California Statewide Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) Projects Overview May 20, 2010

 In 2007, the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC) approved 5 statewide PEI projects  The intended impact is to support the implementation of PEI projects across the entire state by embedding an appropriate infrastructure.  Funding is for 4 years only 2

Background The 5 statewide projects include:  Training, Technical Assistance, and Capacity Building;  Student Mental Health Initiative;  Stigma and Discrimination Reduction;  Suicide Prevention;  Reducing Disparities through Racial, Cultural, and Ethnic Specific Programs 3

(Background Cont’d.)  In May 2008 the MHSOAC determined that the programs would be most effective if implemented by a single statewide entity.  Statewide Strategic Plans were developed and the MHSOAC determined that the projects should be administered by State Department of Mental Health (DMH) 4

Currently the 5 approved projects are in different stages of development and implementation:  Training, Technical Assistance and Capacity Building is being implemented locally and will be evaluated and shared to contribute to statewide learning.  A Statewide Strategic Plan is currently being developed for Reducing Disparities through Racial, Cultural, and Ethnic Specific Programs. 5

Statewide Strategic Plans have been developed via an extensive statewide community planning process for the additional three projects:  Student Mental Health Initiative  Suicide Prevention  Reducing Mental Health Stigma and Discrimination Information concerning Statewide projects can be found at 6

California Student Mental Health Initiative 7

California Student Mental Health Initiative (SMHI)  Developed in response to the Virginia Tech incident  37.5% of overall statewide project funding should be targeted toward this initiative  Only funds projects for 4 years to build systems, not to fund “programs”  The funding is not sustainable past the 4 year time period 8

California Student Mental Health Initiative (continued)  According to State Plan- 76% should be targeting Higher Education institutions, with emphasis on developing prevention and early intervention systems  24% should be targeted at K-12 9

SMHI Key Elements:  System and Policy Development  Training  Evaluation  Campus based mental health programs such as: Mental health promotion, peer to peer support, referral and linkage, and creating the infrastructure for early intervention 10

California Suicide Prevention Plan 11

California Suicide Prevention:  Guidelines indicate 25% of overall funding should be directed toward Suicide Prevention  Should be utilized to develop a “system” of suicide prevention across the state to support projects at the local level 12

California Suicide Prevention Plan Strategies include:  Using targeted approaches for specific populations (ex. Older adults)  Training and Workforce Enhancements (across multiple fields)  Public Education  Improving program effectiveness and system accountability (we need to learn more to be successful) 13

California Plan for Reducing Mental Health Stigma and Discrimination 14

California Strategic Plan to Reduce Mental Health Stigma and Discrimination  Offers four “Strategic Directions” to reduce stigma and discrimination and  Offers six Core Principles 15

Four Strategic Directions (Stigma & Discrimination)  Create Environmental Change  Promote awareness, accountability, and changes in values, practices, policies, and procedures across and within systems and organizations that encourages respect and rights of those with mental health challenges. 16

Strategic Directions (Stigma & Disc. cont’d)  Uphold and advance federal and state laws to identify and eliminate discriminatory policies and practices.  Increase knowledge of effective and promising programs and practices that reduce stigma and discrimination 17

Six Core Principles in Reducing Stigma and Discrimination  Implement culturally competent strategies  Employ life span approaches  Involve a broad spectrum of stakeholders  Address all types of stigma and anti- discrimination laws  Build upon promising practices and proven models  Recognize resiliency, the capacity for recovery, and that those participating in voluntary programs have the best outcomes 18

Where we are now… 19

 In August 2009, the MHSOAC determined that additional options should be made available to counties in accessing PEI Statewide funds for statewide projects.  In September 2009 “Guiding Principles” were adopted by the MHSOAC  In March 2010, DMH released the guidelines for accessing the funding for the three projects with strategic plans. To access the related Information Notices and go to: 20

Three Additional Options outlined in Information Notices & 10-06:  Option 1: Implement Statewide projects through a Joint Powers Authority (JPA)  Option 2: Implement Statewide and/or replicable programs through multi-county collaboration  Option 3: Statewide programs through Assignment to DMH with option to assign to JPA through a contractual agreement 21

What is a Joint Powers Authority (JPA)?  “An Institution permitted under Law Section 6500 State Government Code, whereby two or more public authorities (e.g. local governments) can operate collectively.”  JPA’s have separate, distinct governance from member counties (own administration) and their power is established by participating agencies (the counties that make up the JPA)  JPA’s can employ and contract independent staff to carry out and implement policies/projects 22

(JPA Continued)  Member counties jointly develop, fund, and implement mental health services, projects, and educational programs at the state, regional, and local levels.  JPA functions as the “59 th County”  Currently there are 14 members of the California Mental Health Services Authority (CalMHSA) Joint Powers Authority (JPA). 23

(JPA Continued)  Currently, the Department of Mental Health (DMH) and the CalMHSA have a contractual agreement established allowing the DMH to contract and transfer funds to the JPA for implementation of State of California PEI Projects.  Projects must conform with statewide effect to be approved by the MHSOAC 24

Overview of Options Available for Implementation of California Statewide PEI Projects as outlined in IN & IN Information concerning DMH Information Notices 25

Option 1: Implement State Projects through a JPA  Multi-phase process: First “phase” includes county submitting a request (Enclosure C) to the MHSOAC to delegate administration of Statewide Projects  DMH and MHSOAC must review and approve, certify the participation in the JPA  Once approved, the MHSA agreement between DMH and the county must be modified (meaning the boiler plate language around provision 10)` 26

Option 1: Implement through a JPA (contd.)  Second-phase: JPA completes community planning to determine priorities, submits a plan to MHSOAC and DMH for approval to implement across the state  JPA responsible for administration including annual funding requests, funding requests for new programs, reporting, and evaluating and reporting statewide outcomes 27

Option 2: Implement Statewide and/or Replicable programs through Multi-county Collaboration  Requests to implement multi-county collaborative projects must include specific program actions that will be taken to implement as statewide or replicable.  Plans must be consistent with California Strategic Plans, provide extensive program descriptions, budgets, evaluation strategies and provide description of collaboration with other counties. 28

Option 3: Statewide Programs through Assignment to DMH to Contract with JPA  County submits Enclosure 1 from Information Notice to MHSOAC for approval  MHSOAC reviews and once approved funding is assigned to DMH with the designation of JPA or DMH implementing projects (no modifications to agreement required) 29

We want your feedback 30

For additional questions or information please contact: Michelle Dusick, PEI Coordinator (909)