1 / 0

AB 3632 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

AB 3632 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES. Mary E. Samples, Assistant Superintendent Ventura County SELPA. Where we were… Where we are… Where will we be…. In 1984 AB3632 legislation passed. It required agencies to coordinate services for mental health service.

kuper
Download Presentation

AB 3632 MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. AB 3632MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES

    Mary E. Samples, Assistant Superintendent Ventura County SELPA
  2. Where we were… Where we are… Where will we be…
  3. In 1984 AB3632 legislation passed. It required agencies to coordinate services for mental health service.
  4. Mental Health departments were mandated to provide a range of mental health services as identified on a student’s IEP to assist students in accessing special education services.
  5. *Primary Purpose “assist students in accessing special education services”
  6. Accessing 26.5 Services Referral made through the IEP/Assessment Plan process. Districts are mandated by law to first implement/consider a variety of school-based services to assist the student before making a referral to county mental health. This must be documented in the IEP. Assessment is conducted by mental health to determine eligibility that must adhere to mandated timelines. Eligibility is discussed at an IEP team within 50 days.
  7. Services When eligibility is determined, an eligibility report and treatment plan is drafted and presented to the IEP team. Can include individual and group therapy, collateral and case management services, medication monitoring, and/or day treatment services. Service venues can include outpatient clinics, school-based programs, intensive educational programs or residential treatment centers. Services are also provided within the context of Wraparound type programs.
  8. We were able to build an excellent program in Ventura County – including 25 “enhanced classrooms” and the Phoenix program which included mental health therapists.
  9. We have a detailed MOU with Ventura County Behavioral Health (VCBH) Referral packet has been created collaboratively We have bi-monthly meetings with SELPA/VCBH Collaborative
  10. Two years ago we took a serious look at the effectiveness and efficiency of the program. In examining data we found: The our school based 26.5 clients were spending a far greater time in treatment than clinic students and community clients.
  11. For many reasons it is difficult to remove these services from the IEP
  12. We formulated a list of concerns and plan of action for recommended improvements.
  13. Concerns: Education of parents/students about 26.5 services Appropriateness of referrals from school districts Appropriateness of identified goals and objectives Appropriateness of services offered to the student Effectiveness of services provided as indicated by length of service and outcomes Communication and collaboration with school districts
  14. Summary of Recommendations Improve education to parents/student about IEP-related mental health services. Ensure referrals are complete and appropriate and include the completed IEP Pre-Referral Interventions page Ensure services are goal driven and focused on academic functioning. Employ treatment modalities that are most effective and utilize evidence based practices whenever applicable. Evaluate progress objectively and frequently within the IEP process, including discussion of transitioning to less intensive support services. Hold IEPs when requested to discuss status change. Talk to each other!
  15. Collaboration meetings were held. Some program/staff modifications were made in the summer of 2010.
  16. Then The Day the Blue Pencil Struck in Sacramento October 8, 2010
  17. Two things happened in the state budget Governor Schwarzenegger exercised the line item veto to cut the funds to pay for the mandate of the 26.5 Mental Health Services program. The legislature omitted funding in the Human Services budget designated for Board and Care portion of Residential Placements for SED students.
  18. SELPA and VCBH immediately began discussion on steps needed to ensure stability in the system (short period of uncertainty and questions)
  19. Three court cases were filed…. and began working their way through the courts
  20. #1 A.C. et al. v Schwarzenegger et al (Federal Court) Filed on October 2010 by Public Counsel Law Center and Disability Rights California. This suit is seeking a temporary restraining order on state and school agencies to maintain the status quo regarding the provision of AB3632 services prior to October 8th.
  21. This was heard on December 20th. The court declined to issue a temporary restraining order and at plaintiffs request postponed the hearing until March 3, 2011. Judge ordered CDE to send memo to schools outlining their responsibilities and the dispute process.
  22. #2 County of Sacramento v. California(Superior Court) County Governments seeking a decision that AB3632 is unfunded under Government Code and therefore, the mandate is suspended. Heard on January 7th
  23. February 10th ruling Did not grant County Governments relief from AB3632 mandate because of federal funds being used for the program. However, no funding for board and care so counties may be granted relief from that portion. Ruling awaiting further clarification within the next two weeks.
  24. #3 CSBA/ELA v. Schwarzenegger(California Court of Appeal) Plaintiffs maintain that the Governor did not have the constitutional right to suspend the mandate and that this right is reserved only for the Legislature.
  25. On February 25th the Court of Appeals issued a ruling finding the Governor’s right to suspend the mandate by zeroing out the appropriation was a legitimate action. Stay tuned…
  26. Memorandum of Understanding has been signed The County Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent of SELPA and the Director of Behavioral Health entered into an agreement on December 22, 2010. The SELPA will be paying VCBH to continue providing all mental health services as part of the IEP process throughJune 30, 2011.
  27. Human Services Agency agreed to continue paying for the residential board and care costs while court cases were being heard, with the caveat that if County Government prevails in the courts schools will be billed retroactively for these costs.
  28. Residential Placement School Districts are preparing for the worst case scenario, in which they will pay for the board and care costs for residential placements, in addition to mental health services and educational costs, retroactive to October 8th.
  29. For Now Everything is status quo…and continuing to operate as before Referrals Assessments Services WrapAround Residential
  30. Governor Brown’s Budget Proposal (Hinges on current taxes being extended for 5 years) 2010-2011 – Wait for courts rulings No funding projected 2011-2012 – Use MHSA Proposition 63 Funds to fund AB3632, EPSDT and Managed care
  31. 2012-2013 and beyond – Realign these services to Counties (Government) and send a portion of extended tax funds down to counties to pay for realigned services. (mandate would stay with mental health)
  32. If taxes are not extended Who knows??
  33. What about Next Year? A SELPA committee is meeting frequently to determine how we will continue to meet our requirements to support Special Education students with mental health needs under the IDEA. Collaboration will continue with VCBH.
  34. Questions??
More Related