District of Columbia Code
Subchapter V - Rights of Persons with Intellectual Disabilities
§ 7–1305.06c. Psychotropic medication review

(a) By April 15, 2009, the DDS shall complete a psychotropic medication review for all persons served by DDS.
(b) By October 17, 2008, the DDS shall establish written procedures, which shall include timelines and shall identify responsible entities or persons, for promptly implementing the recommendations for each person identified by the psychotropic medication review.
(c) The psychotropic medication review shall be conducted by a review team that includes professionals with expertise in the prescription, use, and side effects of psychotropic medications as therapy for persons who have been dually diagnosed with intellectual disabilities and mental illness.
(d) DDS shall establish in writing:
(1) Procedures for an initial administrative review of psychotropic medication prescriptions for all persons served by DDS.
(2) Procedures and criteria for determining which persons receive only an initial administrative review of psychotropic medications, and which persons also receive a more detailed clinical review of psychotropic medications; and
(3) Criteria for screening and determining the clinical appropriateness of each psychotropic medication prescribed for each person.
(e) The review team shall complete the initial administrative review of psychotropic medications. The initial administrative review of psychotropic medications shall determine, at minimum, for each person served by DDS:
(1) All prescribed psychotropic medications;
(2) The diagnosis justifying each prescription;
(3) The provision of informed consent for each prescription;
(4) The presence of an accompanying behavioral plan; and
(5) Any other mental health services being provided to the person.
(f) The review team shall conduct a clinical review of psychotropic medications when the initial administrative review meets the review team’s criteria indicating that a detailed clinical review of the person’s psychotropic medication is warranted. The clinical review shall seek to determine the clinical appropriateness of each prescribed psychotropic medication and the potential for alternative approaches. The clinical review shall include, at a minimum, interviews with the person, the prescribing professional, and the person’s residential and day service providers, if any.
(g) By no later than 30 days after completing a psychotropic medication review of a person, the review team shall issue a written report, which shall include recommendations for:
(1) Continued use, modification, or termination of psychotropic medication;
(2) Potential use of alternative approaches, including therapies, behavioral plans, skill development, and environmental modifications;
(3) Informed consent, if informed consent has not been provided; and
(4) Development of a behavioral plan, if no behavioral plan is present.
(h) A copy of the written report of the review team shall be appended to the person’s person habilitation plan and shall be provided to:
(1) The person;
(2) The person’s legal representative, if any;
(3) The person’s advocate for a person with an intellectual disability, if any;
(4) The person’s DDS case manager;
(5) Other persons identified in the person’s person habilitation plan as reasonably available, mentally capable, and willing to provide substituted consent pursuant to § 21-2210, if any;
(6) The person’s residential service provider; and
(7) The Quality Trust for Individuals with Disabilities, Inc.
(Mar. 3, 1979, D.C. Law 2-137, § 506c; as added Oct. 22, 2008, D.C. Law 17-249, § 5(d), 55 DCR 9206; Sept. 26, 2012, D.C. Law 19-169, § 17(kk), 59 DCR 5567; May 5, 2018, D.C. Law 22-93, § 201(c)(35), 65 DCR 2823.)
The 2012 amendment by D.C. Law 19-169 substituted “all individuals served by DDS” for “all DDS customers” in (a) and (d)(1); substituted “individual” for “customer” or variants throughout the section; substituted “intellectual disabilities” for “mental retardation” in (c); substituted “each individual served by DDS” for “each DDS customer” in the introductory language of (e); substituted “advocate for a person with an intellectual disability” for “mental retardation advocate” wherever it appears in the section; and in (h)(5), substituted “Other persons” for “The individuals”.
For temporary (90 day) addition, see § 4(d) of Health-Care Decisions for Persons with Developmental Disabilities Emergency Amendment Act of 2006 (D.C. Act 16-480, September 25, 2006, 53 DCR 7940).
For temporary (90 day) addition, see § 4(d) of Health-Care Decisions for Persons with Developmental Disabilities Congressional Review Emergency Amendment Act of 2006 (D.C. Act 16-566, December 19, 2006, 53 DCR 10272).
For temporary (90 day) addition, see § 4(d) of Health-Care Decisions for Persons with Developmental Disabilities Emergency Act of 2007 (D.C. Act 17-161, October 18, 2007, 54 DCR 10932).
For temporary (90 day) addition, see § 4(d) of Health-Care Decisions for Persons with Developmental Disabilities Congressional Review Emergency Amendment Act of 2008 (D.C. Act 17-245, January 23, 2008, 55 DCR 1230).
For temporary (90 day) addition, see § 5(d) of Health-Care Decisions for Persons with Developmental Disabilities Emergency Act of 2008 (D.C. Act 17-492, August 4, 2008, 55 DCR 9167).
For temporary (225 day) addition, see § 4(d) of Health-Care Decisions for Persons with Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Temporary Amendment Act of 2006 (D.C. Law 16-194, March 2, 2007, law notification 54 DCR 2492).
For temporary (225 day) addition, see § 4(d) of Health-Care Decisions for Persons with Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities Temporary Amendment Act of 2007 (D.C. Law 17-100, February 2, 2008, law notification 55 DCR 3407).
Section 35 of D.C. Law 19-169 provided that no provision of the act shall impair any right or obligation existing under law.