Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Early Intervention topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
HHS pitches coordinated early‑intervention package to reduce costs for 'high utilizers'
Summary
Health and Human Services staff proposed a coordinated package of prevention and diversion strategies for a small group of residents who use a disproportionate share of care, citing jail social work, mental‑health corresponders, peer support and opioid‑settlement funding as current tools.
An HHS presenter asked the St. Croix County Health and Human Services Board on April 16 to consider a more coherent, countywide package of early‑intervention services aimed at people described in the meeting as "high utilizers" of health care and crisis services.
"If we can enroll someone in Medicaid, obviously, that allows them the opportunity then to get behavioral health services," the presenter said, framing insurance enrollment and early outreach as central to preventing higher‑cost hospital or residential placements.
The presenter defined the target population as a relatively small share of residents (the speaker estimated roughly 5–8% of the population) who account for a disproportionate share of health spending and who frequently intersect with emergency departments, crisis services and the criminal‑justice system. Current county efforts cited in the presentation include a jail‑embedded social worker (Bill Schultz), mental‑health corresponders funded initially through a referendum, peer‑support specialists contracted through Northwest Passage using ARPA funds, a state opioid response grant and other pilot efforts such as a jail‑based competency/diversion pilot.
Staff told the board many funding streams already support pieces of the approach and said the intent of a consolidated package would be to show the population size, costs, staff assignments and measurable outcomes so the board could decide on policy direction. The presenter said the package would emphasize reassigning or dedicating existing staff time where possible rather than hiring new positions, and aimed to reduce placements in high‑cost residential settings.
Board members asked for a data‑driven follow‑up. One member requested a report with counts of clientele, the number of personnel serving these populations and a cost breakdown for the board to review before any policy changes.
No formal action or vote occurred; the presentation was positioned as a request for feedback and guidance to develop a more detailed plan.
