Transcript Highlights:

• It would be required to be added to the MassPAT program.
• program?
• I have one question about the prescription monitoring program.
• with substance use disorders had an unmet treatment need.
• that I've worked in, in a number of therapeutic ways and program management.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Mental Health, Substance Use and Recovery held a public hearing on 14 bills focused on insurance, parity, opioids, behavioral health access, and mental health system reform. Chair Mindy Domb and Vice Chair Robyn Kennedy outlined hearing procedures and noted the committee would accept written testimony. The hearing featured testimony from legislators, providers, advocates, and behavioral health organizations, with most speakers urging favorable reports on the bills they addressed. A major topic was psychiatric collaborative care, including H. 222/S. 1390, which would raise reimbursement for collaborative care codes to at least Medicare levels and allow billing outside the MassHealth primary care subcapitation model. Supporters said the model improves access, outcomes, and cost savings by embedding behavioral health in primary care, and several witnesses described successful implementation in practices and schools. Committee members asked questions about how the model works, what specialties use it, barriers to adoption, and whether copays, deductibles, and subcapitation rules should be changed. Witnesses also supported related innovation legislation, including H. 2224, which would create a mental health innovation fund and support nontraditional trauma-healing approaches. Other bills discussed included H. 2212, which would require prescribers to discuss opioid and pain-medication risks, alternatives, and addiction/overdose concerns with patients or guardians; H. 2232 and H. 2233, which would address equitable payment and equitable access for behavioral health providers serving MassHealth patients; and S. 1406, which would add opioid maintenance treatment information to MassPAT and allow patient-authorized access to that information. Witnesses also strongly backed S. 1399, which would set targets to increase behavioral health spending within the overall health care cost benchmark, arguing that Massachusetts underinvests in behavioral health and that greater investment could reduce emergency, hospitalization, homelessness, and criminal justice costs. No votes were taken; the hearing concluded after testimony and committee questions.

Transcript Highlights:

• Some of those programs include improvements to the general surgery program, an orthopedic surgery program
• This is a chronic care program.
• This is a chronic care program.
• This is a chronic care program.
• Cancer treatment is expensive, and without the 340B program many of our patients simply would not have

Keywords: 00:00 Introductions 02:46 Roll Call 03:35 Discussion on SB 14 46:13 Vote on SB 14 48:07 Discussion on SB 17 50:38 Vote on SB 17, 958, all

Summary: The Senate Standing Committee on Health Services opened with the chair welcoming several new members and outlining session rules: hearings would start and end on time, the committee would limit the number of bills heard each meeting, prioritize bills heard during the interim, and generally avoid using the consent calendar except in extreme circumstances. The committee then briefly considered administrative regulations, which were treated as approved if members had no questions. The main item was Senate Bill 14, a measure addressing the 340B drug discount program. The chair said the bill had already passed the Senate in a prior session and had been heard in interim, so he did not present it again. He described the bill as prohibiting drug manufacturers from discriminating against 340B covered entities by refusing 340B pricing when the same drug is offered at that price in the state. He also said the committee would not debate the federal 340B program itself, but would hear testimony on the bill. Hospital leaders and Kentucky Hospital Association representatives testified in support, arguing that 340B savings are essential to rural hospitals, oncology services, transportation support, chronic care, addiction recovery, and new service lines such as chemotherapy and hepatitis treatment. They said the program helps keep care close to home and that manufacturer restrictions on contract pharmacies have reduced access and cost hospitals millions. Opponents from BIO Kentucky and the National Alliance of Healthcare Purchaser Coalitions argued the bill would expand federal law beyond Congress’s intent, create administrative burdens, and not lower patient out-of-pocket costs. The chair repeatedly pressed opponents to address why Kentucky should be denied the same 340B pricing available in other states. No vote on the bill was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• The 340B program is essential.
• The 340B program is a federal program, and let me be clear: the 340B program has been a great program
• This program is not shrinking.
• This program is not shrinking.
• This program is not shrinking.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The committee held a lengthy hearing on a large docket of pharmacy and drug-pricing bills, with most testimony focused on PBM reform, 340B drug discount program protections, specialty medication access, and medication adherence. Chair James Murphy and Senator Paul Feeney opened the hearing and took testimony from legislators, patient advocates, pharmacists, health center leaders, industry representatives, and policy groups. Several speakers described delays, denials, high out-of-pocket costs, and pharmacy closures tied to PBM practices, while others emphasized the importance of community health centers and independent pharmacies in serving patients. On the 340B program, supporters including Senator Eldridge, Senator Payano, Community Care Cooperative, Fenway Health, the Massachusetts League of Community Health Centers, and several community health center leaders argued that bills such as H. 1107 and S. 819 would stop discriminatory PBM and manufacturer practices, preserve contract pharmacy access, and protect safety-net providers that say they reinvest savings into care, pharmacy expansion, interpreter services, behavioral health, and other services. Opponents including PhRMA, the Community Liver Alliance, and a public policy analyst argued the program lacks transparency and accountability, has grown beyond its original purpose, and may benefit large hospitals and for-profit entities more than low-income patients. They urged more reporting and oversight rather than expanding protections. On PBM reform, testimony supported bills including H. 1157, H. 1234, S. 724, S. 831, and related measures that would require rebate pass-through, ban spread pricing, limit steering to PBM-owned pharmacies, and improve reimbursement for community pharmacies. Independent pharmacists and patients said current PBM practices raise costs, create administrative burdens, and threaten access to local pharmacies. PCMA, representing PBMs, opposed the reforms, arguing PBMs lower costs, that plan sponsors choose to contract with them, and that the Health Policy Commission and CHIA should complete their ongoing study before new mandates are adopted. The committee also heard support for H. 1322 and S. 734 on specialty medications, and for H. 781 and H. 1305 on medication synchronization to improve adherence. No votes or formal actions were taken during the hearing.

Transcript Highlights:

• So here we had a Medicaid program paying ...a Medicaid program paying one rate, the fee for service,
• Because it's a federal program, I thought it was worth just a brief explanation: the 340B program is
• We know that it has an impact on the Medicaid program.
• This program was actually developed after meeting with advocates in Colorado who created a Take 5 program
• for the Program for Language Equity.

Keywords: 995, all

Summary: The Joint Committee on Health Care Financing held a public hearing on a large docket of bills focused on MassHealth benefits and reimbursement, health equity, behavioral health, public health, dental access, 340B drug pricing, tobacco cessation, and coverage for children. The chairs emphasized rising health care costs, provider shortages, administrative burdens, and persistent inequities by income, race, geography, and immigration status. Much of the testimony centered on H.1416/S.901, an act to advance health equity, with legislators and members of the Health Equity Compact arguing for statewide benchmarks, stronger health equity leadership, reimbursement for interpreter services, community health workers and patient navigation, Medicaid graduate medical education support, and a health equity zone trust fund. Witnesses described disparities in life expectancy, maternal mortality, access to primary care, and the impact of federal Medicaid and social service cuts, and urged the committee to report the bill favorably. The committee also heard strong support for H.1368/S.847 on rapid whole genome sequencing for critically ill MassHealth children. Testifiers from industry, academia, hospitals, and families said early sequencing can end long diagnostic odysseys, improve treatment decisions, shorten hospital stays, and save money, while also providing emotional relief and information for families. The hearing then moved to H.1407 on MassHealth rate parity for inpatient behavioral health providers, where Rep. Scanlan and the Massachusetts Association of Behavioral Health Systems said the bill would codify existing administrative parity so managed care plans cannot pay less than the MassHealth fee-for-service rate. On H.1392/S.853 to preserve and protect public health, witnesses supported higher vaccine administration fees to improve provider participation and immunization rates. The committee also heard testimony on H.770/845 to protect 340B providers in MassHealth, and on S.848 to require reporting and transparency around 340B revenues and outside administrative costs. Additional bills drew testimony on tobacco cessation coverage for MassHealth members, with advocates supporting broader access to counseling and medications through medical, behavioral health, and dental providers. On H.1409, a nursing home operator asked for more flexibility in a MassHealth staffing-related penalty tied to patient days per resident. On H.1401/S.888, supporters of the “Take 10” dental access proposal said adult MassHealth dental coverage is underused because too few dentists accept MassHealth, leading to long travel times and avoidable emergency room visits; they urged incentive payments for dentists serving new adult MassHealth patients. Finally, on H.1403/S.855, “Cover All Kids,” advocates and immigrant community members urged removal of immigration status as a barrier to full MassHealth coverage for children, while also backing a related bill to ensure 12 months of continuous coverage for children. No votes were taken during the hearing; the committee primarily received testimony and asked questions on costs, reimbursement levels, and implementation details.

Transcript Highlights:

• I've had judges' kids in treatment court. I've had lawyers' kids in treatment court.
• Whether there is a treatment program in North Florida or South Florida, we are all operating with basic
• The benefit is that if they want treatment after one year in the program, they will graduate successfully
• But let me reassure you that there are happy endings, and we are seeing it. in these treatment programs
• There isn't a judge anywhere in the treatment program who will not share multiple testimonials, the success

Keywords: 999, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• , or substance use disorder treatment.
• There is a pending amendment to remove mental health treatment and substance use disorder treatment from
• of the originally authorized treatment.
• The program indicated the program costs are currently being covered, so there's no additional fiscal
• The purpose of the bill is to rename the batterer intervention program as an abuse intervention program

Keywords: 994, senate, all

Summary: The committee met, approved the March 5, 2026 minutes, and then took up several health- and human-services-related bills. House Bill 5086, concerning peer support programs for covered caregivers, was explained as creating training and testimonial privilege protections; the committee adopted an amendment clarifying that boards may still require participation in a board-designated professional health program, and then reported the bill to the full Senate with the recommendation that it do pass. House Bill 5004, an educational bill on PANS and PANDAS, was supported by the sponsor, who described his family’s experience and the importance of earlier diagnosis; it was reported to the Senate without amendment. House Bill 5327, which would require the Department of Human Services to create an ALS services program, also received supportive testimony from the sponsor and members, but the transcript reflects the bill being reported as House Bill 537; it was moved forward without amendment. The committee then considered House Bill 5096, which would remove personal care and intellectual/developmental disability waiver services from certificate-of-need review. The sponsor argued the change would reduce regulatory burden and expand access, while a county aging-program director testified that certificate-of-need revenues help fund senior meals and services and that eliminating the requirement would reduce important support for aging providers. After a division vote, the motion to report the bill failed 3-9. House Bill 4695, allowing PEIA patients to switch to an alternative medically appropriate covered treatment without new prior authorization if it costs no more than the original treatment, was explained as carrying an estimated $13 million annual cost to PEIA and was reported to the Senate. The committee also advanced House Bill 5582, enacting the Respiratory Care Interstate Compact, after discussion of a committee amendment removing a new-background-check-at-initial-licensure provision; the amendment was adopted and the bill was reported. Another House Bill 5582, concerning the TANF drug screening program, was described as removing the sunset date and allowing oral fluid testing in addition to urine samples; it too was reported. Finally, House Bill 5466 renamed the batterer intervention program as an abuse intervention program and allowed live synchronous virtual delivery with an in-person option; the sponsor said the change would expand access statewide, and the bill was reported to the Senate. The committee then adjourned.

Transcript Highlights:

• Those kinds of things—treatment of dementia.
• They've done a great job administering this grant program.
• Hallam just alluded to some other treatments.
• By that time, people become ineligible for treatment.
• Yeah, the window is really from diagnosis to getting on treatment.

Summary: The Arkansas Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia Advisory Council met with legislative members and agency, advocacy, and provider representatives present. The council adopted its rules and procedures, approved the prior meeting minutes, and authorized the co-chairs to approve special expenses. Members then heard an extensive update on the state Alzheimer’s plan and current developments in diagnosis, treatment, research, caregiving, and workforce issues. David Cook of the Alzheimer’s Association described major changes since the first state plan, including the growth of blood-based biomarkers, broader access to amyloid PET scans, and the availability of disease-slowing treatments such as Leqembi and Kisunla. He emphasized that Arkansas still faces major barriers in rural areas, including limited provider awareness, insurance coverage concerns, shortages of specialists, and long wait times for memory care and infusion services. He also highlighted caregiver burden, the need for better education and care navigation, and new efforts such as a dementia resource center pilot with UAMS, respite grants, and workforce training. Members discussed the importance of public education on brain health, diet, exercise, and risk reduction, as well as the need to collaborate with chronic disease partners and improve outreach to primary care providers. The council approved four proposed focus areas for the next state plan: advancing risk reduction, brain health, early detection and diagnosis; strengthening family caregiver support; improving access to diagnostics and treatment; and supporting access and quality of care, including workforce training and crisis response. Members also discussed possible legislative or statutory changes to keep the council active and engaged, and they agreed to pursue a future meeting in August, tentatively August 12 in Hot Springs, with additional meetings under consideration for later in the month. The meeting adjourned after no further business.

Transcript Highlights:

• We work very closely with the Health Care Authority with a number of programs, specifically treatment
• to death. ...that program to death.
• , lots of oversight programs.
• necessary to undergo treatment to fight blood. receive vital treatment necessary to undergo treatment
• It ensures that when a person is ready for treatment or already engaging successfully in treatment, a

Summary: The committee first took up House Bill 213, which would allow optometrists to perform three specific laser procedures. The sponsor presented a committee substitute adding 32 hours of approved advanced training, supervised live-patient practice, adverse-event reporting, and other accountability measures. Supporters argued the bill would improve access to care, while the New Mexico Medical Board opposed it, citing patient-safety concerns and the much greater training required of ophthalmologists. After debate, the committee adopted the substitute and passed the bill 6-3. The committee then considered House Bill 65, renamed the Foster Care Plus pilot program. The substitute changed the bill to require clinical assessment instead of CAN assessment, added reporting to the Legislature and LFC, and clarified contracting with clinical experts. CYFD officials said the $2.5 million request, combined with existing growth funding, would support more children, staff, foster-parent stipends, and related services, and that the program is already being implemented with help from Oklahoma-based experts. Some members remained concerned about cost, staffing, and whether the program could be sustained, but the committee adopted the substitute and passed the bill 8-1. House Bill 127, on expedited medical licensure, was amended to create a provisional pathway for internationally trained physicians, require a job offer and benchmarks before full licensure, and establish a telemedicine registry. The Medical Board supported the amended bill, while public commenters emphasized physician shortages and access to care. The committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill. House Bill 128, which updates firefighter occupational disease and disablement presumptions to add cancers and other changes, drew strong support from firefighters, labor, and workers’ compensation officials; the committee adopted the amendment and passed the bill. House Bill 156, which removes the sunset on the state’s authority to set vaccine guidelines and continue its vaccine program, also passed after supporters argued it preserves access and opponents raised broader vaccine-policy concerns. The committee then began hearing House Bill 137, a buprenorphine access bill, with the sponsor and advocates describing pharmacy supply barriers and a committee substitute aimed at setting minimum stock standards, requiring distributor reporting, and avoiding fines on pharmacies.

Transcript Highlights:

• We do have our Medicated Assistant Treatment (MAT) program.
• So that's part of the MAT program, the Medical Assisted Treatment, or the MOUD, the...
• Senator, for the addiction treatment program, that's actually authorized by the judges.
• Is there any kind of treatment program in the facility itself?
• Chair, there really is kind of no... counseling treatment program, I guess.

Transcript Highlights:

• There are kind of three main programs.
• Program. Oh, okay.
• You know, data-driven programs that you operationalize—I’d love to take the OB program where you've taken
• the ABC program.
• Do we have the nurse partnership program?

Keywords: 962, all

Summary: The MAPOC Women and Children’s Health Subcommittee heard a presentation from Kate Parker Riley, executive director of the Connecticut Dental Health Partnership, on the Husky Dental Program and efforts to improve oral health during pregnancy. She reviewed the structure of Connecticut’s Medicaid dental benefit, the ASO model, provider network, utilization trends, and member barriers to care. She noted that children’s dental measures remain above the national median, but adult utilization is lower and the dental provider network has been shrinking, with longer wait times in rural areas. A major focus was the state’s goal to raise the rate of oral evaluation during pregnancy from about 17.5% to 25% by 2030. Riley described planned outreach to OB/GYN practices using a draft “snapshot” report showing each practice’s pregnancy oral-health rate compared with the state average, along with education materials based on ACOG and AAP guidance. Committee members and guests discussed barriers such as lack of provider training, workflow burden, access to dentists who will see pregnant patients, and the need for stronger referral bridges. Suggestions included adding simple oral-health screening questions in OB settings, using human support to make appointments, and exploring co-located dental hygienists or other embedded models. Riley also highlighted partnerships with DSS, DCF, Head Start, WIC, Read to Grow, YMCA programs, refugee resettlement agencies, and school-based and hospital partners, as well as data-sharing and navigation efforts. She said pregnant members newly identified through HUSKY will now receive outreach and navigation support. DSS dental director Carolyn MacArthur introduced herself and said she supports the initiative, noting the literature linking untreated maternal dental disease to poor child oral-health outcomes. No votes were taken; the meeting ended with thanks and a preview of upcoming July presentations on integrated behavioral health and home visitation programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• to receive treatment.
• community-based treatment.
• treatment.
• programs.
• treatment in California.

Keywords: 987, senate, all

Transcript Highlights:

• When CDCR developed their medication-assisted treatment program for treatment of substance use disorder
• Punitive measures include evidence-based and publicly funded DUI treatment and diversion programs and
• And Linda, Richmond Smith, on behalf of the California Association of DUI Treatment Programs.
• Access to AA and NA programs and other programs like actual substance abuse treatment that help address
• Paul Gonzalez, on behalf of the California Association of DUI Treatment Programs, in strong support.

Summary: The Assembly Public Safety Committee heard a long agenda of bills, with several authors presenting measures focused on probation, prison conditions, public safety, diversion, and infrastructure theft. Early in the hearing, AB 1816 by Assembly Member Davies proposed allowing courts to extend probation for up to one additional year for people convicted of registrable sex offenses who have not completed required treatment. Supporters, including the Chief Probation Officers of California, argued the bill would improve rehabilitation and public safety by allowing treatment to be completed; opponents, including public defenders and civil liberties groups, said existing revocation tools already address noncompliance and warned the bill was vague and would prolong supervision. The bill was later moved on call with an aye recommendation. The committee also heard AB 2593, which would prohibit non-medical staff from interfering with prescribed care for incarcerated patients; it drew broad support from medical, disability, public defender, and justice reform groups and passed to Appropriations. The consent calendar, including AB 1927 and AB 2502, was adopted without controversy. The committee then considered AB 1538 by Assembly Member Krell, which would bar elected or appointed officials from using political power for retaliation. Support came from a student activist and the California News Publishers Association, with additional support from education, law enforcement, and civil liberties groups; no opposition testimony was offered, and the bill passed to Appropriations. AB 2584 by Assembly Member Flora, as amended, would narrow civil liability for lawful defensive force; supporters framed it as protecting self-defense, while one opposition witness objected on behalf of labor and justice groups. The chair noted concerns about eliminating civil liability but still recommended aye, and the bill passed to Judiciary. AB 2217 by Assembly Member Zbur would rename and expand the LEAD diversion program as “Alternatives to Arrest,” broaden eligible offenses, and continue grant funding for local diversion efforts. Supporters emphasized reduced recidivism and service connections, and the bill was moved on call to Appropriations. Later, the committee took up AB 1941 by Assembly Member Mark Gonzalez, which would create an organized metal theft offense and a statewide data-sharing system to address copper theft and damage to public infrastructure. Supporters from utilities, cities, transit, telecom, and law enforcement described widespread outages, costly repairs, and public safety risks; opponents argued the bill would deepen criminalization and racial disparities and that non-carceral solutions were preferable. The author and supporters responded that the bill was needed to address repeated thefts that leave communities without lights, power, or 911 service, and the measure passed to Appropriations. Finally, AB 2499 by Assembly Member Gibson sought stronger protections for incarcerated people and workers from extreme heat and inadequate ventilation in state prisons. The bill was backed by incarcerated workers, family members of a woman who died from heat-related causes, and a wide coalition of public defender, civil rights, and prisoner advocacy groups. Members spoke emotionally about prison conditions and the need for humane treatment, and the bill passed to Labor and Employment with strong support.

Transcript Highlights:

• The treatment worked. And it provided lifesaving treatment.
• The treatment worked. And it provided lifesaving treatment.
• The treatment worked. And it provided lifesaving treatment.
• The treatment worked. And it provided lifesaving treatment.
• </c> just to get their prescribed treatment. just to get their prescribed treatment.

Keywords: 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• I started a program in 2010 called SOAR, School of Addiction Recovery.
• However, only 5% of the cases reviewed had a treatment plan.
• This suggests the need for long-term treatment.
• Assisted outpatient treatment is a fabulous program that can help people stay in adherence with their
• Who is leading our Rural Health Transformation Program efforts.

Keywords: 985, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Contract 111 is with Consolidated Youth Services for qualified residential treatment programs.
• This is for qualified residential treatment programs.
• This is for qualified residential treatment programs.
• Contract 131 is with United Methodist Children's Home for a qualified residential treatment program.
• Contract 134 is also with Youth Home, a qualified residential treatment program.

Keywords: 1204, all

Transcript Highlights:

• versus in-person or one-on-one treatment provider treatment.
• And again, upon leaving an intensive program, the risk for suicide is highest upon exiting a program.
• I work in Kaiser's ADAPT program in Southern California, and we provide short-term treatment for patients
• medicine programs.
• Our members report that this system has led to patients being booked into inappropriate treatment programs

Summary: The Assembly Health Committee held an informational hearing on Kaiser Permanente’s behavioral health care system, focusing on Department of Managed Health Care enforcement actions, Kaiser’s corrective action work plan, and testimony from patients, advocates, and union representatives. DMHC officials reviewed a long history of complaints, surveys, fines, and settlements involving Kaiser’s access to behavioral health services, including deficiencies found in 2012 and 2016, a 2022 non-routine survey, and a 2023 settlement that imposed a $50 million penalty and required $150 million in community investments over five years. DMHC said it continues to monitor Kaiser through quarterly meetings, complaint review, follow-up surveys, and a reimbursement process for members who could not obtain timely in-network care. Committee members pressed DMHC on what “timely access” and continuity of care mean in practice, how virtual care and group therapy fit into the standards, and what triggers a non-routine survey. DMHC said initial behavioral health appointments generally should not take more than two weeks, urgent care should be within days, and follow-up care within 10 days, with out-of-network care required when plans cannot meet standards. Officials also said Kaiser’s initial corrective action work plan lacked detail, but the revised plan was accepted and will be tracked through quarterly reporting and possible additional enforcement if Kaiser fails to comply. The second panel featured testimony from a Kaiser enrollee, a behavioral health policy expert, a Kaiser therapist, and the NUHW president. The enrollee described serious delays and inadequate treatment for his daughter after a suicide attempt, while the therapist and union leader said Kaiser’s behavioral health system is understaffed, relies too heavily on short appointments, group therapy, and webinars, and treats behavioral health as less important than medical-surgical care. They argued Kaiser’s one-appointment-at-a-time scheduling rule and limited treatment time violate parity requirements and harm continuity of care. Several members criticized Kaiser for not appearing at the hearing and said the testimony underscored the need for stronger oversight, clearer metrics, and faster remedies for patients.

Transcript Highlights:

• And because the treatments were only, you know, treating the amyloid build up, And because the treatments
• Those kinds of things, treatment of dementia.
• They've done a great job administering this grant program.
• By that time, people become ineligible for treatment.
• But by that time, people become ineligible for treatment. Yeah.

Summary: The Arkansas Alzheimer’s Disease and Dementia Advisory Council met to introduce members, adopt its rules and procedures, approve prior minutes, and authorize the co-chairs to approve special expenses. The main discussion focused on updating the Arkansas State Plan for Alzheimer’s disease and dementia, with David Cook of the Alzheimer’s Association outlining major changes in prevalence, caregiving burden, diagnostics, and treatment since the prior plan. He noted rising disease and caregiver numbers in Arkansas, the expansion of amyloid PET access, the growing use of blood-based biomarkers, and the availability of FDA-approved treatments such as Leqembi and Kisunla, while emphasizing that access, insurance coverage, and provider education remain major barriers. Members and presenters also discussed the need to better reach rural primary care providers, who may not be aware of new diagnostics and therapies, and the bottlenecks caused by limited specialists and infusion capacity. There was concern about overreliance on blood tests without confirmatory evaluation, and several members stressed the importance of collaboration, public education, and promoting brain health through exercise and diet. The council also heard about existing programs such as the dementia services coordinator, the BOLD grant, caregiver respite grants, workforce training, and a pilot dementia resource center with UAMS Centers on Aging. The council approved a new four-part outline for the next state plan: advancing risk reduction and brain health/early detection, strengthening family caregiver support, improving access to diagnostics and treatment, and supporting access and quality of care, including workforce and crisis response. Members also agreed to consider future agenda items on new treatments, brain health and lifestyle prevention, workforce training, and possible legislative changes to the enabling statute. The meeting ended with discussion of scheduling the next meeting, tentatively set for August 12 in Hot Springs, and adjournment.

Transcript Highlights:

• programs.
• > that</c> Treatment programs that's money that Treatment programs that's money that would<01:38:19.040
• volunteer programs.
• </c><02:14:19.880><c> in</c> programs at the friends program in programs at the friends program in conquered
• </c><02:15:32.520><c> some</c> different for every program some different for every program some programs

Keywords: 928, house, all

Summary: Division 3 Finance held a work session to move through five bills before noon, noting one member’s early departure and adjusting the order of bills accordingly. The first item, HB 54, would allow some alternative treatment centers in the medical cannabis system to operate for profit. Members discussed a fiscal note showing a one-time $133,000 cost, which was described as a Division 1 budget item to be handled through HB 2 rather than directly in Division 3. After discussion about keeping Division 1 informed and the distinction between retaining a bill versus funding it, the committee voted unanimously to retain HB 54 for further finance work and conversion into HB 2. The committee then took up HB 547, concerning reimbursement to counties for enhanced FMAP funds during the COVID period. The chair summarized the issue as federal enhanced Medicaid matching funds that were received by the state before authority existed to pass them through to counties, creating a disputed amount owed to counties. County representatives said the money should have gone to counties and clarified the relevant time period, while the department did not take a position. The chair proposed retaining the bill and moving it into HB 2, with discussion of a possible four-year repayment structure in equal annual installments. The committee agreed to retain the bill for continued work in the budget process. During the HB 547 discussion, members also clarified the fiscal and accounting details, including that the fiscal note had not been widely available and that some figures in the note should be treated as county revenue rather than county expenditure. Testimony explained that the enhanced FMAP increased from 50 percent to 56.2 percent, and that the state’s and counties’ shares of claims were affected by the timing of the federal change and the later state authorization. The committee emphasized that the issue was complex and budget-dependent, and that retaining the bill would allow further negotiation and incorporation into HB 2 rather than immediate final action.

Transcript Highlights:

• And I'm a big fan of the ICAN program and the SNAP program. I've run early intervention programs.
• One of the programs with our affiliation with NMSU is that pathway program, a seven-year program.
• Primary care clinics and other types of outpatient programs where we may have treatment for a substance
• Someone decides that they want to get treatment, they start treatment.
• But we can only accept a limited number because they need to move into treatment programs.

Transcript Highlights:

• One is the BA to MD program, the other is the injectable opioid treatment program, and lastly, the nomination
• Madam Chair, regarding the Injectable Opioid Treatment Program, Dr.
• We were working on the creation and establishment of an Injectable Opioid Treatment Program.
• I appreciate the Substance Use Disorder Treatment and Prevention Program.
• We don't have day treatment programs anymore, for the most part. hospitalization programs.