HB 1035
In CommitteeHouse
Higher ed. traumatic stress
Creating policies and resources to address secondary traumatic stress in the higher education workforce.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill requires Washington’s community and technical colleges and regional universities to adopt policies and practices to prevent and address secondary traumatic stress—emotional strain experienced by workers exposed to others’ trauma. It mandates mental health committees, staff training, and public resources to support workforce well-being.
- The college board must create and publicly post a model policy to prevent and address secondary traumatic stress in community and technical college workplaces by September 1, 2025.
- Each community and technical college district must adopt or update policies by the 2025–26 academic year that include mental health committees, staff assessments, and training.
- The regional universities must develop and post their own model policy by September 1, 2025, with similar requirements for mental health committees and staff training.
- All colleges and universities must publish links to self-assessment tools, mental health resources, and best practices on their websites.
- Campus-wide mental health committees must be formed to share resources, promote inclusivity, and report annually to leadership on activities.
Who is affected
- Community and technical college workforce — Community and technical college staff, faculty, and trustees will be required to adopt and implement new mental health policies and participate in training and resource-sharing efforts to address secondary traumatic stress.
- Regional university workforce — Regional university staff, faculty, and trustees will be required to adopt and implement new mental health policies and participate in training and resource-sharing efforts to address secondary traumatic stress.
- College and university leadership (boards of trustees, presidents, and senior administrators) — The college board and regional universities must develop, publish, and maintain public-facing mental health resources and tools, and coordinate with state agencies to implement the bill.
- Public employees (especially those in higher education) — State employees covered under the public employees' benefits board may gain access to new mental health resources and self-assessment tools through their workplace.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (4)
Creates structured, campus-level mental health support infrastructure—including committees, self-assessment tools, and training—to proactively address secondary traumatic stress, a recognized occupational hazard for frontline educators and support staff (e.g., counselors, first responders, social workers), improving early intervention and reducing burnout.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(c)(i), Sec. 3(2)(c)(i), Sec. 1(4), Sec. 3(4)Requires public posting of mental health resources, self-assessment tools, and best practices, increasing accessibility for frontline workers who may not otherwise seek care due to stigma or lack of awareness—particularly beneficial for non-tenure-track and part-time staff who may have limited institutional support.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(b), Sec. 3(2)(b), Sec. 1(2)(c)(ii), Sec. 2, Sec. 4Mandates regular workforce input into policy implementation and assessment, fostering participatory workplace governance and increasing employee agency—a protective factor against burnout and turnover, especially for non-supervisory staff.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(d), Sec. 3(2)(d)Annual reporting to leadership on mental health committee activities creates accountability and transparency, enabling leadership to identify systemic issues and allocate resources more effectively—though impact depends on whether findings lead to real budget or staffing changes.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(c)(iii), Sec. 3(2)(c)(iii)
Potential Concerns (1)
Mandates additional staff time and administrative burden for mental health committee formation, assessments, and training without dedicated funding—costs will likely be absorbed by colleges through reallocating existing staff resources, potentially diverting time from core instructional or support functions.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(2)(e), Sec. 3(2)(e)
Who Is Most Affected
Frontline staff (e.g., counselors, academic advisors, student success coordinators, custodial and food services staff exposed to trauma narratives or crisis situations) are most likely to experience secondary traumatic stress; the bill provides direct access to resources and peer support structures, reducing emotional exhaustion and turnover risk.
Faculty and staff at regional universities—including those in high-stress roles like Title IX officers, crisis response teams, and disability services—gain standardized mental health protocols and institutional support, though implementation quality will vary by institution resources.
Leadership must allocate staff time and oversight to implement policies and committees; while this increases accountability, it adds administrative burden without new funding—though it may reduce long-term turnover and liability costs.
State employees in higher ed gain access to standardized mental health tools and peer networks, but participation depends on institutional buy-in—some may not see meaningful change if implementation is perfunctory.