February
17, 2006
MHANYS
LETTER TO NYS DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION COMMISSIONER MILLS REGARDING
TRANSITIONAL ISSUES OF HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS WITH MENTAL HEALTH
NEEDS: The text of MHANYS’ February 9, 2006 letter to
Commissioner Mills follows.
Dear
Commissioner Mills:
Our
organization, the Mental Health Association in New York State
(MHANYS), is comprised of 30 chapters across the state representing
54 counties. Much of what MHANYS does is educate the public
about mental illness and advocate for positive reforms in the
mental health system. Many of our members are also community
mental health providers who run programs related to all aspects
of the public mental health system including several school
based preventive services and early childhood programs.
On
January 28, 2006, I had the opportunity to provide testimony
before the Commissioner’s Advisory Panel on Special Education.
I have attached my comments for your review. With over 20 percent
of the nation’s school children exhibiting signs and symptoms
of mental health problems, we think that this has become a health
care crisis across the nation that needs to be addressed through
additional resources, cross agency collaborations and innovative
evidenced base practices that identify the mental health needs
of students.
One
of our greatest concerns is in regard to the needs of individuals
with emotional disorders as they transition from high school
to the adult mental health system. There is an unmet need between
the desire of students with emotional disabilities to attain
employment and/or further schooling and the systemic response
that coerces many of these individuals into the adult mental
health system after high school.
We
have also voiced our concerns regarding the fact that many Individualized
Education Plans (IEP’s) do not always include mental health
services when appropriate. As a result, many families are forced
to pay out of pocket for the cost of services for their child.
Mental health services should be included in the IEP as required
by the Office of Special Education Programs (OSEP) when needed
in order for the student to make progress towards his/her IEP
goals. In these instances, in accordance with Free and Appropriate
Education (FAPE), parents should not bear the cost of these
services.
We
would also like to provide some input regarding several of the
indicators on which State Education Agencies must report to
OSEP in the Annual Performance Plan. These include:
Indicator
13: Percent of youth aged 16 and above with an IEP that includes
coordinated, measurable, annual IEP goals and transition services
that will reasonably enable the student to meet post-secondary
goals.
Indicator
14: Percent of youth who had IEP’s, are no longer in secondary
schools and who have been competitively employed, enrolled in
some form of postsecondary school, or both, within one year
of leaving high school.
With
regard to Indicator 13: The term “coordinated goals and
transition services” suggests that there is a partnership
between schools and other agencies serving adolescents and young
adults. Accordingly, we ask that NYSED collect information which
will shed light on the amount of cross-system planning which
occurs as part of the transition process.
Given
the mission of our organization, we are particularly interested
in the participation rates of non-school mental health professionals
in the development of IEP’s and Transition Plans, as well
as the number of IEP’s and Transition Plans which include
the current provision of mental health services and which identifies
specific mental health services and providers which will be
accessed as part of the transition process. We also ask that
information be available by disability category. Currently,
based on the Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Agency (SAMSHA)
report on school mental health services in the United States
(published in 2005), only 57% of elementary schools nationwide
have agreements with community based mental health providers.
For middle school, the percentage is 58% and for high school
the percentage is 55%.
We
also urge that NYSED seek input from other state agencies, including
the Office of Mental Health, in determining how to measure whether
goals and services in the IEP and Transition Plans are coordinated
and how to disseminate information regarding best practices
in this area.
With
regard to Indicator 14: Add sentence to end of current paragraph
that states, “We also propose that this information be
available by disability category”.
Although
not specific to any indicator, we are greatly concerned about
individuals in schools, predominantly high school, who are substance
abusers. In recent years, it has come to light that many individuals
with mental health issues also have co-occurring substance abuse.
At the district level (especially in high school), there needs
to be an assessment tool that identifies individuals that have
both a substance abuse and mental health issue. Through a coordinated
assessment and referral process, the student should be able
to receive integrated services for their substance abuse and
mental health needs.
We
are very appreciative of the reforms that have been implemented
under your leadership to help better serve individuals with
mental illness in schools. However, we have concerns about the
issues of IEP’s not reflecting the true mental health
needs of individuals in schools, transition plans that do not
always reflect the needs and desires of individuals with mental
health needs in schools and no assessments tools in place that
identify both the substance abuse and mental health needs of
students. The inclusion of these concerns in quality indicators
is a step forward in providing better mental health services
for school aged children.
We
will gladly meet with you to discuss in greater detail.
We
thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Glenn Liebman, CEO
IN
THE NEWS:
Area
legislators favor sex offender confinement. By Elizabeth Cooper
Utica Observer-Dispatch, February 17, 2006
While
they differ on some details, area state representatives unanimously
favor the creation of civil confinement facilities for violent
sex offenders.
And
none are opposed to putting two of those facilities in Marcy.
A
pair of bills that would create the confinement facilities —
including ones at the Central New York Psychiatric Center and
Mid-State Correctional Facility in Marcy — are in a conference
committee in the state Legislature. While some Republicans say
the Assembly bill is too soft, some Democrats say the Senate bill
doesn't adequately address the civil rights of any sex offenders
who may have been rehabilitated.
"The
process of evaluation should be taken very seriously, and certainly
those who pose a threat should be confined," said Assemblyman
William Magee, D-Nelson. "But those who don't should be able
to go back to their communities."
On
the other hand, state Sen. Raymond Meier, R-Western, said he was
concerned about the possibility of some sex offenders being released,
even under intensive supervision.
"I
am disturbed by this element as it would seem that someone who
is a sexual predator ought to be confined," he said.
If
approved by the Legislature, the commitments would lead to nearly
700 new jobs in Marcy, state officials have said.
None
of the local legislators oppose putting centers in Marcy, though
state Sen. James Seward, R-Milford, did not want to discuss the
proposed Marcy centers because they are not located in his district.
But
Meier said the Marcy centers were far from a done deal. Not only
must the civil confinement law be passed, but a range of criteria
must be established, including a review process for offenders
and training for staff.
"There
is a lot of work to be done, questions to be answered and issues
to be covered before we get to the point about which there is
so much premature speculation," he said.
