AN ACT Relating to enhancing crisis response services through co-response integration and support;
HB 1811 is a Washington bill aimed at strengthening crisis response services by integrating co-response models into the state’s behavioral health and emergency response systems. The bill defines and organizes a wide range of crisis-related terms and service models, including mobile rapid response crisis teams, community-based crisis teams, designated crisis responders, regional crisis lines, contact hubs, crisis stabilization services, and peer support services. It also directs the University of Washington, in consultation with the behavioral health administrative services organizations and other stakeholders, to support training, convening, and assessment activities related to co-response.
The bill’s core policy goal is to improve how people experiencing behavioral health crises are served by first responders and human services professionals. It emphasizes de-escalation, diversion from criminal justice and emergency medical systems when appropriate, and bringing behavioral health care into the field for vulnerable populations. It also creates a new framework for crisis responder training, including an academy and optional certification in best practices, and requires development of model curricula, statewide conferences, and periodic assessments of workforce capacity, funding, data systems, and alignment with broader crisis system reforms.
HB 1811 amends multiple sections of Washington law governing behavioral health crisis services, crisis response coordination, and related definitions, while also reenacting and amending existing statutes to align them with the new co-response framework. It establishes new statutory definitions and policy direction for crisis response integration, expands the role of peer support and multidisciplinary response teams, and sets expectations for regional crisis systems and training infrastructure. The bill affects the Department of Health, the Health Care Authority, behavioral health administrative services organizations, local crisis systems, first responders, and the University of Washington, and it may influence how crisis calls are routed, how services are dispatched, and how behavioral health crises are handled across the state.
The overall sentiment around the bill appears strongly favorable. It passed the House committee unanimously, cleared House final passage by a wide margin, and later passed the Senate with strong support in committee and on third reading. The final House vote after Senate amendments was still positive, though narrower than earlier votes, suggesting broad agreement with the bill’s goals even if some members had reservations about the amended version. The voting pattern indicates bipartisan support for improving crisis response and behavioral health integration.
The main points of contention appear to center on implementation details rather than the bill’s overall purpose. The final House vote after Senate amendments was 59-38, indicating that the amended version drew more opposition than the original House-passed bill. Likely areas of concern include the cost and administrative burden of creating training academies, statewide coordination structures, and new reporting or assessment requirements, as well as how the new co-response model will interact with existing first responder, behavioral health, and criminal justice systems. The bill’s extensive definitional and programmatic changes also suggest possible debate over scope, funding, and whether the new framework is sufficiently flexible for local jurisdictions.