Vermont License Reinstatement

Author: A. Ant, CADC-II, Licensing & Accreditation Expert

Disclaimer: This content is provided for general informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal, regulatory, or licensing advice. Requirements change frequently. Consult qualified professionals for guidance specific to your situation.

A residential substance use program in Vermont is usually carrying two separate approvals, on our interpretation of the two rules (no single Vermont source pairs them): a Therapeutic Community Residence license under 33 V.S.A. chapter 71, enforced by DAIL’s Division of Licensing and Protection, and, if it takes Department of Health funding, certification from the Health Department’s Division of Substance Use Programs (DSU). Trouble on one track doesn’t automatically spill onto the other. That cuts both ways, though, because getting fully back in good standing usually means working each one on its own terms. Hospitals, psychiatric units included, answer to a third set of rules, touched on further down.

DAIL Enforcement Against a Therapeutic Community Residence

DAIL’s inspectors can walk into a Therapeutic Community Residence “at all times without notice” (33 V.S.A. § 7108), and the agency has to investigate any complaint unless it reasonably believes the complaint has no merit (§ 7109). When a survey or investigation turns up a violation, the written notice must describe each condition, name the rule or statute it breaks, and set a correction date (§ 7110). The Therapeutic Community Residence regulations add “the date by which the residence must return a plan of correction,” a right to informal review, and a 15-day window from the mailing of the notice to appeal the violation finding to the Commissioner of Disabilities, Aging and Independent Living (Regulations § 4.14).

A filed plan isn’t the finish line. The statute says the facility “shall provide the licensing agency with proof of correction of the violation within the time specified” (§ 7111(b)). Violations left uncorrected can draw daily administrative penalties figured per resident, with the top tier, for health and safety violations, set at up to $10 per resident or $100, whichever is greater, for each day. After notice and an opportunity for a hearing, DAIL may “suspend, revoke, modify, or refuse to renew a license” on grounds that include violating the chapter or its rules and failing to comply with a final agency decision (§ 7111(d)). A person aggrieved by a licensing decision can ask the Human Services Board for a fair hearing under 3 V.S.A. § 3091 (§ 7118), and Board decisions can go on to the Vermont Supreme Court.

DAIL’s Survey Statements page says that, subject to limits on disclosure, state enforcement action information for Therapeutic Community Residences “is available to the public.” Survey and Certification can be reached at AHS.DAILDLPSurveyandCertification@vermont.gov or (802) 241-0480.

DSU Certification Can Lapse Independently

Good standing with one agency buys no protection with the other here. Under the Substance Use Disorder Treatment Certification Rule (effective January 1, 2020), certification “is required for any substance use disorder treatment program that receives state or federal funding from the Department,” and a preferred provider is a certified program that also holds a Department contract or grant. When DSU finds non-compliance, it notifies the program in writing and the program “must cure the non-compliance in the timeframe set forth in the notice” (Rule § 7.1). DSU can suspend or revoke certification at any time for non-compliance, subject to 3 V.S.A. § 809, and can suspend summarily when “public health or safety imperatively requires emergency action” (§ 7.2). On reinstatement the rule is short: “Following the suspension of a certification, the Department may reinstate certification” (§ 7.3). We found no waiting period and no separate reinstatement application in the rule.

The staffing knock-on is what catches operators off guard. Vermont’s counselor statute lets certified (not licensed) AAP and ADC staff practice without an LADC license through an exemption that covers “an individual certified under this chapter who is working in a preferred provider program under the supervision of a licensed alcohol and drug abuse counselor” (26 V.S.A. § 3233(4)). Section 3233(4) says nothing about the certificate itself lapsing. What it limits is where certified staff can practice without an LADC license, and whether OPR treats the certificate as affected is a question for OPR directly. Our reading is that certified-only staff at that program lose the footing that exemption gives them until the status is restored, which is a problem a DAIL finding on its own doesn’t create.

Appeal Routes, and a DSU Rule That Trails the Statute

A program that is denied certification, or has it suspended or revoked, “must be afforded an opportunity for a hearing with the Commissioner or designee pursuant to 3 V.S.A § 809,” and “during the appeal process the program does not maintain certification as a preferred provider” (Rule § 8.1). Appeals have to be in writing and give the reason (§ 8.3). The next step deserves care. Rule § 8.2 sends a further appeal “to the Board of Health pursuant to 18 V.S.A. § 128.” That matched the statute when the rule was written, but § 128 was amended by Act 53 of 2023, effective June 8, 2023. It now says a person aggrieved by a decision of the Commissioner “may appeal within 30 days to the Superior Court of the county in which such person resides or maintains a place of business,” where the court takes the matter de novo. Our view is that the current statute controls, so we’d calendar the 30-day Superior Court deadline and confirm the route with counsel rather than relying on the rule text.

Hospitals, psychiatric hospitals among them, are licensed under the Hospital Licensing Rule, where the State Board of Health is the licensing agency. If the Department finds a substantial violation, it can recommend that the Board refuse to issue or renew the license or revoke it (Rule § 7.8). Notice has to set a hearing date at least 60 days out, or 14 days where patient jeopardy is found, and the hospital may, “within thirty (30) days after issuance of the decision from the Board, appeal to the Vermont Superior Court in the county where the hospital is located” (§§ 7.9.1 and 7.9.2).

What a Credible Response Actually Looks Like

A correction plan that reads well on paper means nothing to either agency without proof it actually happened. Whichever agency is involved, a documented, verified correction carries real weight, actual policy changes implemented, staff retrained and that training confirmed, not a plan that exists only on paper. Given that DAIL and DSU review different things, a facility working to resolve a licensing issue and a certification issue at the same time needs two coordinated correction plans, not one general one, since the surveyors checking each are looking for different evidence.

The GMCB Angle, When It Applies

If the original problem traces back to an expansion, renovation, or new service that should have gone through Certificate of Need review and didn’t, that piece gets settled with the Green Mountain Care Board, not with DAIL or DSU. After notice and an opportunity to be heard, the Board may order that “no license or certificate permitted to be issued by any State agency may be issued” to the facility for the unapproved project for a set period, or that remedial conditions be attached to those licenses (18 V.S.A. § 9445(a)(1)). It can also order insurer and Medicaid payments denied, reduced, or limited (§ 9445(a)(2)). So a CON gap can keep a license problem open even after the survey deficiencies themselves are cleared.

Frequently Asked Questions

Working through a DAIL finding or a DSU certification issue? Reach out here.

Sources

• 33 V.S.A. § 7108: Inspection; technical assistance (checked October 7, 2026)
• 33 V.S.A. § 7109: Investigation; complaint (checked October 7, 2026)
• 33 V.S.A. § 7110: Violation; notice (checked October 7, 2026)
• 33 V.S.A. § 7111: Enforcement; protection of residents (checked October 7, 2026)
• 33 V.S.A. § 7118: Appeals (checked October 7, 2026)
• Licensing and Operating Regulations for Therapeutic Community Residences, §§ 1.7 and 4.14 (verbatim mirror): Cornell LII text of the regulations (checked October 7, 2026)
• DAIL Division of Licensing and Protection: Survey Statements (checked October 7, 2026)
• 3 V.S.A. § 3091: Human Services Board fair hearings (checked October 7, 2026)
• Vermont Department of Health, §§ 3, 4.1, 7 and 8: Substance Use Disorder Treatment Certification Rule (checked October 7, 2026)
• 18 V.S.A. § 128, current text: Appeal (checked October 7, 2026)
• 18 V.S.A. § 128, 2019 text (verbatim mirror): Appeal, prior version (checked October 7, 2026)
• 26 V.S.A. § 3233: Exemptions (checked October 7, 2026)
• Vermont Department of Health, §§ 7.8 to 7.9.2: Hospital Licensing Rule (checked October 7, 2026)
• 18 V.S.A. § 9445: Certificate of need enforcement (checked October 7, 2026)