Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Behavioral Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Yolo county maps Prop 1 spending rules; behavioral health leaders warn of $2M–$3M shortfall
Summary
Health staff told supervisors the Behavioral Health Services Act (Prop 1) requires a 35/35/30 split for FSP/BHSS/housing and strict early-intervention rules, producing an estimated $2.3M–$3.3M shortfall in the BHSS bucket; draft plan to DHCS is due in March.
County behavioral health leaders briefed the Yolo County Board of Supervisors on Jan. 27 about the implementation requirements and funding allocation under the Behavioral Health Services Act (Prop 1), and outlined a projected funding gap that will require board decisions this spring.
Monica, the county’s Health and Human Services director, and Tony (Behavioral Health program lead) explained that Prop 1 requires local integrated plans and allocates local funds by formula: 35% for Full-Service Partnerships (FSP), 35% for Behavioral Health Services & Supports (BHSS), and 30% for housing interventions. Within BHSS, at least 51% of the bucket must be used for early-intervention activities, and at least 51% of early-intervention dollars must target people under 25. The rules also require counties to implement specific evidence-based practices — including assertive community treatment, individual placement and support for employment, intensive case management and high-fidelity wraparound services — with mandated timelines for fidelity and reporting.
Tony told the board that cross-walking the county’s existing Mental Health Services Act spending into the new BHSA buckets left an estimated shortfall of roughly $2.3 million to $3.3 million in the BHSS bucket (noting a $12.4 million fund balance that could be considered as part of the transition). Staff said some categories are restricted — for example, housing funds cannot be used for behavioral-health treatment covered by managed care — and that moving funds between buckets is limited to small percentages without DHCS approval.
The county must submit a draft integrated plan to the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) in March (30-day public review) and a final plan by June 30. Staff told the board they plan to return in March with specific scenarios, including how much of the available fund balance to apply and what programmatic trade-offs would be necessary to meet the BHSA allocation and reporting requirements.
Supervisors asked about program sequencing, capacity to deliver required evidence-based practices, and how the county will work with community-based organizations and schools. Staff said they will try to contract where possible and to use current providers for at least a year while preparing more formal procurements.
Monica and Tony emphasized the need to bolster billing and electronic-record infrastructure to increase federal drawdown and sustain new program investments over time.
