on People with Disabilities
- Perinatal Advisory Council
- Public Health Funding and Policy Committee
Sunset shines a light on state agencies and programs to see if they are still relevant in a changing world. If the answer is yes, Sunset recommends improvements to make them more effective and efficient. If the answer is no, Sunset recommends abolishing the agency or transferring its functions to another agency with related functions. Learn how the Sunset process can have major impacts on state government.
Sunset Process
Agency performs a Self-Evaluation
- State agencies under review perform a self-evaluation following the instructions and format of the Sunset Commission identifying issues the agency believes are pertinent for review
Sunset Staff Evaluation
- Sunset staff performs extensive research and analysis to evaluate the need for, performance of, and improvements to the agency under review.
Sunset Commission Staff
- Reviews agency’s self-evaluation report
- Receives input from interested parties (public input is confidential and is published on the website.)
- Evaluates agency and identifies problems
- Develops recommendations
- Publishes staff report
Sunset Commission Deliberation
- The Sunset Commission conducts a public hearing to take testimony on the staff report and the agency overall. The Sunset Commission conducts a second meeting to vote on which changes to recommend to the Texas Legislature.
Public Hearings
- Sunset staff presents its report and recommendations
- Agency presents its response
- Sunset Commission hears public testimony and receives written comments
- Sunset Commission meets again to consider and vote on recommendations
Legislative Action
- The Texas Legislature considers Sunset’s recommendations and makes final decisions.
Texas Legislature
- Sunset bill on an agency is drafted and filed
- Sunset bills go through normal legislative process
- The Senate and the House conduct committee hearings and debate the bill
- Bill passes or fails adoption
- Governor signs, vetoes, or allows bill to become law without signature
The Public may participate in legislative process. The result is that the agency continues with improvements or the agency is abolished but may continue business for up to one year, or its functions are transferred to another agency.
Department of State Health Services Issues Identified in their Self Evaluation (Follow the link for the complete DSHS Self Evaluation and detail regarding the issues presented below Department of State Health Services Self Evaluation Report.pdf
Major Issue 1, Disaster Response and Funding: With the increased weather and non-weather-related disasters that have occurred over the past few years and the increasing costs DSHS is incurring, DSHS has a need for direct access to the GR Disaster Fund.
Possible Solutions and Impact: Due to the increased response activities and the increased cost, it would be beneficial for DSHS to have a dedicated funding source that can be authorized to support disaster activations as they occur. General Revenue Account 453, Disaster Contingency, was created in accordance with the Texas Disaster Act in 1975. TDEM has access to this account to cover disaster related expenses.
If DSHS received a direct appropriation for disaster responses that could be adjusted based on the response activity during the fiscal year, this would alleviate the need for DSHS to reallocate operating costs or delay HHSC oversight bill payments until reimbursement is received. This appropriation would be partially repaid, based on the reimbursements received from other sources.
Major Issue 2 Consumer Protection Fees: Several programs within the Consumer Protection Division (CPD) are unable to manage revenue and program costs due to statutory caps and statutory requirements related to fee amounts. This limits the Division’s ability to main sufficient capacity to perform its regulatory duties timely.
Possible Solutions and Impact: Consideration could be given as to whether program-specific statutory fee caps should be repealed or revised, and whether the statutory requirements for fees set “by rule” could be amended to give the agency authority to set fees in amounts reasonable and necessary to cover program costs. This would ensure that if program costs increased, the Department would have a mechanism to cover shortfalls in a more reasonable amount of time.
This authority could mirror existing success with the DSHS Laboratory fee schedule, which depends on web-based fee schedules. The DSHS Laboratory reviews the fee schedule on a regular timeline that is communicated to stakeholders, provides stakeholders opportunity for comment, and ensures public notices of fee schedule changes. This approach with the Laboratory fee schedule was possible due to its specific statute provisions and has allowed the Laboratory to more successfully operate like a business, covering its costs in sufficient amounts to support laboratory operations.
Major Issue 3 Vital Statistics Space Needs : The DSHS Vital Statistics Section (VSS) is the official repository for all Texas vital records, dating back to late 1800s. VSS is responsible for issuing certified copies and verifications of vital records, which constituents require to obtain critical government and care services, including driver’s licenses, passports, insurance, and benefits. Vital records are essential, time-sensitive documents, and the demand for VSS services is high given the current Texas population. The demand will continue to grow as the Texas population increases. All activities related to the issuance of vital records and records management must be done onsite in secure, restricted facilities.
Vital Statistics must have controls to secure vital records and run like a business to provide timely vital records. This requires ongoing investment in staffing, facilities, and technologies. However, any further business modernization (e.g., technology, mail operations, security, records management) is impeded by current building limitations. Over the past several years, DSHS has engaged in improvement activities to rebuild the vital statistics system and ensure excellent customer service, security, and data quality of vital records and vital statistics. Improvements have been made in organization, business process, technology, and salaries. However, any further business modernization (e.g., technology, security, records management) is impeded by building limitations in space and power capacity. VSS requires a facility that has additional square footage and a more up-to-date building environment.
Possible Solutions and Impact: Vital Statistics has a need to construct or rehabilitate space to meet growing VSS business needs and facilitate continued Vital Statistics modernization efforts. Doing so would ensure timely processing and delivery of vital records to meet the high demand for services. This would allow for:
- Compliance with building and life safety codes;
- Sufficient space and power capacity to house commercial equipment for large order fulfillment operation;
- Collocated space to maintain efficient workflows and document security;
- Accessible storage with security and environment controls for physical vital records, security paper, and digital records ; and
- Public lobby to accommodate daily customer traffic, including an electronic queue system and public restrooms.
Major Issue 4 Trusted Electronic Framework Common Agreement: Within U.S. HHS is the Assistant Secretary for Technology Policy (ASTP),who administers the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology. Federal statute charges ASTP with creating a national strategy for implementing a secure, standardized national platform to share patient-level data. ASTP has laid out the Trusted Electronic Framework Common Agreement (TEFCA) to remove barriers for sharing health records electronically among healthcare providers, patients, public health agencies, and payers. TEFCA establishes rules for Health Information Networks (HINs) to share medical records across state lines and across networks. TEFCA data exchange may only occur for the following purposes:
- Treatment,
- Payment,
- Healthcare operations,
- Public health,
- Government benefits determination, and
- Individual access services.
At this time, participation in TEFCA is optional but it could become a requirement in the future.
TEFCA has the potential to impact DSHS and LHDs as it pertains to public health surveillance and public health registries. Currently, DSHS administers multiple systems to collect data from electronic lab reports and electronic case reports that are derived from the electronic health records. LHDs, laboratories, healthcare providers, and healthcare facilities all use different systems, with various levels of interoperability and sophistication. Each registry and related data have their own federal or state laws and rules that govern data release and data sharing. A major function of the Public Health Informatics and Data Unit within the Chief Deputy Commissioner’s office is to facilitate data reporting to DSHS. With the implementation of TEFCA, patient-level data entrusted to public health entities could potentially be exchanged at a national level, including vital statistics, immunizations, and infectious surveillance disease data. LHDs could make decisions on participating in TEFCA on their own, even if DSHS does not participate, causing a lack of governance on how Texas data is submitted, what data is shared, and how data points are defined.
Possible Solutions and Impact: DSHS and other state entities will need legislative guidance on whether or how to participate in TEFCA. At this time, facilities, providers, and LHDs can participate in TEFCA voluntarily, but DSHS is not connected into the TEFCA framework. Another option would be for DSHS to determine what standardized public health data may be shared through TEFCA, to ensure data sharing is compliant with state law.
Major Issue 5 Job Classification Levels: Each biennium, the State Auditor’s Office (SAO) State Classification Team reviews the State’s Position Classification Plan (Plan) and makes recommendations to add new job classifications, delete current job classifications that are not utilized or have low utilization, and reallocate job classifications to maintain their market competitiveness. Part of that review includes the SAO sending out an optional assignment to state agencies for Recommended Changes to the State’s Position Classification Plan. The process does not always consider how some changes can have a ripple effect across agencies and classification types. Additional funding is not provided for changes that impact state agencies, but agencies are to make these changes and the necessary payroll actions to convert current employees to the new plan.
Possible Solutions and Impact: It would be beneficial if a strategic approach was taken when considering proposed state classification changes and how it will impact other state agencies. This could help to align and stabilize the classification plans and decrease competition for talent amongst state agencies, thus decreasing turnover and increasing retention. For DSHS, it is imperative to retain experienced staff to support the agency’s public health mission and citizens served. Because state agencies are required to implement changes resulting from the classification plan changes, SAO decisions have a significant impact on agency operations and budgets.
***
The information contained in this publication is the property of Texas Insight and is considered confidential and may contain proprietary information. It is meant solely for the intended recipient. Access to this published information by anyone else is unauthorized unless Texas Insight grants permission. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted in reliance on this is prohibited. The views expressed in this publication are, unless otherwise stated, those of the author and not those of Texas Insight or its management.