Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Behavioral Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Ohio witnesses urge updates to behavioral-health contracting, support penalties for unaccredited recovery housing in SB 138
Summary
Proponents told the House Children and Human Services Committee that Senate Bill 138 would modernize contracting and data practices for local ADAM boards, require transition-of-care protections, and restore criminal penalties for operators running recovery housing without required certification.
Chair White convened the House Children and Human Services Subcommittee for proponent testimony on Senate Bill 138, a package of changes supporters said would update Ohio Revised Code Chapter 340, clarify board-provider contracting, expand data sharing and oversight, and impose penalties for uncertified recovery housing.
Supporters told the committee the measure aims to reduce contractual disputes, create a statewide framework for behavioral-health data, and protect patients during provider transitions. Teresa Lampel, chief executive officer of the Ohio Council of Behavioral Health and Family Services Providers, said the bill was negotiated over many years and "addresses the board provider contracting process, audit and investigation guidance, and a transition of care protection for patients that are in need of behavioral health services." Lampel added that the bill also restores criminal sanctions for entities operating recovery residences without required accreditation.
The bill would align ADAM (alcohol, drug addiction and mental health) board contracting with common managed-care practices, supporters said, and require clearer notice timelines and guardrails for competitive procurement. Several witnesses described the proposal as a way to reduce lawsuits and local disputes that have arisen under the current statutory language. Scott Silak, executive director of the Mental Health and Recovery Services Board of Lucas County and president of Ohio's county behavioral-health association, said the contracting and data provisions are "mutually agreed upon and are likely to eliminate those sources of conflict." He told the committee the changes would help boards construct a system of care "that's responsive to the needs of our entire community."
Supporters emphasized two protections for people receiving services. First, SB 138 would guarantee a transition-of-care period, which witnesses described as up to 60 days, when a contract is not renewed so patients can be transferred without interruption. Don (Don) Schiffbauer, chief executive officer of Rivian Mental Health and Recovery and a board member of the Ohio Alliance of Recovery Providers, said the 60-day timeline is critical because behavioral-health relationships are not "as simple as just switching a provider." Schiffbauer said the period allows new providers to establish a therapeutic relationship and preserve recovery gains.
Second, the bill would reinstate criminal penalties for operating recovery housing without certification by the Department of Mental Health and Addiction Services (OhioMHAS) or an authorized credentialing agency. Witnesses said House Bill 33—the recently enacted state budget—created accreditation requirements and a recovery-housing registry but omitted criminal penalties; SB 138 would add enforcement mechanisms. Lampel and Schiffbauer said operators were given a compliance window under HB 33—about 18 months—to obtain national accreditation and that the registry "went live" in July of last year. Lampel said there is still a shortage of recovery housing in many areas and estimated that the state has
