What’s Up in California: New Funding Sources for Mental Health Services National Alliance to End Homelessness Annual Conference July 18, 2006 Presentation by: Alecia Hopper Public Policy Coordinator Mental.

Download Report

Transcript What’s Up in California: New Funding Sources for Mental Health Services National Alliance to End Homelessness Annual Conference July 18, 2006 Presentation by: Alecia Hopper Public Policy Coordinator Mental.

What’s Up in California:
New Funding Sources for Mental
Health Services
National Alliance to End Homelessness
Annual Conference
July 18, 2006
Presentation by:
Alecia Hopper
Public Policy Coordinator
Mental Health Association
of San Francisco
Jonathan Hunter
California Program Director
Corporation for Supportive
Housing
Moderated by: Karen Gruneisen, Managing Attorney, HomeBase
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Focus on:
 Mental
Health Services Act
(Proposition 63)
 Governor’s Initiative to End
Chronic Homelessness
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Part I:
Mental Health Services Act
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
History In California

1968: state mental hospitals emptied




California led the nation in deinstitutionalizing
mental illness
Promise of community care
Promise never fulfilled
Currently, tens of thousands
are without care

more than 50,000 individuals
with severe mental illness live on the streets of
California
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Background

Darrell Steinberg,
Assemblyman, Sacramento

AB 34/AB2034 (1999)


Created “integrated services
model”
Importance of what was
measured - cost savings
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Why an Initiative?

In spite of clearly documented offsetting
savings, the Legislature has been unwilling
to expand programs

Strong public support

36 year unfulfilled promise of community
programs
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
This initiative is funded by...

1% tax on “taxable” personal incomes
over $1 million

Taxpayers earning $1.5 million would pay a tax
of $5000


Deductible from federal income taxes
Is this tax fair?

This tax is a small portion of what these
taxpayers save

California Property Taxes and recent federal tax cuts
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
How does Prop. 63 affect the State
Budget?
Existing Entitlements are Protected
 State can’t reduce funding or shift costs to
counties



Funds must be used to expand not supplant
services
Estimated $500 million savings for State
General Fund in criminal justice system,
emergency rooms and welfare

LA County jail is the largest mental health care
provider in California
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
What does Prop. 63 do?


The Mental Health Services Act became law
effective January 1, 2005
Provides almost 1 Billion per year to counties





$1.1 and 1.2 billion for 05/06
Estimated between $1.2 and 1.3 billion for 06/07
Uses allocation formula
Offers mental health care to children, transitional
age youth, adults, seniors
Covers uninsured, and those whose insurance
coverage has run out
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
MHSA Fund Allocation – FY 05/06-FY
07/08

Education/Training

Capital Facilities/Technology = 10%

State Imp/Adm.
= 5%

Local Plan
= 0%

Prevention/Early
Intervention
= 20%

= 10%
CSS
= 55%
- (5% of Prev & CSS for “innovative programs”)
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Ed&Tr
Cap&T
State
Local
Prev.
CSS
Five Funding Areas

1) Prevention and Early Intervention


20% of funding
This component will support the design of programs to
prevent mental illnesses from becoming severe and
disabling, with an emphasis on improving timely access
to services for underserved populations.
 Emphasis on reducing:






Suicide
Incarcerations
School failures or dropouts
Prolonged suffering
Homelessness
Removal of children from their homes
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Five Funding Areas

2) Community Services and Support (CSS)


50% of funding
The CSS are the programs, services, and strategies that
are being identified by each county through its
stakeholder process to serve unserved and underserved
populations, with an emphasis on eliminating racial
disparity.

At least 51% of $ must be spent on wrap-around “whatever
it takes services”
 based on AB34 program (see http://www.ab34.org/)

The remaining $ are spent as determined by the County
based on an intensive public stakeholder process
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Five Funding Areas



3) Education and Training
10% of Funding
This component will target workforce development
programs to remedy the shortage of qualified individuals to
provide services to address severe mental illnesses.
 State will create plan
 Educational stipends, loan forgiveness and other
strategies to increase the mental health workforce
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Five Funding Areas

4) Capital and Information Technology



10% of funding
This component will address the capital infrastructure
needed to support implementation of the Community
Services and Supports programs.
It includes funding to improve or replace existing IT
systems and for capital projects to meet program
infrastructure needs.
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Five Funding Areas

5) Innovative Programs


5% of the funding
The goal of this component is to develop and implement
promising and proven practices designed to increase
access to services by underserved groups, increase the
quality of services and improve outcomes, and to
promote interagency collaboration.
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
MHSA Fund Allocation – Years 5+

State Imp/Adm.
= 5%

Prevention and Early
Intervention*
= 20%

CSS
- (5% of Prev. & CSS for
“innovative programs”)

Local Planning up to 5% of local funds

NOTE: Capital Facilities is no longer a “set aside” but counties can choose
to devote CSS funds to meet capital needs on an ongoing basis!
Maximum of 20% can be dedicated to Capital / IT, Education and Training
(ie Human Resources) and Prudent Reserve

= 75%
State
Prev.
CSS
*Amount for Prevention and Early
Intervention can be increased in
specific circumstances.
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Stakeholder Process

Stakeholder: a person or an organization that
feels they have an active interest in the outcome
of an issue or topic.


clients, family members, county mental health
departments, mental health providers, schools, social
services, law enforcement and others.
Intensive on going local and state-wide
stakeholder process


In San Francisco over 70 community meetings held to
create CSS plan
State DMH holds on-going meetings, conference calls,
email updates, etc.
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Oversight and
Accountability Commission


Responsible for Oversight of the MHSA
16 members-- All appointed by governor












Attorney General
Superintendent of Public Instruction
Chairperson of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee
Chairperson of the Assembly Health Committee
Two persons with a severe mental illness
a family member of an adult or senior with a severe mental illness
a family member of a child who has or has had a severe mental illness
a physician specializing in alcohol and drug treatment
a mental health professional
a county Sheriff
a Superintendent of a school district
a representative of
 labor organization
 an employer with less than 500 employees
 an employer with more than 500 employees
 a health care services plan or insurer
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Oversight and
Accountability Commission


Law requires counties to develop three year
plans
 Plan must be developed with local
stakeholders and receive state approval
 Reviewed and renewed on a yearly basis
Works with State DMH to develop policies
that will transform the mental health system
in California
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Reasons for Optimism


Purpose is to
transform the mental
health system, not
business as usual
Shifts the system from
fail first to help first
by focusing funds
specifically on
prevention and early
intervention

Funds are
continuously
appropriated

Funds are not tied to
“medical necessity” local creativity results

Cultural competence
in service delivery is
fostered
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
More Reasons for Optimism


Communities
articulate the link
between “recovery”
and permanent
housing and fund
housing
Unprecedented
consumer and family
involvement brings
much expertise

New roles emerging
for seasoned
stakeholders

Helps to reduce
mental health stigma

Increases the political
voice of the mental
health community
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Part II:
Governor’s Initiative to End
Chronic Homelessness (“GHI”)
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase I: New Capital Dollars!!
 A New Funding Program was established by the
Governor in 2005 to target housing funds to projects
serving people who are severely mentally ill and
chronically homeless
 Note: the State is NOT using the HUD definition of
chronically homeless but individual projects may use
the more restrictive HUD definition if they are
leveraging HUD funds
 This program funding is comprised of:


$40 million in MHP (Multifamily Housing Program-Prop
46)
$2 million in MHSA (from State administrative dollars)
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase I: More than Housing
Fund

In addition to this housing fund, the
Governor:



Created the State Interagency Council on
Homelessness
Provided funds for the Council to develop a Ten
Year Plan to End Chronic Homelessness;
Provided MHSA funds to provide training to
counties on building collaboratives to develop
supportive housing
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase I: Application Process
 These housing funds are available by applying to
the State Department of Housing and Community
Development
 The application form and process is similar to the
State’s existing Multifamily Housing Program
 The application process opened on January 16,
2006 and the deadline for submitting an
application was July 14, 2006
 A handful of applications received; application
process revisited
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase I: What is Funded
 At least 35% of the units in a project must
serve the GHI target population to be eligible
 The GHI program provides $30,000 per unit
MORE in loan funds than MHP
 GHI provides $5,000 per unit in MHSA
funding in a lump sum to establish a rent
reserve
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase I: Funding
Requirements
 MHSA funding for services is required, and
must be committed, to submit an application
 MHSA funding for operating subsidies is
“expected,” unless there is a Federal source
that will cover this cost
 The GHI program requires the same sponsor
experience criteria as MHP
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Governor’s Initiative to End Chronic
Homelessness: Phase II

As part of the (2006) May Revise, the Governor has announced
Phase II of the Governor’s Chronic Homeless Initiative
 $75 million of MHSA funds per year will be “pooled” at the
State
 The goal is to leverage these pooled funds with other public
and private investments to create supportive housing for
people with mental illness who are chronically homeless or
coming out of institutions
 The pooled funds will be administered by the California
Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA)
 State DMH, Housing and Community Development (HCD) and
CalHFA will continue to be partners in expanding supportive
housing options and leveraging funding opportunities
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase II: What we Know Now

“Chronic homeless” definition currently used
in GHI is not the HUD definition. The
definition to be used in Phase II will be
worked out in conversation with stakeholders
in the state’s Ten Year Plan process (probably
this summer)

CalHFA is moving legislation to establish a
special needs lending program that will be
separate from its current lending
instruments; the goal is flexibility to construct
complex deals
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase II: What we Know Now

Projects receiving capital funds must be
linked to MHSA services and operating
support funded by the county

State will work in partnership with counties to
determine allocation goals and process and to
ensure small county set aside

Technical assistance will be available to
counties and project sponsors
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase II: What we Know Now

The $75 million amount means that counties will
still have “room” to designate local MHSA funds
for other capital and workforce development
needs

State will be working in partnership with counties
to further define program and process

Flow of projects is anticipated to be
developer/sponsor seeks county approval and
partnership then goes to state DMH and CalHFA
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
GHI, Phase II: What we Know Now

Some Goals include:






leverage bonds, tax credits and other existing
instruments
link to existing Ten Year Plans to end homelessness and
other partnerships
partner with other local investments by cities, counties,
redevelopment authorities, etc.
real homes for real people integrated into the fabric of
the community
13,000 units of housing over twenty years
First funds may be available in early 2007
Mental Health Association of San Francisco
Questions?
Alecia Hopper
Mental Health
Association of San
Francisco
Phone: 415.421.2926
Email: [email protected]
Jonathan Hunter
Corporation for
Supportive Housing
Phone:619.232.3197
Email:Jonathan.Hunter@
csh.org
Mental Health Association of San Francisco