BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    �



                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  March 27, 2012

                            ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH
                              William W. Monning, Chair
                  AB 1569 (Allen) - As Introduced:  January 31, 2012
           
          SUBJECT  :  Community mental health services: assisted outpatient 
          treatment.

           SUMMARY  :  Extends the sunset date in current law providing 
          counties with the option to implement court-ordered assisted 
          outpatient treatment (AOT) programs for mentally ill persons 
          from January 1, 2013, to January 1, 2019, and deletes an 
          obsolete reporting requirement.  

           EXISTING LAW  : 

          1)Establishes, pursuant to AB 1421 (Thomson), Chapter 1017, 
            Statutes of 2002, the AOT Demonstration Project Act of 2002 
            (Act) to permit counties to provide AOT services for people 
            with serious mental illnesses when a court finds that a 
            person's recent history of hospitalizations or violent 
            behavior, and noncompliance with voluntary treatment, 
            indicates the person is likely to become dangerous or gravely 
            disabled without the court-ordered outpatient treatment.

          2)Sunsets the Act on January 1, 2013, and requires the 
            Department of Mental Health (DMH) to submit a report and 
            evaluation to the Legislature of all counties implementing an 
            AOT program by July 31, 2011.

          3)Establishes the Lanterman-Petris Short Act (LPS Act), which 
            authorizes a person to be involuntarily detained for inpatient 
            mental health treatment when, as a result of a mental 
            disorder, the person is a danger to him or herself or to 
            others, or is gravely disabled.  

          4)Defines "gravely disabled" to mean a condition in which a 
            person, as a result of a mental disorder, is unable to provide 
            for his or her basic personal needs for food, clothing, or 
            shelter.

          5)Specifies the conditions of involuntary detention as follows:
             a)   Initial 72-hour hold.  Initial evaluation and treatment 
               of persons who, as a result of a mental disorder, are 








                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  2

               dangerous to themselves or others, or are gravely disabled.
             b)   Additional 14-day hold.  A person detained for a 72-hour 
               hold may be certified for an additional 14 days of 
               involuntary detention and treatment if: i) the person has 
               been advised of the need for, but has failed to accept, 
               voluntary treatment; and, ii) the medical staff finds that 
               the person continues to be a danger to self or others, or 
               is gravely disabled.
             c)   Renewed 14-day hold if suicidal.  A person detained as 
               dangerous to self may be certified for an additional 14 
               days of involuntary detention and treatment, for a total of 
               31 days, if the person continues to be suicidal.
             d)   Additional, renewable six months hold if "dangerous to 
               others."  After the initial 72-hour and 14-day holds, an 
               additional 180-day detention may be imposed on a person who 
               is imminently dangerous to others, based on recent threats, 
               or attempted or actual infliction of harm.  The person may 
               be placed on an undefined "outpatient status" if the 
               director of the inpatient facility determines the person no 
               longer will be a threat to others and will benefit from 
               outpatient status.
             e)   Additional 30-day to one-year conservatorship if still 
               "gravely disabled," but not dangerous to self or others.  
               After the initial 72-hour and 14-day holds, an individual 
               who continues to be gravely disabled and fails to accept 
               voluntary treatment may be placed under a 30-day 
               conservatorship and then a renewable, one-year 
               conservatorship.

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  This bill has not yet been analyzed by a fiscal 
          committee.

           COMMENTS  :

           1)PURPOSE OF THIS BILL  .  The author states that scientific 
            research demonstrates that sustained AOT services can be 
            highly successful for individuals with the most severe and 
            persistent mental illnesses.  The author points to numerous 
            studies of New York's AOT law, also known as Kendra's Law, 
            that have found that, in the first five years of the program, 
            the estimated 3,900 individuals who received treatment orders 
            experienced a 21% increase in engagement of services, a 34% 
            increase in adherence to prescribed medications, a 75% 
            reduction in hospitalizations, a 14% decrease in homelessness, 
            a 25% reduction in arrests, and, an 18% decrease in 








                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  3

            incarcerations.  The author notes that, while only Nevada 
            County has opted to implement an AOT program in California, 
            this bill is needed to ensure that counties continue to have 
            another tool available for providing the legal and clinical 
            treatment structure necessary to give severely mentally ill 
            individuals who chronically refuse voluntary treatment the 
            support they need to achieve stability and meaningful recovery 
            in their communities.

           2)AB 1421 .  AB 1421 is also known as Laura's Law, in memory of 
            Laura Wilcox, a 19-year-old college student who was killed by 
            a severely mentally ill man who was not adhering to prescribed 
            mental health treatment.  Laura's Law provides counties with 
            the option to implement intensive AOT programs for individuals 
            who have difficulty maintaining their mental health stability 
            in the community and have frequent hospitalizations and 
            contact with law enforcement related to untreated or 
            undertreated mental illness.  AB 1421 requires a county board 
            of supervisors to authorize implementation by resolution and 
            to make a finding that access to voluntary mental health 
            programs serving adults and children would not be reduced as a 
            result of implementation.   

          Under AB 1421, a person subject to AOT must live in the county 
            operating the AOT program, have a history of not complying 
            with needed mental health treatment, and be unlikely to 
            survive safely in the community without supervision.  A person 
            qualifying for AOT must meet the following threshold criteria: 
            the person's mental illness has twice been a factor leading to 
            psychiatric hospitalizations or incarcerations within the 
            prior 36 months or it has resulted in one or more actual or 
            attempted serious acts of violence toward self or others 
            within the prior 48 months.  If these criteria are satisfied, 
            the county mental health director or designee may file a 
            petition with the court indicating that AOT is needed to help 
            prevent relapse or deterioration that would likely result in 
            grave disability or serious harm to self or others.  Such a 
            petition must establish that the person has been offered an 
            opportunity to voluntarily participate in a treatment plan but 
            continues not to engage in treatment and is deteriorating.

            AB 1421 allows an adult living with the person, the parent, 
            spouse, sibling, or adult child of that person, or specified 
            mental health and law enforcement personnel, to request a 
            petition for an AOT order for the person.  Upon receiving the 








                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  4

            request, the county mental health director or designee is 
            required to conduct an investigation. The director or designee 
            is permitted to file a petition only if he or she determines 
            that it is likely that all the necessary elements described 
            above for an AOT petition can be proven by clear and 
            convincing evidence.  

            Although implementation of an AOT program is a local option, 
            counties that choose to implement one are required to submit 
            specified documentation to DMH prior to implementation that 
            includes a copy of the Board of Supervisor's resolution 
            verifying that voluntary services will not be reduced as a 
            result of implementation; documentation of the local mental 
            health board's review of the county's implementation plan; a 
            detailed AOT program narrative; a proposed budget and budget 
            narrative for AOT program expenditures; a description of 
            methods for data collection; and, a plan for development of an 
            AOT training and education program.  
             
           3)IMPLEMENTATION OF AB 1421  .  In a December 2011 report that DMH 
            submitted to the Legislature as required by AB 2357 
            (Karnette), Chapter 774, Statutes of 2006, which extended the 
            sunset date of Laura's Law from 2008 to 2013, the only fully 
            implemented AOT program is in Nevada County where it has been 
            operational since 2008.  The program is recovery-oriented and 
            supportive for individuals by helping them to reduce or avoid 
            hospitalizations and contact with local law enforcement 
            related to their mental illness and focuses on promoting 
            consumer-driven decision making in treatment planning to the 
            extent possible.  The program provides community-based care by 
            a multidisciplinary team of highly trained mental health 
            professionals with a staff-to-client ratio of not more than 
            one to 10.  Services include 24/7 crisis contact and/or 
            intervention, rehabilitation, counseling, medication 
            adherence, and daily living skills assistance.

          For fiscal years (FY) 2008-09 and 2009-10, data show that the 
            AOT program served a total of four court-ordered individuals 
            over two years.  However, DMH notes that recent data suggest 
            an additional six individuals were served by Nevada County 
            through FY 2010-11.  This report only addresses those 
            individuals in Nevada County who went to a court hearing and 
            AOT was, in fact, court-ordered.  DMH notes that 75% of 
            referrals to Nevada County's AOT program result in a 
            "voluntary" agreement by the individual to accept mental 








                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  5

            health treatment assistance.

          Of the four individuals served by Nevada County's program, DMH 
            reports that each year of data shows significant reductions in 
            the number of days of hospitalization by individuals involved 
            in services, due primarily to intensive contact with the 
            treatment team.  The total hospitalization days for all 
            individuals in the 12 months prior to AOT were 239, compared 
            to 97 days during their participation in the program.  

           4)PARTIAL IMPLEMENTATION IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY  .  As a result of 
            a settlement agreement reached after the California Network of 
            Mental Health Clients filed a lawsuit against Los Angeles 
            County in September 2005, the L.A. County Department of Mental 
            Health instituted a voluntary pilot AOT program in April 2010 
            for up to 50 individuals with mental illness involved in the 
            criminal justice system or transitioning from certain county 
            psychiatric facilities who would be able to live safely in the 
            community if they participated in the recommended AOT program. 
             According to outcomes information that L.A. County reported 
            to DMH for the period covering April 2010 through October 
            2010, 10 individuals have been served since the program's 
            inception.  The data showed a 78% reduction in incarcerations 
            for most of the program participants during the six months 
            following their enrollment in AOT and a 77% reduction in 
            hospitalization days after they were discharged from the 
            program.

           5)LPS REFORM TASK FORCE REPORT  .  A March 2012 report entitled 
            "The Case for Updating California's Mental Health Treatment 
            Law" by the LPS Reform Task Force includes several consensus 
            recommendations to address what can be done legally and 
            procedurally for people with mental illness who are badly in 
            need of treatment, likely to suffer harm without treatment, 
            and, unlikely to accept and stay in treatment.  The Task Force 
            consisted of members with first-hand experience and knowledge 
            of the state's mental health system including judges, 
            physicians, psychiatrists, nurses, law enforcement personnel, 
            and representatives of the California Psychiatric Association, 
            the California Hospital Association, and the National Alliance 
            on Mental Illness (NAMI).  

          One of the Task Force's recommendations in the report is to more 
            fully implement Laura's Law statewide by removing the 
            requirement for a Board of Supervisors resolution, reviewing 








                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  6

            and developing expansion strategies, and, extending or 
            removing the current January 1, 2013, sunset date, as proposed 
            in this bill.  According to the Task Force, lack of 
            implementation of Laura's Law deprives communities of an 
            effective early intervention tool that can prevent costly, 
            potentially dangerous deterioration when an individual with a 
            history of repeat hospitalization or arrest due to threat of 
            violence is refusing treatment.  The Task Force notes that 
            statewide implementation of Laura's Law would ensure that the 
            small but significant number of individuals with a severe and 
            persistent mental illness receive needed treatment before a 
            public tragedy occurs and provide clear benefits for courts, 
            law enforcement, emergency responders, and hospital emergency 
            departments.  

           6)PROPOSITION 63  .  In 2004, California voters approved 
            Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA).  
            Proposition 63 enacted a surcharge on incomes over $1 million 
            annually, and dedicated the resulting revenue to expanding 
            community mental health programs.  The MHSA addresses a broad 
            continuum of prevention, early intervention and service needs 
            and the necessary infrastructure, technology, and training 
            elements that will effectively support this system, with the 
            purpose of promoting recovery for individuals with serious 
            mental illness.  Subsequent regulations adopted by DMH require 
            programs and/or services provided with MHSA funds to offer 
            mental health services and supports to individuals with severe 
            mental illness; to be designed for voluntary participation; 
            and, to comply with specified non-supplantation requirements.  
            It is unclear whether or not it is permissible for a county to 
            use MHSA funds to support an AB 1421 program. 

           7)SUPPORT  .  The sponsor of this bill, California Psychiatric 
            Association, states that AB 1421 needs to be extended because 
            it is a valuable early intervention alternative to revolving 
            door hospitalization and incarceration for a small group of 
            individuals who meet certain stringent criteria and occupies a 
            unique niche in counties' continuum of care that supports 
            recovery from severe and persistent mental illness.  The 
            California Treatment Advocacy Coalition notes in support that, 
            in Nevada County, AOT saved $1.81 in hospitalization and 
            incarceration costs for every $1.00 invested and it has had a 
            positive fiscal impact on decreasing costs to other county 
            systems, such as emergency departments, ambulance, law 
            enforcement, and the courts.  L.A. County supports this bill 








                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  7

            and suggests an amendment to include State implementation 
            funds as more funding is needed to increase program capacity 
            and serve more county residents with severe mental illnesses 
            who may be a risk to themselves or others.  The California 
            Association of Psychiatric Technicians adds in support that, 
            as trained, licensed, and regulated mental health and 
            developmental services nursing professionals, they are 
            strongly compelled to support AOT services, which could save 
            lives, families, and funds if AB 1421 is allowed to continue 
            and encouraged to be implemented.

          8)OPPOSITION  .  Disability Rights California (DRC) objects to 
            this bill, arguing that AOT is unnecessary as there are good 
            alternatives to ensure access to needed mental health 
            services; AOT has not been widely implemented and does not 
            work; and, current LPS Act law allows for involuntary mental 
            health treatment under statutorily defined criteria.  DRC 
            contends that some counties already have in place proven 
            voluntary treatment programs that have comparable results to 
            AOT without the expense and coercion of court-ordered 
            treatment, citing Orange County's Full Service Partnerships 
            funded by MHSA that have reduced hospitalizations by 50%, 
            incarcerations by 88%, and homelessness by 70%.  Other 
            opponents, including the California Association of Mental 
            Health Patients' Rights Advocates and the California Network 
            of Mental Health Clients, maintain that forced treatment is 
            inconsistent with mental health recovery principles of 
            self-determination and empowerment and drives people away from 
            the mental health system altogether.  The American Civil 
            Liberties Union of California (ACLU) writes in opposition that 
            California should increase the availability of a full array of 
            voluntary mental health services for the mentally disabled and 
            expand programs that have demonstrated success in saving lives 
            and money.

           9)DOUBLE-REFERRAL  .  This bill is double-referred.  Should it 
            pass out of this committee, it will be referred to the 
            Assembly Judiciary Committee.

           10)POLICY COMMENT  .  While the option to implement an AOT program 
            is considered to be an important tool for providing care to 
            the small minority of individuals whose mental illness is so 
            severe that it poses a danger to the public and to themselves, 
            it is unclear how counties can best utilize it given the 
            state's ongoing fiscal crisis that is requiring counties to do 








                                                                  AB 1569
                                                                  Page  8

            more with less and the lack of an identified funding source in 
            the original statute for implementation.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :  

           Support 
           California Psychiatric Association (sponsor)
          American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, 
          AFL-CIO
          California Association of Psychiatric Technicians
          California Hospital Association
          California State Sheriffs' Association
          California Treatment Advocacy Coalition
          County of Los Angeles
          Friends Committee on Legislation of California
          NAMI Orange County
          Nevada County Suicide Prevention Task Force
          Treatment Advocacy Center
          Several individuals



           Opposition 

           ACLU
          Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law
          California Association of Mental Health Patients' Rights 
          Advocates
          California Association of Social Rehabilitation Agencies
          California Network of Mental Health Clients
          Disability Rights California
          MindFreedom International
          National Association for Rights Protection and Advocacy
          San Diego Disability Action Coalition
          United States Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association
          Voices of the Heart, Inc.
          Several individuals

          Analysis Prepared by  :    Cassie Royce / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097