Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mental Health Funding topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Kittitas County public-health staff recommend using state behavioral-health rules to define 1% mental-health funding eligible programs
Summary
At an April 23 study session, public-health staff recommended using Washington Administrative Code and state statute alongside local health plans to define eligible programs for the county's 1% mental health and chemical-dependency funds; staff will draft a narrowed purpose and goals for RFPs and return to the board for approval.
Kittitas County Public Health staff proposed using state behavioral-health definitions to guide which programs qualify for the county's 1% mental health and chemical-dependency funding, department staff said at a study session on April 23.
Kasey Knutson, a member of the public-health staff, reviewed WAC 246-341-0200 and RCW 82.14.460 and relayed a recommendation from DPA Hartung that the county use the WAC in addition to the RCW when defining eligible programs and services for the levy-funded grants. Knutson said staff would develop a clear purpose statement and specific goals to narrow the scope locally for upcoming requests for proposals (RFPs).
The department proposed using the Community Health Assessment, the Community Health Improvement Plan and a preliminary Behavioral Health Needs Assessment as the technical basis for setting those local purpose and goals. Knutson told commissioners the approach would provide consistent, community-identified priorities to guide competitive RFPs and reduce the need to create a separate advisory board.
Commissioners Laura Osiadacz and Brett Wachsmith discussed the proposed goals and asked staff to add a few additional specifics to the goals document. The group agreed that the purpose should explicitly include improving access to mental-health and substance-use programs and services and should include prevention activities as part of eligible uses.
Knutson said she would incorporate the requested edits and that Chelsey Loeffers would bring the revised purpose and goals back to the board for approval at a Monday morning administrative meeting. The session contained no formal motions or votes on this item.
Next steps: staff will circulate an edited purpose-and-goals draft for the commissioners' review and return with a recommendation for formal board action at a future administrative meeting.
