BILL ANALYSIS Ó SB 364 Page 1 Date of Hearing: August 14, 2013 ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS Mike Gatto, Chair SB 364 (Steinberg) - As Amended: August 5, 2013 Policy Committee: HealthVote:19-0 Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No SUMMARY As proposed to be amended, this bill revises numerous provisions of the Lanterman-Petris-Short (LPS) Act related to 72-hour involuntary detention for mental health evaluation and treatment (so-called "5150 holds," as defined in Section 5150 of the Welfare and Institutions Code). Specifically, key provisions of this bill: 1)Broaden the types of facilities counties may designate for purposes of 72-hour evaluation and treatment. 2)Authorize the county mental health director to develop procedures for the county's designation and training of professionals who will be designated to perform functions under Section 5150. 3)Recast Section 5150 by adding and modifying other existing provisions related to the required sequencing of events. 4)Make numerous other clarifying, technical, and minor substantive changes to Section 5150 and related provisions. FISCAL EFFECT Negligible state fiscal effect. COMMENTS 1)Rationale . This bill is intended make focused changes to the landmark LPS Act, which the author states comprise a civil rights act for persons with mental health disorders to ensure their personal rights. SB 364 Page 2 The author writes that this bill broadens the types of facilities a county can designate for 5150 purposes in order to provide counties with more options for assisting individuals. Provisions authorizing county mental health directors to develop procedures for the county designation of LPS facilities and the training of professionals are intended to improve consistency across counties, transparency, and quality improvement in the 5150 process. In addition, the author indicates this bill restructures and recasts several provisions to more clearly articulate the sequencing of events in the 5150 process. Finally, the bill modifies legislative intent language, updates terminology, and emphasizes that services need to be provided in the least restrictive settings, as appropriate. In support, the California Mental Health Directors Association (CMHDA) writes that this bill provides helpful clarifications to the LPS Act while upholding the original intent of these landmark civil rights statutes. Disability Rights California, also in support, believes this bill will help ensure people with mental health disabilities are treated appropriately and in the least restrictive environments. 2)Related Legislation . a) AB 110 (Blumenfield), Chapter 20, Statutes of 2013, enacts the 2013-14 Budget Act, which includes, among other provisions, $206 million ($143 million one-time GF) for a major investment in mental health services, including additional residential treatment capacity, crisis treatment teams, and triage personnel. AB 110 also designates $400,000 for the development of consensus guidelines for involuntary assessment and discharge regarding Section 5150 and related statutes, and training as appropriate, including for peace officers. b) SB 585 (Steinberg), also being heard today, clarifies that Mental Health Services Act funds and various other local funds may be used to provide mental health services under the Assisted Outpatient Treatment Demonstration Project Act of 2002, or Laura's Law, and allows counties to opt to implement Laura's Law through the county budget process. SB 364 Page 3 1)Concern . The California American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP/CA) is opposed to a provision of the bill that de-links requirements previously placed on "designated facilities" and applies them to designated persons. ACEP/CA requests an amendment to clarify that designated facilities must provide certain services on a voluntary basis, instead of providing the person a right to receive such services. The Citizen's Commission on Human Rights is opposed to this bill based on opposition to the current provisions of Section 5150 and to involuntary treatment broadly. 2)Amendments. Amendments reinstate the current law requirement that DHCS approve designated facilities, clarify the 72-hour limit also applies to circumstances where an individual is taken into custody for assessment and evaluation without necessarily being admitted to a designated facility, and clarify one usage of the word "facility" refers to the "admitting facility." Analysis Prepared by : Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916) 319-2081