Senate committee grants DBHDD authority for national background checks and 'rap back' notifications
March 16, 2026 | 2026 Legislature Georgia, Georgia
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Senate Health and Human Services Committee approved substitute HB 10‑97 (LC620404S) on March 17, granting the Department of Behavioral Health and Developmental Disabilities (DBHDD) statutory authority to request FBI‑level national background checks for employees, owners and contractors in certain behavioral‑health, residential, and treatment programs and to receive ongoing "rap back" (wrap back) notifications when a previously screened individual later appears on a qualifying criminal record.
Sponsor/presenter (S2) told the committee the change corrects a prior oversight from last year’s reorganization of licensure responsibilities and aligns DBHDD with the National Child Protection Act framework to allow national checks rather than only state checks.
Tracy Altman (S10), Deputy General Counsel for DBHDD, and Philip Curtis (S3), an attorney with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, answered technical questions about how checks will be run through GCIC and NCIC, the need for qualified technician access, consent from individuals, and what categories of offenses will trigger provider notification and potential removal from direct care. "Rap back means that, if a person we screened later commits a qualifying offense, the provider gets notified so they can take appropriate action," S2 summarized during discussion.
Committee members asked about operational burdens (annual re‑fingerprinting versus rap‑back notifications), whether the state will maintain immunity for errors in third‑party reports, and whether the statute allows future federal changes (for example, use of DNA in federal systems) to be imported automatically; witnesses said the system relies on fingerprint‑based checks governed by federal law and that liability provisions mirror existing statutory protections used by other state agencies.
A technical drafting fix — inserting an 'or' after 'agency' on line 45 — was added on the floor, then the committee voted to pass the substitute bill as amended. The committee recorded unanimous passage on the floor.
What happens next: The bill moves to the full Senate for consideration. The sponsor and DBHDD officials said they will work with providers on implementation details if the bill advances.
Why it matters: The measure increases the rigor of background screening for people working with vulnerable populations and creates a state mechanism to be notified when hires later have newly recorded disqualifying offenses, a change supporters said will reduce risk to clients while limiting recurring burdens on providers.
Sponsor/presenter (S2) told the committee the change corrects a prior oversight from last year’s reorganization of licensure responsibilities and aligns DBHDD with the National Child Protection Act framework to allow national checks rather than only state checks.
Tracy Altman (S10), Deputy General Counsel for DBHDD, and Philip Curtis (S3), an attorney with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation, answered technical questions about how checks will be run through GCIC and NCIC, the need for qualified technician access, consent from individuals, and what categories of offenses will trigger provider notification and potential removal from direct care. "Rap back means that, if a person we screened later commits a qualifying offense, the provider gets notified so they can take appropriate action," S2 summarized during discussion.
Committee members asked about operational burdens (annual re‑fingerprinting versus rap‑back notifications), whether the state will maintain immunity for errors in third‑party reports, and whether the statute allows future federal changes (for example, use of DNA in federal systems) to be imported automatically; witnesses said the system relies on fingerprint‑based checks governed by federal law and that liability provisions mirror existing statutory protections used by other state agencies.
A technical drafting fix — inserting an 'or' after 'agency' on line 45 — was added on the floor, then the committee voted to pass the substitute bill as amended. The committee recorded unanimous passage on the floor.
What happens next: The bill moves to the full Senate for consideration. The sponsor and DBHDD officials said they will work with providers on implementation details if the bill advances.
Why it matters: The measure increases the rigor of background screening for people working with vulnerable populations and creates a state mechanism to be notified when hires later have newly recorded disqualifying offenses, a change supporters said will reduce risk to clients while limiting recurring burdens on providers.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
