SSB 5933
In CommitteeSenate
Overdose mapping information
Facilitating the rapid sharing of overdose mapping information for overdose prevention.
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 creates a system to quickly share anonymized overdose data from emergency medical services (EMS) providers to public health agencies, enabling faster response to overdose spikes and better targeting of prevention and treatment services. It updates existing data systems to include overdose data while strictly limiting use of the data to public health purposes and protecting individual privacy.
- Requires the Department of Health to share anonymized, near real-time data on opioid overdoses (fatal and nonfatal) from the Washington Emergency Medical Services Information System to the Overdose Detection Mapping Application Program within 24 hours of EMS response.
- Mandates reporting of specific data points for each overdose incident: date/time, GPS location (to four decimal places), whether naloxone or other opioid reversal medication was administered, and whether the overdose was fatal or nonfatal at initial encounter or during transport.
- Prohibits use of the shared overdose data for law enforcement purposes—including welfare checks, warrants, or criminal investigations/prosecution—of the individual who experienced the overdose.
- Requires the data system to protect individual privacy and prevent identification of people who experienced overdoses.
- Expands the existing statewide trauma registry to include suspected drug overdoses and explicitly allows data sharing with the overdose mapping program to support prevention, outreach, and treatment efforts.
Who is affected
- Emergency medical services (EMS) providers — Emergency medical services (EMS) providers—including ambulance and aid services—must report overdose-related data to the state's EMS database, which is then shared with the overdose mapping program within 24 hours.
- Public health and emergency response agencies — State and local public health, law enforcement, and social service agencies will receive anonymized, near real-time data on overdose locations and trends to guide prevention and response efforts.
- People affected by substance use disorders — Individuals experiencing or at risk of overdose benefit from faster access to prevention resources, outreach, and treatment due to improved data-driven targeting of services.
- Hospitals and trauma care providers — Hospitals and trauma centers continue to report trauma data to the state registry, now explicitly including suspected overdoses to support broader public health efforts.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Near real-time, anonymized overdose data will enable faster deployment of harm-reduction resources (e.g., naloxone distribution, mobile crisis teams, outreach workers) to emerging hotspots — directly benefiting communities experiencing overdose spikes, especially those with limited access to care.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a) & Sec. 1(3)(b)Tracking whether naloxone was administered helps public health agencies evaluate the effectiveness of naloxone distribution programs and identify gaps in access — enabling targeted interventions that reduce preventable deaths, especially in underserved areas.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)(iii) & Sec. 1(3)(a)Mandating inclusion of suspected overdoses in the trauma registry allows integration with existing public health infrastructure — supporting coordinated outreach, peer support, and treatment linkage, which are proven to reduce repeat overdoses and improve long-term recovery outcomes.
HealthcarePeopleRef: Sec. 3(2) & Sec. 1(3)(d)Accurate, geographically precise overdose data supports evidence-based public education campaigns — helping schools, community organizations, and health departments tailor prevention messaging to local risks, especially for youth and high-risk populations.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(3) & Sec. 1(3)(c)The bill formalizes interagency collaboration across local, regional, and state levels — enabling counties and cities to coordinate response efforts more efficiently, reducing duplication, and improving resource allocation for communities lacking centralized public health infrastructure.
Local GovernmentPeopleRef: Sec. 1(3)(e) & Sec. 1(2)
Potential Concerns (5)
While the bill prohibits use of overdose data for law enforcement purposes related to the individual overdose, it does not prevent use of the data for broader policing activities (e.g., targeting neighborhoods, conducting surveillance, or executing warrants in areas with high overdose rates) — creating a potential loophole where anonymized location data could still be used to justify increased police presence or stops in vulnerable communities, disproportionately impacting people of color and low-income residents.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 2(2)The requirement to report whether an overdose was fatal *at initial encounter or during transport* may create ambiguity in data accuracy — if a patient dies en route, the system may classify it as nonfatal at initial encounter, potentially undercounting fatal overdoses and skewing public health assessments.
HealthcareLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)(iv)Reporting GPS coordinates to four decimal places (~110 meters accuracy) may still allow for re-identification in low-population or rural areas, especially when combined with other datasets — increasing privacy risks for people experiencing homelessness or living in isolated communities.
HousingLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b)(ii)The bill ties data sharing to the Washington/Baltimore High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) program, a federal initiative historically associated with aggressive policing and militarized drug enforcement — raising concerns that data may be repurposed for federal enforcement actions despite state restrictions.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(4)(d)The bill does not require consent from individuals who experience overdoses before their anonymized data is shared — even with privacy safeguards, the lack of opt-out mechanisms may erode trust in emergency medical services, particularly among people with substance use disorders who fear stigma or future discrimination.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a)
Who Is Most Affected
EMS providers face increased reporting obligations but gain standardized data protocols and integration with existing systems; minimal new cost, but potential administrative burden in rural or under-resourced districts.
Public health agencies gain powerful real-time surveillance tools to guide prevention and outreach; however, they must ensure strict data governance to avoid misuse and maintain community trust.
People with substance use disorders benefit from faster, more targeted interventions and reduced stigma through anonymized data use — but may distrust the system if privacy safeguards are perceived as weak or unenforced.
Hospitals and trauma centers gain inclusion of suspected overdoses in the trauma registry, improving data continuity and enabling better coordination with prehospital providers — but must ensure compliance with new reporting requirements.
Local governments (especially counties with high overdose rates) gain capacity to respond quickly to crises — but may face pressure to allocate limited staff to manage data systems rather than direct services.