BILL ANALYSIS Ó
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Christine Kehoe, Chair
AB 989 (Mitchell)
Hearing Date: 8/25/2011 Amended: 5/27/2011
Consultant: Katie Johnson Policy Vote: Health 9-0
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: AB 989 would require a county mental health
program to specifically consider the needs of transition age
foster youth when including services to address the needs of
transition age youth ages 16 to 25.
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 Fund
Potential cost shifts unknown, potentially significant*
Special**
for foster youth services
*See Staff Comments for estimate example.
**Mental Health Services Fund
_________________________________________________________________
____
STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE.
Existing law, Proposition 63, requires a county, when developing
its county plan, to address the mental health services needs of
transition age youth ages 16 to 25. This bill would additionally
require a county, when developing the transition age youth part
of its county Proposition 63 plan, to consider the mental health
services needs specifically of transition foster youth.
There are approximately 26,000 foster children in California, of
which about 4,000 "age-out" of the system annually. In 2004, the
voters passed Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act
(MHSA), to provide funds to counties to expand services for
individuals with mental illness through a 1 percent tax on
personal incomes above $1 million. Counties are required to
draft 3-year plans that, until recently, were required to be
annually updated and approved by the Department of Mental Health
(DMH), in order to receive MHSA funds. DMH informs counties of
the amount of funding available to each of them annually and the
AB 989 (Mitchell)
Page 1
counties, in turn, submit expenditure plans that detail the
number of individuals served and the cost per person. Over $1
billion were distributed to counties based on their plans in FY
2010-2011.
This process changed with AB 100 (Committee on Budget), Chapter
5, Statutes of 2011. It removed the requirement for state
approval of the annual updates of county mental health program
plans and declares the intent of the Legislature to ensure
continued state oversight and accountability of MHSA. It also
appropriated up to $862 million of MHSA funds on a one-time
basis for use in the Medi-Cal Specialty Mental Health Managed
Care program, mental health services for special education
pupils, and the Medi-Cal Early Periodic Screening Diagnosis and
Treatment program (EPSDT). Instead of linking the plan to the
amount of funds disbursed to a county, the State Controller
would disburse the full amount of funds allocated to a county on
a monthly basis. The counties would continue to develop a plan,
but it would be approved by local mental health boards, not by
the state.
This bill would effectively encourage counties to direct more
MHSA resources toward this specific group of individuals,
although it would be at a county's discretion to 1) deem their
current services to this population adequate, or 2) redirect
funds within their existing county plan toward transition age
foster youth. These fund shifts are unknown, but could be
significant. For example, if counties were to collectively
redirect $100 annually in MHSA funds for one cohort of 4,000
foster youth aging out of the system, the cost shift would be
$400,000 from one purpose to another.
Many counties currently recognize transition age foster youth as
a high-risk group, but also identify other groups at risk too.
The sponsors of this bill, the Children's Advocacy Institute at
the University of San Diego Law School, released a report in
January 2010, that reviewed whether or not MHSA-funded programs
adequately reach transition-age foster youth. The report gave 26
counties received a failing grade and 7 others a D grade.
AB 989 (Mitchell)
Page 2