1. 1 DMH Web Cast Training AB 3632: County Mental Health services to children in special education AB 3632 Cost Reporting AB 3632 Client Services Information Senate Bill 1895 Overview

2. 2 Agenda 9:30-9:40 Webcast Orientation 9:40-9:50 AB 3632 Cost Reports –Chuk Okemiri, County Financial Program Support 9:50-10:00 AB 3632 CSI (Client Services Information) Reporting –Tom Wilson, CSI Unit Manager 10-10:30 SB 1895 Overview –Zoey Todd, Special Education Pupils Program

3. 3 How to Participate in Web Cast Press mute button on phone; E-mail questions through web-ex today, will answer at the end as time allows; Follow up: –This session will be recorded, available in about two weeks at www.cimh.org; you will be notified of this web site.www.cimh.org –List serve will be set up to respond to further questions, you will be notified how to access it. –Questions-e-mail Jessica at: jtakehara@cimh.org

4. 4 What you will learn How to do AB 3632 Cost Reporting- New and Improved! How to do CSI for AB 3632 SB 1895 –Program Changes to AB 3632 that CMHs need to implement immediately –DMH Activities resulting from SB 1895

5. 5 Useful Information… Useful Information…

6. 6 Why this Web Cast? Increased state and local focus on AB 3632 requires improved data on children receiving and services provided and costs to provide them. Senate Bill 1895 was signed by Governor Schwartzenegger September 13, 2004 with an urgency clause.

7. 7 Background AB 3632 has been focus of attention for several years. Why? –Funding Shortfall –Change in funding sources –Law Suits –State Mandates Commission activity –Stanford Youth and Education Law Clinic Report “Challenge and Opportunity”

8. 8 Horror Movie…

9. 9 Background Interest highlighted problem areas, including the need for more accurate data: –How many served, who they are –What it costs- all sources –What mental health services are provided SB 1895 (Burton) written to address these and other issues.

10. 10 Vocabulary AB 3632, Chapter 26.5- Common terms for GC Title 1, Chapter 26.5, Section 7570-88 CCR-California Code of Regulations CDE-California Department of Education CMH-County Mental Health Agency COE-County Office of Education CSI-Client Services Information

11. 11 Vocabulary,2 DMH- California Department of Mental Health GC-California Government Code IDEA- Individuals with Disabilities Act LEA-Local Education Agency SEP-Special Education Pupil’s Program USDE-US Department of Education

12. 12 Cost Reports for Special Education Program (SEP) Chuk Okemiri, DMH County Financial Support Program (916) 651-6367 Chuk.Okemiri@dmh.ca.gov

13. 13 CSI (Client Services Information) Reports for SEP Tom Wilson, DMH CSI Unit Manager (916) 653-4608 Tom.Wilson@dmh.ca.gov

14. 14 The Evolution of Work The Evolution of Work

15. 15 SB 1895 Overview Zoey Todd, DMH AB 3632 Program (916) 651-2024 zoey.todd@dmh.ca.gov SB 1895 has 10 Sections; Text available at www.leginfo.ca.gov; Signed 9/13/04, with urgency clause.

16. 16 SB 1895-Section 1 Adds language to Ed Code; Superintendent of Schools responsible to: –Monitor local educational agencies to ensure compliance with Chapter 26.5; –Submit report to Legislature April 1, 2005.

17. 17 SB 1895-Section 2 Adds language to Ed Code; If an individual with exceptional needs is identified as potentially requiring mental health services, the LEA shall request CMH participation in the IEP; Specifies that certain services must be considered/provided prior to referral to county mental health (CMH) agency for AB 3632 services.

18. 18 Bacon…

19. 19 SB 1895-Section 3 Adds language to GC 26.5 Section 7576 (b) (5)- prior to referral to CMH… –The LEA will provide appropriate counseling and guidance services, psychological services, parent counseling and training, or social work services to the pupil, or behavioral intervention, and, –The IEP team has determined that the services do not meet the pupils educational needs, or, –In cases where these services are clearly inadequate or inappropriate, the IEP team has documented which services were considered and why determined to be inappropriate.

20. 20 SB 1895-Section 3, cont. 7576 (c) requires that the referral packet to CMH will include: –Description of the counseling, psychological, guidance and other interventions that have been provided to the pupil as provided in the IEP of the pupil including initiation, duration and frequency or the services, or, –Explanation of the reasons a service was considered for the pupil and determined to be inadequate or inappropriate to meet the student’s educational needs.

21. 21 Implications for CMH: CMH must review referral packets for: –Description of counseling, psychological, guidance and other interventions that have been provided to the pupil as provided in the IEP including initiation, duration and frequency or the services, or, –Explanation of the reasons a service was considered for the pupil and determined to be inadequate or inappropriate to meet the student’s educational needs. –If packet included neither, CMH must reject the packet, following the procedure in CCR 60045: 5 days to review the referral; If referral is inappropriate, CMH documents the reasons, and notifies the parent and LEA within one working day. –Failure to ensure services have been provided, or justified why not, may result in 3632 audit exceptions.

22. 22 SB 1895-Section 3, cont 7576 (h) is added to CCR, Ch. 26.5: CMH does not have fiscal or legal responsibility for any costs it incurs prior to the approval of an IEP, except for costs associated with the CMH assessment. Implications for CMH: –CMH is not responsible for pre-referral services; –CMH is not responsible for unilateral placements for a child who has not had an IEP that includes CMH services.

23. 23 SB 1895-Section 3, cont Two notes: A COE or SELPA may contract with CMH to provide pre-referral services, BUT IEPs, CSI, and cost reports must be kept separate from post- referral, AB 3632 services; (if you do plan to do this, be sure to contact DMH to discuss how to report those services); An interagency agreement between CMH and a LEA may not set aside the requirement for pre- referral services: interagency agreements must be consistent with state law.

24. 24 Gone…

25. 25 SB 1895-Section 4 New: The DMH Director is responsible for monitoring CMHs to ensure compliance with Chapter 26.5 and to ensure that funds for this purpose are appropriately utilized. –DMH is in the process of developing a CMH monitoring plan.

26. 26 SB 1895-Section 4, cont. New: DMH Director shall report to the Legislature by 4/1/05: –Description of AB 3632 data currently collected by DMH; –Description of the existing DMH monitoring process to ensure that CMHs comply with Ch 26.5; –Recommendations on: How to strengthen and improve DMH compliance monitoring of CMHs; How to strengthen and improve collaboration and coordination with CDE in monitoring and data collection and additional data needed related to Ch. 26.5.

27. 27 SB 1895-Section 4, cont. DMH report to the Legislature: –Process: DMH to collaborate with CDE in preparing the report; DMH to convene at least one meeting of appropriate stakeholders and organizations, including a representative from CDE to obtain input on: –Data collection and monitoring process, and, –Ways to strengthen and improve the data collected and monitoring performed.

28. 28 SB 1895, Section 5 New: DMH will collaborate with an entity with expertise in children’s mental health to collect analyze, and disseminate best practices for delivering mental health services to disabled pupils. These may include, but are not limited to: –Interagency agreements in urban, suburban, and rural areas that clearly identify responsibilities between LEAs and CMH; –Procedures for developing and amending IEPs that provide flexibility and protect the interests of the children in obtaining mental health services; –Procedures for creating ongoing communication between classroom teacher and mental health professional.

29. 29 SB 1895, Section 6 Adds Section 5701.6 to Welfare and Institutions Code to clarify that if realignment funds are used to provide Ch. 26.5 services, the county is eligible for reimbursement from the state for all allowable costs; “This section is declaratory of existing law.”

30. 30 SB 1895, Section 7 New: Requires that the Commission of State Mandates shall, by 12/31/05, reconsider its decision relating to included services and administrative and travel costs associated with 3632 services and the parameters and guidelines for calculating state reimbursements for these costs. Update

31. 31 I hope this guy can read… I hope this guy can read…

32. 32 SB 1895, Section 8 $31 million for pre-referral services to SELPAs are to be allocated on a per average daily attendance basis. Note: these funds are to be used by SELPAs only to provide pre-referral services.

33. 33 SB 1895, Section 9 (a) Identifies $69 million exclusively to support mental health services in an IEP in 2004-05. The $69 million will offset any mandate reimbursement claims. (Funds go from USDE to CDE to COE to CMH.) (Assurances to IDEA that funds were used for appropriate purpose in the particular year are required from CMH, COE, and CDE.)

34. 34 SB 1895, Section 9 (a-b) County allocation plan process: –Formulated by DMH in consultation with representatives of CMHs; –Submit to Dept of Finance (DOF) and Joint Legislative Budget Committee (JLBC); –DOF reviews and approves or disapproves within 21 days of submission; If DOF fails to approve or disapprove, the plan is deemed approved.

35. 35 SB 1895, Section 9 (b) County allocation Plan Process, cont. If DOF disapproves the plan, –DOF submits a letter to the JLBC with the rationale for disapproval; –DOF convenes a working group of representatives of DOF, DMH, and staff of appropriate policy and fiscal committees of the Legislature, who jointly develop a revised expenditure plan and submit to the Director of Finance for approval.

36. 36 SB 1895, Section 9 (c) Distribution of Funds-CDE to COEs: –Not less than 25 % to COEs to be distributed within 30 days after approval of the allocation methodology by DOF; –35% in January; –30 percent in March; –The final 10%, adjusted for actual costs, upon final cost settlement with the COE for 2004- 05 fiscal year claims.

37. 37 SB 1895, Section 9 (c), cont. SB 1895, Section 9 (c), cont. –Any amounts reallocated from counties not expending the allocation are to be provided to other counties where actual costs exceed the allocation provided no later than January 2006; –No county will receive, after claims are cost4 settled, more funding than was actually expended for this purpose.

38. 38 SB 1895, Section 9 (c), cont. SB 1895, Section 9 (c), cont. Distribution of Funds-COEs to CMHs: COEs to allocate funds to CMH no later than 5 business days after receipt; At end of fiscal year, CMHs to provide documentation of services and costs to COEs so that COEs can certify that all costs are allowable under the IDEA, and provided during the fiscal year; A CMH allocation that exceeds actual costs shall be reallocated on a pro rata basis to other counties.

39. 39 Note Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) has advised CDE that all the services identified in AB 3632 regulations (CCR 60000, et seq) are acceptable uses for IDEA funds.

40. 40 SB 1895, Section 10 Urgency clause: It is necessary that this act take effect immediately-signed by Gov Schwartzenegger 9/13/04.

41. 41 This Fall…

42. 42 Additional Information This web cast has been recorded, and will be available in about two weeks at the CIMH website: http://www.cimh.org List Serve SB 1895 text available at www.leginfo.ca.govwww.leginfo.ca.gov Stanford Report “Challenge and Opportunity” available at: http://www.law.stanford.edu/clinics/yelc/YELP_ Chapter_26-5_Report_May_20.pdf http://www.law.stanford.edu/clinics/yelc/YELP_ Chapter_26-5_Report_May_20.pdf