Advocates urge funding for peer respites, prevention and Elm City Compass crisis team
Loading...
Summary
Recovery advocates, clinicians and local officials asked the committee to preserve and expand prevention programs, fund peer‑run respites (7 additional sites requested) and annualize $1.3M for Elm City Compass, a New Haven clinician‑led crisis response integrated with 911.
A coalition of recovery advocates, clinicians, municipal staff and young people urged the Appropriations Committee to preserve prevention funding, expand peer‑run respites and provide annualized support for the Elm City Compass crisis response.
Elm City Compass: Jacob Tevis, director of Elm City Compass, described a clinician‑led mobile crisis team integrated with 911 and first responders. The program has responded to nearly 4,000 mental‑health and substance‑use crises since 2022, Tevis said, and requested $1,300,000 in annualized funding to sustain staffing and rapid response. Carlos Lombardo, deputy community services administrator for New Haven, told the committee Compass reduces unnecessary emergency department visits and avoidable arrests.
Peer‑run respites and prevention: NAMI Connecticut and other mental‑health advocates argued for funding seven additional peer‑run respites authorized in 2024, a request quantified at $7,000,000 in testimony. Witnesses described these respites as voluntary, peer‑staffed, home‑like alternatives to hospitalization that have lower per‑stay costs and better subjective outcomes for people in crisis. Multiple youth witnesses and prevention leaders encouraged continued and expanded funding for the Governor's Prevention Partnership (GPP), citing provisional statewide decreases in overdose deaths (26% in 2024; 21% in 2025 reported in testimony) and the role of youth‑led prevention.
Recovery community supports: CCAR and affiliated recovery centers requested a $1,000,000 increase to support recovery coaching and recovery community centers. Witnesses emphasized the role of peer recovery specialists in emergency departments and cited cost‑savings estimates compared with inpatient care.
What advocates said about results and costs: Witnesses consistently pointed to evidence that peer‑centered services and prevention reduce hospitalizations and downstream costs. Several presenters recommended continued outreach and public awareness funding so newly created services (for example, the Gloria House peer respite) can reach intended populations.
Next steps: Committee members heard sustained support for the network approach—prevention, peer support, and mobile clinical response—but did not take votes. Advocates said they will provide written appropriation language and program metrics.
