Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Behavioral Health Justice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Behavioral‑health panel finds gaps in Buncombe County crisis response, treatment beds and data sharing
Summary
The county's Behavioral Health Justice Collaborative summarized results from a sequential intercept mapping event, citing limited co‑response coverage, gaps in adolescent and dual‑diagnosis treatment, jail medication formulary limits, Medicaid recertification concerns and a need for real‑time data sharing.
Victoria Reichardt, behavioral health manager for Buncombe County, reported results from a sequential intercept mapping event attended by about 45 participants. The mapping exercise identified service gaps across intercepts of the justice system and proposed priorities for county action.
"Expansion of community response" received the most votes at the mapping event, Reichardt said, though the collaborative found the county's current co‑response model is covering about 6.5 percent of behavioral‑health calls. That disparity between demand and available co‑response resources was highlighted repeatedly as a primary gap.
Reichardt described other gaps identified during the mapping exercise: limited adolescent substance‑use services, inadequate options for people with dual diagnoses and limited low‑barrier treatment beds. She said the county had seen a loss of some treatment capacity: a program that previously served a broader region now serves fewer counties and treatment bed options remain constrained.
Reichardt also flagged operational issues: some medications that help manage anxiety and other conditions are not on the jail's formulary, creating continuity‑of‑care problems for inmates being managed in custody. She noted upcoming changes to Medicaid recertification that may increase demand on economic‑services staff to prevent lapses in coverage when people leave jail.
The collaborative discussed embedding peer supports in outreach and pretrial services and improving hospital coordination for mental‑health and substance‑use services. Reichardt said participants voted on a range of gaps and priorities during the mapping session and that the final report is available to stakeholders.
Participants discussed institutionalizing co‑response rather than relying on grants and pilots. Reichardt said one budget estimate discussed in the meeting was roughly $75,000 to outfit a sheriff's office vehicle for co‑response work; staffing and sustainable funding were repeatedly cited as implementation challenges.
Judge Kepel was invited to participate in ongoing work around mental‑health treatment court and diversion opportunities. Sergeant Freeborn was identified as someone who could share operational examples of mental‑health and law‑enforcement coordination in the field.
Reichardt said the collaborative will seek short‑term wins that are low cost as well as longer‑term solutions that require staffing and capital investment. She emphasized the need for real‑time data sharing among providers and crisis teams so field staff can see treatment starts (for example, buprenorphine initiation) and better coordinate follow‑up care.
The collaborative's priorities will inform JRAC strategic planning and subcommittee work going forward; Reichardt said the final sequential‑intercept report is available to members and partners.
