Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Senate committee reviews bill to expand peer-to-peer youth mental-health supports in schools
Loading...
Summary
Senators heard that H817 would fund mental-health literacy training for school staff and establish supervised peer-to-peer programs; members pressed for data on earlier grants, funding levels, and reporting to measure effectiveness before wider rollout.
Senate Health & Welfare spent substantial time on H817, legislation to expand mental-health literacy and peer-to-peer supports for youth in schools and after-school programs. Committee members praised the goal but stressed the need for data and funding clarity before adopting broad programmatic language.
Why it matters: Sponsors and witnesses framed H817 as a preventive, school-centered approach intended to connect students to supports earlier, reduce stigma and build protective factors. Supporters cited alarming mental-health indicators among Vermont youth to argue for action now.
Representative Daisy Rebecca (vice chair in the House Healthcare committee and the bill’s author in that chamber) told senators the bill would "improve how adults who work in schools recognize and understand youth mental health issues," and cited state survey figures — including that roughly one in four high school students reported self-harm behaviors in the past year — to justify a policy response. She and others asked the committee to coordinate with existing programs such as Mentor Vermont, Vermont After School and NAMI to avoid duplication.
Staff and agency presenters walked the committee through the bill's components: a mental-health-literacy training track for educators (subsection b), a supervised peer-to-peer support program for students (subsection c) that is explicitly nonclinical, and a requirement that the Department of Mental Health (DMH) provide written, age-appropriate guidance and submit an annual January 15 report to the policy committees on program uptake and recommendations.
Members pressed for outcomes and fiscal detail: staff pointed to a prior package that totaled $3,000,000 (noted in committee discussion as $500,000 for one section and $2,500,000 for another) used for school-based mental-health supports and suggested the committee review the January report required under Act 112 of 2022 to inform possible guardrails and grant criteria. Staff said grants would be discretionary "to the extent funds are available," and DMH/AOE would be expected to collect data on participating schools, program reach and recommendations.
What happens next: Committee members asked staff to pull prior reports and clarify how past grant funds were spent and what outcomes were reported. No vote was taken; the committee will consider revisions and funding options in follow-up meetings.
