Resolve, to Direct the Department of Health and Human Services to Amend Rules and Establish a Study Group Related to Funding and Reimbursement for Mental Health Crisis Resolution Services
If enacted, LD2223 will significantly alter the funding landscape for mental health crisis services, making them more sustainable and accessible. The study group established by this resolve will evaluate potential funding sources, including Medicaid reimbursements, state appropriations, and grant funding. By January 15, 2025, the DHHS is expected to report on the study group's recommendations, potentially leading to a more structured and financially secure framework for these critical services, which cater to individuals in mental or behavioral crises, as well as those facing challenges related to substance use and intellectual disabilities.
LD2223 is a legislative resolve aimed at directing the Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) to amend its rules and establish a study group focused on funding and reimbursement models for mental health crisis resolution services. The purpose of the bill is to develop a reimbursement model that operates on a cost-reimbursement basis, ensuring that providers can fully cover staff and operational costs for 24/7 services. This approach contrasts with the currently used per-encounter reimbursement system, which may not adequately support the operational needs of crisis services.
The general sentiment surrounding LD2223 appears to be positive, particularly among mental health advocates who recognize the necessity of reliable funding for crisis intervention services. The bill is seen as a progressive step towards enhancing mental health support in the state, responding to ongoing concerns about insufficient funding and access to services. However, the push for changes in reimbursement models could also evoke concerns about the adequacy of future funding streams and whether state funding will meet the demands of these essential services.
Notable points of contention around LD2223 may revolve around the implementation of the new reimbursement model and the anticipated outcomes of the study group. Critics might question the reliance on public funding and the feasibility of generating sufficient resources to sustain an improved model. The effectiveness of the transition from a per-encounter basis to an annual cost reimbursement model is also likely to be scrutinized, particularly in terms of how it impacts the quality and availability of crisis resolution services across the state.