An Act Establishing An Alzheimer's Disease And Dementia Task Force.
HB 6912 establishes an Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia Task Force within state government, effective October 1, 2025. The task force is charged with examining the needs of residents living with Alzheimer’s disease or dementia, the services available to them and their family caregivers, and the capacity of health care providers and institutions to meet those needs.
The task force must also develop a State Alzheimer’s Plan. That plan is required to include findings and recommendations on long-term care, caregiver support, early-stage and early-onset disease, publicly funded health care costs, available diagnosis and care resources, workforce capacity, dementia-specific training, home- and community-based services, quality measures, research, public awareness, early detection, public safety, legal protections, and data collection. The bill creates a broad policy review body rather than directly changing benefit eligibility or service mandates.
The bill adds a new section to the general statutes creating a standing task force and a recurring reporting requirement, but it does not itself create new entitlement programs or funding streams. It directs the Governor to appoint members, requires the first meeting and quarterly meetings, assigns administrative support from the aging committee staff, and requires annual reports beginning January 1, 2027, with updates to the State Alzheimer’s Plan every four years. Its main legal effect is to formalize state-level coordination and policy development around dementia and Alzheimer’s disease across aging, public health, and human services agencies and stakeholders.
The available voting history suggests strong support for the bill: the Aging Committee reported the substitute version favorably with a 13-0 vote. There are no committee transcript excerpts indicating opposition or debate, and the bill’s structure reflects a consensus-oriented study and planning approach focused on gathering information and recommendations rather than imposing immediate regulatory changes.
No major points of contention are evident in the provided materials. Because the bill establishes a task force and planning process, any potential concerns would likely center on the scope of the study, the administrative burden of reporting, or whether the state should move directly to services and funding instead of first creating another advisory body. The bill itself anticipates broad stakeholder representation, including patients, caregivers, providers, aging advocates, and state agencies, which may have helped limit disagreement.