Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Services topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Los Alamos County staff outline social‑services programs, opioid fund plans and regional behavioral‑health push
Summary
County social services staff briefed the Health Council on division growth, the county health‑care assistance program, Narcan outreach, Unite Us referral software and plans for roughly $800,000 in opioid settlement funds; members debated creating working groups, a resource dashboard and next steps for the council work plan.
Jessica Strong, social services manager for Los Alamos County, told the Health Council on Monday that the county’s Social Services Division has expanded staffing and programming to meet needs ranging from immediate food and housing assistance to mental‑health outreach and harm reduction.
Strong said the division now includes a front‑line health care specialist who triages visitors, two case coordination specialists for longer‑term work and a part‑time outreach worker who meets clients where they are. “We are in charge of the county’s health care assistance program,” Strong said, describing HCA as a safety‑net insurer of last resort that covers services for people who do not qualify for Medicaid and for detainees at the county detention center.
Why it matters: Strong framed the update as context for the Health Council’s advisory role and deliverables to the New Mexico Department of Health, including implementation of the Unite Us closed‑loop referral software, local harm‑reduction efforts such as Narcan distribution and stewardship of opioid settlement funds.
The presentation summarized programs and recent initiatives: a comprehensive health plan presented to County Council in December 2024, a community health survey and a countywide Narcan distribution and training campaign that placed kits at the courts, both libraries, visitor centers and the social services office. Strong recounted that early refills were requested first by the visitor center, underscoring demand among travelers and older adults.
Strong said Los Alamos has received a little over $800,000 in opioid settlement funds and described a best‑practice approach to parse those dollars over five years rather than spending them all at once. Proposed and underway uses include school prevention specialists, outreach and education events, certified peer specialists and procurement of online‑treatment or mobile providers to expand access. “That is not enough to build a treatment facility,” Strong said, noting the funds can support a continuum of prevention, treatment and post‑treatment activities.
The presentation also covered regional work: Strong said the state allocated $2 million for Region 1 behavioral‑health planning and that counties must collaborate regionally to build treatment and transportation solutions; she cited a detox facility in Espanola as an example of a regional resource Los Alamos could connect with rather than duplicate locally.
Members asked operational and policy questions. Tyler, an online member with fire/EMS experience, raised concerns about placement of Narcan and other harm‑reduction supplies near youth spaces and potential syringe use; Strong agreed the county is considering site selection carefully. Tyler also asked whether opioid funds could be used to pay for long‑acting medications or transport for individuals; Strong said the county can’t provide direct payments to individuals because of an anti‑donation clause but is exploring contracting mobile providers to bring services into the community, pending legal and procurement review.
Council process and next steps dominated the latter portion of the meeting. Members pressed for a centralized resource directory or dashboard, better notice of county events and a clearer process to turn council ideas into work‑plan items. County Council liaison Melanie Hand advised members to use the council’s work plan (which goes to County Council with budget linkages) to propose working groups, changes to meeting formats or other structural changes. Members tentatively agreed to parse the action plan and prioritize three to five work items ahead of the March meeting and to recruit new members in interviews planned for next week.
No formal votes or motions were recorded during the session; the meeting closed after staff said they would circulate the presentation and follow up on procurement and work‑plan items.
Ending: Staff will distribute the slides and work with members to propose working groups and priorities for the March meeting, while legal and procurement staff continue to review possible mobile‑provider contracts and outstanding RFPs tied to opioid funds.
