Delta County opposes state move on mental health services plans | News, Sports, Jobs

Delta County has recently taken a clear stance against a new plan proposed by the Michigan Department of Health and Human Services (MDHHS) regarding the organization of mental health services in the state. This plan aims to outsource the management of Prepaid Inpatient Health Plans (PIHPs) to private entities, a decision that has raised considerable concerns among local government officials and mental health providers.

In a recent meeting, Pathways CEO Matt Maskart presented his concerns to the Delta County Board, arguing that transferring management responsibilities to private health plans could have detrimental effects on the quality of mental health care. For over six decades, counties in Michigan, including Delta County, have played a crucial role in overseeing the public mental health system. This involvement has been particularly significant since the deinstitutionalization movement in the 1970s and 1980s, which saw a shift away from state psychiatric hospitals to community-based care.

Maskart emphasized that county officials participate on the boards of local Community Mental Health Services Programs (CMHSPs), ensuring that mental health services are tailored to the specific needs of their communities. However, the recent MDHHS initiative claims that a competitive procurement process for PIHP contracts will “create a more accessible and person-centered system of care.” Critics, including the Michigan Association of Counties (MAC), fear this transition could prioritize profit over quality and accessibility.

When announced, the plan evoked swift backlash. The Delta County Board unanimously passed a resolution opposing the MDHHS’s strategy and will ensure its concerns reach state officials, including Governor Gretchen Whitmer. The board highlighted the potential risks of allowing private entities to manage Medicaid mental health dollars and the fear that decisions may become profit-driven rather than rooted in community care quality.

The underlying issue rests on the impact such changes could have on county-run mental health services. With a publicly managed PIHP system currently operating at around 2% overhead costs, the shift to private management could raise administrative costs to around 15%—essentially redirecting funds away from direct services to patients. This concern is shared by the MAC, which states that the restructuring could exacerbate existing funding shortfalls and degrade the quality of care available to those in need.

In response to the state’s RFP—which invites proposals limited to nonprofit organizations—Maskart warned that the process seems skewed towards favoring larger private providers that may not meet the community’s needs. The fear is that with private organizations like Blue Cross Blue Shield, Priority Health, and McLaren Health Care potentially winning these contracts, local providers could be sidelined, replaced by cheaper alternatives that may not sustain the same level of care.

Maskart also raised doubts about the future of services like jail diversion programs that Pathways provides, warning that if private entities take over, essential community services could be jeopardized. Commissioner Patrick Johnson aptly stated, “I don’t want to see our jail become our number one mental treatment facility,” highlighting the pressing need for integrated mental health services within the community rather than reactive approaches often associated with incarceration.

The resolution from Delta County reflects a broader statewide effort; several other counties have voiced similar concerns and passed resolutions opposing the MDHHS procurement process. The MAC’s letter directly urges state officials to collaborate with local stakeholders to find more effective solutions to the state’s mental health challenges rather than imposing a top-down approach that may overlook local context and needs.

Delta County’s decision aligns with the sentiments expressed by other counties that advocate for meaningful reforms designed to close gaps in the mental health workforce, bolster funding, and reduce the administrative burdens on local systems. The ultimate goal is to ensure high-quality, person-centered care continues to be available to residents, particularly those with mental illnesses, developmental disabilities, and substance use disorders.

In addition to discussing the opposition to the MDHHS plan, Delta County’s recent board meeting included a range of other topics reflecting the board’s commitment to various community issues. These discussions encompassed the upcoming fiscal budget for 2025-26, legal resolutions related to the opioid crisis, and enhancements to animal control ordinances.

The board’s unanimous vote against the MDHHS proposal underscores the community’s commitment to maintaining local control over mental health services and ensuring that the voices and needs of Delta County residents are not overshadowed by for-profit interests. As mental health continues to be a critical issue across Michigan, the advocacy efforts by county officials, providers, and residents alike will be vital in shaping a future where accessible and effective mental health care remains a community priority.

This development serves as a reminder of the risks associated with outsourcing essential services that significantly impact the fabric of local communities, particularly in a realm as sensitive as mental health. The ongoing conversations and resolutions indicate a call for collaborative governance that prioritizes the well-being of residents and safeguards the integrity of mental health services in Michigan.

Source link