Mental Health and Penal Institutions; grant program to create peer support programs in hospitals; establish
SB 371 would expand Georgia’s use of certified peer specialists by creating a state grant program to help hospitals and local addiction recovery support centers establish peer support programs for people presenting with substance use disorders. The bill also updates the mental health code to define and recognize several peer specialist designations, including mental health, addictive disease, youth, parent, and forensic peer mentor roles, and requires additional continuing education for peer specialists working in hospitals and on job readiness and workforce reentry.
In addition to the hospital grant program, the bill directs the Department of Corrections and DCS to establish forensic peer mentor programs in every state prison, county jail, and municipal jail. It also requires coordination with agencies, courts, and other entities serving people who are incarcerated, on parole, or on probation to extend peer mentor services into community supervision and diversion settings. The bill includes reporting requirements, technical assistance, evaluation, and rulemaking authority to support implementation and oversight.
SB 371 would amend Title 37 and Title 42 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated by creating a new chapter on peer support programs in mental health law and a new article on forensic peer mentor programs in penal institutions law. It would authorize the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities to award grants to eligible hospitals and addiction recovery support centers, require annual and quarterly reporting on grant activity and program effectiveness, and mandate evaluation of outcomes and cost-effectiveness. It would also impose new duties on the Department of Corrections and DCS to establish peer mentor programs across correctional facilities and coordinate with justice-system and treatment partners.
The bill appears generally supportive of expanding peer-based behavioral health and reentry services, with its structure emphasizing implementation, oversight, and evidence gathering rather than restricting access. Although no committee transcript or vote record is provided, the bill’s findings-oriented reporting, technical assistance, and evaluation provisions suggest an effort to build bipartisan or broad institutional support around treatment, recovery, and criminal justice diversion. The overall tone is policy-expansion and service-oriented.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be funding, administrative burden, and the scope of mandatory implementation. The grant program is expressly subject to appropriations, which may raise questions about whether hospitals and recovery centers can realistically be funded statewide. Requiring forensic peer mentor programs in every state prison, county jail, and municipal jail could also draw concern from correctional agencies and local governments over staffing, training, and operational costs. In addition, the bill’s data-sharing and evaluation requirements may prompt privacy and compliance concerns, even though the bill directs that health information protections be observed.