Showing posts with label MHSA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label MHSA. Show all posts

Thursday, March 12, 2015

Darrell Steinberg Report on California Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Wrong

Darrell Steinberg and the California Mental Health Directors who distribute Mental Health Services Act funds just released their own MHSA report saying MHSA is working fine and they are doing a good job. It got press in SacBee and LA Times and others.
MHSA does help some people with serious mental illness. But following was what was left out of the report
  • 100% of the funds go to the mentally ill who are well enough to recognize they are ill. The homeless psychotic screaming at voices and eating out of dumpsters are not. 
  • There was no info about the diagnosis of those being served in the report. MHSA is legislatively limited to helping those with “serious mental illness”. The funds are going to others who are easier to serve, hence the good numbers.
  • There was also no mention of the MHSA waste and how Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability regulations divert  Prevention and Early Intervention funds to those without serious mental illness. 
  • There was no mention of oversight regulators diverting MHSA funds to their own programs.
  • There was no mention of funds being given to groups that want to sue to stop counties from using Laura's Law to help people with serious mental illness.
It is not surprising that the Behavioral Health directors who distribute the funds came up with a report saying they are doing a good job. But independent sources say that is not true. The California State Auditor report, Associated Press investigation, Little Hoover Commission, and Mental Illness Policy Org investigation all found they are not. But those organizations don't have the $11 million PR budget those who run MHSA have. How did they get the $11 million? They diverted MHSA funds to it.

Learn about waste and fraud in Mental Health Services Act at http://mentalillnesspolicy.org/states/california/mhsa/mental_health_services_act_mhsa.html
Learn about serious mental illness at http://mentalillnesspolicy.org

Thursday, August 14, 2014

New Report: California Mental Health Services Act Fails Seriously Mentally Ill

California Mental Health Services Act Oversight Commissioners (MHSOAC) just issued a press release saying Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) programs (20% of total MHSA Funds) are working. 
http://www.mhsoac.ca.gov/MHSOAC_Publications/docs/PressReleases/2014/PR_Programs-Work_080514.pdf

However, they didn't even study adults with serious mental illness.

Monday, September 2, 2013

Tell Governor Brown to Sign SB 585 to allow MHSA Funds for Laura's Law

(Updated 9/3/13)


Urgent: Contact Governor Jerry Brown immediately (Sept. 2013) and URGE HIM TO SIGN SB 585 which will help clarify that Mental Health Services Act (Prop 63) funds may be used to fund Laura's Law.  Phone: (916) 445-2841.  Fax: (916) 558-3160 and use his online contact form.

Background:

Laura's Law allows courts to order a small group of people who have serious mental illness and a history of dangerousness to stay in treatment as a condition of living in the community. It has reduced arrest, incarceration, hospitalization and length of hospitalization in the two counties that use Laura's Law.

Two Reasons Counties Haven't Implemented Laura's Law:

There are two reasons more counties don't implement Laura's Law. Three million dollars in Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds are going to Disability Rights California and they are using those funds to threaten to sue counties that use any MHSA funds to implement Laura's Law even though such expenditure is clearly allowed. Laura's Law requires county boards of supervisors to vote to implement Laura's Law and simultaneously certify that no voluntary programs will be cut to do it.

Steinberg initially promised to help:

 In reaction to widespread outrage that people were being denied access to MHSA funded programs merely because they were so sick they were eligible for Laura's Law, Senator Steinberg introduced SB 585 in early April. The ostensible purpose was to clarify that MHSA funds could be used for people in Laura's Law.  But Steinberg  weakened his own bill. He added back a requirement that other bills by other legislators would have removed. Specifically, he added back a requirement that boards of supervisors vote (directly or through the budget process) to implement Laura's Law. And he added back a requirement that counties certify no voluntary programs will get cut to implement Laura's Law.

Unfortunately, SB 585 is the only bill Steinberg would let pass. And since it does somewhat clarify that MHSA funds can be used for Laura's Law, we are supporting it. Contact Governor Jerry Brown immediately (Sept. 2013) and urge him to sign SB 585 which will help clarify that Mental Health Services Act (Prop 63) funds may be used to fund Laura's Law. Phone: (916) 445-2841 Fax: (916) 558-3160 and use his  online contact form

Thursday, August 15, 2013

California's Prop 63/Mental Health Services Act Fails Seriously Mentally Ill

In 2004, Californians altruistically passed a 1% tax on millionaires specifically to fund services for people with serious mental illness. As a result of reports that the funds were not reaching people with serious mental illness Mental Illness Policy Org. conducted a study and found many of the complaints to be true. Below is a summary of our report released August 15, 2013. The full report is here Our op-ed in San Diego Union Tribune is here. We shared our concerns with the California State Auditor.

California’s Mental Health Service Act:   A Ten Year $10 Billion Bait and Switch 

An investigation by Mental Illness Policy Org and Individual Californians


August 15, 2013 
Background

In November, 2004 California voters enacted a 1% tax on millionaires (Prop 63) to establish the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) fund solely to help people with serious mental illnesses.[1] $10 billion has been raised since inception. Voters also created a Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission (MHSOAC a/k/a “Oversight Commission”) to see the program stuck to its purpose of helping people with serious mental illness.

Primary Findings

Many people with serious mental illness are receiving critical treatment as a result of Prop 63 but billions are being diverted to other purposes:
  •  $1-2 Billion of Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) Funds was intentionally diverted to social service programs masquerading as mental illness programs or falsely claim they prevent serious mental illness.
  • ·$2.5 billion of the “Full Service Partnership (FSP) funds were spent without oversight of whether the recipients had schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, or the other serious mental illnesses that made them eligible for MHSA funds.
  •  $23 million went to organizations directly associated with Oversight Commissioners.
  • $11 million is going to PR firms that make the Oversight Commissioners look good and hide the failure of MHSA to accomplish its mission
  • $9 million is going to organizations working prevent the seriously ill from receiving treatment until after they become violent.
  • ·Up to $32 million was diverted to TV shows, radio shows, PSAs and other initiatives designed to reach the public without mental illness. Some feature the Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg

Additional Findings

Tuesday, July 30, 2013

Two new studies should lead to widespread use of Laura’s Law in California


Two new studies (including one reported in the New York Times) should lead to widespread adoption of Laura’s Law in California as a way to help some people with the most serious mental illnesses. Laura’s Law allows courts to order a narrowly defined group of individuals who have a history of violence to stay in treatment while living in the community. It has reduced violence, incarceration, hospitalization and homelessness wherever it has been used.

The first study was conducted in Australia and found 25% of individuals with schizophrenia were charged with a criminal offense during their lifetime. 6.4% of those with schizophrenia and 22.8% of those with schizophrenia plus substance abuse were charged with violent crimes compared to only 2.4% in the control group.

Unfortunately, California’s non-profit mental health industry continues to deny a relationship between violence and untreated serious mental illness and therefore oppose programs like Laura’s Law that can reduce the violence. They also claim it is too expensive.

A second study from Duke University studied New York’s version of Laura’s Law and found any increase in cost is dramatically offset by reduced hospitalization and incarceration costs.

Tuesday, June 18, 2013

Darrell Steinberg's CA Bill Dangerous to Families of Mentally ill, Mentally Ill, and Public

Imagine if someone who wanted to call 911 to report a crime in progress had to give their name and know that it would be provided to the criminal directly? Either 911 calls would be cut down or the caller would have to agree to place himself at potentially huge risk. California Senate Leader Pro Temp Darrell Steinberg is pushing a bill that just does that if the caller is a family member of someone with serious mental illness who wants to report they are becoming dangerous.

Steinberg's SB 364  requires the identity of families who call police alleging someone needs involuntary commitment to be provided to the person with mental illness along with their reasoning if that information was used to determine whether there was probable cause to take someone in for evaluation(1). This disclosure happens even if the police officer makes his/her own determination the person is danger to self or others. The disclosure applies to the families, but Steinberg--perhaps understanding the risk caused by his bill--exempted mental health professionals from having their names disclosed.

Steinberg's bill could cause retribution, when a seriously mentally ill person discovers it was the parents who asked doctors to evaluate the loved one for involuntary commitment. At minimum, it increases the potential for hostility and damages the familial relationship. If, for example a son knows his mom is the one who called police and said he is mentally ill and becoming dangerous, the son may attack the mom when released or could decide he doesn't want to live with mom, become homeless, deteriorate...and then who knows what could happen?

  •  Steinberg's bill makes it less likely that parents will call for help for their seriously ill kid. This is the exact opposite of what everyone is saying should be done for persons with mentall illness: get them help earlier. Again: this puts patients and public at risk.
  • According to the Treatment Advocacy Center, releasing the name of a citizen informant to a patient who may be in need of involuntary care is in direct conflict with other provisions of code and violates professional ethical standards regarding not releasing records that could be harmful. They state this sort of disclosure is unprecedented in any other state’s mental health law and or other civil or criminal procedures.  
  • Steinberg's language significantly increases potential for further deterioration of an individual’s psychiatric condition by postponing or eliminating intervention. 

 This bill which harms people with mental illness was almost certainly drafted by Disability Rights California (DRC) (mis)using MHSA funds intended to help people with mental illness. Eduardo Vega, a board member of DRC was able to use his recently expired position as an MHSA Oversight Commission Director to funnel $3 million in MHSA funds to DRC, ostensibly to identify laws that 'cause stigma'. It is a barely disguised misuse of MHSA funds by DRC to ensure that certain seriously mentally ill individuals are not allowed to be treated until after they become 'danger to self or others'.


Other problematic provisions of the bill:

It changes the legislative intent of 5150 in order to provide a basis for future challenges
It removes the obligation to provide treatment for someone who is dangerous in a hospital
It allows counties to dumb down the qualifications of individuals providing care for persons with serious mental illness
It holds family members libel, but exempts mental health workers from liability if they provide false information


Send your letter to the Assembly Committee on Health expressing your opposition to SB 364. If you are affiliated with an organization be sure to include that information in your letter.
Letters can be addressed to Chair Pan and emailed to benjamin.russell@asm.ca.gov  or mailed or faxed to: 
Assembly Committee on Health
Assembly Member Richard Pan, Chair
P.O. Box 942849
Sacramento, CA 94249-0009
Fax: (916) 319-2109 


For more information: 
Serious mental illness and Laura's Law in California
Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Waste and Fraud in California
Policy Information on Serious Mental Illness
Serious Mental Illness, NYS/OMH, and Kendra's Law in New York

Follow us on Facebook and Twitter @MentalIllPolicy

(1) An earlier version was not clear that the family members identity is disclosed of the officer or crisis intervention team used that information as part of their determination that the person needed evaaluation.

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Darrel Steinberg pseudo-support for Laura's Law

(Updated 9/3/13)


Urgent: Contact Governor Jerry Brown immediately (Sept. 2013) and urge him to sign SB 585 which will help clarify that Mental Health Services Act (Prop 63) funds may be used to fund Laura's Law.Phone: (916) 445-2841 Fax: (916) 558-3160 and use online contact form.

Background:

Laura's Law allows courts to order a small group of people who have serious mental illness and a history of dangerousness to stay in treatment as a condition of living in the community. It has reduced arrest, incarceration, hospitalization and length of hospitalization in the two counties that use Laura's Law.

Two Reasons Counties Haven't Implemented Laura's Law:

There are two reasons more counties don't implement Laura's Law. Three million dollars in Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds are going to Disability Rights California and they are using those funds to threaten to sue counties that use any MHSA funds to implement Laura's Law even though such expenditure is clearly allowed. Laura's Law requires county boards of supervisors to vote to implement Laura's Law and simultaneously certify that no voluntary programs will be cut to do it.

Steinberg initially promised to help:

 In reaction to widespread outrage that people were being denied access to MHSA funded programs

Sunday, February 24, 2013

4 New Laura's Law/MHSA Bills Could Help Mentally Ill in California

Bills Clarify MHSA Funds Can Be Used For Laura's Law and Make Other Improvements

Following is our preliminary analysis of the four California bills introduced 2/22/13
SB 585 (Steinberg/Correa) clarifies Mental Health Services Act (MHSA/ Prop 63) funds may be used by counties to implement Laura's Law
SB 664 (Yee/ Wolk) states counties may implement Laura's Law without first forcing County Boards of Supervisors to undertake a special vote or represent that they they will treat everyone else in the county before they treat those who need Laura's Law. (Unfortunately it allows counties to limit the number of individuals in Laura's Law.) 
AB1265 (Conway along with Achadjian/Beth Gaines/Gorel/ Hagman/Harkey/ Morrell) allows individuals under Laura's Law to receive treatment for up to one year (instead of the six month max previously allowed). It would also, smartly, require facilities discharging involuntarily committed patients first evaluate them to see if they could benefit from Laura's Law. They would then notify county officials so they can file a Laura's Law petition. 
AB 1367 (Mansoor along with Achadjian/ Alle/ Conway/Beth Gaines/Gorel/ Hagma/ Harkey/ Morrell). Like SB 585 (but using different language ) it clarifies that MHSA funds may be used to implement Laura's Law. It also makes changes (not necessarily improvements) to Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) funds.

Thursday, January 31, 2013

Crowd Source Better Care for Mentally Ill in California


We are going to improve care for persons with serious mental illness in California by crowd-sourcing the hunt for waste and fraud in Prop 63/Mental Health Services Act (MHSA)

MHSA funds meant to help seriously mentally are being diverted

MHSA funds are supposed to help people with serious mental illness. And many do. But funds are also being diverted elsewhere. The media has reported on MHSA funds being used for Wilderness Adventure Tours, Gardens for people of Hmong ancestry, massage chairs and tons of other programs not related to serious mental illness. They have also reported on programs that may be worthy and/or politically correct social services (ex tutoring, ending poverty, etc.)  but don't serve people who have mental illness. We have also reported on diverting, wasting, or giving away MHSA funds to well-connected 'consultants' and insiders

California State Auditor is investigating

Because of the media attention, the California State Auditor is looking closely at how California Counties (And especially Sacramento, LA, San Bernardino and Santa Clara) are not spending the money to provide real services to people with serious mental illness.

The Auditor Needs Our Crowdsourcing To Find the Waste and Fraud


Thursday, October 25, 2012

Will California’s next proposed tax increase work any better than the last?

Before deciding whether to support or oppose Proposition 30, California voters should take a close look at what happened with the last tax on millionaires they approved. In 2004, Californians altruistically passed Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA), a 1% tax on millionaires to improve services for people with serious mental illness Yet in spite of the $8 billion raised many are still homeless, psychotic, eating out of dumpsters and screaming at voices only they can hear. Programs that can help, like Laura’s Law, remain unimplemented. The number of homeless mentally ill increased.
What happened?
Mental health officials accepted the voter’s mental health money, but not their requirement to spend it on the most seriously ill.

Friday, September 14, 2012

CA Mental Health Services Act (MHSA/Prop 63) Insider Dealing

Over $16 million in Prop 63/MHSA funds is being diverted to organizations
associated with Oversight Commissioners

"Insider Dealing in MHSA Funds"

September 10, 2012
Summary
California's Mental Health Services Act is a good and important program that funds services for people with serious mental illness. But Mental Illness Policy Org (MIPO) found that over $16 million in Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds are going to organizations currently or formerly run by those responsible for oversight of the expenditures. This is likely a violation of California’s conflict-of-interest laws and raises serious questions about whether MHSA funds are being spent appropriately. The Associated Press in “California Mental Health Spending Often Bypasses Mentally Ill” and numerous op-eds have previously reported on the diversion of other MHSA funds to projects that do not serve people “with serious mental illness"..Rose King filed a whistleblower complaint. This is the first report on insider dealing.

Wednesday, September 12, 2012

Numerous setbacks in care for seriously mentally ill

Sorry for not sending summer Mental Illness News

Sorry for not sending summer Mental Illness News. Here are recent developments in serious mental illness (not mental “health”).

 

Announcement: VIDEO FOOTAGE WANTED

We would like video of people with serious mental illness who are off medications and psychotic. If you have, please send. Try to get permission to use, but if you can't, we can blank out faces if needed. We want to educate the public about what serious untreated mental illness looks like. Footage may come from police interrogations, home video, trials, whatever. Most advocacy groups won’t allow public to see untreated serious mental illness. We want to change that because we believe a better understanding will lead to better laws and treatment.

 

LIBERTARIAN Thomas Szasz, progenitor of the ‘mental illness is a myth’ myth died. Szasz’s ideology that mental illness is a myth has permeated parts of government and prevented millions from receiving treatment. The NY Times obit revealed his prior connection to Scientology. Relatedly, we prepared a fact sheet comparing and contrasting Scientology (CCHR) and Mindfreedom. To their credit, the Libertarian Cato Institute ran our piece on How involuntary commitment & Treatment can increase civil liberties of mentally ill. Dr. Ronald Pies highlighted the pathology of schizophrenia and Rael Jean Issac, author of the most brilliant book on subject, Madness in the Streets took on Szasz directly.

 

CONSUMER NEWS

 

 

 

In light of the above, advocates argue for more police training. We believe if the mental health system were trained not to abandon people with serious mental illness and hide behind civil commitment laws the police would not need to be called.

 

It is nice to see consumer leaders emerging willing to stand up to the anti-treatment Szasian wing of the movement:

 

 

FAMILY NEWS

 

Families are between a rock and a hard place: if they call the mental health system, they won’t help unless their child is well enough to accept help. When they deteriorate and the family is forced to call police, police can feel threatened and shoot. as two cases in CALIFORNIA demonstrated.

  • Julian Kurita in NY received the minimum sentence, after his mom pleaded for the court for leniency when he was convicted of killing her husband, his father due to his schizophrenia.
  • Jeneen Interlandi wrote a moving and highly visible piece in Sunday NY Times Magazine about civil commitment laws creating an inability to get her father treatment for his mental illness and the needless pain and suffering that caused. Hundreds of families commented.

 

POLITICS OF SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS:

 

 

“The suspect's parents will be blamed, though our civil rights laws make it extremely difficult for family members to force anyone to see a doctor or seek medical treatment if he or she has a mental disorder and is acting oddly. By law, we protect the right of an individual to be "crazy." Yet, we become outraged when a Cho or a Loughner kill and maim.” Huffington Post blogger made a full-throated case for better assisted treatment laws.

 

 

CIVIL COMMITMENT NEWS:

 

 

BAD STATE NEWS:

 

 

MEDICAL BRIEFS:

 

New fact sheet shows ANOSOGNOSIA (lack of awareness that you are ill) prevents many seriously mentally ill from getting treatment. There was a tempest in a teapot when pop-media reporting spanking is associated with mental illness. Not true.

 

BEST QUOTES

 

”A mentally ill person in US can get a gun easier than healthcare for their illness.”

 

"With respect to severe mental illness, our county has a “can't do, can’t change, cant fund and can’t help attitude”

said Jim Bassler, who’s son Aron killed two and was hunted down by police and killed after the mental health system used civil commitment laws to deny him care.

PSYCHIATRISTS:

 

  • Dr. George Dawson (a/k/a “Real Psychiatry”) and James Coyne (a/k/a “Skeptical Sleuth”) regularly tackle the internet memes, myths, pop-psychology and nonsense surrounding serious mental illness. Coyne wrote how the race towards early identification of ‘at-risk’ individuals (as opposed to treating those who are already ill) may be leading to oncologists being bribed by pharma to find 'mental illness' in Psychology Today.
  • Dr. Sally Satel, Dr. Steve Sharfstein, and Dr. E. Fuller Torrey did a brilliant serious mental illness roundtable discussion that focused on Dr. Torrey’s succinct analysis of the failure of federal mental ‘health’ system. The roundtable focused on SAMHSA encouraging states to move away from medical treatment; the failure to use Assisted Outpatient Treatment; the lack of psychiatric hospital beds and many of the other issues important to Mental Illness Policy Org but ignored by mental ‘health’ community (NAMI, MHA, consumertocracy, etc.)

 

JUDGES, POLICE & CORRECTIONS

 

  • Judge Leifman says, ““We never deinstitutionalized; we just transferred responsibility from a hospital system to the prison system,”
  • GEORGIA prison chief wrote on why we should “Decriminalize Mental Illness
  • Michael Biasotti, President of NYS Association of Chiefs of Police encouraged NY legislators to close the cracks in Kendra’s Law.

 

NEW YORK

 

Mental Illness Policy Org was very active in NYS this summer and started a NY Specific site. We wrote too many op-eds and testimonies to present them all here.

 

NY FAILURE TO CLOSE CRACKS IN KENDRAS LAW:

 

In spite of our efforts the legislature did not close the cracks in Kendra’s Law as proposed by NYS Senator Catherine Young and Assembly Member Ailleen Gunther. Mentally ill individuals discharged from prisons, jails, and involuntary commitment will continue to go to the community without first determining if they could benefit from enrollment in Kendra’s Law. This was a victory for NY’s mental ‘health’ community and a defeat for those who care about people with serious mental illness. See numerous editorials and op-eds in NY Daily News, and op-eds in NY Post. We thank them for their support (although don’t agree with periodic use of juvenile and offensive language). Highlights include our own op-ed blaming NYS OMH Commissioner Michael Hogan and this by Michael Benjamin. The Daily News blamed NYS Assembly MH Committee Chair Felix Ortiz for acknowledging the dangers and Felix Ortiz for doing nothing, and Felix Ortiz for promising hearings he never even held. Other papers around the state (that no longer make the articles available online) also supported reform. Thanks to our efforts the Department of Justice certified Assisted Outpatient Treatment as an “effective crime prevention strategy.”

 

PATIENT’S RIGHTS IN NY

 

NYS is holding hearings on how to comply with Olmstead v. L.C. which held that services for persons with mental illness be provided in the “most integrated setting ". We testified greater use of Kendra’s Law can prevent people from going to incarceration. The commission did not hold any hearings in jails or prisons where those who live in the least integrated setting are.

 

NY MENTALLY ORDERED OUT OF GROUP HOMES

 

NYS OMH Commissioner Michael Hogan also issued instructions to kick seriously mentally ill people out of adult homes.

 

REPORT ON NYS MENTAL HEALTH COURTS issued

 

LYNN SHUSTER one of the best advocates for improved care for seriously mentally ill in NYS stepped down as leader of NAMI Buffalo. Her parting words,

 

“Never trust a bureaucrat. It's THEIR money (and power and prestige, it's just our loved one's lives. And we know which comes out on top. "Making nice" makes you feel good, but doesn't result in success. News reporters are our friends. Tell the truth, the REAL truth.... Maintain a sense of humor even in dark days--we all need to laugh. Persevere. Persevere some more.... “

 

 

CALIFORNIA

 

Mental Illness Policy Org was very active in California and started a site on Laura’s Law and a site on Problems with Proposition 63/Mental Health Services Act. We had numerous op-eds and letters published including this by Mary Ann Bernard

 

INSIDER DEALING IN CALIFORNIA MHSA/PROP 63:

 

Mental Ilness Policy Org researched and issued a report finding over $16 million of Prop 63 funds going to oversight committee commissioners own organizations and a salary of $681,758 for Rusty Selix.

 

CA MHSA FUNDS NOT REACHING MENTALLY ILL

 

Due to voters altruistically passing Prop 63, a 1% tax on millionaires to fund services (Mental Health Services Act) for people with “serious mental illness”, California is the only state with plenty of money to provide care for people with serious mental illness. But it is being diverted elsewhere. Taking off on the work of Carla Jacobs, Rose King, Teresa Pasquini, and many others in CA, Hannah Dreier at AP reported Calif mental health dollars bypassing mentally ill . This led to editorials, calls for an investigation, the consideration of an investigation, our criticism, and a coverup by those who approved the spending. (They failed to disclose that the programs do not serve people with mental illness as the legislation requires.)

 

How can you help in California?

 

Be a Whistle Blower. The auditor wants to hear about problems with MHSA. She needs your help. If you know MHSA Programs that do not serve people with serious mental illness, especially in Los Angeles, please send them to the auditor. Make them as specific as possible and include links, details that will allow verification. You know the California mental illness system better than the auditor, so send Ms. Howle the tips she needs:

Elaine M. Howle

California State Auditor

555 Capitol Mall

Suite 300

Sacramento, California 95814

Phone Number: (916) 445-0255

General Fax: (916) 327-0019

Executive Office Fax: (916) 323-0913

 

Email a copy of your information about programs that do not focus on serious mental illness to those trying to stop the diversion of MHSA funds.

 

 

LAURA’S LAW

 

CalMHSA gave (and MHSAOC approved) a $2,917,092 grant to Disability Rights California and $1,539,225 to California Network of Mental Health Clients which will be used to prevent counties from providing Laura’s Law to patients who could benefit from it. This supplements SAMHSA money flowing into CA also being used to prevent those who don’t know they are ill from receiving treatment.

 

 

Thank you for your financial support which makes our work possible. Together we will get more mental ‘health’ money going to people with ‘serious mental illness’.