Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Early Childhood Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory board urges Yolo County to streamline home‑visiting referrals and prioritize early‑childhood action
Summary
The maternal, child and adolescent health advisory board told supervisors that better coordination across 12 home‑visiting programs, a central referral/triage point and clearer outcome metrics would improve services for families with children under five. Board members asked staff for options and next steps.
The Yolo County maternal, child and adolescent health (MCAH) advisory board told the Board of Supervisors that the county should shift from planning to action for services serving families with children under five.
Anya Balanoff Suleiman, chair of the advisory board, and other board members reviewed the group’s annual recommendations and said the county should prioritize coordination across the county’s 12 home‑visiting programs, develop a plain‑language family resource portal, and measure outcomes beyond simple participation counts.
"We know what we need to do. Let’s make it happen," the advisory board said during its presentation and recommended creating a central access point to triage referrals so families are matched to the home‑visiting program that best fits their needs.
David Linebarger, the county’s oral‑health program coordinator, cited reductions in dental decay in the county and framed prevention as a cost‑effective approach. "We have seen the dental‑decay rate come down on average across the county from 30 percent to 25 percent," Linebarger said, noting the county’s networks that refer Medi‑Cal patients for care.
Advisory‑board members and county staff described several models for a referral hub, including a central triage role that could be staffed by a public‑health nurse to identify medically intensive cases and place them appropriately. Staff said Welcome Baby and the county nurse home‑visiting program already include nursing elements, but the county lacks a single, countywide intake that routes every referral to the optimal provider.
Supervisors pressed for clarity on implementation: how many additional staff would be needed, whether the county would host the triage function or contract with community partners, and how any centralized system would avoid duplicating existing work. Supervisor Herb asked, "How do we take on these 30 recommended actions?" and staff replied that prioritizing coordination and moving from planning to action would be the initial focus.
The advisory board also recommended incentivizing collaboration among advisory bodies to reduce repetitive requests to the board of supervisors and urged a focus on preventive services alongside crisis management. They asked the board to consider whether Brown Act rules (SB 707) should exempt the body to enable broader virtual participation by community members.
Board members requested staff return with concrete options and cost estimates to support a central referral system and other high‑priority recommendations. The item was presented as information and generated a series of follow‑up questions and a request that staff report back with implementation scenarios.
What’s next: Staff agreed to prepare options and cost‑estimates for board review so supervisors can consider whether to allocate funding or alter program structure to support a central triage and improved coordination of home‑visiting and early‑childhood services.
