The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to adopt its Draft Three-Year FY 26-29 Behavioral Health Integrated Plan, required by the passage of Proposition One by voters in March of 2024. The intent of the Integrated Plan is to modernize the behavioral health delivery system in California. California’s Proposition One (also known as Behavioral Health Transformation) is expected to significantly expand mental health and substance use disorder treatment capacity while restructuring how the state funds behavioral health services. The Integrated Plan also redirects existing funding streams toward housing support, with 30% of the Mental Health Services Act revenue to be allocated to housing intervention programs rather than traditional outpatient and crisis services. The Plan emphasizes outcomes, accountability, and equity in service delivery, and covers all funding within the County Department of Health Services.
Developed through a locally-designed planning process, requiring the involvement of stakeholders from twenty-nine identified groups, counties are currently completing 30-day open comment periods before revising and forwarding the recommended Integrated Plans to Boards of Supervisors. HEAPA believes that reviewing the draft plans of all California counties would be a useful process, and has therefore developed a spreadsheet listing links to county behavioral health websites with information about their planning processes and resulting draft plans.
The Sonoma County Behavioral Health Board’s meeting this Tuesday, from 5-7pm, in the Santa Rosa Conference Room at 1440 Neotomas Ave, will offer an opportunity to make final comments on the Draft County Plan.
First 5 Sonoma County is pleased to announce the release of a new Request for Proposals (RFP): Building Parent Leadership & Power in Sonoma County (RFP#2627-201).
Through this funding opportunity, First 5 Sonoma County seeks proposals from community-based organizations to develop and implement culturally and linguistically responsive activities that strengthen parent leadership, advocacy, civic engagement, and opportunities for shared decision-making on issues impacting young children and families.
A total of $900,000 over a three-year period has been allocated for this initiative, with contracts anticipated to begin on August 1, 2026.
Programs funded through this opportunity should support:
Parent and caregiver networking and leadership development
Advocacy and civic engagement training
Participation in boards, commissions, councils, and policy efforts
Culturally responsive and inclusive engagement strategies for families with young children
Priority will be given to proposals that engage:
Low-income and under-resourced communities
Multilingual families
Families of children with developmental, behavioral, or social-emotional needs
Key Dates:
May 15, 2026 – RFP Released
May 22, 2026 (5:00PM) – RFP Questions due to First 5
May 26, 2026 (5:00 PM) -Responses to questions posted on the First 5 Sonoma County website
May 29, 2026 (5:00 PM) – Mandatory Letter of Intent Due
June 22, 2026 (5:00 PM) – Proposals Due
Only applicants that submit a complete and eligible Letter of Intent will be invited to submit a full proposal.
Questions regarding the RFP may be submitted to: funding@first5sonomacounty.org. Please visit the First 5 Sonoma County website to review the full RFP and application materials.
HEAPA’s Response
The Request For Proposals above got us thinking about how HEAPA could participate in a submission. Our collective history has demonstrated our commitment to developing leadership, advocacy, and civic engagement among low income and under-resourced communities. That includes years of focus in early child development and behavioral health.
Currently, our projects are designed to bring increased civic engagement and power acquisition to experienced unhoused through personal support and communication technology training serving: SAVS and Share of Sonoma County case managers, Homeless Coalition Lived Experience Advisory Board members, Los Cien BRIDGE Members, and Asian American Teen Advocacy Council members.
Upcoming projects include applying the lessons learned in our work with Share of Sonoma County case managers to better communicate and collect data within the new amalgamation of the current HMIS and Smart Key data systems in the Department of Health Services. We are additionally exploring utilizing current participants to research the barriers to full participation by parents and caregivers in Sonoma County advisory boards and commissions. Expenses for the project could address child care, transportation, employment, and the impact on benefit allowances.
HEAPA will be contacting our partners to discuss other ways in which we might play a role in the development of responses to this RFP.
I’ve been asked by many to provide my perspective on the County’s development of the Proposition One’s required Sonoma County Three-year Integrated Plan for Behavioral Health and Substance use Disorder Services beginning July 1, 2026. Having served on the County’s Behavioral Health Board for the last two years, and as Chair of the Board’s Subcommittee charged with its review and report until early April, I was in a unique position to monitor the County’s performance.
The instructions from the California Department of Health Care Services to counties, concerning the process of developing the Integrated Plan, represented a significant expansion of the programs and funding sources involved, as well as the variety of additional stakeholders required to be included in the planning. County staff, complaining of delayed state direction, consumed nine of the twelve months of planning providing stakeholders with information from the initiative that impacted the previously reported MHSA funding (Prop 63). How was Sonoma County was going to add substance abuse services, spend thirty percent of the funds on housing for clients, and half of the Full support Partnerships on those under 25 years of age without any additional funding? When combined with the failure of the Health Department’s Fiscal Division to deliver to the Department any useful information concerning the remaining 90% of the Plan’s responsibility, the proposed stakeholder engagement and Board review of the proposed Plan quickly became an exercise in unproductive meetings with repetitious powerpoint presentations.
The Subcommittee I chaired soon found themselves useless in their attempt to build an understanding of the work of Plan development, and as a result could not adequately assist in informing required stakeholders. Adding to the barriers to engagement, one of the largest stakeholder oversight entity (Sonoma County Homeless Coalition) was never approached by the Department, or given a chance to participate.
The result is a year of missed opportunities to inform and consider the views of an expanded stakeholder community concerning the expenditure of over a billion dollars of government funding for those with behavioral health and substance use disorder needs.
How is HEAPA Supporting Unhoused Civic Engagement? 1. We provided the first stipends, transportation, and meeting operational support for lived experience individuals to participate in County homeless advisory boards. 2. We equipped service agency case managers and advocates with laptops and digital assistance devices. 3. We assisted the Sonoma County Lived Experience Advisory Board to participate in state and national peer conferences. 4. We partnered with the County Department of Human Services to expand the distribution of brochures promoting their Open Doors Program to the unhoused at libraries and low income housing residents at Burbank Housing project sites. 5. We purchased two portable charging stations for the Sonoma County Department of Human Services Mobile Vans serving targeted low income and service agencies. 6. We established the unhoused bicycle repair project by equipping a mobile repair resource person with a long history of service on those who live and travel the streets.
What is the California Transparency Project doing? 1. We purchased digital personal assistant devices for several agencies to test out their use improving communication and data management. 2. We produced a video instructing digital assistant users on how to provide meeting reports. 3 We requested copies of all service contracts issued by the Departments of Health Services and Human Services for FY 25-26, and made them available online. 4. We called for the convening of NOFA planning committees of the Sonoma County Community Development Commission, Santa Rosa Housing Authority, Sonoma County Homeless Coalition, and the Behavioral Health Boards to prioritize citizen access to strategic planning and the coordination of their work.
Next Actions:
With the approval throughout California of Proposition One-mandated Behavioral Health Three-Year Integrated Plans by county boards of supervisors, and of their responsibility to partner with the California Department of Health Care Services, the evaluation of its outcomes will begin. HEAPA is committed to facilitate and support the participation of consumers of the services delivered. We are currently funding the out-of-pocket costs of their appointments to county advisory commissions, equipping and training them to conduct research into program performance, providing meeting opportunities for cross-county discussions, and mentoring lived experienced individuals in Sonoma County in surveying recipients in a variety of safety net programs and facilities. We will be expanding our support of the California Safety Net Evaluation Project to include the establishment of a contract archive for over $40 billion in awarded program funds, and employing hundreds of recipients to utilize AI capabilities to produce first-hand reports of program impacts.
This morning, I concluded that I’ve always been a teacher. And my topic is how to be me. I have always tried to learn new skills, be more productive, and improve my performance. And I have never shied away from sharing my life with others.
So I’m going to make sure that I give myself enough time to use my newly-found skills in social media communication to pass on what I’m learning.
The next video in our California Transparency Project is now up on YouTube. The link to it is here.
Providence, R.I. – The U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island today ruled that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and HUD Secretary Scott Turner violated the law through their “slapdash imposition of political whims,” when approving new funding restrictions that would have unlawfully conditioned access to federal housing grants on compliance with the Trump-Vance administration’s partisan agenda.
The decision issued today in National Alliance to End Homelessness v. Turner, et al., is a victory for The National Alliance to End Homelessness and Women’s Development Corporation, which filed a lawsuit last September challenging the grant restrictions. The groups are represented by Democracy Forward, National Homelessness Law Center, Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island, and ACLU Foundation of Rhode Island in the matter.
“This ruling is a victory for people across this nation who have overcome homelessness and stabilized in HUD’s permanent housing programs,” said Ann Oliva, CEO of the National Alliance to End Homelessness. “Today’s news reinforces a fundamental truth: that the work to end homelessness is not partisan, and never should be interfered with for political means. On behalf of the people and providers we serve, the National Alliance to End Homelessness pledges to continue fighting back against efforts to dismantle homeless response in America.”
“The solution to homelessness is stable, predictable, permanent housing,” said Frank Shea, Executive Director of Women’s Development Corporation. “Organizations providing this housing need fair, predictable programs that are free of politicized criteria. We are glad the court agrees. Our neighbors in need of housing deserve nothing less.”
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, asserted that HUD’s newly imposed criteria for “Continuum of Care (CoC) Builds” grants were unlawful. This is the third time that HUD has issued this same grant opportunity, even after grant awards had already been announced to Congress. In so doing, HUD introduced extreme political criteria to the application. Under the new funding application rules, service providers and communities were blocked from applying for federal housing funds for new Permanent Supportive Housing for individuals and families experiencing homelessness if they operate in jurisdictions with policies the Trump-Vance administration disfavors. This includes states and cities with sanctuary protections and cities that criminalize public camping. The new funding criteria also would have disqualified organizations that provide services considered “harm reduction,” such as Safe Drug Use Criteria practices and those that have inclusive policies for transgender people.
Today’s ruling declares the notice announcing the funding opportunities, the new political criteria used by HUD when deciding to issue grants, and the one-week application period for the grants all to be unlawful and orders the policies vacated and set aside. The court additionally ordered the already-appropriated funding to remain available for award, consistent with the Court’s order.
“For more than three decades, the federal government has supported housing providers and communities through HUD’s programs to help people experiencing homelessness move into stable housing,” said Skye Perryman, President and CEO of Democracy Forward. “We are honored to have worked with these brave plaintiffs and co-counsel to hold this administration accountable for their unlawful actions, and we are pleased that the court has stopped the Trump-Vance administration from holding life-saving funding hostage to a political agenda.”
“Hundreds of thousands of unhoused people need housing and supports to survive. Instead of following Congress’ direction to increase that supply of supportive housing, this Administration unlawfully manipulated a grantmaking process that would have only made homelessness across the country worse,” said Antonia Fasanelli, Executive Director at the National Homelessness Law Center. “We were honored to represent the National Alliance to End Homelessness and to work with our esteemed co-counsel in preventing the Administration from forcing an ideological agenda on a program that is intended to save lives.”
“The Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island will continue to fight for Rhode Islanders whenever and however the Trump Administration threatens them with unlawful actions,” said Amy Romero, Chief Legal Counsel of Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island. “We are pleased with this court’s decision that recognizes that this Administration violated the law by imposing their political whims on federal funds intended to address the needs of individuals and families experiencing homelessness.”
“The federal government’s distortion of the grant process for blatant political and ideological gains put funding for life-saving services at risk,” said Steven Brown, executive director of the ACLU of Rhode Island. “We are extremely gratified that Rhode Island organizations like the Women’s Development Corporation will be allowed to receive federal funding thanks to the court’s decision.”
The plaintiffs are represented by Kristin Bateman, Yenisey Rodríguez, Kristen Miller, and Robin Thurston from Democracy Forward; Amy Romero and Kevin Love Hubbard for the Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island; Antonia Fasanelli from the National Homelessness Law Center; and Lynette Labinger for the ACLU Foundation of Rhode Island.
Read today’s order here and the original filing here.
We did it.
For the second time in two days, the courts have ruled against the Trump Administration’s efforts to illegally meddle in federal homelessness programs. Today’s ruling from the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals means the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) cannot move forward with its plan to release the December 19th Continuum of Care (CoC) Program Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) to hold an absurd partial-year competition. Our Preliminary Injunction remains in place.
This will bring immense relief to communities across the country who were faced with the prospect of running overlapping local CoC NOFO competitions. Most importantly, this means HUD must renew all awards expiring this year — which will keep people in their homes, program staff employed, and landlords paid their rent. The full opinion can be found here:Read the Full Press ReleaseAnd it’s not over yet. Preventing the December NOFO is just a part of our ongoing litigation. The full merits of our case remain before the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island awaiting final judgment, and we trust our legal counsel has put forth a strong set of arguments for the Court to consider. Democracy Forward and the ACLU Foundation of Rhode Island represent the coalition of nonprofit organizations in the matter; the National Homelessness Law Center represents NAEH and NLIHC; Public Rights Project represents the cities of Boston, Cambridge, Nashville, and Tucson as well as King County; Santa Clara County and San Francisco are also plaintiffs. The Lawyers’ Committee for Rhode Island represents all plaintiffs.
Today, two local advocates whose dedication to those living on the street here in Santa Rosa is unequaled, joined HEAPA’s Transparency Project. Each were given Fieldy devices and a short course in how to use them. Their addition to the growing number of community activists who are helping HEAPA capture the words and actions of our public servants is greatly appreciated. As part of their training, we are sharing with them what my Fieldy device has to say about the conversation which occurred before and after we met.
Here is a link to the Powerpoint (coming soon) outlining the recent settlement terms between Homeless Action! and the County of Sonoma and the City of Santa Rosa resolving their 8-year old federal lawsuit over the rights of the unhoused during clearance of their encampments.
Here is a summary of each:
City Settlement Highlights
The settlement with the City of Santa Rosa provides that the City will not remove unhoused people’s belongings from public property except in very limited circumstances:
There are exigent circumstances—e.g., an immediate threat to health and safety—that require the items’ removal;
When the police arrest someone and safekeep their property; or
When items are collected for evidence.
Instead—and even in exigent circumstances, where possible—the City agrees to give people time to move their own belongings, including letting them move their belongings in multiple trips and other accommodations based on individual needs and circumstances.
The language also includes requirements for City staff and contractors to document instances when they remove belongings from public property, including posting notices where feasible and sharing information on the City’s website.
The City also agreed not to use threats of citation or arrest to pressure people into abandoning their belongings.
These and other requirements will be incorporated into the written policies for SRPD and the City’s Debris Response Team, and the City will train staff on the policy changes.
The City settlement will remain in effect for one year.
County Settlement Highlights
The settlement with Sonoma County and the Sonoma County Community Redevelopment Commission includes policy commitments related to the County’s treatment of unhoused people’s personal property, reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities, and due process in County shelter facilities.
The settlement requires the County—including sheriff’s deputies on the Joe Rodota Trail—to provide reasonable written notice of no less than 10 hours before it removes unhoused people’s belongings from public property, as well as storage of those belongings for at least 90 days, with limited exceptions. It also requires a post-removal notice and a process for people to get their belongings back.
The County settlement includes requirements for certain County policies, protocols, and contracts to include language regarding reasonable accommodations for people with disabilities to ensure fair treatment and meaningful access for unhoused people with disabilities.
The County will also comply minimum due process requirements that must be followed before people can be “exited” from County homeless shelters, ensuring that individuals have notice of the reason for the exit and an opportunity to challenge the exit if they disagree.
The County settlement will remain in effect for three years.
Homeless Emergency Assistance Program Association 