Community Crisis
Response Program
Receive an update on the work-to-date related to the development and implementation of a Community Crisis Response Program
Background
● Reimagining Public Safety Task Force (Task Force) created June 2020
● Program design and proposed by Task Force subcommittee based on existing programs (CAHOOTs, MACRO, MH First)
● CCRP program funding available in July 2021
● CCRP program focus:
○ Provide non-law enforcement community response
○ Support community safety and address community trauma ○ Provide a community-based crisis response
○ Navigate people to the right services at the right time ○ Incorporate research, data analysis, existing assessments, and community input 2 Tasks 1 & 2 - Ongoing
Project Initiation and Data GatheringTask 1
• Data Needs Analysis
• Case Studies
Community EngagementTask 2
• Focus Groups
• Complete interviews with stakeholders
• Dispatch sit-along
• Survey Distribution (digital & in-person)
• Focus Groups
• Community Meetings
3 Tasks 3 & 4 – Report to Council April/May 2023
Analysis of Program OptionsTask 3
• Landscape Analysis and Lessons Learned
• Collaborations and Engagement
• Data Collections
• Funding
Proposed Program PlanTask 4
• Training and Dispatch
• Systems Integration
• Facilities and Equipment
• Community Education
• Recruitment and Program Protocols
Implementation Plan (TBD)Task 5 4
Community Crisis Response Program
Timeline
5 FY 21-22
CCRP
Funding
(7/21)
(7/21 - 12/21)
CCRP
Discussions &
Initial
Community
Conversations
Transfer
from Fire
to CSD
(~1/22)
(4/22)
CCRP
RFP
Released
Monthly
County
A3
Meetings
(5/22)
Urban
Strategies
Council
Contract
Approved
(7/22)
USC
Council
Update
(1/23)
USC
Present
CCRP Plan
Options
(Tasks 3&4)
(5/23)
CCRP
Implementation
(Task 5)
Community Crisis Response Program | Richmond, CA - Official Website:
https://www.ci.richmond.ca.us/4451/Community-Crisis-Response-Program Comparisons: Department Timelines
6 Mayor
Host youth
violence
summit
(10/05)
(6/06)
Contract
Mentoring
Center
Draft Report
Prelim
Report
(12/06)
(3/07)
Final
Report
Director
Hired
(7/07)
(10/07)
Director
Starts
Director &
Admin
Draft Job
Specs
(1/08)
(9/08)
4 FTE
NCA
Director
and Admin
7 FTE NCA
Director &
Admin
Fully Staffed
(12/09)
Measure
E&K
(6/18)
(1/19)
RDCY
Established
Staff,
Research,
Learning
(2/19-10/19)
(12/19)
RFCY
Board
Seated
Hire
CNA/SIP
Consultant
(2/20)
(4/20)
Initiate
CNA & SIP
Approve
CNA &
SIP
(11/20)
(12/20)
RFCY
Grant
Released
First
Grants
Awarded
(7/21)
Office of Neighborhood Safety (ONS)
Richmond Fund for Children and Youth (RFCY)
David Harris and Anne Janks
● Founded in 1987
● Nationally recognized organization based in the Bay Area, California ● Focused on advancing positive health, economic, and educational outcomes in communities of color, utilizing:
○ Data & Research
○ Leadership Development & Training
○ Collaboration Building
○ Policy Innovation and Advocacy
Who We Are
8 Community Response Elements
● Respond to a broad range of calls (not solely identified mental health calls)
● Help residents access referrals and resources
● Engagement is voluntary (no arrest, no involuntary
hospitalization)
● Reflects the unique needs and resources of diverse
neighborhoods
● Teams recruited from the communities they serve
● Good jobs that honor the challenging work, enable team members to thrive
● Teams are experienced and well-trained, but not professional clinicians
9 Crisis Response Model: CAHOOTS (Eugene, OR)
● Crisis Assistance Helping Out On The Street (CAHOOTS) began in 1989
● Mobilize two-person teams
○ Medic (e.g., nurse, paramedic, or EMT)
○ Crisis Worker (training/experience in the mental health field) ● Address nonviolent crimes and non-emergent medical issues:
○ Non-violent call (not involving serious crimes)
○ Avoid costly ambulance transport
○ Emergency room treatment.
● Advantages
○ Saves money, lower arrests, hospitalizations
○ More appropriate, compassionate response
○ Safe for responders
10 Engagement Explores Residents’ Experiences
● Interactions with emergency services
● Access to emergency and non-emergency services
● Barriers to access
● Outcomes
● Community assets
● Unrecognized, under-developed, under-funded community resources
● Informal and community support during crisis
● Where and how residents receive information about resources and services
“Community engagement is a part of community design. Engagement is a foundation for educating and organizing community to support the implementation” 11 Task Complete and Initated
● Literature and Data Review
○ Health-in-All Policies
○ Community Needs Assessment and Strategic Plan
(RFCY)
○ Reimgagining Public Safety Task Force Documents
● Key Informant Interviews
○ Council members
○ Fire Department
○ Police Departement
12 Task Completed and Initated
● Key Stakeholder Meetings and Briefings
○ Richmond Neighborhood Coordinating Council
○ Reimaging Public Safety Task Fource
○ Healthcare for Homeless
○ Matrix Consulting
○ Office of Neighborhood Safety
○ Family Justice Center
○ Asian American Pacific Islander Coalition
○ And many more
13 Task Scheduled
● Key Stakeholder Meeting and Briefings
○ Greater Richmond Interfaith Program
○ City of Richmond
■ Employment and Training
■ Youth Works
○ RCF Connects
○ Business Community Associations, Organizations, etc.
● Community Engagement Activities
○ Communty Surveys
○ Focus Groups
○ Community Meetings
14 Deliverables April/May USC Report
● Deliver report to City Council. Provide support in decision making ● Assist with establishing the relationship, depending on the selected program option (city, CBO, or county). If CBO, assist city in drafting the RFP/Q for implementing the program ● Develop protocols, job descriptions, (even if the program is contracted, the CBO will need guidance on the elements of the protocols and job descriptions that reflect the city’s model) ● Publicity on upcoming RFQ to ensure broad response
● Pre-implementation community awareness campaign - social media, meeting announcements, Community Advisory Board
recruitment 15
Consideration for Deliverables USC Report
Analysis of decision points:
● What calls/situations/crises? Qualitative and quantitative analysis
○ Types of calls, outcomes, geographic areas, community needs, needs of hihigh-frequencysers
○ Survey and community input
● County integration - especially A3 (Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime)
● Where to house CCRP - Non-profit, City (which department), County
● Staffing considerations
● Program Structure
● Community oversight & engagement
16 THANK YOU, ANY QUESTIONS?
17