HHS Asks Americans What Actually Works in Addiction Treatment

The federal government is doing something it rarely does before writing addiction policy: it is asking the people who live with the problem what actually helps. On June 10, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services published a Request for Information in the Federal Register inviting the public to weigh in on which research, programs and policies have done the most to treat addiction, improve mental health and sustain long-term recovery. The comment window runs through July 5, 2026.

The notice is unusually open-ended. Rather than floating a specific rule or funding formula, HHS is soliciting evidence and lived experience across the board — and it is explicitly inviting patients and people in recovery to respond alongside clinicians, community organizations and academic researchers. The department frames the effort as part of Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s "Great American Recovery" initiative, and says the responses will help shape both policy development and where federal dollars flow next.

Why the timing matters

The request lands at a moment when the overdose picture is finally improving but remains catastrophic by any historical measure. More than 80,000 people died of opioid overdoses in 2024, and annual deaths have stayed above 70,000 since 2017. Fentanyl and other synthetic opioids still drive the vast majority of those fatalities, and drug overdose remains a leading cause of death for Americans under 55.

That backdrop gives the RFI real stakes. Federal addiction funding has been turbulent over the past year, with grant terminations, shifting harm-reduction rules and a reorganized treatment bureaucracy leaving providers unsure what Washington will pay for. An open call for evidence is a chance for the field to make the case for the interventions with the strongest track records — from medication for opioid use disorder to recovery housing and peer support — before the next round of funding decisions is locked in.

What it means for the field

For treatment providers and advocacy groups, the practical takeaway is simple: the comment period is short, and silence cedes the floor. Submissions go through federalregister.gov, and HHS has signaled it wants concrete accounts of what works, not just position statements. People with direct experience of treatment — and the families who navigated the system with them — are being asked to document the gaps and the wins in their own words.

Whether the exercise translates into durable policy is an open question; agencies issue requests for information that sometimes produce little. But the deadline is real, and so is the opportunity. For a field that has long complained federal decisions are made without input from the front lines, the next three weeks are a rare chance to be heard before the rules are written.