8/17/1983 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

AUG 17 1983 e�mtc 'i4 PAcz.` equity is reached with respect to deinstitutionalization funds in the event the legislature does not continue the appropriation. Secondly, there does not appear to be any plan to reach an equitable situation with respect to non -deinstitutionalization funds. The reallocation of $46,000 helps but it is a one-time, one-shot fix to a situation that based upon 1983 funding levels would require the transfer of over $250,000 to the four county area to achieve equity. Consequently, we do not believe the.current version of the plan specifies priorities and anticipated expenditures and revenues with enough clarity and certainty to assure adequate services will be available to handl-e the four county area needs. The governing statute F.S. §394.78 (4) grants each governing body the authority to require necessary modification to that portion of the plan that affects mental health programs and services within their respective jurisdictions. We now request that you promptly make the following changes to the plan: 1. A specific allocation methodology be included within the district plan together with a procedure and guidelines and timetable for implementing the methodology. 2. A failsafe plan for providing the necessary services in the event that the $169,000 in deinstitutionalization funds is not made available to the four county area. 3. That service goals be ranked in a manner that corresponds to the most critical unmet service needs. The goals with the highest ranking must be addressed in order until the service need that they represent is alleviated at least to the extent prevalent throughout the entire district. 4. That funds be shifted throughout the entire district to meet the most critical needs of the district as a whole. In the past the Board has shifted funds within the three areas in Palm Beach County but has failed to shift funds out of the Palm Beach County area to meet critical needs in the northern area. The continuation of this type of subdistricting thinking assures the continuation of the huge disparity in the service availability between the two areas. 5. The plan should prohibit any new programs or additions to programs that already exist until the critical needs are met on an equitable basis throughout the district. 6. The plan should follow the guidelines set forth by state law with respect to local cash match -requirements. 7. The plan should contain a method and a timetable to obtain an equitable distribution of non -deinstitutionalization funds. 8. The plan should identify crisis stabilization and treatment services as the highest priorities. 9. The plan should not attempt to.encumber local matching funds for any purpose whatsoever. Local matching funds should be utilized in aid of the highest priority within the jurisdiction that provided the matching funds. 10. The plan shall highlight in accordance with all consultant reports and state -site visit reports that the top priority for the district is the in-patient crisis in the four county area. The plan shall contain a methodology guidelines and timetable for solving this crisis and this priority shall not be considered to be addressed until the in-patient situation in the four county area is commensurate with that which exists throughout the remainder of the district. 11.. The plan shall indicate that all funds of the Board shall be considered on a district -wide basis and shall not be considered as earmarked. 90