MHSA Speaking Points:

Below are a few suggested items to include in your letter(s) to the Mental Health Services Act Oversight and Accountability Commission. Please look them over and see whether they help with the composition of your letter(s).

Because the money in Proposition 63 is to supplement, rather than supplant, County Mental Health funds, now is the time to expand mental health services where it can do the most good – in the schools and in primary health care.

These two systems offer:

·              Easy-to-access children, youth, adults and older adults

·              Opportunity to serve millions of Californians

·              The ability to reach a highly diverse population

·              The opportunity to leverage other funds and resources.

Using the money to pay for school-based mental health programs is especially cost-effective. Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) programs for children and youth in schools result in fewer severe problems requiring intensive treatment. This, in turn, would make mental health a central part of the schools’ mission and help each child and student meet their greatest potential in school and life.

PEI invests in schools with planning, and supporting a leadership team, and filling key program gaps. The additional funding could be utilized for leveraging and coordinating currently operating programs, including:

·              Juvenile Court Schools

·              Early Mental Health Initiative Programs

·              Special Education, especially the new Early Intervening component

·              Title I

·              Safe and Drug-free Schools

·              Healthy Start school-linked services

·              After school programs

·              School-based health centers

·              First 5 School Readiness and preschool programs

·              Curriculum for building resiliency skills and mental health literacy, including stigma education

By funneling the MHSA funding through the schools, mental health workers will be able to reach children and youth, ages 0 through 25, and their families, with special emphasis on:

·              Children and youth at risk of entering the juvenile justice system

·              Children and youth at risk of entering or in the foster care system

·              Children and youth at risk of school failure

·              Infants and very young children with risk factors (focus is on supporting positive relationships with parents/caregivers and support for child care providers)

·              Children and youth “first break” (initial episode of a severe mental illness)

·              Children, youth and their families that are homeless

·              Children and youth who are survivors of trauma

·              Children and youth from ethnically and racially diverse communities where research demonstrates they are at risk for specific mental health disorders

We agree with the following conclusions put forward by PEI:

·              Focusing substantial resources in schools and primary health care is logical

·              Building a more comprehensive and connected system is crucial as counties and their stakeholders build an integrated approach

·              Focusing on a reasonable number of priority populations is essential to demonstrate impact

·              Looking forward to continued dialogue and collaboration with our partners and stakeholders

·              Due to the fact that 50% of all lifetime mental health disorders start by 14 and 75 % start by age 24, a significant emphasis must be placed on the 0-25 age population.

In today’s society, there is a certain stigma about needing mental health services. By having these services readily available in the schools, the stigma will eventually diminish. This helps everyone – from those needing the services to those needing a better understanding of mental health.