<p class=ldtitle>A BILL to amend and reenact §§ 2.2-3802, 51.5-148, 63.2-1605, and 63.2-1606 of the Code of Virginia and to amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Article 5 of Chapter 14 of Title 51.5 sections numbered 51.5-148.1 and 51.5-148.2 and by adding sections numbered 63.2-1605.1, 63.2-1605.2, and 63.2-1605.3, relating to adult protective services; adult abuse, neglect and exploitation central registry.</p>
SB243 revises Virginia’s adult protective services framework and creates a public-facing Adult Protective Services central registry. The bill directs the Department for Aging and Rehabilitative Services to maintain an adult abuse, neglect, and exploitation information system and a central registry, sets rules for what information may be entered, and excludes self-neglect determinations and adults neglected without intent from registry entry. It also requires the Department to post the registry on its website and make it searchable by name, last four digits of the Social Security number, and date of birth.
The bill expands and clarifies the responsibilities of local departments of social services in adult protective services investigations. It requires an investigation to begin within 24 hours after a valid report is received, sets timelines for completing investigations and entering dispositions, requires coordination with law enforcement in cases involving sexual abuse, death, serious bodily injury, financial exploitation, or other imminent danger, and creates a formal appeal process for persons identified as perpetrators in substantiated cases. It also adds provisions for confidentiality, cooperation among agencies, and a process for petitioning circuit court when a person believes an unfounded report was made in bad faith or with malicious intent.
SB243 also updates reporting and enforcement rules for mandated reporters and financial institutions. It broadens the list of mandated reporters, preserves immunity for good-faith reporting, imposes civil penalties for failure to report, and authorizes financial institution staff to delay or refuse transactions when they reasonably believe an adult is being financially exploited. The bill further requires the Commissioner to adopt implementing regulations, with the initial regulations exempt from the Administrative Process Act, and delays the effective date until July 1, 2028.
In terms of state law impact, the bill amends multiple sections of Titles 2.2, 51.5, and 63.2 and adds several new sections governing adult protective services administration, registry disclosure, investigations, appeals, and reporting. It would materially change how adult abuse, neglect, and exploitation cases are tracked, investigated, and disclosed, while also creating new public access to registry information that is currently not available in this form.
The bill appears to have broad support in committee and no recorded opposition in the available votes, passing the Rehabilitation and Social Services committee 14-0 and being continued in Finance and Appropriations 15-0. The main point of likely contention is the public searchable registry, which raises privacy, due process, and reputational concerns for accused individuals, especially because the registry would be accessible online and tied to personal identifiers. Supporters appear to favor stronger adult protection, better coordination, and more accountability for substantiated abuse, neglect, and exploitation.
SB243 would significantly expand Virginia’s adult protective services statutes by creating a centralized adult abuse, neglect, and exploitation registry, requiring public online access to that registry, and establishing new procedures for investigations, appeals, confidentiality, and interagency cooperation. It amends existing social services and privacy provisions to carve out access to APS registry information and to direct DARS and local departments to maintain and use a new information system. The bill also broadens mandated reporting and authorizes financial institutions to intervene in suspected financial exploitation cases, affecting local departments of social services, DARS, law enforcement, mandated reporters, financial institutions, and adults subject to APS investigations.
The available voting history shows strong support and no recorded dissent: the bill was reported from committee 14-0 and later continued to the next session in Finance and Appropriations by a 15-0 vote. That suggests general agreement with the bill’s protective goals and administrative reforms. No committee transcript excerpts were provided, so the broader discussion sentiment can only be inferred from the unanimous votes and the bill’s focus on adult safety and exploitation prevention.
The most notable point of contention is the creation of a public, searchable Adult Protective Services central registry. While the bill limits entry for self-neglect and non-intentional neglect and provides an appeal process for substantiated findings, the public disclosure of registry information may raise concerns about privacy, accuracy, due process, and the consequences of being listed. Another possible area of concern is the expanded authority for financial institutions to delay or refuse transactions, which could be viewed as a necessary anti-exploitation safeguard by supporters but as an intrusion on personal financial autonomy by critics. The bill’s appeal and bad-faith-report provisions appear designed to address some of those concerns.