- http://www.mercurynews.com/california/ci_21182263/california-mental-health-spending-often-bypasses-mentally-ill
- http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_21203578
- http://www.sacbee.com/2012/08/10/4712005/mental-health-spending-needs-an.html
- http://articles.ivpressonline.com/2012-07-31/mental-health_32966913
Provide names of other journalists involved.
Hannah Dreier
List date(s) this work was published or aired.
July 28, with follow-up stories through August
Provide a brief synopsis of the story or stories, including any significant findings.
I sifted through hundreds of pages of public records to break the news that while California’s budget crisis forced deep cuts in mental health treatment, “wellness” programs are flush with money. I revealed that some of those programs _ yoga, drama classes, acupuncture _ have little or nothing to do with mental health. In researching mental health cuts, I discovered that 20 percent of the money raised through a tax specifically aimed at funding mental health treatment instead goes to wellness programs. My story prompted editorials around California and inspired lawmakers to work to change how mental health funding is spent so it serves those who need it most. The state is now conducting a $400,000 audit into the program.
Explain types of documents, data or Internet resources used. Were FOI or public records act requests required? How did this affect the work?
With California Democrats balancing the budget on the promise of tax hike ballot initiative, I thought it was a good time to check in on the last statewide tax voters approved: a 2004 “millionaire’s tax” to was sold as a way fix the state’s broken mental health care system. It took me weeks to familiarize myself with the byzantine laws that the initiative created, but one day I spotted what looked like it could be the basis for a story: While the ballot initiative had been sold as a way to help the severely mentally ill, the Department of Mental Health had decided in 2007 that 20 percent of the revenue_ more than $1 billon to date_ could only be used to help people without a diagnosed mental illness. In practice, this means that money raised through a tax specifically aimed at funding mental health treatment instead goes to wellness programs like yoga, drama classes and acupuncture. The first big hurdle in reporting this story was finding out exactly where that 20 percent of tax revenue had gone. The state does not track this spending in a centralized way, so I had to request 58 county plans going back several years, and then comb through hundreds of pages of scanned documents. By reading through each of these plans, I was able to reveal a pattern of state-funded programs serving a group one of my sources called “the worried well:” students, immigrants, expectant mothers, and other groups that could benefit from social services but are not mentally ill. In addition to forming the foundation of my reporting, I used the public records put together a sidebar listing wellness programs around the state. I also relied heavily on legislative documents. The story hinged on discrepancies between the tax initiative voters passed and the regulations the state wrote to implement that tax. This required me to spend several weeks delving deep into state code, which was often nearly unintelligible.
Explain types of human sources used.
I had to work hard to find local mental health workers who would speak about their concerns on the record. I ended up finding my on-the-record sources by asking public health workers who raised alarms on background to refer me to people who might be willing to go public. I developed a chain of contacts this way that eventually led to the health workers quoted in the story. The author of the 2004 initiative, and current leader of the state Senate, initially refused to talk to me. To change his mind, I explained the premise of the story to a dozen lobbyists and state administrators and asked them to put in a word with him for me.
Results:
The story prompted editorials across the state (a few of which are linked in my entry packet). Several newspapers used my PRA request to write localized sidebars looking at wellness programs in their own communities. The day after the story ran, lawmakers began calling for oversight hearings. The next week, two lawmakers officially requested a state audit of the spending, despite the strong objections of the state Senate leader, who had written the 2004 initiative. The Senate leader held a secret meeting with all California reporters except AP to discuss the growing controversy. Ultimately, he joined with the other lawmakers in requesting a rush audit. The state is expected to issue its recommendations in early 2013.
Follow-up (if any). Have you run a correction or clarification on the report or has anyone come forward to challenge its accuracy? If so, please explain.
No
Advice to other journalists planning a similar story or project.
The key to this story was persistency. I worked my way through a thick stack of public records and a dense chapter of California health code over the course of about seven months. It can take a long time to get familiar with this kind of wonky health care policy issue. But that’s all the more reason to pursue a story like this. I think the complex nature of this issue is one reason it went unreported on for so many years.