PAC endorses outline for Innovation Partnership Fund RFP after public input on equity and CBO access

Chair Dr. Gary Tsai convened the Program Advisory Committee of the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission to consider an outline for an Innovation Partnership Fund request for proposals. Kelly Clark, the commission’s research supervisor for research evaluation and program operations, reviewed the draft framework and said, “We do plan to release the RFP this winter, hopefully, by January.” Clark described three mandatory applicant requirements drawn from the previously approved framework: meet the RFP definition of innovation, address designated target populations, and support county programs. She also listed five application areas applicants must address, including equity and reducing disparities, lived-experience engagement, financial sustainability, data use, and alignment with statewide behavioral-health transformation efforts.

The committee discussed operational details, including a proposed small-grant tier with a requirement that the lead grantee be a community-based organization, tribal organization, or nonprofit, while larger grants would be open to any organization. Commissioners urged a learning-community or peer-learning element to connect grantees and suggested flexibility in evaluation metrics so applicants of different sizes are not unduly excluded.

Multiple public commenters urged explicit prioritization of BIPOC and LGBTQ+ communities, cautioned that requiring Medi‑Cal billing for sustainability could exclude low-income-serving CBOs, and asked that existing California Reducing Disparities Project (CRDP) grantees not be automatically disqualified because some CRDP funding sunsets in mid‑2026. John Alita, executive director of the San Joaquin Pride Center and a CRDP grantee, asked that applications require more concrete demonstrations of equity rather than only demographic statements. Staff clarified that “no program would be automatically disqualified” and encouraged written feedback to inform final RFP drafting.

After discussion and public comment, the PAC held a symbolic roll-call vote recommending that the full commission adopt the IPF RFP outline and forward it for full-commission action. The advisory vote passed by majority vote and will be placed on the full commission’s January agenda for final action.

The PAC also requested staff include clear guidance on conflict-of-interest and recusal procedures for commissioners who may consider applying for IPF funding, and to consider peer-learning and data-collection supports to reduce administrative barriers for smaller CBOs.

Next steps: staff will accept written comments through the deadline indicated in meeting materials and will present a final draft RFP outline to the full commission for approval in January.