BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  1


          CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
          AB  
          38 (Eggman)


          As Amended  August 19, 2016


          Majority vote


           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |ASSEMBLY:  |      |(June 2, 2015) |SENATE: |39-0  |(August 29,      |
          |           |      |               |        |      |2016)            |
          |           |      |               |        |      |                 |
          |           |      |               |        |      |                 |
           -------------------------------------------------------------------- 
                 (vote not relevant)


           ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
          |COMMITTEE VOTE: |     |(August 30,     |RECOMMENDATION:   |concur     |
          |                |16-0 |2016)           |                  |           |
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
          |                |     |                |                  |           |
           ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 
           (Health)




          Original Committee Reference:  HIGHER ED.


          SUMMARY:  Establishes the Early Diagnosis and Preventive  
          Treatment (EDAPT) Program Fund, for the purpose of utilizing  








                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  2


          integrated systems of care to provide early intervention,  
          assessment, diagnosis, a treatment plan, and necessary services  
          for individuals with severe mental illness and children with  
          severe emotional disturbance, as specified.


          The Senate amendments delete the Assembly approved version, and  
          instead:


          1)Establish the EDAPT Program Fund within the State Treasury,  
            from which moneys from private or other sources may be  
            deposited into the fund and used for purposes of the EDAPT  
            Program.


          2)Define the EDAPT Programs as programs that utilizes integrated  
            systems of care to provide early intervention, assessment,  
            diagnosis, a treatment plan, and necessary services for  
            individuals with severe mental illness and children with  
            severe emotional disturbance using an interdisciplinary team  
            of physicians, clinicians, advocates, and staff who coordinate  
            care on an outpatient basis.


          3)Require, once the EDAPT Program Fund has reached or exceeded  
            $1,200,000, the State Controller to distribute all of the  
            moneys in the fund to the Regents of the University of  
            California (UC) for the purpose of providing reimbursement to  
            an EDAPT Program for services provided to persons who are  
            referred to that program, but whose private health benefit  
            plan does not cover the full range of required services.


          4)Require, upon acceptance of moneys from the EDAPT Program fund  
            by the Regents of the UC, the Regents to report, on or after  
            January 1, 2022, but before January 1, 2023, to the health  
            committees of both houses of the Legislature information on  
            the EDAPT Program, as specified.


          5)Sunset the EDAPT Program and Program Fund on January 1, 2023.








                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  3




          AS PASSED BY THE ASSEMBLY, this bill required the Legislative  
          Analyst's Office to conduct an initial analysis to assess the  
          need for a new campus of the California State University. 


          FISCAL EFFECT:  According to the Senate Appropriations  
          Committee:


          1)Ongoing administrative costs likely in the range of $75,000 to  
            $150,000 per year over the life of the EDAPT program for the  
            Department of Health Care Services to manage the EDAPT program  
            and ensure that state funding is used for the allowed uses  
            (General Fund (GF)).


          2)Ongoing program costs of about $400,000 per year to provide  
            state funding for services and supports not covered by private  
            health care coverage (GF).  Currently, the University of  
            California, Davis (UCD) program admits 50-60 new patients each  
            year, patients generally participate for two years, annual  
            costs are about $15,000, and roughly 40% of per-capita program  
            costs are not covered by private insurance.


          3)One-time costs likely between $100,000 and $200,000 for an  
            evaluation of the UCD program (GF).


          COMMENTS:  According to the author, this bill establishes the  
          framework for the private and federal funding and studying of  
          the EDAPT pilot program operated by the UC.  This bill requires  
          that UC report to the Legislature on the outcomes and cost  
          effectiveness of a comprehensive mental health delivery system  
          and early intervention in psychosis.  Currently, the private  
          health plan system lags far behind the county mental health  
          system in providing comprehensive mental health care.  Data  
          produced through the UC and backed by the state will demonstrate  
          to plans that a more robust range of services earlier in  
          treatment is not only beneficial to those in care, but to the  








                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  4


          health plans as well.  Rather than asking that the State mandate  
          that plans cover services, this bill seeks to contribute to the  
          research necessary for plans to make that decision for  
          themselves, and provide it to the Legislature if action is  
          necessary.  The author states that the longer we wait for  
          studies of EDAPT programs, the more Californians dealing with  
          severe mental illness, along with their families and  
          communities, will suffer without adequate care. 


          The sponsor of this bill, the California Psychiatric Association  
          (CPA), states that this bill addresses the vast gulf between the  
          comprehensive array of mental health services available  
          throughout public mental health system, and the relatively  
          narrow range of benefits available for privately insured  
          patients.  Ample data from the National Institute of Mental  
          Health (NIMH) collected for over a decade demonstrate an array  
          of wrap around services necessary to stem deterioration before  
          it become severe disability after an initial psychotic episode.   



          CPA argues that the participation of managed health care  
          organizations in programs like EDAPT is any formal way, not only  
          within California but also nationally, is unknown.  The UCD  
          EADPT program was one of the original NIMH centers contributing  
          to demonstrate the efficacy of early intervention.  UCD's EDAPT  
          Program accepts privately insured patients, but reimbursement to  
          the program from private insurance is typically for a  
          traditional array of services like psychiatrist visits,  
          medications, and a therapist.  Privately insured families then  
          pay out of pocket for the remainder of the wrap around service  
          that have been identified as effective by NIMH.  With data  
          demonstrating expensive repeat hospitalizations, as well as  
          failure at school and/or work, deterioration in social  
          relationships and alienation from their family, the CPA hopes to  
          persuade health insurers that spending upfront for wraparound  
          services not only improves beneficiaries health and mental  
          health outcomes, but is ultimately less costly. 


          Analysis Prepared by:                        Paula Villescaz /  








                                                                      AB 38


                                                                    Page  5


          HEALTH / (916) 319-2097                             FN: 0005000