DOC and DHHS outline medication‑assisted treatment in prisons, cite diversion and capacity limits

Department of Health and Human Services officials told the Health and Human Services Interim Committee they are continuing medication‑assisted treatment (MAT) for people with opioid use disorder in state correctional settings while piloting delivery models to reduce diversion and preserve institutional safety. "MAT, MOUD, is a critical, evidence based component of care for individuals with opioid use disorder," said Dr. Stacy Bank, executive medical director for the department. Department clinical staff and Department of Corrections leaders described program details, funding sources and operational challenges. The department said prison health services screens every person at intake for substance use disorder and that approximately 29 percent of people entering custody meet criteria for opioid use disorder—about 1,827 of an estimated 6,300 incarcerated individuals. At the time of the presentation, CHS said it was treating about 370 people (roughly 20 percent of the estimated OUD population) and that capacity limits and funding required prioritization. The department listed its prioritization order: continuing treatment for pregnant people; continuing treatment for parole violators who had an active prescription within 30 days before incarceration (staff added a local practice of requiring a prescription within 30 days rather than the statutory six months); and continuing care for people already on MAT. Presenters said the program was not broadly initiating MAT for all eligible people at that time. Funding sources cited were $1.2 million in opioid‑litigation appropriations (about 59 percent of the program budget for the year), a federal State Opioid Response grant (about 29 percent) and a 12 percent share from other ongoing sources authorized by 2024 legislation; federal grant funding is time‑limited. Officials emphasized logistics as a major constraint: intake screening for about 50 people per week, time‑intensive direct‑observation medication lines, cell‑to‑cell medication delivery in some housing, and the added custody time needed for observation. Custody and medical staff said they are piloting injectable formulations in restricted housing to limit pill‑line diversion and reduce nursing and custody burdens. Deputy director Mike Schoenfeld told the committee investigators had not found an organized, gang‑level diversion scheme; rather, individuals were often cheeking or diverting small quantities to sell for personal benefit. Committee members asked about post‑release continuity and metrics; clinicians said data on how many people ultimately taper off medication after incarceration are not yet available because the prison program is still early and continuation/taper decisions are individualized. The corrections deputy said reported in‑custody overdoses had not been observed and staff pointed to Suboxone's ceiling effect as one reason. Presenters also discussed drug‑testing practices: CHS performs urinalysis on medication renewals and the Department of Corrections conducts random housing‑unit screening for illicit substances; both agencies said additional testing capacity and coordinated data sharing are needed to support program compliance and diversion monitoring. No committee motion to change policy was taken; the presentation was informational.