I am writing to ask DBHDS to revise the proposed recovery residence regulations so they recognize the important differences between staffed recovery residences and peer-run, self-governing recovery homes such as Oxford House.

As someone who works with individuals recovering from substance use disorders, I see firsthand how important safe, stable, and affordable recovery housing can be. Oxford Houses provide an important option for individuals who need continued peer support and accountability while rebuilding their lives in recovery.

I support strong standards that protect individuals in recovery from unsafe housing, exploitation, and unethical practices. However, those standards should also reflect how different recovery housing models actually operate. Requiring a self-governing, unstaffed Oxford House to comply with requirements designed for staffed or commercial operations could unintentionally eliminate an established recovery housing option rather than improve its safety.

I respectfully ask DBHDS to ensure the final regulations:

1. Allow self-governing residences to meet requirements without being required to employ or designate paid staff.

2. Clearly define who is considered the “operator” of a democratically operated Oxford House.

3. Distinguish between commercial recovery residence businesses and unincorporated, self-supporting associations when establishing requirements such as business insurance and State Corporation Commission registration.

Uniform standards should provide consistent protections for people in recovery without requiring every recovery residence to operate under an identical organizational structure.

Please revise the proposed regulations so Virginia can strengthen oversight and resident protections while preserving legitimate peer-run recovery housing models that many Virginians rely upon.

Thank you for considering the experiences of people in recovery, their families, treatment professionals, and recovery communities as these regulations are finalized.