Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Email this article to a Colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to My Articles & Searches Download to citation manager Citing Articles via Google Scholar Articles by Teich, J. L. Articles by Ireys, H. T. Search for Related Content PubMed Citation Articles by Teich, J. L. Articles by Ireys, H. T. Child/Adolescent Psychiatry Financing of Programs Community Residential Facilities Health Policy and Legislation Related Article

A National Survey of State Licensing, Regulating, and Monitoring of Residential Facilities for Children With Mental Illness

OBJECTIVE: Little national information is available to help policy makers understand the methods that states use to regulate residential facilities for children with mental illness. This article describes the results of a government-sponsored survey of state officials that examined how states license, regulate, and monitor such facilities. METHODS: Questionnaires were mailed to selected officials in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia, followed by extensive telephone and e-mail contacts. Questionnaire items covered program characteristics, licensing and accreditation, mandated services, monitoring and oversight methods, and payment sources. RESULTS: Information was gathered on 71 types of residential facilities in 38 states, accounting for 3,628 separate residential facilities with 50,507 beds as of September 30, 2003. States differed widely in the types of residential facilities that they regulate and their mix of regulatory methods, which included requirements for announced and unannounced visits, mandated staff-to-client ratios, minimum levels of education for facility directors, specifications for licensing practices and critical incident reporting, mandated complaint review procedures, and accreditation from designated organizations. Welfare, mental health, and health departments all participated in regulating facilities. CONCLUSIONS: States relied on at least several regulatory methods, but no state used all of the possible methods. The regulatory environment is complex in most states because several agencies are involved in licensing, regulating, and reviewing complaints. To ensure that residential facilities effectively address the needs of children with mental illness and their families, policy makers should review and improve their state's data on methods for regulating residential facilities.

Related Article:

July 2007: This Month's Highlights
Psychiatr Serv 2007 58: 899. [Full Text] [PDF]

Get information about faster international access.

Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2007 American Psychiatric Association. All rights reserved.

Home | Search | Current Issue | Past Issues | Subscribe | All APPI Journals | Help | Contact Us