Background
The mental health (MH) and substance use disorder (SUD) service fields face shortages of licensed, certified, and trained clinicians and paraprofessionals. There is an urgent need for the evaluation of current federal investments and additional investments in the MH and SUD workforce infrastructure. One example of federal funding, FY 2017 Access Increases in Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services (AIMS) supplemental funding, aimed to increase access to behavioral healthcare by increasing personnel and increasing technical support and the general expansion of access to MH services and SUD services focusing on the treatment, prevention, and awareness of opioid abuse. Upon evaluation of the funding, the Office of Inspector General found that, within selected states, 67 of 100 health centers did not use the funds appropriately. To further expand upon the evaluation of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) funding, researchers at the Behavioral Health Workforce Research Center (BHWRC) aim to examine where the funding was designated, and if this might impact the effectiveness of the federal funding.
Findings
The number of AIMS clinics per 100,000 state residents and total state AIMS funds per 1,000 state residents was greater in states with small populations compared with large populations. We observed the opposite relationship for the association between population within HPSA and AIMS funding. Indeed, as the population within HPSAs grew, the number of AIMS centers per 100,000 and total AIMS funding per 1,000 within a state decreased. We also found no relationship between the opioid overdose rate and AIMS funding distribution. Finally, states with low averages for the number of psychologists, social workers, and psychiatrist had more AIMS centers and more AIMS funds than peer states with high numbers of all three provider types.
