House Human Services hears bill to certify family peer support specialists

Representative S. J. Howell, sponsor of House Bill 76, told the House Human Services Committee that the bill would establish a certified family peer support system to help families of children and youth with special health-care needs navigate hospitals, schools, juvenile justice, and other child-serving systems. "House Bill 76 is a bill to create a certified family peer support system," Howell said as she opened the hearing.

Proponents described family peer supporters as trained parents or caregivers with lived experience who work directly with caregivers (not the child) to provide empathetic listening, connections to resources, and guidance through complex systems. Beth Ayers of Montana's Peer Network said the group's DPHHS-funded pilot produced strong self-reported results: "92% of families surveyed felt the quality of their family's life had improved," and "86% felt that the quality of their child's care had improved." Ayers also presented program-level cost estimates from the pilot — she said every peer-support contact saved $132.60 for families and that one full-time family peer supporter translated to $92,902.12 in annual Medicaid savings in their calculations.

Witnesses and sponsor emphasized that certification is intended as a workforce and quality measure rather than an immediate payment change. Representative Howell and DPHHS staff told the committee the bill itself does not create a Medicaid reimbursement mechanism but "paves the way" for reimbursement later; DPHHS staff said prior peer-support certifications were later added to Medicaid in subsequent sessions. Representative Howell also said the Behavioral Health Commission recommended $500,000 toward family peer support as a continuation of grant funding.

Several witnesses, including Mary Windecker of the Behavioral Health Alliance of Montana, urged clearer statutory language: the bill alternates between the terms "certification" and "licensure," which risks confusion about the intended scope. Windecker said peer supporters are paraprofessionals who are typically "certified" (like a CNA), not licensed professionals who provide clinical treatment. Quinlan O'Connor, chief legal counsel to the Department of Labor and Industry, told the committee that Montana code's definition of "license" can include a certificate, calling it "a distinction without a difference," but also acknowledged sponsor concerns that the bill language may need cleanup.

Witnesses described recommended training and safeguards proposed alongside certification: a 40-hour recommended curriculum covering HIPAA/confidentiality, mandatory reporting, suicide prevention, a code of ethics, scope-of-practice boundaries, and supervision. Clinicians and hospitals said certification and HIPAA training would increase providers' confidence in integrating peers into care teams.

Committee members asked about fiscal implications, asking whether certification would automatically lead to Medicaid billing and whether a fiscal note is needed. DPHHS said certification is a necessary precursor to Medicaid reimbursement but that the bill as written contains no payment or insurance mandate; Howell said funding and reimbursement could be addressed in a later session or the budget process. Questions also explored how peers would work alongside social workers and school counselors; proponents said peers bring lived experience and a distinct support lane focused on caregivers.

The hearing closed without committee action; Howell asked committee members to support the bill when it returns for executive consideration. No formal vote or amendment was taken during the hearing.

Ending: The committee closed the HB 76 hearing and recessed briefly; executive action on the bill was scheduled for a later meeting.