Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Local mental‑health authority proposes small respite center in Scurry County to reduce jail transports
Summary
West Texas Center presented a proposal to use a surplus EMS building as a 6–8‑bed respite center serving the county; the agency said it would pursue grants and local collaboration but the county would likely need to help with facilities and staffing commitments.
Get email alerts on the Mental Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
West Texas Center officials told Scurry County commissioners on July 21 that the regional mental‑health authority is exploring a local respite center for residents experiencing behavioral‑health crises and that the county could play a role by providing space or partnering on renovations.
Rodney Jones, CEO of West Texas Center, presented a county profile and described existing West Texas Center services: mental‑health clinics across 23 counties and a 16‑bed respite facility in Howard County that serves the region. Jones said about 755 Scurry County residents had received services from the center since Sept. 1 and that a smaller local respite facility (6–8 beds) could reduce transports to Howard County, avoid long officer wait times, and provide 24/7 supervision and crisis supports that can divert people from jail.
Staff from West Texas Center said the Howard County model is staffed 24/7 by a contracted operator (the Woods Group). The agency said it would pursue grants and other funding but would not automatically receive new state money for a Scurry County respite center; the county would likely be asked to help with facility modifications, ongoing maintenance and possibly a county match for operating support. Commissioners asked for a cost analysis and for staff to estimate savings from avoided transports and officer time; the court agreed to follow up with a request for two years of transport/time data to estimate potential operational savings.
No formal decision or funding was approved at the meeting; commissioners asked the agency and county staff to return with more detailed cost and feasibility information.

