Home
>> Public Policy >>
Glenn Liebman, CEO
Mental Health Association in New York State, Inc.
Testimony
to
JOINT
BUDGET HEARINGS OF THE NEW YORK STATE
SENATE AND ASSEMBLY ON MENTAL HEALTH, MENTAL
RETARDATION AND DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
January
25, 2006
Introduction:
Thank you very much Senator Johnson and Assemblymember Farrell
and Mental Health Chairs, Assemblymember Rivera and Senator Morahan
for providing us with an opportunity to present our thoughts on
Governor Pataki’s ‘06-07’ executive budget proposal.
The
Mental Health Association in New York State, Inc. is comprised
of 30 affiliates across New York State representing 54 counties.
Our members provide education and training to the community about
mental illness. Many of our members also provide mental health
services to their community. These community programs include
housing, peer run programs, jail diversion, school based prevention
programs, case management, trainings on co-occurring substance
abuse and mental illness services, crisis lines, emergency services
and a variety of other programs as well.
We
also advocate for positive changes in the mental health system.
To that end, this year’s budget represents the best budget
proposal we have seen in several years. Though we still have concerns
that we will voice, we are pleased by the enhanced funding for
children’s services, additional housing through a New York/New
York III agreement, a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) for direct
care workers, funding for suicide prevention, resources for those
with co-occurring disorders and funding for the Geriatric Mental
Health Act, signed into law last year by Governor Pataki. We would
like to thank Governor Pataki and Commissioner Carpinello for
putting such an emphasis on areas that have been under funded
in the past.
Children’s Mental Health Services
Of
great significance to us is the funding for children’s mental
health services. According to the recently released report from
the Federal government on School Mental Health Services, one-fifth
of the children and adolescents in the country experience the
signs and symptoms of a mental health problem in the course of
a year. Despite these large numbers, there is a disconnect between
the onset of a mental illness in childhood and initial contact
with treatment professionals.
According
to the National Co morbidity Survey Replication Preliminary Findings,
the median duration of delay in manifestation of an anxiety disorder
and the first treatment contact is an average of ten years. The
average age for initial onset of an anxiety disorder is 11 years
old. Largely because in the past, there was limited funding for
assessments and referrals, thousands of younger New Yorkers had
early signs of undiagnosed mental illness that went untreated.
For bipolar disorder, it is six years between manifestation of
the symptoms and first treatment contact. This is a public policy
failure. Ultimately, many of these children with undiagnosed mental
illness will end up as part of the adult mental health system,
many for the rest of their lives.
That
is why we are supportive of the initiative by the Office of Mental
Health to provide funding for the early recognition of emotional
disturbances in children. The evidence is overwhelming, through
evidence-based practices, that early intervention and identification
does reduce the severity and length of mental illness. Having
the ability to screen 400,000 children and assess 76,000 children,
as proposed in the budget, will greatly enhance the ability of
clinicians to identify an illness at its early stages and provide
the necessary resources to provide the best treatment for those
children with an identifiable mental illness. Parents, family
members, and children’s mental health advocates have long
pointed to the need for additional resources for screening and
treatment for children with mental health needs. This is excellent
step forward and we are strongly supportive of this initiative.
MHANYS
is also part of the New York Children’s Action Network (NYCAN),
which recently wrote to Senator Johnson and Assemblymember Farrell
requesting that a Children's Budget Hearing be incorporated into
the annual budget hearings. Children are New York's most important
resource and investments in our children are the most worthwhile
investments we can make. Their needs are of concern to all of
us which is why we ask the Assembly and Senate to hold a Children's
Budget Hearing to focus attention on the dollars New York spends
on children. We believe New York CAN and must do more for children
and families.
Cost of Living Increase for Community Mental Health Workforce
We
are also supportive of a 2.5 percent COLA for residential and
several non-residential providers. Many of our members would be
among those who would be receiving this COLA. Ever since funding
for reinvestment has dried up, the lifeline for new funding for
community providers has dried up as well. In recent years,
we have fought cuts of $7.7 million two years ago and $3.9 million
last year. We thank the legislature very much for restoring $4.3
million that was cut from the $7.7 million in last year’s
budget.
Many
of those cuts were to the services that are integral to recipients
of mental health services living in the community. Due to the
multiple cuts over the years and increases in health insurance,
heating and rental space, it has become exceptionally difficult
for providers to keep running quality programs and keep qualified
workers.
It is only through dedication, commitment and the belief in the
recovery of individuals with mental illness that staff working
for community providers are staying in the field and not moving
to higher paying jobs (i.e. fast food) in the service industry.
MHANYS
has been part of a coalition of advocates who would like to see
a 10 percent increase across the board for community mental health
programs. The Governor’s 2.5 percent increase is a good
first step, but we need a quantum leap just to keep qualified
individuals working in community mental health programs.
We
hope to work with all of you this year to enhance the funding
for the COLA and to make the COLA permanent. In addition, we support
the addition of ten million dollars for the many service providers
who have been cut over the last two years. Many of these program
cuts have gone to transportation programs, family support and
respite program, peer run programs and multicultural initiatives.
Without
this funding, programs that have proven effective for recipients
of psychiatric disabilities will either be greatly reduced or
eliminated altogether. We do not believe that anyone wants to
see that happen or witness the disastrous consequences of a poorly
funded community mental health system.
Housing
We
are very pleased by the state’s commitment to a New York/New
York III agreement in housing. 9000 units of housing over a 10
year period represents a historic commitment to housing for people
with psychiatric disabilities. Approximately 5500 of these units
will be dedicated to individuals with psychiatric disabilities.
Both the Governor and Mayor Bloomberg deserve a great deal of
credit for this agreement.
However,
we all know that there is a great deal of work ahead for us in
creating more housing capacity for individuals with psychiatric
disabilities. This agreement does not include housing for individuals
coming from corrections settings, those who want to move out of
adult homes and those with psychiatric disabilities who are living
at home with elderly parents.
Also,
housing for people with mental illness is at crisis level across
the state. We need similar agreements in Long Island, Central
New York, the Hudson River Region and in Western New York. We
also urge passage of legislation that provides for a housing waiting
list that identifies the need for housing in the community for
people with psychiatric disabilities, similar to that which presently
exists for people served through the Office of Mental Retardation
and Developmental Disabilities. Without an identified need, it
becomes very difficult to provide proper planning for residential
placement.
Lastly,
we were pleased to see the Governor’s proposal also included
additional funding for supported housing programs. Supported housing
is an important component of the housing continuum that allows
people with mental health needs to begin living independently,
laying the groundwork for even more independent living in the
future.
Adult Homes
In
regard to housing, 12,000 individuals in New York with a psychiatric
disabilities remain in adult homes, many of whom would like the
opportunity, and have the capability, to live in a less restrictive
setting. In the previous two years, the state has allocated $10
million each year for adult home residents, which included independent
case management services and funding for quality of life initiatives
for residents. In addition, we remain very appreciative of your
work last year in creating an SSI increase for adult home residents.
Unfortunately,
this year, there appears to be a glaring omission in funding for
adult home residents. We urge the legislature to add funding for
essential adult home services that would be utilized to insure
that residents of adult homes live as independently as possible
either in the homes or in other placements in the community. In
addition, there must be funding in place for much needed legal
and lay advocacy and air conditioning in the adult homes. This
population must not be forgotten.
Geriatric
Mental Health Act, Suicide Prevention
and Co-occurring Disorders
Other
initiatives we are pleased with in the budget include funding
for the Geriatric Mental Health Act, an important recognition
of the elderly and their growing mental health concerns, more
funding for suicide prevention and also additional funding for
co-occurring disorders. One of the most significant problems in
today’s mental health system is for individuals who have
both a mental illness and substance abuse issue. Recent estimates
suggest that over 50% of people with psychiatric disabilities
also have a co-occurring substance abuse disorder. One of the
evidence-based practices in mental health is integrated treatment
for this population. We are pleased to see funding in the budget
that is earmarked for this program, which we hope will lead to
better recovery rates for those with co-occurring disorders.
Civil Commitment of Sexual Offenders
One
area we are still gravely concerned about is the housing of sexual
offenders in OMH run facilities. We have consistently voiced our
opposition to the housing of sexual offenders in psychiatric facilities.
First and foremost, the facilities and services provided by the
Office of Mental Health are designed to be therapeutic environments
where individuals can be helped in the recovery process from serious
mental illness, such as schizophrenia, major depressive disorder,
and bipolar disorder. It is not a system intended to serve as
lock down wards for sexual offenders.
- Safety Issues - Individuals with mental illness
living in the community are 12 times more likely to be the victims
of violence than the general population. We would have serious
safety concerns about the population of individuals with psychiatric
disabilities, who are even more vulnerable than those in the
community, being housed amongst sexual offenders.
- Funding - We believe that funding for sexual
offenders should not be part of the Office of Mental Health’s
budget. Instead, we are advocating for a separate funding stream,
completely lined out independently in the budget. The funding
for sexual offenders should not in any way, shape or form be
co-mingled with the mental health budget.
- Stigma - There is already an overwhelming
stigma associated with people living with mental illness, often
referred to in the media as “crazy” or “psychopaths.”
To lump them together with sexual offenders only serves to further
advance those negative stereotypes that impede the road to recovery.
Though
we are somewhat mollified by the proposed housing of sexual predators
at Camp Pharsalia (and that funding in the next few years for
the programs would provide housing at either Central New York
Psychiatric Center, which is a forensics facility, and a separate
facility on the grounds of St. Lawrence Psychiatric Center), we
still have concerns about OMH overseeing the housing of sexual
offenders.
This
also does not get to our point about the co-mingling of funding
for mental health and sexual offenders. Completely separating
this funding in the budget process is necessary to ensure that
no siphoning off of resources otherwise dedicated for services
to those with mental health needs occurs. In addition, we recommend
bill language to insure that if the Office of Mental Health does
end up overseeing this population of people, that an annual report
on the costs associated with the confinement of sexual offenders
and any impact those costs have had on the availability of resources
for those with serious mental health needs.
The
worst case scenario for the mental health community is that resources
in the budget for community mental health services would have
to compete with resources for sexual offenders in the mental health
budget.
Health Issues
Two
issues of concern to us that are currently in the health budget
are in regard to the Governor’s attempt to roll back safeguards
incorporated into last year’s Preferred Drug Program (PDP)
and with regard to the implementation of Medicare Part D. Though
we will get into greater detail in our Health testimony, these
proposals impact people living with mental illness.
Specifically,
we are concerned about the Governor’s proposal to remove
the language authorizing the physician to make the final determination
about which drug will be prescribed to a Medicaid patient in the
Preferred Drug Plan (PDP). A physician, not a bureaucracy focused
on saving money, should have the final say as to which medications
are appropriate for an individual.
Also,
we are concerned that by allowing cost to be a consideration in
the approval of drugs under the Clinical Drug Review Program,
this could have a very negative impact on those with mental health
needs and the expensive drugs on which they rely.
With
regard to Medicare Part D, we must develop additional strategies
to insure people on both Medicare and Medicaid (dual eligibles)
have access to the medications they need to remain healthy. Though
we appreciate the Governor’s efforts to ensure that Medicaid
is available to pay for the first few weeks of Medicare Part D
when problems arise, this is just a stopgap measure. There must
be a full commitment from the state to cover the co-pays for dual
eligibles unable to afford these new co-pays. Without that funding
in place, there will be a number of people who will stop taking
medication because of the cost associated with the co-payments.
In
addition, before the implementation of Medicare Part D on January
1st, advocates were assured that Medicaid would be available to
cover medically necessary medications that Part D plans refused
to cover. While we assumed that this coverage would remain, we
were alarmed to read in the Governor’s proposal that such
“wrap around” coverage would end on July 1st. Given
the current lack of success in the implementation of Medicare
Part D, there is little reason to believe that all issues will
be ironed out by July. Therefore, we believe that the state should
provide funding for this “wrap around” until March
31, 2007, which will allow for a thorough examination of any problems
surrounding Part D one year after its implementation.
Summary:
There is a lot in this budget that we are very pleased with including
the commitment to children with funding based on evidence-based
best practices and a planning process. We are also pleased with
housing through New York/New York III, a historic agreement that
will have positive ramifications for years to come for individuals
with psychiatric disabilities. We appreciate the dedication to
funding the Geriatric Mental Health Act, suicide prevention and
for services to those with co-occurring disorders. Though we are
appreciative of the commitment for a 2.5 percent COLA, we need
additional funding and a permanent COLA to motivate qualified
individuals to continue to work in community mental health programs.
Our
other major concerns involve a separation of the funding for sexual
offenders, additional funding for adult home residents, reinstatement
of the language safeguarding Medicaid patients in the PDP funding
to pick up the cost of co-payments for dual eligibles currently
enrolled in Part D, and continuation of the Medicaid “wrap
around” that acts as a safety net for Part D enrollees.
We
thank you very much for your time and consideration.