BILL ANALYSIS Ó AB 2017 Page 1 CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS AB 2017 (McCarty) As Amended August 19, 2016 Majority vote -------------------------------------------------------------------- |ASSEMBLY: |77-0 |(June 2, 2016) |SENATE: | 39-0 |(August 23, | | | | | | |2016) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | -------------------------------------------------------------------- Original Committee Reference: HEALTH SUMMARY: Establishes the College Mental Health Services Program (CMHS Program) Act, which creates a grant program (CMHS Program Grant) for public community colleges, colleges, and universities to improve access to mental health services and early identification or intervention programs. Specifically, this bill: 1)Establishes, upon appropriation by the Legislature to the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC), the CMHS Program Grant. 2)Requires the MHSOAC to create a grant program for public community colleges, colleges, and universities, in collaboration with county behavioral health departments, to AB 2017 Page 2 improve access to mental health services and early identification or intervention programs. 3)Requires the MHSOAC to establish guidelines for grant funding and a request for application (RFA). Establishes RFA guidelines, as specified. 4)Permits CMHS Program Grants to be awarded to a Community College District in the California Community College system, a campus within the California State University system, or a campus within the University of California system. 5)Requires CMHS Program Grants to be proportional to the number of students served, and cannot exceed more than $5 million per campus, per application. 6)Requires CMHS Program Grants to be awarded on competitive bases, only to a campus that can show dollar-for dollar match of funds from the campus. 7)Requires the MHSOAC to provide technical assistance to smaller colleges and counties, and county behavioral health departments upon request, in the application process to ensure equitable distribution of CMHS Program Grant awards. 8)Requires CMHS Program Grant recipients to report annually to the executive office of their respective systems. Requires the report to include the following information: a) grant funds and matching revenue expenditures; b) available evaluation data, including outcomes of the campus mental health programs funded; c) program information regarding services being offered and the number of individuals being served; and, d) plans for sustainability of mental health programming beyond the funding from the CMHS Program Grant. AB 2017 Page 3 9)Requires the MHSOAC, upon an appropriation of funds, to contract with a public or private research university or institute in this state to evaluate the CMHS Program. Requires the MHSOAC to develop the research design and issue a request for proposal for a contract for the evaluation, with the assistance of the Department of Finance and requires the MHSOAC to develop an evaluation plan to assess the impact of the program. 10)Requires the MHSOAC to submit the evaluation established in 9) above, to the Legislature by February 1, 2019, and annually thereafter by no later than February 1 of each year, and requires that the report be made available to the public and on the MHSOAC Internet Web site. 11)Establishes legislative findings and declarations related to college mental health services. 12)Establishes a January 1, 2022, sunset of the CMHS Program. The Senate amendments delete the $40 million appropriation to the College Mental Health Services Trust Account and delete the requirement that CalMHSA establish CMHS Program Grant guidelines and instead require DHCS to be the sole administrator of the CMHS Program Grant. FISCAL EFFECT: According to the Senate Appropriations Committee: 1)Unknown ongoing costs to provide grant funds to public college campuses (General Fund or other fund source). 2)One-time costs of $240,000 and ongoing costs of $365,000 per year for DHCS to provide technical assistance to grantees and to oversee the operation of the program (General Fund). AB 2017 Page 4 3)Ongoing costs likely between $1 million and $2 million per year CalMHSA to develop grant guidelines, review grant applications, and provide technical assistance to college campuses (General Fund). 4)Unknown costs to public college campuses to put up matching funds to receive grants under the bill (General Fund or special funds). The bill would require public college campuses that apply for funding to agree to provide a dollar-for-dollar match or another match. Depending on the match requirement, and the extent to which colleges could count existing program funds for the match requirement, the bill could impose additional costs on public college campuses. COMMENTS: According to the author, there are tremendous mental health needs that Californians face related to access, care, and homelessness. However, an often forgotten part of this discussion is our college-age students. Unfortunately, many of our public colleges do not have mental health services for their students on campus, particularly community colleges. Due to a lack of access to care, college-aged students often do not seek mental health services when they need them. The stigma around mental health is something that can be improved if we increase access to mental health services for students. The author argues that if students have the resources they need, which is the intent of this bill, the more likely they will seek help. Proposition 63 was passed by voters in November 2004. The MHSA imposes a 1% income tax on personal income in excess of $1 million and creates the 16 member Commission charged with overseeing the implementation of MHSA. The fiscal year (FY) 2015-16 Governor's Budget projected that $1.776 billion would be deposited into the MHSF in FY 2015-16. The MHSA addresses a broad continuum of prevention, early intervention, and service needs, as well as provided funding for infrastructure, technology, and training needs for the community mental health system. In addition to local programs, the MHSA authorizes up AB 2017 Page 5 to 5% of revenues for state administration. These include administrative functions performed by a variety of state entities such as the DHCS and the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development (OSHPD). It also funds evaluation of the MHSA by the Commission, which was established by the MHSA. ---------------------------------------------------- | FY | Revenue Generated | Estimated Revenue | | | | Expended | | | | | |-------+--------------------+-----------------------| |2012-13| $1.478 billion | $1.632 billion | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------+--------------------+-----------------------| |2013-14| $1.376 billion | $1.484 billion | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------+--------------------+-----------------------| |2014-15| $1.588 billion | $1.443 billion | | | | | | | | | | | | | |-------+--------------------+-----------------------| |2015-16| $1.776 billion | TBD | | | (projected) | | | | | | | | | | ---------------------------------------------------- MHSA requires each county mental health department to prepare and submit a three-year plan to DHCS that must be updated each year and approved by DHCS after review and comment by the Commission. In their three-year plans, counties are required to include a list of all programs for which MHSA funding is being AB 2017 Page 6 requested, that identify how the funds will be spent, and which populations will be served. Counties must submit their plans for approval to the Commission before the counties may spend certain categories of funding. According to national data compiled by the Center for Collegiate Mental Health over six academic years (2009-15) from over 93 institutions, on average, the growth in the number of students seeking services at counseling centers (+29.6%) was more than five times the rate of institutional enrollment (+5.6%). Further, the growth in counseling center appointments (+38.4) is more than seven times the rate of institutional enrollment. The lifetime prevalence rate for serious suicidal ideation among college students (i.e., "I have seriously considered suicide") has increased substantially over the last five years from 23.8% to more than 32.9%, a considerable change, especially in the context of other indices that are decreasing, at, or increasing only slightly. According to data compiled by the California Electronic Violent Death Reporting System (CalEVDRS), a total of 6,471 individuals from 20 to 24 years of age were treated for a suicide attempt in 2014. This represents a 17% increase (5,553 to 6,471) from 2000 to 2014 in individuals who attempted suicide who received professional treatment by either being hospitalized or treated in an emergency department. CalEVDRS provides detailed information from participating counties on violent deaths, including homicides and suicides by linking data from vital statistics death files, supplementary homicide reports from the California Department of Justice, and coroners' investigations. Analysis Prepared by: Paula Villescaz / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097 FN: 0004768 AB 2017 Page 7