Kathryn Burgum has been identified in White House coverage and major news reports as the Senior Advisor for Addiction Recovery and a co‑chair of the Initiative. Senior Advisers to the President are White House political appointees who are selected by the President and serve without Senate confirmation (appointments within the Executive Office of the President typically do not require Senate advice and consent).
The Executive Order does not give the Co‑Chairs any new statutory authority over other agencies; it directs them to recommend, advise, hold hearings/roundtables, and coordinate, but Section 4(a) preserves existing statutory authority of agency heads and makes clear the order does not alter legal powers of departments or their heads.
The order does not create new federal funding streams; implementation is “subject to the availability of appropriations” (Section 4(b)), so the Initiative will advise on directing grants but any grant funding depends on existing or future appropriations and applicable law.
The Initiative must set clear objectives and provide “data‑driven updates to the public on progress towards meeting these objectives” (Sec. 3(i)); the order does not specify exact metrics or datasets — those measurement details will be defined by the Co‑Chairs and participating agencies and published later.
The Director of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP Director) is the head of the Executive Office of the President office that coordinates federal drug control activities and strategies. Under the Executive Order, the ONDCP Director is a designated member of the Initiative and will participate in coordination, planning, and advising on aligning federal programs and grants to address addiction.
The order directs the Initiative to “consult with States, tribal nations, local jurisdictions, community‑based organizations, faith‑based organizations, the private sector, and philanthropic entities” (Sec. 3(v)). It authorizes outreach, hearings, and roundtables to coordinate strategies, but implementation with states/tribes will be by consultation and recommendations; the EO does not preempt state or tribal authority.
No. The Executive Order does not change federal privacy or data‑sharing protections for people in treatment; it contains no language altering HIPAA, 42 CFR Part 2, or other privacy laws — implementation must be “consistent with applicable law” (Sec. 4(b)), so existing privacy rules remain in force.