Residential Child Care Programs - Education of Children and Training of Child and Youth Care Practitioners
HB0396 establishes the Substance Abuse Early Intervention and Detoxification Services Fund for Prince George’s County. The fund is intended to pay for up to 90 days of treatment and rehabilitation for students expelled from school in the county who need services related to alcohol or drug misuse, and to use any remaining money to cover treatment costs for uninsured or underinsured minors in the county receiving similar services. The bill also authorizes referrals of expelled students by the Maryland Department of Health or the Department of Juvenile Services to the county’s local behavioral health authority for treatment and rehabilitation.
The bill creates a special, continuing, nonlapsing fund administered by the Prince George’s County Health Department, with state budget appropriations beginning in fiscal 2027 set at $2 million annually. The fund may also receive gifts, grants, and other money, and it is subject to state accounting rules, possible legislative audit, and annual reporting to the General Assembly beginning in 2027. The required annual report must include financial activity and counts of students and minors served, with demographic breakdowns.
In terms of state law, the bill adds a new section to the Health - General Article and cross-references the definition of local behavioral health authority used elsewhere in Maryland law. It does not broadly change statewide substance use treatment policy, but it creates a county-specific funding and referral mechanism tied to school expulsions and juvenile services in Prince George’s County. The bill also requires the Governor to include the annual appropriation in the budget bill, making the program dependent on recurring state funding.
The general sentiment reflected by the bill text is supportive of early intervention, treatment access, and rehabilitation for youth affected by substance misuse, especially those who are expelled from school or lack insurance coverage. No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no direct evidence of floor debate or recorded opposition in the materials supplied. Based on the structure of the bill, likely points of discussion would include the use of state funds for a county-specific program, the $2 million annual appropriation, and the requirement to report demographic data and outcomes.
HB0396 would add a new county-specific program to the Health - General Article, creating a dedicated state-funded mechanism for substance use treatment and rehabilitation services in Prince George’s County. It would require the Governor to budget $2 million annually beginning in fiscal 2027, direct administration to the Prince George’s County Health Department, and allow referrals from state agencies to the county’s local behavioral health authority. The bill affects expelled students and uninsured or underinsured minors in Prince George’s County, while also imposing reporting, accounting, and potential audit requirements on the new fund.
The bill appears to be framed as a public health and youth intervention measure, with an emphasis on treatment rather than punishment for students affected by alcohol or drug misuse. Because no committee testimony or vote history was included, there is no documented record here of support or opposition from legislators or stakeholders. On its face, the proposal suggests a generally favorable sentiment toward expanding access to behavioral health services for vulnerable minors in Prince George’s County.
The main likely points of contention are the county-specific nature of the program, the recurring $2 million state appropriation, and whether state dollars should be dedicated to a fund serving a single jurisdiction. Another possible issue is the scope of eligibility, including services for expelled students and uninsured or underinsured minors, and the administrative burden of annual reporting by demographic category. No explicit objections or amendments are provided in the supplied materials, so these concerns are inferred from the bill’s structure rather than from recorded debate.