[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6164834,"mediaKeyId","5426959-6a8fd5e9579b50f1bbf31644aac13203","parentId",5426959,"title","Program Advisory Committee delays adoption of decision-making framework after public requests for more review","audioSeconds",1583,"startMs",1484000,"endMs",3067000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5426959-6a8fd5e9579b50f1bbf31644aac13203&start=1484&end=3067","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5426959-6a8fd5e9579b50f1bbf31644aac13203/thumbnail_1484000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6164834/California/Program-Advisory-Committee-delays-adoption-of-decision-making-framework-after-public-requests-for-more-review","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6164834-6b0e6adf5f48b3c4391b10dad4c57c55/orig.mp4?Expires=1771203175&Signature=bWeq-OazsG-8mU6umWoaYGYI4v1EYgtFApfO08EqHYkFTKDJNnBIkoa9b~HK1odI-qYVP3Xh-oc-rvTPAmP6ZwgNUIftYxUyNsK9l2kvqplnLJH980pnebrAlk2pgdsQbzXjUZhtVsuqJlksl7lHAMF3xgowajHKDanqZesgSDUdkwwSR9lRVWmi-kg4xxkqh3CDlaNgn6BmhAdIAOp2ds-G0ntnEpe9KOZeHzna-wrZOGLm~NrofiF62HNFqd8gM~VEzfoe3HEvd-Zd3K80ofgBu2nFGSyU-jtby8KuEnPE9hLOCh-Z0Q06j5~3zYTA6V6-NrTURXVgIB6h2J9LyQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission","date","2025-07-18T20:55:53.433Z","article","The Program Advisory Committee of the California Commission for Behavioral Health opened its inaugural meeting and discussed a draft decision-making framework, but the committee agreed to postpone adoption so the public and commissioners could review the materials in more detail.

The framework is intended to guide how the PAC will review grant proposals, research and evaluation reports, and public-facing accountability tools. \"We would like to make a recommendation to adopt this framework,\" Melissa Martin Mollard, acting deputy director of Research Evaluation and Programs, said while presenting the draft. The committee did not take a formal action on adoption at the meeting.

The framework was introduced as a guiding tool to center equity, identify programmatic priorities, and align the PAC's recommendations with the broader commission's goals. Chair Gary Tsai, who chaired the meeting, and Vice Chair Commissioner Madrigal Weiss said the framework would be a living document that could evolve over time. \"We're happy to discuss this, as we go through,\" Chair Gary Tsai said when introducing the proposed foundational pillars and decision tool.

Public commenters and several commissioners raised concerns about timing and notice. Stacy Hiramoto of the Racial and Ethnic Mental Health Disparities Coalition said she had difficulty finding the PowerPoint online and objected to adoption at the meeting because the document was posted shortly before the session: \"I must object to you voting on this today because I do not believe these slides or this information was available until very recently,\" Hiramoto said. Rekaya Ahmad of the California Pan Ethnic Health Network and other public participants similarly said the materials had been posted very recently and asked for more time to review and provide meaningful feedback.

Commissioner Marjorie Swartz urged caution about using the PAC's one-time guidance to fund ongoing programs: \"This is a 1-time source. If we fund projects like that, once the funding dries up, people will come forward and say, 'you've cut our funding,'\" she said, arguing that sustainability plans should be required for proposals. Commissioner Fernandez and others asked the PAC to allow room for projects that may have been piloted elsewhere in California but could still be innovative and valuable in counties that lack the same capacity.

After discussion, the chair and commissioners agreed to table a vote on adopting the draft decision-making framework and return it to a future PAC meeting to allow additional time for public review and comment. The chair instructed staff to post materials earlier for future meetings and to circulate the draft decision framework for further discussion.

The PAC clarified that it is an advisory body and cannot take final action; it will make recommendations to the full commission. The committee also reiterated Bagley-Keene Act open-meeting requirements will be followed for PAC meetings and that agendas will be posted in advance. The PAC plans to reconvene the framework discussion at a future meeting after additional public review and written feedback are collected.

Looking ahead, the commission staff said they would send meeting materials earlier and publish a working draft for public comment so community stakeholders, including those representing BIPOC and LGBTQ+ communities, can provide input. The committee also emphasized the draft framework is intended to be consistent with other commission committees so recommendations are comparable across advisory groups.

The PAC adjourned the agenda item without adopting the framework and moved on to other items on the agenda.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","CBH Program Advisory Committee Meeting for July 17, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Program Advisory Committee of the California Commission for Behavioral Health opened its inaugural meeting and discussed a draft decision-making framework, but the committee agreed to postpone adoption so the public and commissioners could review the materials in more detail.","taxTitle","Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission, Other State Agencies, Executive, California","taxId",76744,"location","California","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6164824,"PAC recommends one-year contract with California Association of Local Behavioral Health Boards and Commissions",0,5977000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5426959-6a8fd5e9579b50f1bbf31644aac13203&start=5977&end=5977","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5426959-6a8fd5e9579b50f1bbf31644aac13203/thumbnail_5977000.jpg","/articles/6164824/California/PAC-recommends-one-year-contract-with-California-Association-of-Local-Behavioral-Health-Boards-and-Commissions","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6164824-68cde4e77f04b2bb0c70e1d54a1a958d/orig.mp4?Expires=1771203175&Signature=MH8yEIBJZ0fpxn-YSmY4Pl8XyVfeGqjApsdSfF2CP95-orhzxx4a1Zzfn60DXw0KvfThIqg~e4IEHleezGviV88Wgu0mb6gM7JuZ8VsQ8b6zuYJWS27FRxtZ9cmsg8aZNQqYGqztsIsC189dz1NSqHVU0BFDM76qKwjqqLMqgwPiLh6nAPVI0Z6gHkjgIUduQooL1JjltoAReK4kHPfj4dE7sFzfiFT4FoFVfpFCRvcCBzG10R-q2YXsExTmQLIQr-bF~XzwiIq~qL1JfCj9CNXM6u-4VhyBAOrBBZR62bP9vCfL09WS0qfF~frBoa8qZ5iUN-YNUge~O4rtO4SK9w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Program Advisory Committee voted to recommend that a one-year contract with the California Association of Local Behavioral Health Boards and Commissions (CALBHBC) be forwarded to the Budget and Fiscal Advisory Committee and then placed on the full commission\u0000consent agenda in October.

Teresa Comstock, executive director of the California Association of Local Behavioral Health Boards and Commissions, addressed commissioners during public comment and described the organization's role providing training, education and technical assistance to county behavioral health boards and commissions. Melissa Martin Mollard, acting deputy director of Research Evaluation and Programs, told the PAC the proposed contract focuses on capacity building related to Behavioral Health Services Act implementation, three-year integrated plans and performance metrics.

Commissioner Madrigal Weiss moved the recommendation and Commissioner Fernandez seconded. Chair Gary Tsai called a roll-call vote. Commissioners voted in favor: Commissioner Bair (aye), Commissioner Fernandez (aye), Commissioner Designee Swartz (aye), Chair Gary Tsai (aye) and Vice Chair Madrigal Weiss (aye). Sandra (staff) announced the motion passed.

Melissa Martin Mollard said the contract supports county boards and commissions and the commission's objective of lifting up community voice to inform local planning processes. \"The proposed contract for this fiscal year will focus on capacity building around BHSA, including the BHSA 3 year integrated plans and associated performance metrics,\" she said.

Teresa Comstock requested timely processing of the contract because the organization's prior contract had ended June 30 and the structural changes in the commission may delay award timing. \"Now that you have this committee structure, it is important for small organizations that have small contracts to have those contracts in place so that we can have that funding in our budget,\" Comstock said in public comment.

The PAC's recommendation will be reviewed by the Budget and Fiscal Advisory Committee and, if routed as proposed, will appear on the October full commission consent agenda for final approval.

No changes to the contract were made at the PAC meeting; the committee's role was to recommend forwarding the proposed one-year contract for further review and final action by the full commission.","The Program Advisory Committee recommended forwarding a proposed one-year contract with the California Association of Local Behavioral Health Boards and Commissions (CALBHBC) to the Budget and Fiscal Advisory Committee and then to the full commission consent agenda in October. The PAC voted to recommend the contract.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6164829,"Commission discusses Innovation Partnership Fund definition, public urges equity and recognition of community-defined models",738,3002000,3740000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5426959-6a8fd5e9579b50f1bbf31644aac13203&start=3002&end=3740","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5426959-6a8fd5e9579b50f1bbf31644aac13203/thumbnail_3002000.jpg","/articles/6164829/California/Commission-discusses-Innovation-Partnership-Fund-definition-public-urges-equity-and-recognition-of-community-defined-models","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6164829-644e6c2ca473313f090be522fa3f316b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771203175&Signature=nF400UhTyvjAe281K5sk53TQqREj9a9Ih~We9bL1W5bA~r0-DsyydV~AqEVm9bcqny8vm0fotTyxb3569G~ETFeeNYO7a1uFuty3Jb4yU2F2hHYv5T9fNxIkrZuOXtKpzChlQX7CQk2yNQi-OlkVnKf4HAqgsPIsYNlhYfxRAXDk102Jnv0k8NQyzLICbFvVx6idOd55fWWV6sBRQSXdKXYw7bJHUbR6KvO7i2O44fxf0CRmlLq~eXOP4zR3XfWhUHURo2L8eQNG4qtjslfTj0S-~BZsLF2uvH20gIZkEW5Og13MvVMUK7xgm-SMBfeMZU06Ua1K9t1HPqwZ~tuw4w__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Program Advisory Committee held an extended discussion about the Innovation Partnership Fund, which Marco Mijic described as authorized by Proposition 1 and intended to fund new or adapted approaches to behavioral health challenges. The committee asked for public feedback on a working definition that staff circulated in a meeting packet.

\"The idea here really is to engage in a lot more conversation. We're not taking action on anything, so I just wanna be very clear about that,\" Marco Mijic said while presenting the IPF concept and timeline. The staff working document outlined a draft definition of innovation and proposed investment pillars and cross-cutting priorities.

The working draft defined innovation as new or adapted approaches that: advance models not widely implemented in California; introduce or scale community-centered solutions that increase access to prevention, treatment and recovery supports (including harm reduction); demonstrate a clear break from the status quo rather than incremental tweaks; be actionable and ready for real-world implementation; and \"not be designed to supplant or replace existing public funding streams.\" The draft also described proposed priority pillars: equity-focused projects, financing and sustainability, youth engagement, lived-experience leadership, and alignment with existing state efforts.

Public commenters — including representatives of the California Reducing Disparities Project (CRDP), community defined evidence practice (CDEP) proponents, and community clinics — urged changes. Ava (speaker identified in transcript as a CRDP/partner) and Joel Baum of Safe Passages highlighted the CRDP work: project leaders said 35 CRDP projects have been running for years and demonstrate community-defined evidence approaches that have been evaluated and found effective. \"These are models that have been proven in the state of California but are not widely implemented,\" a CRDP speaker said. Joel Baum asked that community-defined evidence practices be explicitly elevated in the IPF design and said limiting funding to narrow clinical diagnoses would exclude prevention and early-intervention projects.

Commenters and some commissioners warned against an interpretation of \"not widely implemented in California\" that would exclude efforts ready to be scaled in counties that lack capacity. Commissioner Fernandez suggested allowing projects that have worked in one county to be funded to scale in other counties: \"Different counties in the state of California are at very different sort of points in terms of their maturity or sophistication,\" he said. Multiple public speakers and Commissioner Fernandez also urged that the fund allow proposals that build on successful pilots or scale proven community programs.

Several speakers pressed staff to ensure equity is explicit and specific rather than general. Rekaya Ahmad of the California Pan Ethnic Health Network asked how community members would participate in the review process and whether an equity rubric or scoring tool would be incorporated: \"Given how central the framework is in guiding funding decisions, 1 day is not really enough time for community stakeholders to really review and provide meaningful feedback,\" she said.

Other public suggestions: adopt a lean startup or rapid-iteration approach that allows small \"incubator\" grants to test minimum viable solutions; publish evaluation data and learnings from IPF projects; and require clear sustainability plans so one-time funding does not create expectation of ongoing support without a transition path. Jerry Hall suggested using a small portion of the fund to seed an incubator and to \"fail fast\" on low-performing ideas so successful models can be scaled.

Staff presented a tentative engagement timeline: a series of virtual community engagement sessions in July and August, a lived-experience session, a return to the PAC for more detailed discussion in September, and presentation to the full commission in October. Several public commenters asked for evening or weekend engagement options to increase participation.

Commissioners and staff agreed the IPF definition and pillars are a starting point. Staff asked for written feedback on the working paper and said they would iterate the draft based on public and commissioner input. No funding decisions or RFPs were approved; staff emphasized that proposals for RFPs and award processes will require additional committee and full commission steps.

The committee did not set final eligibility rules at this meeting; instead it sought input on how to balance incentives for new models, scale proven practices, and ensure equity and sustainability.","Committee members and public commenters debated how to define \"innovation\" for the Innovation Partnership Fund (IPF) created under Proposition 1. Speakers urged centering community-defined evidence, equity for BIPOC and LGBTQ+ populations, and flexibility to scale proven local models rather than excluding projects that have piloted elsewhere.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Program Advisory Committee delays adoption of decision-making framework after public requests for more review

PAC recommends one-year contract with California Association of Local Behavioral Health Boards and Commissions

Commission discusses Innovation Partnership Fund definition, public urges equity and recognition of community-defined models