RISE from Trauma Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Dec 11, 2025
Bottom line
This bill aims to create a more comprehensive, community-based, and workforce-ready system for addressing childhood trauma and promoting resilience across multiple sectors.
What it actually does
H.R. 6625, the RISE from Trauma Act, establishes new grant programs and reauthorizes existing ones to improve the identification and support of children and families affected by trauma. It creates local coordinating bodies, expands performance partnership pilots, funds hospital-based interventions, and strengthens the workforce for trauma-informed care in various settings including schools, healthcare, and law enforcement.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue that the bill provides much-needed resources and a coordinated approach to address the pervasive issue of childhood trauma, which has long-term impacts on health, education, and societal well-being. They emphasize the importance of early intervention, community-led solutions, and a trauma-informed workforce to break cycles of violence, addiction, and poverty.
Opponents contend
Potential opponents might raise concerns about the scale of federal involvement in local community programming, the potential for bureaucratic overlap with existing programs, or the overall cost of the authorized appropriations. Some might argue that the bill's broad scope could dilute focus or that local control over such sensitive issues is preferable to federal mandates.
The bill is moderately complex due to its amendments to existing acts, but its structure is clear. A dedicated reader can understand its core provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Title I, Sec. 101, amending Title V of the Public Health Service Act
Local Coordinating Bodies to Address Community Trauma, Prevention, and Resilience
This section authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to award grants (up to $6 million for 4 years) to State, local, tribal, or nonprofit entities. These entities will act as coordinating bodies to prevent or mitigate trauma and toxic stress, and promote resilience in communities. Eligible entities must include representatives from at least 5 categories (e.g., public health, education, criminal justice, healthcare, community organizations, general public). Priority is given to communities with high rates of trauma (e.g., high overdose deaths, violence, child welfare/juvenile justice involvement). Funds can be used for needs assessments, data collection, awareness campaigns, strategic planning, implementation of services, and identifying sustainable funding.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision empowers local communities to tailor trauma-informed approaches to their specific needs, fostering collaboration among diverse stakeholders and ensuring culturally responsive services. The focus on high-trauma communities is seen as critical for addressing disparities.
Critics contend
Critics might argue that creating new coordinating bodies could lead to bureaucratic inefficiencies or overlap with existing local initiatives. Concerns might also be raised about the federal government dictating local community structures.
Tradeoffs
Balancing local autonomy in addressing trauma with federal guidance and funding requirements. Ensuring effective coordination among diverse entities without creating undue administrative burden.
Title I, Sec. 102, amending Section 526 of the Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2014
Trauma-Informed Care Performance Partnership Pilots
This section expands an existing Performance Partnership Pilot program to include up to 10 new pilots specifically focused on improving outcomes for infants, children, youth, and their families affected by trauma. These pilots allow federal agencies to use discretionary funds across different or multiple years (FY2026-2030) to support integrated services for populations like low-income, homeless, child welfare-involved, or juvenile justice-involved youth in communities facing discrimination, poverty, violence, or high drug overdose rates. It also requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue guidance and explore start-up funding.
Title I, Sec. 103, amending Section 393 of the Public Health Service Act
Grants for Hospital-Based Trauma Interventions
This section authorizes HHS to award grants to hospitals or health systems (including tribal organizations) to deliver and evaluate hospital-based interventions. These interventions aim to improve outcomes and reduce subsequent reinjury or readmissions for patients presenting after overdosing, attempting suicide, or suffering violent injury or abuse. Funds can be used for comprehensive education, screening, counseling, discharge planning, skills building, and long-term case management. The Secretary, through CMS, must also evaluate opportunities for health insurance coverage and reimbursement for these activities.
Title I, Sec. 104, amending Section 582 of the Public Health Service Act
National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) Reauthorization
This section reauthorizes appropriations for the NCTSN at $93,887,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030. It also adds a requirement for collaboration among all NCTSN grantees for developing evidence-based resources, training, and interventions, and clarifies that all grantees are permitted to deliver both training and services.
Title I, Sec. 105, amending Section 7134(l) of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act
Trauma Support Services in Schools Grant Program Reauthorization
This section reauthorizes appropriations for the Trauma Support Services in Schools Grant Program for fiscal years 2026 through 2030. The specific amount is not stated in this section, but it refers to the original authorization.
Title I, Sec. 106, amending Section 7131(e) of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act
CDC Trauma Surveillance and Data Collection Reauthorization
This section reauthorizes appropriations for CDC surveillance and data collection activities related to trauma at $9,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030, a significant increase from the previous authorization of $2,000,000.
Title II, Sec. 201, amending Section 7132(i) of the SUPPORT for Patients and Communities Act
Interagency Task Force on Trauma-Informed Care Reauthorization
This section extends the authorization for the Interagency Task Force on Trauma-Informed Care until 2031, extending its work by one year.
Title II, Sec. 202, amending Part B of Title VII of the Public Health Service Act
Workforce Recruitment from High-Trauma Communities
This section mandates that in carrying out activities under Part B of Title VII (which relates to health professions education and training), the Secretary of HHS shall emphasize the recruitment of individuals from communities with high levels of trauma, violence, or addiction. It also requires appropriate activities to be carried out in partnership with community-based organizations with expertise in these challenges.
Title II, Sec. 203, amending Section 10503(b)(2) of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act
National Health Service Corps (NHSC) Funding for Trauma-Informed Settings
This section allocates an additional $50,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030 to the National Health Service Corps. These funds are specifically for awards to eligible individuals whose obligated service locations are in schools or community-based settings, as described in section 338N of the Public Health Service Act (which relates to NHSC loan repayment and scholarship programs).
Title II, Sec. 204, amending Part P of Title III of the Public Health Service Act
Infant and Early Childhood Mental Health Clinical Leadership Program
This section establishes a new program within HHS to award grants to eligible entities (institutions of higher education, including HBCUs and Tribal colleges, or affiliated hospitals/medical societies) to establish a national network of training institutes for infant and early childhood clinical mental health. The goal is to equip aspiring and current mental health professionals with culturally responsive skills in prevention, screening, assessment, diagnosis, and treatment for infants and children affected by trauma. Funds can be used for community-based training, graduate education tracks, scholarships, and mid-career training. $25,000,000 is authorized for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Title II, Sec. 205, amending Section 202 and 203 of the Higher Education Act of 1965
Trauma-Informed Teacher and School Leader Training
This section amends the Higher Education Act to integrate trauma-informed and resilience-focused teaching strategies into teacher and school leadership preparation programs. It requires partnerships to prepare teachers and early childhood educators to support students who have experienced trauma (including those in foster care, juvenile justice, or homeless youth) and in alternative education settings. It also emphasizes training in positive behavior interventions, social-emotional learning, mitigating trauma effects, and alternatives to punitive discipline. School leadership programs are also amended to include identifying students with trauma and connecting them to services.
Title II, Sec. 206
Development of Trauma-Informed Toolkits for Front-Line Providers
This section directs the Secretary of HHS, within 18 months, to develop accessible and understandable toolkits for front-line service providers (e.g., teachers, social workers, healthcare providers, first responders, faith leaders) to identify, respond to, and support infants, children, youth, and families affected by trauma or toxic stress. The toolkits must incorporate best practices and include strategies for addressing secondary trauma, compassion fatigue, and burnout among providers.
Title II, Sec. 207, amending Title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968
Grants to Support Children Exposed to Violence and Substance Use
This section establishes a new grant program within the Department of Justice (DOJ) for States, local governments, tribal organizations, and nonprofit organizations. The grants aim to reduce violence and substance use by preventing children's trauma from exposure to violence or substance use and supporting healing. Funds can be used for public awareness, training for parents and professionals, and community collaborations. Priority is given to communities addressing multiple types of violence and poly-victimization. $11,000,000 is authorized for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Title II, Sec. 208
National Law Enforcement Child and Youth Trauma Coordinating Center
This section establishes a new Center within the DOJ (in coordination with the Civil Rights Division) to assist state, local, and tribal law enforcement agencies in interacting with children and youth exposed to violence or trauma. The Center will disseminate best practices (e.g., trauma-informed conflict resolution, de-escalation, early interventions, officer secondary trauma support), provide training, and award grants. Grants can be used for officer training on identifying and responding to trauma, and establishing referral/partnership programs with mental health and social service professionals. $6,000,000 is authorized for grants and $2,000,000 for other Center activities for each of fiscal years 2026 through 2030.
Defines 'covered services' as culturally responsive, evidence-based/informed/promising practices to prevent/mitigate trauma or promote resilience. 'Covered setting' lists a comprehensive array of places where individuals interact with children at risk of trauma, including schools, hospitals, early childhood, home visiting, after-school, child welfare, public health, mental health, substance use, faith-based, domestic violence, violence intervention, child advocacy centers, homeless services, refugee services, juvenile justice, law enforcement, Healthy Marriage Promotion, Responsible Fatherhood, and TANF service settings.
Sec. 101(i)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to define terms for clarity and scope.
Case for: Supporters argue these broad definitions ensure the grant program can support a wide range of effective interventions and reach children in virtually any environment where they might encounter trauma or receive support. The emphasis on 'culturally responsive' is also key.
Case against: Critics might argue that such broad definitions could lead to a diffusion of resources or make it difficult to measure specific program effectiveness across such varied settings and services.
Estimated impact: Significantly broadens the potential scope and reach of the local coordinating body grants, allowing for highly integrated community approaches.
Requires the Director of OMB, within 9 months of enactment, to work with various Secretaries (Labor, HHS, Education, HUD, Attorney General) to explore authorities for start-up funding, issue guidance documents, template waivers, performance measurements, best practices, and align application timing for the trauma-informed care pilots.
Sec. 102(b)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to include implementation directives.
Case for: Supporters argue this ensures the pilot programs are effectively launched and supported, learning from past experiences and providing necessary flexibility and guidance to potential awardees.
Case against: No specific opposition, but some might view it as adding another layer of bureaucracy.
Estimated impact: Crucial for the successful and efficient rollout of the Performance Partnership Pilots, potentially accelerating their impact.
Directs the Secretary, acting through the Administrator of CMS, to evaluate existing authorities, flexibilities, and policies and disseminate information on opportunities for health insurance coverage and reimbursement for the hospital-based trauma interventions.
Sec. 103(c)(5)
Why it matters:Standard legislative practice to include directives for agency action.
Case for: Proponents argue this is a critical step towards making hospital-based trauma interventions sustainable beyond grant funding, integrating them into the broader healthcare system and ensuring long-term access.
Case against: No specific opposition, but some might argue it's an unfunded mandate on CMS or that such evaluations should be ongoing.
Estimated impact: Potentially significant long-term impact on the financial viability and widespread adoption of hospital-based trauma care.