Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Barry County mental‑health director reports rising demand, highlights audits and flags state policy changes
Summary
Barry County Community Mental Health reported serving nearly 2,000 unduplicated clients last year, with 263 crisis visits and roughly 40–43,000 total service contacts; the director cited successful state and fiscal audits but warned of state RFP and policy moves that could shift intensive services to health plans.
Rich Simpy, director of Barry County Community Mental Health, told the Board of Commissioners May 11 that the agency served just under 2,000 unduplicated individuals last year — about 577 children and 1,422 adults — and logged roughly 263 crisis events and about 36 pre‑screens for hospitalization. Simpy said the agency provided roughly 40,000–43,000 service contacts overall.
The report focused on crisis services and on expanding evidence‑based care. Simpy said the agency launched dialectical behavior therapy (DBT) last year and sees early promise in reducing hospitalizations, comparing it to the earlier ACT program. He also told the board that state auditors from MDHHS reviewed the county’s CCBHC work and cited the county’s referral process as an example for other providers.
Why it matters: Commissioners heard both performance and risk signals. Simpy praised fiscal audits, noting several 100% scores in access, claims management, credentialing and substance‑use disorder services, and he said a recent fiscal year audit produced high marks for multiple areas. At the same time he described an active legal and policy issue: a state PHP RFP that county providers believe violates state law, a lawsuit that was dismissed without prejudice, and an expectation that the state will issue a reworked RFP.
Simpy said the state indicated it would issue a new RFP that complies with the law; meanwhile CHs and PHPs are consulting counsel and preparing strategy in advance of a new procurement or a possible appeal. He also warned about a proposed state mental‑health framework that would shift responsibility for highly intensive services — inpatient care, crisis residential and partial hospitalization — to health plans. “The concern would be that the health plans don’t have a good track record with intensive cases,” he said, and noted the county association and the hospital association oppose the framework as currently described.
Commissioners asked whether crisis volume is rising. Simpy said the county is outpacing last year’s numbers midway through the year, citing his chief clinical officer Emily for the observation. He also said staffing has increased — from about 70 community mental‑health employees a few years ago to roughly 110 today — to meet rising demand.
Next steps and context: Simpy encouraged commissioners to request the agency’s annual report (which the office will circulate) and to monitor the state’s revised RFP and any appeals. He said the county will continue to track hospitalization prescreens and crisis‑care outcomes, and that his agency will keep the board informed about any procurement developments or policy changes driven by MDHHS or the legislature.
The board did not take formal action on the presentation during the meeting.
