Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Behavioral Health Programs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Patients and staff urge Alameda County to save Fairmont and Highland outpatient mental‑health programs
Summary
Dozens of patients, therapists and caseworkers told supervisors that Fairmont and Highland intensive outpatient and partial hospitalization programs are lifelines; many described reduced readmissions and asked the Board to halt cuts while exploring alternatives with staff.
Hundreds of public commenters told the Alameda County Board of Supervisors that proposed closures or reductions to Fairmont and Highland outpatient behavioral‑health programs — including intensive outpatient (IOP) and partial hospitalization (PHP) services and associated health‑advocate and complex‑care teams — would harm clients who rely on those services for daily structure and crisis prevention.
Patients and family members described IOP/PHP as life‑saving and said closures would lead to more emergency psychiatric hospitalizations, homelessness and criminal‑justice contacts. Clinicians and program managers reported that the clinics serve high‑acuity, Medi‑Cal populations that are typically not well served by other community providers because of transportation, language and benefit barriers.
Program directors and frontline staff said they had already taken steps to improve financial sustainability (increasing group sessions, adding an admissions coordinator and other changes) and asked for the opportunity to work with AHS leadership to redesign operations before the Board or trustees finalize closures. Staff argued that community referral options cited by management often lack capacity, transportation or the language supports required for AHS patients.
Why it matters: Testimony from patients and clinicians emphasized that outpatient behavioral‑health programs prevent hospitalizations and provide continuity. The loss of these programs would likely shift demand to emergency departments and inpatient units and could increase county costs and human suffering.
Board response and next steps: Supervisors thanked speakers and said they would pursue collaborative options before making final decisions; the Board voted to continue deliberations March 3 and directed staff to return with options including potential county bridge funding and a working group with labor and AHS leaders.
Sources: Dozens of in‑chamber and teleconference comments recorded in the public record, clinician testimony from program managers and the medical executive committee, and AHS presentations describing program reductions.
