Commission considers shifting Measure L mental‑health funding toward secondary and tertiary services

Commissioners and staff on June 4 reviewed how Measure L mental‑health grants were categorized and considered whether future rounds should prioritize secondary and tertiary services that identify and treat youth with active symptoms.

Presenters outlined a three‑tier framework: primary prevention (universal resilience and psychoeducation), secondary prevention (early detection and brief interventions for youth reporting symptoms such as anxiety or depression) and tertiary care (ongoing psychotherapy, psychiatric medication management and rehabilitation). Speakers noted that many previously funded programs fell under primary prevention and argued that the next RFP round should increase focus on services that reach youth already experiencing mental‑health symptoms.

Staff presented examples from other jurisdictions — including Richmond’s RFP language and the California Youth Mental Health Core peer‑navigator model — that explicitly list program types (individual and group counseling, school‑based therapists, trauma recovery services) which better align with secondary/tertiary categories.

Commissioners discussed tradeoffs: several emphasized the continued value of upstream prevention programs and structural interventions (for example programs that reduce poverty or build education supports), but many favored stronger evidence requirements and a preference for secondary/tertiary programming for the mental‑health goal this cycle to ensure funds reach youth in acute need.

Next steps: Commissioners directed their ad hoc to draft RFP language and preference‑point options that could encourage secondary/tertiary services without contradicting the CIP; staff and the City Attorney will test legal constraints and report back.