Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Health Telehealth topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hazel Health pitches school-centered telehealth to expand student mental health access in Vermont
Summary
Hazel Health representatives told the Senate Health & Welfare Committee that their telehealth model delivers virtual primary and mental health services in schools and at home, serving 5 million students nationally. They proposed partnering with state agencies and districts to expand access and supplied outcome metrics they say support the model.
Representatives from Hazel Health presented the company’s school-centered telehealth model to the Senate Committee on Health & Welfare and described operations, clinical outcomes and contracting options for K–12 mental-health care.
Sean Bradley, Hazel’s strategic lead, described Hazel Health as a national provider of school-centered telehealth operating in 20 states and said the company provides services at no out-of-pocket cost to families in partnered districts. Bradley told the committee Hazel has served five million students nationally and that the company’s data show reductions in absenteeism and disciplinary actions.
Bob McCullough, a licensed clinician on Hazel’s growth team, described the operational model: Hazel contracts with school districts and with state education or health agencies, hires clinician employees (W-2), provides virtual visits (HIPAA-compliant) and requires parental or guardian consent before delivering care. He said Hazel’s telehealth services are intended to supplement, not replace, in-school or community mental-health services and that Hazel provides care coordination and referrals to higher levels of care when clinically indicated.
Contracting, reimbursement and outcomes
McCullough said Hazel establishes relationships with state and commercial payers (including Medicaid) and noted that not all services Hazel provides are billable to insurers (care coordination and account management are often not reimbursed). He described contracting as a per-student fee arrangement that can range from roughly $10 to $15 per student depending on scope and utilization. Hazel representatives said clinicians who provide services in a state hold that state’s clinical license.
On outcomes, Hazel reported aggregated program figures to the committee: more than 410,000 learning days recovered, 92 percent of students reporting positive outcomes after using Hazel services, a 60 percent reduction in absenteeism and a 50 percent decrease in disciplinary actions; the company cited third-party studies (Clemson University was referenced) indicating clinically significant improvements in depression and anxiety symptoms after a short course of visits. The presenters offered to provide the committee with written materials and study references.
Data protection and consent
Hazel representatives said all services comply with HIPAA and FERPA standards and that the company does not sell student data to third parties. They said parent or guardian consent is required for services and that care coordination is used to link students with local providers when more intensive or in-person care is needed.
Next steps offered to committee
Hazel asked the committee to consider partnering on a statewide K–12 telehealth program to expand mental-health access and offered to provide follow-up documentation, contracting templates and outcome studies for the committee’s review.
