WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

SB 592

An Act relating to the delivery of services and programs to individuals with disabilities; conferring powers and duties on the Office of the Governor; establishing the Office for Individuals with Disabilities and the Advisory Committee for Individuals with Disabilities; and providing for the powers and duties of the office and the committee and for funding of the office and the committee.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Maria Collett and 11 co-sponsors

Creates a special Health Care Quality Fund to finance training, grants, and demonstrations to improve statewide community-based behavioral health care.

Referred to State Government
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · SB 592

SB 592 — Public Health: Health Care Quality Fund for Community‑Based Behavioral Health Programs (Maryland)

Status: Hearing scheduled Feb 18, 2025 (Finance)
Introduced: Feb 20, 2025 (Sen. Augustine)
Subject: Establishes a special fund to support quality improvement for community‑based behavioral health programs

Main purpose

Create a dedicated, nonlapsing special fund—the Health Care Quality Fund for Community‑Based Behavioral Health Programs—managed by the Maryland Department of Health (MDH) to finance activities that improve the quality of behavioral health care statewide (training, grants, demonstration projects, and similar uses).

Key provisions

  • Establishes the Health Care Quality Fund (the Fund) as a special, nonlapsing fund in MDH. The Fund is to be held by the State Treasurer and administered by MDH.
  • Fund uses: training, grant awards, demonstration projects, or other purposes designed to improve the quality of behavioral health care.
  • Revenue sources for the Fund:
    • Civil money penalties collected from behavioral health programs by the Behavioral Health Administration (BHA) or the Office of Health Care Quality (OHCQ) (MDH pays penalties to the Comptroller; Comptroller distributes into the Fund).
    • State budget appropriations, interest earnings, and any other money accepted for the Fund’s benefit.
  • Interest earned on the Fund is credited to the Fund.
  • Expenditures from the Fund must be made in accordance with the annual State budget and are explicitly supplemental to funds that otherwise would be appropriated to BHA or OHCQ.
  • MDH must adopt regulations governing distribution of Fund money.
  • The bill includes statutory amendments to ensure the Fund is listed among special funds exempted from certain general‑fund interest‑accrual provisions.
  • Effective date: October 1, 2025.

Fiscal impact (summary of fiscal note)

  • Special fund revenues and expenditures: indeterminate increase beginning FY 2026, dependent on amounts of civil penalties assessed and any appropriations.
  • General fund revenues: decrease (penalty dollars previously credited to the general fund would instead flow into the new special fund); amount indeterminate.
  • Administrative costs: MDH staffing/administrative costs to manage the Fund. MDH estimated three positions (costing ~$238,874 in FY 2026). The Department of Legislative Services (DLS) estimates one program manager would be sufficient, with general fund administrative costs of about $90,800 in FY 2026 (annualizing to higher amounts in later years). If the Fund grows substantially, additional administrative staffing (and associated general fund costs) may be required.
  • Local impact: If grants are awarded, local health departments and jurisdictions may see increases in revenues/expenditures.

Who would be affected

  • Behavioral health programs regulated by MDH/BHA/OHCQ (source of civil penalties).
  • MDH, BHA, OHCQ, the Comptroller, and the State Treasurer (administration/flow of funds).
  • Entities eligible for training, grants, or demonstration project funding (community behavioral health providers, local health departments, and related organizations).

Procedural/Timeline notes

  • Hearing listed Feb 18, 2025 (Finance committee).
  • Bill becomes effective Oct 1, 2025 if enacted.
  • MDH required to adopt regulations to implement distribution procedures before funds are expended.

Implementation considerations

  • The Fund redirects civil penalty revenues away from the General Fund; legislative appropriations still govern actual spending from the Fund.
  • The bill requires MDH rulemaking to set award and distribution procedures; timing of regulations will affect when grants/activities begin.
  • The ultimate scale of the Fund (and programmatic impact) depends on: (1) amounts of civil penalties assessed; (2) any direct appropriations; and (3) regulatory criteria for awards.

Sources: bill text and fiscal analysis / fiscal note prepared for SB 592 (Maryland General Assembly).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.