📋

Extracted from Consolidated Report

This investigation was originally published as part of a larger consolidated report containing multiple investigations. View the consolidated PDF for the complete document.

Orange County Grand Jury • 2014-2015

Orange County Mental Health: Crisis Intervention Programs No Beds for Children According to an article in the Orange

Published: June 12, 2015 20 pages Consolidated Report

View PDF View Full Original

⚠️ Translation Notice: This content has been automatically translated. The original English text is the official version. Translation may contain errors.

⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.

Findings 6 findings

The County’s Evaluation Treatment Services facility does not provide needed medical stabilization services such as those included in the Psychiatric Emergency Services model.

The current need and demand for involuntary psychiatric emergency services in South Orange County is not being met.

The County has an insufficient number of psychiatric beds to provide in-patient care to mentally ill clients who are not able to be referred to less restrictive treatment.

Although a plan is in place at CHOC for an 18-bed unit to open in 2017, there are currently no psychiatric beds in Orange County for children under the age of 12.

The Mental Health Services Act Steering Committee has no direct representation from local designated private hospitals.

Given the language in the California Code of Regulations and the Welfare and Institutions Code regarding funding for involuntary treatment, the issue of using Mental Health Services Act funds for involuntary psychiatric clients who are gravely disabled or a danger to self or others, is unclear. RECOMMENDATIONS In accordance with California Penal Code Sections 933 and 933.05, the 2014- 2015 Grand Jury requires (or, as noted, requests) responses from each agency affected by the recommendations presented in this section. The responses are to be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court. Based on its investigation titled “Orange County Mental Health: Crisis Intervention Programs”, the 2014-2015 Orange County Grand Jury makes the following six recommendations:

Recommendations 6

R1

Continue with the planned expansion of the Evaluation Treatment Services facility in Santa Ana and convert it to a Psychiatric Evaluation Services model of care that includes basic medical services currently provided 5150 clients by private hospital emergency departments. (F.1.)
R2

Add an additional Evaluation Treatment Services facility to be located in South Orange County and initiate substantive, concrete efforts to do so in Fiscal Year 2015-2016. (F.2.)
R3

Continue efforts to locate and secure commitments for additional psychiatric beds in Orange County and nearby adjacent counties in order to increase the number of beds available for County use. (F.3.)
R4

Follow-up on the planned children’s psychiatric unit at CHOC and continue to work with appropriate private hospitals in Orange County in an effort to provide additional psychiatric beds for children in Orange County. (F.4.)
R5

Add Mental Health Services Act Steering Committee representation from designated private hospitals that have demonstrated effectiveness in evaluating and treating Welfare and Institutions Code 5150 clients in crisis situations. (F.5.)
R6

Request an opinion from County Counsel regarding the purported restrictions on using Mental Health Services Act funds for involuntary mental health programs. (F.6.) REQUIRED RESPONSES The California Penal Code section 933 requires the governing body of any public agency which the Grand Jury has reviewed, and about which it has issued a final report, to comment to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body. Such comment shall be made no later than 90 days after the Grand Jury publishes its report (filed with the Clerk of the Court). Additionally, in the case of a report containing findings and recommendations pertaining to a department or agency headed by an elected County official (e.g. District Attorney, Sheriff, etc.), such elected official shall comment on the findings and recommendations pertaining to the matters under that elected official’s control to the Presiding Judge with an information copy sent to the Board of Supervisors. Furthermore, California Penal Code section 933.05 (a), (b), (c), details, as follows, the manner in which such comment(s) are to be made: (a) As to each Grand Jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) As to each Grand Jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a time frame for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a time frame for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This time frame shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefore. (c) If a finding or recommendation of the Grand Jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the Board of Supervisors shall respond if requested by the Grand Jury, but the response of the Board of Supervisors shall address only those budgetary /or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. Comments to the Presiding Judge of the Superior Court in compliance with Penal Code section 933.05 are required from: Responses Required: Responses to Findings F.1. through F.6. and Recommendations R.1. through