SB 942 revises Maryland law governing medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for incarcerated individuals in local correctional facilities. The bill repeals the existing requirement that each local facility make available at least one formulation of each FDA-approved opioid medication class used to treat opioid use disorder, and replaces it with a broader funding and administration framework. Under the bill, local facilities must continue to screen incarcerated individuals for mental health and substance use disorders, evaluate those with suspected opioid use disorder, provide information about medication options, offer MAT when appropriate, provide counseling and peer recovery support, continue treatment when individuals are transferred or released unless medically inappropriate or voluntarily stopped, and develop prerelease reentry plans for people with opioid use disorder.
A major change in the bill is the creation of a county grant program administered by the Maryland Secretary of Health through the Office of Overdose Response. Each county would receive an annual grant equal to the costs it incurred in the prior fiscal year for implementing a MAT program in accordance with the statute, subject to reporting requirements and possible reductions for late reporting. The bill also authorizes the Governor to include a budget appropriation for these grants and expands the permitted uses of the Opioid Restitution Fund to include grants to counties for MAT implementation in local correctional facilities.
Impact
SB 942 would amend the Correctional Services Article to shift Maryland’s approach from a direct statutory medication-availability mandate toward a state-funded county reimbursement model for jail-based MAT programs. It also amends the State Finance and Procurement Article to add county MAT grants as an authorized use of the Opioid Restitution Fund, thereby creating a new funding stream tied to opioid settlement revenues and any related budget appropriations. Counties operating local correctional facilities would be affected most directly, as they would need to comply with screening, treatment, counseling, peer support, reporting, and reentry-planning requirements to qualify for reimbursement.
Sentiment
The bill text and available context suggest a generally supportive posture toward expanding access to treatment for incarcerated individuals with opioid use disorder. The measure is framed as a public health and correctional-services reform bill, and its structure indicates an effort to preserve treatment access while addressing local implementation costs. No committee transcripts or recorded votes were provided, so there is no documented opposition or formal vote pattern in the supplied materials.
Contention
The main policy tension appears to be between mandatory service delivery and funding responsibility. By repealing the requirement that each local facility stock at least one formulation of each FDA-approved opioid-use-disorder medication, the bill may reduce a rigid operational mandate, but it also raises questions about whether counties will consistently implement robust MAT programs without guaranteed reimbursement timing or sufficient settlement-fund revenues. Another possible point of contention is the reporting and penalty structure, including the 20% grant reduction for late submissions, which could be viewed as necessary accountability by supporters and as an administrative burden by counties. No specific stakeholder objections were included in the provided record.