Georgia House Bill HB332

Georgia 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/6/25

Caption

Social services; convene an advisory working group to review tools and protocols for screening of children for trauma; provisions

Summary

HB 332 would direct the Georgia Department of Human Services, in consultation with behavioral health, child welfare, managed care, and other stakeholders, to convene an advisory working group to review and potentially update the tools and protocols used to screen children for trauma in the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment (EPSDT) program. The working group would examine existing screening tools, including nationally recognized pediatric and preventive-health recommendations, and assess which types of providers should be authorized to administer trauma screenings. The group must be convened by October 1, 2025, and report its findings, recommendations, and estimated funding needs by October 1, 2026. The group would be abolished at the end of 2026, after which the department would continue periodic review of trauma-screening protocols at least once every five years. The bill also conditions implementation on the availability of federal approval and the protection of federal Medicaid funding, and it delays any recommendations requiring new appropriations until the General Assembly acts.

Impact

The bill would amend Georgia law governing services for children with disabilities by adding a new Code section focused on trauma screening within the EPSDT Medicaid framework. It does not itself mandate immediate statewide screening changes, but instead creates a process for review, recommendation, and later periodic reassessment. Any changes that require additional funding would need separate legislative appropriation, and the bill would only take effect to the extent federal Medicaid participation is preserved and necessary federal approvals are obtained.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to indicate strong support or opposition. Based on the bill text, the measure appears policy-oriented and procedural rather than controversial, aiming to study and improve trauma screening practices before implementation. The conditional language around federal approval and appropriations suggests an effort to build consensus and avoid unintended fiscal or Medicaid compliance issues.

Contention

The main potential points of contention are likely to be the scope of trauma screening in the EPSDT program, who should be allowed to conduct screenings, and whether the state should commit resources to any recommended changes. Another possible issue is the bill’s dependence on federal approval and Medicaid funding protections, which could limit or delay implementation. Because the working group’s recommendations may require future appropriations, lawmakers concerned about costs or administrative expansion may scrutinize the bill’s fiscal implications.