California 2021-2022 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB565

Introduced
2/18/21  
Refer
3/3/21  
Refer
3/3/21  
Refer
3/8/21  
Refer
3/8/21  
Refer
3/18/21  
Report Pass
4/8/21  
Refer
4/8/21  
Refer
4/8/21  
Report Pass
4/14/21  
Refer
4/14/21  
Refer
4/14/21  

Caption

State Department of State Hospitals: facility expansion: report.

Impact

If passed, SB 565 would necessitate significant changes to the operation and capacity of state hospitals, which include facilities like Atascadero and Napa. By imposing a deadline for the department to report back to the legislature with a plan, the bill seeks to ensure accountability and expedite processes that currently leave many patients waiting for extended periods before receiving care. This could lead to more timely mental health interventions, which is crucial in addressing severe mental health crises.

Summary

Senate Bill 565, introduced by Senator Jones, addresses the urgent need for improved mental health services in California by mandating the State Department of State Hospitals to develop a plan for expanding the capacity of its facilities. Specifically, the bill requires the department to submit a report detailing the anticipated costs associated with such expansions, aiming to reduce patient wait times to 60 days or less. This is particularly pertinent for individuals committed under the provisions of the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act, which governs the rights of individuals with severe mental disorders.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 565 appears to be largely supportive among mental health advocates and healthcare professionals who see the bill as a necessary step toward addressing the backlog of patients waiting for admission to state hospitals. However, some concerns have been raised regarding the financial implications of expanding facilities and ensuring that quality of care is maintained as capacity increases. Balancing cost, patient care quality, and the administrative capabilities of state hospitals is an ongoing point of discussion.

Contention

The main contention surrounding this bill revolves around funding and resource allocation. While proponents argue for the necessity of facility expansions to enhance patient care, opponents worry about the fiscal strain that such expansions could impose. Further discussion focuses on the current adequacy of resources within the State Department of State Hospitals to implement these changes effectively without compromising existing patient services.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB471

Office of the Developmental Services Ombudsperson.

CA SB683

Developmental services: regional centers.

CA AB1643

Developmental services: fair hearings.

CA SB422

California Workforce Development Board: developmental services.

CA AB812

Developmental services: Inspector General.

CA AB1946

Mental health services: involuntary detention.

CA SB412

Developmental services: fees.

CA SB402

Involuntary commitment.