Apr 3, 2026 By Mike Jones 5 min read

Another four opioid settlement grants in Washington County – including one for a recovery house and another for teen outreach programs – were rejected last week by the statewide board overseeing the money, prompting a county official to question the committee’s motives.

The Pennsylvania Opioid Misuse and Addiction Abatement Trust’s dispute resolution committee during its March 27 meeting deemed the four grants requesting a combined $530,000 as non-compliant, while the county withdrew one grant and four others under review were approved.

The rejected grants were $350,000 for the Shawn Patrick Recovery House; $80,000 to WHS Teen Outreach’s Common Ground Teen Center; $75,000 for The Childcare Group Solutions Center by Direct Consulting Solutions; and $25,000 for training and continuing education for the county’s Department of Human Services.

The decision last week to reject the grants comes on the heels of four others the county disbursed that were denied by the committee following a March 13 hearing before the board. The string of rejections led to a blistering response Thursday from county commission Chairman Nick Sherman, who said they have more questions than answers about the opioid settlement funds.

“I really question the integrity of this board at this point. I don’t believe they’re operating in good faith. They’ve never been able to answer questions about why they have made these decisions,” Sherman said in a phone interview.

Sherman pointed to the “cutting edge” Shawn Patrick Recovery House that opened in January with seven residents living in the home dedicated to helping people recover from drug or alcohol abuse. The county gave a $350,000 grant to the friends and family of Shawn Patrick Nairn, who died from a drug overdose at age 28 in 2020, as they worked to open the house to help others in recovery.

Sherman also questioned the decision to reject the grant for the WHS Teen Outreach program run by Dr. Mary Jo Podgurski to offer education and preventative education to young people.

“I mean, this review board is at best wishy-washy. Mary Jo Podgurski has a track record of helping thousands of kids in Washington County and her application could not be more buttoned up. And they denied it,” Sherman said. “One educational program will get approved and another one won’t.”

In comparison, the LeMoyne Center’s After School Program and Financial Literacy was approved to receive $75,000, along with $15,000 for the Mel Blount Youth Home and $3,510 to Gateway Rehab to “support people in treatment and recovery,” according to the trust’s database. A $300,000 grant to the county’s Department of Human Services for case management software was also approved, while county officials withdrew a $26,400 grant to the district attorney’s office for preventative programs.

“I caution and question their approach, and I really don’t understand their process,” Sherman said. “We’re asking for clarity and concrete definitions about how these (programs) did not qualify … and they have yet to expect to explain it to us,” Sherman said.

Sherman said the county is “100% appealing” the decisions while reviewing its own application process for grants to be sent to the committee for review. But he also did not rule litigation against the committee due to the number of rejections in the last two rounds of the approval process.

“At this point, we’re reviewing all options, but legal action is not out of the question. Not to protect the county, but to protect the people of Washington County who have done good work for a long time,” Sherman said.

An email sent through the opioid review committee’s website requesting comment on the decisions received an automatically generated reply notifying the sender that the “standard response time” takes two to four weeks.

While Sherman blamed the review committee, others at Thursday’s commissioners meeting blamed county officials. Laura Dieterle, who serves as director of Clinical and Case Management Services for Washington Drug and Alcohol Commission, laid the blame for “mismanaged and mispent funds” on Sherman and Human Services Director John Tamiggi, who helps select the grants and submits the grant applications to the trust fund’s review board.

“At this point, this is no longer an isolated issue. It’s a pattern,” Dieterle said. “They spent funding that was earmarked to address the opioid crisis on other things, such as favors to friends. They withheld required information about these grants from the trust, and residents’ questions about funding decisions remain unanswered.”

She noted that the funds either must be paid back to the trust fund or future allotments might be withheld, giving the county fewer grants to fund. Dieterle added that she still has concerns about the county’s new opioid grant committee that is tasked with choosing which programs should be funded.

The consequences of these decisions will fall on the very people this money was meant to help,” she said.

It’s not known when the appeal hearing will be held on the four rejected grants. The county has allocated $4.7 million in grants from the settlement trust over four rounds since September 2024, with the money designed to help battle the opioid epidemic.

A full list of the grants can be found on the opioid trust fund’s website at www.paopioidtrust.org.