Dillon's Law updates federal guidelines to grant preference points to states that allow any trained personnel, not just school employees, to administer epinephrine delivery systems in schools.
Glenn Grothman
Representative
WI-6
Dillon's Law amends federal guidelines to grant preference points to states that allow trained, non-school personnel to administer epinephrine in schools. This change broadens the definition of who can provide life-saving medication beyond just school employees. The law also updates terminology to cover a wider range of epinephrine delivery systems.
This legislation, officially named Dillon’s Law, is making a smart, practical change to how states qualify for federal preference points related to emergency medical preparedness in schools. Essentially, the bill updates the rules to reward states that allow a wider range of trained people—not just school employees—to administer life-saving epinephrine, like EpiPens, during an emergency.
Right now, federal incentives focus on states that train “School personnel.” Dillon’s Law changes this language everywhere in the relevant Public Health Service Act section (SEC. 2) to “Trained personnel.” This is a big deal because it means states can now get credit for authorizing people who might be on campus regularly but aren't official employees—think volunteers, coaches hired by outside organizations, or even authorized parents assisting with school trips.
The bill includes a “Special rule” that lets schools treat non-employees as part of the trained staff, provided they meet specific training requirements already established in the law. This flexibility is crucial. For example, if your child’s school relies heavily on volunteer chaperones for field trips, this law encourages the state to authorize and train those volunteers to administer an EpiPen, significantly increasing the odds of a quick response if a student has a severe allergic reaction.
The law also updates the medical terminology (SEC. 2). Where the old rules focused on “auto-injectable epinephrine,” the new text uses the broader term “epinephrine delivery systems.” This is policy catching up with technology. Epinephrine delivery isn't static; this change ensures that if new, perhaps easier or more effective, delivery methods are developed, states can use them without losing their federal preference points. This is a subtle but important move toward future-proofing emergency response protocols.
While the expansion of who can administer epinephrine is a clear win for safety, there’s a necessary bureaucratic hurdle built in. For states to get credit for authorizing these non-employee individuals, the State’s Attorney General has to confirm the certification process (SEC. 2). This step is designed to ensure accountability and legal clarity—making sure that the person giving the shot is properly trained and authorized, even if they aren't on the school's payroll. However, this relies on the Attorney General’s office efficiently managing this confirmation, which could potentially become a bottleneck if the process isn't streamlined. School districts will need clear protocols to manage and track the training and authorization of a broader pool of personnel, which could add some administrative load, but that's a small price for better emergency preparedness.