Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Behavioral Health Rates topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board hears extensive provider concerns about behavioral‑health rate changes; requests further analysis
Summary
Behavioral health contractors urged the board not to cut or eliminate 'differentials' and warned that reducing rates would destabilize service networks. The board received the department's quarterly report, asked for follow‑ups on revenue maximization, workforce studies and data, and scheduled further budget discussion next week.
The Board of Supervisors received a quarterly report on behavioral health services and workforce development on Tuesday amid heated public comment from community behavioral‑health contractors and providers. Dozens of providers, union representatives and provider association leaders said a proposed change to contract differentials would reverse progress toward stabilizing the county’s behavioral‑health safety net.
Contractors said the differential rates — higher payments for intensive, mobile or community delivered services — were essential to keep clinicians and frontline staff on the job, to pay for outreach and home‑based work, and to sustain investments in electronic health records, clinical supervision and internship programs. Several CEOs and provider advocates told the board their agencies had cut turnover and increased service capacity since the differential structure was adopted; they warned that a reversal would increase churn, reduce access and eliminate recent gains in workforce retention.
In response, behavioral‑health leadership outlined progress on several fronts: efforts to centralize rental assistance programs for clients leaving hospitals or incarceration, collaborations with managed‑care plans on CalAIM and transitional rent benefits, and a UCSF‑supported workforce strategic plan designed to expand pipelines, retention and licensure supports. Staff said they are still awaiting state responses to behavioral health infrastructure grant applications and are rolling out a stakeholder convening process to prioritize workforce investments.
Following provider testimony and supervisor questions, the board directed staff to: (1) continue engagement with behavioral‑health contractors and unions; (2) prioritize maximizing new or existing revenue streams including transitional rental benefits through managed‑care plans and CalAIM; (3) return with the UCSF workforce study off‑agenda as soon as it is available; (4) include 988 and call‑center metrics and suicide‑related data in future quarterly reports; and (5) present more detailed analysis of the potential operational impacts of any rate adjustments at the budget workshop next week. The board also asked staff to coordinate with the Office of Labor Standards and Department of Environmental Health for any outreach related to workforce communications.
The department maintained that no immediate county‑wide rate cuts were being implemented on the day of the report and staff emphasized the intent to coordinate with providers to avoid destabilizing care. The board voted to receive the report and asked multiple follow‑ups; the vote on the motion to accept the report and request the analyses was unanimous, 5‑0.
