What should residents consider about Finding F2.13: F2.13: There is limited knowledge and use of non-traditional therapies., and the County’s response?
Audit context
Response says
DMH disagrees, explaining specialty mental health obligations, yoga's asserted exclusion from approved services and clinician scope, and contractor provision or funding of adjunct non-traditional services. Response does not establish knowledge or uptake across modalities.
Audit analysis
Whole disagreement and reasons are explicit. State DHCS contract and service-approval framework are checkable bases, with yoga and contractor funding examples; these do not fully engage claimed variation in clinician training and actual use. Report physical PDF page(s) 135; County response physical PDF page(s) 21. Claims remain attributed; adoption date is not a filing or receipt date.
Finding-response score
Document completeness and usefulness—not factual verification or a legal conclusion.
4/4
Statutory elements
5/6
Public usefulness
Whole disagreement and reasons are explicit. State DHCS contract and service-approval framework are checkable bases, with yoga and contractor funding examples; these do not fully engage claimed variation in clinician training and actual use.
Scoring confidence: high
Source pages
Public participation
Use Pol.is to discuss both the Grand Jury finding and the County’s response, see where participants agree, and add a perspective for others to consider. Participant statements do not alter this audit or verify factual claims made by any participant or source document.