BILL ANALYSIS
Senate Appropriations Committee Fiscal Summary
Senator Kevin Murray, Chair
631 (Leno)
Hearing Date: 1/19/06 Amended: 5/26/05
Consultant: John Miller Policy Vote: Health 10-5
_________________________________________________________________
____
BILL SUMMARY: The bill requires the Department of Alcohol and
Drug Programs to provide for mobile narcotic treatment programs
_________________________________________________________________
____
Fiscal Impact (in thousands)
Major Provisions 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Fund
Drug Medi-Cal $100 * $200*
$200* GF & FF
*Costs could be offset by savings in conventional treatment
centers.
_________________________________________________________________
___
STAFF COMMENTS: SUSPENSE FILE
This bill is intended to qualify mobile methadone treatment for
Medi-Cal reimbursement. The measure requires the State
Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs to establish a program
for the operation and regulation of mobile narcotic treatment
programs. The bill requires that a mobile treatment program
hold--or be affiliated with a holder of--a primary narcotic
treatment program license.
The San Francisco Department of Public Health currently operates
a mobile methadone treatment program to bring substance abuse
treatment to primarily homeless individuals who do not access
treatment in traditional methadone clinics. Methadone treatments
provided eligible beneficiaries in clinics are reimbursable
while methadone provided from a mobile clinic is not. The San
Francisco mobile lab estimates that 20 percent of its clientele
are Medi-Cal eligible.
The sponsor and author note that methadone is a particularly
cost-effective treatment for heroin addiction and that increased
access to methadone will reduce heroin use and the costs of
related crime, disease and death. If the mobile facilities were
to add less than 45 patients for a year, the program would
increase Drug Medi-Cal costs by over $200,000 annually, with the
costs evenly distributed between the state General Fund and
federal funds. To the extent that the treatment provided by the
mobile facilities reduced treatment in other state programs, the
identified costs could be offset by savings in other programs.