Mental health: community mental health services.
Summary
Existing law, the Bronzan-McCorquodale Act, contains provisions governing the operation and financing of community mental health services for the mentally disordered in every county through locally administered and locally controlled community mental health programs. Under existing law, the State Department of Mental Health is allowed to advance, in equal monthly increments, up to 95% of the annual funds due to community mental health programs. This bill would remove the restriction to 12 monthly installments and a maximum of 95% for advances. Existing law provides for administration of the Early and Periodic Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment Program (EPSDT) by the State Department of Mental Health. Existing law separately establishes the Medi-Cal program, administered by the State Department of Health Care Services, under which basic health care services, including mental health services are provided to qualified low-income persons. The Medi-Cal program is partially governed and funded under federal Medicaid provisions. Under existing law, the State Department of Mental Health is required to implement managed mental health care for Medi-Cal recipients through fee-for-service or capitated contracts with counties, counties acting jointly, qualified individuals or organizations, or nongovernmental entities. Existing law requires the department to allocate the contracted amount to the mental health plan (MHP) at the beginning of the contract period. This bill would require the State Department of Mental Health to allocate and distribute annually the full appropriated amount to the MHP for the managed mental health program, exclusive of the EPSDT component. Existing law requires MHPs to have sufficient matching funds on deposit with the department as matching funds necessary for federal financial participation, as specified. This bill would eliminate this requirement. Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act, an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, establishes the Mental Health Services Fund (MHSF) to fund various county mental health programs. The act may be amended by the Legislature only by a 23 vote of both houses and only so long as the amendment is consistent with and furthers the intent of the act. The Legislature may clarify procedures and terms of the act by majority vote. Under existing law, funding for the Mental Health Services Act is required to be used to expand mental health services, but may be loaned to the General Fund, as provided. This bill would, instead, subject to the availability of funding in the MHSF, require the State Department of Mental Health to distribute in a single lump sum the total approved funding, as defined, to the counties for the provision of programs and other activities, as specified.
Bill status
signed
all 5 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2010
Committee Review
Aug 2010
Senate Passage
May 2010
Assembly Passage
Aug 2010
Signed into Law
Sep 2010
Introduced Feb 19, 2010
Signed Sep 30, 2010
Floor votes · Senate Aug 27, 2010 · Assembly Aug 23, 2010
How they voted
31–0
Passed · 7 other
Total votes 38
Aug 27, 2010
D
Democratic25
88% Yea
R
Republican13
69% Yea
Vote distribution
All Yea
All Nay
Mixed
No data
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
39
Key actions
11
Committee
13
Amendments
4
Sep 30, 2010
Signed into law
Approved by Governor.
legislature
Aug 27, 2010
Senate · Passed
Senate Vote: pass (31-0-7)
senate
Aug 27, 2010
Introduced
Senate concurs in Assembly amendments. (Ayes 32. Noes 0. Page 4975.) To enrollment.
upper
Aug 26, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: That the Assembly amendments be concurred in. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 4954.)
upper
Aug 25, 2010
Committee
From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on HEALTH pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10. (Ayes 4. Noes 0. Page 4858.) Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
upper
Aug 25, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on RLS. pursuant to Senate Rule 29.10.
upper
Aug 23, 2010
Assembly · Passed
Assembly Vote: pass (57-9-2)
assembly
Aug 17, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on August 12.)
lower
Aug 17, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 12. Noes 5.)
lower
Aug 5, 2010
Committee
Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
Aug 2, 2010
Committee
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Jul 6, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 29.)
lower
Jul 6, 2010
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 18. Noes 0.)
lower
Jun 22, 2010
Lower · Passed
(Heard in committee on June 21.)
lower
Jun 22, 2010
Committee
From committee: Be re-referred to Com. on HEALTH. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Jun 21, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on RULES.
lower
May 11, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8 and be placed on Consent Calendar.
upper
Apr 22, 2010
Committee
Read second time. Amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
upper
Apr 21, 2010
Upper · Passed
From committee: Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to Com. on APPR with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 8. Noes 0. Page 3311.)
upper
Apr 15, 2010
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on T. & H.
upper
Feb 19, 2010
Introduced
Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
upper
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Darrell Steinberg
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about SB 1392
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand SB 1392. What would you like to know?
Try one of these
i
Maddy answers using official bill text and legislative records. Always verify before sharing.
Sources cited inline