Skip to main content.

Are children with Medi-Cal shortchanged when it comes to mental health care?

Are children with Medi-Cal shortchanged when it comes to mental health care?

Picture of Claudia Boyd-Barrett
[Photo by Ian D. Keating via Flickr.]

California spends an estimated $4 to $5 billion a year on mental health services for children and teens. Yet advocates have long complained about a lack of information on how the money is spent.

For our 2017 California Data Fellowship project, we plan to dig into one piece of this spending mystery: how counties across the state spend money on low-income kids with mental health needs. Our goal is to find out whether access to mental health care is equitable across the state, as required by law. A cursory look at the data suggests it is not.

More than half of California’s children are enrolled in Medi-Cal, the joint state and federal health insurance program for the poor. That means a majority of children with mental health problems in the state depend on Medi-Cal to obtain treatment.

Children with a range of mental health issues — including depression, anxiety, attention deficit disorders, anxiety disorders, eating disorders, antisocial personality problems and schizophrenia — can get help through Medi-Cal. But our preliminary research suggests that some children in the state’s Medicaid program fare better than others.

Our reporting will explore the problem, and we’ll ask why. Why do some children receive better mental health treatment than others? Why do these disparities exist? And what can be done?

The Affordable Care Act made mental health care an Essential Health Benefit, meaning that all those with health insurance should be able to access treatment. However, many Californians still lack access to mental health care. The disparity extends even further, because low-income residents and people of color “end up bearing the brunt of this health inequity,” Kimberly Chen, government affairs manager for the California Pan-Ethnic Health Network, wrote in a July op-ed for the California Health Report.

It’s worth noting that the percentage of children receiving mental health services in all counties is likely deficient. The California Health Care Foundation estimates that 8 to 10 percent of low-income children in California meet criteria for “serious emotional disturbance.” No county is the state is providing mental health services to anywhere near that percentage of Medi-Cal eligible children. A 2014 report by UCLA also concluded that three out of four California children with mental health needs don’t get treated.

Other data suggests that per-child spending on some Medi-Cal mental health services also varies widely by county. For example, average per-child spending in Fresno County is just over $4,000. In San Francisco County it’s almost $14,000. Why is spending per child so dramatically different?

This reporting is especially important now, because beginning in July 2018, Medi-Cal patients’ access to some mental health services and specialists will depend on the region of the state they live in. A California Department of Health Care Services’ access plan says that beginning in mid-2018, patients who live in rural California could be required to travel up to four times as far as patients in Los Angeles County to see specialists, including psychiatrists.

The goal of our fellowship project is to further investigate these potential disparities as they relate to children’s mental health care. We will look for the causes of the problem, pursuing additional relevant data and talking to advocates, mental health providers, administrators and families. In doing this, we hope to shine a light on this murky area of the state’s mental health care spending.

We’re looking for families, health care providers and policymakers to share their stories about children with Medi-Cal trying to access mental health treatment. If you have a story to share, or any tips for our investigation, please email Claudia at cboydbarrett@gmail.com or Hannah at hannah@calhealthreport.org.

[Photo by Ian D. Keating via Flickr.]

Comments

Picture of

I'm inquiring about reprinting an article in the VCStar. Do I contact them or Claudia?

Picture of Ryan White

Hi Rick, Yes, you're welcome to reprint this in the VC Star, just include a credit at some point to the Center for Health Journalism.

Leave A Comment

Announcements

More than 100 anti-transgender rights bills were introduced in state legislatures this year. Many focus on children and teens. Join us for our next Health Matters webinar, where we'll explore the health and well-being of transgender youth as states such as Arkansas and Tennessee seek to limit their rights. Our expert panel will share the latest research, seed story ideas and offer reporting advice. Sign-up here!

Are you passionate about helping journalists understand and illuminate the social factors that contribute to health and health disparities at a time when COVID-19 has highlighted the costs of such inequities? Looking to play a big role in shaping journalism today in the United States?  Apply now for one of our positions. 

The best journalism these days wraps compelling narratives around scrupulous data analysis. Apply now for our 2021 Data Fellowship to learn the skills necessary to use big data to inform your reporting on health and social welfare issues. Learn more in this webinar on Aug. 3.

CONNECT WITH THE COMMUNITY

Follow Us

Facebook


Twitter

CHJ Icon
ReportingHealth