Advisory committee backs Innovation Partnership Fund framework, sends plan to full commission for action

The Program Advisory Committee of the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission recommended that the full commission consider adopting the Innovation Partnership Fund framework (version 3) after staff presented an updated definition, findings from summer listening sessions, and proposed next steps.

Sarah Brooks, senior director with SellersDorsey, told the committee, “The IPF or the Innovation Partnership Fund is administered by the CBH starting on 07/01/2026, which, equates to $20,000,000 per year for 5 years, which starts in fiscal year 2026'027 through fiscal year 2030'031, totaling a $100,000,000 total.” Melissa Martin Mahler, deputy director of research, evaluation and programs, said the staff plan is to present the framework to the full commission in October and an RFP outline in January, with a target to release grant awards to begin 07/01/2026.

Committee discussion and public comment focused on three recurring themes: the statutory priority populations the IPF must serve; whether prevention in the IPF should include early intervention versus population-based prevention administered by CDPH; and how to ensure culturally informed, community-defined evidence practices (CDEPs) and small community-based organizations can access funding.

Several public commenters who identified themselves with the California Reducing Disparities Project and local community organizations urged a broad interpretation of eligible IPF activities. Carlene Davis, vice president of evaluation strategy for California Black Women—s Health Project, said the CRDP model—s “community defined evidence based practices . . . have been evaluated and proven effective in preventing negative outcomes, including but not limited to suicide, attempted suicide, school failure or dropout, worsening of symptoms and the conditions over time, and involuntary mental health detentions.” Josefina Alvarado Mena, CEO of Safe Passages, and other speakers pressed staff and commissioners to ensure CDEPs and prevention-oriented early intervention were not excluded by a narrow statutory reading.

Staff clarified statutory constraints: prevention that is population-based now sits with the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), while the IPF is intended to help counties implement the Behavioral Health Services Act priorities, focusing on priority populations (for children and youth: those who are chronically homeless or at risk of homelessness, involved or at risk of involvement with juvenile justice, child welfare, conservatorship, or institutionalization). Melissa Martin Mahler said there is a limited area of overlap where early intervention falls within the IPF—s scope.

The committee then voted to recommend the IPF framework (version 3) be considered by the full commission. The motion was moved by Commissioner Bernick and seconded by Commissioner Chambers. The vote was recorded as yes from Commissioners Burnick, Chambers, Cross, Designee Swartz, Chair Tsai and Vice Chair Madrigal Weiss; no votes and abstentions were not recorded.

The committee asked staff to (1) incorporate public feedback about community-defined practices and culturally competent approaches where consistent with statute, (2) continue discussions with state agency partners (including DHCS and CDPH) about areas of overlap and alignment, and (3) present the finalized framework and RFP timetable to the full commission for action in October and January respectively.

Staff materials distributed and the listening-session summaries will be used to refine the RFP framework; a formal procurement process will follow state procurement rules and use an outside procurement consultant to oversee scoring and legal review.

The committee—s recommendation is advisory; the full commission will consider and vote on formal adoption of the IPF framework at an upcoming meeting.