A Democratic bill with 1 Democratic cosponsor · See the cosponsor
Last activity — Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services to create a grant program to help establish, operate, or expand one-stop crisis facilities. These facilities are meant to provide behavioral health services, substance use disorder treatment, housing services, and other wrap-around support in a single location. Eligible entities like cities, counties, States, and Indian Tribes can apply for these funds by submitting a plan to the Secretary. The bill authorizes $11,500,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to fund these grants. It also prohibits discrimination based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability in any programs funded by this Act.
Yes· 3 of 40
- Scored +8
Would households on low incomes be better off under this?
Low-income individuals benefit directly from accessible behavioral health care, housing assistance, and legal aid.
- Scored +8
Is this likely to reduce homelessness?
The legislation targets unhoused individuals through dedicated outreach, housing assistance, and housing-first policy strategies.
- Scored +8
Does this make mental health care easier to get?
The legislation establishes a major grant program to fund one-stop crisis facilities providing behavioral health services and substance use disorder treatment.
The opposite
No question was scored the opposite.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Support for Behavioral Health and Treatment: Under Section 2(b)(4)(A), grant funds can be used to provide health care services, behavioral health and substance use disorder treatment, and medication for opioid use disorder. This is positive because it helps individuals struggling with addiction and mental health get direct medical assistance.
-
Housing Assistance and Legal Aid: According to Section 2(b)(4)(D) and (E), facilities can provide housing assistance, including financial assistance, and legal services. This is a good thing for people facing eviction, homelessness, or legal troubles because it offers them direct, practical support in one place.
-
Outreach for Vulnerable Populations: Section 2(b)(6) allows for outreach services to engage with vulnerable and high-need communities, including unhoused individuals, youths, and people living in public housing. This is beneficial because it actively reaches out to folks who might otherwise fall through the cracks and miss out on help.
-
Civil Rights Protections: Section 2(f) states that no person shall be excluded from participation in, denied the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination under any funded program based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or disability. This ensures fair and equal access for everyone seeking help.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- No Negative Impacts Identified: Based strictly on the text provided in the bill, there are no specific sections or provisions that outline negative consequences or burdens for individuals or groups of people in the United States.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — Low-income individuals benefit directly from accessible behavioral health care, housing assistance, and legal aid. Would Native Americans be better off under this? — Indian Tribes are designated as direct eligible entities with dedicated funding reservations under the grant program. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged individuals struggling with behavioral health or substance use disorders benefit from comprehensive care centers. Would people with disabilities be better off under this? — The bill explicitly prohibits discrimination based on disability and requires accessible facility design and planning. Would people in cities be better off under this? — Metropolitan cities receive substantial dedicated funding allocations to establish one-stop crisis centers. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — Young adults facing mental health or housing crises benefit from targeted outreach and specialized facility services. Would children be better off under this? — The bill includes specific provisions for youth-focused crisis programming and transitional housing strategies for youth. Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill mandates addressing language and cultural barriers and encourages partnerships with immigrant and refugee assistance organizations. Would people in rural areas be better off under this? — Nonentitlement units of local government and rural counties are allocated dedicated portions of the grant funding. Would Black Americans be better off under this? — Explicit non-discrimination protections and equity requirements help ensure minority communities have fair access to care. Would Asian Americans be better off under this? — Non-discrimination and language barrier provisions support equitable service delivery. Would Hispanic Americans be better off under this? — The bill mandates addressing language and cultural barriers to ensure equitable access for Hispanic and immigrant populations. Would LGBTQ people be better off under this? — Explicit protections based on sexual orientation and gender identity safeguard LGBTQ individuals seeking assistance. Would men be better off under this? — Men experiencing behavioral health crises or homelessness benefit from the expanded availability of wrap-around services. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — The legislation encourages coordination with aging and senior services programs. Would veterans be better off under this, taking everything together? — The legislation requires coordination with veteran service organizations to connect veterans with necessary support. Would women be better off under this? — Non-discrimination protections based on sex ensure equal access to all funded crisis and support programs. Would farmers be better off under this? — Rural counties and local government units are included in funding allocations, extending services to agricultural regions. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — Middle-class families dealing with a behavioral health crisis in the household can utilize these public crisis facilities. Would retired people be better off under this? — Coordination with aging services helps connect older adults with appropriate behavioral and community support. Would students be better off under this? — Young people and students experiencing crisis can access counseling and mental health services. Would white Americans be better off under this? — All Americans benefit equally from expanded community crisis infrastructure without racial exclusion.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Is this likely to reduce homelessness? — The legislation targets unhoused individuals through dedicated outreach, housing assistance, and housing-first policy strategies. Does this make housing cost less? — Facilities are authorized to provide housing assistance, financial assistance for housing, and implement housing-first strategies. Is this likely to lift people out of poverty? — By offering housing assistance, legal aid, and wrap-around support, the bill helps address deep poverty and crisis situations. Does this expand the rights of people with disabilities? — Programs funded under the act are explicitly prohibited from discriminating based on disability and require barrier-reduced access. Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — The bill provides explicit non-discrimination protections based on sex. Does this expand the rights of LGBTQ people? — The bill explicitly includes sexual orientation and gender identity in its non-discrimination protections for funded programs. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The legislation mandates non-discrimination protections based on race and color across all funded programs. Does this change how police departments operate? — The bill encourages coordination with law enforcement and first responders to divert individuals experiencing crises to care facilities.
- Healthcare
- Does this make mental health care easier to get? — The legislation establishes a major grant program to fund one-stop crisis facilities providing behavioral health services and substance use disorder treatment. Does this do more about addiction and overdose deaths? — The bill explicitly allows funds to be used for substance use disorder treatment, including medication for opioid use disorder. Does this make health care easier to get in general? — Grant funds directly support health care services, counseling, and wrap-around medical support in a single location. Does this help veterans get medical care? — The bill includes veteran service organizations in coordination efforts, indirectly supporting better crisis access for veterans.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — States, counties, and local governments are direct recipients and administrators of the grant funds. Does this make what the government does easier for the public to see? — Grant applications require comprehensive planning and stakeholder consultation reporting. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill establishes a federally funded grant program administered by the Department of Health and Human Services.
- Economy And Finance
- Is this likely to create jobs? — The bill provides grant funding that can be used for training, hiring, and retaining staff at crisis facilities.
- Environment Energy And Infrastructure
- Does this invest in rural communities? — The bill includes nonentitlement units of local government and rural counties in the direct allocation of grant funds.
- National Security And Foreign Policy
- Does this increase the pay, pensions or support veterans receive? — The bill explicitly provides for coordination with veteran service organizations to assist veterans in crisis.
- 11/7/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/28/2025
- Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Financial Services, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
- Introduced in House
Eleanor NortonDemocrat · District of Columbia