Week 5 of the 2026 Session

• Home
• Articles

Week 5 of the 2026 Session

During week 5, legislative committees were busy holding bill hearings and passing bills out of committee leading up to Turnaround Day on Feb. 19. Committees considered bills related to health care provider scope of practice and licensure, dementia care certification standards for assisted living facilities, the powers and duties of the State Board of Nursing, juvenile crisis intervention centers, and licensing requirements for family foster homes. The House Committee on Appropriations also passed out its budget adjustments and funding recommendations for fiscal years 2026 through 2029.

This edition of Health at the Capitol looks at health-related policy issues addressed by the Kansas Legislature the week of Feb. 9.

Health at the Capitol is a weekly summary providing highlights of the Kansas legislative session, with a specific focus on health policy related issues. Sign up here to receive these summaries and more, and also follow KHI on Facebook, X, LinkedIn and Instagram . Previous editions of Health at the Capitol can be found on our ARCHIVE PAGE.

House Committee on Health and Human Services
(Rep. Will Carpenter, Chair)

On Monday, Feb. 9, the Committee took final action on House Bill (HB) 2364, which would prohibit Medicaid, the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) and the State Employee Health Plan from favoring opioid medications over non-opioid prescription drugs for the treatment of acute pain. The bill would prevent insurers from requiring patients to try opioids first, imposing more restrictive authorization requirements on non-opioids or placing non-opioid medications on higher cost-sharing tiers. The bill was passed favorably out of committee.

On Tuesday, Feb. 10, the Committee held a hearing on HB 2676, which would create the Pharmacist Practice Authority Act and would permit a pharmacist to initiate therapy for certain conditions consistent with the pharmacist's education, training and experience. The bill would allow a pharmacist to initiate therapy if the condition does not require a new diagnosis, is minor and generally self-limiting, is guided by the results of a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA)-waived test (simple laboratory tests that carry a low risk of erroneous results and can be performed in various health care settings without extensive training) or, in the pharmacist's professional judgement, constitutes a patient emergency.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated the bill would allow pharmacists to practice to the top of their education and training, improve patient access to care and align Kansas with other states that have adopted a standard-of-care framework. Opponents stated the bill represents a significant expansion of pharmacist authority, particularly related to prescribing and limited diagnosis, and argued that existing mechanisms such as collaborative drug therapy management and previously authorized test-and-treat protocols, already address access concerns. There was no neutral testimony presented.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether the Board of Pharmacy would determine which conditions will be treated (Revisor stated the bill does not mention the Board of Pharmacy and leaves discretion to the pharmacist, subject to the limitations in the bill); what specific examples fall under the bill (proponent described four categories in the bill, including preventive services not requiring a new diagnosis, minor generally self-limiting conditions, conditions guided by CLIA-waived tests such as respiratory viruses, and emergency refills); whether other states have seen increases in complaints or disciplinary actions (states that have adopted similar models have not seen increases in patient or physician complaints or additional investigative burden); and whether the bill would create advantages for corporate pharmacies over independent pharmacies (representative of Kansas Pharmacists Association said the bill could diversify revenue sources and improve sustainability across pharmacy settings).

The Committee also held a hearing on HB 2702, which would amend the Physician Assistant Licensure Act to provide for criminal record checks, update terminology to include physician associates, clarify collaboration and supervision requirements, modify practice agreement provisions and provide for revocation of a physician assistant license under certain circumstances.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated the bill modernizes Kansas law to reflect team-based health care delivery, clarifies collaboration and supervision terminology, reduces administrative burdens related to supervising physician changes and improves continuity of care while preserving physician leadership. Neutral testimony was provided by a representative of the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts, who stated the Board initially had concerns regarding definitions of collaboration and supervision but, after discussion with stakeholders, was comfortable with the language. There was no opponent testimony presented.

On Wednesday, Feb. 11, the Committee took final action on 2025 HB 2368, which would enact the Anesthesiologist Assistant Licensure Act, regulating and licensing anesthesiologist assistants (AAs) under the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts. The Committee adopted a technical amendment, discussed concerns regarding rural access to care, supervision requirements and impacts on certified registered nurse anesthetist (CRNA) training pipelines, and passed the bill favorably out of committee, as amended.

The Committee also took final action on HB 2520, which would amend the definition of a Home Plus facility to increase the maximum number of residents from 12 to 16. The Committee adopted an amendment to require any Home Plus facility increasing capacity above 12 residents to develop and maintain written plans demonstrating the ability to meet residents' needs, respond to emergencies and maintain resident health and safety at the increased capacity, with such plans available for review during survey or inspection, and then passed the bill favorably out of committee, as amended.

On Thursday, Feb. 12, the Committee held a hearing on HB 2370, which would require additional licensing requirements for assisted living facilities that offer dementia care services by creating an assisted living facility with dementia care certification. The bill would require consideration of the director's and clinical nurse supervisor's experience, completion of a state-approved dementia care certification program, sufficient staffing levels, standardized dementia care training for employees and contract staff, an activity services program and compliance within 12 months of enactment.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents, including the State Long-Term Care Ombudsman and LeadingAge Kansas, stated the bill would increase transparency and accountability for facilities marketing memory or dementia care services, protect families from misrepresentation and help ensure facilities advertising specialized dementia care have appropriate training, staffing and expertise. Opponents expressed concerns that the bill's language is overly broad, lacks clear definitions and measurable standards, and could create unintended operational and access issues, particularly in rural communities. Neutral written testimony was provided by a representative of Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS), who outlined an upfront cost of $50,000 to $100,000 for the creation of a new credentialing category as well as seven additional full-time equivalent positions.

Committee members asked questions regarding why legislation is needed now (proponent stated families have reported being promised memory care services that were not delivered and the bill is intended as a preventive measure against "bad actors"); whether existing licensure already addresses dementia care (current licensure does not provide a separate, defined memory care designation); and how rural facilities would be impacted (representative of Midwest Health said smaller rural communities may not have separate designated memory care units but still provide dementia services, and overly rigid certification could affect their ability to market and provide aging-in-place options).

On Friday, Feb. 13, the Committee worked HB 2528, which would make changes to the powers, duties and responsibilities of the Kansas State Board of Nursing. The Committee adopted amendments to:

• Clarify that only disciplinary actions related to applications for licensure or license renewal would be voided
• Prohibit Board members from serving while elected to the office of governor, attorney general or the Legislature
• Extend the investigation deadline from one year to three years, clarify investigator qualifications and make technical changes
• Require refunds from the Board's fee fund to be issued "upon request" in cases of overpayment or duplicate payment

The bill was then passed favorably out of committee, as amended.

The Committee also worked 2025 HB 2366, which would expand the scope of practice for naturopathic doctors to include ordering and performing physical examinations, ordering diagnostic imaging, and prescribing and administering certain drugs, supplements and controlled substances, while prohibiting surgery, general anesthesia, obstetrics, and opioids and narcotics. The Committee amended the bill to:

• Add naturopathic doctors to the Health Care Provider Insurance Availability Act, making them subject to Health Care Stabilization Fund coverage requirements
• Restructure portions of the scope language, clarifying definitions, retaining the statutory definition of physician and specifying certain treatments taught in approved naturopathic medical colleges
• Prohibit naturopathic doctors from prescribing, dispensing or administering drugs or performing procedures involving the termination of a pregnancy
• Define "minor office procedures" to include treatment of superficial lacerations, abrasions and removal of superficial foreign bodies, while excluding suturing, invasive repair, excision and administration of general or spinal anesthesia
• Require naturopathic doctors to carry professional liability insurance of at least $1 million per claim and $3 million aggregate

The bill was then passed favorably out of committee, as amended.

Senate Committee on Public Health and Welfare
(Sen. Beverly Gossage, Chair) 

On Tuesday, Feb. 10, the Committee held a hearing on Senate Bill (SB) 448, which would authorize the use of expedited partner therapy (EPT) for the treatment of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). The bill would allow a physician, advanced practice registered nurse (APRN) or physician assistant who diagnoses a patient with an STD to prescribe, administer or dispense antimicrobial drugs to a sexual partner of the patient if, in the provider's professional judgment, the partner is unlikely or unable to be present for examination, testing and treatment.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated EPT is a safe, evidence-based best practice supported by national medical organizations and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), reduces reinfection rates and helps address rising rates of chlamydia, gonorrhea and syphilis. There was no opponent or neutral testimony submitted.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether Kansas' STD rates are higher compared to states that have implemented EPT (representative of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment said Kansas' rates are "exponentially higher" compared to some states that have implemented EPT and provided 2024 case counts of 12,211 chlamydia cases, 3,039 gonorrhea cases and 1,327 cases of all stages of syphilis); the consequences for a pregnant woman and her child if infections are not treated (representative of Kansas Section, American College of Obstetrics and Gynecologists said syphilis can cross the placenta and cause congenital infection and neurologic damage, and untreated gonorrhea or chlamydia can lead to preterm labor, bleeding, conjunctivitis and blindness in newborns); and how repeated infections impact local health department funding (representative of the Kansas Association of Local Health Departments stated recurrent infections can result in additional local government costs and strain limited public health resources). The Committee subsequently worked the bill on Feb. 11 and passed it favorably out of committee.

On Wednesday, Feb. 11, the Committee held a hearing on SB 430, which would allow licensed physical therapists to perform certain point-of-care laboratory tests classified as CLIA-waived tests to assist in physical therapy evaluation and treatment planning. The bill would allow physical therapists to perform point-of-care testing of lactate and blood glucose tests only for the purpose of obtaining information related to muscle metabolism, exercise tolerance or rehabilitation status.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated the bill would enhance patient safety by allowing physical therapists to use limited CLIA-waived testing, particularly lactate and blood glucose testing, to better monitor patients during rehabilitation, and further stated the testing would not be used for diagnosis and would not be billed separately to insurance. Opponents stated that while proposed amendments limiting the bill to lactate and blood glucose testing reduced concerns, they remain opposed due to potential duplication of services, increased out-of-pocket costs to patients, lack of coverage under the Health Care Stabilization Fund and possible additional regulatory costs to the Board of Healing Arts. Neutral testimony was provided by a representative of the Kansas Medical Society (KMS), who stated that KMS is uncertain about the clinical benefit of capillary lactate testing and raised concerns about variability and correlation with venous lactate measurements.

The Committee subsequently worked the bill on Feb. 12, adopted an amendment that would outline the specific tests (lactate and blood glucose) the bill would allow, and then passed it favorably out of committee, as amended.

On Thursday, Feb. 12, the Committee held a hearing on SB 431, which would allow a pharmacy to employ certain remote workers to engage in the remote practice of pharmacy. The bill would define "remote practice of pharmacy" as practice conducted at any location other than the employing pharmacy and would establish conditions for remote work, including notice requirements, record retention, a written policy and procedures manual, training requirements for pharmacy interns and technicians and prohibitions on handling, compounding, dispensing or labeling drugs outside of a licensed pharmacy.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated the bill would modernize pharmacy practice by allowing certain electronic and administrative components of pharmacy work to be performed remotely while maintaining strict safeguards and noted that remote work could support recruitment and retention, expand service capacity and address workplace well-being concerns within the profession. There was no neutral or opponent testimony presented.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether remote practice increases data vulnerability, particularly if using Wi-Fi (Alexandra Blasi, Kansas Board of Pharmacy, stated equipment must be secured by the employing pharmacy, including use of secure systems such as VPNs, and that similar safeguards are used in other health professions); whether remote workers would have access to the prescription drug monitoring program (pharmacists may access it through secure systems, but delegate access is limited and generally integrated into pharmacy management systems); and whether the bill requires remote workers to ensure they are in a secure, confidential setting (bill places responsibility on the pharmacy owner, pharmacist in charge and remote worker to ensure confidentiality and security).

House Committee on Child Welfare and Foster Care
(Rep. Cyndi Howerton, Chair)

On Monday, Feb. 9, the Committee held a hearing on HB 2639, which would rename juvenile crisis intervention centers as juvenile stabilization centers, modify admission criteria and services provided at such centers, revise related statutory language in the Child in Need of Care (CINC) and Juvenile Offender Codes, and transfer $2 million from the Evidence-Based Programs Fund to support stabilization services.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponent Chair Howerton stated the bill builds on discussions held during the summer and fall related to 2025 HB 2329, which expanded youth residential bed capacity following adjudication, and noted those discussions identified a gap between intake and adjudication, when youth may not yet qualify for residential placement but still require short-term stabilization support. She described juvenile stabilization centers as a response to that gap and noted that a similar model currently operates in Johnson County under Department for Children and Families (DCF) licensure but is limited in placement duration and availability and also explained that the bill replaces the existing Juvenile Crisis Intervention Center (JCIC) statute, enacted in 2018, which has not been utilized due to stringent statutory requirements and insufficient funding. Additional proponents stated the bill would address a critical service gap by creating a more flexible and accessible stabilization option for youth between intake and adjudication.

One opponent, a representative of the Kansas Community Corrections Association, opposed the bill's mandatory detention override provisions, which require detention when a juvenile has presented twice within a year, regardless of offense severity, and could result in detention of low-risk youth for minor or situational offenses.

Neutral conferees included Megan Milner, Deputy Secretary, Kansas Department of Corrections (KDOC), Tanya Keys, Deputy Secretary, Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF) and Drew Adkins, Commissioner for Behavioral Health, Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS). Milner stated that KDOC is concerned about the definition of crossover youth, which the bill defines as one who is at risk of being placed in foster care or currently in foster care due to behaviors that could result in juvenile offender allegations, while an existing interagency state policy team uses a broader, bi-directional definition that includes youth involved in either the child welfare or juvenile justice systems who are at risk of crossing into the other system. She also noted that KDOC has a fully executed agreement with DCF regarding the transfer of $2 million and requested clarification on whether the bill language would provide an additional $2 million for a total of $4 million. Keys stated that DCF is requesting use of the existing statewide definition of crossover youth developed through interagency policy work rather than adopting a narrower statutory definition, a new statutory definition for juvenile stabilization services instead of modifying the existing JCIC statute, and maintaining the current statutory definition of "behavioral health crisis" or providing clear language if replacing it with the undefined term "in need of stabilization." Adkins raised concerns about removing the requirement for qualified mental health professional authorization and the absence of clearly defined admission standards.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether "child in need of stabilization" is defined in statute (Revisor stated it is not defined and would be interpreted by intake staff or law enforcement); where stabilization centers would be located and whether children would be removed from their communities (Howerton stated DCF would likely issue Request for Proposals for county-based centers); the current structure of the Johnson County stabilization center (Adkins stated it has approximately 12 beds, is funded through county investment and Medicaid reimbursement, and includes staffing such as a medical director, licensed mental health professionals and social workers); definitions and qualifiers for admission criteria, including crossover youth (Milner noted the existing behavioral health crisis definition may assist in clarifying admissions criteria); and whether local detention centers have sufficient capacity if mandatory overrides increase detention (opponent stated capacity is already limited in many jurisdictions and could require youth to be transported outside their home communities).

The Committee then worked HB 2524, which would amend the licensure requirements for family foster homes and require the Secretary of DCF to grant a license or allow maintenance of an existing license of a family foster home when an applicant or individual residing in the home has certain disqualifying convictions or adjudications. The Committee amended the bill to:

• Remove language requiring the granting of a license in certain circumstances
• Add language regarding conviction and adjudication to the list of factors allowing continuation of a license under the bill
• Remove language requiring a child with an adjudication or conviction to be more than 18 years of age
• Add language regarding safety concerns when the Secretary is granting or continuing a license
• Make other technical amendments

The bill was then passed favorably out of committee, as amended.

On Wednesday, Feb. 11, the Committee held a hearing on HB 2638, which would require the Secretary for DCF to provide a child with a verbal and written notice of their rights and additional information once a child is placed into the Secretary's custody.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents, including Deputy Secretary Tanya Keys, DCF, and Kerrie Lonard, Child Advocate, stated that current statutory requirements for informing children of their rights are insufficient and inconsistently implemented in practice and they support codifying into statute the requirement that the Foster Care Bill of Rights be presented to children in an age and developmentally appropriate manner to ensure they understand the information provided. Other proponents suggested amendments to strengthen and clarify the language of the Bill of Rights to ensure it is child-friendly and trauma-informed, including explicit language regarding the reason for placement, changes in placement, freedom from abuse while in care, age and developmentally appropriate life skills and transition planning beginning at age 14, access to health care, and the right to understand and exercise one's rights. There was no opponent or neutral testimony presented.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether there is enough capacity to consistently present rights to children, and if yes, why isn't it already happening (Keys said this is not a resource issue but a training and reinforcement issue for case workers and there is a minimum requirement of monthly contact where the rights can be presented and reenforced); and the rights for children in foster care who are being prescribed medication (they should have information on their health care, prescriptions and providers, but nothing explicitly mentions health and health care).

The Committee then held a hearing on HB 2601, which would establish a new child abuse and neglect central registry to be maintained by the Secretary for DCF and provide procedures and protections for placing individuals on the registry. The bill would also amend current law to no longer automatically prohibit an individual from residing, working or volunteering in a child care facility, unless the person is given an opportunity to be interviewed and to present information during the investigation of the alleged abuse or neglect.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents, including Chair Howerton, stated the bill puts due process into statute and strengthens fairness and transparency, expressed the need to have the new registry structure completely replace the current system rather than operate parallel to it, and emphasized the need for clear implementation to ensure the registry functions effectively without slowing down background checks or placement decisions for children. Opponent testimony will be presented during the week of Feb. 16.

Neutral conferee Kerrie Lonard, Child Advocate, expressed concerns regarding how the new registry would interact with existing systems, potential fiscal impacts if the new process in the bill results in an increase in hearings, appeals and related litigation costs, the time period between substantiation and registry placement if appeals are pending, and the automatic expungement provision after three years that may unintentionally reduce long-term tracking of individuals who pose an ongoing risk to children. Neutral conferee Loren Snell Jr., Acting Director, Administrative Law Judge, stated the bill would shift the burden to the agency to establish substantiation prior to registry placement, extend the time frame for requesting a hearing to 12 months, and could delay final registry determinations. He further noted that approximately 40 to 45 percent of substantiations are currently appealed, suggesting that the proposed changes could significantly increase the volume of hearings.

Committee members asked questions regarding whether an individual substantiated by DCF for child abuse or neglect would be placed on the registry prior to a criminal conviction (Howerton clarified that registry placement relates to administrative proceedings and is separate from criminal conviction, and that a hearing would occur prior to placement on the registry); whether individuals are being properly informed about the process for being added to and removed from the registry (Lonard stated the notice requirements need to be strengthened to ensure individuals understand their rights and timelines).

The Committee also held a hearing on HB 2734, which would amend the Revised Code for Care of Children as it would apply to a child under two years of age and would require the Secretary of DCF to implement expedited procedures for permanency of a child at the time a child welfare petition was filed. The bill sets an expectation of achieving a permanent outcome within 12 months and establishes firm timelines once the court determines that reintegration is no longer viable.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents included Rep. Susan Humphries; Kerrie Lonard, Child Advocate; and Michael Kagay, District Attorney, Third Judicial District of Kansas. Kagay stated the bill establishes an expedited permanency track for children under two years of age. Opponent and neutral testimony will be heard the week of Feb. 16. Committee members asked about the impact of the proposed timelines on best interest staff and related court personnel and Kagay replied that the bill is designed to streamline and expedite the process rather than create additional burden.

House Welfare Reform Committee
(Rep. Francis Awerkamp, Chair)

On Tuesday, Feb. 10, the Committee held a hearing on HB 2738, which would again direct the Secretary of DCF to request a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service to exclude food commonly marketed, advertised or recognized as candy and soft drinks from the definition of eligible foods under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). If a pending waiver application exists, the bill would require the Secretary to amend and re-submit the application, and if no waiver is granted, the Secretary would be required to annually submit an application until such waiver is granted. For purposes of the waiver request, the bill would define "candy" as certain sugar- or chocolate-based confectionery items commonly marketed as candy, such as chocolate bars, hard candies, gummies, caramels, taffy, licorice, mints and chewing gum, but would exclude baked goods, such as cakes, cookies, muffins, brownies, pastries, bread and similar bakery products. The bill would define "soft drinks" by reference to K.S.A. 79-3602. During the 2025 session, the Legislature directed DCF to submit a waiver request in a proviso included in the state budget.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

One proponent stated the bill would better align SNAP with its stated purpose of supporting nutritious food purchases, noting that soda is a top SNAP purchase, and that taxpayer funds should not subsidize products associated with poor health outcomes. Written-only opponent testimony was submitted by representatives of fuel and convenience retailers and the National Confectioners Association.

Neutral testimony was provided by Dr. Carla Whiteside-Hicks, DCF, who reported that DCF has already submitted a waiver request pursuant to last year's legislation. She also noted that the lack of baseline heath data specific to SNAP participants in Kansas may make outcome measurement difficult and also expressed concern about changing the definition of candy at this stage, which could delay federal approval and implementation and that a delay in waiver approval could jeopardize summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) funding if tied to waiver approval.

Committee members asked questions regarding how many states have implemented or committed to similar waivers (a representative of proponent FGA Action indicated 18 states have had waivers approved, five are operating and additional states have committed to submitting a waiver); what percentage of SNAP dollars are spent on soda (nearly one in ten SNAP dollars are spent on soft drinks, possibly including candy and salty snacks); and whether there is evidence that convenience stores in other states have shifted inventory toward healthier options (waivers are recent and there has not yet been sufficient time to evaluate outcomes).

The Committee subsequently worked the bill on Feb. 12 and adopted an amendment requiring that if the waiver is granted, DCF will implement it within six months and submit a new waiver request 12 months prior to expiration of an approved waiver to ensure continuity and passed the bill favorably out of committee, as amended.

The Committee then held a hearing on HB 2731, which would require the Secretary for DCF to contract with the Office of Inspector General (OIG) to establish and operate a SNAP fraud detection unit by Jan. 1, 2027, and prohibit DCF from employing other fraud investigators for SNAP thereafter.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Opponent testimony was provided by Mark Altenbernt, General Counsel, DCF, who stated the bill could create statutory and operational conflicts because federal regulations require the state agency administering SNAP to establish and operate a fraud detection unit. He expressed concern that contracting with an independent OIG could conflict with federal approval requirements and data-sharing restrictions, particularly with Social Security Administration data and further cautioned that if federal authorities do not approve the structure, Kansas could risk losing reimbursement or being left without authorized fraud investigators due to the bill's prohibition on DCF employing other investigators.

Neutral testimony was provided by Inspector General Steve Anderson, who stated consolidating SNAP fraud audits and investigations under OIG would require significant coordination and structural changes. No proponent testimony was presented.

Committee members asked questions regarding the fiscal impact of the bill (the fiscal note estimated approximately $1.1 million in ongoing annual costs); and existing limitations on sharing SNAP data (Altenbernt stated federal law restricts sharing individual SNAP data outside the administering agency unless approved and emphasized uncertainty regarding federal approval of a contracted model).

The Committee subsequently worked HB 2731 on Feb. 12 and amended the bill to remove its contents pertaining to a contract between the Secretary and OIG, inserted language pertaining to a data-sharing agreement to exchange information and documents related to cash assistance, child care assistance and food assistance, and created Substitute for HB 2731. The substitute bill was then passed favorably out of committee.

House Committee on Federal and State Affairs
(Rep. Tom Kessler)

On Tuesday, Feb 10, the Committee held a hearing on HB 2635, which would enact the Pregnancy Center Autonomy and Rights of Expression Act. The bill would prohibit state agencies (including departments, divisions, bureaus, institutions and subdivisions), counties, cities or political subdivisions of the state from enacting or adopting any type of measure that would require pregnancy centers or medical pregnancy centers to offer or perform abortions and other related services as detailed in the bill and would also place other restrictions on what could be regulated at these centers. The bill would provide for civil actions for violations and allow for a procedure for the Legislature to intervene in related legal proceedings.

Read testimony submitted by all conferees.

Proponents stated the bill is a proactive measure to protect pregnancy centers' constitutional rights of free speech, free exercise of religion and free association. Opponents argued that pregnancy centers are faith-based organizations and the bill would violate principles of separation of church and state by granting protections that favor certain religious beliefs. They also stated the bill could shield pregnancy centers from accountability and limit the ability of local governments to regulate entities that provide pregnancy-related services.

Committee members asked questions regarding how pregnancy centers address ethical concerns and informed consent (proponent stated existing legal protections and professional standards provide guardrails for organizations operating in this space); oversight and regulation of crisis pregnancy centers (opponent stated that pregnancy centers are not licensed medical facilities unless they provide medical services, and therefore are regulated based on the scope of services they offer); and whether health centers such as Planned Parenthood provide counseling services (opponent stated comprehensive reproductive health providers, including Planned Parenthood, offer counseling options regarding parenting, adoption and abortion, and are subject to medical and informed consent standards).

Other Bills With Action During Week 5

Substitute for HB 2434 contains fiscal year (FY) 2026 funding adjustments, funding for state agencies for FY 2027, and selected adjustments for FYs 2028 and 2029. The bill also provides funding and implementation for the new Office of Early Childhood. For FY 2027 the bill includes recommendations to:

• Add $75.3 million, including $20.0 million State General Fund (SGF), in on-going funding for the Children's Health Insurance Program
• Adds $41.3 million, including $16.1 million SGF, to provide a 3.0 percent reimbursement rate increase for providers of home and community-based services (HCBS) waivers
• Adds $37.8 million, including $14.6 million SGF, for a Medicaid capacity payment for nursing facilities of $10 per resident per day
• Adds $30.9 million, including $28.9 million SGF, for first year operations at South Central Regional Mental Health Hospital
• Adds $12.1 million SGF to fund the administrative portion of the SNAP program
• Adds $10.0 million SGF for hospitals providing inpatient behavioral health services for adults
• Withholds $10.0 million SGF from DCF pending approval and implementation of the Healthy Foods Waiver removing candy and soda from SNAP benefits.

The substitute bill was passed favorably out of committee by the House Committee on Appropriations on Friday, Feb. 13.

HB 2489, as amended, would create new law requiring school districts to develop fentanyl abuse education programs and maintain a stock supply of naloxone. The bill would require the State Board of Education to develop guidance for age-appropriate instruction on the prevention of the abuse of and addiction to fentanyl and other opioids and distribute such guidance to school districts. The bill was passed favorably out of committee, as amended, on Feb. 9.

HB 2509, as amended, would amend the Health Care Provider Insurance Availability Act to add APRNs to the list of health care providers participating in the Health Care Stabilization Fund. The House Committee on Health and Human Services amended the bill and passed it favorably out of committee on Feb. 12

HB 2521, as amended, would modify the definition of "governmental entity" in the Kansas Tort Claims Act to add a child placement agency, as defined in current child care facilities law, if the child placement agency had an active contract with the Secretary for DCF when the act or omission giving rise to the claim occurred. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Judiciary on Feb. 9, and the bill, as amended, was subsequently passed favorably out of committee.

HB 2562 would add physical therapists, licensed to practice under the Physical Therapy Practice Act, to the list of authorized practitioners who can certify to the Kansas Department of Revenue, Division of Vehicles, that an individual has a disability for the purpose of issuing a special license plate or permanent or temporary placard for a person with a disability. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Health and Human Services on Feb. 9, and the bill was passed favorably out of committee.

HB 2576 would establish "Erin's Law" and would require, beginning with the 2026-2027 school year, all local boards of education to provide annual training on child sexual abuse, as well as sexual assault awareness and prevention, to all teachers in the school district. The training and instruction may be developed or provided by the Erin's Law Foundation, which provides resources at no cost, or other resources deemed appropriate by the local board of education. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Education on Feb. 9.

HB 2587 would permit licensed private psychiatric hospitals that utilize the services of pharmacists to maintain an emergency medication kit under the supervision of a prescriber and pharmacist for pharmaceutical emergencies. The bill would allow controlled substances in the kit subject to limitation by a pharmaceutical committee and require compliance with the Uniformed Controlled Substance Act. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Health and Human Services on Feb. 9.

HB 2592 would establish the Kansas Task Force on Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies to study and evaluate the impacts, risks, workforce implications and regulatory needs of artificial intelligence and related emerging technologies. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Legislative Modernization on Feb. 9.

HB 2637 would require eligible local boards of education to consider participation in the community eligibility provision of the federal school lunch programs. The bill would provide a financial hardship provision from participation and would require the Department of Education to assist school districts seeking to participate in the community eligibility provision. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Education on Feb. 12.

HB 2703 would create the Kansas Health Insurance Affordability Transparency Act and would require the Kansas Department of Insurance, upon request of a legislator, to prepare a report concerning the financial impact to covered individuals that would result from the passage of certain health insurance legislation. Health insurance legislation is defined as any bill that has been introduced in either chamber of the Legislature during the current legislative session and includes any new:

• Requirement for minimum health insurance coverage, including requiring coverage for specific health conditions, products, medications, health care procedures or services
• Requirement on the amount or type of cost-sharing that a health insurer or administrator may require a covered person to pay
• Fee or other licensure requirement for a health insurer or administrator
• Tax or change to tax rates paid by a health insurer or an administrator
• Prohibition on any business practice of a health insurer or an administrator
• Mandate requiring a health insurer or administrator to conduct business with respect to a covered person, contracted service provider or any state governmental agency

A hearing was held in the House Committee on Insurance on Feb. 13 and the bill was subsequently passed favorably out of committee.

HB 2729 would amend informed consent provisions of the Woman's Right to Know Act concerning required information and notice signs for both abortion procedures and medication abortion. The bill would specify that the information required to be provided shall be on a form provided by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) and that such form may be provided in hardcopy format on white paper or electronically transmitted to the woman. The bill was passed favorably out of committee by the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs on Feb. 12.

HB 2736 would require non-disproportionate share hospitals to screen all patients for eligibility of such hospital's financial assistance program and charity care policy using the process prescribed by KDHE. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Insurance on Feb. 13.

HB 2740 would adopt the compounding standards established by U.S. Pharmacopeia (USP) for sterile, nonsterile and radiopharmaceutical and would become part of the state's Pharmacy Act. The bill would remove the requirement for the Board of Pharmacy to adopt rules and regulations governing proper compounding practices and distribution of compounded drugs by pharmacists and pharmacies but would retain the Board's authority to adopt rules and regulations related to compounding and to establish waivers from USP standards. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Health and Human Services on Feb. 11.

HB 2765 would amend the Uniform Controlled Substances Act by adding and removing certain substances in Schedules I, III and IV and make conforming changes to the criminal code, including updating the definition of fentanyl-related controlled substances and adding certain substances, including 7-hydroxymitragynine (7-OH), to Schedule I. A hearing was held in the House Committee on Health and Human Services on Feb. 11.

SB 363 would require the Secretary for DCF and the Secretary for KDHE to enter into data-matching agreements with state agencies to verify eligibility for food and medical assistance; direct KDHE to submit certain data to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services; prohibit certain public assistance program waivers or exemptions without legislative approval, prohibit self-attestation for determining eligibility for public assistance programs, require redetermination of eligibility for medical assistance on a quarterly basis; limit retroactive enrollment in the medical assistance program; require immediate termination of eligibility for medical assistance upon confirmation of death of the enrollee; increase the age limit for able-bodied adults without certain dependents; and prohibit certain exemptions from work requirements under the food assistance program. A hearing was held in the Senate Committee on Government Efficiency on Feb. 10 and 11.

SB 405 would make it unlawful for a person to knowingly train artificial intelligence to encourage or support suicide or murder, provide emotional support, develop an emotional relationship, act as a mental health or health care professional, act as a sentient human, encourage isolation, encourage providing financial information or simulate a human being. The bill would allow the Attorney General or an individual to bring a civil action against a person for violations of the bill and outlines damages that could be recovered. A hearing was held in the Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs on Feb. 9.

SB 408 would amend the definition of "child in need of care" in the Revised Kansas Code for Care of Children (CINC Code) to exclude a person less than 18 years old who is engaging in independent activities without adult supervision when a parent allows such child to engage in such activities if:

• Such independent activities are appropriate for the child's age, maturity and mental abilities
• Such lack of supervision does not constitute such grossly negligent conduct that it would endanger the health and safety of the child

The bill would define "independent activities" to include, but not be limited to, traveling to or from school or nearby locations on foot or bicycle, playing outdoors, remaining home for a reasonable amount of time or remaining in a vehicle that is not dangerously hot or cold for a reasonable amount of time. A hearing was held in the Senate Committee on Judiciary on Feb. 11 and the bill was subsequently passed favorably out of committee.

SB 497 would amend the Uniform Controlled Substances Act by adding kratom to schedules I as outlined in the bill. The bill would also make conforming amendments to the definition of "fentanyl-related controlled substance" in the criminal code. A hearing was held in the Senate Committee on Federal and State Affairs on Feb. 12.