N/A

Good afternoon, I am writing in favor of HB103 and extending early intervention services to age 5. As a parent of 2 children who have received EI services, and a 4th year teacher with Montgomery County, I can speak firsthand to the benefits of extending this vital program. The current age out system works under the impression that children will be able to continue vital services through preschools and use of county school intervention teachers. This model doe snot account for the vast caseloads of intervention teachers and the lack of equitable services provided after graduating EI. My son received speech services for a later diagnosed apraxia of speech from 18 mon. - 3 years through EI. At age 3 when he graduated, we were told by our school system that his next step would be to come to our local campus, where he would be placed with an aide and receive virtual speech therapy, as there was only one speech teacher for the county. This is an inequitable transition from the 1-1 in home speech therapy he was receiving through EI. After approximately 1 year of searching, we found a new speech therapist who understood my son's needs and is able to support him. Extending EI would have allowed my son to continue working directly with a known and trusted teacher until he transitioned into the school system, where there was a better chance of receiving services in person. As a teacher, I know that my son's case is not an isolated one. For the last two years I have worked as a kindergarten teacher in MCPS, where each year I work with families who had services, graduated services, or lost quality teachers and now must re-enroll their child into services through the school system. This takes additional time as documentation and testing is completed, different services and types of care are tracked and quantified, and new services begin. This leads to a greater gap for the child to overcome. As a teacher I also see the large caseloads our intervention teachers work with, and extending EI would allow them to pour more of their time into the students they serve on campus, as families of young children continue to get the flexible support my family relied on. This extension reduces strain on not only our families but our school systems, and brings extreme benefits to the child. Continuity of services and providers creates stronger bonds and higher growth, and by extending EI to age 5 these two systems will be able to greater partner together to set incoming kindergarteners for success with the support they need. EI and school systems will be able to trade notes directly, without progress and notes getting lost from therapist to therapist or company to school as the child grows. I urge you to vote yes on HB 103, and extend early intervention services for the benefit of our children, and our schools. Thank you, Kyle Evans Father of 3 Kindergarten Teacher MCPS

Comments Document

Please see attachment

Good afternoon. My name is Devin Hebble, and I’m a licensed Occupational Therapist providing Early Intervention services in Virginia. I’m here to support HB 103, which would allow eligible children to continue Early Intervention services through four years of age. This is a bipartisan, evidence-based, cost-effective proposal that strengthens school readiness and supports working families. Currently, many children lose services at age three despite ongoing functional need—creating a gap during a critical developmental window. From an occupational therapy perspective, ages three to four are essential for foundational skills that impact participation at home and in preschool: self-care, communication, sensory regulation,attention, motor planning, and mobility. Extending Early Intervention improves equitable access, supports continuity of care, and provides a strong return on investment by preventing more intensive—and more expensive—needs later. This is a targeted, fiscally responsible approach and an efficient use of taxpayer resources. HB 103 is a practical investment in Virginia’s children, families, and communities. I respectfully urge your support. Thank you.

These should be basic right standards. These cause less trauma, less injuries, deaths, and for a better society

Comments Document

Attached please find the testimony of the U.S. Department of War regarding HB 574, the Athletic Trainer compact, and HB 575, the Respiratory Care Interstate Compact.

Comments Document

Attached please find the testimony of the U.S. Department of War regarding the policies reflected in House Bill 574, the Interstate Massage Therapy Compact.

I encourage passage of each of the above bills. These are all improvements for the residents of our state ,in safety , legal protection and personal freedom and responsibility.

Comments Document

Attached please find the testimony of the U.S. Department of War regarding HB 574, the Athletic Trainer compact, and HB 575, the Respiratory Care Interstate Compact.

Comments Document

Testimony in support of HB 579 from the American Massage Therapy Association

Comments Document

Testimony in support of HB 579 from the American Massage Therapy Association

Comments Document

Attached please find the testimony of the United States Department of War regarding House Bill 579.

Comments Document

HB 579 – Opposition Summary Position: The Federation of State Massage Therapy Boards (FSMTB) opposes HB 579 and urges the Subcommittee not to advance the bill this session. Context: Virginia has already enacted the Interstate Massage Compact (IMpact), a regulator-led compact developed through a multi-year national process and now approaching the threshold needed to form the Compact Commission and begin implementation. Key Concerns with HB 579: Reopens and alters compact statute before the Compact Commission is formed, bypassing the agreed governance structure. Makes substantive policy changes that are inaccurately characterized as technical amendments. Risks creating multiple versions of the Compact, delaying implementation and undermining interstate licensure portability. Weakens uniform public protection safeguards, including those critical to addressing illicit massage businesses and human trafficking. Removes regulatory issues that are more appropriately addressed through Commission rulemaking, not statute. Public Protection Impact: Massage therapy regulation intersects directly with anti–human trafficking enforcement. Fragmented or weakened standards increase risks related to licensure fraud, regulatory evasion, and public harm. Professional Support: FSMTB survey data from over 1,700 verified massage therapists shows 98% support for the original IMpact language, including strong support among Virginia licensees and members of national professional associations. Recommendation: Allow IMpact to proceed as enacted, enable formation of the Compact Commission, and address any future refinements through the established compact governance and rulemaking process.

Comments Document

I am the Executive Director of Healwell, an Arlington-based 501c3 that works to create sustainable careers for massage therapists in healthcare settings through research, education and service (since 2009). Our team of 20 massage therapists works at Inova Fairfax/Schar Cancer Institute, Goodwin House/Goodwin Living, in homes throughout the DMV with home hospice and palliative care programs, with Georgetown University Medical Center, Children’s National Hospital and Johns Hopkins Howard County. The expense and logistics of maintaining multiple licenses for our team has been a challenge for the 17 years we have existed. The progress that has been made toward the establishment of an interstate compact signals a game change for us. We have read and fully support the original language and also the momentum that it represents for other states who are primed to ratify it this session. Changing the language to allow less-qualified therapists to transfer their licenses and shifting the structure of the commission is both unwelcome and unnecessary. Healwell opposes S.282 and respectfully requests that it not advance this session. Our key concerns about this proposal are shared below: • It was not requested by regulators or the profession These amendments were not sought by state regulatory boards or by massage therapists. • Undermines a regulator-led compact process IMpact was developed through a multi-year, regulator-led effort and is now only two states away from forming the Compact Commission. The massage therapy profession cannot wait for years more while this process begins again with new language that attempts to circumvent the rulemaking process. • Creates competing compacts and delays implementation Advancing these amendments would result in two competing compacts, delay multistate licensure, and create “compact islands” that limit practitioner mobility, perhaps more than is already the case. • Raises public protection and human trafficking concerns Certain provisions weaken uniform education and licensure standards, increasing vulnerability to exploitation by illicit massage businesses and human trafficking networks. • Lacks professional support A national IMpact survey of 1,715 professionals shows 98% support for the original IMpact language, including 97% of AMTA members and 98% of Virginia respondents. I am hopeful that legislators will not permit S.282 to advance in this session. The remaining specifics about the compact can and should be allowed to be addressed through Commission rulemaking rather than statutory reopening. I welcome the opportunity to speak with you directly and answer any questions you may have. Thank you again for your leadership and for your continued consideration.

Dear Delegate Wachsmann and Health and Human Services Committe members, I hope this message finds you well. My name is Dr. Lauren Grawert, and I am an addiction psychiatrist practicing in Northern Virginia in the Arlington Virginia area. I am also a member of the Virginia Society of Addiction Medicine (VASAM) Advocacy Committee and the Medical Society of Virginia (MSV). I am writing to introduce myself and to express VASAM's strong support for HB 712. As an addiction psychiatrist who provides office-based buprenorphine treatment daily, I greatly appreciate the bill’s clarification that a patient’s refusal of counseling should not, in itself, preclude access to medication treatment for opioid use disorder. While therapy is an important component of addiction care, in practice, rigid counseling requirements can unintentionally create barriers to care for some of our most vulnerable patients, and HB 712 reflects a thoughtful, evidence-based approach to improving access to life-saving medication while preserving clinical judgment. Of note, VASAM submitted a formal request to the Virginia Board of Medicine last fall also asking that the counseling requirement be removed. The Board of Medicine responded that it would defer to the state legislation (you) to make this change if warranted. During the public comment period, our request received a total of 172 public comments from Virginians all over the state which were all in staunch support of this change. There were no comments that were against the requested update. Thank you for your leadership on this important issue. HB172 would go a long way in helping Virginia addiction treatment specialists like myself save more lives and combat the opioid epidemic. Warm regards, Lauren Grawert, MD Addiction Psychiatrist Chief Medical Officer, Aware Recovery Care Member, VASAM Advocacy Committee Member, Medical Society of Virginia

I apologize that I am just now able to comment on this bill that Delegate Davis drafted for us. I had our Board meeting first thing this morning & I am just now returning to my desk. I also had to put salt on our sidewalks so my Board members did not fall & was busy purchasing and throwing it down early this am. For HB 727 we requested to add another term due to the fact that it is hard to find citizens willing to 1 be on the bill and 2 understand what it is we do here at Social Services. When board members finally understand our responsibilities with 14 separate programs, it is time for them to come off of the board as their 2 terms has been served. This bill allows us to keep those that are experienced on the board. The ability for the Board of Supervisor or Town Council to not reappoint if they choose not to reappoint remains in place. This just allows them to reappoint if they believe that appointment is in the best interest of the DSS Board and the County/City they represent. Thank you so much for the consideration. Anita "Toni" Turner, MSW Director II FCDSS

America has been dealing the worst opioid epidemic ever since former President Biden and Democrats allowed drugs, cartels, criminals, and traffickers into America. Now taxpayers have to pay for the Left’s failures and selfishness.