FEDERAL REVENUE STREAMS IN NEVADA: A DATA SNAPSHOT

Nevada’s 2017-2019 biennial budget amounts to approximately $26.2 billion. Federal funds account for more than one-third  (34.3 percent) of all revenues in the biennial budget. Federal revenues also flow into Nevada’s non-profits and local and county governments. This policy brief summarizes federal revenue streams in Nevada in recent years. Full report with additional information found here.

Share on FacebookShare on Google+Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInPrint this page
  • Nevada’s 2017-2019 biennial budget amounts to approximately $26.2 billion. Federal funds account for more than one-third  (34.3 percent) of all revenues in the biennial budget. Federal revenues also flow into Nevada’s non-profits and local and county governments. This policy brief summarizes federal revenue streams in Nevada in recent years. Full report with additional information found here.

    The Guinn Center, in partnership with Southern Nevada Strong, Nevada Grant Office, Community Foundation of Nevada, and the United Way of Southern Nevada, has been working to build state and local capacity to increase Nevada’s federal grant competitiveness. The data contained in this policy brief has been presented at various meetings of stakeholders.

  • Between federal fiscal year (FFY) 2008 and FFY 2011, Nevada ranked near or at the bottom (50th or 51st) of all states in federal government expenditures/ obligations per capita. Federal spending in Nevada has tended to be relatively low throughout the Great Recession and recovery, as is true for the neighboring state of Utah. With the exception of New Mexico, the rest of the Intermountain West states had a moderate level of federal spending over this time frame. From FFY 2008 through FFY 2014, New Mexico enjoyed fairly high levels of federal spending, with rankings that place it at either 6th or 7th.

    Source: Federal Government Expenditures/Obligations: FFY 2008-2010, Consolidated Federal Funds Reports, and FFY 2011-2014, Pew Charitable Trusts, Federal Spending in the States: 2005-2014 | Population (for per capita adjustment): U.S. Census Bureau. Note: Expenditures/obligations are defined as retirement and disability, other direct payments, grants, procurement, and salaries and wages for FFY 2008-2010 and as retirement, nonretirement, contracts, grants, and salaries and wages for FFY 2011-2014. Ranked by the Guinn Center, from highest amount per capita to lowest.

  • Grants per capita were disproportionately low relative to all other federal government expenditures/obligations per capita between federal fiscal year (FFY) 2008 and FFY 2014. In FFY 2011, when grants per capita as a percentage of total federal expenditures/obligations per capita was the lowest ($829; 10 percent), just 10 cents of every federal dollar in Nevada was grant money, while the other 90 cents of each federal dollar were  allocated to all other federal expenditures/ obligations per capita. The slightly higher grants per capita amounts in FFY 2009 and FFY 2010 likely reflect additional money provided to the state by the federal government under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. Beginning in FFY 2011, the additional expenditures began to taper off and then increased again in FFY 2012. Grants per capita remained flat, that is, at or above FFY 2012 levels, in subsequent years.

    Source: Federal Government Expenditures/Obligations: FFY 2008-2010, Consolidated Federal Funds Reports, and FFY 2011-2014, Pew Charitable Trusts, Federal Spending in the States: 2005-2014 | Population: U.S. Census Bureau. Note:  Expenditures/ obligations are defined as retirement and disability, other direct payments, grants, procurement, and salaries and wages for FFY 2008-2010 and as retirement, nonretirement, contracts, grants, and salaries and wages for FFY 2011-2014. Each stacked column segment is calculated as a percentage of total federal expenditures/obligations per capita.

  • In comparison to the other Intermountain West states, federal financial assistance per capita is relatively low in Nevada and Utah. Both states rank at or near the bottom of all states over the 10-year period. In the Silver State, federal financial assistance per capita was highest in federal fiscal year (FFY) 2009 with the implementation of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009. (Amongst other provisions, ARRA provided state and local fiscal relief.) Federal financial assistance per capita has remained in the $5,100-$6,300 range since then.

    Source: Federal financial assistance: USAspending.gov | Population (for per capita adjustment): U.S. Census Bureau. Note: Federal financial assistance includes contracts, grants, loans, and “Other Financial Assistance.” (See Glossary in Appendix B for additional details.) Ranked by the Guinn Center, from highest amount per capita to lowest.

  • Federal grants per capita in Nevada are lower, on average, than the other Intermountain West states. While this does not hold true for all years, the general pattern places the state at or near the bottom of the rankings. Federal grants per capita were lowest in federal fiscal year (FFY) 2008. After that, they increased in FFY 2009, with the infusion of funds via the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009, declined slightly in FFY 2010 and FY 2011, increased again in FFY 2012, and then decreased in FFY 2013. Nevada saw an increase in grants per capita as a result of Medicaid expansion in FFY 2014 and FFY 2015. (Nevada Medicaid, Title XIX, is categorized as a grant, and expansion went into effect on January 1, 2014.) Federal grants per capita decreased thereafter, both in FFY 2016 and FFY 2017, though the Medicaid expansion remains in effect.

    Source: Grants: USAspending.gov | Population (for per capita adjustment): U.S. Census Bureau. Note: Ranked by the Guinn Center, from highest amount per capita to lowest.

  • The figure shows total federal grant money awarded to Nevada between federal fiscal year (FFY) 2000 and FFY 2017 in current dollars (not adjusted for inflation) and constant dollars (inflation-adjusted). Over the 18-year period, federal grant money has kept apace of inflation. Federal grants awarded to the state increased steadily from FFY 2000 to FFY 2003, before leveling off through FFY 2007. Total grant money declined slightly in FFY 2008, before increasing considerably in FFY 2009 with the addition of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 funds. The next spike, in FFY 2015, signifies the first full year that Nevada’s Medicaid expansion money was reflected in the federal grant award total. Total grants have increased by 154.4 percent over FFY 2000 and FFY 2017, even when inflation is taken into account.

    Source: Grants: USAspending.gov | Inflation Adjustment: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, “CPI-All Urban Consumers (Current Series)” 

  • Relative to other types of federal financial assistance, such as contracts and loans, amongst others, federal grants received by Nevada is somewhat small in terms of total number and award amounts. Since federal fiscal year (FFY) 2009, the state has been awarded 3,000 to 4,000 federal grants per year. In FFY 2016, for example, Nevada received 3,671 federal grants but 28,093 other federal awards. Federal grants account for a relatively small share of overall federal financial assistance provided to the Silver State.

    Source: USAspending.gov.

  • In Nevada, formula grants far outweigh other grant types (e.g., cooperative agreements, block grants, project grants). For example, in federal fiscal year (FFY) 2011, the state received roughly $2.0 billion in formula grants, or 74.2 percent of all federal grant money. In the same year, project grants amounted to about $366 million, or 13.7 percent of all federal grant money. Increases in federal grant money for formula grants vis-à-vis all other types of assistance, beginning in FFY 2015, likely reflect Medicaid expansion, as federal funding for that program is categorized as a formula grant.

    Source: USAspending.gov. Note: Each stacked column segment is calculated as a percentage of the total. Medicaid is coded in the original data erroneously as a block grant for federal fiscal year (FFY) 2007 and FFY 2008. Data is presented as provided in the source material.

  • Governments of all jurisdictional types, combined, received the majority of federal grants awarded to Nevada. The preponderance of federal grant money has been allocated to governments. For example, in federal fiscal year (FFY) 2016, governments received about $4.7 billion in federal grant dollars, or 93.2 percent of all federal grant money in the state. By way of comparison, non-profits received about $101.4 million in federal grant dollars, or 2.0 percent of all federal grant money in the state.

    Source: USAspending.gov. Note: Each stacked column segment is calculated as a percentage of the total. Medicaid is coded in the original data erroneously as a recipient type of “All other” for federal fiscal year (FFY) 2007. Data is presented as provided in the source material.

  • Nevada Medicaid, as a percentage of the amount of federal grant money awarded in the state, increased substantially only twice between federal fiscal year (FFY) 2000 and FFY 2008. After dipping in FFY 2009, it began to increase at a fairly consistent rate through FFY 2014, though there was some leveling-off during that time frame. The spike in FFY 2015 results from the additional funds that flowed to Nevada with its expansion of Medicaid in on January 1, 2014 (FFY 2015 was the first full fiscal year of funding). From FFY 2000 to FFY 2017, Medicaid as a share of all federal grants in the state increased by 36.1 percentage points.

    Source: USAspending.gov

  • The dollar amount of grants awarded as a percentage of the dollar amount of all federal funds awarded in Nevada is displayed here: the burgundy line is the actual data, while the turquoise line shows the hypothetical case of Medicaid exclusion from the totality of grant awards. Up until the full year of Medicaid expansion money, that is, federal fiscal year (FFY) 2015, the lines correspond with one another. Beginning in FFY 2015, however, the lines diverge considerably. Actual grant dollars, as a percentage of the total, spike to the 25 percent to 35 percent range. Hypothetical grant dollars exhibit a flattening-out effect, with a slight decrease, in the 10 percent to 15 percent range. This suggests that the grants landscape in Nevada may be distorted by the influence of Medicaid funding.

    Source: USAspending.gov. Note: Medicaid refers to Nevada Medicaid, Title XIX. “Without Medicaid” is a stylized calculation, as computed by the Guinn Center.

  • The impact of Medicaid on federal financial assistance per capita and grants per capita is felt acutely throughout the Intermountain West states. In the absence of Medicaid, federal grants per capita in Nevada decreases by nearly $1,000 per capita. The largest loss per capita, in the theoretical absence of Medicaid funding, is in New Mexico, at roughly $2,100 per capita. For Arizona and California, their rankings drop from 23 to 44 and 12 to 37, respectively.

    Source: USAspending.gov | Population (for per capita adjustment): U.S. Census Bureau. Note: : Federal financial assistance includes contracts, grants, loans, and “Other Financial Assistance.” (See Glossary in Appendix B for additional details.) Ranked by the Guinn Center, from highest amount per capita to lowest. Medicaid refers to Nevada Medicaid, Title XIX. “Without Medicaid” is a stylized calculation, as computed by the Guinn Center.

Get Our Newsletter

  • Enter your email addresses to receive email alerts and our newsletters