Berkeley City Council
September 10, 2024

III. AGENDA
20City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order a) Supplemental and revised agenda material shall be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 5:00 p.m. seven calendar days prior to the City Council meeting at which it is to be considered. Supplemental and revised items that are received by the deadline shall be distributed to Council in a supplemental reports packet and posted to the City’s website no later than 5:00 p.m. five calendar days prior to the meeting. Copies of the supplemental packet shall also be made available in the office of the City Clerk and in the main branch of the Berkeley Public Library. Such material may be considered by the Council without the need for a determination that the good of the City clearly outweighs the lack of time for publiccitizen review or City Councilmember evaluation.
b) Supplemental and revised agenda material submitted to the City Clerk after 5:00 p.m. seven days before the meeting and no later than 12:00 p.m. one day prior to the City Council meeting at which it is to be considered shall be distributed to Council in a supplemental reports packet and posted to the City’s website no later than 5:00 p.m. one day prior to the meeting.

Copies of the supplemental packet shall also be made available in the office of the City Clerk and in the main branch of the Berkeley Public Library. Such material may be considered by the Council without the need for a determination that the good of the City clearly outweighs the lack of time for publiccitizen review or City Council evaluation. c) After 12:00 p.m. one calendar day prior to the meeting, supplemental or revised reports may be submitted for consideration by delivering a minimum of 4240 copies of the supplemental/revised material to the City Clerk for distribution at the meeting and submitting the material electronically to the City Clerk. Each copy must be accompanied by a completed supplemental/revised material cover page, using the form provided by the City Clerk. Revised reports must reflect a comparison with the original item using track changes formatting. The material may be considered only if the City Council, by a two-thirds roll call vote, makes a factual determination that the good of the City clearly outweighs the lack of time for publiccitizen review or City Councilmember evaluation of the material. Supplemental and revised material must be distributed and a factual determination made prior to the commencement of public comment on the agenda itemAgenda Item in order for the material to be considered.

5.6. Submission of Late Urgency Items Pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(b)
Late Urgency Items are items proposed for submission to the Council Agenda pursuant to Government Code Section 54954.2(b)
All items to be submitted for consideration for addition to an agendaAgenda as Late Urgency Items shall be accompanied by a cover sheet that includes 1) boxes to check for the Author to affirm whether the item is submitted under the Emergency or Immediate Action Rule (and a short explanation of what is required to meet each rule, as well as the vote threshold required for the item to be placed onto the agendaAgenda by the City Commented [NML15]: For web posting so that virtual
attendees have access

III. AGENDA
21City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order Council); 2) a disclaimer in BOLD 14pt. CAPS stating that the item is not yet agendized and may or may not be accepted for the agendaAgenda as a Late Urgency Item, at the City Council’s discretion according to Brown Act rules; 3) a prompt requiring the authorAuthor to list the facts which support consideration of the item for addition to the agendaAgenda as either an Emergency or Immediate Action item; and 4) a copy of the City Attorney memo on Late Urgency Items.

Late Items must be submitted to the City Clerk no later than 12:00 p.m. (noon) the day prior to the meeting.

All complete Late Items submitted by the deadline will be distributed with Supplemental Communication Packet #2 by 5:00 p.m. the day before the Council meeting. A Late Item is not considered “complete” and will not be distributed unless submitted with the required cover sheet, filled out in a complete manner.

Very Late Urgency Items of an extremely urgent nature (e.g., earthquake, severe wildfire, pandemic) may be submitted for addition to the agendaAgenda after the deadline of 12:00 p.m. the day before the meeting to accommodate unforeseeable, extreme and unusual circumstances. A Very Late Urgency Item will be distributed at the Council meeting prior to any vote to add it to the agendaAgenda and the Presiding Officer may provide an appropriate break to allow Councilmembers and the public to review the item before voting on whether to add it to the agendaAgenda and possibly again, at the Presiding Officer’s discretion, before the item is voted on.

The required cover sheet should be included with the Very Late Urgency Item unless extremely exigent circumstances underlie the Very Late Urgency Item submission and a written cover sheet could not be prepared (for example, power is out and printing or emailing is not possible), in which case the individual “walking in” the item should be ready to provide all required information verbally at the meeting before a vote is taken to add or not add the item to the Agenda.

6.7. Scheduling a Presentation.

Presentations from staff are either submitted as an Agenda Item or are requested by the City Manager. Presentations from outside agencies and the public are coordinated with the Mayor's Office. The Agenda & Rules Committee may adjust the schedule of presentations as needed to best manage the Council Agenda.

The Agenda & Rules Committee may request a presentation by staff in consultation with the City Manager.

E. Packet Preparation and Posting

1. Preparation of the Packet.

Not later than the thirteenth day prior to said meeting, the City Clerk shall prepare the packetPacket, which shall include the agendaAgenda plus all its corresponding agenda itemAgenda Items. No item shall be considered if not included in the packetPacket, except as provided for in Section III.D.5.C.4 and Section III.DE.4.

2. Distribution and Posting of Agenda.

III. AGENDA
22City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order a) The City Clerk shall post each agendaAgenda of the City Council regular meeting no later than 11 days prior to the meeting and shall post each agendaAgenda of a special meeting at least 24 hours prior toin advance of the meeting inon the official bulletin board. The City Clerk shall maintain an affidavit indicating the location, date and time of posting each agendaAgenda.
b) The City Clerk shall also post agendaAgendas and annotated agendaAgendas of all City Council meetings and notices of public hearings on the City's website.
c) No later than 11 days prior to a regular meeting, copies of the agendaAgenda shall be mailed by the City Clerk to any resident of the City of Berkeley who so requests in writing. Copies shall also be available free of charge in the City Clerk Department.

3. Distribution of the Agenda Packet.

The Agenda Packet shall consist of the Agenda and all supporting documents for agenda itemAgenda Items. No later than 11 days prior to a regular meeting, the City Clerk shall:
a) distribute the Agenda Packet to each member of the City Council; b) post the Agenda Packet to the City’s website;
c) place copies of the Agenda Packet in viewing binders in the office of the City Clerk and in the main branch of the Berkeley Public Library; and d) make the Agenda Packet available to members of the press.

4. Failure to Meet Deadlines.
a) The City Clerk shall not accept any agenda itemAgenda Item or revised agenda itemAgenda Item after the deadlines established. b) Matters not included on the published agendaAgenda may be discussed and acted upon as otherwise authorized by State law or providing the Council finds one of the following conditions is met:
 A majority of the Council determines that the subject meets the criteria of "Emergency" as defined in Section III.B.78.  Two thirds of the Council determines that there is a need to take immediate action and that the need for action came to the attention of the City subsequent to the posting of the agendaAgenda as required by law.
c) Matters listed on the printed agendaAgenda but for which supporting materials are not received by the City Council on the eleventh day prior to said meeting as part of the agendaAgenda packetPacket, shall not be discussed or acted upon.

III. AGENDA
23City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order E.F. Agenda Sequence and Order of Business
The Council agendaAgenda for a regular business meeting is to be arranged in the following order:

1. Preliminary Matters: (Ceremonial, Land Acknowledgement Statement, Comments from the City Manager, Comments from the City Auditor [if requested], Non-Agenda Public Comment, Public Comment by Employee Unions) a) The Land Acknowledgement Statement and Public Comment from Employee Unions are regularly agendized only for the first regular meeting of each month.

1.2. Consent Calendar

2.3. Action Calendar
a) Appeals
b) Public Hearings
c) Continued Business
d) Old Business
e) New Business

3.4. Information Reports

4.5. Non-Agenda Public Comment

5.6. Adjournment

6.7. Communications
Action items may be reordered at the discretion of the Chair. with the consent of Council.

The Agenda & Rules Committee shall have the authority to re-order the items on the Action Calendar regardless of the default sequence prescribed in this section.

F.G. Closed Session Documents
This section establishes a policy for the distribution of, and access to, confidential closed session documents by the Mayor and members of the City Council.

1. Confidential closed session materials shall be kept in binders numbered from one to nine and assigned to the Mayor (#9) and each Councilmember (#1 to #8 by district). The binders will contain confidential closed session materials related to Labor Negotiations, Litigation, and Real Estate matters.

2. The binders will be maintained by City staff and retained in the Office of the City Attorney in a secure manner. City staff will bring the binders to each closed session for their use by the Mayor and Councilmembers. At other times, the binders will be available to the Mayor and Councilmembers during regular business hours for review in the City Attorney’s Office. The binders may not be removed from the City Attorney’s Office or the location of any closed session Commented [NML16]: Per discussionn at Agenda & Rules
on 7/8/24 – for clarity.

III. AGENDA
24City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order meeting by the Mayor or Councilmembers. City staff will collect the binders at the end of each closed session meeting and return them to the City Attorney’s Office.

3. Removal of confidential materials from a binder is prohibited.

4. Duplication of the contents of a binder by any means is prohibited.

5. Confidential materials shall be retained in the binders for at least two years.

6. This policy does not prohibit the distribution of materials by staff to the Mayor and Councilmembers in advance of a closed session or otherwise as needed, but such materials shall also be included in the binders unless it is impracticable to do so.

III. AGENDA
25City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order G.H. Regulations Governing City Council Policy Committees

1. Legislative Item Process
All agenda itemAgenda Items begin with submission to the Agenda & Rules Committee.

Full CouncilExempt Items Track
Regular Items under this category submitted by the Mayor or Councilmembers are exempt from Agenda & Rules Committee discretion to refer them to a Policy Committee. Items in this category may be submitted for the agendaAgenda of any scheduled regular meeting pursuant to established deadlines (same as existing deadlines). Types of Full Council TrackExempt Iitems are listed below. a. Items submitted by the City Manager and City Auditor b. Items submitted by Boards and Commissions
c. Position Letters and Resolutions on Legislation and Electoral Issues relating to Outside Agencies/Jurisdictions
d. Position Letters and/or Resolutions of Support/Opposition e.d. Donations from the Mayor and Councilmember District Office Budgets f.e.Referrals to the Budget Process that are not related to a Major Item g.f.Proclamations
h.g. Sponsorship of Events
i.h. Information Reports
j.i. Presentations from Outside Agencies and Organizations k.j. Ceremonial Items
l.k. Committee and Regional Body Appointments
The Agenda & Rules Committee has discretion to determine if an item submitted by the Mayor or a Councilmember falls under a Full Council is classified as an Exempt Item Track exception or if it will be processed as a Policy Committee or if the item is subject to Policy Committee review Track item.

Policy Committee Track Major Items Track
Items submitted by the Mayor or Councilmembers with moderate to significant administrative, operational, budgetary, resource, or programmatic impacts will go first to the Agenda & Rules Committee on a draft City Council agendaAgenda.

The Agenda & Rules Committee must refer antake action on an item as prescribed in Chapter III.D. to a Policy Committee at the first meeting that the item appears before the Agenda & Rules Committee. The Agenda & Rules Committee may only assign the item to a single Policy Committee , except that an item meeting the definition of a Major Item that also includes a budget referral may be referred to both the Budget & Finance Committee in the form of a notice that a budget referral is under Commented [NML17]: Changes in this section are primarly related to the new definitaiton of Major Items and Regular Items as well as the amended process for the Agenda & Rules Committee in Chapter III.D.Commented [NML18]: This is already covered in Chapter III.D.1.c.

Commented [NML19]: This is not covered in Chapter
III.D.1.d.

Commented [NML20]: No change in process, just
reworded with new terms

III. AGENDA
26City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order consideration at another Committee, and one other Policy Committee for subject matter review.

For a Major Item Policy Committee Track item, the Agenda & Rules Committee, at its discretion, may either route item directly to 1) the Council Aagenda currently under consideration, 2) one of the next subsequent three full Council Agendas for a Regular Meeting of the City Council (based on completeness of the item, lack of potential controversy, minimal impacts, etc.), or 3) to a Policy Committee.

Time Critical TrackItems
A Time Critical item is defined as a matter that is considered urgent by the sponsor and that has a deadline for action that is prior to the next meeting of the Council and for which a report prepared by the Mayor or Councilmember is received by the City Clerk after established deadlines and is not included on the Agenda & Rules Committee’s published agendaAgenda.

The Agenda & Rules Committee retains final discretion to determine the time critical nature of an item.

Time Critical items submitted on the Full Council Track deadlines, that would otherwise be assigned to a the Policy Committee Track, may bypass Policy Committee review if determined to be time critical. If such an item is deemed not to be time critical, it may be referred to a Policy Committee.

Time Critical items on the Full Council Track or Policy Committee Track that are submitted at a meeting of the Agenda & Rules Committee may go directly on a Ccouncil agendaAgenda if determined to be time critical.

2. Council Referrals to Policy Committees
The full Council may refer any agenda itemAgenda Item to a Policy Committee by majority vote.

3. Participation Rules for Policy Committees Pursuant to the Brown Act a. The quorum of a three-member Policy Committee is always two members. A majority vote of the committee (two ‘yes’ votes) is required to pass a motion. b. Two Policy Committee members may not discuss any item that has been referred to the Policy Committee outside of an open and noticed meeting. c. Notwithstanding paragraph (b) above, two members of a Policy Committee may be listed as Authors or Co-Sponsors on an item provided that one of the Authors or Co-Sponsors will not serve as a committee member for consideration of the item, and shall not participate in the committee’s Commented [NML21]: These actions are now enshrined in
Chapter III.D.1.b.

III. AGENDA
27City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order discussion of, or action on the item. For purposes of the item, the appointed alternate, who also cannot be an Author or Co-Sponsor, will serve as a committee member in place of the non-participating Author or Co-Sponsor. d. All three members of a Policy Committee may not be Authors or Co-Sponsors of an item that will be heard by the committee.
e. Only one Author or Co-Sponsor who is not a member of the Policy Committee may attend the committee meeting to participate in discussion of the item. f. If two or more non-committee members are present for any item or meeting, then all non-committee members may act only as observers and may not participate in discussion. If an Author who is not a member of the committee is present to participate in the discussion of their item, no other non-committee member Councilmembers, nor the Mayor, may attend as observers. g. An item may be considered by only one Policy Committee before it goes to the full Council.

4. Functions of the Policy Committees
Committees shall have the following qualities/components:
a. All committees are Brown Act bodies with noticed public meetings and public comment. Regular meeting agendaAgendas will be posted at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting.
b. Minutes shall be available online.
c. Committees shall adopt regular meeting schedules, generally meeting once or twice per month; special meetings may be called when necessary, in accordance with the Brown Act.
d. Generally, meetings will be held at 2180 Milvia Street in publicly accessible meeting rooms that can accommodate the committee members, public attendees, and staff.
e. Members are recommended by the Mayor and approved by the full Council no later than January 31 of each year. Members continue to serve until successors are appointed and approved.
f. Chairs are elected by the Committee at the first regular meeting of the Committee after the annual approval of Committee members by the City Council. In the absence of the Chair, the committee member with the longest tenure on the Council will preside.
g. The Chair, or a quorum of the Committee may call a meeting or cancel a meeting of the Policy Committee.

III. AGENDA
28City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order h. Committees will review items for completeness in accordance with Section III.C.1 and III.C.2B.2 of the City Council Rules of Procedure and Order and alignment with Strategic Plan goals.
i. Reports leaving a Policy Committee must adequately include budget implications, administrative feasibility, basic legal concerns, and staff resource demands in order to allow for informed consideration by the full Council. j. Per Brown Act regulations, any revised or supplemental materials must be direct revisions or supplements to the item that was published in the agendaAgenda packetPacket.

Items referred to a Policy Committee from the Agenda & Rules Committee or from the City Council must be agendized for a committee meeting within 60 days of the referral date.

Within 120 days of the referral date, either (1) the committee Chair may accept the Primary Author’s request, either in writing, or in person at a meeting of the committee, that the item remain in committee until a date certain (more than one extension may be requested by the Primary Author); or (2) the committee may vote to send the item to the Agenda & Rules Committee to be placed on a Council Agenda with a Committee recommendation consisting of one of the four options listed below. The Committee Chair shall report any extension granted outside of a meeting to the Committee and the City Clerk by email or verbally at the next Committee meeting.

1. Positive Recommendation (recommending Council pass the item as proposed),

2. Qualified Positive Recommendation (recommending Council pass the item with some changes),

3. Qualified Negative Recommendation (recommending Council reject the item unless certain changes are made) or

4. Negative Recommendation (recommending the item not be approved).

The Policy Committee’s recommendation will be included in a separate section of the report template for that purpose.

A Policy Committee may not refer an item under its consideration to a Ccity board or commission.

The Primary Author of an item referred to a Policy Committee is responsible for revisions and resubmission of the item back to the full Council. Items originating from the City Manager are revised and submitted by the appropriate Ccity staff. Items from Commissions are revised and resubmitted by the members of the Policy Committee. Items and recommendations originating from the Policy Committee are submitted to the City Clerk by the members of the committee.

III. AGENDA
29City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order If a Policy Committee does not take final action by the 120-day deadline, the item is returned to the Agenda & Rules Committee and appears on the next available Council agendaAgenda. The Agenda & Rules Committee may leave the item on the agendaAgenda under consideration or place it on the next Council agendaAgenda. Items appearing on a City Council agendaAgenda due to lack of action by a Policy Committee may not be referred to a Policy Committee and must remain on the full Council agendaAgenda for consideration.

Policy Committees may add discussion topics that are within their purview to their agendaAgenda with the concurrence of a majority of the Committee. These items are not subject to the 120-day deadline for action.

Once the item is voted out of a Policy Committee, the final item will be resubmitted to the agenda process by the Primary Author, and it will return to the Agenda & Rules Committee on the next available agendaAgenda. The Agenda & Rules Committee may leave the item on the agendaAgenda under consideration or place it on the following Council agendaAgenda. The Agenda & Rules Committee may agendize the item on the Consent Calendar or Action Calendar.Only items that receive a Positive Recommendation can be placed on the Consent Calendar.

The Primary Author may request expedited committee review for items referred to a committee. Criteria for expedited review is generally to meet a deadline for action (e.g. grant deadline, specific event date, etc.). If the committee agrees to the request, the deadline for final committee action is 45 days from the date the committee approves expedited review.

5. Number and Make-up of Policy Committees
Six committees are authorized, each comprised of three Councilmembers, with a fourth Councilmember appointed as an alternate. Each Councilmember and the Mayor will serve on two committees. The Mayor shall be a member of the Agenda and Rules Committee.

The committees are as follows:

1. Agenda and Rules Committee

2. Budget and Finance Committee

3. Facilities, Infrastructure, Transportation, Environment, and Sustainability

4. Health, Life Enrichment, Equity, and Community

5. Land Use, Housing, and Economic Development

6. Public Safety
Commented [NML22]: Per discussion at Agenda & Rules
on 7/8/24 to allow for more discretion to place items returning from committee on Consent

III. AGENDA
30City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order The Agenda & Rules Committee shall establish the Policy Committee topic groupings, and may adjust said groupings periodically thereafter in order to evenly distribute expected workloads of various committees.

All standing Policy Committees of the City Council are considered “legislative bodies” under the Brown Act and must conduct all business in accordance with the Brown Act.

6. Role of City Staff at Committee Meetings
Committees will be staffed by appropriate City Departments and personnel. As part of the committee process, staff will undertake a high-level, preliminary analysis of potential legal issues, costs, timelines, and staffing demands associated with the item. Staff analysis at the Policy Committee level is limited to the points above as the recommendation, program, or project has not yet been approved to proceed by the full Council.

I. Agenda Items Authored by Former Mayors and Councilmembers Upon the date that the elected official leaves office, all Agenda Items in the legislative process for which the former official is the Primary Author shall be placed on the next available draft Council Agenda to be reviewed by the Agenda & Rules Committee. The Agenda & Rules Committee shall then place the items on the Council Agenda under consideration or the next Council Agenda.

At the Council meeting where the items appear on the Agenda, the Mayor or any Councilmember may assume primary authorship of any item authored by the former official. The Council may then, by motion and vote, take any legislative action permitted under the Rules of Procedure.

If any of the items from the former official are not assumed by the Mayor or any Councilmember, the Council may then, by motion and vote, take any legislative action permitted under the Rules of Procedure, except that the item may not be referred to a policy committee.

Commented [NML23]: New policy based on discussion at
Agenda & Rules on 7/8/24
Commented [NML24]: From discussion at Agenda & Rules
on 8/26/24

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
31City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order IV.CONDUCT OF MEETING
A. Comments from the Public
Public comment will be taken in the following order:
 An initial ten-minute period of public comment on non-agenda items, after the commencement of the meeting and immediately after Ceremonial Matters and City Manager Comments.
 At the first regular meeting of the month, a period of public comment reserved for officially designated representatives of City of Berkeley employee unions, with five minutes allocated per union if representatives of three or fewer unions wish to speak and up to three minutes per union if representatives of four or more unions wish to speak.
 Public comment on the Consent and Information Calendars.  Public comment on the Action Calendar at the onset of the Action calendar with the exception of appeals, public hearings, and quasi-judicial matters requiring public comment for due process purposes (if invoked by the Presiding Officer).
 Public comment on Aaction items by those who did not speak in the earlier Action Calendar public comment period, any appeals, public hearings, and/or other quasi-judicial matters requiring extended public comment for due process purposes as they are taken up under procedures set forth in the sections governing each below.
 Public comment on non-agenda items from any speakers who did not speak during the first round of non-agenda public comment at the beginning of the meeting.

Except in the case of public comment by employee unions, speakers are permitted to yield their time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes. A speaker wishing to yield their time shall identify themselves, shall be recognized by the chair, and announce publicly their intention to yield their time. Disabled persons shall have priority seating in the front row of the public seating area.

With respect to public comment by employee unions, each union’s allocated time may be shared between more than one representative, and representatives and other members of unions may speak during other public comment periods in the same manner as members of the public.

If ten or fewer persons are interested in speaking on an individual Actionagenda Iitem, each speaker may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons interested in speaking on an item, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers on the item to one minute per speaker. Speakers are permitted to yield their time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes.

Commented [NML25]: Moved here as these rules are
intended to cover all types of public comments
Commented [NML26]: Stated above, no need to repeat.

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
32City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order This procedure also applies to public hearings except those types of public hearings specifically provided for in this chapter.section, below.

The Presiding Officer has the discretion to reduce speaker time if needed in order to allow the orderly conduct of the meeting, subject to the consent of a majority of the City Council.

In order to inform members of the public of their place in the speaker's queue, the Presiding Officer will call the names of 5 speakers at a time.

A member of the public may only speak once at public comment on any single item, unless called upon by the Mayor or a Councilmember to answer a specific inquiry, or unless the individual is speaking with respect to a public hearing, a quasi-judicial matter, and/or any other item requiring extended public comment as a matter of due process.

1. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Matters.

Immediately following Ceremonial Matters and the City Manager Comments and prior to reserved public comment by employee unions, up to ten persons will be selected by lottery to address matters not on the Council Aagenda. If five or fewer persons submit speaker cards for the lotteryare identified to provide non-agenda comment, each person selected will be allotted two minutes each. If more than five persons submit speaker cards for the lottery, up to ten persons will beare selected to address matters not on the Council agendaAgenda, and each person selected will be allotted one minute each.

In-person attendeesPersons wishing to address the Council on matters not on the Council agendaAgenda during the initial ten-minute period for such comment, must submit a speaker card to the City Clerk in person at the meeting location and prior to the moment that the Presiding Officer calls for public comment on non- agenda items.commencement of that meeting. Remote attendees must raise their hand in the videoconference application when the Presiding Officer calls for non- agenda speakers. The first five raised hands on the videoconference application will be selected to speak and the first five cards drawn at the meeting will be selected to speak. The number of in-person and remote speakers selected may be adjusted by the Presiding Officer if fewer than five speakers from either format are identified.

The remainder of the speakers wishing to address the Council on non-agenda items will be heard at the end of the agendaAgenda. Speaker cards are not required for this second round of public comment on non-agenda matters.

Persons submitting speaker cards are not required to list their actual name, however they must list some identifying information or alternate name in order to be called to speak.

For the second round of public comment on non-agenda matters, the Presiding Officer retains the authority to limit the number of speakers. by subject. The Presiding Officer will generally request that persons wishing to speak, line up at Commented [NML27]: From Appendix C
Commented [NML28]: From Appendix C
Commented [NML29]: This section moved here to mirror
the order of business on the agenda
Commented [NML30]: Revised to account for hybrid
meetings.

Commented [NML31]: Per discussion at Agenda & Rules
on 7/8/24 to facilitate public participation
Commented [NML32]: Per discussion at Agenda & Rules
on 7/8/24 – not current or even recent practice

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
33City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order the podium to be recognized or raise their hand on the videoconference application to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time.

Each speaker will be entitled to speak for two minutes each unless the Presiding Officer determines that one-minute is appropriate. given the number of speakers.

Pursuant to this document, no Council meeting shall continue past 11:00 p.m. unless a two-thirds majority of the Council votes to extend the meeting to discuss specified items. If any agendized business remains unfinished at 11:00 p.m. If the meeting is automatically adjourned at 11:00 p.m., or the expiration of any extension after 11:00 p.m., it will be referred to the Agenda & Rules Committee for scheduling pursuant to Chapter II, Section F. In that event, the meeting shall be automatically extended for up to fifteen (15) minutes forto hear public comment on non-agenda items.

2. Public Comment on Consent Calendar and Information Items.

The Council will first determine whether to move items on the agendaAgenda for “Action” or “Information” to the “Consent Calendar,” or move “Consent Calendar” items to “Action.” Items that remain on the “Consent Calendar” are voted on in one motion as a group. “Information” items are not discussed or acted upon at the Council meeting unless they are moved to “Action” or “Consent.” The Council will then take public comment on any items that are either on the amended Consent Calendar or the Information Calendar. A speaker may only speak once during the period for public comment on Consent Calendar and Information items. No additional items can be moved onto the Consent Calendar once public comment has commenced.

At any time during, or immediately after, public comment on Information and Consent items, the Mayor or any Councilmember may move any Information or Consent item to “Action.” Following this, the Council will vote on the items remaining on the Consent Calendar in one motion.

For items moved to the Action Calendar from the Consent Calendar or Information Calendar, persons who spoke on the item during the Consent Calendar public comment period may speak again at the time the matter is taken up during the Action Calendar.

Commented [NML33]: Per discussion at Agenda & Rules
on 7/8/24
Commented [NML34]: Language is simplified and removed
repition from other sections.

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
34City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order

3. Public Comment on Action Items.

After the initial ten minutes of public comment on non-agenda items, reserved public comment by employee unions, public comment on Cconsent and iInformation items, and adoption of the Consent Calendar, the public may comment on each remaining item listed on the Agenda for action as the item is taken up.

At the discretion of the Presiding Officer, with the consent of the Council, there may be a public comment period for one or several of the Action Calendar items at the beginning of the Action Calendar. Speaking time during this comment period is subject to the standard rules for public comments in Chapter IV.A. Speakers may speak to multiple items, but may only speak once during this period. This provision is not applicable to the public may comment on each remaining item listed on the agenda for action. Public comment will occur for each Action item— excluding public hearings, appeals, and/or quasi-judicial matters. Attendees that speak on an action item at the scheduled public comment period may not speak again when the action item is taken up by the Council.—in separate but consecutive public comment periods before the Action Calendar is discussed by Council and staff and as the item is taken up. The Presiding Officer will open and close the public comment period for each Action Item, and each period will occur based on the order of the items on the agenda, or based on the discretion of the Presiding Officer.

During the public comment period for each Action Item, the Presiding Officer will request that persons wishing to speak, line up at the podium to be recognized and raise their hand on the videoconference application to determine the number of persons interested in speaking onat that item.time.

If ten or fewer persons are interested in speaking on an individual Action Item, each speaker may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons interested in speaking on an item, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers on the item to one minute per speaker. Speakers are permitted to yield their time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes.

This procedure also applies to public hearings except those types of public hearings specifically provided for in this section, below.

Commented [NML35]: Per discussion at Agenda & Rules
Committee this is a re-working of the previous language adopted by Council in 2023.

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
35City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order

4. Appeals Appearing on Action Calendar.

With the exception of appeals from decisions of the Zoning Adjustments Board and Landmarks Preservation Commission, appeals from decisions of City commissions appear on the “Action” section of the Council Agenda. Council determines whether to affirm the action of the commission, set a public hearing, or remand the matter to the commission. Appeals of proposed special assessment liens shall also appear on the “Action” section of the Council Agenda.

Appeals from decisions of the Zoning Adjustments Board and Landmarks Preservation Commission are automatically set for public hearing and appear on the “Public Hearings” section of the Council Agenda.

Time shall be provided for public comment for persons representing both sides of the action/appeal and each side will be allocated seven minutes to present their comments on the appeal. Where the appellant is not the applicant, the appellants of a single appeal collectively shall have seven minutes to comment and the applicant shall have seven minutes to comment. If there are multiple appeals filed, each appellant or group of appellants shall have seven minutes to comment.

Where the appellant is the applicant, the applicant/appellant shall have seven minutes to comment and the persons supporting the action of the board or commission on appeal shall have seven minutes to comment. In the case of an appeal of a proposed lien (nuisance abatement/special assessment) lien, the appellant shall have seven minutes to comment.

After the conclusion of the seven-minute comment periods, members of the public may comment on the appeal. Comments from members of the public regarding appeals shall be limited to one minute per speaker. Any person that addressed the Council during one of the seven-minute periods may not speak again during the public comment period on the appeal. Speakers may yield their time to one other speaker, however, no speaker shall have more than two minutes. Each side shall be informed of this public comment procedure at the time the Clerk notifies the parties of the date the appeal will appear on the Council agendaAgenda.

5. Public Comment on Non-Agenda Matters.

Immediately following Ceremonial Matters and the City Manager Comments and prior to reserved public comment by employee unions, persons will be selected by lottery to address matters not on the Council agenda. If five or fewer persons submit speaker cards for the lottery, each person selected will be allotted two minutes each. If more than five persons submit speaker cards for the lottery, up to ten persons will be selected to address matters not on the Council agenda and each person selected will be allotted one minute each. Persons wishing to address the Council on matters not on the Council agenda during the initial ten-minute period for such comment, must submit a speaker card to the City Clerk in person at the meeting location and prior to commencement of that meeting.

The remainder of the speakers wishing to address the Council on non-agenda items will be heard at the end of the agenda. Speaker cards are not required for this second round of public comment on non-agenda matters.

Commented [NML36]: Clarification based on BMC
language
Commented [NML37]: Moved above

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
36City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order Persons submitting speaker cards are not required to list their actual name, however they must list some identifying information or alternate name in order to be called to speak.

For the second round of public comment on non-agenda matters, the Presiding Officer retains the authority to limit the number of speakers by subject. The Presiding Officer will generally request that persons wishing to speak, line up at the podium to be recognized to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time. Each speaker will be entitled to speak for two minutes each unless the Presiding Officer determines that one-minute is appropriate given the number of speakers.

Pursuant to this document, no Council meeting shall continue past 11:00 p.m. unless a two-thirds majority of the Council votes to extend the meeting to discuss specified items. If any agendized business remains unfinished at 11:00 p.m. or the expiration of any extension after 11:00 p.m., it will be referred to the Agenda & Rules Committee for scheduling pursuant to Chapter II, Section F. In that event, the meeting shall be automatically extended for up to fifteen (15) minutes for public comment on non-agenda items.

6. Ralph M. Brown Act Pertaining to Public Comments.

The Brown Act prohibits the Council from discussing or taking action on an issue raised during Public Comment, unless it is specifically listed on the agendaAgenda.

However, the Council may refer a matter to the City Manager.

B. Consent Calendar
There shall be a Consent Calendar on all regular meeting agendaAgendas on which shall be included those matters which the Mayor, Councilmembers, boards, commissions, City Auditor, and Charter OfficersCity Manager deem to be of such nature that no debate, prolonged discussion, or inquiry will be necessary at the Council meetings. Ordinances for second reading may be included in the Consent Calendar.

It is the policy of the Council that the Mayor or Councilmembers wishing to ask questions concerning Consent Calendar items should ask questions of the contact person identified prior to the Council meeting so that the need for discussion of cConsent cCalendar items can be minimized.

Consent Calendar items may be moved to the Action Calendar by the Council. Action items may be reordered at the discretion of the Chair with the consent of Council.

C. Information Reports Called Up for Discussion
Reports for Information designated for discussion at the request of the Mayor or any Councilmember shall be added to the appropriate section of the Action Calendar and may be acted upon at that meeting or carried over as pending business until discussed or withdrawn. The agendaAgenda will indicate that at the request of the Mayor or any Councilmember a Report for Information may be acted upon by the Council.

Commented [NML38]: Moved to Chapter II.D.

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
37City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order D. Written Communications
Written communications from the public will not appear on the Council agendaAgenda as individual matters for discussion but will be distributed as part of the Council agendaAgenda packetPacket with a cover sheet identifying the author and subject matter and will be listed under "Communications." All such communications must have been received by the City Clerk no later than 5:00 p.m. fifteen days prior to the meeting in order to be included on the agendaAgenda.

In instances where an individual forwards more than three pages of email messages not related to actionable items on the Council agendaAgenda to the Council to be reproduced in the "Communications" section of the Council packetPacket, the City Clerk will not reproduce the entire email(s) but instead refer the public to the City's website or a hard copy of the email(s) on file in the City Clerk Department.

All communications shall be simply deemed received without any formal action by the Council. The Mayor or a Councilmember may refer a communication to the City Manager for action, if appropriate, or prepare a cConsent or aAction item for placement on a future agendaAgenda.

Communications related to an item on the agendaAgenda that are received after 5:00 p.m. fifteen days before the meeting are published as provided for in Chapter III.DC.54.

E. Public Hearings for Land Use, Zoning, Landmarks, and Public Nuisance Matters
The City Council, in setting the time and place for a public hearing, may limit the amount of time to be devoted to public presentations. Staff shall introduce the public hearing item and present their comments.

Following any staff presentation, and prior to opening the public hearing, each member of the City Council shall verbally disclose all ex parte contacts concerning the subject of the hearing. Members shall also submit a report of such contacts in writing prior to the commencement of the hearing. Such reports shall include a brief statement describing the name, date, place, and content of the contact. Written reports shall be available for public review in the office of the City Clerk prior to the meeting and placed in a file available for public viewing at the meeting.

This is followed by five-minute presentations each by first the appellant and then the applicant. Where the appellant is not the applicant, the appellants of a single appeal collectively shall have five minutes to comment and the applicant shall have five minutes to comment. If there are multiple appeals filed, each appellant or group of appellants shall have five minutes to comment.

Where the appellant is the applicant, the applicant/appellant shall have five minutes to comment and the persons supporting the action of the board or commission on appeal shall have five minutes to comment. In the case of a Commented [NML39]: Codifies long-standing practice

IV. CONDUCT OF MEETING
38City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order public nuisance determination, the representative(s) of the subject property shall have five minutes to present.

The Presiding Officer will request that persons wishing to speak, line up at the podium to be recognized or raise their hand on the videoconference platform,and to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time.

If ten or fewer persons are interested in speaking, each speaker may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons interested in speaking, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers to one minute per speaker. Any person that addressed the Council during one of the five-minute periods may not speak again during the public comment period on the appeal. Speakers are permitted to yield their time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes. The Presiding Officer may with the consent of persons representing both sides of an issue allocate a block of time to each side to present their issue.

F. Work Sessions
The City Council may schedule a matter for general Council discussion and direction to staff. Official/formal action on a work session item will be scheduled on a subsequent agendaAgenda under the Action portion of the Council agendaAgenda.

In general, public comment at Council work sessions will be heard after the staff presentation, for a limited amount of time to be determined by the Presiding Officer.

The Presiding Officer will request that persons wishing to speak, line up at the podium or raise their hand on the videoconference to be recognized and to determine the number of persons interested in speaking at that time. If ten or fewer persons are interested in speaking, each speaker may speak for two minutes. If there are more than ten persons interested in speaking, the Presiding Officer may limit the public comment for all speakers to one minute per speaker. Speakers are permitted to yield their time to one other speaker, however no one speaker shall have more than four minutes.

After Council discussion, if time permits, the Presiding Officer may allow additional public comment. During this time, each speaker will receive one minute. Persons who spoke during the prior public comment time may be permitted to speak again.

G. Protocol
People addressing the Council may first give their name in an audible tone of voice for the record. All remarks shall be addressed to the Council as a body and not to any member thereof. No one other than the Council and the person having the floor shall be permitted to enter into any discussion, either directly or through a member of the Council, without the permission of the Presiding Officer. No question shall be asked of a Councilmember except through the Presiding Officer.

V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
39City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
A. Persons Authorized to Sit at Tables
No person, except City officials, their representatives and representatives of boards and commissions shall be permitted to sit at the tables in the front of the Council Chambers without the express consent of the Council.

B. Decorum
No person shall disrupt the orderly conduct of the Council meeting. Prohibited disruptive behavior includes but is not limited to shouting, making disruptive noises, such as boos or hisses, creating or participating in a physical disturbance, speaking out of turn or in violation of applicable rules, preventing or attempting to prevent others who have the floor from speaking, preventing others from observing the meeting, entering into or remaining in an area of the meeting room that is not open to the public, or approaching the Council Dais without consent. Any written communications addressed to the Council shall be delivered to the City Clerk for distribution to the Council.

C. Enforcement of Decorum
When the public demonstrates a lack of order and decorum, the presiding officer shall call for order and inform the person(s) that the conduct is violating the Rules of Order and Procedure and provide a warning to the person(s) to cease the disruptive behavior. Should the person(s) fail to cease and desist the disruptive conduct, the Ppresiding Oofficer may call a five (5) minute recess to allow the disruptions to cease.

If the meeting cannot be continued due to continued disruptive conduct, the presiding officer may have any law enforcement officer on duty remove or place any person who violates the order and decorum of the meeting under arrest and cause that person to be prosecuted under the provisions of applicable law.

D. Precedence of Motions
When a question or motion is before the Council, no motion shall be entertained except:

1. To adjourn;

2. To fix the hour of adjournment;

3. To lay on the table;

4. For the previous question;

5. To postpone to a certain day;

6. To refer;

7. To amend;

8. To substitute; and

9. To postpone indefinitely.

V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
40City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order These motions shall have precedence in order indicated. Any such motion, except a motion to amend or substitute, shall be put to a vote without debate.

E. Robert’s Rules of Order
Robert’s Rules of Order have been adopted by the City Council and apply in all cases except the precedence of motions in Section V.D shall supersede.

F. Rules of Debate

1. Presiding Officer May Debate.

The presiding officer may debate from the chair; subject only to such limitations of debate as are by these rules imposed on all members, and shall not be deprived of any of the rights and privileges as a member of the Council by reason of that person acting as the presiding officer.

2. Getting the Floor - Improper References to be avoided.

Members desiring to speak shall address the Chair, and upon recognition by the presiding officer, shall confine themself to the question under debate.

3. Interruptions.

A member, once recognized, shall not be interrupted when speaking unless it is to call a member to order, or as herein otherwise provided. If a member, while speaking, were called to order, that member shall cease speaking until the question of order is determined, and, if in order, the member shall be permitted to proceed.

4. Privilege of Closing Debate.

The Mayor or Councilmember moving the adoption of an ordinance or resolution shall have the privilege of closing the debate. When a motion to call a question is passed, the Mayor or Councilmember moving adoption of an ordinance, resolution or other action shall have three minutes to conclude the debate.

5. Motion to Reconsider.

A motion to reconsider any action taken by the Council may be made only during the same session such action is taken. It may be made either immediately during the same session, or at a recessed or adjourned session thereof. Such motion must be made by a member on the prevailing side, and may be made at any time and have precedence over all other motions or while a member has the floor; it shall be debatable. Nothing herein shall be construed to prevent any member of the Council from making or remaking the same or other motion at a subsequent meeting of the Council.

6. Repeal or Amendment of Action Requiring a Vote of Two-Thirds of Council, or Greater.

Any ordinance or resolution which is passed and which, as part of its terms, requires a vote of two-thirds of the Council or more in order to pass a motion pursuant to such an ordinance or resolution, shall require the vote of the same percent of the Council to repeal or amend the ordinance or resolution.

V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
41City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order G. Debate Limited
For the Consent Calendar, the Mayor and Councilmembers will initially have up to five minutes each to make comments. After all members of the Council have spoken (or passed) and after public comment, members will each have two additional minutes to discuss the Consent Calendar.

For non-Consent items, the Mayor and Councilmembers will have fivetwo minutes each to make initial comments on an agenda itemAgenda Item., except for the author of an agenda item who will have five minutes to initially present the item.

After every Councilmember has spoken or declined and after public comment, Councilmembers will each have another five minutes per person to address an item.

Debate may be extended beyond a second round of Council comments by a majority vote (5 votes).

Time will toll during staff answers to questions; Councilmembers are urged to ask their questions of city staff before the meeting or in writing.

1. Consideration of each matter coming before the Council shall be limited to 20 minutes from the time the matter is first taken up, at the end of which period consideration of such matter shall terminate and the matter shall be dropped to the foot of the agenda, immediately ahead of Information Reports; provided that either of the following two not debatable motions shall be in order:
a) A motion to extend consideration which, if passed, shall commence a new twenty-minute period for consideration; or
b) If there are one or more motions on the floor, a motion for the previous question, which, if passed by a 2/3 vote, shall require an immediate vote on pending motions.

2. The time limit set forth in subparagraph 1 hereof shall not be applicable to any public hearing, public discussion, Council discussion or other especially set matter for which a period of time has been specified (in which case such specially set time shall be the limit for consideration) or which by applicable law (e.g. hearings of appeals, etc.), the matter must proceed to its conclusion.

3. In the interest of expediting the business of the City, failure by the Chair or any Councilmember to call attention to the expiration of the time allowed for consideration of a matter, by point of order or otherwise, shall constitute unanimous consent to the continuation of consideration of the matter beyond the allowed time; provided, however, that the Chair or any Councilmember may at any time thereafter call attention to the expiration of the time allowed, in which case the Council shall proceed to the next item of business, unless one of the motions referred to in Section D hereof is made and is passed.

H. Motion to Lay on Table
A motion to lay on the table shall preclude all amendments or debate of the subject under consideration. If the motion shall prevail, the consideration of the subject may Commented [NML40]: Per Council direction on 5/7/24
Commented [NML41]: Per discussion at Agenda & Rules
on 7/8/24 – eliminates redundancy in this paragraph.

Commented [NML42]: This obsolete “20-minute rule”
language is replaced with the language immediately above from Appendix C

V. PROCEDURAL MATTERS
42City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order be resumed only upon a motion of a member voting with the majority and with consent of two-thirds of the members present.

I. Division of Question
If the question contains two or more propositions, which can be divided, the presiding officer may, and upon request of a member shall, divide the same.

J. Addressing the Council
Under the following headings of business, unless the presiding officer rules otherwise, any interested person shall have the right to address the Council in accordance with the following conditions and upon obtaining recognition by the presiding officer:

1. Written Communications.

Interested parties or their authorized representatives may address the Council in the form of written communications in regard to matters of concern to them by submitting their written communications at the meeting, or prior to the meeting pursuant to the deadlines in Chapter III.D.5.C.4.

2. Public Hearings.

Interested persons or their authorized representatives may address the Council by reading protests, petitions, or communications relating to matters then under consideration.

3. Public Comment.

Interested persons may address the Council on any issue concerning City business during the period assigned to Public Comment.

K. Addressing the Council After Motion Made
When a motion is pending before the Council, no person other than the Mayor or a Councilmember shall address the Council without first securing the permission of the presiding officer or Council to do so.

L. Use of Cellular Phones and Electronic Devices
The use of cell phones during City Council meetings is discouraged for the Mayor and Councilmembers. While communications regarding Council items should be minimized, personal communications between family members and/or caregivers can be taken outside in the case of emergencies. In order to acknowledge differences in learning styles and support tactile learners, note-taking can continue to be facilitated both with a pen and paper and/or on electronic devices such as laptop computers and tablets.

The use of cell phones during Closed Session Meetings is explicitly prohibited for the Mayor and Councilmembers.

VI. FACILITIES
43City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order VI.FACILITIES
A. Meeting Location Capacity
Attendance at Ccouncil meetings shall be limited to the posted seating capacity of the meeting location. Entrance to the meeting location will be appropriately regulated by the City Manager on occasions when capacity is likely to be exceeded. While the Council is in session, members of the public shall not remain standing in the meeting room except to address the Council, and sitting on the floor shall not be permitted.

B. Alternate Facilities for Council Meetings
The City Council shall approve in advance a proposal that a Council meeting be held at a facility other than the School District Board Room.

If the City Manager has reason to anticipate that the attendance for a meeting will be substantially greater than the capacity of the Board Room and insufficient time exists to secure the approval of the City Council to hold the meeting at an alternate facility, the City Manager shall make arrangements for the use of a suitable alternate facility to which such meeting may be recessed and moved, if the City Council authorizes the action.

If a suitable alternate facility is not available, the City Council may reschedule the matter to a date when a suitable alternate facility will be available.

Alternate facilities are to be selected from those facilities previously approved by the City Council as suitable for meetings away from the Board Room.

C. Amplified Sound, Signs, Objects, and Symbolic Materials Amplified sound devices such as bullhorns, megaphones, portable sound systems, and similar devices are prohibited within the meeting location during Council meetings.

Objects and symbolic materials such as signs and banners are permitted in the meeting location provided that they do not interfere with the cameras that broadcast the meeting, obstruct the view of other attendees, or create a fire or safety hazard.

Any type of stick, pole, or similar object is prohibited in the meeting location during Council meetings.

D. Fire Safety
Exits shall not be obstructed in any manner. Obstructions, including storage, shall not be placed in aisles or other exit ways. Hand carried items must be stored so that such items do not inhibit passage in aisles or other exit ways. Attendees are strictly prohibited from sitting in aisles and/or exit ways. Exit ways shall not be used in any way that will present a hazardous condition.

E. Overcrowding
Admittance of persons beyond the approved capacity of a place of assembly is prohibited. When the meeting location has reached the posted maximum capacity, additional attendees shall be directed to the designated overflow area.

VI. FACILITIES
44City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order F. Format of Meetings
The City Council may conduct regular meetings or special meetings held at the School District Boardroom in the hybrid format with both in-person and virtual participation as provided for in the Brown Act, and as noticed on the meeting Agenda. Council meetings at other locations may be conducted in the hybrid format if technologically feasible.

Commented [NML43]: Per Council direction on 5/7/24

APPENDIX A. POLICY FOR NAMING AND RENAMING PUBLIC FACILITIES 45City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order APPENDIX A. POLICY FOR NAMING AND RENAMING PUBLIC

FACILITIES
Purpose
To establish a uniform policy regarding the naming and renaming of existing and future parks, streets, pathways and other public facilities.

Objective
A. To ensure that naming public facilities (such as parks, streets, recreation facilities, pathways, open spaces, public building, bridges or other structures) will enhance the values and heritage of the City of Berkeley and will be compatible with community interest.

Section 1 – Lead Commission
The City Council designates the following commissions as the ‘Lead Commissions’ in overseeing, evaluating, and ultimately advising the Council in any naming or renaming of a public facility. The lead commission shall receive and coordinate comment and input from other Commissions and the public as appropriate.

Board of Library Trustees
Parks, and Recreation & Waterfront Commission – Parks, recreation centers, camps, plazas, and public open spaces, and public facilities within the area of the City known as the Waterfront, as described in BMC 3.36.060.B.

Transportation and Infrastructure Public Works Commission – Public buildings (other than recreation centers), streets and bridges or other structures in the public thoroughfare.

Waterfront Commission –Public facilities within the area of the City known as the Waterfront, as described in BMC 3.36.060.B.

Section 2 – General Policy
A. Newly acquired or developed public facilities shall be named immediately after acquisition or development to ensure appropriate public identity.

B. No public facility may be named for a living person, but this policy can be overridden with a 2/3 vote of the City Council.

C. Public facilities that are renamed must follow the same criteria for naming new facilities.

In addition, the historical significance and geographical reference of the established name should be considered when weighing and evaluating any name change.

D. The City encourages the recognition of individuals for their service to the community in ways that include the naming of activities such as athletic events, cultural presentations, or annual festivals, which do not involve the naming or renaming of public facilities.

E. Unless restricted by covenant, facilities named after an individual should not necessarily be considered a perpetual name.

Section 3 – Criteria for Naming of Public Facilities
When considering the naming of a new public facility or an unnamed portion or feature within an already named public facility (such as a room within the facility or a feature within an Commented [NML44]: Moved above due to commission
consolidation

APPENDIX A. POLICY FOR NAMING AND RENAMING PUBLIC FACILITIES 46City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order established park), or, the renaming of an existing public facility the following criteria shall be applied:

A. Public Facilities are generally easier to identify by reference to adjacent street names, distinct geographic or environmental features, or primary use activity. Therefore, the preferred practice is to give City-owned property a name of historical or geographical significance and to retain these names.

B. No public facility may be named for a living person, but this policy can be overridden with a 2/3 vote of the City Council.

C. The naming of a public facility or any parts thereof in recognition of an individual posthumously may only be considered if the individual had a positive effect on the community and has been deceased for more than 1 year.

D. When a public facility provides a specific programmatic activity, it is preferred that the activity (e.g. skateboard park, baseball diamond) be included in the name of the park or facility.

E. When public parks are located adjacent to elementary schools, a name that is the same as the adjacent school shall be considered.

F. When considering the renaming of an existing public facility, in addition to applying criteria A-E above, proper weight should be given to the fact that: a name lends a site or property authenticity and heritage; existing names are presumed to have historic significance; and historic names give a community a sense of place and identity, continuing through time, and increases the sense of neighborhood and belonging.

Section 4 –Naming Standards Involving a Major Contribution When a person, group or organization requests the naming or renaming of a public facility, all of the following conditions shall be met:

A. An honoree will have made a major contribution towards the acquisition and/or development costs of a public facility or a major contribution to the City.

B. The honoree has a record of outstanding service to their community C. Conditions of any donation that specifies that name of a public facility, as part of an agreement or deed, must be approved by the City Council, after review by and upon recommendation of the City Manager.

Section 5 –Procedures for Naming or Renaming of Public Facilities A. Any person or organization may make a written application to the City Manager requesting that a public facility or portion thereof, be named or renamed.

1. Recommendations may also come directly of the City Boards or Commissions, the City Council, or City Staff.

B. The City Manager shall refer the application to the appropriate lead commission as defined in Section 1 of the City’s policy on naming of public facilities, for that commission’s review, facilitation, and recommendation of disposition.

1. The application shall contain the name or names of the persons or organization making the application and the reason for the requested naming or renaming.

C. The lead commission shall review and consider the application, using the policies and criteria articulated to the City Policy on Naming and Renaming to make a recommendation to Council.

1. All recommendations or suggestion will be given the same consideration without regard to the source of the nomination

APPENDIX A. POLICY FOR NAMING AND RENAMING PUBLIC FACILITIES 47City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order D. The lead commission shall hold a public hearing and notify the general public of any discussions regarding naming or renaming of a public facility.

1. Commission action will be taking at the meeting following any public hearing on the naming or renaming.

E. The commission’s recommendation shall be forwarded to Council for final consideration.

The City of Berkeley Policy for Naming and Renaming Public Facilities was adopted by the Berkeley City Council at the regular meeting of January 31, 2012.

APPENDIX B. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING AND WRITING COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS 48City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order APPENDIX B. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING AND WRITING CITY

COUNCILMEMBER/MAYOR MAJOR AGENDA ITEMS
These guidelines are derived from the requirements for Agenda items listed in the Berkeley City Council Rules of Procedure and Order, Chapter III, Sections B(1) and (2), reproduced below. In addition, Chapter III Section C(1)(a) of the Rules of Procedure and Order allows the Agenda & Rules Committee to request that the Primary Author of an item provide “additional analysis” if the item as submitted evidences a “significant lack of background or supporting information” or “significant grammatical or readability issues.”
These guidelines provide a more detailed and comprehensive overview of elements of a complete Council item. While not all elements would be applicable to every type of Agenda item, they are intended to prompt Authors to consider presenting items with as much relevant information and analysis as possible.

Chapter III, Sections (B)(1) and (2) of Council Rules of Procedure and Order:

2. Agenda items shall contain all relevant documentation, including the following as Applicable:
a. A descriptive title that adequately informs the public of the subject matter and general nature of the item or report and action requested; b. Whether the matter is to be presented on the Consent Calendar or the Action Calendar or as a Report for Information;
c. Recommendation of the City Manager, if applicable (these provisions shall not apply to Mayor and Council items.);
d. Fiscal impacts of the recommendation;
e. A description of the current situation and its effects; f. Background information as needed;
g. Rationale for recommendation;
h. Alternative actions considered;
i. For awards of contracts; the abstract of bids and the Affirmative Action Program of the low bidder in those cases where such is required (these provisions shall not apply to Mayor and Council items.); j. Person or persons to contact for further information, with telephone number.

If the Primary Author of any report believes additional background information, beyond the basic report, is necessary to Council understanding of the subject, a separate compilation of such background information may be developed and copies will be available for Council and for public review in the City Clerk Department, and the City Clerk shall provide limited distribution of such background information depending upon quantity of pages to be duplicated. In such case the agenda item distributed with the packet shall so indicate.

Commented [NML45]: Eliminated here – redundant with
text in the body of the ROP

APPENDIX B. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING AND WRITING COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS 49City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order Guidelines for City Council Items: Requirements for City Councilmember/Mayor Major Items are provided in Section [XXX]Chapter III.C.2 of the City Council Rules of Procedure and Order. These guidelines further explain the requirements and are intended to assist in the preparation of fully researched and documented items that are likely to be eligible to move forward in the legislative process as determined deemed complete by the Agenda and& Rules Committee. in [process].

1. Title

2. Consent/Action/Information Calendar

3. Recommendation

4. Summary Statement/Current situation and its effects

5. Background

6. Review of Existing Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws

7. Actions/Alternatives Considered

8. Consultation/Outreach Overview and Results

9. Rationale for Recommendation

10.Implementation, Administration and Enforcement

11.Environmental Sustainability

12.Fiscal Impacts

13.Outcomes and Evaluation

14.Contact Information

15.Attachments/Supporting Materials
___________________________________________________

1. Title
A descriptive title that adequately informs the public of the subject matter and general nature of the item or report and action requested.

2. Consent/Action/Information Calendar
Whether the matter is to be presented on the Consent Calendar or the Action Calendar or as a Report for Information.

3. Recommendation
Clear, succinct statement of action(s) to be taken. Recommendations can be further detailed within the item, by specific reference.

Common action options include:
● Adopt first reading of ordinance
● Adopt a resolution
● Referral to the City Manager (City Manager decides if it is a short term referral or is placed on the RRV ranking list)
● Direction to the City Manager (City Manager is directed to execute the recommendation right away, it is not placed on any referral list) ● Referral to a Commission or to a Standing or Ad Hoc Council Committee ● Referral to the budget process

APPENDIX B. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING AND WRITING COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS 50City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order ● Send letter of support
● Accept, Approve, Modify or Reject a recommendation from a Commission or Committee
● Designate members of the Council to perform some action

4. Summary Statement/ “Current situation and its effects” A short resume of the circumstances that give rise to the need for the recommended action(s).
● Briefly state the opportunity/problem/concern that has been identified, and the proposed solution.
● Example (fictional):

Winter rains are lasting longer than expected. Berkeley’s winter shelters are poised to close in three weeks, but forecasts suggest rain for another two months. If they do not remain open until the end of the rainy season, hundreds of people will be left in the rain 24/7. Therefore, this item seeks authorization to keep Berkeley’s winter shelters open until the end of April, and refers to the Budget Process $40,000 to cover costs of an additional two months of shelter operations.

5. Background
A full discussion of the history, circumstances and concerns to be addressed by the item.
● For the above fictional example, Background would include information and data about the number and needs of homeless individuals in Berkeley, the number and availability of permanent shelter beds that meet their needs, the number of winter shelter beds that would be lost with closure, the impacts of such closure on this population, the weather forecasts, etc.

6. Review of Existing Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws Review, identify and discuss relevant/applicable Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws, and how the proposed actions conform with, compliment, are supported by, differ from or run contrary to them. What gaps were found that need to be filled? What existing policies, programs, plans and laws need to be changed/supplemented/improved/repealed? What is missing altogether that needs to be addressed?
Review of all pertinent/applicable sections of:
● The City Charter
● Berkeley Municipal Code
● Administrative Regulations
● Council Resolutions
● Staff training manuals
Review of all applicable City Plans:
● The General Plan

APPENDIX B. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING AND WRITING COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS 51City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order ● Area Plans
● The Climate Action Plan
● Resilience Plan
● Equity Plan
● Capital Improvements Plan
● Zero Waste Plan
● Bike Plan
● Pedestrian Plan
● Other relevant precedents and plans
Review of the City’s Strategic Plan
Review of similar legislation previously introduced/passed by Council Review of County, State and Federal laws/policies/programs/plans, if applicable

7. Actions/Alternatives Considered
● What solutions/measures have other jurisdictions adopted that serve as models/cautionary tales?
● What solutions/measures are recommended by advocates, experts, organizations?
● What is the range of actions considered, and what are some of their major pros and cons?
● Why were other solutions not as feasible/advisable?

8. Consultation/Outreach Overview and Results
● Review/list external and internal stakeholders that were consulted ○ External: constituents, communities, neighborhood organizations, businesses and not for profits, advocates, people with lived experience, faith organizations, industry groups, people/groups that might have concerns about the item, etc.
○ Internal: staff who would implement policies, the City Manager and/or dDeputy CM, Department Heads, City Attorney, City Clerk, etc. ● What reports, articles, books, websites and other materials were consulted? ● What was learned from these sources?
● What changes or approaches did they advocate for that were accepted or rejected?

9. Rationale for Recommendation
A clear and concise statement as to whether the item proposes actions that:
● Conform to, clarify or extend existing Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws ● Change/Amend existing Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws in minor ways ● Change/Amend existing Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws in major ways ● Create an exception to existing Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws

APPENDIX B. GUIDELINES FOR DEVELOPING AND WRITING COUNCIL AGENDA ITEMS 52City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order ● Reverse/go contrary to or against existing Plans, Programs, Policies and Laws
Argument/summary of argument in support of recommended actions. The argument likely has already been made via the information and analysis already presented, but should be presented/restated/summarized. Plus, further elaboration of terms for recommendations, if any.

10.Implementation, Administration and Enforcement
Discuss how the recommended action(s) would be implemented, administered and enforced. What staffing (internal or via contractors/consultants) and materials/facilities are likely required for implementation?

11.Environmental Sustainability and Climate Impacts
Discuss the impacts of the recommended action(s), if any, on the environment and the recommendation’s positive and/or negative implications with respect to the City’s Climate Action, Resilience, and other sustainability goals.

12.Fiscal Impacts
Review the recommended action’s potential to generate funds or savings for the City in the short and long-term, as well as the potential direct and indirect costs.

13.Outcomes and Evaluation
State the specific outcomes expected, if any (i.e., “it is expected that 100 homeless people will be referred to housing every year”) and what reporting or evaluation is recommended.

14.Contact Information

15.Attachments/Supporting Materials

APPENDIX C
53City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order APPENDIX C. TEMPORARY RULES FOR THE CONDUCT OF CITY

COUNCIL MEETINGS THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE DURING THE
COVID-19 EMERGENCY
Mayor and Councilmember Speaking Time on Agenda Items
For the Consent Calendar, the Mayor and Councilmembers will initially have up to five minutes each to make comments. After all members of the Council have spoken (or passed) and after public comment, members will each have two additional minutes to discuss the Consent Calendar.

For non-Consent items, the Mayor and Councilmembers will have two minutes each to make initial comments on an agenda item, except for the author of an agenda item who will have five minutes to initially present the item. After every Councilmember has spoken or declined and after public comment, Councilmembers will each have another five minutes per person to address an item. Debate may be extended beyond a second round of Council comments by a majority vote (5 votes).

Time will toll during staff answers to questions; Councilmembers are urged to ask their questions of city staff before the meeting or in writing.

Procedure for Pulling Items from Consent or Information Calendar Three (3) members of the City Council must agree to pull an item from the Consent or Information Calendar for it to move to Action. Absent three members concurring, the item will stay on Consent or Information Calendar and, with respect to Consent items, the Mayor or Councilmembers will be allowed to record their aye, nay or abstain votes on individual items or the entire Consent Calendar.

Moving an item from the Action Calendar to the Consent Calendar requires the unanimous consent of the entire City Council.

Public Comment Speaking Time
With the exception of prescribed times in the Rules of Procedure for public hearings and public comment by employee unions, the amount of time for each speaker during public comment is limited to two minutes maximum and that speakers can only address an agenda item once, however the Presiding Officer has the discretion to reduce speaker time if needed in order to allow the orderly conduct of the meeting, subject to the consent of a majority of the City Council. Speakers may yield their time for a maximum of four minutes per individual. If a speaker wishes to yield their time, they must indicate so when called on by the Presiding Officer and state who they are yielding their speaker time to. The Presiding Officer will keep a list with the names and amount of time yielded to individuals.

In order to inform members of the public of their place in the speaker's queue, the Presiding Officer will call the names of 5 speakers at a time.

Public Comment on Non-Agenda Matters will be conducted in the order of hands raised on the Zoom platform, and will be limited to either the first 10 speakers during the initial round of Non-Agenda public comment, as well as all hands raised during the closing round of Non-Agenda public comment at the conclusion to the meeting, until such time that the Commented [NML46]: Relevant portions have been moved
to the body of the document.

Commented [NML47]: Relevant portions have been moved
to the body for the Rules of Procedure.

Commented [NML48]: This paragraph is only applicable to virtual-only meetings, which are currently not permitted under the Brown Act.

APPENDIX C
54City of Berkeley Council Rules of Procedure and Order meeting adjourns. If there are five or fewer speakers with hands raised for Public Comment on Non-Agenda Matters, each speaker will have two minutes to address the City Council. If there are more than five speakers with their hands raised then speaker time will be limited to one minute per person. The procedure for selection of Non-Agenda speakers prescribed in the Rules of Procedure by random draw is suspended for videoconference meetings where there is no physical meeting location.

Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099` E-Mail: [email protected] Website: https://berkeleyca.gov/

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 10, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: LaTanya Bellow, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Henry Oyekanmi, Director, Finance
Subject: Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council Approval on September 10, 2024

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the request for proposals or invitation for bids (attached to staff report) that will be, or are planned to be, issued upon final approval by the requesting department or division. All contracts over the City Manager’s threshold will be returned to Council for final approval.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Total estimated cost of items included in this report is $5,960,000 PROJECT Fund Source Amount
Early Intervention System
Platform 011 Prof. Services – Misc. $100,000
City of Berkeley: Public Art
Strategic Plan 148 Cultural Trst $110,000
Berkeley-based Food
Assistance 011 Prof. Services – Misc. $200,000
PW Engineering On-Call
Handrail Services 501 Prof. Services – Misc $150,000
FY 2024 Storm Drain
Improvements 616 CAP – Infr- Storm Drain $1,500,000
Police Vehicle
Supplies/Materials and
Installation Services
671 CAP – FA - Vehicles $900,000
FY 2025 Curb Ramp
Improvement Project
130
134
501
CAP – Infr. – Roadway/Streets
CAP – Infr .– Roadway/Streets
Prof. Services – Misc
$3,000,000
Total: $ 5,960,000

Formal Bid Solicitations and Request for Proposals CONSENT CALENDAR Scheduled for Possible Issuance After Council September 10, 2024 Approval on September 10, 2024

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
On May, 6, 2008, Council adopted Ordinance No. 7,035-N.S. effective June 6, 2008, which increased the City Manager’s purchasing authority for services to $50,000. As a result, this required report submitted by the City Manager to Council is now for those purchases in excess of $100,000 for goods; and $200,000 for playgrounds and construction; and $50,000 for services. If Council does not object to these items being sent out for bid or proposal within one week of them appearing on the agenda, and upon final notice to proceed from the requesting department, the IFB (Invitation for Bid) or RFP (Request for Proposal) may be released to the public and notices sent to the potential bidder/respondent list.

BACKGROUND
On May 6, 2008, Council adopted Ordinance No. 7,035-N.S., amending the City Manager’s purchasing authority for services

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
The Finance Department reviews all formal bid and proposal solicitations to ensure that they include provisions for compliance with the City’s environmental policies. For each contract that is subject to City Council authorization, staff will address environmental sustainability considerations in the associated staff report to City Council.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
Need for the goods and/or services.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
None.

CONTACT PERSON
Roopreet Soorma, Senior Buyer, Finance, 510-981-7311
Attachments:
1) Early Intervention System Platform
2) City of Berkeley: Public Art Strategic Plan
3) Berkeley-based Food Assistance
4) PW Engineering On-Call Handrail Service
5) FY 2024 Storm Drain Improvements
6) Police Vehicle Supplies/Materials and Installation Services 7) FY 2025 Curb Ramp Improvement Project
Note: Original of this attachment with live signature of authorizing personnel is on file in General Services.

NEXT 30 DAYS
DATE SUBMITTED: SEPTEMBER 10, 2024
Attachment 1

SPECIFICATION
NO.

DESCRIPTION OF

GOODS /

SERVICES BEING

PURCHASED
APPROX. RELEASE
DATE
APPROX. BID

OPENING DATE

INTENDED USE ESTIMATED COST BUDGET CODE TO BE

CHARGED
DEPT. / DIVISION CONTACT NAME
& PHONE
25-11673-C Early Intervention
System Platform
Sept. 12, 2024 Oct. 3, 2024 Web-based platform
subscription service for
identifying off-track officer
behavior.
$100,000/year 011-71-701-801-0000-
000-421-6511110
Police Chuck Gunter,
Fiscal Services
Manager,
510-981-5976
--
Arlo Malmberg,
Project Manager,
510-981-5747
DEPT. TOTAL $ 100,000
25-11674-C City of Berkeley:

Public Art Strategic
Plan
September 16, 2024 November 1, 2024 Contract with Consultant for administrative guidelines and
policy updates to determine
prioritization of public art
programming and allocations of
funds.
$ 110,000
148 CMO/OED Mark Salinas
510.981.7538
DEPT. TOTAL $ 110,000
25-11675-C Berkeley-based Food
Assistance
8/12/2024 9/3/2024 Support for Berkeley-based non-
profit food assistance providers to
serve food insecure households
$ 200,000 011-51-505-540-0000-000-
444-612990-
HHCS/Aging Services
Division
Tanya Bustamante
981-5178
DEPT. TOTAL $ 200,000
25-11676-C
PW Engineering On-
Call Handrail Services
September 11, 2024 October 2, 2024
On-call services to fabricate and
install handrails at various
locations throughout the City.
$150,000
over 2 years
501-54-623-674-0000-000-
431-612990 as needed and
available
Public Works -
Engineering
Srinivas Muktevi
981-6402
Terrence Salonga
981-6447
25-11677-C
FY 2024 Storm Drain
Improvements
9/11/2024 10/8/2024 Project to repair storm drain
infrastructure and mitigate
localized flooding at several
locations throughout the City.
$1,500,000
Includes 20%
contingency
616-54-623-675-3016-000-
473-665120-PWENSD2401
(to be project budgeted from
listed account)
Public Works -
Engineering
Ricardo Salcedo
981-6407
Srinivas Muktevi
981-6402
25-11678-C
Police Vehicle
Supplies/Materials and
Installation Services
9/1/2024 10/1/2024 Police vehicle supplies/materials
and installation services including
specialized lights, interior
components, and electronics for
20 Police vehicles.

NTE $900,000.00
over two years
671-54-626-723-0000-000-
473-664120
Public Works Greg Ellington: 510-
981-6469
Don Colbert: 510-
981-6467
25-11679-C
FY 2025 Curb Ramp
Improvement Project
September 12, 2024 October 10, 2024 Improve existing curb ramps. $ 3,000,000 130-54-623-673-0000-000- 431-665110-PWENST2501
($750,000)
134-54-623-674-0000-000-
431-665110-PWENST2501
($55,500)
501-54-623-673-0000-000-
431-665110-PWENST2501
($2,194,500)
Public Works -
Engineering
Srinivas Muktevi
981-6402
Terrence Salonga
981-6447
DEPT. TOTAL $ 5,550,000
TOTAL $ 5,960,000
1 of  1

Office of the City Manager
2180 Milvia Street, Berkeley, CA 94704 ● Tel: (510) 981-7000 ● TDD: (510) 981-6903 ● Fax: (510) 981-7099 E-Mail: [email protected] Website: https://berkeleyca.gov/

CONSENT CALENDAR
September 10, 2024
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: LaTanya Bellow, Interim City Manager
Submitted by: Scott Gilman, Director, Health, Housing & Community Services Department
Subject: Mental Health Services Act Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution approving the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update, which identifies uses of funds for mental health programming, and forwarding the Annual Update to appropriate State officials.

SUMMARY
California MHSA revenues are allocated to mental health jurisdictions across the state on an annual basis to transform the mental health system into one that is consumer and family driven, culturally competent, wellness and recovery oriented, collaborative with community partners, and inclusive of integrated services. MHSA includes five defined funding components: Community Services and Supports; Prevention and Early Intervention; Innovations; Workforce, Education & Training; and Capital Facilities Technological Needs.

The City utilizes MHSA funds to address the various needs of the residents of Berkeley.

Some of the highlights of MHSA programming have included: A reduction in psychiatric inpatient hospital and/or incarceration days for severely mentally ill clients; a decrease in the number of days severely mentally ill clients spent homeless; step down to a lower level of care for some clients; services and supports for family members; Wellness Center services; consumer driven wellness recovery activities; housing, and benefits advocacy services and supports for clients; augmented prevention and intervention services for children and youth in the schools and community; increased outreach, and supportive services for Transition Age Youth, Adults and Older Adults and individuals in unserved, underserved and inappropriately served cultural and ethnic populations; and free access for a limited time to the MyStrength and HeadSpace Mental Health Apps for anyone who lives, works or goes to school in Berkeley.

Additionally, an outcome of the implementation of the MHSA is that mental health consumers, family members and other stakeholders now regularly serve on several of Mental Health Division’s internal decision-making committees. These individuals share their “lived experience” and provide valuable input which has become an integral

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

component that informs the Mental Health Division on the implementation of MHSA services and supports. In order to utilize MHSA funds, stakeholder informed MHSA Three Year Program and Expenditure Plans and Annual Updates are required to be developed and locally approved.

The Mental Health Division will create one additional Annual Update for Fiscal Year 2026, under the current MHSA regulations, prior to Fiscal Year 2027 when the Proposition 1, Behavioral Health Services Act, guidelines and regulations will become applicable for Three Year Plans and Annual Updates.

FISCAL IMPACTS OF RECOMMENDATION
Approval of the MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update enables funding for MHSA programs and services. The City of Berkeley receives funding from MHSA revenues (Fund 315, the Mental Health Services Act) on a monthly basis from the State of California. The total MHSA funding amount the city will receive in any given year is unknown until the end of the year. Therefore, MHSA Three Year Plans and Annual Updates must approximate revenues and expenditures for each year. This Annual Update includes the following estimated revenue and expenditures in each MHSA component:
2025

MHSA FUNDING

COMPONENT
Estimated Unspent
Funds
Estimated New
Funding
Estimated
Expenditures
Community Services &
Supports
$13,247,388 $6,414,353 $8,608,952
($208,654
transfer to WET)
Prevention & Early
Intervention
$4,154,447 $1,603,588 $2,165,302
Innovations $2,413,336 $421,997 $600,000
Workforce Education &
Training
$0 $208,654
(Transfer from CSS)
$208,654
Capital Facilities &
Technological Needs
$0 $0 $0
TOTALS $19,815,171 $8,648,592 $11,582,908
The budget provides estimated revenue and expenditures for this Annual Update. The Division obtains financial projections from the state on the amount of MHSA revenue to be allocated in a given year. Financial projections for this Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update reflect an increase in MHSA funds, to what was previously estimated in the approved Fiscal Year 2024-2026 Three Year Plan. $11.7M was allocated in the FY2025 Adopted Budget.

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

The projected additional revenue in Fiscal Year 2025, and savings from previous years (due to staff vacancies, slower start-ups with new programs, etc.), will assist in providing funding to support MHSA programs and services over the next couple of years should the MHSA fund begin to decrease.

The Division will continue to closely monitor the City of Berkeley MHSA allotments and expenditures to assess whether program changes are needed in the future. Any proposed program changes will be vetted for community input and reflected in the Fiscal Year 2026 Annual Update.

CURRENT SITUATION AND ITS EFFECTS
The MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update provides an update to the City Council approved MHSA Fiscal Years 2024 – 2026 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan.

Informed by area stakeholders, this Annual Update details current mental health programs and services, proposes a few program changes, and includes the state required MHSA Fiscal Year 2023 Prevention and Early Intervention Annual Report and the MHSA Fiscal Year 2023 Innovation Annual Evaluation Report. Per state legislation, MHSA Three Year Plans and Annual Updates must include the following steps:

Conducting a community program planning process with the involvement of area stakeholders; writing a draft plan; initiating a 30-day public review on the Draft Plan; and conducting a public hearing at a Mental Health Commission meeting.

This City of Berkeley MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update included a community program planning process to obtain input via multiple meetings; drafting a plan; incorporating feedback from the planning process; a 30-day Public Review from June 26 through July 25; and a Public Hearing on the evening of July 25 before the Mental Health Commission.

The Division received public comments on the MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update during the Community Program Planning Process which includes the 30-Day Public Review and Public Hearing. All public comments were recorded regardless of topic.

Some of the public comments received were regarding programs and services that are not currently funded through MHSA and/or are executed through other City programs or through Community-based organizations. As a result of public comments received during this process, the Division will not be eliminating the funding for the Mental Health Promotion Campaign, and will be utilizing the campaign to educate the community on available services. All input will be utilized to inform future MHSA Plans and Annual Updates.

Outlined in the following categories below are the input and questions received during the Community Input Meetings, 30-Day Public Review, and the Public Hearing:

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

Children/Youth
 Don’t forget funding for services for children.
 Create activities that youth can engage with on their phones that will increase their mental health.
 Figure out how to reach youth online social media to obtain their input into mental health needs in the community.
 Reach out to Berkeley High School to obtain student input into mental health programs.
 Refurbish an abandoned building in South Berkeley to create a safe space for youth to congregate and participate in various activities such as music, arts, sports, job training, etc.

Data and Evaluation
 We see individuals still struggling and don’t have any way of judging outcomes and whether the Specialized Care Unit and other mental health services are working or not.
 We need top to bottom evaluations of staff and funded programs that is conducted bi-annually or quarterly, not results based accountability evaluations.  Program data should be provided in a way that meets accessibility needs for individuals who are disabled, and dispersed to the community on a regular basis so that the disabled community can provide informed input on funded programs.  Programs shouldn’t just be evaluated when they receive funding, but regularly throughout the year by a panel of reviewers that includes individuals who receive the program services.
 Data for all programs should be easily accessible at any point in time to the community.

Housing
 Need licensed Board and Care facilities, and high-quality supportive housing.  Utilize the Land Trust to increase housing and improve the quality of services.  Develop more community owned or non-profit owned housing for those highly affected by mental illness so housing can’t be sold or go out of business.  Quality supportive services are necessary in housing for those living with mental illness (residents at two Berkeley housing developments complain about poor maintenance and support services in their buildings).
 Who provides services and oversees staff at hotels?
 You can’t put people in Single Room Occupancies (SROs) as they will be traumatized. The bathrooms are locked; there’s drug use; the people who work there seem hostile; and there is no monitoring of the facilities.  People are afraid to complain about bad housing conditions because of the shortage of housing.
 What is the complaint process for hotels?

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

 In regards to housing community “Block Fund Trust”, there needs to be evaluation to the validity of applications. When giving money, there should be a body of City people to evaluate these contractors.
 There needs to be different kinds of housing with different levels of care and have peer support services for individuals experiencing homelessness.  Address the shortage of housing for people experiencing mental illness and address the traumatized individuals experiencing homelessness by providing stable, welcoming environments.
 There is a need for more affordable housing for veterans.  All Resources for Community Development (RCD) properties should have supportive services. University Avenue does not have adequate supportive services. Concerned that there is not a plan with RCD on how people will get into housing, and limited to no supportive housing.

Mental Health Services
 Interns dealing with individuals in need are not culturally diverse. Need more community outreach with culturally diverse, trained, skill people.  Don’t separate mental health and substance abuse.
 A meeting with community-based organizations should occur to obtain information on services provided and to ask questions of providers,  What modes of technology are being used by the Mobile Crisis Team and by clinicians who provide services in the field for individuals who have disabilities to meet their accessibility needs?
 Individuals who are disabled may not know how to access services or even what questions to ask regarding services unless they are being advertised in a way that meets accessibility needs.
 Do Contracts include the requirements for accommodations for individuals with disabilities?
 There is a disconnect between policy makers and the needs in the community.

Policy makers need to be out there seeing what is happening.  What is currently happening at the Berkeley Daytime Drop In Center? It is not running the way it used to, when people got the services they need.  A fully functioning Drop-In Center is needed for our un-housed neighbors.  Do the FSP’s have 24/7 services?
 Increase high quality outreach and treatment services for those suffering from substance abuse and mental illness.
 Create a public education campaign about the services available in Berkeley so people know where to find them.
 Feel there is a lot of staff turnover at Berkeley Mental Health and I wonder what is going on.
 Individuals who are affected are not engaged in mental health policy and they need to be engaged in the process.

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

 Don’t see any services for white straight males, who are in need and may be suicidal.
 As a white person my mental health issues are not addressed.  Put more money into the Mobile Wellness Center, there is so much need, we should have a second team.
 The vacancies and freezing of positions in the Mental Health Division is concerning and support should be provided by City Council.
 What is happening with the unspent funds?
 Even if you weren’t able to sustain programs long-term a large portion of the unspent forms should be allocated now for programming that will address community mental health needs.
 On what basis are people being declared mentally unstable or unhealthy? How do individual’s life experiences and history such as experiences with police, PTSD, economic issues play into an individual’s diagnosis? A different way of approaching individuals needs to be developed.
 What can we do in the community to be more visible? People are experiencing stress.
 Berkeley Mental Health programs should hire community people to help individuals get mental health services.
 See so much Mental Health needs in the South Berkeley area.  Mental Health issues in Berkeley are getting worse.
 There is a need for more program staff on the street in the community to do outreach and to help assess the mental health needs of the community.  Use funds to create a mental health curriculum for the middle schools.  Provide lockboxes, porta-potties and dumpsters near Homeless Encampments.  Convert an empty building in Berkeley into a shower station for homeless individuals.

MHSA FY25 Annual Update Community Input Meetings
 Paper fliers for the meetings should have been posted widely.  There should be more attendees at the community meetings.

Specialized Care Unit
 What’s going on with the Specialized Care Unit (SCU) services, are these services working?
 Is the Berkeley Specialized Care Unit (SCU) phone number publicly posted?  The City should stencil the Specialized Care Unit’s phone number on the sidewalk.  Make the Specialized Care Unit, SCU (Crisis Services) well-functioning and well publicized.
 My individual experience with the SCU was not good. The SCU program was engaged by a family member who was concerned about me and although the program is not supposed to include the use of Law Enforcement, the Police

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

showed up at my door. I was not connected to resources following my release from John George and was released without shoes or a cell phone I had just purchased so I had no way to call my doctor to give permission to release my medical history to a mental healthcare provider. I didn’t have a good experience with the FSP either and my trust is shaken.

Additional input on programming unspent funds that was submitted by some of the Friends of Adeline group is outlined in Appendix E Public Comments section of the Annual Update.

After the close of the Public Hearing, the Mental Health Commission passed the following motion:

M/S/C (Prichett, Opton) The Mental Health Commission approves the overall MHSA Annual budget with modifications. The Mental Health Commission recommends that the $600,000 for the Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center be reconsidered and these funds reallocated to support the needs of the unhoused people. This funding shall be contingent upon a public hearing that includes community input with service users and providers and that a plan be developed for its effective use. The Mental Health Commission also recommends that the Mobile Crisis Team be funded through BDP (Berkeley Police Department) and overseen by the Mental Health Department.

Ayes: Jones, Lunaparra, Prichett, Opton, Turner Noes: None; Abstentions: None;

Absent: Krishnan
The Health, Housing and Community Services Department agrees with the recommendation for City Council to approve the MHSA FY25 Annual Update, but does not agree to the modifications to the Annual Update due to the following reasons:
 The Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Project and the contract to execute these services has been approved by City Council on numerous occasions through the MHSA Innovations Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Project Plan, MHSA FY23 Annual Update, MHSA FY24-26 Three Year Plan, and Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Contract with Options Recovery Services;
 This project will be the home for implementing the Council’s referral to develop a “Buddy” Pilot Project for mentally ill homeless individuals;  This project will be one of the primary strategies the City utilizes to support individuals experiencing homelessness;
 The process to develop and approve the Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Project included robust feedback, participation, and guidance by members of the public, including by residents who would be receiving its services. Delaying or preventing implementation will further prevent services to this vulnerable population;

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

 Removing funds from this project would subject some of the associated funding to reversion. Approximately $600,000 the first year and increasing approximately $400,000 for the follow three years, may be subject to reversion by the State, meaning that we must use or lose a portion of these funds now on an approved MHSA project.

BACKGROUND
California voters adopted the Mental Health Services Act (Proposition 63 – MHSA) on November 2, 2004. The Act places a 1% tax on every dollar of personal income over $1 million. MHSA revenues are allocated to mental health jurisdictions across the state to transform the mental health system into one that is consumer and family driven, culturally competent, wellness and recovery oriented, collaborative with community partners, and inclusive of integrated services. MHSA includes the following five funding components:
 Community Services and Supports: Primarily for treatment services and supports for Severely Mentally Ill Adults and Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Children.
 Prevention & Early Intervention: For strategies to prevent mental illnesses from becoming severe and disabling.
 Innovations: For short-term pilot projects designed to increase new learning in the mental health field.
 Workforce, Education & Training: Primarily for strategies to identify and remedy mental health occupational shortages, promote cultural competency, and promote the employment of mental health consumers and family members.  Capital Facilities and Technological Needs: For capital projects on owned buildings and on mental health technology projects.

MHSA also provides funding for local housing development, collaborative programs for suicide prevention, school mental health, programs that combat stigma and discrimination; and training and technical assistance in the areas of cultural competency and prevention/early intervention.

As required by the State, this MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update provides an update to the City Council approved MHSA Fiscal Years 2024 – 2026 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan. Since the inception of MHSA, funds have been utilized to transform the mental health service delivery system to better meet the needs of underserved and inappropriately served communities, among others. This initiative has also provided the opportunity for the City of Berkeley Mental Health Division to further develop and expand the system of care by adding new programs within the division and utilizing non-profit providers in the planning and delivery of comprehensive mental health services.

Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) CONSENT CALENDAR
Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update September 10, 2024

Past Council Action
Since the inception of the MHSA Program in 2006, Council has taken actions to approve all MHSA Plans and Annual Updates. The most recent actions taken on MHSA Three Year Plans or Annual Updates are as follows:
 December 1, 2020, approval of the MHSA Fiscal Years 2021– 2023 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan.
 September 14, 2021, approval of the MHSA Fiscal Year 2022 Annual Update.  July 26, 2022, approval of the MHSA Fiscal Year 2023 Annual Update.  July 25, 2023, approval of the MHSA Fiscal Years 2024 – 2026 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan.

Council has also previously approved the initial MHSA component plans, Innovation Plans, the uses of MHSA funding for local housing development projects, and contracts with community-based agencies to implement mental health services and supports, housing and vocational services, and translation services.

ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY AND CLIMATE IMPACTS
There are no identifiable environmental effects, climate impacts, or sustainability opportunities associated with the subject of this report.

RATIONALE FOR RECOMMENDATION
State legislation requires mental health jurisdictions to create MHSA Three Year Plans and to provide updates on MHSA Plans on an annual basis. The legislation also requires local approval on MHSA Plans and Annual Updates. Approval of this MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update will fulfill state requirements and enable MHSA funded programs and services to continue to be implemented.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS CONSIDERED
As obtaining approval on MHSA Plans and Annual Updates by the local governing body is a state requirement, there were no other alternative actions considered.

CONTACT PERSON
Karen Klatt, Community Services Specialist III, HHCS, (510) 981-7644 Jeff Buell, Manager of Mental Health Services, HHCS, (510) 981-7682 Attachments:
1: Resolution
Exhibit A: MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update

RESOLUTION NO. ##,###-N.S.

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ACT (MHSA) FISCAL YEAR 2025 ANNUAL UPDATE WHEREAS, Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds are allocated to mental health jurisdictions across the state for the purposes of transforming the mental health system into one that is consumer and family driven, culturally competent, wellness and recovery oriented, includes community collaboration, and implements integrated services; and WHEREAS, MHSA includes five funding components: Community Services & Supports; Prevention & Early Intervention; Innovations; Workforce, Education & Training; and Capital Facilities and Technological Needs; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Department of Health, Housing & Community Services, Mental Health Division, receives MHSA Community Services & Supports, Prevention & Early Intervention, and Innovation funds on an annual basis, and received one-time distributions of MHSA Workforce, Education & Training and Capital Facilities and Technological Needs funds; and
WHEREAS, in order to utilize funding for programs and services, the Mental Health Division must have a locally approved Plan; Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan, or Annual Update, in place for the funding timeframe; and WHEREAS, since 2015 the City Council has authorized multiple Three-Year Plans and Annual Updates, most recently on July 25, 2023 by Resolution No. 70,990-N.S. approving the MHSA Fiscal Year 2024 through 2026 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan; and
WHEREAS, City Council has previously approved MHSA funding for local housing development projects and contracts with community-based agencies to implement mental health services and supports, housing and vocational services, and translation services; and
WHEREAS, in order to comply with state requirements, the MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update must be approved by City Council.

NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Berkeley that the MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update that, incorporated herein as Exhibit A, is hereby approved.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Manager is authorized to forward the MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update appropriate state officials.

Exhibit
A: MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update

EXHIBIT A

MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES ACT (MHSA)
FISCAL YEAR 2025 ANNUAL UPDATE

City of Berkeley Mental Health
Mental Health Services Act
(MHSA)
Fiscal Year 2025
Annual Update

1 5
9 15
17 18
18 98
152
159
160
162
163
1A
1B
1C

TABLE OF CONTENTS

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW

DEMOGRAPHICS

COMMUNITY PROGRAM PLANNING
MHSA FY23 ANNUAL UPDATE

PROPOSED PROGRAM CHANGES
PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND FY23 DATA

COMMUNITY SERVICES & SUPPORTS (CSS)

PREVENTION & EARLY INTERVENTION (PEI)

INNOVATION (INN)

WORKFORCE, EDUCATION & TRAINING (WET)

CAPITAL FACILITIES AND TECHNOLOGICAL NEEDS (CFTN)
FY22 AVERAGE COST PER CLIENT*

BUDGET NARRATIVE
APPENDIX A: PROGRAM BUDGETS
APPENDIX B: RESULTS BASED ACCOUNTABILITY DATA
APPENDIX C: PEI FY23 ANNUAL EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX D: INN FY23 ANNUAL EVALUATION REPORT
APPENDIX E: PUBLIC COMMENTS
1D
1E

BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW
California voters passed Proposition 63, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA), in November 2004, to expand and transform the public mental health system. This legislation places a 1% tax on personal incomes above $1 mi
llion dollars. Funds are deposited into the
MHSA State Treasury Fund and allocations per each mental health jurisdiction are determined based on the total population in a given area.

Through the following five funding components, the MHSA was designed to create the capacity for a broad continuum of prevention, early intervention and treatment services along with the necessary infrastructure, technology, and training elements to support effective mental health system transformation:
• Community Services & Supports (CSS): Pr imarily provides treatment services and supports for Severely Mentally Ill Adults and Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Children and Youth. • Prevention & Early Intervention (PEI
): For strategies to recognize early signs of mental
illness and to improve early access to services and programs, including the reduction of stigma and discrimination, and for strategies to prevent mental illness from becoming severe and disabling.
• Innovation (INN): For short-ter m pilot projects designed to increase new learning in the mental health field.
• Workforce, Education & Training (WET): Primarily for strategies to identify and remedy mental health occupational shortages, promote cultural competency and the employment of mental health peers and family members in the workplace. • Capital Facilities and Technological Needs (CFTN): For capital projects on owned buildings and on mental health technology projects.

Among other things, the MHSA was designed to provide enhanced services and supports for seriously emotionally disturbed children, youth
and Transition Age Youth (TAY), adults, and
older adults suffering from severe mental illness through a “no wrong door” approach and aims to move public mental health service delivery from a “disease oriented” system to one that is culturally responsive, consumer informed, and wellness recovery oriented. This is accomplished through implementing programs that focus on the following major components:
• Wellness, recovery and resilience;
• Cultural competency;
• Consumer/family member driven services;
• Consumer/family member integration in the mental health system; and • Community collaboration.
1

The MHSA also strives to improve and increase services and supports for individuals and families from cultural and ethnic populations that are traditionally unserved and underserved in the mental health system. In Berkeley these have included: Asian Pacific Islanders (API); Latinos/Latinas/Latinx (Latino/a/x); Lesbian, Gay, Bi-Sexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, Inter-Sexed, Agender, Plus others (LGBTQIA+); Older Adults; and Transition Age Youth (TAY).

African Americans have been an additional population of focus as data indicates they are overrepresented in the mental health system and hence “inappropriately served”, which could be due to being provided services that are not culturally responsive and/or appropriate.

In order to access MHSA funds, a stakeholder informed plan outlining how funds will be utilized must be developed and locally approved. Development of an MHSA Plan includes: community program planning with the involvement of area stakeholders, writing a draft plan, initiating a 30- day public review, conducting a public hearing at a Mental Health Commission meeting, and obtaining approval on the plan from City Council.

The Community Services & Supports, Prevention & Early Intervention, and Innovation funding components are the only re-occurring MHSA monies that are allocated annually and may be spent over a five-year period. Workforce, Education & Training and Capital Facilities and Technological Needs funds had initial expenditure time periods of 10 years each, and were to be utilized by the end of Fiscal Year 2018 or 2019. Per the City Council approved MHSA AB114 Reversion Expenditure Plan (which is posted on the City of Berkeley MHSA webpage), some CFTN and WET projects were continued past the original timeframes.

MHSA legislation requires mental health jurisdictions to provide updates on MHSA Plans on an annual basis, and an int
egrated Program and Expenditure Plan must also be developed every three years. Currently, the City of Berkeley Mental Health (BMH) Division has a City Council approved MHSA Fiscal Years 2023/2024 - 2025/2026 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan in place.

City of Berkeley MHSA Services
Since 2006, MHSA funding has been utilized to provide mental health services and supports in Berkeley. Additionally, from Fiscal Year 2011 (FY11) through FY20, the City of Berkeley also utilized a portion of MHSA funds to provide services in the City of Albany, although Albany is a part of the Alameda County total population. Beginning in FY21, per agreement with Alameda County Behavioral Health Care Services (BHCS), the Division transitioned to only using MHSA funds for services and supports in Berkeley, and BHCS now provides MHSA funded services in Albany.

As a result of the City‘s approved MHSA Plans and Annual Updates, a number of services and supports have been implemented to address the various needs of the residents of Berkeley.

Some of the many programs include the following:
• Intensive services for Children, TAY, Adults, and Older Adults; • Multi-Cultural Outreach engagement, trainings, projects, and events; 2

• Increased mental health services and supports for homeless individuals; • Wellness Recovery services and activities;
• Family Advocacy, Housing services and supports, and Benefits Advocacy; • Case management and mental health services and supports for TAY; • Trauma support services for unserved, underserved, and inappropriately served populations;
• I ncreased mental health prevention, and intervention services for children and youth in area schools and communities;
• A Wellness Recovery Center in collaboration with Alameda County Behavioral Health Care Services (BHCS);
• Funding for increased services for Older adults and the API population; and • Services for individuals experiencing co-occurring disorders.

Additionally, an outcome of the implementation of the MHSA is that mental health peers, family members and other stakeholders now regularly serve on several of the BMH internal decision- making committees. These individuals share their “lived experience” and provide valuable input which has become an integral component that informs the Division on the implementation of MHSA services and supports. Even prior to the passage of Proposition 63, BMH convened (and has since maintained) an MHSA Advisory Committee which serves in an advisory role on MHSA programs and is comprised of mental health peers, family members, and community stakeholders.

This City of Berkeley MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) Annual Update is a stakeholder informed plan that provides an update to the previously approved FY2024-2026 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan (Three Year Plan). This Annual Update summarizes proposed program changes that will begin during the FY25 timeframe. Descriptions of MHSA services that will be continued in FY25, through the approved FY24-26 Three Year Plan, and a reporting of FY23 program data are also provided.

Proposition 1 – The Behavioral Health Services Act
In 2023 Senate Bill 326 (SB326), the Modernization of the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) and Assembly Bill 531, a Behavioral Health Infrastructure Bond for treatment facilities and supportive housing were linked and signed by the Governor. On March 5, 2024 the linked bill was on the ballot as one measure, Proposition 1, which was narrowly passed by the voters.

This legislation renames the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) to the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) as it includes an allowance to utilize funding for services for individuals who have Substance Use Disorders.

Beginning 7/1/26, through the BHSA, the current five MHSA funding allocations will change to the following three components:

3

• Housing: For children and families, youth, adults and older adults living with severe mental illness or serious emotional disturbance and/or Substance Use Disorders who are experiencing homelessness or are at risk of homelessness, with 50% being prioritized for interventions for the chronically homeless.

• Full Service Partnership (FSP): Includes the use of funds for mental health, supportive services, and substance use disorder treatment services for Severely Mentally Ill Adults, Seriously Emotionally Disturbed Children and Youth, and individuals who experiences Substance Use Disorders.
• Behavioral Health Services and Supports: Includes early intervention, outreach and engagement, workforce education and training, capital facilities, technological needs, and innovative pilots and projects. A majority (51%) of funds must be used for Early Intervention services to assist in the early signs of mental illness or substance misuse, and 51% of the Early Intervention services and supports must be for individuals who are 25 years and younger.

Among other things, the BHSA will also make changes to the planning process and Three Year Plans and Annual Updates. These c
hanges will require the demonstration of coordinated
behavioral health planning around all behavioral health funding received, and an integrated plan that includes all local behavioral health funding, services, and program outcomes. It is anticipated that the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) will release regulations for the new BHSA in early 2025. In preparation, the City has started pre-planning around the changes to MHSA and will begin engaging the community in the upcoming months to share information on the BHSA requirements and obtain input on local mental health needs.

4

DEMOGRAPHICS

Description
Situated in the heart of the San Francisco Bay area, and home to the University of California, Berkeley is an urban city, located in northern Alameda County. With a combined land mass of around 12.2 miles and a total population of approximately 118,962 (updated estimates since the 2020 census), the City of Berkeley is densely populated and larger than 23 of California’s small counties.

Race/Ethnicity
Berkeley is a diverse community with changing demographics. The African American population has decreased in recent years while the Latinx and Asian populations have both increased.

Berkeley has a large student population, which provides housing for many of University of California’s foreign students and their families. Threshold languages include English, Spanish, Farsi, Cantonese, and Vietnamese, and approximately 30% of Berkeley residents speak a language other than English at home. Berkeley is comprised of the following racial and ethnic demographics: African American; Asian; Latino/Latina/Latinx; White; American Indian/Alaska Native; and Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander (P.I.). Demographics are outlined below:

African
American 8%
Asian 21%
Whi
te
56%
Latinx
13%
Am. Indian/
Alaska Native
1%
N. Hawaiian/
P. I., 1%
City of Berkeley Race/Ethnicity
5

Age/Sex
As depicted in the table below, a large percentage of individuals in Berkeley are over the age of eighteen:

Sex demographics are as follows:

Females
Males
51%
49%
City of Berkeley
Sex
12%
88%
Un
der 18 18 & Over
City of Berkeley
Age
6

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer/Questioning, Intersexed, Agender, Plus (LBGTQIA+) Population
Per a brief by the Williams Institute, UCLA, entitled “LGBT Adults in Large US Metropolitan Areas” the LGBT population is 6.7% in the San Francisco Bay Area. According to the Brief, the estimated percentages of adults age 18 and older who identify as LGBT was derived from the Gallup Daily Tracking Survey which is an annual list-assisted random digit dial (70% cell phone, 30% landline) survey, conducted in English and Spanish, of approximately 350,000 U.S. adults ages 18 and up who reside in the 50 states and the District of Columbia. LGBT identity is based on response to the question, “Do you, personally, identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or transgender?” Respondents who answered “yes” were classified as LGBT. Respondents who answered “no” were classified as non-LGBT. Estimates derived from other measures of sexual orientation and gender identity may yield different results. (Conron,K.J, Luhur.W., Goldberg, S.K. Estimated Number of US LGBT Adults in Large Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA), (December 2020). The Williams Institute, UCLA. Los Angeles, CA.) Income/Housing
With some of the highest housing costs in the Bay Area, the Berkeley median household income is $104,716. Nearly 18% of Berkeley residents live below the poverty line and approximately 27% of Berkeley children qualify for free and reduced lunches. While 43% of Berkeley residents own their own homes, there are many individuals experiencing homelessness including women, TAY, and Older Adults.

In order to measure the prevalence and characteristics of homelessness, a comprehensive street count of individuals experiencing homelessness is conducted in communities across the country every two years. According to the 2024 Alameda County Everyone Home Point-in-Time Count, which included a detailed assessment of the City of Berkeley, approximately 844 individuals were experiencing homelessness. Of this amount 47% were in some form of shelter, and 53% were unsheltered (as defined by someone whose primary residence is a car, park, abandoned building, or another place that isn’t designed to be housing). These numbers represent a 20% decrease in the overall homeless population, and a 45% decrease in individuals who are unsheltered in Berkeley since the 2022 Alameda County Everyone Home Point-in-Time Count. Since 2021, there have been several initiatives to support individuals who are experiencing homelessness, and funding for new housing in the City, which has had a direct impact on individuals who are unhoused.

Education
Berkeley has a highly educated population: 97% of individuals aged 25 or older are high school graduates; and approximately 74% possess a bachelor’s degree or higher.

System Organization
Berkeley Mental Health (BMH), one of two city-based public mental health programs in the state, provides services for residents in Berkeley. It is a Division of the City of Berkeley Health, Housing & Community Services (HHCS) Department. Services are provided at multiple clinic 7

sites and in the field. BMH has several programs providing services: Crisis; Family, Youth & Children; High School Mental Health, Full Service Partnership Services, and Adult Services.

Services include: assessment, assertive community treatment, individual and group therapy, case management, and crisis intervention. In addition to offering treatment, outreach, and support, some services are provided through a variety of community-based agencies and at school sites. As part of the Crisis unit, a Mobile Crisis Team operates seven days a week when fully staffed. The majority of mental health services provided by BMH are aimed towards the Medi-Cal and uninsured population; as such it is important to note the ways in which the Medi- Cal population demographics differ from the overall demographics in Berkeley. Using data available from Alameda County, the Medi-Cal population in Berkeley in 2023 was as follows:

43%
African
Americ…
40%
Whi
te
7%
Asian
7%
Latinx
2% Al.

Nat.l…
1%
Other
African American - 43% White - 40%
Asian - 7% Latinx - 7%
Alaska Nat./Am. Ind. - 2% Other - 1%
8

COMMUNITY PROGRAM PLANNING
During the Community Program Planning (CPP) process two MHSA Advisory Committee meeting were held on Thursday, May 30th, and Tuesday July 23rd and ten Community Input Meetings were held on the following dates/times:
• Thursday, June 6th: 11:00am-12:30pm
• Monday, June 10th: 1:00pm-2:30pm
• Wednesday, June 12th: 6:00pm-7:30pm
• Thursday, June 13th: 6:00-7:30pm
• T uesday, June 18th: 6:00-7:30pm
• Wednesday, June 19th: 6:00pm-7:30pm
• T uesday, July 9th: 6:00pm-7:30pm
• Thursday, July 11th: 6:00pm-7:30pm
• Tuesday, July 16th: 6:00pm-7:30pm
• Thursday, July 18th: 6:00-7:30pm

Announcements of the meetings were posted on the MHSA webpage and on the City’s event calendar. Meeting fliers were posted in various locations throughout the City. Announcements were sent to MHSA Advisory Committee members, mental health peers, family members, representatives from community-based organizations, individuals from unserved, underserved and inappropriately served populations, HHCS Staff, City Commissioners, City Staff and other MHSA stakeholders.

During the MHSA Advisory and Community Input Meetings a presentation was conducted to provide information on MHSA background, funding, program requirements, the CPP process, and on upcoming changes to the funding requirements as a result of Proposition 1. The presentation also covered detailed information on the proposed MHSA FY25 Annual Update and provided opportunities for input from the community.

An anonymous voluntary survey through Survey Monkey, was administered during each meeting to obtain demographic information on meeting participants. Individuals who joined the meetings by phone were contacted following the meeting to have the opportunity to voluntarily participate in the survey. Survey results of individuals who participated in the CPP Process through meetings or provided input by phone were as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 53
Age Category
Age Category % of total
Transition Age Youth *
Adult *
Older Adult 38%
Declined to Answer (or unknown) *

9

Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male *
Female 39%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Black or African American *
White 22%
Latino/a/x *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Heterosexual 38%
Gay/Lesbian *
Queer *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Veteran Status
Veteran Status % of total
Non-Veteran 45%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 55%
Disability Status
Disability Status % of total
Disabled 23%
Not Disabled 26%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 51%
Representative Categories**
Representative Status % of total
Consumer *
Family Member of Consumer *
Community Member or MHSA Stakeholder 28%
Representative of City of Berkeley Commission *
Parent, Student or Representative of UC Berkeley
or City College
*
Representative of Mental Health or Social
Services Agency
*
Representative of Health Care Organization *
City of Berkeley Staff *
Other 41%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 38%
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants. **Many participants were in more than one category.

As with previous MHSA Plans and Annual Updates, a methodology utilized for conducting CPP for this Annual Update was implemented to enable a collaborative process to occur between BMH staff, MHSA Advisory Committee members, Community members and other MHSA 10

stakeholders. Development of this Annual Update began with an internal examination of existing programs, unaddressed needs, and available funding which included a review of input received over the prior year and during previous MHSA planning processes. Following an internal review, proposed new additions were vetted through the MHSA Advisory Committee prior to engaging community members and other MHSA stakeholders.

Proposed program changes in this Annual Update include the following:
• Move an Assistant Management Analyst position that was previously approved for the Adult Full Services Partnership, to the Children’s Full Services Partnership; • Eliminate the PEI funded Mental Health Promotion Campaign; • Eliminate the PEI funded Early Child Health and Wellness Program; • Eliminate the allocation of local PEI funding for the PEI Statewide Projects initiative.

Details are outlined in the “Proposed Program Changes” section of this Annual Update.

A 30-Day Public Review was held from Wednesday, June 26 th through Thursday, July 25 th to
invite input on this Annual Update. A copy of the Annual Update was posted on the BMH MHSA website, and announcements of the 30-Day Public Review were mailed and/or emailed to community stakeholders and City staff. Immediately following the 30-Day Public Review, a Public Hearing on the Annual Update w as held at 7:00pm on Thursday, July 25 th, at the Mental Health Commission meeting.

The Division received public comments on the MHSA Fiscal Year 2025 Annual Update during the Community Program Planning Process which includes the 30-Day Public Review and Public Hearing. All public comments were recorded regardless of topic. Some of the public comments received were regarding programs and services that are not currently funded through MHSA and/or are executed through other City programs or through Community-based organizations.

As a result of public comments received during this process, the Division will not be eliminating the funding for the Mental Health Promotion Campaign, and will be utilizing the campaign to educate the community on available services. All input will be utilized to inform future MHSA Plans and Annual Updates.

Outlined in the following categories below are the input received during the Community Program Planning Process:

Children/Youth
• Don’t forget funding for services for children.
• Create activities that youth can engage with on their phones that will increase their mental heal
th.
• Figure out how to reach youth online social media to obtain their input into mental health needs in the community.
• Reach out to Berkeley High School to obtain student input into mental health programs. • Refur
bish an abandoned building in South Berkeley to create a safe space for youth to congregate and participate in various activities such as music, arts, sports, job training, etc. 11

Data and Evaluation
• We see individuals still struggling and don’t have any way of judging outcomes and whether the Specialized Care Unit and other mental health services are working or not. • We need top to bottom evaluations of staff and funded programs that is conducted bi-annual ly or quarterly, not results based accountability evaluations. • Program data should be provided in a way that meets accessibility needs for individuals who are disabled, and dispersed to the community on a regular basis so that the dis abled
community can provide informed input on funded programs. • Programs shouldn’t just be evaluated when they receive funding, but regularly throughout the year by a panel of reviewers that includes individuals who receive the program services. • Data for all programs should be easily accessible at any point in time to the community.

Housing
• Need licensed Board and Care facilities, and high-quality supportive housing • Utilize the Land Trust to increase housing and improve the quality of services. • Who provides services and oversees staff at hotels?
• You can’t put people in Single Room Occupancies (SROs) as they will be traumatized. The bathrooms are locked; there’s drug use; the people who work there seem hostile; and there is no monitoring of the facilities.
• People are afraid to complain about bad housing conditions because of the shortage of housing.
• What is the complaint process for hotels?
• In regards to housing community “Block Fund Trust”, there needs to be evaluation to the validity of applications. When giving money, there should be a body of City people to evaluate these contractors.
• There needs to be different kinds of housing with different levels of care and have peer support services for individuals experiencing homelessness. • Address the shortage of housing for people experiencing mental illness and address the traumatized individuals experiencing homelessness by providing stable, welcoming environments.
• There is a need for more affordable housing for veterans. • All Resources for Community Development (RCD) properties should have supportive services. University Avenue does not have adequate supportive services. Conc erned that there is not a plan with RCD on how people will get into housing, and limited to no supportive housing.

Mental Health Services
• Interns dealing with individuals in need are not culturally diverse. Need more community outreach with culturally diverse, trained, skill people. • Don’t separate mental health and substance abuse.
• A meeting with community-based organizations should occur to obtain information on services provided and to ask questions of providers,
12

• What modes of technology are being used by the Mobile Crisis Team and by clinicians who provide services in the field for individuals who have disabilities to meet their accessibility needs?
• Individuals who are disabled may not know how to access services or even what questions to ask regarding services unless they are being advertised in a way that meets accessibility needs.
• Do Contracts include the requirements for accommodations for individuals with disabilities? • There is a disconnect between policy makers and the needs in the community. Policy makers need to be out there seeing what is happening.
• What is currently happening at the Berkeley Daytime Drop In Center? It is not running the way it used to, when people got the services they need. • Do the FSP’s have 24/7 services?
• Feel there is a lot of staff turnover at Berkeley Mental Health and I wonder what is going on. • Individuals who are affected are not engaged in mental health policy and they need to be engaged in the process.
• Don’t see any services for white straight males, who are in need and may be suicidal. • As a white person my mental health issues are not addressed. • Put more money into the Mobile Wellness Center, there is so much need, we should have a second team.
• The vacancies and freezing of positions in the Mental Health Division is concerning and support should be provided by City Council.
• What is happening with the unspent funds?
• Even if you weren’t able to sustain programs long-term a large portion of the unspent forms should be allocated now for programming that will address community mental health needs. • On what basis are people being declared mentally unstable or unhealthy? How do individual’s life experiences and history such as experiences with police, PTSD, economic issues play into an individual’s diagnosis? A different way of approaching individuals needs to be developed.
• What can we do in the community to be more visible? People are experiencing stress. • Berkeley Mental Health programs should hire community people to help individuals get mental health services.
• See so much Mental Health needs in the South Berkeley area. • Mental Health issues in Berkeley are getting worse.
• There is a need for more program staff on the street in the community to do outreach and to help assess the mental health needs of the community.
• Use funds to create a mental health curriculum for the middle schools. • Provide lockboxes, porta-potties and dumpsters near Homeless Encampments. • Convert an empty building in Berkeley into a shower station for homeless individuals.

MHSA FY25 Annual Update Com
munity Input M eetings
• Paper fliers for the meetings should have been posted widely. • There should be more attendees at the community meetings. 13

Specialized Care Unit
• What’s going on with the Specialized Care Unit (SCU) services, are these services working? • Is the Berkeley Specialized Care Unit (SCU) phone number publicly posted? • The C
ity should stencil the Specialized Care Unit’s phone number on the sidewalk. • My individual experience with the SCU was not good. The SCU program was engaged by a family member who was concerned about me and although the program is not supposed to include the use of Law Enforcement, the Police showed up at my door. I was not connected to resources following my release from John George and was released without shoes or a cell phone I had just purchased so I had no way to call my doctor to give permission to release my medical history to a mental
healthcare provider. I didn’t have a good experience with the FSP either and my trust is shaken.

Input that was submitted by the Friends of Adeline (some of which are also represented above and were stated by individuals from this community group who attended an MHSA Community Input meeting) were as follows:
• Develop more community owned or non-profit owned housing for those highly affected by mental illness so housing can’t be sold or go out of business. • A fully functioning Drop-In Center is needed for our un-housed neighbors. • Quality supportive services are necessary in housing for those living with mental illness (residents at two Berkeley housing developments complain about poor maintenance and support services in their buildings).
• Increase high quality outreach and treatment services for those suffering from substance abuse and mental illness.
• Create a public education campaign about the services available in Berkeley so people know where to find them.
• Make the Specialized Care Unit, SCU (Crisis Services) well-functioning and well publicized.

Additional input on programming unspent funds that was submitted by some of the Friends of Adeline gro
up is outlined in Appendix E Public Comments section of this Annual Update.

As a result of public comments received during this process, the Division will not be eliminating the funding for the Mental Health Promotion Campaign, and will be utilizing the campaign to educate the community on available services. All input will be utilized to inform future MHSA Plans and Annual Updates.

During the Mental Health Commission Meeting, the following motion on the Annual Update was

made:

M/S/C (Prichett, Opton)
The Mental Health Commission approves the overall MHSA Annual budget with modifications. The Mental Health Commission recommends that the $600,000 for the Encampment based Mobile Wellness Center be reconsidered and these funds reallocated to support the needs of the unhoused people. This funding shall be contingent upon a public hearing that includes community input with service users and providers and that a plan be 14

developed for its effective use. The Mental Health Commission also recommends that the Mobile Crisis Team be funded through BDP (Berkeley Police Department) and overseen by the Mental Health Department.

Ayes: Jones, Lunaparra, Prichett, Opton, Turner Noes: None; Abstentions: None; Absent:

Krishnan
The Health, Housing and Community Services Department agrees w ith the recommendation for
City Council to approve the MHSA FY25 Annual Update, but does not agree to the modifications to the Annual Update due to the following reasons:
• The Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Project and the contract to execute these services has been approved by City Council on numerous occasions through the MHSA Innovations Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Project Plan, MHSA FY23 Annual Update, MHSA FY24-26 Three Year Plan, and Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Contract with Options Recovery Services;
• This project will be one of the primary strategies the City utilizes to support individuals experiencing homelessness;
• The process to develop and approve the Encampment-based Mobile Wellness Center Project included robust feedback, participation, and guidance by members of the public, including by residents who would be receiving its services. Delaying or preventing implementation will further prevent services to this vulnerable population; • Removing funds from this project would subject some of the associated funding to reversion by the State, meaning that we must use or lose a portion of these funds now on an approved MHSA project. The remainder of the funds will also be subject to reversion if not spent on an approved project.

MHSA Fiscal Year 2024/2025 A
nnual Update
This City of Berkeley MHSA Fiscal Year 20
24/2025 (FY25) Annual Update is a stakeholder
informed plan that provides an update to the previously approved MHSA FY2023/2024 – 2025/2026 Three Year Program and Expenditure Plan. This Annual Update summarizes proposed program changes, includes descriptions and updates of currently funded MHSA services that will be continued in FY25 through the previously approved Three Year Plan, and provides a reporting on FY23 program data. Additionally, per state regulations, this Annual Update includes the Prevention and Early Intervention (PEI) Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (FY23) Annual Evaluation Report (Appendix C), and the Innovations (INN) Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (FY23) Annual Evaluation Report (Appendix D).

As reported in previous MHSA Plans and Annual Updates, the Division has engaged in several ini
tiatives over the past several years to increase data collection and evaluation efforts including the following:
• Impact Berkeley: In 2018, the Healt
h Housing and Com munity Services (HHCS) Department
implemented “Impact Berkeley”. Central to this initiative is using a highly regarded framework 15

called Results Based Accountability (RBA) to account for the work of the Department. RBA provides a new way of understanding the quality and impact of services provided by collecting data that answer three basic questions:

1. How much did you do?

2. How well did you do it?

3. Is anyone better off?
RBA has been incorporated into selected programs within the Department. This has included community agency programs funded through the MHSA Prevention & Early Intervention (PEI) Community Education & Supports program. Through this initiative the Department worked with each contractor to envision, clarify and develop measures on the outcomes and results each program is seeking to achieve, and used a rigorous framework to measure and enhance progress towards these results. The results of this initiative are outlined i n the PEI Community Education & Supports program section of this Annual Update. • Results Based Accountability Evaluation for all BMH Programs: Through a previously approved MHSA Annual Update the Division hired Resource Development Associates (RDA) to conduct a Results Based Accountability (RBA) Evaluation for all programs across the Division. Since FY21 RDA has been working with the Division to implement the RBA research methodology. An update of the activity’s RDA conducted in FY23 on this evaluation is included in this Annual Update.

RBA outcomes in FY23 are outlined throughout this Annual Update for the following MHSA funded internal programs: Children/Youth FSP; TAY, Adult and Older Adult FSP; Homeless FSP; Wellness Recovery Services; Crisis Services; Transitional Outreach Team; Social Inclusion Project; and the High School Prevention Project. The complete set of RBA outcomes for all BMH programs is located in Appendix C. • Program Evaluator: Per the approved FY23 Annual Update, in order to build internal capacity for data collection and reporting, the Division hired a Program Evaluator who will be collecting and reporting on RBA Outcomes and future evaluations.

Future MHSA Plans and Annual Updates will continue to include reporting on the progress of these ini
tiatives.

Per State requi
rements, Evaluation Reports for PEI and INN programs are also in cluded in the Appendix of this Annual Update as follows:
• PEI Data Outcomes: Per MHSA PEI regulations, all PEI funded programs are required to collect state identified outcome measures (specific to the category of services provided) as well as detailed demographic information. PEI Evaluations are required to be included in each MHSA Annual Update or Three-Year Plan. See Appendix C for the Prevention & Early Intervention Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (FY23) Annual Evaluation Report. • INN Data Outcomes: Per MHSA INN regulations, all INN funded programs are required to collect state identified outcome measures and detailed demographic information. INN 16

Evaluations are required to be included in each MHSA Annual Update or Three-Year Plan.

See Appendix D for the Innovation (INN) Fiscal Year 2022/2023 (FY23) Annual Evaluation Report.

PROPOSED PROGRAM CHANGES

The Division is proposing the following changes through this Annual Update:
• Move Assistant Management Analyst position to Children’s Full Services Partnership (FSP):

Through the previously approved FY23 Annual Update, the Division received approval to hire an Assistant Management Analyst for the Adult Clinic Programs. In an effort to support the need for administrative support, the Division is proposing to move this position to the Children’s FSP.

• Eliminate MHSA funding for the Early Child Health and Wellness Program:

The Early Childhood Health and Wellness program (formerly named the Be A Star Project) has been a collaboration with the City of Berkeley’s Public Health Department since the initial MHSA PEI Plan. It provides a coordinated system in Berkeley that identifies children birth to age five and their parents, who are at risk of childhood development challenges including developmental, social, emotional, and/or behavioral concerns and provides linkages to services and supports for individuals in need. Services include triage, assessment, treatment and referrals to appropriate community-based or specialist services as needed.

Beginning in FY25, the MHSA PEI funding for this program will be discontinued, as the Public Health Division will be transitioning these program activities to be funded and housed programmatically under their Maternal, Child and Adolescent (MCAH) Program:
 The MCAH Program is a California Department of Public Health (CDPH) funded program committed to serving women, children, teens and their families by improving access to comprehensive, quality health care, and focusing on prevention and early intervention strategies.
 Within MCAH, there are program requirements which align with the focus of early identification, assessment, treatment, and referral for children (ages 0-5) and their families that provides rationale for the shift to MCAH.
 As part of the MCAH scope of work, the focus on supporting early childhood development screenings will be able to be integrated with other programs that reside within the MCAH scope, such as the Berkeley Black Infant Health Program and Fatherhood Initiative.

Going forward, the Early Childhood Health and Wellness Program (ECHW) move under the MCAH Program will address the MCA
H Child priority need to optimize the healthy
development of all children so they can flourish and reach their full potential with a child focus area to expand and support developmental screening.

17

• Eliminate funding for the Prevention/Early Intervention (PEI) Statewide Projects Initiative:

In 2009, California’s counties formed the California Mental Health Services Authority (CalMHSA) as a Joint Powers Authority. Contributing jurisdictions are members of a CalMHSA board that provides direction into various types of initiatives that are implemented.

One of the initiatives that was implemented is the PEI Statewide Projects. With an approved combined funding level of $40 million per year for four years during the timeframe of 2011 through 2015, CalMHSA implemented statewide initiatives in the following areas: Suicide Prevention, Stigma and Discrimination Reduction, and Student Mental Health.

Following 2015, funding for PEI Statewide projects was generated through pooled contributions from individual mental health jurisdictions. In order to continue to sustain programming, CalMHSA previously requested jurisdictions to allocate 4% of their annual local PEI allocation each year to these statewide initiatives.

The Division has provided the requested 4% of PEI funds on an annual basis since 2015, to participate in this initiative. At present, the City has approximately $153,901 of unspent funds that were previously allocated to CalMHSA for this initiative. As a result, through this Annual Update, the Division is proposing to eliminate the allocation of local annual PEI funding for this initiative. Additionally, the Division will either utilize the previously allocated funds that are remaining at CalMHSA, to continue this initiative for a short-time, or to have the funds returned to the City for local use.

PROGRAM DESCRIPTIONS AND FY23 DATA

BY FUNDING COMPONENT
Outl
ined in this section per each funding component are descriptions of current City of Berkeley MHSA ser
vices that were continued through the previously approved Three Year Plan and FY23 program data. In FY23, across all MHSA funded programs, approximately 4,717 individuals participated in some level of services and supports. Some of the FY23 MHSA funded program highlights included: A reduction in psychiatric inpatient hospital and/or incarceration days for severely mentally ill clients; a decrease in the number of days severely mentally ill clients spent homeless; step down to a lower level of care for some clients; services and supports for family members; increased services for individuals who are experiencing homelessness; Wellness Center services; community-based support group services; consumer driven wellness recovery activities; housing and benefits advocacy services; augmented prevention and early intervention services for children and youth in the schools and community; outreach, supportive services for TAY, Adults and Older Adults in unserved, underserved and
inappropriately served cultural and ethnic populations; and free access to the HeadSpace Mental Health App for anyone who lives, works or goes to school in Berkeley.

COMMUNITY SERVICES & SUPPORTS (CSS)
The Community Services & Supports (CSS) funding component primarily provides treatment services and supports for Severely Mentally Ill Adults and Seriously Emotionally Disturbed 18

Children and Youth. Funding is provided in three areas of programming: Full Services Partnerships; Multicultural Outreach & Engagement; and System Development.

Following a year-long community planning and plan development process, the initial City of Berkeley Community Services & Supports (CSS) Plan was approved in September 2006. Since the approval of the original plan, Three Year Plans or Annual Updates outlining proposed CSS funding and programming have been developed and approved on an annual basis. From the original CSS Plan and/or through subsequent plan updates, some of the many services the City of Berkeley has provided through CSS funding are as follows:
• Wrap-around Services for Children and their families; • TAY, Adult and Older Adult Intensive Treatment Services; • Supportive Services for Individuals experiencing homelessness; • Diversity & Multi-cultural Services;
• TAY Case Management and Support Services;
• Consumer Advocacy;
• Wellness and Recovery Services;
• Family Advocacy;
• Transitional Outreach Team;
• Support Groups for individuals;
• A Wellness Recovery Center; and
• Benefits Advocacy.

Descriptions of each CSS funded program that were continued through the previously approved Three-Year Plan, and FY23 data are outlined below:

FULL SERVICE PARTNERSHIPS (FSP)

Children/Youth Intensive Support Services Full Service Partnership The Intensive Support Services Full Service Partnership (FSP) is for children ages 0-21 and their families. This program is for children, youth and their families who would benefit from, and are interested in participating in a program designed to address the total needs of a family whose child (and possibly other family members) is experiencing significant emotional, psychological or behavioral problems that are interfering with their wellbeing.

Priority populations include children and youth who:
• have substantial impairment in self-care, school functioning, family relationships, the ability to function in the community, and are at risk of or have already been removed from the home and have a mental health disorder and/or impairments that have presented for more than six months or are likely to continue for more than one year without treatment; 19

OR
• display psychotic features, or a history of hospitalization due to Danger to Self, Danger to Others, Grave Disability or a recent suicide attempt within the last six months from the date of referral.

The Children/Youth FSP program utilizes wraparound as the treatment model. Wraparound differs from many service delivery strategies, in that it provides a comprehensive, holistic, youth and family-driven way of responding when children or youth experience serious mental health or behavioral health challenges. The model puts the child or youth and family at the center. With the help of the FSP team, the family and young person take the lead in deciding their vision and goals. Team member’s work together to put the goals into an action plan, monitor how well it is working, and make changes to it as needed. The projected number of individuals to be served in FY25 by each age category is as follows: 6-12 years = 9 individuals; 13-17 years = 9 individuals; 18-21 years = 2 individuals.

In FY23, a total of 13 children/youth and their families were served through this program.

Demographics on those served were as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 13
Age Category
Age Category % of total
6-12 years *
13-17 years *
18-21 years *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male *
Female *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Black or African American *
Multi-racial *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Heterosexual *
Gay or Lesbian *
Queer *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

Flex funds are used to provide various supports for FSP program participants and/or the families of program participants. In FY23, flex funds were utilized as follows: 1 individuals/families received funding for housing assistance; 6 individuals/families received funding for food/groceries; 6 individuals/families received funds for clothing/hygiene; 2 20

individuals/families received funding for Bus Passes or transportation; and 7 individuals/family members received funding for other various needs including school supplies, birthday and Holiday gifts, and pro-social activities.

Program Successes:
• Successfully worked with all CFSP clients in-person, as the pandemic continued to subside. • Increased access to psychiatric medication services within the clinic and t he provision of individual/family therapy.
• Transitioned one CFS
P client who was over 18 to community-based services to support their housing and behavioral health needs.
• Continued to reduce psychiatric hospitalizations and the usage of crisis services. • Services continued to be provided by clinicians who mirror the racial/ethnic identity of the populations served and was able to provide care to families who are monolingual Spanish. • Continued to provide flex funding to support the felt needs of clients; this was extremely important as there was an increase in needs due to parent’s loss of employment, the increased cost of goods and services, and parents continued to struggle with employment.

These purchases supported the purchase of birthday/holiday gifts, food, household items, fun activities for clients and their siblings, and clothing. The team was able to pay for a family to stay in a hotel in order to reduce the likelihood they would become unhoused. • Successfully on-boarded a temporary staff member to fulfill the Social Services Specialist role until the position could be filled.
• Successfully supported three families to use the After-Hours service to reduce the need for emergency/crisis services.

Program Challenges:
• There we a reduction in referrals that were accepted due to staff transitions resulting in clients having to be placed on wait lists or referred to other FSP programs.

In FY23, the RBA Measures that were established for this FSP were as follows:

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
• # of clients served
• # of new clients opened
f
or ongoing services
• Average # of days in
FSP for client
• Average # of services
hours per client per
month
• Average # of services
per client per month
• % of clients who have at
least completed one
CANS/ANSA for each six-
month period that they are
in the program
• % of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient visits
per month
• % of discharges from
hospitalization or subacute
who had a follow-up visit
with CFSP staff within 7
• % of clients with a primary
care visit in the last 12 months
• % of clients who had a
reduction in psychiatric care
emergency services/inpatient/
crisis stabilization units in the
las
t 12 months compared to
the 12 months before
enrollment**
21

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
business days
• % of clients with no service
gap of over 30 days
• #/% of clients closed, by
reason closed
• % of clients or family
members who participate in
the survey**
• % of clients with a decrease in
hospitalizations/hospitalization
days
*Demographic data was reported at the program level, where available **Data not available for baseline reporting period, will be included in future rounds of reporting Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total clients served Yellowfin
# of new clients Clients who were not served by the
program in the previous fiscal year
Yellowfin
Average # of days in FSP
per client
Average length of stay for primary
program episodes which have closed
since the beginning of the reporting
period
Yellowfin
Average # of service hours
per client per month
Average of hours of service in a month
divided by clients served in a month.

Includes all services recorded for clients.

Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
Average # of service hours
per client per month
Average of hours of service in a month
divided by clients served in a month.

Includes all services recorded for clients.

Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
Average # of services per
client per month
Average services in a month divided by
clients served in a month. Includes all
services recorded for clients. Note: more
than one service can be provided during
a single contact. Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
% of clients who have at
least one completed
CANS/ANSA for each six
month period that they are
in the program
Of clients with a completed CANS/ANSA,
what percentage of them had an
assessment at least every six months? Objective Arts
% of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient
visits per month
Clients must be been open to a provider
for at least 30 days in order to be
included in this metric. Phone contacts
are included during the pandemic. Days in
subacute or jail not counted, but services
are counted.

Yellowfin
% of clients with no
service gap of over 30
days
Maximum days each Level 1 client went
without service during their episode(s) in
the reporting period. Only considered
clients open to a provider for at least a
total of three months during the reporting
Yellowfin
22

Measure Definition Data Source
fiscal year.
% of discharges from
hospitalization or
subacute who had a
follow up visit with FSP
staff within 7 business
days
Follow-up rates for individuals open to
Level 1 providers at the time of MH
hospital discharge.

Yellowfin
#/% of clients closed, by
reason closed
Discharge reason for clients discharged
during the reporting period
Yellowfin

Data Development Agenda – meas ures the team is interested in reporting on but for which reliable data was not available:
• Spending: # of Flex Funds spent on a family per year , based on tenure in program; • Service provision: % of clients who received unscheduled service contacts due to low engagement or necessity/acuity of family needs;
• Staff training:
-% of staff trained in WRAP;
-% of staff who are skilled to implement trauma-informed interventions; • Staff satisfaction: % of staff who report that they have the tools/resources necessary to do their jobs;
• Client satisfaction, specifically in regards to measuring racially responsive care; • #/% of clients/families who report high quality, racially responsive care on the annual Consumer Perception Survey;
• Client/family outcomes:
-# of clients/families who can navigate systems better to address their needs; -# of clients with improved school attendance and increased engagement in class/school; -% of clients with improved family relations (communication and stability, problem solving, support);
• Client-to-staff ratio;
• % staff retention year-to-year;
• % of clients who schedule a meeting with FSP team within 14 calendar days of referral; • % of clients who are referred to other primary services (therapy, TBS, etc.,) within 5 calendar days of agreement in a family team or a provider meeting; • % of new clients who receive a face-to- face visit within 7 calendar days of the episode opening date;
• % of clients/families discharged from services within 9-12 months because of improved life circumstances.
23

For context around the RBA Outcomes, throughout FY23 the Children/Youth Full Service Partnership (CFSP) team operated below full staffing levels. This shortfall impacted the program's capacity, limiting the number of clients the program could accommodate and reducing the extent of services that could be delivered each month.

RBA Outcomes in FY23 for this FSP are outlined on the following pages. 24

13 Clients Served
9 New Clients
Process Outcomes ("How much did we do?")
Child Full Service Partnership (CFSP)
BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period July 2022 - June 2023
Program Description: This team provides wrap around services to children and families with acute needs, who meet the following criteria: child is at risk of/has been removed from their parent/guardian; child is involved with the Juvenile Justice System or at risk of that; has been recently had a psychiatric hospitalization or is at risk of a hospitalization.

Program Updates: For all time periods in this report, the CFSP team was not fully staffed. This affected both the total number of clients that the program was able to serve, as well as the monthly services provided. *
*
*
6-12 13-17 18-25
Demographics (Age)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
*
*
* * *
Black or African
American
Hispanic or Latino White Asian or Pacific
Islander
Alaska Native or
American Indian
Demographics (Ethnicity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 25

* *
*
Female Male Missing or unknown
Demographics (Gender Identity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
*
*
*
Heterosexual LGBTQ+ Missing
Demographics (Sexual Orientation)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
*LGBTQ+ includes gay, questioning, and other.

NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 26

10 7
Average # of service hours per client per month Average # of services per client per month Average Monthly Services per Client
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
460
Average # of days in FSP per client
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 27

Quality Outcomes ("How well did we do it?")
*
% of clients who have at least one completed
CANS/ANSA for each six-month period that they are
in the program
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n< 11)
69%
% of clients and/or their caregivers who receive an
average of four or more face-to-face outpatient
visits per month
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
*
% of discharges from hospitalization or subacute who had a follow up visit with CFSP staff within 7 business days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n< 11)
*
% of clients with no service gap of over 30 days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n< 11)
Service Consistency
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 28

Impact Outcomes ("Is anyone better off?")
*
% of clients who had a reduction in stays/days in psychiatric emergency services/inpatient/crisis stabilization units Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n< 11)
Client Outcome Improvements
89%
% of clients with connection to primary care
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n< 11)
*
*
*
*
*
*
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n< 11)
Mutual Agreement/ Treament Goals Partially
Reached
Client Withdrew: AWOL, AMA, No Improvement
Client Dissatisfied
Administrative Reasons
Client Withdrew: AWOL, AMA, Partial
Improvement
Other
* *
Hospitalizations Hospitalization days
% of clients with a decrease in hospitalizations/hospital days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n< 11)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 29

Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total clients served Yellowfin
# of new clients Clients who were not served by the program in the previous fiscal year Yellowfin
Average # of service hours per client
per month
Average of hours of service in a month divided by
clients served in a month. Includes all services recorded for clients. Does not include medcation services (MAA).

Yellowfin
Average # of services per client per
month
Average services in a month divided by clients served
in a month. Includes all services recorded for clients.

Note: more than one service can be provided during a
single contact. Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
% of clients with no service gap of over
30 days
Maximum days each Level 1 client went without service
during their episode(s) in the reporting period. Only
considered clients open to a provider for at least a
total of three months during the reporting fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of clients who have at least one
completed CANS/ANSA for each six-
month period that they are in the
program
Of clients with a completed Child or Adult Needs and
Strengths Assessment (CANS/ANSA), what percentage
of them had an assessment at least every six months?
Objective Arts
% of clients and/or their caregivers who
receive an average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient visits per
month
Clients must be been open to a provider for at least 30 days in order to be included in this metric. Phone
contacts are included during the pandemic. Days in
subacute or jail not counted, but services are counted.

Yellowfin
Yellowfin
Follow-up rates for individuals open to Level 1 providers at the time of mental health hospital discharge.
*note: clients used to calculate follow up rates include those who didn’t receive outreach and those who
were lost to follow up (e.g. not contactable, not
responsive)
% of discharges from hospitalization or
subacute who had a follow up visit with
FSP staff within 7 business days
% of clients with a primary care visit
Of clients who completed 6 consecutive months during
the fiscal year, percentage who had an appointment
with a Anthem/Alliance/Community Health Center
Network (CHCN) primary care provider during the fiscal
year. Metric excludes individuals with six or more
months out of the community (in Subacute, MH
hospital, and/or jail).

Yellowfin
#/% of clients closed, by reason closed Discharge reason for clients discharged during the reporting period Yellowfin
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 30

% of clients with a decrease in
hospitalization days/admissions
Decrease in hospital days/admissions in the years that a client was active in the program compared to the year
prior to program admission. Includes clients who had at least one hospital day in the 12 months prior to
admission and remained in the program for at least 1
year. Only available for fiscal years.

Yellowfin
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 31

Adult Full Service Partnership
The Adult Full Service Partnership offers dedicated support services to individuals aged 18 and older (Transitional Age Youth, Adults, and Older Adults) facing severe mental illness. Grounded in the Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) approach, the program is designed to assist individuals encountering challenges in obtaining or sustaining housing, enduring frequent and/or prolonged psychiatric hospitalizations, and experiencing repeated or extended periods of incarceration. Priority populations include those from unserved, underserved, and culturally and ethnically marginalized communities.

The ACT approach maintains a low staff-to-client ratio of 10:1, enabling frequent and intensive support services to clients. Clients receive assistance in securing suitable housing, with the potential for temporary financial aid. The primary objectives of the program are to actively involve clients in their treatment and to reduce the instances of homelessness, hospitalization, and incarceration. In tandem, it seeks to improve employment and educational preparedness, encourage self-sufficiency, and support overall wellness and recovery. Through a targeted commitment to these goals, the Adult Full Services Partnership endeavors to significantly improve the lives of its participants.

In FY23 a total of 63 T
AY, Adults, and Older Adults participated in the program for all or part of the fiscal year. Demographics on those served include the following:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 63
Age Category
Age Category % of total
Transition Age Youth *
Adult 71%
Older Adult 21%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male 57%
Female 41%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Asian or Pacific Islander *
Black or African American 54%
White 41%
Latino/a/x *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Heterosexual 81%
Bisexual *
Queer *
Questionning *
32

Multiple Sexual Orientations *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

Flex funds are used to provide supports for FSP program participants. In FY23, 41 partners received rental and housing assistance; 20 received food and groceries; 6 received In-Home Assistance (cleaning, activities of daily living); and 32 partners were provided with miscellaneous assistance with bills, clothing, clothing, transit, medical supplies, storage, etc.

Program Successes:

In FY23, the Adult Full Service Partnership (FSP) program engaged 63 individuals actively, with 54 successfully completing at least one full year of service. The outcomes discussed below are derived from the state's Full Service Partnership Data Collection & Reporting (DCR) system, offering a comprehensive insight into the achievements of these 54 participants.

Program Enrollment and Disenrollment: Throughout the fiscal year, the program welcomed 12 new partners, with 9 of these participants completing a full year of service. In contrast, 11 partners were disenrolled from the program during FY 23. Disenrollment reasons include partners meeting treatment goals and transitioning to lower levels of care (27%), partners transferring to specialized Full Service Partnership teams for chronically homeless individuals (18%), partners sadly passing away (18%), partners becoming unlocatable (9%), partners being institutionalized in psychiatric settings (9%), and partners no longer meeting program criteria (9%).

Comparative Analysis - 54 Individuals Completing 1 Full Year of Service: For the 54 individuals completing a full year of service, a thorough comparison between the 12 months before program enrollment and the first 12 months in treatment revealed significant positive outcomes:
• A notable 39% reduction in days spent homeless, with partners experiencing 5,458 days of homelessness in the year prior to program enrollment and 3,318 days during the first year of program participation.
• A substantial 68% reduction in days spent in various hospital settings, including Psychiatric Emergency, acute psychiatric inpatient, IMDs, MHRCs, state psychiatric hospitals, medical hospitals, and SNFs. Partners spent 2,632 days in hospital settings the year before program enrollment and 833 days during the first year of program participation. • A significant 53% reduction in days spent incarcerated during the first year of program participation. Partners spent 1,236 days incarcerated (jail and prison) in the year prior to program enrollment, compared to 578 days during the first year of program participation.

These outcomes underscore the program's positive impact in addressing homelessness, hospitalization, and incarceration among its participants, reflecting the effectiveness of the Adult FSP program during FY23, as tracked and reported through the DCR system.

33

Comparative Analysis - Alameda County Database Source (YellowFin) - FY23 vs. Most Recent 12 Months: In contrast to the state DCR, the Alameda County database, facilitated through the YellowFin system, draws information from a diverse set of over thirty external reporting sources.

This data allows for a focused comparison of FY23 data to the most recent prior 12 months. The findings highlight significant positive outcomes for participants in the current fiscal year:
• Reduction in Psychiatric Emergency Services/Inpatient/Crisis Stabilization:

A noteworthy 77% of participants experienced a decrease in psychiatric emergency services, inpatient care, and crisis stabilization compared to the preceding 12 months (n=13).
• Reduced Jail Days:

A substantial 69% of clients witnessed a reduction in jail days when comparing the current fiscal year to the most recent 12 months (n=16).

This shift in data source offers a nuanced perspective, providing additional insights into the program's impact on participant outcomes, and aligns with the evaluation data from the state database (DCR).

Program Challenges:
• Bay Area Housing Crisis – In FY23 the Bay Area continued to be entrenched in a formidable housing crisis, characterized by the daunting challenge of securing safe and affordable housing. Housing prices, among the highest in the country, contribute to the extreme difficulty faced by individuals in finding suitable accommodations. Adding to this, Licensed Board & Cares, offering 24/7 support and medication monitoring, increasingly demanded additional funding from the city or county to sustain operations. The rent for these facilities surpasses the social security disability income received by our participants. Moreover, 5,458
2,632
1,236
3,318
833 578
0 1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
39% decrease # days
homeless
68% decrease # days
hospital settings
53% decrease # days
incarcerated
FSP Outcomes During 1st Year of Service
34

Single Room Occupancy Hotels have raised their monthly rates to the extent that clients find it unaffordable without housing subsidies.
• Coordinated Entry System - The Coordinated Entry System in Alameda County, aimed at addressing homelessness more efficiently and equitably, introduces its own set of challenges. While standardizing the assessment process and prioritizing resources for individuals with the highest need, guiding these individuals through the assessment process proves challenging. Some individuals we serve are hesitant to acknowledge their mental health and substance use issues, resulting in lower "needs" assessment scores and diminished chances of obtaining permanent supported housing resources. • Staffing Challenges - Retaining and hiring staff has been exceptionally challenging in FY23.

The departure of several team members has left numerous vacancies, exacerbated by a substantial decline in applicants over the past several years. The scarcity of mental health workers in the public sector, coupled with the ongoing challenges posed by the Covid-19 pandemic, likely contributes to this hiring crisis. The nature of Full Service Partnership work, involving engagement with individuals deemed the highest need within our service system, presents inherent challenges. Burnout, cited by departing staff, underscores the demanding nature of the work. Despite these challenges, we remain optimistic about filling the current vacancies in the coming fiscal year.

The Division is committed to enhancing the Adult FSP Teams staff expertise in treating co- occurring substance abuse disorders through ongoing training in Motivational Interviewing.

Concurrently, efforts will persist in refining adherence to the ACT model, reflecting the Divisions dedication to delivering effective and compassionate care to the community.

The projected number of individuals to be served in each age category in FY25 is as follows:
18-24 years – 3 individuals; 25-44 years - 23 individuals; 45-64 years - 14 individuals; 65 years and older - 11 individuals.

In FY23, the RBA measures that were established for this FSP were as follows:

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
• # clients served
• # of new clients opened
for ongoing services
• Average # of days in
FSP per client
• Average # of service
hours per client per
month
• Average # of services
per client per month
• % of clients who have at
least completed one
CANS/ANSA for each six-
month period that they are
in the program
• % of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient visits
per month
• % of c lients with no ser
vice
gap of over 30 days
• % of discharges from
hospitalization or subacute
• % of clients who had a
reduction in jail days in the
last 12 months compared
to the 12 months before
enrollment
• % of clients who had a
r
eduction in psychiatric
emergency
services/inpatient/crisis
stabilization units in the last
12 mont
hs compared to the
12 months before enrollment
35

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
who had a follow up visit
with FSP staff within 7 and
within 30 calendar days
• #/% of clients closed, by
reason closed
• #/% of clients transferred to
another level of care
• % of clients who were satisfied
with services**
• % of clients with a
decrease in
hospitalizations and
hospitalization days
• % of clients with a primary
care visit in the last 12
months
• % of c lients who moved out of
hom
elessness**
*Demographic data was reported at the program level, where available **Data not available for baseline reporting period, will be included in future rounds of reporting Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total clients served Yellowfin
# of new clients Clients who were not served by the
program in the previous fiscal year
Yellowfin
Average # of days in FSP
per client
Average length of stay for primary
program episodes which have closed
since the beginning of the reporting
period
Yellowfin
Average # of service hours
per client per month
Average of hours of service in a month
divided by clients served in a month.

Includes all services recorded for clients.

Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
Average # of services per
client per month
Average services in a month divided by
clients served in a month. Includes all
services recorded for clients. Note:
more than one service can be provided
during a single contact. Does not
include MAA
Yellowfin
% of clients who hav e at
least one completed
CANS/ANSA for each six
month period that they are
in the program
Of clients with a completed CANS/ANSA,
what percentage of them had an
assessment at least every six months? Objective Arts
% of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient
visits per month
Clients must be been open to a provider
for at least 30 days in order to be
included in this metric. Phone contacts
are included during the pandemic. Days
in subacute or jail not counted, but
services are counted.

Yellowfin
% of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient
visits per month
Clients must be been open to a provider
for at least 30 days in order to be
included in this metric. Phone contacts
are included during the pandemic. Days
in subacute or jail not counted, but
services are counted.

Yellowfin
36

Measure Definition Data Source
% of clients with no service
gap of over 30 days

Maximum days each Level 1 client went
without service during their episode(s) in
the reporting period. Only considered
clients open to a provider for at least a
total of three months during the reporting
fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of discharges from
hospitalization or subacute
who had a follow up visit
with FSP staff within 7 and
within 30 calendar days
Follow-up rates for individuals open to
Level 1 providers at the time of MH
hospital discharge.

Yellowfin

Data Development Agenda – measures the team is interested in reporting on but for which reliable data was not available:
• % of clients who have a billa ble contact with FSP staff within 7 calendar days:
-Following discharge (from a hospital, crisis residential or release from jail); -After assignment to the team;
• Client-to-staff ratio;
• % staff retention year-to-year;
• Average # of contacts per month per client.

To provide context around the FY23 RBA Outcomes for this FSP, during FY22 and FY23 the Adult Full Service Partnership experienced a notable rate of staff changes. Additionally, there was a general decrease in productivity, which can be attributed to the ongoing impacts of the pandemic. Efforts are currently underway to enhance staff retention strategies.

RBA Outcomes in FY23 for this FSP are outlined on the following pages.

37

63 Clients Served
11 New Clients
BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period July 2022 - June 2023
Adult Full Service Partnership (AFSP)
Process Outcomes ("How much did we do?")
Program Description: The Full-Service Partnership (FSP) team provides services to clients who are considered the highest need within our adult mental health service system. The FSP team is based on an Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) Model which involves low staff-to-client ratios at approximately 10:1 and a focus on providing care as a team rather than individual case load assignments. Services are primarily provided in the community rather than in an office setting.

Program Updates: In Fiscal Year 2021-2022, the Adult Full Service Partnership was not fully staffed, this has been remedied in FY 2022-23. *
71%
21%
*
Transition Age Youth Adult Older Adult Declined to Anwer (or Unknown)
Demographics (Age)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=63)
54%
41%
* *
Black or African American White Asian or Pacific Islander Latino/a/x Demographics (Ethnicity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=63)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 38

57%
41%
*
Male Female Declined to Anwer (or Unknown)
Demographics (Gender Identity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=63)
81%
*
*
*
*
*
He
terosexual
Multiple sexual orientations
Bisexual
Queer
Questioning
Declined to Anwer (or Unknown)
Demographic (Sexual Orientation)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=63)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 39

6.7 5.1
Average # of service hours per client per month Average # of services per client per month Average Monthly Services per Client
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=63)
991
Average Number of Days in FSP
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=63)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 40

Quality Outcomes ("How well did we do it?")
*
*
Same level (FSP) Lower level (service team)
Clients Transferred to Another Program, by Level of Care Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=12)
*
*
*
*
*
*
Clients Closed, by Reason Closed
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=12)
Client Dissatisfied
Discharge/Administrative
Reasons
Client Incarcerated
Client Withdrew: AWOL, AMA,
Treatment Partially Completed
Client Withdrew: AWOL, AMA, No
Improvement
Discharge/Program Unilateral
Decision
Client Died
Other
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 41

87%
100%
7 days follow up 30 days follow up
Hospital Follow Up Consistency
% of discharges from hospitalization or subacute who received FSP follow up within 7 and 30 days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=15)
60%
% of clients and/or their caregivers who receive
an average of four or more face-to-face
outpatient visits per month
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=63)
39%
% of clients with no service gap of over 30
days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=61)
Service Consistency
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 42

Impact Outcomes ("Is anyone better off?")
*
% of clients who had a reduction in
psychiatric emergency
services/inpatient/crisis stabilization units
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
*
% of clients who had a reduction
in jail days
% of clients who had a reduction
in jail days
76%
% of clients with a primary care visit
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=55)
Client Outcome Improvements
65%
73%
Ho
spitalizations Hospitalization days
% of clients with a decrease in hospitalizations/hospital days Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=26)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 43

# of clients transferred to another level
of care
Of clients discharged in the reporting period, # who
were transferred to a full service partnership program, service team, or outpatient services in Alameda County
within 90 days of discharge.

Yellowfin
Data SourceDefinitionMeasure
# clients served Total clients served Yellowfin
Clients who were not served by the program in the
previous fiscal year Yellowfin# of new clients opened for ongoing services
% of clients and/or their caregivers who
receive an average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient visits per
month
Clients must be been open to a provider for at least 30 days in order to be included in this metric. Phone
contacts are included during the pandemic. Days in
subacute or jail not counted, but services are counted.

Yellowfin
% of clients with no service gap of over
30 days
Maximum days each Level 1 client went without service
during their episode(s) in the reporting period. Only
considered clients open to a provider for at least a total of three months during the reporting fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of discharges from hospitalization or
subacute who had a follow up visit with
FSP staff within 7 and within 30
calendar days
Follow-up rates for individuals open to Level 1 providers at the time of mental health hospital discharge.
*note: clients used to calculate follow up rates include those who didn’t receive outreach and those who were
lost to follow up (e.g. not contactable, not responsive) Yellowfin
#/% of clients closed, by reason closed Discharge reason for clients discharged during the reporting period Yellowfin
% of clients who have at least one
completed CANS/ANSA for each six-
month period that they are in the
program
Of clients with a completed Child or Adult Needs and
Strengths Assessment (CANS/ANSA), what percentage
of them had an assessment at least every six months?
Objective Arts
Average # of service hours per client
per month
Average of hours of service in a month divided by
clients served in a month. Includes all services recorded for clients. Does not include medical services (MAA)
Yellowfin
Average # of services per client per
month
Average services in a month divided by clients served in a month. Includes all services recorded for clients. Note:
more than one service can be provided during a single
contact. Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 44

% of clients with a decrease in
hospitalizations/hospitalization days
Decrease in hospital days/admissions in the years that a client was active in the program compared to the year
prior to program admission. Includes clients who had at least one hospital day in the 12 months prior to
admission and remained in the program for at least 1
year. Only available for fiscal years.

Yellowfin
% of clients with a primary care visit
Of clients who completed 6 consecutive months during
the fiscal year, percentage who had an appointment
with a Anthem/Alliance/Community Health Center
Network (CHCN) primary care provider during the fiscal
year. Metric excludes individuals with six or more months out of the community (in Subacute, MH hospital, and/or
jail).

Yellowfin
Of clients who completed six consecutive months
during the 12-month fiscal year, percentage with a
reduction in psychiatric emergency services, inpatient or crisis stabilization unit other than Amber House, when comparing unduplicated days from the 12 months prior
to the fiscal year to the current 12-month fiscal year.

Excludes clients if out of community (in jail and/or
subacute) for six or more months during the current
fiscal year or the prior fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of clients who had a reduction in jail
days
Of clients who completed six consecutive months
during the 12-month fiscal year, percentage with a
reduction in jail days, when comparing unduplicated
days from the 12 months prior to the fiscal year to the current 12-month fiscal year. Excludes clients if out of community (in hospital and/or subacute) for six or more months during the current fiscal year or the prior fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of clients who had a reduction in
psychiatric emergency
services/inpatient/crisis stabilization
units
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 45

Homeless Full Service Partnership
Through the previously approved MHSA FY20 Annual Update, and as a result of the need to ensure ongoing services and supports for individuals experiencing homelessness following the ending of the Homeless Outreach and Treatment Team (HOTT) Pilot Program, a Homeless Full Services Partnership (HFSP) was developed. The HFSP provides services to individuals primarily in the community, and in any temporary housing placement (e.g. shelter, unhoused encampment) who meet the following criteria:
• Adults (18 years and older);
• Unhoused and those at risk of being unhoused;
• Severe Mental Illness; and
• Significant impairments in functioning (e.g., frequent psychiatric hospital utilization, involvement in the criminal justice system, domestic violence survivors, trauma, severe co- occurring disorders).

The HFSP utilizes a team model for providing intensive treatment, meeting people up to several times per week.

In FY23, 47 individuals were served. Demographics on individuals served are as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 47
Age Category
Age Category % of total
Adult (26-59) 89%
Older Adult (60+) 11%
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male 70%
Female 30%
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Black or African American 62%
Asian Pacific Islander *
Latino/a/x *
White 28%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Heterosexual 64%
Bisexual *
Gay *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

Flex funds are used to provide supports for FSP program participants. During FY23, 2 partners received rental and housing assistance; 16 received food and groceries; 5 partners received 46

bus passes or transportation; 4 partners were provided with assistance with clothing/hygiene; and 8 partners were provided with assistance with cell phones, bills, or obtaining a mail box.

Program Successes:

The most significant success for the team in FY23 was the hiring of the Mental Health Clinical Supervisor to lead the team and two Case Managers. The Team was able to enroll additional participants, continue to serve the unhoused community, and support individuals making the transition into housing.

Program Challenges:

The ongoing challenge for the team has been difficulties in locating and consistently meeting with clients who are unhoused and who’s mental health symptoms make it difficult for them to attend scheduled appointments, keep and maintain cell phones to stay connected to service providers, etc. The team continued to make attempts to outreach and engage clients in the community by going out to look for them at various locations in the community when they missed meetings. Another challenge was the difficulty the team had when attempting to link clients to crisis services, including crisis stabilization units. The HFSP was provided with feedback that the behaviors the individual’s exhibited were too challenging and/or that there were too many risk factors for the client to be at that level of care. The main purpose of the team was to support individuals with their mental health symptoms. However, the Team begun to function as housing navigators by supporting clients in locating housing, even though the team and clinic are not a housing program. If the team and client were able to locate housing, there were also insufficient resources and supports within the housing community to help the client maintain that placement, leading to the increased likelihood of recidivism to homelessness.

The projected number of individuals to be served through this program in FY25 by age category is as follows: 18-24 years - 2 individuals; 25-44 years - 16 individuals; 45-64 years - 23 individuals; 65 years and older - 5 individuals.

In FY23, the RBA Measures that were established for this FSP were as follows:
47

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
• # of clients served
• # of new clients opened
f
or ongoing services
• Average # of days in
FSP for client
• Average # of services
hours per client per
month
• Average # of services
per client per month
• % of clients who have at
least one completed
CANS/ANSA for each six-
month period that they are
in the program
• % of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient visits
per month
• % of discharges from
hos
pitalization who had a
follow up visit with HFSP
staff within 7 and wi
thin 30
calendar days
• % of clients with no service
gap of over 30 days
• #/% of clients closed, by
reason closed
• % of clients who were
satisfied with services**
• # of clients housed**
• # of clients who gained or
maintained housing since
enrollment**
• % of clients who had a
r
eduction in jail days in the last
12 months compared to the 12
months before enrollment
• % of clients with a primary
care visit in the last 12 months
• % of clients who had a
reduction in psychiatric care
emergency services/inpatient/
crisis stabilization units in the
last 12 months compared to
the 12 months before
enrollment
• % of clients with a decrease in
hospitalizations/hospitalization
days
• % of clients with an increase in
the number of days in
community living compared to
12 month period before
enrollment**
*Demographic data was reported at the program level, where available **Data not available for baseline reporting period, will be included in future rounds of reporting Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total clients served Yellowfin
# of new clients Clients who were not served by the
program in the previous fiscal year
Yellowfin
Average # of days in FSP
per client
Average length of stay for primary
program episodes which have closed
since the beginning of the reporting
period
Yellowfin
Average # of service hours
per client per month
Average of hours of service in a month
divided by clients served in a month.

Includes all services recorded for clients.

Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
Average # of services per
client per month
Average services in a month divided by
clients served in a month. Includes all
services recorded for clients. Note: more
than one service can be provided during
a single contact. Does not include MAA
Yellowfin
48

Measure Definition Data Source
% of clients who have at
least one completed
CANS/ANSA for each six-
month period that they are
in the program
Of clients with a completed CANS/ANSA,
what percentage of them had an
assessment at least every six months?

Objective Arts
% of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more
face-to-face outpatient
visits per month
Clients must be been open to a provider
for at least 30 days in order to be
included in this metric. Phone contacts
are included during the pandemic. Days
in subacute or jail not counted, but
services are counted.

Yellowfin
% of clients with no service
gap of over 30 days
Maximum days each Level 1 client went
without service during their episode(s) in
the reporting period. Only considered
clients open to a provider for at least a
total of three months during the reporting
fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of discharges from
hospitalization or subacute
who had a follow up visit
with FSP staff within 7 and
within 30 calendar days
Follow-up rates for individuals open to
Level 1 providers at the time of MH
hospital discharge.

Yellowfin
#/% of clients closed, by
reason closed
Discharge reason for clients discharged
during the reporting period
Yellowfin
% of clients who had a
reduction in days in
psychiatric emergency
services/inpatient/crisis
stabilization units
Of clients who completed six consecutive
months during the 12-month fiscal year,
percentage with a reduction in psychiatric
emergency services, inpatient or crisis
stabilization unit other than Amber
House, when comparing unduplicated
days from the 12 months prior to the
fiscal year to the current 12-month fiscal
year. Excludes clients if out of
community (in jail and/or subacute) for
six or more months during the current
fiscal year or the prior fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of clients with a decrease
in hospitalization
Decrease in hospital admits and
hospitalization days in the years that a
client was active in the program
compared to the year prior to program
admission. Includes clients who had at
least one hospital admit in the 12 months
prior to admission and remained in the
program for at least 1 year

Yellowfin
% of clients who had a
reduction in jail days
Of clients who completed six consecutive
months during the 12-month fiscal year,
percentage with a reduction in jail days,
when comparing unduplicated days from
the 12 months prior to the fiscal year to
the current 12-month fiscal year.

Excludes clients if out of community (in

Yellowfin
49

Measure Definition Data Source
hospital and/or subacute) for six or more
months during the current fiscal year or
the prior fiscal year.
% of clients with a primary
care visit in the last 12
months
Of clients who completed 6 consecutive
months during the fiscal year,
percentage who had an appointment with
a Anthem/Alliance/CHCN primary care
provider during the fiscal year. Metric
excludes individuals with six or more
months out of the community (in
Subacute, MH hospital, and/or jail).

Yellowfin

Data Development Agenda: measures the team is interested in reporting on but for which reliable data was not available:
• Client satisfaction with services;
• Client engagement in interpersonal activities;
• Client income (incl. entitlements);
• Change in violence (e.g. # of violent interactions reported) experienced by the client; • Change in educational or workforce training status of client; • Client-to-staff ratio;
• % staff retention year-to-year;
• % of clients and/or their caregivers who have consented to participate in services and have received one or more face-to-face visits within 7 calendar days of their HFSP referral; • #/% of clients who maintained housing at 6 months from housing placement date.

To provide context for the FY22 RBA outcomes, the HFSP initiated service in FY22 leading to an expansion of their client base. Throughout the latter part of FY23, the team underwent staffing changes but has since achieved full staffing capacity. The workforce was augmented by two new members, enhancing the follow-up capabilities of the program. Staff maintained a high frequency of interaction with clients, ensuring robust support. Although the HFSP lacked a Clinical Supervisor from August 2022 to April 2023, the gap was bridged by interim personnel to assist clients in progressing towards their treatment objectives.

RBA Outcomes in FY23 for this FSP are outlined on the following pages.

50

47 Clients Served
11 New Clients
BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period July 2022 - June 2023
Process Outcomes ("How much did we do?")
Homeless Full Service Partnership (HFSP)
Program Description: HFSP serves unhoused residents of Berkeley in an Assertive Community Treatment (ACT) model at high staff to client ratios, providing intensive case management and mental health services in a multi-disciplinary team approach. This team serves those with the highest level of need, supporting a population that is primarily unhoused and has multiple severe functional impairments.

Program Updates: HFSP began offering services during Fiscal Year 2021- 22, and therefore was growing their caseload. They additionally had some staffing transitions in the second half of FY 2022-23 but are now fully staffed.
89%
11%
Adult Older Adult
Demographics (Age)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=47)
62%
28%
* * *
Black or African
American
White Asian or Pacific
Islander
Latino/a/x Declined to answer
(or Unknown)
Demographics (Ethnicity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=42)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 51

70%
30%
Male Female
Demographics (Gender Identity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=47)
64%
* *
*
Heterosexual Bisexual Gay Decline to answer (or
unknown)
Demographics (Sexual Orientation)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=42)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 52

8 5
Average # of service hours per client per month Average # of services per client per month Average Monthly Services per Client
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=42)
425
Average Number of Days in FSP
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=42)
*
*
Same level (FSP) Lower level (service team)
Clients Transferred to Another Program, by Level of Care Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n>11)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 53

Quality Outcomes ("How well did we do it?")
58%
79%
7 days follow up 30 days follow up
Hospital Follow Up Consistency
% of discharges from hospitalization or subacute who received FSP follow up within 7 and 30 days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=19)
80%
% of clients who have at least
one completed CANS/ANSA
for each six-month period that
they are in the program
Jun'23 - Jul '23 (n=40)
50%
% of clients and/or their
caregivers who receive an
average of four or more face-
to-face outpatient visits per …
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=40)
38%
% of clients with no service gap
of over 30 days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=39)
*
*
**
*
*
Clients Closed, by Reason Closed
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n>11)
Client Died
Client Moved Out of Service Area
Client Dissatisfied
Client Withdrew: AWOL, AMA, No
Improvement
Client Withdrew: AWOL, AMA,
Treatment Partially Completed
Other
Service Consistency
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 54

Impact Outcomes ("Is anyone better off?")
77%
% of clients who had a reduction in
psychiatric emergency
services/inpatient/crisis stabilization
units
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=13)
56%
% of clients who had a
reduction in jail days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=16)
74%
% of clients with a primary care
visit
Jul '22-Jun '23 (n=27)
Client Outcome
75% 75%
Ho
spitalizations Hospitalization days
% of clients with a decrease in
hospitalizations/hospital days
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=12)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 55

% of clients who have at least one
completed CANS/ANSA for each
six-month period that they are in
the program
Of clients with a completed Child or Adult Needs
and Strengths Assessment (CANS/ANSA), what
percentage of them had an assessment at least
every six months?
Objective Arts
% of clients and/or their caregivers
who receive an average of four or
more face-to-face outpatient visits
per month
Clients must be been open to a provider for at
least 30 days in order to be included in this
metric. Phone contacts are included during the
pandemic. Days in subacute or jail not counted,
but services are counted.

Yellowfin
% of clients with no service gap of
over 30 days
Maximum days each Level 1 client went without
service during their episode(s) in the reporting
period. Only considered clients open to a
provider for at least a total of three months during
the reporting fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of discharges from
hospitalization or subacute who
had a follow up visit with FSP staff
within 7 and within 30 calendar
days
Follow-up rates for individuals open to Level 1
providers at the time of mental health hospital
discharge.
*note: clients used to calculate follow up rates
include those who didn’t receive outreach and
those who were lost to follow up (e.g. not
contactable, not responsive)
Yellowfin
#/% of clients closed, by reason
closed
Average # of service hours per
client per month
Average of hours of service in a month divided by
clients served in a month. Includes all services
recorded for clients. Does not include medical
services (MAA)
Yellowfin
Average # of services per client
per month
Average services in a month divided by clients
served in a month. Includes all services recorded
for clients. Note: more than one service can be
provided during a single contact. Does not
include MAA
Yellowfin
# clients served Total clients served Yellowfin
# of new clients opened for
ongoing services
Clients who were not served by the program in
the previous fiscal year Yellowfin
Measure Definition Data Source
Discharge reason for clients discharged during
the reporting period Yellowfin
# of clients transferred to another
level of care
Of clients discharged in the reporting period, #
who were transferred to a full service partnership
program, service team, or outpatient services in
Alameda County within 90 days of discharge.

Yellowfin
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 56

% of clients who had a reduction
in jail days
Of clients who completed six consecutive months
during the 12-month fiscal year, percentage with
a reduction in jail days, when comparing
unduplicated days from the 12 months prior to
the fiscal year to the current 12-month fiscal year.

Excludes clients if out of community (in hospital
and/or subacute) for six or more months during
the current fiscal year or the prior fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of clients who had a reduction
in psychiatric emergency
services/inpatient/crisis
stabilization units
Of clients who completed six consecutive months
during the 12-month fiscal year, percentage with
a reduction in psychiatric emergency services,
inpatient or crisis stabilization unit other than
Amber House, when comparing unduplicated
days from the 12 months prior to the fiscal year to
the current 12-month fiscal year. Excludes clients
if out of community (in jail and/or subacute) for six
or more months during the current fiscal year or
the prior fiscal year.

Yellowfin
% of clients with a decrease in
hospitalizations/hospitalization
days
Decrease in hospital days/admissions in the years
that a client was active in the program
compared to the year prior to program
admission. Includes clients who had at least one
hospital day in the 12 months prior to admission
and remained in the program for at least 1 year.

Only available for fiscal years.

Yellowfin
% of clients with a primary care
visit
Of clients who completed 6 consecutive months
during the fiscal year, percentage who had an
appointment with a
Anthem/Alliance/Community Health Center
Network (CHCN) primary care provider during the
fiscal year. Metric excludes individuals with six or
more months out of the community (in Subacute,
MH hospital, and/or jail).

Yellowfin
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 57

MULTI-CULTURAL OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
Diversity & Multicultural Services
The Diversity & Multicultural Coordinator (DMC) provides leadership in identifying, developing, implementing, monitoring, and evaluating services and strategies that lead to continuous cultural, ethnic, and linguistic improvements within the organization’s system of care, with a special emphasis on unserved, underserved, inappropriately served, and emerging populations.

The DMC also collaborates with the state, regional counties, other city divisions, local agencies, and community groups in order to address mental health inequities and disparities for targeted populations and communities, and the community-at-large in Berkeley.

The Diversity & Multicultural Coordinator accomplishes these goals by:
• Providing cultural humility competency training to all behavioral health, community partners, and all stakeholders in Berkeley and other geographic locations in the region as a collaborative partner;
• Performing outreach and engagement to unserved, underserved, inappropriately served and emerging communities and populations;
• Developing long and short-term goals and objectives to promote cultural/ethnic and linguistic competency within the system of care;
• Developing an annual training plan and budget;
• Chairing the agency’s Diversity and Multicultural Committee; • Attending continuous trainings in the areas of cultural competency; • Monitoring Interpreter and Translation Services for the agency; • Collaborating with State, Regional, County, and local groups and organizations, and • Developing and updating BMH’s Cultural Humility Competency Plan as needed.

In FY23, there was a vacancy in this position.

Transition Age Youth (TAY) Support Services
The Transition Age Youth (TAY) Support Services program provides outreach, services, supports, and/or referrals to TAY with serious mental health issues who are homeless or marginally housed and not currently receiving services. Priority is given to youth coming out of foster care and/or the juvenile justice system and particular outreach strategies are utilized to engage youth from various ethnic communities, including African Americans, Asian and Latino/a/x populations, among others. Program services include: Culturally appropriate outreach and engagement; peer counseling and support; assessment; individual and group therapy; family education; case management, coaching, ancillary program referrals and linkages. Also provided are services in housing attainment and retention, financial management, employment, schooling, and community involvement. Services are designed to be culturally relevant, tailored to each individual’s needs, and delivered in multiple, flexible environments. The main goals of the program are to increase outreach, treatment services, and supports for mentally ill TAY in need, and to promote self-sufficiency, resiliency and wellness. This program serves 15-20 youth at a time. This program has not been implemented over the past couple of years, it will not be implemented in FY25.
58

SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT
System Development includes Wellness Recovery Support Services that are intended to expand collaboration with stakeholders, promote the values of wellness, recovery and resilience, and move the Division towards a more consumer and family member driven system.

Services are comprised of the following main components: Wellness/Recovery System Integration a
nd Family Advocacy Services. Together, both ensures that mental health peers and family members are informed of, and able to be involved in, opportunities to provide input and direction in the service delivery system and/or to participate in recovery-oriented or other supportive services of their choosing. Strategies designed to reach program goals include:
developing policies that facilitate the Division in becoming more Wellness & Recovery oriented

and consumer/family member driven; outreach to, and inclusion of, mental health peers and family members on Division committees; provision of family support & education; supported employment and vocational services; wellness activities; peer supportive services; and client advocacy. Some of the additional services and supports that CSS System Development provides funding for are as follows: Housing Services and Supports; Benefits Advocacy; Employment/Educational Services; Wellness Recovery Center; Counseling Services for Senior Citizens; Youth Case Management Services; Hearing Voices Groups; Transitional Outreach Team; Flex Funds and Sub-Representative Payee Services for clients, etc.

Wellness Recovery Services
The BMH Wellness Recovery Team works with staff, stakeholders, community members and clients to advance the goals of Wellness and Recovery on a system wide level. In order to accomplish these goals, some of the various tasks include: Recruiting peers for Division committees; convening committees around Wellness Recovery system initiatives; oversight/administration of peer stipends; convening and conducting meetings for the Berkeley “Peers Organizing Community Change (POCC)”; working with staff to develop various Wellness and Recovery related policy and procedures; and oversight of the Division’s “Wellness Recovery Activities”. The Consumer Liaison is also a resource person around “Mental Health Advance Directives” for individuals desiring to express their treatment preferences in advance of a crisis, and is a participant on a number of local MHSA initiatives. The combination of individual services and system-level initiatives impact all clients and their family members across the system in a given year. In FY23, there were approximately 397 clients in the BMH system.

Three positions were added in FY23, to the Wellness Recovery Program. The vacant Assistant Mental Health Clinician position was filled and two Social Service Specialist positions, or Wellness Community Specialists, were hired to make the clinic more welcoming and provide peer support to individuals waiting to be seen at the clinic. Adding these positions made more individuals aware of the wellness groups, community resources and support that the clinic has to offer.

Being fully staffed, The Wellness Recovery Team was able to bring some groups back in- pers
on such as the WRA- Wellness Recovery Activities and to start engaging with people in the waiting room, offering resources, peer support, light refreshments and warm connections. All of 59

the group flyers received a facelift and were re-vamped and the Monthly Wellness Recovery Activities Newsletter was brought back for the peer community.

During the reporting timeframe, some of the various activities of the Wellness Recovery Team that were conducted under the direction of the Consumer Liaison included:

Wellness Recovery Groups
Designed to promote self-care and independence, the Wellness Recovery Team builds on the talents of consumers, encouraging self-efficacy, psycho-education and motivation through multiple groups and interactions that can spark interest through wellness activities and social interactions as follows:

Wellness Recovery Activities
The Wellness Recovery Activities (WRA) group highlights consumer facilitation and creativity skills. In FY23, there were 11 group sessions with a total of 9 attendees. The projected numbers to be served in FY25 per each age group is as follows: 18-25 years – 1 individual; 26-59 years – 5 individuals; 60 years or older – 5 individuals.

Walking Groups
The Wellness Recovery Team provides walking groups to help with isolation, promote physical activities and socialization. The walks take place at local Berkeley parks and neighborhoods and they varied in physical intensity. The walks are advertised in the Wellness Recovery monthly calendar. In FY23, 20 walks were scheduled throughout the year. During the month of January walks were not scheduled due to rainy weather. The parks visited were Ohlone, Grove Park, Cedar Rose, 4th street, Aquatic Park, Berkeley Marina, San Pablo Park and the University of California at Berkeley campus. A total of 9 unduplicated individuals participated in the Walking Groups. The projected numbers to be served in FY25 per each age group is as follows: 18-25 years – 1 individual; 26-59 years – 5 individuals; 60 years or older – 2 individuals.

Field Trips
In FY23 the Wellness Recovery Team did not schedule any field trips due to staff shortage.

Card Party Groups
This program is modeled after the Do-Send-A-Card program created by the San Francisco Mental Health Association. BMH Wellness Recovery staff partnered with the Peer Wellness Collective formally known as “Alameda Network of Mental Health Clients” Reach-Out Program to distribute the cards that were created from the Card Party groups when they visit the hospitals throughout the County.

In FY23 a total of 24 Card making groups were offered to inspire peers to write inspirational messages in cards as well as design cards with arts and crafts for individuals in psychiatric hospitals and Board & Cares. Peers can choose the card they want to receive. Through this program 50 cards were created and given to the Reach-Out Program. The number of cards made this year was significantly lower due to a loss of attendees or connecting to pick up cards from attendee’s homes. This program has been operating in-person and on the Zoom platform.

A total of 4 unduplicated individuals participated in the Card Party Groups. The projected 60

numbers to be served in FY25 per each age group is as follows: 18-25 years – 1 individual; 26- 59 years – 6 individuals; 60 years or older – 3 individuals.

Mood Group
The Mood Group is designed for people to share their thoughts and feelings in a safe place where support is also offered. In FY23 the group met mostly twice a month but a few months the group only met once due to staff shortage and events. The group focused on reviewing a Mood Scale to help people identify their emotions and address the impacts of their choices among non-judgmental peers. The group was hosted for a total of 20 times during the reporting timeframe with a total of 3 unduplicated participants. The projected numbers to be served in FY25 per each age group is as follows: 18-25 years – 2 individuals; 26-59 years – 4 individuals; 60 years or older – 4 individuals.

Peers Organizing Community Change
Peers Organizing for Community Change (POCC) which was formerly known as Pool of Consumer Champions is a community activism group designed to educate, advocate and lead and it is open to any community member who identifies as a peer, a person with lived mental health conditions. The committee meets once a month and focuses on the needs and concerns of Berkeley residents as well and provides input on the Mental Health Service Act. In FY23, the group met 10 times, with 7 regular attendees, 5 of whom assumed positions within the committee. Each year the committee is tasked with identifying and coordinating a community event to educate on a popular topic. For the FY23 the topic was “Standing proudly with Berkeley Resources” and 30 community members attended the event. The projected numbers to be served in FY25 per each age group is as follows: 26-59 years – 3 individuals; 60 years or older – 3 individuals.

Mental Health Advance Directives

One-on-One Consultations on Mental Health Advance Directives are available through Wellness Recovery Staff. Although consultations were advertised in the Wellness Recovery Newsletter and calendar, in FY23 there weren’t any requests for this service. The projected numbers to be served in FY25 per each age group is as follows: 18-25 years – 1 individual; 26-59 years – 2 individuals; 60 years or older – 3 individuals.

In FY23, a total of 49 individuals participated in Wellness Recovery services. Demographics on 30 of the individuals served are as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 30
Age Category
Age Category % of total
25-44 years *
45-64 years *
65 years and older *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
61

Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male *
Female *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Asian or Pacific Islander *
Black or African American *
White *
Multi-racial *
Other *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Heterosexual *
Bisexual *
Questioning *
Multiple Sexual Orientations *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

Program Successes:

In the third quarter of FY23, the Wellness Recovery Team added two Social Services Specialist positions to the program. These positions titles are designed to make the clinic more welcoming and provide peer support to individuals in the clinic waiting room. Adding these positions made more people aware of the wellness groups, events and support that the clinic has to offer. In the fourth quarter an Assistant Mental Health Clinician position was filled to provide full staffing capacity on the team.

Being fully staffed, some of the groups such as the Wellness Recovery Activities were able to be conducted in-person, and more individuals were engaged and began participating in groups.

Staff has been able to do one on one support in the waiting room and offer resources to people in crisis. Some groups continued to meet on Zoom and a hybrid option was available as well and there was a consistent number of individuals who benefitted from the groups. Staff also engaged with individuals in the waiting room offering light refreshments and connections, one on one supports, and resources for individuals in crisis. In June, all of the group flyers received a facelift and were re-vamped.

Program Challenges:

There were still some members of the groups only wanted to attend group activities online or through dial-in even after the option was provided to meet in the office. It was challenging to manage the groups with the hybrid option. Engaging individuals to fill out the demographic form 62

was challenging as well, when individuals participated online, or either came after group had started or left prior to the ending of a group activity.

In FY23, the RBA measures for this program (which were combined with the Soc ial Inclusion,
Telling Your Story Project measures, as both are conducted by the same staff) were as follows:

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
• # of participants served
• # of different groups
c
onvened per year
• # of group ev
ents held
per year
• # of group participants
who meet the
requirements for
“Telling Your Story”
(MHSA PEI Requirement)
• #/% of participants who
return for group events
• #/% of participants who
reported feeling less shame
about their experiences and
challenges
• #/% of participants who
reported progress in their
recovery
Measure Definition Data Source
# participants served Total # of participants served Wellness Recovery Group Attendance Tracker
# of different group convened Number of different types of groups (i.e. walking group, mood group,
Telling Your Story group) convened
Wellness Recovery Group
Attendance Tracker
Group events Total number of meetings held Wellness Recovery Group Attendance Tracker
# of participants who meet
the requirements for
"Telling Your Story"
Total number of participants in all "Telling
Your Story" meetings
Wellness Recovery Group
Attendance Tracker
# of participants who return
for group events
Of total number of participants, % who
returned for more than one event or
meeting
Wellness Recovery Group
Attendance Tracker
% of participants who
reported feeling less shame
about their experiences and
challenges
Of participants who took the survey,
percent who responded "agree" or
"strongly agree" to the question.

Telling Your Story Survey
% of participants who
reported recognizing
progress in their recovery

Of participants who took the survey,
percent who responded "agree" or
"strongly agree" to the question.

Telling Your Story Survey
Data Development Agenda: measures the team is inter
ested in reporting on but for which
reliable data was not available:
• Advance Directives Data:
-#/% of participants with an Advance Directive completed; 63

-#/% of participants able to advocate for themselves with service providers; • Equity of services (e.g. client demographics compared to Medi-Cal population); • % of clients who were satisfied with services.

To provide context for the FY23 RBA outcomes, the Wellness Recovery Services experienced notable growth in FY23, expanding its team and broadening the scope of its services.

Subsequent reports will be refined to comprehensively reflect the program's extensive services and its overall influence.

RBA Outcomes in FY23 for this program are outlined on the following pages.

64

49 Different groups
convened
BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period July 2022 - June 2023
Process Outcomes ("How much did we do?")
Wellness & Recovery Services
Participants
served
710
Participants who meet
requirements for
"Telling Your Story"
Program Description The Wellness and Recovery Program is designed to provide outreach, support, education, activities, and advocacy to consumer members living with mental illness and living in Berkeley. Wellness group activities include: Berkeley Peers Organizing Community Change (POCC), Card Groups, Mood Groups, Walking Groups, and field trips.

Program Updates The Wellness Recovery Team added two Social Services Specialist positions to the program. Adding these positions made more people aware of the wellness groups, events and support that the clinic has to offer. 84 JUL '22 - JUN '23

WELLNESS GROUP
MEETINGS ACROSS 7

DISTINCT GROUPS
10 17
9 22
13 12
1 B -POCC MEETING

CARD GROUP

MOOD GROUP

TELLING YOUR STORY

WALKING GROUP

WELLNESS RECOVERY

ACTIVITIES

POCC ANNUAL

COMMUNITY EVENT

WELLNESS GROUP

MEETINGS
JUL '22 - JUN '23 (N=84)
65

Quality Outcomes ("How well did we do it?")
68%
% of participants who return for group events
Total Returning Participants
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=49)
86%
75%
33%
90%
40%
56%
B-P
OCC Meeting Card Group Mood Group Telling Your Story Walking Group Wellness Recovery
Activities
% Repeat Attendees for Wellness Groups
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=38)
66

% of participants reporting
feeling less shame about their
experiences and challenges
Percentage of survey respondents who
agree or strongly agree that they feel less
shame about their experiences and
challenges
Telling Your Story Survey
% of participants reporting
recognizing progress in their
recovery
Percentage of survey respondents who
agree or strongly agree that they
recognize progress in their recovery
Telling Your Story Survey
# of participants who meet the
requirements for “Telling Your
Story"
Total number of participants in all "Telling
Your Story" meetings
Wellness Recovery
Group Attendance
Tracker
% of participants who return for
group events
Of total number of participants, % who
returned for more than one event or
meeting
Wellness Recovery
Group Attendance
Tracker
# of different groups convened
Number of different types of groups (i.e.
walking group, mood group, Telling Your
Story group) convened
Wellness Recovery
Group Attendance
Tracker
Average # of group events held
per 6 months Total number of meetings held
Wellness Recovery
Group Attendance
Tracker
Measure Definition
# participants served Total # of participants served
Data Source
Wellness Recovery
Group Attendance
Tracker
67

Family Support Services
A Family Service Specialist works with family members, staff, community-based organizations etc. to improve services and supports for BMH clients and their family members on a system- wide level. Services provide both individual family services and supports, and system–wide change initiatives.

This family/caregiver-centered program provides information, education, advocacy and support for family/caregivers of children, adolescents, TAY, adults and older adults with serious emotional disturbance or severe mental illness. Services are provided in a culturally responsive manner providing outreach to people of various ethnicities and language groups.

The Family Services Specialist serves as a point of contact for family members who are currently accessing or attempting to access services and/or who have questions and concerns about the mental health system, providing them with supports, and as needed, referrals to additional community resources. Outreach is provided to families through existing BMH family support groups, NAMI of the East Bay, community clinics and the Alameda County Family Education Resource Center (FERC). Additionally, the Family Services Specialist coordinates forums for family members to share their experiences with the system; recruit’s family members to serve on BMH committees; supports family members through a “Warm line”; conducts a Family Support Group; and creates training opportunities to educate mental health staff on how to effectively work with families. The combination of individual services and system-level initiatives impact all clients and their family members across the system in a given year. In FY23, there were approximately 397 clients in the BMH system.

During the reporting timeframe, the following individual or group services and supports were conducted through this program:

Warm Line Phone Support: A phone Warm Line provided a sympathetic resource for family members needing information, referrals, supports, and assistance in navigating the complex mental health system. Through the Warm Line, the Family Services Specialist helped families find services and resources as needed.

Family Support Group: Provided supports for parents, children, siblings, spouses, significant others or caregivers. The group met once a month for two hours.

During FY23 a total of 19 family members were served. Demographics of individuals served are outlined below:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 19
Age Category
Age Category % of total
25-44 years *
45-64 years *
65+ years *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *

68

Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male *
Female *
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Asian or Pacific Islander *
Black or African American *
White *
Multi-racial *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 100%
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

As the Family Services Specialist position was vacant from April 2019 to May 2023, the previous position holder continued the Family Support Group and occasional Warm Line Phone support, until the position was filled.

The projected numbers of individuals to be served in FY25 by each age group are as follows:
18-24 years - 2 individuals; 25-44 years - 10 individuals; 45-64 years - 15 individuals; 65 years and older - 38 individuals. There are approximately 5 additional individuals of an unknown age at this time that are projected to be served.

Employment Services
Previously, a BMH Employment Specialist provided services to support individuals in job readiness and accessing employment opportunities. It was envisioned that these services would at a minimum, create and nurture supported vocational, educational and volunteer “try- out” opportunities in the community; build employment and educational readiness; and increase the numbers of individuals who are gainfully employed and/or engaging in other meaningful activities such as school or volunteer work. Different strategies were implemented over time including utilizing the Dartmouth model of supported employment. The Dartmouth model helps to promote wellness and recovery by enabling clients to work alongside other non-mentally ill workers in a competitive environment in their community.

Up until there was a vacancy in the position, the Employment Specialist provided supports to clients who were interested in starting their own business by guiding them through the necessary steps of getting a license, advertising, etc.; assisted clients who weren’t quite ready to obtain employment, in becoming involved in volunteer opportunities; connected clients with the Department of Rehabilitation for computer skills training; worked with staff to ensure clients were adhering to their medication regimen; and supported clients in filling out job applications and or practicing their interview skills. Although various strategies were implemented over the years, client participation and employment outcomes remained low. 69

Low client outcomes coupled with the vacancy in the Employment Specialist position prompted the Division to evaluate best practices for mental health client employment. Additionally, input received during various MHSA Community Program Planning processes, provided recommendations on strategies to better support clients in reaching their employment goals, such as: assisting clients on interviews and on what to share with an employer regarding reasonable accommodations; providing mentoring and job shadowing; implementing technology training for clients; having services be integrated and supported, and implementing evidence- based practices.

It was envisioned that once the Employment Specialist position was filled, work would be focused on utilizing an evidenced based model for supporting individuals with serious mental illness in obtaining and retaining competitive employment. The hiring process for this position has not occurred yet, as the City of Berkeley has spent time assessing whether the best use of funds would be to hire the full-time position, or to contract the services out to a local organization that focuses on employment services and supports for mental health consumers.

Housing Services and Supports
The Housing Specialist provides housing resource services for clients; working with landlords to increase housing opportunities; collaborating with case management staff, landlords, and Board & Care Managers to provide additional supports for clients who are already housed; and works in tandem with the City of Berkeley HHCS Department Hub (which serves as a single entry point into emergency shelter and transitional housing, where clients are triaged based on their housing and service needs). Some of the various places where clients with subsidies are housed are the Berkeley Food and Housing Project Russell Street Residence Board and Care, McKinley House, and Lakehurst Hall.

Benefits Advocacy Services
Through this project a community-based organization, the Homeless Action Center (HAC), assists clients in obtaining public benefits. Services are provided for approximately 10 BMH clients a year. In FY23, 10 clients were served through this program. Demographics on those served were as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 10
Age Category
Age Category % of total
18-24 years *
25-44 years *
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male *
Female *
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Black or African American *
White *
70

Latinx *
Other *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 100%
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

Program Successes:

In FY23, 80% (4 out of the 5 cases closed) resulted in the individuals receiving SSI Benefits. All but one of the cases were approved at the initial or reconsideration stage. The fifth case was closed when the individual moved out of the area.

Program Challenges:

There were no program challenges during the reporting timeframe.

The projected numbers of individuals to be served in FY25 per each age category is as follows:
18-24 years = 3 individuals; 25-44 years of age: 7 individuals.

Flexible Funds for Level One Clients
A contract with the community-based organization, Berkeley Food & Housing Project (now known as Insight Housing), enables flexible funds to be used with clients across the system for supports such as housing, clothing assistance, food, transportation, etc. This use of flexible funds aids individuals in achieving better stability in areas where they are less capable of addressing their daily living needs. This program is set up to aid any clients in need across the system in a given year. In FY23, there were a total of 397 clients in the BMH system.

Mobile Crisis Team (MCT) Expansion
Through a previously approved Three Year Plan, and as a result of staff and community input on increasing and improving services for those experiencing a mental health crisis, the following additions to BMH have been or are in the process of being implemented through CSS System Development funds:
• Increase in staff to expand the Mobile Crisis Team (MCT) capacity and hours of operation; • Mental Health First Aid Trainings to teach community members how to assist individuals who are in crisis or are showing signs and symptoms of a mental illness; • A Consumer/Family Member Satisfaction Survey for Crisis services .

In FY23, the RBA Measures that were established for this program were as follows:

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
• # of clients served
• # of documented
co
ntacts

• % of clients who receive a
visit (phone contact with
client or hospital provider)
in the 24 hours after
• None available at this time

71

hospitalization
• % of Mobile Crisis Team
who had a Crisis,
Assessment Team staff
attempt to contact
• % of clients who were
satisfied with services**
*Demographic data was reported at the program level, where available **Data not available for baseline reporting period, will be included in future rounds of reporting Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total unique clients served MCT Contact Log Client contact types # of client contacts made, by
a. Field contacts
b. Phone contacts
c. Other
MCT Contact Log
Total referrals, by referring
party
# of crisis services referrals made to
the MCT, by referring party (i.e. BPD,
BFD, BMH, community, etc.)
MCT Contact Log
# of 5150 evaluations
conducted
Total number of incidents with 5150
Evaluations of any sort
MCT Contact Log
Results of 5150 Evaluations % of 5150 evaluations that did or did not result in transportation to a receiving
facility for further evaluation
MCT Contact Log
Number of interventions per
client
% of clients who had one, two, or more
than two interventions
MCT Contact Log
Data Development Agenda: measures the team is inter
ested in reporting on but for which
reliable data was not available:
• #/% of calls to CAT line that receive crisis intervention support that does not involve the police: crisis referral to non-MCT, crisis support, de-escalation support; • % of clients who receive a follow-up call for a no-show screening, intake or appointment; • #/% of no-show clients for whom there is inter-system coordination to engage; • #/% of clients and families who receive connection to grief counseling and other services; • % of clients connected to a service team within 7 calendar days; • % of clients assessed or referred on the same day as inquiry.

For context around the FY23 RBA outcomes, since 2019, the Mobile Crisis Team (MCT) has been functioning with a limited core of just two full-time clinicians and without a supervisory lead. To address this shortfall, the team has relied on supplemental staffing through overtime and part-time hourly personnel. Despite these efforts, the MCT has faced challenges in operating at its intended full capacity.

RBA Outcomes in FY23 for this program are outlined on the following pages. 72

BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period: June 2022 - July 2023
700
Clients Served
978
Incidents Responded To
Mobile Crisis Team (MCT)
Process Outcomes ("How much did we do?")
Program Description
The Mobile Crisis Team (MCT) serves residents of
Berkeley, from 11:30am-10pm each day of the
week when fully staffed (1 Supervisor + 3 Full
Time Clinicians). It provides crisis interventions,
including but not limited to 5150 evaluations,
consultations, and referrals/linkages.

Program Updates
Since 2019, the MCT has had only 2 FT clinicians
and no supervisor. As a result, the program has
not been able to operate at full capacity.
3%
7%
12%
20%
4%
54%
<18 18-25 26-40 41-70 >70 Not Reported
Demographics (Age)
Jul '22- Jun '23 (n=700)
54%
24%
15%
4% 3% *
Other White Black or African
American
Asian or Pacific
Islander
Hispanic or Latino More than one
race
Demographics (Ethnicity)
Jul '22- Jun '23 (n=700)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 73

BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period: June 2022 - July 2023
From June 2022 - July 2023, the MCT program
performed 189 5150 Evaluations
46%
40%
*
*
Male Female Unknown Transgender
Demographics (Gender Identity)
Jul '22- Jun '23 (n=700)
70%
21%
7%
Phone Field Other (incl. office and home)
Client Contacts Made by Contact Type
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=978)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 74

BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period: June 2022 - July 2023
1%
8%
1%
1%
2%
3%
14%
13%
16%
20%
28%
Fo
llowup
City of Berkeley
Berkeley Fire
Department
Merchant
UC Police
Department
Berkeley
Mental Health
Citizen
Self
Family
Other
Berkeley Police
Department
Referrals by Referring Party
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=978)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 75

BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period: June 2022 - July 2023
Impact Outcomes ("Is anyone better off?")
Quality Outcomes ("How well did we do it?")
80%
% of 5150 evaluations that did not result in transportation to a receiving facility for further evaluation Results of 5150 Evaluations
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=189)
61%
8% 6%
Clients with 1 intervention Clients with 2 interventions Clients with >2 interventions Number of Interventions per Client
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=700)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 76

BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period: June 2022 - July 2023
Number of interventions per client
# of client contacts made, by
a. F
ield contacts
b. Phone contacts
c. Other
MCT Incident Log
# of crisis services referrals made to the MCT, by referring party (i.e. Berkeley Police Department, Berkeley Fire
Department, Berkeley Mental Health, community, etc.)
MCT Incident Log
Total number of incidents with 5150 Evaluations of any sort MCT Incident Log % of 5150 evaluations that did or did not result in
transportation to a receiving facility for further evaluation MCT Incident Log % of clients who had one, two, or more than two
interventions on separate dates requiring service MCT Incident Log # of client contacts made
# of referrals by referring party
# of 5150 evaluations conducted
Results of 5150 Evaluations
Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total unique clients served MCT Incident Log NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 77

Transitional Outreach Team (TOT)
The Transitional Outreach Team (TOT) was added thru the previously approved MHSA FY16 Annual Update to support Crisis Services, through interventions that address issues individuals experience either immediately prior to, or following a mental health crisis. This team, follows up with individuals and families that have had a recent crisis. The goal of the team is brief outreach and engagement to assist the individual and/or family in getting connected to the resources they may need.

In FY23, 50 individuals were served through this project. Demographics on those served were as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 50
Age Category
Age Category % of total
0-18 years *
18-25 years *
25-44 years *
45-64 years *
65 years or older *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male 30%
Female 60%
Transgender *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Asian or Pacific Islander *
Black or African American 22%
Latinx *
White 46%
Multi-racial *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 100%
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

Services provided by this team are subject to the number of referrals that are generated by the Mobile Crisis Team crisis calls. Clients served by TOT often enter the crisis system with fewer resources such as collateral supports, lack of insurance, etc. 78

Program Successes:
• Continued successful follow-up with residents who had contact with Mobile Crisis by phone and/or in person.
• Connected individuals and families to needed and wanted mental health, housing, family, and other social services.
• Offered intensive short-term support to individuals and families who experienced a mental health crisis, including referrals, linkage, psychoeducation, and active support in connecting with needed service in Berkeley or elsewhere in the Alameda County system of care. • Provided in person outreach and engagement to individuals receiving homeless services and staff at homeless service provider agencies, including Dorothy Day, BOSS, BFHP, and others.
• Coordinated with other programs within the City’s Mental Health Division, including the Crisis/Assessment/Triage (CAT) On Duty staff and field-based services such as Mobile Crisis (MCT).
• C ontinues to follow-up on hospital referrals and coordinating with individuals and hospital staff after a MCT contact.

Program Challenges:
• TOT appears to have served fewer individual people during FY23 than during FY22. One possible reason may be due to how contacts were categorized in the database system. • Data collection system does not capture all necessary information that would support ac
curate outcome reporting. This remains an ongoing difficulty due to the limitations of the current system.

In a prior year, TOT was merged with the Crisis Assessment and Triage (CAT) Team due to staffing limitations and to increase flexibility of staffing capacity.

The proj
ected numbers of individuals to be served in FY25 by each age group are as follows:
0-15 years - 4 individuals; 16-25 years - 7 individuals; 26-59 years - 27 individuals; 60 years or older - 5 individuals. There are approximately 6 additional individuals of an unknown age at this time that are projected to be served.

In FY23, the RBA measures that were established for TOT/CAT were measures as follows:

Process Measures
How much did we do?
Quality Measures
How well did we do it?
Impact Measures
Is Anyone Better off?
• # of clients served
• # of documented
co
ntacts

• % of clients who receive a
visit (phone contact with
client or hospital provider)
in the 24 hours after
hospitalization
• % of Mobile Crisis Team
who had a Crisis,
Assessment Team staff
attempt to contact
• None available at this time

79

• % of clients who were
satisfied with services**
*Demographic data was reported at the program level, where available **Data not available for baseline reporting period, will be included in future rounds of reporting Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total unique clients served Mobile Crisis Team (MCT) & Crisis Assessment (CAT)
Contact Log
# of documented contacts Total number of documented incidents MCT & CAT Contact Log Follow-up after
hospitalization
% of clients who receive a visit (phone
contact with client or hospital service
provider) in the 24 hours after
hospitalization
MCT & CAT Contact Log
% of MCT contacts who had
a CAT attempt to contact
Of Client IDs in MCT contact log, %
which also have record in CAT contact
log
MCT & CAT Contact Log
Data Development Agenda: measures the team is interested in reporting on but for which reliable data was not available:
• #/% of calls to CAT line that receive crisis intervention support that does not involve the police: crisis referral to non-MCT, crisis support, de-escalation support. • % of clients who receive a follow-up call for a no-show screening, intake or appointment. • #/% of no-show clients for whom there is inter-system coordination to engage. • #/% of clients and families who receive connection to grief counseling and other services • % of clients connected to a service team within 7 calendar days • % of clients assessed or referred on the same day as inquiry For context around the FY23 RBA outcomes, in June 2023, the Crisis, Assessment, Triage (CAT)/Transitional Outreach Team (TOT) lengthened its walk-in availability from 3 to 5 hours.

This change, while accommodating more immediate client needs, constrained the team's ability to conduct follow-up services, given the surge of new clients. Balancing the increased walk-in service hours with the imperative of crisis response made it challenging to allocate sufficient time for follow-ups.

RBA Outcomes in FY23 for this program are outlined on the following pages. 80

Crisis, Assessment, and Triage/Transitional Outreach Team (CAT/TOT) 645
Clients Served
1425
Contacts
BMH RBA Report FY 2023
Reporting Period July 2022 - June 2023
Process Outcomes ("How much did we do?")
Program Description
CAT/TOT is BMH's intake and follow-up team for Adult Mental Health Services. This team provides screening/assessment for ongoing mental health services, linkage to community-based resources, crisis support, and coordination with other
agencies. Services include, but are not limited to: psychiatric services, transportation, food access, medical care, health insurance, benefits, legal assistance, affordable housing listings, utilities and energy assistance resources. Services are provided in person at the clinic, as well as via the team phone line.

Program Updates
The program expanded their walk-in hours from 3 hours to 5 hours in June 2023. Due to the increase in new clients, there has been limited staff capacity for follow up services. *
7%
16%
24%
*
47%
<18 18-25 26-40 41-70 >70 Unknown
Demographics (Age)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=645)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 81

Note: "Other" includes those marked as "Other." Unknown includes those marked as "Unknown" or missing due to clients not disclosing, clinician unable to make the determination, or a crisis situation not allowing for more comprehensive data collection. Sexual orientation data not available.
47%
23% 20%
5% 4% 2%
Other/Unknown White Black or African
American
Hispanic or Latino Asian or Pacific
Islander
More than one
race
Demographics (Ethnicity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=645)
42%
38%
*
1%
Male Female Unknown Transgender
Demographics (Gender Identity)
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=645)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 82

Quality Outcomes ("How well did we do it?")
24%
11%
65%
Clien
ts who received visit within 24
hours
Clients who received visit after 24 hours No follow up
Follow-up after hospitalization
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=38)
34%
66%
Recorded contact No recorded contact
MCT contacts who had a CAT attempt to contact
Jul '22 - Jun '23 (n=1425)
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 83

Measure Definition Data Source
# clients served Total clients served MCT & CAT
Incident Log
% of MCT contacts who had a CAT
attempt to contact
Of Client IDs in MCT contact log, % which also have
record in CAT contact log. Reasons for no contact may
include no viable contact information or client declined contact.

MCT & CAT
Incident Log
# of documented contacts Total number of documented incidents MCT & CAT Incident Log
% of clients who receive a visit
(phone contact with client or
hospital service provider) in the 24
hours after hospitalization
% of clients who receive a visit (phone contact with client or hospital service provider) in the 24 hours after
hospitalization. Reasons for no follow up may include no viable contact information, client was not amenable to
follow-up services, or the client is already connected to follow-up services provided by another agency.

MCT & CAT
Incident Log
NOTE: *Some data not displayed to protect individual privacy when N< 11. Smaller data was combined. 84

Sub-Representative Payee Program
The Sub-representative Payee Program is implemented through the contractor, Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency (BOSS). Through this program services are provided to individuals who are in need of a payee to assist with managing their money. Approximately 79 individuals receive services a year.

In FY23, 76 individuals were served. Demographics on individuals served were as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 76
Age Category
Age Category % of total
18-24 years *
25-44 years 17%
45-64 years *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male 71%
Female 29%
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Black or African American 62%
Asian Pacific Islander *
Native American *
White *
Other *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 100%
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

Program Successes:

A part-time receptionist was hired in FY23 to support the program. All new clients were paired with a case manager, which enhanced staff ability to provide more effective assistance to each individual.

Program Challenges:

The Social Security Office was persistently understaffed which led to delays in processing new representative payee applications, instances of receiving incorrect funds, and various other issues related to the clients Social Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Income (SSDI) funds.

The projected numbers of individuals to be served in FY25 by each age group are as follows:
16-25 years = 5 individuals; 26-59 years = 25 individuals; 60+ years = 45 individuals. 85

Hearing Voices Support Groups
The Hearing Voices Support Groups are offered through a contract with the Bay Area Hearing Voices Network. A free weekly drop-in Support Group is provided for adults who experience voices, visions, special messages, unusual beliefs or extreme states of consciousness. The support group is co-facilitated by trained group facilitators whom have lived experience in the mental health system. A separate support group for Family Members of individual participants is also provided.

In FY23, a total of 1,308 individuals were served through weekly online support groups.

Demographics on individuals served were as follows:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 1,308
Age Category
Age Category % of total
25-44 years 28%
45-64 years 40%
65 years or older 32%
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male 60%
Female 40%
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
African American 16%
Asian or Asian Pacific Islander *
Latino/a/x 8%
Multi-Racial *
Native American *
White 65%
Other *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Heterosexual or Straight 75%
Bisexual *
Gay 10%
Other Sexual Orientation *
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 10%
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

In FY23, three more hearing voices groups (two adult groups and a family member’s group) were added. A successful Community workshop for family members, clinicians, and family members was also held at the North Berkeley Senior Center. An Instagram app was launched, and there are approximately one hundred followers on this social media platform. The on-line newsletter was also redesigned and sent out every month. 86

Program Successes:
• BAHVN is the only community organization which offers on line peer-led groups for adults who hear voices and have other unusual experiences. Participants who attend groups regularly express that the continuity helps them to stay out of mental hospitals, deal with stigma as well as stress and difficult experiences associated with the voice hearing experiences.
• On-line groups continued to expand in numbers of attendees. • New facilitators were added and the monthly facilitator trainings were well attended. • Successfully reached out to NAMI East Bay to co-host an annual community workshop. • Started to use social media and other media sources to get the word out about groups and to help offset stigma.

Program Challenges:
• Would like to expand outreach and education to community mental health organizations, clinics, and schools.
• Would like to offer a Transitional Age hearing voices groups. • BAHVN is seeking an organization to sponsor a new Sunday Hearing Voices group. • Would also like to expand the BAHVN network to include other mental health agencies like Kaiser and are looking for grants to help fund the education outreach program.

Results from a survey questionnaire of 216 group participants on the impact of the groups were as follows:

How have the groups helped you?
• “It has given me a forum to share my experiences, thoughts, and symptoms.” • “This group has helped me to stay connected and find people with similarities to myself. I really enjoy coming.”
• “Social connectivity and emotional support. It helped me find safety when I needed it and allowed me to be the validating accepting person anchoring someone else down when they needed it. It increased my vocabulary.”
• “It has helped me to not feel alone, find resources, gain clarity, and learn about myself.” • “This group has helped me have an open mind towards all people with differences. Most importantly, it has given me hope for a more positive future for my daughter and other loved ones who might be in a similar situation. It has also helped me maintain my relationship with my daughter.”
• “It has helped me feel deeply in a safe place, it has helped me to break my isolation, learn new things about my loved one's situation.”

How do you feel supported by the facilitators (or not)? • “The facilitators are sometimes the best listeners and help the group discussions move forward.”
• “They treat me kindly and offer validating words and qualifiers so that I feel like I belong.” • “They are very kind and compassionate people.”
87

• “Welcoming.”
• “Good leadership.”
• “They want to hear from me and address my concerns.”
• “Group agreements.”
• “Empathetic and helpful answers. Sometimes I think its hard for everyone (me included) to remember to ask if people want advice or feedback but I want to work on a well.” • “They are expert listeners, their presentations hit home each time, and they validate what people say. They also provide suggestions for many helpful resources.” • “They try to let everyone speak.”
Describe your overall experience in the Group.
• “I sti
ll think about some of the interactions and things said from groups that were 5 or more years ago. These are positive impacts and memories.”
• “Good, though I think on occasion some people get a lot more time to speak in group, at the expense of others getting to share.”
• “It is very positive.”
• “Life changing to know that I am not alone.”
• “This is the only time that I fill I have for myself to express my true feelings.” • “Our group meetings last two hours. The facilitators give us a brief introduction to the Hearing Voices Movement. We may have up to twelve members participating on Zoom each week. What I like most is the diversity of the group, some who live in other parts of the country--New York, Cincinnati, Auston, and Los Angeles for example, but most from Berkeley and the Bay Area. It is rare that anyone leaves the group before the two hours are up. We always have a lot to share with each other.”
• “Positive.”
• “This group has become as important to me as my fringe house church. Without referencing a higher power, we are essentially in a school of love every Monday night.” • “I feel comfortable talking about my voice experiences.” The projected numbers of individuals to be served in FY25 by each age group are as follows:
16-25 y
ears = 18 individuals; 26-59 years = 1,287 individuals; 60+ years = 645 individuals.

Berkeley Wellness Cent
er
The Berkeley Wellness Center is an MHSA funded collaboration between the City of Berkeley, Mental
Health Division and the Alameda County BHCS. This pr
ogram implemented through the
community-based organization, Bonita House, provides: mental health and substance use disorder counseling; living skills training; educational activities; pre-vocational training; wellness recovery programming; support groups; referrals to community resources; computer training; Art Therapy and other activities. The main goals of the program are to assist individuals in functioning as highly as possible so they can become integrated into the community.

In FY23, 48 individuals participated in this program. Demographics on individuals served were as follows:
88

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 48
Age Category
Age Category % of total
18-24 years *
25-44 years 25%
46-64 years *
65 years and older 25%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) *
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male 42%
Female 58%
Race/Ethnicity
Race/Ethnicity % of total
Black or African American *
Asian or Asian Pacific Islander *
Latinx *
White *
Other *
Unknown *
Sexual Orientation
Sexual Orientation % of total
Heterosexual or Straight 33%
Declined to Answer (or Unknown) 67%
*Indicates information is withheld to protect the privacy and confidentiality of individual participants.

In FY23, the Berkeley Wellness Center’s former director resigned, and the program was led by an interim program manager for four months. In September, a new program manager was hired and programs were expanded. Navigation provisions and resource information was also consolidated and offered a greeting and entrance program. Outreach plans were created and implemented ranging from on the ground, to coordination with fellow service programs.

Program Successes:

Since the creation and implementation of outreach plans, the numbers of clientele increased daily, and new clients invariably became repeat visitors to the center. Individuals responses to new programming was enthusiastic. Navigation services were easier to access, which resulted in clients inquiring more often about various service needs, and staff being better equipped to provide supports.

Program Challenges:

The various program challenges were as follows: The building needs to be made more visible to community members; creating public awareness of services, and particularly making meaningful connections with Board and Care facilities; reintegration of previous clients that have stalled use of services; balancing the social issues arising in the meeting of various levels of cognition, emotional stability, sobriety, and class among the clients. 89

The projected numbers of individuals to be served in FY25 by each age group are as follows:
16-24 years = 7 individuals; 25-44 years = 11 individuals; 46-64 – 20 individuals; 65+ years = 11 individuals.

BMH Peer and Family Member Positions
Since the first MHSA Plan, BMH has included positions for peers and family members with lived experience to be added to various programs throughout the Division. The Division utilizes existing City job classifications for an employment track for peer or family member providers. The entry level position is Community Health Worker, the mid-level is Assistant Mental Health Clinician, and the top-level is Social Services Specialist. All of these classifications are also used broadly for differing purposes throughout the City. For the specific positions where the MHSA Plan envisioned utilizing peer or family providers, BMH has had success in establishing employment lists where there are applicants who describe themselves as having “lived experience” and as peer or family member providers. In 2018, a peer provider was hired to support the Wellness Recovery services work. This position became vacant in December 2021 and it wasn’t filled until the third quarter of FY23.

Two additional positions were added through the FY22 Annual Update, to increase the Wellness Recovery work and enable a greater ability to provide a variety of peer led services, and the provision of activities and supports to individuals in the waiting room. These positions were hired in the third quarter of FY23.

Case Management for Youth and Transition Age Youth
In response to a high need for additional services and supports for youth and Transition Age Youth (TAY) who experience mental health issues and may be homeless or marginally housed, case management services for TAY are provided through a local community partner, Youth Spirit Artworks (YSA). This project serves approximately 50 individuals a year.

In March 2020, due to the pandemic, YSA was forced to close its facilities in Berkeley. Staff and youth participants quickly transitioned to online services. During the pandemic, staff social workers communicated with youth primarily through phone calls and tele-conferencing via the Zoom platform. As YSA transitioned back to in-person service provision, remote services remained as an option.

In FY23, 62 youth were served through this project. Demographic data on youth participants is outlined below:

DEMOGRAPHICS N = 62
Age Category
Age Category % of total
16-25 years 100%
Gender Identity
Gender Identity % of total
Male *
Female 37%
Transgender *
90