Existing law requires that, as a condition of parole, a prisoner who has a severe mental health disorder, as specified, be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals, if the prisoner meets certain requirements, including, among others, that the person in charge of treating the prisoner and a practicing psychiatrist or psychologist from the State Department of State Hospitals have evaluated the prisoner and that a chief psychiatrist of the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation certify to the Board of Parole Hearings that by reason of the prisoner's severe mental health disorder, the prisoner represents a substantial danger of physical harm to others. This bill would require that certain factors be considered in determining whether an offender poses a substantial danger of physical harm to others, including, but not limited to, a history of violent behavior and prior history of state hospital commitment. Existing law allows a prisoner to request a hearing before the Board of Parole Hearings for the purpose of proving that the prisoner meets the criteria to be treated by the State Department of State Hospitals. Existing law allows a prisoner who disagrees with the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings to file a petition in court for a hearing on whether they met the criteria and, if the court reverses the determination of the Board of Parole Hearings, existing law authorizes the court to require the parties to return to court to ensure that the entities involved in the release of the prisoner have coordinated an exit plan for the prisoner. This bill would require that an exit plan include the submission of an application for Medi-Cal benefits and a recommendation, as appropriate, to the supervising county's behavioral health department by a licensed behavioral health professional, as specified, supervising the treatment of, or treating, the prisoner for a mental health disorder for certain resources and programs, including substance use disorder treatment, assisted outpatient treatment, and early psychosis intervention services. Existing law, the Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) , an initiative measure enacted by the voters as Proposition 63 at the November 2, 2004, statewide general election, funds a system of county mental health plans for the provision of mental health services, as specified. The MHSA establishes the Mental Health Services Fund, a continuously appropriated fund, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services (department) , to fund specified county mental health programs. Existing law, the Behavioral Health Services Act (BHSA) , a legislative act amending the MHSA that was approved by the voters as Proposition 1 at the March 5, 2024, statewide primary election, recast the MHSA by, among other things, renaming the fund to the Behavioral Health Services Fund and reallocating how moneys from that fund may be spent. The BHSA requires each county to establish and administer a full-service partnership program that includes, among other things, outpatient behavioral health services, as specified, and housing interventions. Existing law establishes criteria for an individual with a serious mental illness to be presumptively eligible for a full-service partnership, including, among other things, the person is transitioning to the community after 6 months or more in the state prison or county jail. This bill would add to the criteria for presumptively eligibility for a full-service partnership an individual transitioning to the community after 6 months or more in a state hospital. Existing law establishes the Medi-Cal program, which is administered by the State Department of Health Care Services and under which qualified low-income individuals receive health care services. The Medi-Cal program is, in part, governed and funded by federal Medicaid program provisions. Existing law, the California Advancing and Innovating Medi-Cal (CalAIM) Act, supports the stated goals of identifying and managing the risk and needs of Medi-Cal beneficiaries, transitioning and transforming the Medi-Cal program to a more consistent and seamless system, and improving quality outcomes. Existing law makes a qualifying inmate of a public institution eligible, commencing no sooner than January 1, 2023, to receive targeted Medi-Cal services, limited to those services approved in the CalAIM Terms and Conditions for 90 days, as specified. This bill would also make a qualifying inmate of a state hospital eligible to receive targeted Medi-Cal services, as described. By expanding the population receiving benefits under the BHSA and to the extent that the bill would create new duties for counties relating to Medi-Cal eligibility determinations, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above.
Existing law establishes the California Community Colleges, administered by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges, as one of the segments of public postsecondary education in the state. Existing law requires the board to appoint a chief executive officer, known as the Chancellor of the California Community Colleges. Existing law establishes community college districts throughout the state, under the administration of community college district governing boards, and authorizes these districts to provide instruction at the community college campuses they operate. Existing law establishes the Part-Time Community College Faculty Health Insurance Program, which authorizes the governing board of a community college district to provide a program of health insurance for part-time faculty, multidistrict part-time faculty, and their dependents. Existing law requires the chancellor, by June 15 of each year, to apportion to each community college that establishes a program an amount that equals up to12 of the total cost of the individual premiums required to be paid for the health insurance coverage of participating part-time faculty, multidistrict part-time faculty, and their dependents, and to apportion any remaining funds to each community college district that establishes a program and meets certain criteria, up to the total cost of the individual premiums required to be paid for the health insurance coverage of the participants, as provided. If funds appropriated for purposes of the program remain after those apportionments, existing law requires that the balance revert to the General Fund annually, as specified. This bill would instead require that the balance be deposited into the Part-Time Community College Faculty Health Insurance Program Fund, which the bill would create. The bill would continuously appropriate the moneys in the fund to the chancellor for purposes of the above-described apportionments, as specified. This bill would state the intent of the Legislature that, by January 1, 2030, each community college district commence negotiations with the exclusive representatives for part-time community college faculty to offer health insurance benefits to part-time and multidistrict part-time community college faculty and their eligible dependents.
Existing law generally provides requirements for the licensing of business establishments. Existing law requires a business that provides services to minors, as defined, to provide written notice to the parent or guardian of a minor participating in the service offered by the business regarding the business' policies relating to criminal background checks for employees, as specified. Existing law requires the Department of Justice to maintain state summary criminal history information, as defined, and to furnish this information as required by statute to specified entities, including a human resource agency or an employer. Under existing law, the disclosure of state summary criminal history information to an unauthorized person is a crime. This bill would require a person who provides behavioral health treatment for a behavioral health center, facility, or program to undergo a background check, as specified. By expanding the scope of the crime of unlawful disclosure of state summary criminal history information, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law requires the State Department of Education, on or before January 1, 2024, to develop a plan to expand mental health instruction in California public schools. This bill would require the department, on or before January 1, 2028, to develop a plan to expand digital wellness instruction in California public schools, as provided.
Existing law requires the State Department of Education to identify an evidence-based online training program that a county office of education, school district, state special school, or charter school that serves pupils in grades 7 to 12, inclusive, can use to train school staff and pupils as part of their policy on pupil suicide prevention. Existing law requires the department, subject to an appropriation for these purposes, to provide a grant to a county office of education to acquire a training program identified by the department and disseminate that training program at no cost to specified educational entities, as specified. This bill would revise and recast these provisions by (1) deleting the requirement to provide the above-described grant, (2) deleting the requirement of the department to identify the above-described evidence-based online training program, (3) instead requiring the Behavioral Health Services Oversight and Accountability Commission to develop an online training program to train school staff, pupils who are 13 years of age or older, and parents, guardians, or caregivers of pupils as part of the policy on pupil suicide prevention adopted by county offices of education, school districts, state special schools, and charter schools that serve pupils in kindergarten or in any of grades 1 to 12, inclusive, as specified. The bill would require those educational entities that elect to conduct suicide risk screenings to report, on or before June 30, 2027, and June 30 annually thereafter, the number of pupils screened, and which screening instruments were used, for the reporting year, to the department, as provided, and would require the department to compile and post statewide aggregate data on these screenings on its internet website, as provided. This bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an urgency statute.
Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists by the California State Board of Pharmacy. Existing law authorizes a pharmacist to, among other things, perform certain procedures or functions and furnish specified drugs. Existing law authorizes the refilling of a prescription for a dangerous drug without the authorization of the prescriber if the prescriber is unavailable to authorize the refill and, in the pharmacist's professional judgment, failure to refill the prescription might interrupt the patient's ongoing care and have a significant adverse effect on the patient's well-being. Existing law requires a pharmacist to notify the prescriber, as specified, of any prescription refilled without their authorization. This bill would only require a pharmacist to provide that notification if a prescriber is identified.
Existing law, the Health Care Decisions Law, provides for the creation, form, and revocation of advance health care directives, and authorizes an adult having capacity to give an individual health care instruction. Under existing law, the advance health care directive of a patient in a skilled nursing facility is not effective unless a patient advocate or ombudsman signs the advance directive as a witness and declares that they are serving as a witness pursuant to this requirement. Existing law authorizes a witness who is a patient advocate or ombudsman to rely on the representations of the administrators or staff of the skilled nursing facility, or of family members, as convincing evidence of the identity of the patient, as specified. This bill would delete a patient advocate from the above-described witness duties, thus requiring that an ombudsman witness the advance health care directive of a patient in a skilled nursing facility.
Existing law, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, provides for the regulation of various subjects relating to the manufacturing, processing, labeling, advertising, and sale of food, drugs, and cosmetics, under the administration and enforcement of the State Department of Public Health. A violation of these provisions is punishable as a misdemeanor. This bill would require a manufacturer of infant formula for sale or distribution in this state to test its final infant formula product for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury at least once per month. The bill also would, commencing on January 1, 2028, require a brand owner, as defined, to provide information to consumers on its internet website or package label regarding specific information about its infant formula that includes, among other things, certain test results for arsenic, cadmium, lead, and mercury. The bill would specifically prohibit a person from selling in the state or manufacturing, delivering, holding, or offering for sale in the state any infant formula that does not comply with these requirements. The bill would require the manufacturer and brand owner to provide test results to the department upon request, as specified. By expanding the requirements relating to infant formula under the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Law, the violation of which would be a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Existing law authorizes a court to grant pretrial diversion to a defendant suffering from a mental disorder, on an accusatory pleading alleging the commission of a misdemeanor or felony offense, in order to allow the defendant to undergo mental health treatment. Existing law provides that a defendant is eligible for diversion if they have been diagnosed with certain mental disorders and the court finds that the mental disorder was a significant factor in the commission of the charged offense, unless there is clear and convincing evidence that the disorder was not a motivating, causal, or contributing factor to the defendant's involvement in the alleged offense. Existing law prohibits defendants charged with specified offenses, including murder, from being placed in this diversion program. This bill would require that the diagnosis or rediagnosis with a mental disorder be within 5 years before the alleged offense. Existing law makes a defendant suitable for this diversion program if, among other criteria, a qualified mental health expert opines that the defendant's symptoms of the mental disorder that caused, contributed to, or motivated the criminal behavior, would respond to mental health treatment and the defendant will not pose an unreasonable risk of danger to public safety if treated in the community, as specified. The bill would revise that standard and instead require the court to find that the defendant will not pose a substantial and undue risk to the physical safety of another person if treated in the community. The bill would require the mental health expert's opinion to include that the proposed mental health diversion plan is clinically appropriate to address the symptoms of the defendant's mental disorder, as specified. The bill would require the court to state the reasons for denial on the record.
Existing law requires, among other things related to ensuring the safety of companion chatbots, an operator to prevent a companion chatbot on its companion chatbot platform from engaging with users unless the operator maintains a protocol for preventing the production of suicidal ideation, suicide, or self-harm content to the user, as specified. This bill, the Preventing AI User Self Endangerment (PAUSE) Act, would require an operator to adopt and make publicly available a policy governing its protocol for identifying and responding to credible crisis expressions and, for each companion chatbot an operator makes available to users in this state, implement a system for monitoring and detecting credible crisis expressions in user conversations with companion chatbots. The bill would require, if the monitoring system detects a credible crisis expression, the operator to take certain actions, including commence a crisis interruption pause, as specified. The bill would define "credible crisis expression" to mean a statement by a user of a companion chatbot that reasonably indicates, as determined through contextual analysis rather than keyword detection alone, intent to harm the user or others. This bill would require an operator of a companion chatbot to document certain information related to credible crisis expressions and crisis interruption pauses and, beginning January 1, 2028, annually report that information to the Office of Suicide Prevention. The bill would provide for its enforcement, as specified.
