College Mental Health Services Program.
Summary
Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act, an initiative statute enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, funds a system of county mental health plans for the provision of mental health services, as specified. Existing law establishes the continuously appropriated Mental Health Services Fund. Existing law requires the Controller, prior to distributing the balance of the funds to the counties, as specified, to reserve up to 5% of the total annual revenues of the fund for the costs for the State Department of Health Care Services, the California Behavioral Health Planning Council, the Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development, the Mental Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission, the State Department of Public Health, and any other state agency to implement all duties pursuant to the programs set forth in the act. This bill would amend Proposition 63 by appropriating $40,000,000 annually from the administrative account of the Mental Health Services Fund to the Board of Regents of the University of California, the Board of Trustees of the California State University, and the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as specified, to implement the College Mental Health Services Program. The bill would require the governing boards, as defined, to create a grant program for public community college, college, and university campuses for the purpose of establishing or improving access to mental health services on those campuses, as specified. The bill would require campuses that have been awarded grants under these provisions to report annually on the use of those grant funds and to post that information on their internet websites. The bill would also require each governing body to submit a report to the Legislature evaluating the impact of the program, as specified. The bill would require that evaluation to be conducted by a public or private research university or institute in this state and would require the Department of Finance to assist the governing bodies in issuing a request for proposal for that contract.
Bill status
failed
1 of 4 stages cleared
Introduction
Feb 2019
Committee Review
Floor Vote
Governor
Introduced Feb 22, 2019
Last action Feb 3, 2020
Floor votes
How they voted
No floor votes recorded yet.
Full legislative history
Actions timeline
Total actions
14
Key actions
4
Committee
8
May 16, 2019
Lower · Passed
In committee: Held under submission.
lower
May 8, 2019
Committee
In committee: Set, first hearing. Referred to APPR. suspense file.
lower
May 2, 2019
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 24, 2019
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 11. Noes 0.) (April 23). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
lower
Apr 10, 2019
Lower · Passed
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on HIGHER ED. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (April 9). Re-referred to Com. on HIGHER ED.
lower
Apr 2, 2019
Committee
Re-referred to Com. on HEALTH.
lower
Mar 18, 2019
Committee
Referred to Coms. on HEALTH and HIGHER ED.
lower
Feb 23, 2019
Lower · Passed
From printer. May be heard in committee March 25.
lower
Feb 22, 2019
Introduced
Introduced. To print.
lower
1 primary · 0 co-sponsors
Sponsors
Role
Legislator
Party
State
District
P
Kevin McCarty
DDemocratic
Ask Maddy
·
AI policy assistant
Ask Maddy about AB 1689
Scope: CA
Hi! I can help you understand AB 1689. 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