Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves $600,000 grant bill to train clinicians in RTM protocol amid questions about procurement and evidence
Summary
Lawmakers voted to advance HB 832, a $600,000 appropriation to train 100 clinicians in the Reconsolidation of Traumatic Memories (RTM) protocol. Proponents touted rapid outcomes and international use; the department said the award would be made by competitive RFP and the bill does not mandate a single named therapy.
Representative Jerry Schillinger opened HB 832 describing RTM (Reconsolidation of Traumatic Memories) as a brief, non‑medication intervention for PTSD. Proponents, including veterans and representatives from the Post Traumatic Training Institute, asked the committee to fund training of 100 clinicians statewide and ongoing weekly supervision for two years.
Proponents described the intervention and training model: Robin Hampton (Post Traumatic Training Institute) said clinicians receive a 3‑day training, fidelity assessment and ongoing supervision; she and other witnesses said most clinical clients respond in three sessions and cited high success rates in trials and program reports. Jonathan Hamblin and others described studies including trials at Walter Reed and international use; proponents characterized RTM as effective for military and civilian trauma and said costs per patient are reported in the testimony at roughly $500–$1,000 per case.
Committee members raised procurement and specificity questions. Quinlan O’Connor (Department of Labor and Industry) said the bill appropriates the funds to a single awardee through a competitive procurement (RFP) requiring the grantee to run a two‑year project focused on non‑medication PTSD treatments; the bill as written does not require the department to select any particular named protocol. Senator Morgeau and others noted the hearing included heavy advocacy for RTM and asked whether the legislation in effect favored a single vendor; O’Connor said the RFP would set parameters and other evidence‑based approaches could compete.
Outcome: The committee voted to advance HB 832 to the floor. Lawmakers and proponents signaled plans to monitor procurement language and clinical reporting requirements in follow-up implementation work.
