House education committee adopts substitute for SB 1303 on school diabetes care, then passes the bill "by for the day"

The House Committee on Education on Monday adopted a substitute to Senate Bill 13‑03, a measure to consolidate and update Virginia law on diabetes management in K‑12 schools, and then voted to pass the bill "by for the day" so members could review the substitute language before the committee’s next meeting.

The substitute, introduced on the floor by Senator McPike, revises existing code to combine diabetes-management provisions into a single section, clarifies the role of diabetes management medical plans (DMMPs), makes certain training levels permissive rather than mandatory, and limits required stock glucagon to schools that have a student with a diagnosed diabetes and a DMMP in place.

Why it matters: supporters told the committee the substitute aims to create consistent statewide expectations so parents, school staff and health providers share a uniform approach to diabetes care. Backers said the measure clarifies liability protections for staff who assist students, and provides guidance where school nurses are not available.

Senator McPike, the bill patron, told the committee the substitute "combines and amends outdated and insufficient Virginia codes pertaining to diabetes management care" and said he worked with school nurses, school boards and advocates to address concerns raised in earlier drafts. McPike said training levels described in existing Virginia Department of Education guidance are now permissive in the substitute, and that language referencing bus drivers was removed and referred to a DOE study instead.

Parents and advocates gave extensive in-person and online testimony. Carrie Murphy, founder of Follow‑2NDs, said the substitute "incorporates all requested amendments from the Virginia Association of School Nurses, resolves concerns given to the senator from the Virginia School Boards Association, and includes recommendations from the American Diabetes Association." Chad Stewart of the Virginia Education Association said teachers and staff who "want to do the best by students" appreciated the bill's immunity provisions. Several parents described local difficulties getting school systems to accept doctors' orders and DMMPs, and said the bill would create consistent statewide procedures.

Representatives of school systems and related organizations urged caution and asked for more time to review the substitute. Stacy Haney of the Virginia School Boards Association said she did not believe "all of our concerns have been addressed" and asked that the School Health Services Commission give the measure further review. Patrick Finneran, representing Falls Church and Newport News public schools, said his districts had not yet seen the substitute and wanted time to examine any changes affecting staff training and plan development.

Andrew Lamar of the Virginia Association of School Nurses said many of his group's concerns were incorporated in the new language but requested additional review of recently added text. The American Diabetes Association representative recommended supervision requirements for level‑3 trainees and suggested referencing ADA standards of care in addition to the VDOE manual.

Committee action and next steps: the committee first adopted the senator's substitute (voice vote) and then, after public testimony and questions from members, a motion was made and seconded to "pass SB 13‑03 by for the day". The motion carried by voice vote; the chair asked the senator to provide any additional substitute language to the commission counsel by the end of the week so members could review changes before the committee reconvenes for final action.

The bill as presented would (among other changes) do the following: consolidate diabetes provisions into one code section; clarify DMMP and modification forms (noted in the substitute as lines 4‑27 to 4‑35); change certain training requirements to permissive language (lines 4‑82 to 4‑97 in the posted substitute); limit required stock glucagon to schools with diagnosed students and a DMMP; and provide immunity for staff who administer care consistent with training and the DMMP.

The committee noted the substitute's aim to balance student safety, parent and provider authority, and practical limits where school nurses are not available. Members and witnesses asked the School Health Services Commission and relevant stakeholders to continue technical review so the final form of the bill can be considered at the committee’s next meeting.