Modifies provisions governing mental health efforts in public schools
HB 3024 revises Missouri law governing mental health efforts in public schools by repealing and reenacting several sections related to suicide awareness, suicide prevention policies, mental health awareness instruction, and student access to mental health resources. The bill keeps and updates existing requirements for school districts to adopt youth suicide awareness and prevention policies, while adding new training expectations for educators and new student-facing requirements for public and charter schools.
The bill would require, over time, more structured suicide prevention training for teachers, principals, and licensed educators, including guidance on the Columbia Protocol/C-SSRS and training on a new virtual mental health tool to be developed by the Department of Mental Health’s children’s office. It also expands school district policy requirements, updates model policies and curricula developed by the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, and requires certain school ID cards for grades 7-12 to display the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline number and related crisis contact information. In addition, it creates a new section directing the state to develop a virtual tool that provides mental health information, screening questions, assessments, and resource directories.
HB 3024 also strengthens student mental health education requirements. It continues the existing mandate for high school mental health awareness instruction and adds more detailed content requirements beginning in the 2027-28 school year, including age-appropriate suicide awareness, information about 988, and use of the Columbia Protocol. The bill creates a new “Brennan’s Law” subsection requiring mental health awareness training before students enter ninth grade and requiring age-appropriate instruction for grades 5-8, also beginning in 2027-28.
The bill’s impact on state law is to expand and formalize statewide mental health and suicide prevention obligations for public schools and charter schools, while assigning implementation and curriculum-development duties to DESE and the Department of Mental Health. It affects school districts, educators, students in grades 5-12, and school ID card practices, and it adds a new state-developed digital resource intended to connect students and other individuals to mental health support.
The available context shows no recorded committee testimony or votes, so there is no documented public debate in the provided materials. Based on the bill text, the overall sentiment appears supportive of school-based mental health and suicide prevention efforts, with the measure framed as an expansion and modernization of existing protections rather than a controversial policy shift. The most likely points of contention are implementation burden, training requirements for educators, the cost and logistics of updating curricula and ID cards, and the state’s role in mandating specific protocols and digital tools for schools.
HB 3024 would amend Missouri statutes governing school suicide prevention and mental health education by repealing and reenacting sections 170.047, 170.048, and 170.307 and adding a new section 630.099. It would impose updated duties on school districts, public schools, charter schools, DESE, and the Department of Mental Health, including educator training, district policy updates, student instruction requirements, and development of a statewide virtual mental health resource tool. It also requires certain student ID cards to include crisis hotline information and expands the content and timing of mental health instruction for grades 5-12.
No committee transcript or vote record is provided, so there is no direct evidence of debate or opposition in the supplied materials. The bill’s subject matter and structure suggest generally favorable sentiment toward suicide prevention and student mental health supports, with the legislation presented as a public-safety and student-wellness measure. Any concerns would likely center on administrative burden, compliance costs, and the practicality of implementing new training and curriculum mandates across districts.
The main potential areas of contention are the added obligations on school districts and educators, including mandatory training, policy revisions, and curriculum changes tied to specific protocols such as the Columbia Protocol/C-SSRS. Schools may also face operational concerns about printing crisis information on ID cards and adopting a new virtual mental health tool developed by the state. Another possible point of debate is the bill’s phased-in timeline, especially the more detailed requirements beginning in 2027-28, which could be viewed as either a reasonable implementation period or an additional mandate with uncertain costs.