County updates supervisors on Care Court roll-out and Behavioral Health Services Act planning

County behavioral-health officials briefed the Board of Supervisors July 22 on two ongoing initiatives: the state Care Court program that creates a voluntary court-based pathway into intensive mental-health services for people with schizophrenia-spectrum and similar disorders, and planning to implement the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA), the 2024 voter measure that refocuses Mental Health Services Act funds.

Care Court update: Ryan Quist, director of Behavioral Health, said Sacramento began accepting petitions in December and now has 74 petitions filed; 16 respondents have been accepted into Care Court to date. Staff said roughly two-thirds of petitions that reach a court hearing result in the respondent entering the Care Court program. Quist emphasized that the court order obligates the county to provide services but does not itself force medication: “There is not compelling going on in terms of accepting the treatments,” he said, but added that appearing before a judge often prompts engagement — “the black robe effect.” County teams include clinicians and peers who do outreach, find petitioned individuals and connect successful referrals to full-service partnerships, bridge housing or core outpatient services.

BHSA planning and community process: County staff also described the new BHSA requirements and an expanded community planning process. BHSA repackages Mental Health Services Act funding into three main buckets (30% for housing interventions, 35% for full-service partnerships, 35% for behavioral health services and supports with an emphasis on early intervention). Staff noted that BHSA does not create new dollars; instead, it prescribes how existing funds are allocated and requires an integrated plan and expanded stakeholder engagement (including labor groups, public-safety partners and community organizations). County staff began a two-phase community outreach: an initial round of “community conversations” already underway (one large meeting attracted more than 100 attendees) followed by a second phase to present draft priorities and gather final direction.

Board discussion and next steps: Supervisors asked for more comparative data from early adopter counties and for clear materials showing the full continuum of care (from voluntary outpatient treatment through conservatorship and court-based programs) for use in a planned joint city–county meeting Oct. 28. Staff said they will return with additional updates and that the county expects to revisit Care Court status within six months.

Ending: Staff emphasized coordination with courts, public defenders, hospitals and tribal partners; supervisors encouraged further outreach, education for city partners, and more precise cost and outcome data ahead of deeper October discussions.