Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Opioid Treatment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Fiscal court agrees to free $50,000 for Net Recovery treatments if provider signs MOU and provides reporting
Summary
After a lengthy presentation on an opioid-treatment device and local outcomes, the Letcher County Fiscal Court moved to honor a prior $50,000 commitment for the Net Recovery program but tethered the release to a signed memorandum of understanding and reporting on participant outcomes.
The Letcher County Fiscal Court voted April 20 to honor a prior $50,000 opioid-abatement commitment for the Net Recovery treatment program, but conditioned release of the funds on a signed memorandum of understanding (MOU) and a reporting requirement describing outcomes for the past cohort and the next patients.
Presenters associated with Net Recovery described a small local sample of 10 people treated under an earlier agreement and cited an aggregate claim that roughly 86% of participants who completed the provider’s protocol remained non-using during a three-year window in their internal follow-up. The provider also said that, nationwide, their program has treated an estimated 1,000 people (an estimate provided in the meeting).
Several magistrates pressed the provider for follow-up and tracking details. The court’s motion (made by S11 and seconded by S12 at the meeting) asks staff to require a signed MOU that establishes reporting expectations — including an “average outcome” summary for the prior treated cohort and for subsequent patients — before the remaining $50,000 of county-committed funds will be disbursed. The court recorded a roll-call vote approving the motion.
The provider and several local presenters described the program as an additional tool in treatment options and emphasized it was not a universal cure. Court members also requested written clarifications from the Opioid Abatement Commission and indicated they expect more detailed follow-up data before future disbursements.
Next procedural step: county staff will circulate an MOU template and request provider reporting as described; the court did not ask for further immediate funding beyond the previously committed amount without the required MOU and reporting.
Note: the court’s decision reflects the transcript record and does not evaluate the clinical efficacy of the treatment; provider outcome claims were presented by the vendor (S11/S15) during questioning and were not independently verified at the meeting.
