Providing for behavioral health benefits for justice-involved children; and, in juvenile matters, further providing for definitions and for costs and expenses of care of child, providing for mandatory intake conference and screening in cases alleging delinquency and further providing for informal adjustment and for powers and duties.
HB2477 would create a new chapter in Title 40 requiring health insurance policies and certain government programs to cover behavioral health screenings, assessments, and services for justice-involved children when those services are connected to juvenile delinquency intake, informal adjustment, or consent decree procedures. The bill defines key terms such as behavioral health condition, behavioral health provider, screening, and treatment plan, and it requires insurers to contract with qualified behavioral health providers in their service area, including providers enrolled in Medicaid who accept the insurer’s payment terms.
The bill also amends Title 42’s juvenile provisions to require a mandatory intake conference in delinquency cases before a petition is filed, followed by a screening to determine whether a behavioral health assessment is in the child’s and public’s best interest. If a referral is made, the receiving agency must decide whether to accept the child, obtain consent, complete the assessment within 30 days when possible, and provide a report with recommendations to the child, parent or custodian, attorney, and referring officer. The bill adds confidentiality protections and limits the use of assessment materials in law enforcement investigations and adjudicatory or adult criminal proceedings, subject to consent and certain exceptions.
HB2477 would also change how costs for these services are paid by directing that screenings, assessments, and related behavioral health services be covered under the new Title 40 chapter rather than under the general juvenile care-cost provisions. In addition, it expands the Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission’s duties to approve screening tools, develop referral and assessment procedures, and distribute informational materials to law enforcement and juvenile justice personnel. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment.
The overall policy direction of the bill is to increase early identification and treatment of mental health and substance use needs among children involved in the juvenile justice system, while also creating a more formalized diversion and assessment process before delinquency petitions are filed. The bill appears designed to reduce unnecessary court involvement, connect children to services sooner, and ensure insurance and public programs pay for those services.
No committee transcript or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded debate or voting pattern to indicate support or opposition. Based on the bill text alone, likely points of contention would include the mandate for insurers to cover and contract for these services, the added administrative burden on probation officers and agencies, the confidentiality and admissibility rules for assessment records, and the circumstances under which a delinquency petition may proceed before an assessment is completed.
HB2477 would amend Title 40 to require coverage of behavioral health screenings, assessments, and services for justice-involved children under private health insurance policies and specified government programs, including Medicaid and the uninsured children’s coverage program. It would also amend Title 42 juvenile law by adding a mandatory intake conference and screening process, revising definitions related to children and screenings, shifting payment responsibility for these behavioral health services to the new coverage chapter, and expanding the Juvenile Court Judges’ Commission’s duties regarding screening tools and procedures.
No votes or committee discussion were provided, so the bill’s sentiment cannot be measured from the record. The text suggests a generally reform-oriented and child-focused approach, emphasizing access to behavioral health care, diversion, and early intervention in juvenile cases. Any opposition would likely center on cost, implementation, insurer obligations, and procedural concerns rather than the bill’s core policy goal.
The main likely points of contention are the insurance mandates and provider contracting requirements, which could be viewed by insurers as expanding covered benefits and administrative obligations. Juvenile justice stakeholders may also debate the mandatory intake conference and screening requirement, the timeline for assessments, and the exceptions allowing petitions to be filed before assessment completion when immediate detention or placement is sought or when consent is withheld. Another area of concern is the bill’s confidentiality and admissibility rules, which limit use of assessment materials in law enforcement and court proceedings unless consent is given.