Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows
Lawmakers Hear Case for Task Force to Move Adult Residential Mental Health Services into CCO Model
Loading...
Summary
Representative Mike Nelson asked the committee on March 4 to authorize a task force to study bringing adult residential mental‑health services under CCOs’ management, arguing the aim is better coordination and fewer delays for OHP members who need 24‑hour care.
Representative Michael (Mike) Nelson opened the public hearing on House Bill 2206 and described the bill as creating a task force to examine phasing adult residential mental‑health services into Coordinated Care Organization (CCO) operations. He told the committee the current carve‑out—under which OHA contracts directly for many residential placements—creates fragmented pathways for members who need round‑the‑clock care and can delay placements.
Supporters from CCOs and residential providers told the committee a task force would be a necessary venue for stakeholders to discuss complex operational, funding and legal questions before changing the system. Stefan Sheer of CareOregon said the current “carve‑out creates a gap in CCOs’ ability to administer the entire continuum of care,” and called for a phased, evidence‑based integration to allow alternative payment models and administrative simplification. Mindy Statlander, CEO of HealthShare of Oregon, emphasized the wide variation in community need and praised a phased approach, saying the task force could help determine “types and numbers of mental health treatment capacity needs that fit what each of our communities needs.”
Residential‑provider testimony underscored workforce, reimbursement and Medicaid‑waiver questions. Julie Ibrahim, CEO of New Narrative, told the committee the task force should assess “what is Federally allowable under the current Medicaid waiver and what is allowable under the current lawsuits regarding management of the state hospital.” Providers urged the committee to include provider, CCO, OHA and county representatives on any task force so technical questions about capacity, payment and legal constraints could be resolved.
Representative Britt McIntyre asked whether a CCO would be expected to provide outreach to people living unsheltered; Nelson said the task force would have to address operational questions such as outreach, enrollment lapses and placement availability. Members asked about existing studies on residential capacity; members noted past assessments and the 2,000–3,000‑bed shortfall often cited by stakeholders, and Nelson said the bill would enable a careful transition that would make CCOs responsible for their members’ residential care when feasible.
Why it matters: HB 2206 does not itself change procurement or payment rules but would create a stakeholder group to assess whether and how to move adult residential mental‑health benefits into CCOs—an integration that could change who coordinates and funds high‑acuity placements, affect access for people with severe mental illness and affect the state hospital’s workload.
