The Horror, The Horror

Written by Amanda Barnabe and Jen M. Padron

old empty room by barnabe
Old Room, Photo Credit: Amanda Barnabe, 2015

The first line of treatment in US psychiatric care is the prescription of psychotropic medications to an effected individual exhibiting mental diversity symptomology entailing behavioral and/or physical medically descriptive treatment.

The symptoms and prescribed diagnosis, according to the Diagnostic Statistical Manual’s (DSM-5, 2016) symptomology of “Serious Mental Illness” (SMI) includes anxiety or panic disorder(s), behavioral and mood disorder(s) with the more complex or complicated issues being major depression and the bipolar or schizophrenia spectrum disorders.  The result then, is a dire public health crisis. Suicide completion numbers worldwide today tragically occur every 40 seconds[1] and injury accounts for 30-40% of excess mortality, where 60% of premature deaths in persons with a diagnosis of schizophrenia are due to medical conditions such as cardiovascular, pulmonary and infectious diseases[2]. Compared with adults without diagnosed mental illness issues, people with SMIhave higher rates of chronic disease, heart disease, seizure conditions, hypertension, diabetes, and obesity.

Physical health problems are a major issue among individuals living with a psychiatric label.  Nearly half (45%) of all individuals living with any mental disorder have two or more debilitating physical disorders further lowering their quality of life and leading to a significantly high rate of comorbid physical issues[3].

Physical co-morbidities is the leading reason why people with SMI are dying 25 years earlier than the general population[4]. There is a higher frequency of multiple general medical conditions that more than double the rate of premature deaths from these conditions[5].

Loss of life expectancies in the United States for depression, bipolar, and schizophrenia has lowered total life expectancy by 12 – 25 years as compared to individuals not in the community public mental health system[6].  According to the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration[7] and NASMHPD[8] individuals living with a diagnosed SMI, limited to receipt of current public mental health care are dying on average 25 years nationwide earlier than those receiving private care for mental illness. Forty-six (46) years ago, in 1967, 1:3 American adults filled a prescription for a “psychoactive” medication, with total sales of this family of drugs reaching $692 million[9].

In the US, psychotropics are broadly prescribed, the least regulated, and fall in the fastest, biggest-selling class of drugs nationally. In 2010, $16.1 billion was spent on antipsychotics in the US, to treat depression, bipolar and schizophrenia.  $11.6 billion was spent on antidepressants, while $7.2 billion for the treatment for ADHD, according to IMS Health, which tracks prescription drug sales (Wall Street Journal, 2011). MH treatment spending between 2009 and 2020 estimates showed a percent contribution of each provider type to the eagerly anticipated $91 billion increase in the treatment for the SMI nationwide. The International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) refers to SMI as “mental disorders” (i.e., codes in sections 290 through 319)[10].

A medically, clinically necessary diagnosis substantiating the use of psychotropic medication dosing is geared to control and manage exhibited DSM-5 symptomology popularized and normalized by the American Psychiatric Association, the American Medical Association, National Association of Social Work and the American Psychological Association. The US SMHA expenditures for mental health treatment alone was $38,098.64 in the millions (2013) which included jails, prisons, MH/SUD facilities, but not did not include children’s services nationwide[11]. 35.5% percent of all US Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) beneficiaries live with such a diagnosis[12]. The SSA 2012 numbers of 10,088,739 SSDI beneficiaries nearly doubled from 5,044,388 since 1995.

Kaiser Health Foundation of State Effected SMHA:

Using IMS data for 2012 as a starting point, baseline expenditures representing $/spent for SMI prescribed and purchased psychotropics are predicted using the formula (described earlier):

Δ expenditures = Δ P * Δ Q

where Δ means growth represented by 1 plus the percent change (example: 5.1 percent growth = 1.051), P represents price of services, and Q represents quantity of services. Spending was projected at the molecular level for those products expected to lose patent protection or at the therapeutic class level for all classes where the generic share was higher than 70 percent.

“For quantity of prescriptions, growth in the number of prescriptions for each therapeutic class was projected using the “target growth” technique described in the baseline projections section above. This method uses average growth over 2009–2012 and, in one case, over the longer time period of 2002–2012 to establish the growth rate at the end of the period. An assumption that the growth in volume will change gradually from 2012 to 2020 to hit that target growth rate was used.  In addition, patent expiration dates were used to determine points in time when branded medicines lost market exclusivity and would lose volume. The assumption was also made that most consumers would switch from a branded to the generic version, with 70 percent of the switching occurring in the first year after patent expiration and 95 percent in the second year after patent expiration,” (HHS Publication No. SMA-14-4883, 2014).

Source:  Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Projections of National Expenditures for Treatment of Mental and Substance Use Disorders, 2010–2020. HHS Publication No. SMA-14-4883. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2014[13].

Social stigma for diagnosis and living with an SMI increases triggers and stressors to an already vulnerable, disenfranchised, marginalized and impoverished population of citizens living with perceived mental illness and physical comorbidity. LGBQT individuals are 2 or more times more likely than heterosexual individuals to have a mental health condition. 11% of trans individuals reported being denied care by mental health clinics due to bias or discrimination. Lesbian, gay, bisexual, gender queer, trans and questioning youth are 2 to 3 times more likely to attempt suicide than heterosexual youth.

Critical Issues Faced by Multicultural Communities[14]:

  • Culturally insensitive health care system
  • Higher levels of stigma
  • Language barriers
  • Lower rates of health insurance
  • Less access to treatment
  • Less likely to receive treatment
  • Poorer quality of care
  • Racism, bias, homophobia or discrimination in treatment settings

Trending study on the association of ill health and SMI includes analysis of physical wellness measures and Quality of Life (QoL).  QoL has emerged to be an “influential outcome measure in people with psychosis”[15] related most significantly to schizophrenia and major depression.  There is a significant relationship between physical health, overall subjective health levels and QoL in pervadive research between illness-related factors with chronic mental health disorders, substance abuse/addiction disorders and comorbidities.  Psychiatric and comorbidities ill-health symptoms diminish QoL[16]. Preventable physical health conditions rise out of the lack of exercise due to the high rate of tobacco smoking, poor nutrition and prescribed psychotropic medication side effects, giving way to cardiovascular disease, raised sugar levels (Type 2 diabetes), hypertension, and liver disease[17].

The physical health of individuals living with a psychiatric and/or substance abuse disorder and comorbidity is currently inordinately neglected in treatment which requires an Integrated care solution. Co-locating behavioral and physical primary care providers to deliver a balanced, whole regimen in assessment, treatment plan and a consistent continuum of care[18] in a public/private health care environment.  Drake, et al., (1998) support an Integrated behavioral health and substance abuse treatment in an assertive community treatment (ACT) approach for patients living with a psychiatric and substance abuse/addiction dual disorder based upon clinical and epidemiological data indicating that the rate of the SMI population with comorbidity are significantly higher than in the general population[19]. Reducing the severity of needs for individuals living with an SMI and substance abuse/addiction disorder benefits ensures a higher experienced personal QoL for recipients of public community health services[20]. Predictors of higher QoL stem from lowered needs, having one’s personal and social supports in place, having a higher personal feeling of worth, less substance abuse/addiction disorders and having housing in place increases self-worth and predicts a favorable long-term outcome in schizophrenia with better daily and social functioning[21].

The absence and lowered levels of personal needs, having a sense of daily hope, lessened social exclusion, greater safety to self and a measureable, identified personal benefit to living are directly involved with greater personal QoL[22]showing value in ensuring a higher QoL in this disenfranchised population.  It has been argued that “… fostering hope and positive self-concept should be central components of recovery-oriented services and interventions…”[23] and is strongly linked to individuals experiencing increased QoL. An effective early intervention method to improving the physical health of adults with SMI to achieve higher overall QoL’s and meaningful Physical Health Quality of Life (PHQoL) is to develop and implement effective, culturally attune and sustainable lifestyle interventions[24].

In the scientific literature, there have been several reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on Peer providers (Certified Peer Specialist, Forensic Peer Recovery Specialist, Recovery Coach and Community Health Worker) for mental health services. Controlled studies substituting people with lived experience for providers of direct or adjunctive mental health services generally find the same impact on service user outcomes as other mental health providers, with improved treatment outcomes in some instances with no additional risk of harm to service users[25]. There is also theoretical literature which addresses the challenges and benefits of hiring consumer providers in mental health agencies[26] and a long history of activist writings on the importance of leadership, community-building, and mutual support among people with lived experience of the mental health system[27].

As of February 2016, 43 States, two Territories (Guam and Puerto Rico), the District of Columbia and the Veterans Administration system have established programs to train and certify Peer specialists is in process of developing and/or implementing a program. Appalachia Consulting[28] contracted proprietary CPS curricula is used in 23 states. Recovery Resources[29] free CPS curricula is used broadly by the Department of Veterans Affairs and a limited number of states. Recovery Innovations / Recovery Opportunities (Ashcraft, 2015) contracted and proprietary CPS curricula is also broadly purchased and contractually provided.

Given the groundswell of perspectives that endorse the growing prominence and importance of Peer support in mental health and human services, it is essential that we document evidence to examine the impact the peer support workforce has on access to care, cost of services, participant outcomes, and system and provider outcomes[30]. Included in this must be rigorous research on the particular approaches and philosophies of peer support workers that make them an addition rather than a substitute for clinical and social care disciplines[31].

The real horror is that Western “medicines” were “supposed to make one feel better” and is juxtaposed with the overwhelming intention that psychotropics are chemical restraints designed to alleviate psychiatric symptomology. It is in the authors’ opinion that mental illness and the disease model rarely takes into consideration cultural bias, white privilege, trauma, re-traumatization or hate ofthe other. For the mentally ill, psychotropic medications hold the illusion of controlling (mal)behavior in that the individual is molded to meet public acceptance levels of socially accepted cultural mores, inherently white, male, patriarchal, heterosexual Judeo-Christian based and is hierarchical.

The caveat then, is that psychotropics are often not prescribed to improve apatient’s QoL alone, but rather, to shape neat predictable cookie cutter shapes of people with shared life experience or to fit antiquated sociocultural stereotype and meet appropriate biased social expectation and roles of compliance.

 

Citations

[1] World Health Organization (2016). Retrieved April 11, 2016http://www.befrienders.org/suicide-statistics

[2] National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (NASMHPD) Medical Directors Council Report, 2006

[3] Harvard Mental Health Letter, (2003); NASMHPD, (2006); Parks, Svendsen, Singer, Foti, (2006).

[4] Fricks, (2012); Mental Health America, (2010); National Alliance on Mental Illness, (2011).

[5] Kelly, Boggs, and Conley, 2007; Mauer, 2006; Parks et al., 2006; Sokal et al., 2004; Saha, Chant, and McGrath, 2007; Laursen et al., 2013).

[6] Robert WhitakerAnatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America, 2010.

[7] National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors (NASMHPD) Medical Directors Council Report, 2006.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Robert WhitakerAnatomy of an Epidemic: Magic Bullets, Psychiatric Drugs, and the Astonishing Rise of Mental Illness in America, 2010.

[10] Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. Projections of National Expenditures for Treatment of Mental and Substance Use Disorders, 2010–2020. HHS Publication No. SMA-14-4883. Rockville, MD: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2014.

[11] National Association of State Mental Health Program Directors Research Institute, Inc. (NRI), (2013) http://www.nri-incdata.org/

[12] Annual Statistical Report on the Social Security Disability Insurance Program

[13] SAMHSA, 1996 (Coffey et al., 2000; Levit et al., 2013; Levit, Kassed, Coffey, Mark, McKusick, et al., 2008; Levit, Kassed, Coffey, Mark, Stranges, et al., 2008; Mark et al., 2000; Mark et al., 2007; Mark and Coffey, 2004; Mark, Coffey, McKusick, et al., 2005; Mark, Coffey, Vandivort-Warren, et al., 2005; Mark, Levit, Vandivort-Warren, Buck, and Coffey, 2011; Mark, McKusick, King, Harwood, and Genuardi, 1998; McKusick et al., 1998; SAMHSA, 2010; SAMHSA, 2013).

[14] National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) (2016). Cited statistics provided by the National Institute of Mental Health. http://www.nimh.nih.gov, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, New Evidence Regarding Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Mental Health and Injustice at every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey.

[15] Theodore, K., et al., 2012, p. 545

[16] Parks et al., (2006).

[17] Must, Spadano, Coakley, Field, Colditz, & Dietz, (1999).

[18] Robson & Keen, (2012).

[19] Cuffel, (1996).

[20] Fleury, M., et al, (2013).

[21] Karow, A., et al., (2014).

[22] Fleury, M., et al, (2013).

[23] Hodgekins & Fowler, 2010; Theodore, et al., (2012), p. 549.

[24] Fricks, L., (2014).

[25] Pitt, V., Lowe, D., Hill, S., Prictor, M., Hetrick, S. E., Ryan, R., & Berends, L., 2013; Chinman, M., George, P., Dougherty, R. H., Daniels, A. S., Ghose, S. S., Swift, A., & Delphin-Rittmon, M. E., (2014).

[26] Davidson et al., (2006); NASMHPD, (2014).

[27] Chamberlin, (1978); Morrison, (2013).

[28] Fricks & Powell, (2015).

[29] Harrington, S., (2015)

[30] Hardin & Padron, (2014).

[31] Chinman, M., George, P., Dougherty, R. H., Daniels, A. S., Ghose, S. S., Swift, A., & Delphin-Rittmon, M. E., (2014).

Advertisements

US Peer Services | Supports Initiative Fall 2015 – Winter 2016 Coming Soon

It is in my opinion, speaking as a person with shared lived experience and as a Certified Peer Specialist with my fingers in the water of US Peer initiatives, that we’re on an exciting pathway that is entirely Spirit led.

I was recently at AltCon15 in Memphis | Tennessee that Peer Link and MHA of Oregon hosted and brava to the Team!

Dr. Jessica Wolf (Yale University), Erme Mahla (MHASP) and I co-presented Education 2.0! which is a pendium workshop length presentation on the educational opportunities leverageable for CPS, RC and CHW. Nice work together.

I will be providing my collateral knowledge nationally within a sharp broadband environment this Fall 2015 and Winter 2016.

My interest in the US Peer Workforce is simple. It’s about Jobs, stupid. The economy of life and saving lives.

For more information, email me directly at jennifermpadron@gmail.com.

Padron Logarithm for Quantifying Related Peer Workforce Medicaid State by State Rehab Option Functions

Quantifying Peer Service Deliverables Formula for # Referrals: [(a)(b)(c)/(c/(e/f) = x][1]

Where (a) Number(s) of CPS Medicaid Service Deliverable(s) Code(s)  X  (b) Dollar Value for Fifteen Minute Billable Protocol per type of Service Deliverable[i]  X  (c) CPS Point of Contacts Per Annum Medicaid Service Deliverable / (d) FY [e.g., 15, 16, 17] / (e) number of months of service deliverable(s) =  (x) Number of necessary Referrals is dependent upon the TYPE of CPS provided service deliverable (e.g., (f) (e.g., PSR, Meds Management, Case Management, Group, F2F Peer to Peer).

 (a)(b)(c)

(c/(e/f) = x, when:

[x = [(a)(b)(c)/(12/(e)(f)  Point of Contact Referrals as per 1) Months, and 2) Sum/anuum for FY 2015, 2016, 2017)] = d

[1] Padron & Associates Peer Services Deliverable Algorithm © 2015 All Rights Reserved.

[i] (f) PSR, Meds Management, Case Management, Crisis, Group, F2F Peer to Peer and other supports

Expert Q & A with Jen Padron and Dr. Nev Jones

Expert Q & A with Dr. Nev Jones, Stanford University

Expert Q & A with Dr. Nev Jones (Stanford University) in work with NASHMPD:

Jen Padron M.ED, ACPS, CPS, CHW, PhD(c)

Jen Padron is a nationally recognized expert on peer support and peer workforce development and is currently the Principal at Padron & Associates, based in Georgia.  The consultancy are subject matter experts in co-locating Behavioral and Physical public health care environments which directly impact the US Peer Workforce (Certified Peer Specialist Certification).  Before moving to Georgia, as Project Manager to The Hope Concept Wellness Center and Director to The HOPE Project her extensive experience as a recovery consultant and evaluation specialist supported Texas and national mental health transformative initiatives.  Recently, Jen has contracted to provide technical assistance and program development on a Latino/a-focused early intervention in psychosis (EIP) peer support development project based in Southern Methodist University in Dallas.

Q:  Given your expertise in peer support and peer workforce development, what do you think current priorities should. be for peer inclusion/support in EIP services?

 Jen Padron:  SAMHSA’s naming the Certified Peer Specialist as a Best Practice of Peer Services and Supports, paired with their recent CPS Core Competencies is fab. In order to be considered an EBP and melded into federal wordspeak, it “normalizes” a US Peer Workforce to grow and rolls-out proven Accountable Care Act public health Integration initiatives via various types of Peer Services | Supports deliverables.  It also means that CLAS must be adhered to. In other words, the CPS must ultimately adhere to National Standards for Culturally Linguistically Appropriate Services (CLAS) in Health and Health Care.  CLAS addresses and preserves multicultural, linguistic and diversity through inclusive accountability for ethnicity, religion, gender, age, geography and socioeconomic status, language and literacy, sexual identity where “orientation” and gender identity cross a binary continuum.

Q:  Not a lot of work in early intervention has focused on cultural sensitivity or culturally-informed intervention.  Why do you think such work needs to be prioritized?

Jen Padron:  Priority #1. In simple terms, the backstory on Recovery, is still that she is the orphan child of the clinically medical based psychiatric and psychological community globally. More than the majority of early interventions center around people identified as living with a schizophrenia affective disorder. There are numerous longitudinal studies having ease in quantifying where something as “new” as the CPS does not. If you want Recovery-based look at time tested work coming out of Boston University, University Pennsylvania, Temple University, Rutgers University, Yale University, the University of Southern California, the University of Missouri-St. Louis, the work of Pat Deegan, Mary Ellen Copeland, Steve Harrington, Sheri Mead and Chris Hansen, Dan Fisher, Peggy Swarbrick, Mark Salzer, John Brekke, Laysha Ostrow, Lauren Tenney, Ron Manderscheid and others. It is interesting to me but makes total sense that most, if not all of innovative and emerging work around Recovery, the CPS, Recovery Coach, Community Health Worker Promotora is being developed by peer-led interest groups who are carefully tucked into national oversight behavioral and health leadership organizations (e.g., ACMHA College for Behavioral Health Leadership’s Peer Leadership Interest Group) and initiated MCO Integration initiatives are rolling out (in ’15-’16) an array of CPS service deliverables that will grow a US Peer workforce exceeding the recognized state’s Medicaid Rehabilitation Option billing model (e.g., Psychosocial Rehabilitation, Medications Management, Case Management).  As well, the national consumer related TACs, funded by SAMHSA are doing excellent work (e.g., BRSS TACS, Peer Link, MHA National, The National Self-Help Consumer Clearinghouse/MHASP).

Q:  How do you see peers in particular contributing to culturally-informed services, including planning and evaluation?

Jen Padron:  The National Consumer Technical Training and Assistance Centers (TACs) are producing quality and worthwhile mentionable Youth and Peer-Led initiatives regionally and nationally.  For example, the SAMHSA ADS Center work around social inclusion and SAMHSA / CMHS’ campaign on whole health and wellness (e.g., 10X10, National Wellness Week, National Wellness Month, Million Hearts) accomplished much to hallmark leadership in the myriad of regionally and nationally centric communities in multiculturalism, cultural linguistic diversity and stigma reductive measures directing social change efforts (e.g., Gitane Williams, Craig Lewis, Tracy Love, Sharon Cretsinger, Tina Minkowitz, Adam Slosberg, Daphne Klein, Diane Engster, Lauren Tenney, Leah Harris, Amy Smith, et al.). The Psychiatric Rehabilitation Association produced outstanding psychiatric multicultural principles under the direction of Lisa Razzano, Peter Ashenden, and Boston University’s Sargent College.  Gender and women’s studies prevailing thought centers on Hope, WRAP(R), IPS (R), eCPR (R), and the CPS core competencies (SAMHSA, 2015) guarantee a culturally-informed, sustainable community and trauma informed recovery oriented system of care.

Peer Services in Behavioral Health Care Integration Workshop, June 14-17, 2015 (University of Wisconsin-Stout)

The Certified Peer Specialist in Behavioral Health Care Integration

I’m presenting “Peer Services in Behavioral Health Care Integration” with Heidi Levy, MA (Community Access, NY) at the University of Wisconsin-Stout’s National Institute on Rural Alcohol and Drug Abuse Conference 2015.  We will present a Certified Peer Specialist centric triage model of care offering a peer services | supports portfolio of public health care service deliverables in co-located behavioral and physical health care environments.

Individuals with shared life experience of mental diversity play a vital role (e.g., Certified Peer Specialist) of providing peer services and supports in the mental health and behavioral health care settings (SAMHSA, 2013). The Certified Peer Specialist is effective in promoting behavioral change in service recipients they serve by increasing utilization rates and providing significant reductions in hospital admissions and re-admissions (Fedder, Chang, Curry, 2003).

The Certified Peer Specialist (CPS) provides for behavioral and physical wellness health coaching supports in an integrated setting (Swarbrick, M. (2013); Manderscheid, R (2013). The CPS is the vehicle that the US Peer workforce will initially exemplify the multitude of roles and is the only available source provider for peer services and supports where service deliverables are sustainably funded by the Medicaid and Manage Care Organization (MCO) peer supports in the ACA market. This is a public/private health care sustainable funding model.  Peer Services | Supports are a win/win wellness and whole health solution in today’s ACA environment utilizing peer-driven services (Vestal, C. 2013) to co-locate in behavioral and physical integrated care environments.

The Medicaid 1915 Community waiver, 1115 Medicaid waiver, and state by state Rehabilitation Option funding options offer direct solutions for viable peer supports via physical and behavioral health integrated delivery systems of care. The March 2014 DOL advent offering peer services supports a state and federal billing provides for additional sustainability.

Mitigating rising health care costs and a fundamental shift in reimbursement is occurring. “Patients” and organizations, alike, are inherently required to transition from an episodic, fee-for-service model of reimbursement to a new model that reimburses and encourages money in the pocket wellness and care across the health service continuum.

A wellness focus on prevention and coached self-activated management of chronic conditions that our population experiences with early intervention and prevention, care experience will improve, providers will be better able to deliver quality care seeing an overall reduction in costs.

Workforce Trends

The professional workforce in the future will be smaller, and the work itself will be different than it is today. Projections for nursing shortages and primary care physician shortages have been published widely, and the shortage of primary care physicians will only be exacerbated by increased demand for their services by 2014. This is due to the aging population, the addition of an estimated 32 million patients into the system as a result of ACA, and the increasing movement of chronic disease care into the ambulatory arena.

To function as seamless efficient teams, all health care professionals (both current and future) must be trained in inter-professional educational and cross-trained settings. This represents a major challenge for our centers of professional education to innovate in the redesign of both pre-clinical and clinical curricula.

The US Certified Peer Specialist (CPS) certification currently operates and is managed by an irregular un-uniform state by state “Recovery Waiver” Medicaid reimbursement mechanism limited to local mental health authorities clinical supervising teams offering psychosocial rehabilitation, medication compliance monitoring and various kinds of community resource linkage.

Technical, training and assistance services are commonly provided regionally by the State, or an oversight body requiring application for certification, certification training and continuing education training. Advanced trainings (e.g., Intentional Peer Support (IPS); Emotional CPR (eCPR); Trauma Informed Peer Support, Social Change and Trauma Healing; Mental Health First Aid (MHFA); Whole Health and Action Management (WHAM); Wellness Recovery Action Plan (WRAP) and other peer-led supports are offered without federal oversight or a national standardizing of core competencies or a national credentialing body.

As of April 2014, 39 states and the District of Columbia have established programs to train and certify peer specialists and 7 states are in the process of developing and/or implementing a program.  Appalachia Consulting (Fricks & Powell, 2015) contracted proprietary CPS curricula is used in 23 states.  Recovery Resources (Harrington, 2015) free CPS curricula is broadly used by the Department of Veterans Affairs and a limited number of states.  Recovery Innovations/Recovery Opportunities (Ashcraft, 2015) contracted and proprietary CPS curricula is also broadly used.  Fewer states utilize an in-state developed CPS curricula. There is minimal CPS certification reciprocity between particular states requiring application and testing to acquire state certification.

This unique rural alcohol and drug abuse conference provides participants the opportunity to personally interact with other rural alcohol and drug abuse professionals, federal agency representatives and nationally known institute faculty and resource individuals while accessing the latest in evidence-based practices for the improvement of rural services.

Co-sponsored by:

  • National Rural Alcohol and Drug Abuse Network, Inc. (NRADAN)
  • Scaife Family Foundation
  • SAMHSA: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration
  • SAMHSA: Center for Substance Abuse Treatment
  • US Department of Justice-Bureau of Justice Assistance
  • National Association of Drug Court Professionals
  • Wisconsin Council on Problem Gambling
  • Cenpatico/Centene Corporation

To register for “Peer Services in Behavioral Health Care Integration Workshop” and the conference, see: http://www.uwstout.edu/profed/nri/

%d bloggers like this: