Existing law establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to oversee the implementation of Housing First guidelines and regulations, and, among other things, identify resources, benefits, and services that can be accessed to prevent and end homelessness in California. Existing law requires a state agency or department that funds, implements, or administers a state program that provides housing or housing-related services to people experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness to revise or adopt guidelines and regulations to include enumerated Housing First policies. Existing law specifies the core components of Housing First, including services that are informed by a harm-reduction philosophy that recognizes drug and alcohol use and addiction as a part of tenants lives and where tenants are engaged in nonjudgmental communication regarding drug and alcohol use.

This bill would authorize state programs to fund supportive community recovery residences, as defined, that emphasize abstinence under these provisions as long as the state program meets specified criteria, including using at least 90% of its funds in each county for housing or housing-based services using a harm-reduction model. The bill would specify requirements for applicants seeking funds under these programs and would require the state to perform periodic monitoring of select supportive community recovery residence programs to ensure that the supportive community recovery residences meet certain requirements, including that core outcomes of the supportive community recovery housing emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness. The bill would also prohibit eviction on the basis of relapse, as specified. The bill would require, if a tenant is no longer interested in living in a supportive community recovery residence or is at risk of eviction, that the supportive community recovery residence secure the tenant a permanent housing unit at a partner or other housing program operated with harm-reduction principles.

Existing law requires the State Department of Health Care Services to license and regulate facilities that provide residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services. Existing law also requires the department to certify alcohol and other drug treatment recovery services, as specified.

This bill would require the department to oversee certification of supportive community residences that serve individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness and who have substance use disorders with a housing first model, as defined. The bill would require the department to establish criteria for certification of supportive community residences in order to allow a supportive community residence to receive referrals from the department as available housing for persons experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness and who have substance use disorders. The bill would prohibit supportive community residences from providing any licensed services onsite, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services. adopt the most recent standards approved by the National Alliance for Recovery Residences, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, or other equivalent standards as the minimum standard for supportive recovery residences that receive public funds under these provisions. The bill would require the department to establish a separate process for determining if the supportive recovery residence complies with the core components of Housing First. The bill would authorize the department to charge a fee for certification of a supportive community recovery residence in an amount not to exceed the reasonable cost of administering the program, not to exceed $1,000, and would establish the Supportive Community Recovery Residency Program Fund for collection of the fee.

Existing law establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to oversee the implementation of Housing First guidelines and regulations, and, among other things, identify resources, benefits, and services that can be accessed to prevent and end homelessness in California. Existing law requires a state agency or department that funds, implements, or administers a state program that provides housing or housing-related services to people experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness to revise or adopt guidelines and regulations to include enumerated Housing First policies. Existing law specifies the core components of Housing First, including services that are informed by a harm-reduction philosophy that recognizes drug and alcohol use and addiction as a part of tenants lives and where tenants are engaged in nonjudgmental communication regarding drug and alcohol use.

This bill would authorize state programs to fund supportive community residences, as defined, that emphasize abstinence under these provisions as long as the state program meets specified criteria, including using at least 90% of its funds in each county for housing or housing-based services using a harm-reduction model. The bill would specify requirements for applicants seeking funds under these programs and would require the state to perform periodic monitoring of select supportive community residence programs to ensure that the supportive community residences meet certain requirements, including that core outcomes of the supportive community housing emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness. The bill would also prohibit eviction on the basis of relapse, as specified. The bill would require, if a tenant is no longer interested in living in a supportive community residence or is at risk of eviction, that the supportive community residence secure the tenant a permanent housing unit at a partner or other housing program operated with harm-reduction principles.

Existing law requires the State Department of Health Care Services to license and regulate facilities that provide residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services. Existing law also requires the department to certify alcohol and other drug treatment recovery services, as specified.

This bill would require the department to oversee certification of supportive community residences that serve individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or and who have substance use disorders with a housing first model, as defined. The bill would require the department to establish criteria for certification of supportive community residences in order to allow a supportive community residence to receive referrals from the department as available housing for persons experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues. and who have substance use disorders. The bill would prohibit supportive community residences from providing any licensed services onsite, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services. The bill would authorize the department to charge a fee for certification of a supportive community residence in an amount not to exceed the reasonable cost of administering the program, not to exceed $1,000, and would establish the Supportive Community Residency Program Fund for collection of the fee.

Existing law establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to oversee the implementation of Housing First guidelines and regulations, and, among other things, identify resources, benefits, and services that can be accessed to prevent and end homelessness in California. Existing law requires a state agency or department that funds, implements, or administers a state program that provides housing or housing-related services to people experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness to revise or adopt guidelines and regulations to include enumerated Housing First policies. Existing law specifies the core components of Housing First, including services that are informed by a harm-reduction philosophy that recognizes drug and alcohol use and addiction as a part of tenants lives and where tenants are engaged in nonjudgmental communication regarding drug and alcohol use.

This bill would authorize state programs to fund recovery housing, supportive community residences, as defined, that emphasize abstinence under these provisions as long as the state program meets specified criteria, including using at least 75% 90% of its funds in each county for housing or housing-based services using a harm-reduction model. The bill would specify requirements for applicants seeking funds under these programs and would require the state to perform periodic monitoring of select recovery housing supportive community residence programs to ensure that the recovery housing meets supportive community residences meet certain requirements, including that core outcomes of the recovery housing supportive community housing emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness. The bill would also prohibit eviction on the basis of relapse, as specified.

Existing law requires the State Department of Health Care Services to license and regulate facilities that provide residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services. Existing law also requires the department to certify alcohol and other drug treatment recovery services, as specified.

This bill would require the department to oversee certification of recovery houses supportive community residences that serve individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or who are experiencing serious mental illness or substance use disorders with a housing first model, as defined. The bill would require the department to establish criteria for certification of recovery houses supportive community residences in order to allow a recovery house supportive community residence to receive referrals from the department as available housing for persons experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues. The bill would prohibit recovery houses supportive community residences from providing any licensed services onsite, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services. The bill would authorize the department to charge a fee for certification of recovery houses a supportive community residence in an amount not to exceed the reasonable cost of administering the program, not to exceed $1,000, and would establish the Shared Recovery Housing Supportive Community Residency Program Fund for collection of the fee.

Existing law establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness to oversee the implementation of Housing First guidelines and regulations, and, among other things, identify resources, benefits, and services that can be accessed to prevent and end homelessness in California. Existing law requires a state agency or department that funds, implements, or administers a state program that provides housing or housing-related services to people experiencing homelessness or who are at risk of homelessness to revise or adopt guidelines and regulations to include enumerated Housing First policies. Existing law specifies the core components of Housing First, including services that are informed by a harm-reduction philosophy that recognizes drug and alcohol use and addiction as a part of tenants lives and where tenants are engaged in nonjudgmental communication regarding drug and alcohol use.

This bill would authorize state programs to fund recovery housing, as defined, that emphasize abstinence under these provisions as long as the state program uses meets specified criteria, including using at least 75% of its funds in each county for housing or housing-based services using a harm-reduction model and model. The bill would specify requirements for applicants seeking funds under these programs and would require the state to perform periodic monitoring of select recovery housing programs to ensure that the recovery housing meets certain requirements, including that core outcomes of the recovery housing emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness. The bill would also prohibit eviction on the basis of relapse, as specified.

Existing law requires the State Department of Health Care Services to license and regulate facilities that provide residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services. Existing law also requires the department to certify alcohol and other drug treatment recovery services, as specified.

This bill would require the department to oversee certification of recovery houses that serve individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues, who are experiencing serious mental illness or substance use disorders with a housing first model, as defined. The bill would require the department to establish criteria for certification of recovery houses in order to allow a recovery house to receive referrals from the department as available housing for persons experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues. The bill would prohibit recovery houses from providing any licensed services onsite, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services. The bill would authorize the department to charge a fee for certification of recovery houses in an amount not to exceed the reasonable cost of administering the program, not to exceed $1,000, and would establish the Shared Recovery Housing Residency Program Fund for collection of the fee.

Existing law requires the State Department of Public Health, among other things, to develop a coordinated state strategy for addressing the health-related needs of women and requires the department to place priority on providing information to consumers, patients, and health care providers regarding womens gynecological cancers, including signs and symptoms, risk factors, the benefits of early detection through appropriate diagnostic testing, and treatment options.

This bill would make technical, nonsubstantive changes to these provisions.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

Senator Anna Caballero, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular Session

AB 2893 (Ward) - The Supportive Recovery Residence Program

Bill Summary:

AB 2893 would require the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to establish a certification process for “supportive recovery residences,” as defined.

Fiscal Impact:

• Unknown ongoing General Fund costs, likely low millions, for the DHCS to administer the certification process. General Fund costs would be offset to the extent that fee revenues would support these activities.
• The California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH) estimates one-time General Fund costs of $705,000 in 2025-26 and $673,000 in 2026-27 to create a monitoring unit to receive monthly reports specified in the bill, monitor select supportive recovery residencies, report out on results, and intervene when statute is violated.
• The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation estimates that the bill could create a minimum of $436,000 in annual General Fund costs to certify sub-contractor facilities as supportive recovery residences.

Background:

Current law grants the DHCS the sole authority in state government to administer, license, certify, and regulate all substance use disorder (SUD) functions and programs, including licensing adult alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities (RTFs). Current law defines “recovery residence (RR)” as a residential dwelling that provides primary housing for individuals who seek a cooperative living arrangement that supports personal recovery from an SUD and that does not require DHCS licensure or does not provide RTF licensable services. RRs may include, but not be limited to, residential dwellings commonly referred to as “sober living homes,” “sober living environments,” or “unlicensed alcohol and drug free residences.”

Current law establishes the Cal ICH with the purpose of coordinating the state’s response to homelessness by utilizing Housing First practices. Agencies and departments administering state programs created on or after July 1, 2017 must incorporate the core components of Housing First. Current law outlines the core components of Housing First, including that “services are informed by a harm-reduction philosophy that recognizes drug and alcohol use and addiction as a part of tenants’ lives, where tenants are engaged in nonjudgmental communication regarding drug and alcohol use, and where tenants are offered education regarding how to avoid risky behaviors and engage in safer practices, as well as connected to evidence-based treatment if the tenant so chooses.”

Proposed Law:

Specific provisions of the bill would:

• Define “supportive recovery residence” to mean housing in a residence that serves individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness and who have substance use disorders and that does all of the following:
  • Satisfies the core components of Housing First, pursuant to state law.
  • Uses substance-use-specific, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from substance use disorders.
  • Emphasizes abstinence.
  • Offers tenants permanent housing only.
• Require DHCS to adopt the most recent standards approved by the National Alliance for Recovery Residences (NARR), the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, or other equivalent standards as the minimum standard for supportive recovery residences that receive public funding, as specified.
• Authorize DHCS to charge a fee for certification of supportive recovery residences in an amount not to exceed the reasonable cost of administering the program, not to exceed $1,000.
• Establish the Supportive Recovery Residency Program Fund; provide that all fees collected be deposited in the fund; and require the moneys in the fund to be available upon appropriation by the Legislature for the purposes of supporting the certification activities of the DHCS.
• Add to the meaning of core components of Housing First to include that state departments or agencies may allow programs to fund supportive recovery residences, as specified, and use substance-use-specific, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from substance use disorders that emphasizes abstinence and promotes self-determination in the recovery process, so long as the state program meets specified requirements.

Related Legislation:

SB 1339 (Allen) would require DHCS to administer a voluntary certification program for supportive community residences. The bill was not heard in the Assembly Health Committee.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Senator Richard Roth, Chair

BILL NO: AB 2893

SUBJECT: The Supportive Community Residency Program

SUMMARY:

Requires the Department of Health Care Services to establish a certification process for supportive community residences (SCRs). Expands Housing First core components to permit state entities to fund SCRs that use substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery.

Existing law:

1. Grants the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) the sole authority in state government to administer, license, certify, and regulate all substance use disorder (SUD) functions and programs, including licensing adult alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities (RTFs). [HSC §11750, et seq. and §11839.3]
2. Defines “alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facility” or “facility” as any premises, place, or building that provides residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services. [HSC §11834.02]
3. Defines “recovery residence (RR)” as a residential dwelling that provides primary housing for individuals who seek a cooperative living arrangement that supports personal recovery from an SUD and that does not require DHCS licensure or does not provide RTF licensable services. Permits a RR to include, but not be limited to, residential dwellings commonly referred to as “sober living homes (SLHs),” “sober living environments,” or “unlicensed alcohol and drug free residences.” [HSC §11833.05(f)]
4. Requires California agencies and departments administering state programs created on or after July 1, 2017, to collaborate with the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH) to adopt or revise guidelines and regulations to incorporate Housing First (HF) core components, except for the Returning Home Well Program, Specialized Treatment for Optimized Programming Program, and Long-Term Offender Reentry Recovery Program, all of which are administered by the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation and fund “recovery housing.” Defines “state programs” as those that a state entity funds, implements, or administers to providing housing or housing-based services to people experiencing or are at risk of homelessness. [WIC §8255(a-c and e) and §8257]
5. Defines “Housing First (HF)” as the evidence-based model that uses housing as a tool, rather than a reward, for an individual’s recovery, and that centers on providing or connecting homeless people to permanent housing as quickly as possible. HF employs various core components that include such things as engaging tenants in services informed by a harm-reduction philosophy and recognize drug and alcohol use and addiction as a part of tenants’ lives; engage tenants in nonjudgmental communication about drug and alcohol use; and offer education to avoid risky behaviors and engage tenants in safer practices with connection to evidence-based treatment, if tenants so choose.

[WIC §8255(b and d)]

1. Defines “recovery housing” as sober living facilities and programs that provide housing in a recovery-focused and peer-supported community for people recovering from SUD issues. Participation for tenants is voluntary, unless it is ordered by a court or is a condition of release for individuals under the jurisdiction of a county probation department or the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation. [WIC §8256(c)(3)]

This bill:

Certification of Supportive Community Residences (SCRs)

1. Requires DHCS to oversee certification of SCRs and establish criteria for initial certification, conditions that would result in decertification, and the means for regaining certification. Permits DHCS to charge a certification fee that does not exceed $1,000 for the reasonable cost of administering the program.
2. Defines “supportive community residence” as a residence that serves individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness and who have SUDs and that does all of the following:
   1. Satisfies the core components of HF;
   2. Uses substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction;
   3. Emphasizes abstinence; and,
   4. Offers tenants interim or permanent housing only.
3. Establishes, in the State Treasury, the SCR Program Fund into which all fees collected under this program will be deposited and made available to DHCS upon appropriation by the Legislature to support its SCR certification activities.
4. Requires DHCS-certified SCRs to be permitted to receive referrals from DHCS, its agencies, or contractors as available housing for persons who are experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness and who have a SUD.
5. Prohibits SCRs from providing any licensable services onsite, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services authorized by DHCS.

Housing First

1. Expands HF core components to permit state departments or agencies to allow programs to fund SCRs that use substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction, and emphasizes abstinence and promotes self-determination in the recovery process if the program meets specified requirements, such as:
   1. It uses at least 90% of funds in each county for housing or housing-based services employing a harm reduction model;
   2. It demonstrates engagement with those who have experienced homelessness and substance use to inform local decisions to fund SCRs;
   3. The state performs periodic monitoring of select SCRs to ensure it complies with offering at least one harm-reduction housing placement option to an individual or family and they choose a SCR over housing offering a harm-reduction approach;
   4. Holistic services and peer-based recovery supports are available and directly communicated to all program participants;
   5. The housing abides by local and state landlord-tenant laws governing grounds for eviction;
   6. Relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing, and tenants receive relapse support;
   7. Eviction from a SCR only occurs when a tenant’s behavior substantially disrupts or impacts other people where the tenant resides, but has procedures for the tenant to reenter that SCR; and,
   8. The SCR or housing program finds alternative housing for a tenant who is no longer interested in living in that SCR or is at risk of eviction, including permanent housing that uses harm reduction principles at either a partner or other housing program. The SCR is required to continue to house the tenant until they are successfully rehoused.

FISCAL EFFECT:

According to the Assembly Appropriations Committee:

1. Estimated costs to DHCS of an unknown, but likely significant amount, offset to an unknown extent by certification fee revenue, to establish and oversee a certification process outlined in this bill for SCRs. This bill authorizes DHCS to charge a certification fee of up to $1,000. DHCS is still developing its estimate and was unable to respond to the committee’s request for fiscal information.
2. Cal ICH estimates General Fund costs of $705,000 in the first year and $673,000 in the second year for four staff positions to receive reports and periodically monitor select SCRs, report results, and intervene when statute is violated. This cost estimate assumes Cal ICH will be the agency conducting “periodic monitoring” of SCRs, although the bill does not clearly specify the agency that is to conduct the periodic monitoring.

PRIOR VOTES:

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s statement. According to the author, as California continues to navigate the mental health needs of our unhoused population along with the state housing crisis, we have learned these issues are often intertwined. This bill establishes a state certification process for RRs through DHCS. This housing model has proven very successful and pairing it with HF principles that ensure people are placed into housing as an early step so they can have a safe environment to move forward in addressing their issues. This bill standardizes care and requirements for all RRs in California, while also making it available as a tool the state can use to address treating our unhoused population.
2. RRs/SLHs. A 2010 report on the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website, “Sober Living Houses for Alcohol and Drug Dependence: 18-month Outcomes,” states that SLHs are not formal treatment programs and are not obligated to comply with state or local regulations applicable to treatment. However, NIH does not provide a formal definition of an SLH. The report also mentions that it is difficult to determine how many SLHs there are in California because they are outside of the purview of state licensing authorities. The NIH report cites the protection that the federal Fair Housing Act affords SLHs to be located in residentially zoned areas, personal privacy under the Fourth Amendment, and the right of people with disabilities to live together for a shared purpose, such as mutually assisted recovery and maintenance of an abstinent lifestyle.

According to DHCS’s website, some types of residences do not provide alcohol and other drug services and therefore do not require licensure by DHCS, including cooperative living arrangements with a commitment or requirement to be free from alcohol and other drugs, sometimes referred to as RRs, SLHs, transitional housing, or alcohol- and drug-free housing. DHCS states that while SLHs are not required to be licensed by DHCS, they may be subject to other types of permits, clearances, business taxes, or local fees, which may be required by the cities or counties in which they are located. If a SLH is providing licensable services to adults, then it must obtain a valid RTF license. Licensable services can include, but are not limited to, detoxification services, group sessions, individual sessions, one-on-one counseling, educational sessions, or recovery, treatment, or discharge planning. If a SLH is providing just one of the mentioned services, then it should be classified as a RTF and must obtain a license from DHCS.

1. Drug Medi-Cal Organized Delivery System (DMC-ODS). According to DHCS, DMC-ODS provides a continuum of care modeled after the American Society of Addiction Medicine criteria for SUD treatment services, enables more local control and accountability, provides greater administrative oversight, creates utilization controls to improve care and efficient use of resources, implements evidenced-based practices in SUD treatment, and coordinates with other systems of care. This was a first-in-the-nation approach to provide Medi-Cal members with access to the care and system interaction needed in order to achieve sustainable recovery, initially approved as a five-year demonstration project by the federal government in California’s 1115 SUD Waiver that required counties to opt into this delivery system. DMC-ODS remains a county opt-in system of care of which 37 of the state’s 58 counties have chosen to do, representing about 96% of the state’s population. Statutorily required external quality reviews (EQRs) indicate progress towards improving clients’ access to treatment, enhancing timeliness to get into treatment, and adding the key elements of quality that benefit clients and DMC-ODS system, all of which were observed and documented across the reviews conducted in fiscal year (FY) 2021-22.

A 2023 EQR report on the DMC-OCS states that though not required as part of the DMC-ODS framework, RRs and transitional housing are a particularly important part of the continuum of care and was an issue in virtually every county reviewed in the EQRs. DMC-ODS permits counties to use RRs as an optional service for beneficiaries in their continuum of care if they adhere to the following guidelines: do not provide SUD services that would require DHCS licensure; all residents of a RR are actively engaged in medically necessary recovery support services to be provided off-site; and, each county develops guidelines for contracted RR providers and provide monitoring and oversight on their own. However, where available housing is short and costs are higher, housing issues are more acute and may impact the system of care at many levels. Counties fund RRs for clients in treatment through various allowable funding streams like Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant funds, along with some funds from criminal justice reform programs that resulted from AB 109 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 15, Statutes of 2011) and Proposition 47, passed by voters in 2014. The report contends limited fiscal resources available for RRs are a poor match for the challenges: there are too few buildings available for conversion to RRs, and those that are available are too expensive; there are too few providers to run quality RRs; and there are too many clients who lack stable, secure housing. For the clients who are working to build their recovery in outpatient services, or those transitioning from DHCS-licensed residential care into outpatient and community living, safe and secure housing is critical. For example, COVID-19 related factors along with the current housing and RR crisis have contributed to the declines in intensive outpatient treatment (IOT) utilization, as clients who could otherwise function at a level appropriate for IOT can only do so with stable housing. Counties have been adding RR slots as they become available, but it is a challenging work in progress.

1. Double referral. This bill was heard in the Senate Housing Committee on June 18, 2024, and passed with an 8-2 vote.
2. Related legislation. SB 1339 (Allen) requires DHCS, by January 1, 2027, to establish a voluntary certification program for SCRs using HF core components. SB 1339 requires a referring entity to provide information to individuals related to the license or certification status of a step-down care facility covered by their health insurance. SB 1339 was not heard in the Assembly Health Committee.

AB 2479 (Haney) was substantially similar to this bill in its HF provisions, but did not include the provision requiring DHCS to certify SCRs. AB 2479 is not being scheduled for hearing in the Senate Housing Committee and instead its author was added as a lead author to this bill.

AB 2995 (Jackson) replaces outdated and stigmatizing terminology from existing law in relation to SUDs with updated, person-centered terms. AB 2995 is pending on the Senate Floor.

1. Prior legislation. AB 1098 (Daly of 2021) would have required the Secretary of California Health and Human Services to develop and publish on DHCS’s website consensus-based guidelines and nationally recognized standards for counties to use to promote the availability of high-quality RRs. AB 1098 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.

AB 1220 (Luz Rivas, Chapter 398, Statutes of 2021) restructured various things about the Homeless Coordinating and Financing Council (HCFC), such as renamed it Cal ICH; removed all required members that are not department or agency heads and placed them on an advisory board that includes Legislative appointees and a person who has experienced homelessness; and, required it to meet regularly with the advisory board and seek its counsel.

SB 992 (Hernandez, Chapter 784, Statutes of 2018) requires programs licensed or certified by DHCS to disclose business relationships with RRs. SB 992 also made changes and improvements in DHCS’s licensing requirements for RTFs.

AB 2214 (Rodrigues, Melendez of 2018), AB 285 (Melendez of 2017), AB 2255 (Melendez of 2016), SB 214 (Benoit of 2009), and AB 724 (Benoit of 2007) would have required DHCS to establish a process for certifying RRs wherein DHCS approves organizations to certify the RRs while also giving DHCS authority to conduct periodic reviews and inspect the records of a certifying organization (CO). AB 2214, AB 285, and AB 2255 were all held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file. SB 214 was not heard in this Committee. AB 724 failed passage in this Committee on a 5-4 vote.

SB 1380 (Mitchell, Chapter 847, Statutes of 2016) established HF in this state and created the HCFC.

SB 1283 (Bates of 2016) would have permitted a city, county, or city and county to adopt by ordinance a registration process, health and safety standards, enforcement mechanisms for structured SLHs. SB 1283 was not heard in this Committee.

AB 2491 (Nestande of 2014) and SB 992 (Wiggins of 2008) would have required DHCS to license RRs to be known as adult recovery maintenance facilities. AB 2491 was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee suspense file. SB 992 was vetoed by Governor Schwarzenegger who stated: while licensure and regulation of SLHs are important to ensure SLHs respect and participate in their local community; for communities to provide support to these facilities; and for individuals seeking recovery from alcohol and drug addiction to live in safe environments that help them in their recovery, this bill did not accomplish these policy goals.

1. Support. Supporters, including SHARE! as sponsor, state they are a public-private solution to housing for people with disabilities that uses evidence-based, peer-to-peer practices and self-help support groups. The program builds support, resilience, and independence at a fraction of the cost of other housing programs. SHARE! says they have housed more than 2,200 mental health consumers in Los Angeles and continue to catch those falling through the cracks by accepting everyone who comes through its doors. SHARE! says they have never turned anyone away or asked anyone to leave. This bill would require DHCS to oversee certification of RRs that serve individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues, with a HF model, and would establish RRs at the end of the continuum of care that does not provide any licensed medical services onsite. This definitional bill is crucial to ensure that during these difficult budgetary times, only the most effective programs that have a certified and proven track record should gain access to our strapped state funds.
2. Opposition. Advocates for Responsible Treatment (ART) are opposed to the bill, which they state is not implementable regardless of the intentions. ART notes that the language in the bill presents ambiguities in the law, including what category of housing would be funded, in what structures and conditions would tenants live, and what services are provided and by whom. ART also opposes based on this bill not creating expectations for individuals in such housing to either seek or be engaged in recovery.
3. Policy comment. Other related bills that had been considered this session, including SB 1339 (Allen), which was approved by this Committee, included more categories of facilities that would be certified by DHCS under this bill, such as RRs; recovery housing for those with mental health conditions only that does not require licensure; mixed recovery residences for those with SUD and mental health dual diagnosis; and, abstinence and non-abstinence RRs. Because of the various possibilities, SB 1339 created a blanket term, which was “supportive community residence.” Since the introduction of these bills, the were various categories were amended out, and this bill, which started as serving those who are or are at risk of being homeless and also have a mental health condition, adopted the term SCR and now specifies that the population would be those who are or are at risk of being homeless and also have an SUD.

Further, this bill creates a definition for SCRs, which ultimately ties to the definition of “recovery housing” in 6) above of existing law. There is a definition of RR in 3) above of existing law that doesn’t mirror the definition in 6) above, but includes the same type of housing. To complicate things further, when the general public and local governments already seem confused about RRs, this bill creates yet a third definition when in reality an SCR would be an RR with the only difference being that they house those who are or are at risk of being homeless.

Lastly, this bill requires DHCS to do the certification for SCRs. Past bills moved from requiring DHCS to perform the functions to requiring DHCS to approve COs to perform certifying functions while giving DHCS authority to inspect COs and their records to ensure compliance with the law. DHCS uses this model for certifying SUD counselors.

To address the concerns outlined above, the author may wish to consider the following amendments, in addition to some technical fixes:

• 1. Create a name for RRs that will house those who are or are at risk of being homeless that aligns with the current definitions of RR;
  2. Amend the existing definitions of RRs so that they align with each other;
  3. Require DHCS to approve COs to perform the certification functions; and,
  4. Replace mentions of “addiction” with “SUD,” to align with AB 2995.

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:

Support: SHARE! Collaborative Housing (sponsor)

Awakening Recovery

Brentwood Community Council

County Behavioral Health Directors Association of California
Downtown Women's Center
Ibar Special Needs Trust Advisors
Los Angeles Recovery Connect
Safe Place for Youth

Satyagraha Alliance

Five individuals

Oppose: Advocates for Responsible Treatment

California Association of Alcohol and Drug Program Executives, Inc.

-- END --

SENATE COMMITTEE ON HOUSING

Senator Nancy Skinner, Chair

2023 - 2024 Regular

Bill No: AB 2893 Hearing Date: 6/18/2024

SUBJECT: The Supportive Community Residency Program

DIGEST: This bill establishes a certification process for supportive community residences and adds a standard for supportive community residences that meets the state's Housing First requirements.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Grants the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) the sole authority in state government to license alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities (RTFs).
2. Defines “alcoholism or drug abuse RTF” as any, place or building that provides 24-hour residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services.
3. Defines a “recovery residence” (RR) as a residential dwelling that provides primary housing for individuals who seek a cooperative living arrangement that supports personal recovery from a substance use disorder (SUD) and that does not require licensure by DHCS or does not provide licensable services, as specified, including residential dwellings commonly referred to as “sober living homes,” “sober living environments,” or “unlicensed alcohol and drug free residences.”
4. Prohibits any person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, or local governmental entity from operating, establishing, managing, conducting, or maintaining an alcoholism or drug abuse RTF to provide recovery, treatment, or detoxification services without first obtaining a current valid license from DHCS.
5. Establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal-ICH) with the purpose of coordinating the state’s response to homelessness by utilizing Housing First practices.
6. Requires agencies and departments administering state programs created on or after July 1, 2017 to incorporate the core components of Housing First.
7. Defines “Housing First” to mean the evidence-based model that uses housing as a tool, rather than a reward, for recovery and that centers on providing or connecting homeless people to permanent housing as quickly as possible.
8. Defines, among other things, the “core components of Housing First” to mean:
9. Acceptance of referrals directly from shelters, street outreach, drop-in centers, and other parts of crisis response systems frequented by vulnerable people experiencing homelessness.
10. Supportive services that emphasize engagement and problem-solving over therapeutic goals and service plans that are highly tenant-driven without predetermined goals.
11. Participation in services or program compliance is not a condition of permanent housing tenancy.
12. Tenants have a lease and all the rights and responsibilities of tenancy, as outlined in California’s Civil, Health and Safety, and Government codes.
13. The use of alcohol or drugs in and of itself, without other lease violations, is not a reason for eviction.
14. Establishes the Homeless Housing Assistance and Prevention Program (HHAPP) to provide funds to help local jurisdictions combat homelessness.

This bill:

1. Defines "supportive community residence" as a residence that serves individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or SUD and that does all of the following:
   
   • 1. Satisfies the core components of Housing First;
     2. Uses substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction,
     3. Emphasizes abstinence, and
     4. Offers tenants interim or permanent housing only.
2. Requires DHCS to oversee certification of supportive community residences by establishing criteria for conditions under which a supportive community residence may be certified and regain certification.
3. Authorizes DHCS to charge a fee of not more than $1,000 for certifying supportive community residence.
4. Establishes the Supportive Community Residency Program Fund to receive all funds collected for certifying supportive community residence.
5. Authorizes supportive community residence that are certified by DHCS to receive referrals from the department, its agencies, or contractors as housing available for persons experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness.
6. Prohibits supportive community residence from providing services on-site, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services, as defined.
7. Allows state departments and agencies to fund r supportive community residence if the state program uses at least 90% percent of funds for housing or housing-based services using a harm-reduction model, and the supportive community residence complies with all of the following: 
8. The individual or family is offered at least one harm-reduction housing placement option and the individual or family chooses a supportive community residence over housing that provides a harm-reduction approach;
9. The supportive community residence otherwise complies with all other components of Housing First;
10. Participation in a program is self-initiated;
11. Core outcomes emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness;
12. Policies and operations ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity, and respect; freedom from coercion and restraint; and continuous, uninterrupted access to the housing;
13. Holistic services and peer-based recovery supports are available and directly communicated to all program participants along with services that align with participants' choice and prioritization of personal goals of sustained recovery and abstinence from substance use;
14. The housing abides by local and state landlord-tenant laws governing grounds for eviction; and
15. Relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and, instead, tenants receive relapse support.
16. Eviction from supportive community residence should only occur when a tenant's behavior substantially disrupts or impacts the welfare of the supportive community residence in which the tenant resides. A tenant may apply to reenter the housing program if expressing a renewed commitment to living in a housing setting targeted to people in recovery with an abstinence focus. Presence of a roommate or roommates shall not be a valid basis for eviction.
17. If an eviction proceeding is initiated for an alleged violation of a lease provision agreement, the subgrantee shall submit documentation of the alleged lease violation to the local continuum of care and any other grantor.
18. If a tenant is no longer interested in living in a recovery-housing model or the tenant is at risk of eviction, the housing program must provide assistance in accessing permanent housing operated with harm-reduction principles that is permanent housing.
19. Requires the state program, prior to awarding subgrants, to require the subgrantee to confirm that it has achieved successful outcomes in promoting housing retention, at a similar to rate as harm reduction programs.

COMMENTS:

1. Author’s statement. “As California continues to navigate the mental health needs of our unhoused population along with the state housing crisis, we have learned these issues are often intertwined. AB 2893 establishes a state certification process for recovery houses through the Department of Health Care Services. This housing model has proven very successful and pairing it with Housing First principles ensures that people are placed into housing as an early step so they can have a safe environment to move forward in addressing their issues. This bill standardizes care and requirements for all recovery houses in California, while also making it available as a tool the state can use to address treating our unhoused population.”
2. Why are so many experiencing homelessness in California? In recent years, an increasing number of people, including unaccompanied youth, older adults, and families, have found themselves living on the street, in shelters, or in other transitional housing arrangements, such as living with friends and family, for the first time. The causes of homelessness are varied and complicated. Economic hardship, high cost of housing, separation from the family, domestic violence, death of the family breadwinner, mental or behavioral health, and substance use disorders can all contribute to a person experiencing homelessness.

While there may be a perception that people experience homelessness due to inability or disinterest in sustaining employment because of mental health or substance use issues, many individuals and families experiencing homelessness have, or recently had, jobs. A study by the California Policy Lab found that 74% of homeless individuals in Los Angeles County had a record of employment between 1995 and 2018 prior to becoming homeless; 47% were employed within four years before their first experience of homelessness; and 19% were employed in the quarter in which they became homeless^[1]. However, the average annual earnings of study participants was only $9,970 in the year prior to experiencing homelessness.

So what are the primary drivers leading to increases in homelessness?

• 1. Available housing is not affordable. The lack of affordable housing plays a significant role in causing individuals to become homeless or creating obstacles for individuals experiencing homeless to transition into stable housing. The median home price in California was $771,270 in 2022, double the nationwide median. In addition, almost three million renter households, almost half of rental households in California, are low-income (50-80% of the Area Median Income, or AMI), very low-income (30-50% AMI), or extremely low-income (0-30% AMI). As a result, many Californians are rent burdened (spend more than 30% of their income on rent). By income level, almost 90% of extremely low-income, 85% of very low-income, and 63% of low-income households are rent burdened.
  2. There is not enough housing. The lack of supply is the primary factor underlying California’s housing crunch. The state Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) estimates that California needs to build 180,000 new homes a year to keep up with population growth^[2]. More recently, HCD noted in its statewide housing plan that California must plan for more than 2.5 million homes over the next eight-year cycle, and no less than one million of those homes must meet the needs of lower-income households. This represents more than double the housing planned for in the last eight-year cycle.^[3]

1. What are the primary solutions to ending and preventing homelessness? Simply put, we need more housing; more housing at all income levels, and in particular, more housing affordable to the lowest income earners. According to the United States Interagency Council on Homelessness, in a May 2019 report, “when housing costs are more affordable and housing opportunities are more readily available, there is a lower likelihood of households becoming homeless, and households who do become homeless can exit homelessness more quickly and with greater likelihood of sustaining that housing long-term. To reduce the negative impacts of housing instability, and to end homelessness as quickly and efficiently as possible, communities are increasingly focused on expanding the supply of housing that is affordable to renter households at lower income levels, as well as ensuring that people experiencing and exiting homelessness have access to such housing.”^[4]
2. What is the state doing to end and prevent homelessness? Beginning largely in 2017^[5], the State of California and the voters have taken significant steps to invest billions of dollars for affordable housing construction, homeownership opportunities, and flexible homelessness solutions, as well as investments in infrastructure necessary to support these projects.^[6] The Legislature has also created streamlined development approval processes and reduced opportunities for local governments to disapprove of quality permanent housing projects and homeless shelters, which have sped-up the approval of these processes, and reduced costs associated with unreasonable project delays.^[7] Further, the state has increased planning requirements to ensure that local governments create an environment to facilitate the creation of housing, and in particular, affordable housing construction^[8], and has provided grants directly to local governments for these purposes.

According to Cal-ICH, between 2017 and 2020, Continuums of Care (CoCs) across California have increased efforts to address the homelessness crisis by serving 40% more people experiencing homelessness (176,412 in 2017 compared to 246,142 in 2020)^[9]. In many areas of the state, despite these efforts, for every person housed, another two fall into homelessness.

There is no denying more can and should be done; however, with limited resources and looming budgetary challenges, the state should focus limited investments on evidence-based programs that ensure housing stability.

1. What is Housing First? Housing First approaches homelessness by providing permanent, affordable housing for families and individuals as quickly as possible, then providing supportive services to prevent their return to homelessness. This strategy is the evidence-based model that focuses on the idea that homeless individuals should be provided shelter and stability before underlying issues can be successfully addressed. Under the Housing First approach, anyone experiencing homelessness should be connected to a permanent home as quickly as possible, and programs should remove barriers to accessing the housing, like requirements for sobriety or absence of criminal history. It is based on the “hierarchy of need;” people must access basic necessities—like a safe place to live and food to eat—before being able to achieve quality of life or pursue personal goals. Housing First values choice in not only where to live, but whether to participate in services. This approach contrasts to the “housing readiness” model where people are required to address predetermined goals before obtaining housing. In other words, housing readiness means housing is “earned” and can also be taken away, thus returning to homelessness.

Housing First was embraced by California in 2015 through SB 1380 (Mitchell, Chapter 847, Statues of 2016), which requires all housing programs in the state to adopt this model.

1. What type of housing is considered Housing First? Programs using Housing First generally fall into two categories:
2. Supportive housing, which is a home made affordable through long-term rental assistance, paired with intensive services promoting housing stability.
3. Rapid re-housing, which connects a family or individual to a home affordable through short-to medium-term rental assistance, along with moderate services designed to allow that household to increase their income sufficiently to be able to afford the apartment over the long-term.
4. Housing First fact-checks. Those who criticize Housing First tend to argue three main points: (a) Housing First is “one size fits all”, (b) Housing First does not provide adequate treatment to clients, and (c) Housing First is not effective.
5. Housing First is the flexible, low-barrier homelessness solution. Housing First is not housing only, nor does it preclude financing emergency shelters or other interim housing solutions. Rather, it recognizes that the needs of people experiencing homelessness vary person by person, family by family. To that end, some people merely need stable, affordable housing while struggling with economic hardships, while others need wraparound services to address physical, behavioral, or substance abuse challenges.
6. Housing First does not mean housing only – it means housing “first”. Housing First means that a person does not have to earn housing, whether interim or permanent; rather people are provided housing first, in addition to any additional supports specific to their individual or familial needs.
7. Housing First does not preclude evictions of disruptive tenants. Those opposed to Housing First falsely allege that tenants cannot be evicted under state law. However, state law governing Housing First specifically provides that landlord/tenant right and responsibilities extend to these programs; Housing First provides that “the use of drugs or alcohol in and of itself, without other lease violations, is not a reason for eviction.” In other words, a tenant that is otherwise disruptive to other residents or engaging in other lease violations may be evicted.
8. Housing First does not preclude court ordered sobriety. Some seeking to fund non-Housing First programs falsely claim that those who are serving a court order to maintain sobriety cannot comply with Housing First principles; this is of particular importance for mothers seeking custody of their children. Housing First does not hinder a court order, and bears no relationship to a person’s housing situation. Should a person violate a court order, specified court sanctions will occur (such as penalties related to child custody). This would be no different from anyone living in a non-state subsidized housing unit who is subject to a court order.
9. Housing First is the data driven solution keeping people housed, longer. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness, Housing First has been tested again and again, and the overwhelming volume of research supports Housing First; this is why federal and state homelessness programs currently require applicants to comply with Housing First principles. For example, the Benioff Homelessness and Housing Initiative at the University of California San Francisco conducted a randomized control trial of a permanent supportive housing intervention in Santa Clara County on a Housing First basis for those with the highest needs. Of those who received treatment, 86% were successfully housed and remained housed for three years. There was also a sharp drop in utilization of emergency psychiatric services among the treatment group. Further, providing people experiencing homelessness with housing and wrap around services is incredibly cost effective and reduces burdens on the taxpayer, who pay for emergency services and jails^[10].
10. Housing First does not hinder homeless shelters or navigation centers from receiving state funds. For example, awardees for both HHAPP have utilized funds for homeless shelters.
11. Housing First saves the taxpayers money. According to the most comprehensive homelessness cost study conducted in the United States released in 2015, by prioritizing housing opportunities for persistently homeless individuals with the highest costs, it is possible to obtain savings that more than offset the cost of housing. In Santa Clara County, the average pre-housing public cost was $62,000 and the average post-housing cost was $20,000, or a nearly $43,000 annual reduction^[11]. Another cost study, conducted in Los Angeles in 2009 found that public costs are overall reduced by 79% when homeless individuals are provided with permanent supportive housing^[12].
12. What is the recovery housing model? Recovery housing is a model that is abstinence-focused and offers peer supports for people recovering from substance abuse issues. These homes are not licensed or regulated by DHCS or any other state or local government. After treatment for substance abuse, whether by prison, hospital-based treatment programs, or therapeutic communities, many patients return to former high-risk environments or stressful family situations. Returning to these settings without a network of people to support abstinence increases chances of relapse. As a consequence, alcohol and substance use recidivism following treatment is high for both men and women. Recovery housing offers participants an option to live with other abstinence-focused residents while being offered supports through the recovery process.
13. Federal guidance regarding recovery housing. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) guidance for recovery housing or “sober living environment” (e.g., the supportive community residences contemplated in this bill) emphasizes the housing first approach, but also recognizes the importance of providing “individual choice to support various paths towards recovery.” Some people pursuing recovery from addiction express a preference for an abstinence-focused residential or housing program where they can live among and be supported by a community of peers who are also focused on pursuing recovery from addiction – environments that are provided by recovery housing programs. However, this guidance states that supporting individual choice must also mean that a community is ensuring that housing options are available for people at all stages of recovery, including people who continue to use drugs or alcohol.^[13] In other words, if a person chooses an abstinence-focused/sober living program and relapses, in order to comply with Housing First principles, the relapse alone should not be treated as an automatic cause for eviction or termination.

This bill seeks to create a new category of "supportive community residences" for people who are homeless or at risk of experiencing homelessness and are experiencing mental health or substance abuse issues. Supportive community residences or recovery housing programs, as currently defined under existing law, is not required to comply with Housing First requirements, although some may do so. This bill would require a "supportive community residences" to comply with Housing First, which means that although the provider of the housing could emphasize abstinence, an individual would be offered options and would choose recovery housing over housing offering a harm-reduction approach; participation would be self-initiated; relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and tenants receive relapse support; and policies and operations must ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity and respect, and freedom from coercion and restraint, as well as continuous, uninterrupted access to housing. This bill also seeks to allow state funding for homelessness programs to be used for supportive community residences by adding supportive community residences to the existing Housing First definition in statute.

The state should be focusing its limited resources on solutions that are evidence-based and data driven, reduce barriers to maintaining and accessing housing, and are least likely to return people to the streets. In order to strike a balance between offering homeless individuals and families more choice in their housing options and with investing in evidence-based practices, the author recently amended the bill in the following ways:

1. Increased the percentage of funds that should go to housing first compliant programs, over that of supportive community residences, from each state program from 75% to 90%;
2. Clarified that if a tenant has a roommate and relapses, the presence of the roommate shall not be the basis for eviction;
3. Required a recovery housing program funding recipient to submit documentation to the appropriate CoC and other grantee documentation indicating the lease violation that results in an eviction proceeding.
4. Clarifying that an individual or family shall be offered at least one harm-reduction placement option with a recovery housing option.
5. Funding for recovery housing shall only be available to interim and permanent housing programs.
6. Removes people experiencing serious mental illness from eligibility for residence in a supportive community residence program, given this would significantly increase the population eligible for residence.

In order to guarantee that a resident of a supportive community residence maintains their housing should they face possible eviction or they change their mind and wish to instead utilize a harm reduction model, the committee may wish to consider only funding supportive community residence programs that directly connect the tenant to a partner housing program that operates a harm reduction model with permanent housing.  Additionally, the supportive community residence must continue to house the tenant until such time as the supportive community residence has secured alternative housing for the tenant with a housing first program.

Amendment: 

(XI) If a tenant is no longer interested in living in a supportive community residence model or the tenant is at risk of eviction, the supportive community residence housing program will secure the tenant with a permanent housing unit at provides assistance in accessing a partner or other housing program operated with harm-reduction principles. The supportive community residence shall continue to house the tenant until the tenant is successfully housed with another permanent housing program operated with harm reduction principles.

1. Certification: alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities (RTFs) vs. recovery residences (RRs). DHCS has sole authority to license RTFs in the state. Licensure is required when at least one of the following services is provided: detoxification; group sessions; individual sessions; educational sessions; or, alcoholism or other drug abuse recovery or treatment planning. Additionally, facilities may be subject to other types of permits, clearances, business taxes, or local fees that may be required by the cities or counties in which the facilities are located.

As part of their licensing function, DHCS conducts reviews of RTF operations every two years, or as necessary. DHCS's SUD Compliance Division checks for compliance with statute and regulations to ensure the health and safety of RTF residents and investigates all complaints related to RTFs, including deaths, complaints against staff, and allegations of operating without a license. DHCS has the authority to suspend or revoke a license for conduct in the operation of an RTF that is inimical to the health, morals, welfare, or safety of either an individual in, or receiving services from, the facility or to the people of the State of California. AB 118 (Committee on Budget, Chapter 42, Statutes of 2023), requires other non-residential, outpatient alcohol or other drug programs be certified by DHCS. Certification is required when at least one of the following is provided: outpatient treatment services; recovery services; detoxification; or medications for addiction treatment.

On the other hand, DHCS does not license alcohol and drug RRs with six or fewer beds that don’t provide licensable services, known as RRs. An RR is a residence for people in recovery from substance abuse. It may serve as support for individuals undergoing treatment but it does not provide treatment or care, whether medical or nonmedical. The state laws and licensing requirements that govern treatment and care facilities do not currently include RRs. Therefore, the state does not keep any list of registered RRs, conduct inspections of RRs, or perform any of the other activities associated with licensing facilities. An RR may be completely self-governed or have formal on-site management, but in the latter case, the managers’ duties relate to the administration of the house rather than the tenants or their recovery (as in “case management”). The tenants of an RR pay rent and abide by house rules, which always include maintenance of sobriety and participation in a self-help program.

This bill would require DHCS to oversee the certification of that serve people experiencing homelessness with a Housing First model. DHCS would be required to establish criteria for certification for a supportive community residence to receive referrals from DHCS.

1. Department of corrections. Recent amendments intended to narrow the population eligible for supportive community residences, but were drafted incorrectly. The author will accept a technical amendment to correct that error so that the bill applies to people with a substance use disorder and are either experiencing or at risk of homelessness. Additionally, the amendments were intended to increase funding for housing first in each county throughout the state. The requirement that each county have a specific amount for housing first was intentional to ensure that there is sufficient housing first options throughout the state, and not inadvertently result in housing first “deserts” in certain areas of the state. The author has agreed to add back in the provision that this requirement occur in “each county.”
   
2. Opposition. Advocates for Responsible Treatment are opposed to the bill, which they state is not implementable regardless of the intentions. They note that the language in the bill presents ambiguities in the law, including what category of housing would be funded, in what structures and conditions would tenants live, and what services are provided and by whom.
   
3. Double-referral. This bill was also referred to the Health Committee, which has jurisdiction over DHCS programs.

RELATED LEGISLATION:

SB 1380 (Mitchell, Chapter 847, Statutes of 2016) — required the state to adopt a Housing First approach and required all state-funded programs to comply with Housing First.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

POSITIONS: (Communicated to the committee before noon on Wednesday,

June 12, 2024.)

SUPPORT:

Share! Collaborative Housing (Sponsor)
Awakening Recovery
Ibar Special Needs Trust Advisors
Los Angeles Recovery Connect
Safe Place for Youth
Satyagraha Alliance
Share! the Self-help and Recovery Exchange
1 Individual

OPPOSITION:

Advocates for Responsible Treatment

-- END --

1. Till Von Watcher, Geoffrey Schnorr, and Nefara Riesch. Employment and Earnings Among LA County Residents Experiencing Homelessness. (California Policy Lab, February 2020). https://www.capolicylab.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Employment-Among-the-Homeless-in-Los-Angeles.pdf ↑

2. California’s Housing Future: Challenges and Opportunities. (California Department of Housing and Community Development, February 2018). https://www.hcd.ca.gov/policy-research/plans-reports/docs/sha_final_combined.pdf ↑

3. A home for every Californian. (Department of Housing and Community Development, March 2022). https://statewide-housing-plan-cahcd.hub.arcgis.com/ ↑

4. The Importance of Housing Affordability and Stability for Preventing and Ending Homelessness. (US Interagency Council on Homelessness, May 2019). https://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/Housing-Affordability-and-Stablility-Brief.pdf ↑

5. “2017 Legislative Housing Package”. (Senate Housing Committee, October 2017). https://shou.senate.ca.gov/sites/shou.senate.ca.gov/files/2017%20Housing%20Legislative%20Package.pdf ↑

6. “Background on Financing Programs for Affordable Housing”. (Senate Housing Committee, October 2021). https://shou.senate.ca.gov/sites/shou.senate.ca.gov/files/Housing%20Finance%2010.2021.pdf ↑

7. “Overview of Housing Issues in California”. (Senate Housing Committee, October 2021). https://shou.senate.ca.gov/sites/shou.senate.ca.gov/files/Overview%20of%20housing%20issues%20-%2010.2021.pdf ↑

8. “Housing Element and RHNA Law: Recent Reforms”. (Senate Housing Committee, October 2021). https://shou.senate.ca.gov/sites/shou.senate.ca.gov/files/RHNA%20reform%20fact%20sheet%20-%2010.2021.pdf ↑

9. California Interagency Council on Homelessness. “Homeless Data Integration System”. (2021) https://bcsh.ca.gov/calich/hdis.html ↑

10. Maria C. Raven, Margot Kushel, Matthew J. Niedzwiecki. A randomized trial of permanent supportive housing for chronically homeless persons with high use of publicly funded services. (University of California San Francisco, September 2020). https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1475-6773.13553 ↑

11. Daniel Flaming, Halil Toros, and Patrick Burns. Home Not Found: The Cost of Homelessness in Silicon Valley (Economic Roundtable, 2015). http://economicrt.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Home_Not_Found_2015.pdf ↑

12. Daniel Flaming, Patrick Burns, and Michael Matsunaga. Where we Sleep: Costs when Homeless and Housed in Los Angeles. (Economic Roundtable, 2009). http://economicrt.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Where_We_Sleep_2009.pdf ↑

13. “Recovery Housing Policy Brief”. (United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, December 2015). https://files.hudexchange.info/resources/documents/Recovery-Housing-Policy-Brief.pdf ↑

ASSEMBLY THIRD READING

ATR Bill Id:AB 2893

Author:(Ward)

As Amended Ver:April 17, 2024

Majority vote

SUMMARY

Establishes a certification process for recovery homes and adds a standard for recovery homes that meets the state's Housing First requirements.

Major Provisions

1. Includes the following definitions:
   1. "Housing first model" means housing that satisfies the core components of Housing First pursuant to Section 8255 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
   2. "Recovery house" means a residence that serves individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues and that does all of the following:
      1. Satisfies the core components of Housing First pursuant to Section 8255 of the Welfare and Institutions Code;
      2. Uses substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction; and
      3. Emphasizes abstinence.
   3. "Trauma-informed practices" means a trauma-informed approach to care guided by the principles of safety, trustworthiness and transparency, peer support, collaboration and mutuality, empowerment and choice, and culture, historical, and gender issues.
2. Requires the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to oversee certification of recovery houses by establishing a criteria for the certification of recovery housing conditions under which a recovery home may be certified and regain certification.
3. Authorizes DHCS to charge a fee of not more than $1,000 for certifying recovery houses.
4. Establishes the Shared Recovery Housing Residency Program Fund to receive all funds collected for certifying recovery housing.
5. Authorizes recovery houses that are certified by DHCS to receive referrals from the department, its agencies, or contractors as housing available for persons experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness or mental health issues.
6. Prohibits recovery housing from providing services on-site, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services, as defined.
7. Adds provisions regarding recovery housing to the existing statute governing Housing First, including the following:
   1. Allows state departments and agencies to fund recovery housing that use substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction that emphasizes abstinence so long as the state program uses at least 75% of the funds for housing or housing-based services using a harm reduction model, and that recovery housing complies with the following:
      1. An individual or family is offered options and chooses recovery housing over housing offering a harm-reduction approach;
      2. The recovery housing otherwise complies with all other components of Housing First, in existing law, including low barrier to entry;
      3. Participation in a program is self-initiated;
      4. Core components emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness;
      5. Policies and operations ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity and respect, and freedom from coercion and restraint, as well as continuous, uninterrupted access to housing;
      6. Holistic services and peer-based recovery supports are available to all program participants along with services that align with participants' choice and prioritization of personal goals of sustained recovery and abstinence from substance use.
      7. The housing abides by local and state landlord-tenant laws governing grounds for eviction.
      8. Relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and tenants receive relapse support.
      9. Eviction from recovery housing shall only occur when a tenant's behavior substantially disrupts or impacts the welfare of the recovery community in which the tenant resides. A tenant may apply to reenter the housing program if expressing a renewed commitment to living in a housing-setting targeted to people in recovery with an abstinence focus.
      10. If a tenant is no longer interested in living in a recovery housing model or the tenant is at risk of eviction, the housing program provides assistance in accessing housing operated with harm-reduction principles that is also permanent housing.

COMMENTS

Homelessness in California: Based on the 2023 point in time count, California has the largest homeless population in the nation with 181,399 people experiencing homelessness on any given night. Many of those people (113,660) are unsheltered, meaning they are living outdoors and not in temporary shelters. Nearly half of all unsheltered people in the country were in California during the 2023 count. The homelessness crisis is driven in part by the lack of affordable rental housing for lower income people. In the current market, 2.2 million extremely low-income and very low-income renter households are competing for 664,000 affordable rental units. Of the six million renter households in the state, 1.7 million are paying more than 50% of their income toward rent. The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates that the state needs an additional 1.5 million housing units affordable to very-low income Californians.

Recovery Housing: Under existing law, "recovery housing" or "sober living homes" are residential dwellings that provide cooperative living in a residential dwelling that support an individual's personal recovery from a substance use disorder. These homes are not licensed by DHCS or any other state or local government. This bill seeks to create a new category of "recovery home" for people who are homeless or at risk of experiencing homelessness or mental health or substance abuse issues. Recovery housing, as currently defined under existing law, is not required to comply with Housing First requirements, although some may do so. This bill would require a "recovery home" to comply with Housing First, which means that although the provider of the housing could emphasize abstinence, an individual would be offered options and would choose recovery housing over housing offering a harm-reduction approach; participation would be self-initiated; relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and tenants receive relapse support; and policies and operations must ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity and respect, and freedom from coercion and restraint, as well as continuous, uninterrupted access to housing. By incorporating the principles of Housing First an evidence-based approach to housing, recovery homes will ensure greater success for individuals to remain housed.

Housing First: Decades of research demonstrate that evidence-based approaches like supportive housing – affordable housing coupled with wrap-around services – resolves homelessness for most individuals. In addition, the state has a policy of Housing First, which is an approach that prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness, thus ending their homelessness and serving as a platform from which they can pursue personal goals and improve their quality of life. Many state and local programs effectively utilize these evidence-based approaches to address homelessness; however, the number of people falling into homelessness continues to overwhelm the response system and surpasses the affordable housing stock in many communities. These factors lead to persistently high rates of homelessness despite recent state and local investments. Other strategies, such as rental assistance and help with identifying and securing housing (housing navigation) can also help with those individuals who need prevention tools to avoid homelessness.

Shifting Funding: SB 1380 (Mitchell), Chapter 847, Statutes of 2016 required the state to adopt a Housing First approach and required all state-funded programs to comply with Housing First. Traditional recovery housing does not necessarily conform to Housing First because it is an abstinence-based approach to addressing substance abuse. This bill would set new guidelines for how recovery homes could continue to provide an option for abstinence but also comply with Housing First. This bill would allow state programs to use 25% of available funding for homelessness for licensed recovery homes, as defined.

According to the Author

"AB 2893 would direct the California Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) to create a statewide certification program for recovery houses that would be in compliance with housing first policies under the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) definition. This bill would instruct DHCS to create a certification program for these homes at a state level to standardize their care as well as reign in bad actors. This is a working model that the state can use housing funds for to solve its acute homelessness and addiction crisis."

Arguments in Support

According to the sponsors, SHARE!,"AB 2893 (Ward) would require the Department of Healthcare Services to oversee certification of recovery houses that serve individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues, with a housing first model. The bill would require the department to establish criteria for certification of recovery houses in order to allow a recovery house to receive referrals from the department as available housing for persons experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues.

AB 2893 would establish recovery houses at the end of the continuum of care that does not provide any licensed medical services onsite. This definitional bill is crucial to ensure that during these difficult budgetary times, only the most effective programs that have a certified and proven track record should gain access to our strapped state funds."

Arguments in Opposition

None on file.

FISCAL COMMENTS

According to the Assembly Committee on Appropriations:

1. Estimated costs to DHCS of an unknown, but likely significant amount, offset to an unknown extent by certification fee revenue, to establish and oversee a certification process for recovery houses. The bill authorizes DHCS to charge a certification fee of up to $1,000. DHCS is still developing its estimate and was unable to respond to the committee’s request for fiscal information.
2. The California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH) estimates General Fund costs of $705, 000 in the first year and $673,000 in the second year, for four staff positions to receive reports and periodically monitor select recovery housing programs, report results, and intervene when statute is violated. This cost estimate assumes Cal ICH will be the agency conducting "periodic monitoring" of recovery houses, although the bill does not clearly specify the agency that is to conduct the periodic monitoring.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years.

VOTES

ASM HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT: 7-0-2

YES: Ward, Grayson, Kalra, Lee, Quirk-Silva, Reyes, Wilson

ABS, ABST OR NV: Joe Patterson, Sanchez

ASM HEALTH: 14-0-2

YES: Bonta, Waldron, Aguiar-Curry, Arambula, Wendy Carrillo, Flora, Haney, Jones-Sawyer, Maienschein, McCarty, Rodriguez, Santiago, Schiavo, Weber

ABS, ABST OR NV: Joe Patterson, Sanchez

ASM APPROPRIATIONS: 11-0-4

YES: Wicks, Arambula, Bryan, Calderon, Wendy Carrillo, Mike Fong, Grayson, Haney, Hart, Pellerin, Villapudua

ABS, ABST OR NV: Sanchez, Dixon, Jim Patterson, Ta

UPDATED

VERSION: April 17, 2024

CONSULTANT: Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085 FN: 0003102

Date of Hearing: May 15, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Buffy Wicks, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2893

Author:(Ward) – As Amended Ver:April 17, 2024

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: No Reimbursable: No

SUMMARY:

This bill requires the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to establish a certification process for recovery homes and adds a standard for recovery homes that meets the state’s Housing First requirements.

Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires DHCS to oversee certification of recovery houses by establishing criteria for the certification of recovery housing.
2. Defines “recovery house” as a residence that serves individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or who are experiencing serious mental illness or substance use disorders (SUDs) and that does all of the following:
   1. Satisfies the core components of Housing First pursuant to existing law.
   2. Uses substance-use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction.
   3. Emphasizes abstinence.
3. Authorizes DHCS to charge a fee of not more than $1,000 for certifying a recovery house.
4. Establishes the Shared Recovery Housing Residency Program Fund to receive all funds collected for certifying recovery housing.
5. Authorizes recovery houses certified by DHCS to receive referrals from DHCS, its agencies, or contractors as housing available for persons experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness or who are experiencing serious mental illness or SUDs.
6. Prohibits recovery housing from providing services on-site, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services, as defined.
7. Adds provisions regarding recovery housing to existing law governing Housing First.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Estimated costs to DHCS of an unknown, but likely significant amount, offset to an unknown extent by certification fee revenue, to establish and oversee a certification process for recovery houses. The bill authorizes DHCS to charge a certification fee of up to $1,000. DHCS is still developing its estimate and was unable to respond to the committee’s request for fiscal information.
2. The California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal ICH) estimates General Fund costs of $705, 000 in the first year and $673,000 in the second year, for four staff positions to receive reports and periodically monitor select recovery housing programs, report results, and intervene when statute is violated. This cost estimate assumes Cal ICH will be the agency conducting “periodic monitoring” of recovery houses, although the bill does not clearly specify the agency that is to conduct the periodic monitoring.

According to the Legislative Analyst’s Office, the General Fund faces a structural deficit in the tens of billions of dollars over the next several fiscal years.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. According to the author:

[This bill] would direct the California Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) to create a statewide certification program for recovery houses that would be in compliance with housing first policies under the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) definition. This bill would instruct DHCS to create a certification program for these homes at a state level to standardize their care as well as reign in bad actors. This is a working model that the state can use housing funds for to solve its acute homelessness and addiction crisis.

1. Background. Extensive research demonstrates evidence-based approaches like supportive housing – affordable housing coupled with wrap-around services – resolves homelessness for most individuals. Housing First is a state policy that prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness, thus ending their homelessness and serving as a platform from which they can pursue personal goals and improve their quality of life.

Under existing law, “recovery housing” or “sober living homes” are residential dwellings that provide cooperative living and support an individual’s personal recovery from a substance use disorder. The state laws and licensing requirements that govern treatment and care facilities do not include recovery houses. Therefore, the state does not keep a list of recovery houses, conduct inspections, or perform any of the other activities associated with licensing facilities. The tenants of a recovery house pay rent and abide by house rules, which always include maintenance of sobriety and participation in a self-help program. The California Research Bureau estimates there are at least 12,000 sober living beds in the state to serve an eligible population of between 25,000 and 35,000 individuals. If a recovery house provides licensable services it must obtain a valid recovery or treatment facility (RTF) license from DHCS.

This bill creates a new category of “recovery home” for people who are homeless or at risk of experiencing homelessness or mental health or substance abuse issues. Recovery housing, as defined under existing law, is not required to comply with Housing First requirements and, thus, doesn’t qualify for state funding under state homelessness programs. The author seeks to remedy this by adding recovery housing to the Housing First definition in statute. Under this bill, a provider of recovery housing may emphasize abstinence, but relapse would not be a cause for eviction as is required under existing law. Instead tenants could receive relapse support and uninterrupted access to housing.

1. Related Legislation. AB 2479 (Haney), of this legislative session, is similar to this bill and allows recovery housing, as defined, to qualify for state funding related to homelessness under the Housing First definition, if certain conditions are met. AB 2479 is pending in this committee.

Analysis Prepared by: Jennifer Swenson / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: April 23, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HEALTH

Mia Bonta, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2893

Author:(Ward) – As Amended Ver:April 17, 2024

SUBJECT: The Shared Recovery Housing Residency Program.

SUMMARY: Requires the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to establish a certification process for recovery homes and adds a standard for recovery homes that meets the state’s Housing First requirements. Specifically, this bill:

1. Requires DHCS to oversee certification of recovery houses by establishing a criteria for the certification of recovery housing conditions under which a recovery home may be certified and regain certification.
2. Defines “recovery house” as a residence that serves individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or who are experiencing serious mental illness or substance use disorders (SUDs) and that does all of the following:
   1. Satisfies the core components of Housing First pursuant to existing law;
   2. Uses substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction; and,
   3. Emphasizes abstinence.
3. Authorizes DHCS to charge a fee of not more than $1,000 for certifying recovery houses.
4. Establishes the Shared Recovery Housing Residency Program Fund to receive all funds collected for certifying recovery housing.
5. Authorizes recovery houses that are certified by DHCS to receive referrals from DHCS, its agencies, or contractors as housing available for persons experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness or who are experiencing serious mental illness or SUDs.
6. Prohibits recovery housing from providing services on-site, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services, as defined.
7. Adds provisions regarding recovery housing to existing law governing Housing First, including the following:
   1. Allows state departments and agencies to fund recovery housing that use substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction that emphasizes abstinence so long as the state program meets all of the following requirements:
      1. The state program uses at least 75% of the funds for housing or housing-based services using a harm reduction model;
      2. Requires the state program to require an application for funding, and in the submission of an application for funding, to demonstrate engagement with people with lived experience of homelessness and substance use that informs the local decision to seek funding for recovery housing options. Requires an applicant to include minutes or notes of at least two meetings between the applicant and a new or existing body of people with lived experience of homelessness and substance use in order to demonstrate engagement with people with lived experience of homelessness and substance use; and,
      3. Requires the state program to require a grantee under the program, prior to awarding subgrants, to confirm that the subgrantee has achieved successful outcomes in promoting housing retention, similar to rates of housing retention as harm reduction programs.
      4. Requires the state to perform periodic monitoring of select recovery housing programs to ensure that the recovery housing complies with the following:
         1. An individual or family is offered options and chooses recovery housing over housing offering a harm-reduction approach;
         2. The recovery housing otherwise complies with all other components of Housing First, in existing law, including low-barrier to entry;
         3. Participation in a program is self-initiated;
         4. Core components emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness;
         5. Policies and operations ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity and respect, and freedom from coercion and restraint, as well as continuous, uninterrupted access to housing;
         6. Holistic services and peer-based recovery supports are available to all program participants along with services that align with participants’ choice and prioritization of personal goals of sustained recovery and abstinence from substance use;
         7. The housing abides by local and state landlord-tenant laws governing grounds for eviction;
         8. Relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and tenants receive relapse support;
         9. Eviction from recovery housing shall only occur when a tenant’s behavior substantially disrupts or impacts the welfare of the recovery community in which the tenant resides. A tenant may apply to reenter the housing program if expressing a renewed commitment to living in a housing-setting targeted to people in recovery with an abstinence focus; and,
         10. If a tenant is no longer interested in living in a recovery housing model or the tenant is at risk of eviction, the housing program provides assistance in accessing housing operated with harm-reduction principles that is also permanent housing.
8. Defines “Housing first model” as housing that satisfies the core components of Housing First as described in 7) of existing law, below.
9. Defines “trauma-informed practices” to means a trauma-informed approach to care guided by the principles of safety, trustworthiness and transparency, peer support, collaboration and mutuality, empowerment and choice, and culture, historical, and gender issues.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Grants DHCS the sole authority in state government to license alcoholism or drug abuse recovery or treatment facilities (RTFs). [Health and Safety Code (HSC) §11834.01]
2. Defines “alcoholism or drug abuse RTF” as any, place or building that provides 24-hour residential nonmedical services to adults who are recovering from problems related to alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug misuse or abuse, and who need alcohol, drug, or alcohol and drug recovery treatment or detoxification services. [HSC §11834.02]
3. Defines a “recovery residence” (RR) as a residential dwelling that provides primary housing for individuals who seek a cooperative living arrangement that supports personal recovery from a SUD and that does not require licensure by DHCS or does not provide licensable services, as specified, including residential dwellings commonly referred to as “sober living homes,” “sober living environments,” or “unlicensed alcohol and drug free residences.” [HSC §11833.05]
4. Prohibits any person, firm, partnership, association, corporation, or local governmental entity from operating, establishing, managing, conducting, or maintaining an alcoholism or drug abuse RTF to provide recovery, treatment, or detoxification services without first obtaining a current valid license from DHCS. [HSC §11834.30]
5. Establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness with the purpose of coordinating the state’s response to homelessness by utilizing Housing First practices. [Welfare and Institutions Code Section (WIC) §8255]
6. Requires agencies and departments administering state programs created on or after July 1, 2017 to incorporate the core components of Housing First. [WIC §8255]
7. Defines “Housing First” to mean the evidence-based model that uses housing as a tool, rather than a reward, for recovery and that centers on providing or connecting homeless people to permanent housing as quickly as possible. Housing First providers offer services as needed and requested on a voluntary basis and that do not make housing contingent on participation in services. [WIC §8255]
8. Defines, among other things, the “core components of Housing First” to mean:
   1. Acceptance of referrals directly from shelters, street outreach, drop-in centers, and other parts of crisis response systems frequented by vulnerable people experiencing homelessness;
   2. Supportive services that emphasize engagement and problem-solving over therapeutic goals and service plans that are highly tenant-driven without predetermined goals;
   3. Participation in services or program compliance is not a condition of permanent housing tenancy;
   4. Tenants have a lease and all the rights and responsibilities of tenancy, as outlined in existing law; and,
   5. The use of alcohol or drugs in and of itself, without other lease violations, is not a reason for eviction. [WIC §8255]
9. Prohibits, under the Fair Employment and Housing Act, discrimination against any person in any housing accommodation on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, or disability. Specifies that discriminatory land use regulations, zoning laws, and restrictive covenants are unlawful acts. [GOV §12900 et seq.]

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown. This bill has not yet been analyzed by a fiscal committee.

COMMENTS:

1. PURPOSE OF THIS BILL. According to the author, this bill would direct DHCS to create a statewide certification program for recovery houses that would be in compliance with housing first policies under the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development definition. The author continues that this bill would instruct DHCS to create a certification program for these homes at a state level to standardize their care as well as reign in bad actors. The author concludes that this is a working model that the state can use housing funds to solve its acute homelessness and addiction crisis.
2. BACKGROUND.
   1. Prevalence of SUD in California. A 2022 publication from the California Health Care Foundation, entitled “Substance Use in California: Prevalence and Treatment,” reported that substance use in California is widespread with over half of Californians over age 12 reporting using alcohol in the past month and 20% reporting using marijuana in the past year. According to the report, 9% of Californians have met the criteria for a SUD within the last year. While the health care system is moving toward acknowledging SUDs as a chronic illness, only about 10% of people with an SUD within the last year received treatment. Overdose deaths from both opioids and psychostimulants (such as amphetamines), are soaring. This issue, compounded by the increased availability of fentanyl, has resulted in a 10-fold increase in fentanyl related deaths between 2015 and 2019. The California Department of Public Health’s Opioid Overdose Dashboard reported 7,385 deaths related to “any” opioid overdose in 2022, with 6,473 (87.7%) of those deaths fentanyl related.
   2. Homelessness in California. Based on the 2023 point in time count, California has the largest homeless population in the nation with 181,399 people experiencing homelessness on any given night. Many of those people (113,660) are unsheltered, meaning they are living outdoors and not in temporary shelters. Nearly half of all unsheltered people in the country were in California during the 2023 count. The homelessness crisis is driven in part by the lack of affordable rental housing for lower income people. In the current market, 2.2 million extremely low-income and very low-income renter households are competing for 664,000 affordable rental units. Of the six million renter households in the state, 1.7 million are paying more than 50% of their income toward rent. The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates that the state needs an additional 1.5 million housing units affordable to very-low income Californians.
   3. Alcohol and Drug Treatment Facility Licensing and Certification. DHCS has sole authority to license RTFs in the state. Licensure is required when at least one of the following services is provided: detoxification; group sessions; individual sessions; educational sessions; or, alcoholism or other drug abuse recovery or treatment planning. Additionally, facilities may be subject to other types of permits, clearances, business taxes, or local fees that may be required by the cities or counties in which the facilities are located.

As part of their licensing function, DHCS conducts reviews of RTF operations every two years, or as necessary. DHCS's Substance Use Disorder Compliance Division checks for compliance with statute and regulations to ensure the health and safety of RTF residents and investigates all complaints related to RTFs, including deaths, complaints against staff, and allegations of operating without a license. DHCS has the authority to suspend or revoke a license for conduct in the operation of an RTF that is inimical to the health, morals, welfare, or safety of either an individual in, or receiving services from, the facility or to the people of the State of California.

AB 118 (Committee on Budget), Chapter 42, Statutes of 2023, requires other non-residential, outpatient alcohol or other drug programs be certified by DHCS. Certification is required when at least one of the following is provided: outpatient treatment services; recovery services; detoxification; or medications for addiction treatment. DHCS does not license alcohol and drug RRs with six or less beds that don’t provide licensable services, known as RRs.

• 1. RRs. An RR is a residence for people in recovery from substance abuse. It may serve as support for individuals undergoing treatment but it does not provide treatment or care, whether medical or nonmedical. The state laws and licensing requirements that govern treatment and care facilities do not currently include RRs. Therefore, the state does not keep any list of registered RRs, conduct inspections of RRs, or perform any of the other activities associated with licensing facilities. An RR may be completely self-governed or have formal on-site management, but in the latter case, the managers’ duties relate to the administration of the house rather than the tenants or their recovery (as in “case management”). The tenants of an RR pay rent and abide by house rules, which always include maintenance of sobriety and participation in a self-help program. Multiple studies have shown the effectiveness of this kind of environment as a support for people transitioning out of drug or alcohol treatment. The effectiveness of sober living as one component of a person’s successful recovery program is not controversial. The California Research Bureau estimates that there are at least 12,000 sober living beds in the state to serve an eligible population of between 25,000 and 35,000 individuals. If an RR is providing any licensable services then it must obtain a valid RTF license from DHCS.

DHCS’s Drug Medi-Cal-Organized Delivery System waiver permits counties to use RRs in their continuum of services if they adhere to the following guidelines: the RR does not provide SUD services that would require licensure by DHCS; all residents of an RR are actively engaged in medically necessary recovery support services to be provided off-site; each county develops guidelines for contracted RR entities; and, the county provides monitoring and oversight of the RR.

This bill seeks to create a new category of “recovery home” for people who are homeless or at risk of experiencing homelessness or mental health or substance abuse issues. Recovery housing, as currently defined under existing law, is not required to comply with Housing First requirements, although some may do so. This bill would require a “recovery home” to comply with Housing First, which means that although the provider of the housing could emphasize abstinence, an individual would be offered options and would choose recovery housing over housing offering a harm-reduction approach; participation would be self-initiated; relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and tenants receive relapse support; and policies and operations must ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity and respect, and freedom from coercion and restraint, as well as continuous, uninterrupted access to housing.

• 1. Housing First. Decades of research demonstrate that evidence-based approaches like supportive housing – affordable housing coupled with wrap-around services – resolves homelessness for most individuals. In addition, the state has a policy of Housing First, which is an approach that prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness, thus ending their homelessness and serving as a platform from which they can pursue personal goals and improve their quality of life. Many state and local programs effectively utilize these evidence-based approaches to address homelessness; however, the number of people falling into homelessness continues to overwhelm the response system and surpasses the affordable housing stock in many communities. These factors lead to persistently high rates of homelessness despite recent state and local investments. Other strategies, such as rental assistance and help with identifying and securing housing (housing navigation) can also help with those individuals who need prevention tools to avoid homelessness.
  2. Harm Reduction. According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH) website, harm reduction is a strategy that aims to reduce the harms associated with certain behaviors. When applied to SUDs, harm reduction accepts that a continuing level of drug use (both legal and illegal) in society is inevitable and defines objectives as reducing adverse consequences. It emphasizes the measurement of health, social, and economic outcomes, as opposed to the measurement of drug consumption. Harm reduction has evolved over time, from its initial identification in the 1980s, as an alternative to abstinence-only focused interventions for adults with SUDs. At the time, it was recognized that abstinence was not a realistic goal for those with SUDs. In addition, those individuals who were interested in reducing, but not eliminating, their use were excluded from programs that required abstinence. NIH’s website states there is persuasive evidence that harm reduction approaches greatly reduce morbidity and mortality associated with risky health behaviors. For example, areas that have introduced needle-exchange programs have shown mean annual decreases in HIV prevalence compared with those areas that have not introduced needle-exchange programs. Access to and use of methadone maintenance programs are strongly related to decreased mortality, both from natural causes and overdoses, which suggests that these programs have an impact on overall socio-medical health. The most recent addition to the harm reduction continuum is that of safe consumption spaces, which have been successfully implemented in over 100 sites around the world.
  3. Shifting Funding. SB 1380 (Mitchell), Chapter 847, Statutes of 2016 required the state to adopt a Housing First approach and required all state-funded programs to comply with Housing First. Traditional recovery housing does not necessarily conform to Housing First because it is an abstinence-based approach to addressing substance abuse. This bill aims to set new guidelines for how recovery homes could continue to provide an option for abstinence but also comply with Housing First. This bill would allow state programs to use 25% of available funding for homelessness for licensed recovery homes, as defined.

1. SUPPORT. According to the sponsors, SHARE! Collaborative Housing, this bill would establish recovery houses at the end of the continuum of care that do not provide any licensed medical services onsite. The sponsors argue that this definitional bill is crucial to ensure that during these difficult budgetary times, only the most effective programs that have a certified and proven track record should gain access to our strapped state funds.
2. RELATED LEGISLATION.
   1. AB 2479 (Haney) adds requirements for recovery housing to Housing First. AB 2479 is currently pending in the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee.
   2. AB 2574 (Valencia) exempts sober living homes (SLHs) from being considered a residential use of property when evidence demonstrates that the SLH is an integral part of a licensed drug treatment facility located elsewhere. AB 2574 is currently pending in the Assembly Health Committee.
   3. SB 1438 (Niello) changes the core components of Housing First to allow the eviction of a resident for the use of drugs or alcohol if children are housed in the same location, and include “recovery housing” programs, as specified. SB 1438 is currently pending in the Senate Housing Committee.
   4. SB 913 (Umberg) permits a city attorney of a city in which housing units are located or a district attorney, if the units are located in the unincorporated area of the county, to enforce parts of DHCS licensing laws, as specified. Requires DHCS to adopt a process that permits a city or county to conduct announced and/or unannounced site visits to facilities licensed by DHCS and to SLHs/RRs that do not require DHCS licensure. SB 913 is currently pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
   5. SB 1334 (Newman) defines an RR, for purposes of licensing RTFs, as a residential dwelling that provides primary housing for individuals who seek a cooperative living arrangement that supports personal recovery from a SUD, does not require DHCS licensure, and does not provide licensable services, and clarifies that an unlicensed RR may provide services to its residents, including, but not limited to, dining, housekeeping, security, transportation, and recreation. Exempts RRs from being required to be licensed RTFs if the facility does not offer recovery services, as defined, and would allow residents of an RR to actively participate in recovery services outside of the home. Requires RRs to be operated as a separate business from a licensed RTF and require RRs to maintain separate agreements with each resident for the housing and services it provides SB 1334 is currently pending in the Senate Health Committee.
   6. SB 1339 (Allen) requires DHCS to establish and provide for the administration of a voluntary certification program for supportive community residences. Defines “supportive community residence” as a residential home serving adults with SUD, a mental health diagnosis, or a dual diagnosis that does not provide licensable services.
3. PREVIOUS LEGISLATION.
   1. AB 1696 (Sanchez) of 2021 would have required any government entity that contracts with a privately owned RR to provide recovery services to require the RR to comply with specified requirements. AB 1696 was vetoed by the Governor.
   2. SB 349 (Umberg), Chapter 15, Statutes of 2022, creates the California Ethical Treatment for Persons with Addiction Act to provide protection for SUD treatment clients and their families. Imposes requirements and proscribed unlawful acts relating to marketing and advertising with respect to treatment provide. Requires treatment providers to adopt a client bill of rights for persons seeking treatment for SUD, and to make the bill of rights available to all clients and prospective clients; a treatment provider to maintain records of referrals to or from a RR, as specified and, provides that acts made unlawful by the bill be subject to a civil fine of up to $20,000 per violation.
   3. AB 1158 (Petrie Norris), Chapter 443, Statutes of 2021, requires an RFT licensed by DHCS serving more than six residents to maintain specified insurance coverages, including commercial general liability insurance and employer’s liability insurance. Required a licensee serving six or fewer residents to maintain general liability insurance coverage. Requires any government entity that contract with privately owned RR or RTF serving more than six residents to require the contractors to, at all times, maintain specific insurance coverage.
   4. AB 1098 (Daly) of 2021 would have created the Excellence in Recovery Residence Housing Act. Would have required the Secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency to develop and publish on the DHCS internet website consensus-based guidelines and nationally recognized standards for counties to use to promote the availability of high-quality RR housing for individuals with a SUD and to dissuade the use of contracting with, or referral to, RRs that do not meet these guidelines and standards. AB 1098 was held on the Assembly Appropriations Committee suspense file.
4. POLICY COMMENTS. While the effectiveness of sober living as a component of successful recovery is not controversial, RRs have been subject to intense scrutiny by local governments and residents across the state. RRs are an especially important type of housing for persons with disabilities, and are thus afforded protections under the Fair Housing Act (FHA), Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and state fair housing laws. In recent years, numerous local governments have amended their zoning ordinances to add discriminatory regulations for RRs. This led the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to issue an extensive Group Home Technical Advisory (GHTA) providing guidance to local governments on how discriminatory ordinances interact with obligations under state planning and zoning laws to promote more inclusive communities and affirmatively further fair housing. Even so, RRs and their presence in residential neighborhoods continue to be a focus of fierce debate. This year alone multiple bills targeting RRs have been introduced in direct contradiction of policies and recommendations outlined in HCD’s GHTA.

This bill defines a new term in “recovery housing.” But beyond meeting the core components of Housing First, it is unclear what the difference is between an RR and a “recovery home.” In addition to creating this new term, this bill requires DHCS to certify “recovery homes” and give those preferential referrals and funding.

In the context of a shortage of adequate housing for persons with disabilities, which is a particularly acute problem within California’s broader housing crisis and the overlapping SUD epidemic, the Legislature should question if the focus of statewide efforts to support sober living should solely be on this narrow type of “recovery housing.” Specifically, the Legislature should consider:

• 1. Should we be creating new terminology? RR is a term already codified in state statute and is recognized by state and national organizations and entities. At a time when these types of housing are under such scrutiny does it make sense to bring in new definitions and terminology that could increase confusion? Or, are there pathways to formally recognize RRs that also meet higher standards, such as Housing First?
  2. Should certification, and the standards, referrals, and funding that come along with it, only be afforded to a narrow subset of housing? Given the state’s extreme shortage of housing and SUD treatment capacity, the goal should be to support and develop as much of this housing as possible. Could we certify as many RRs as possible, ensuring we have ample housing supply that meets statewide standards, and then further recognize those who go beyond the baseline standards?
  3. Is Housing First an appropriate model for sober living? Housing First approaches homelessness by providing permanent, affordable housing as quickly as possible, then providing supportive services to prevent their return to homelessness. This strategy focuses on the idea that individuals experiencing homelessness should be provided shelter and stability before underlying issues can be successfully addressed. Housing First, as defined in state law, explicitly states that “the use of alcohol or drugs in and of itself, without other lease violations, is not a reason for eviction.” The RR model is generally abstinence based, with the focus on an individual’s successful recovery from SUD. While advocates for the industry state that residents are not immediately evicted upon usage, there are steps that need to be taken to support an individual to get them back on track for recovery. Even so, these principles are seemingly contradictory and the impacts of substance usage in a residence that is housing multiple people in recovery needs to be thoroughly considered. The Legislature should question if Housing First, as currently defined in state law, is an appropriate principle to apply to housing that is meant to support recovery.

1. DOUBLE REFERRAL. This bill is double referred; it passed the Assembly Committee on Housing and Community Development with a vote of 7-0 on April 17, 2024.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

Share! Collaborative Housing (sponsor)

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Riana King / HEALTH / (916) 319-2097

Date of Hearing: April 17, 2024

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

Christopher M. Ward, Chair

ABPCA Bill Id:AB 2893 (

Author:Ward) – As Amended Ver:March 21, 2024

SUBJECT: The Shared Recovery Housing Residency Program

SUMMARY: Establishes a certification process for recovery homes and adds a standard for recovery homes that meets the state’s Housing First requirements. Specifically, this bill:

1. Includes the following definitions:
   1. “Housing first model” means housing that satisfies the core components of Housing First pursuant to Section 8255 of the Welfare and Institutions Code.
   2. “Recovery house” means a residence that serves individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues and that does all of the following:
      1. Satisfies the core components of Housing First pursuant to Section 8255 of the Welfare and Institutions Code;
      2. Uses substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction; and
      3. Emphasizes abstinence.
   3. “Trauma-informed practices” means a trauma-informed approach to care guided by the principles of safety, trustworthiness and transparency, peer support, collaboration and mutuality, empowerment and choice, and culture, historical, and gender issues.
2. Requires the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to oversee certification of recovery houses by establishing a criteria for the certification of recovery housing conditions under which a recovery home may be certified and regain certification.
3. Authorizes DHCS to charge a fee of not more than $1,000 for certifying recovery houses.
4. Establishes the Shared Recovery Housing Residency Program Fund to receive all funds collected for certifying recovery housing.
5. Authorizes recovery houses that are certified by DHCS to receive referrals from the department, its agencies, or contractors as housing available for persons experiencing or at risk of experiencing homelessness or mental health issues.
6. Prohibits recovery housing from providing services on-site, including, but not limited to, incidental medical services, as defined.
7. Adds provisions regarding recovery housing to the existing statute governing Housing First, including the following:
   1. Allows state departments and agencies to fund recovery housing that use substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction that emphasizes abstinence so long as the state program uses at least 75% of the funds for housing or housing-based services using a harm reduction model, and that recovery housing complies with the following:
      1. An individual or family is offered options and chooses recovery housing over housing offering a harm-reduction approach;
      2. The recovery housing otherwise complies with all other components of Housing First, in existing law, including low barrier to entry;
      3. Participation in a program is self-initiated;
      4. Core components emphasize long-term housing stability and minimize returns to homelessness;
      5. Policies and operations ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity and respect, and freedom from coercion and restraint, as well as continuous, uninterrupted access to housing;
      6. Holistic services and peer-based recovery supports are available to all program participants along with services that align with participants’ choice and prioritization of personal goals of sustained recovery and abstinence from substance use.
      7. The housing abides by local and state landlord-tenant laws governing grounds for eviction.
      8. Relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and tenants receive relapse support.
      9. Eviction from recovery housing shall only occur when a tenant’s behavior substantially disrupts or impacts the welfare of the recovery community in which the tenant resides. A tenant may apply to reenter the housing program if expressing a renewed commitment to living in a housing-setting targeted to people in recovery with an abstinence focus.
      10. If a tenant is no longer interested in living in a recovery housing model or the tenant is at risk of eviction, the housing program provides assistance in accessing housing operated with harm-reduction principles that is also permanent housing.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Establishes the California Interagency Council on Homelessness (Cal-ICH) with the purpose of coordinating the state’s response to homelessness by utilizing Housing First practices. (Welfare and Institutions Code Section 8255)
2. Requires agencies and departments administering state programs created on or after July 1, 2017 to incorporate the core components of Housing First. (WIC 8255)
3. Defines “Housing First” to mean the evidence-based model that uses housing as a tool, rather than a reward, for recovery and that centers on providing or connecting homeless people to permanent housing as quickly as possible. Housing First providers offer services as needed and requested on a voluntary basis and that do not make housing contingent on participation in services. (WIC 8255)
4. Defines, among other things, the “core components of Housing First” to mean:
   1. Acceptance of referrals directly from shelters, street outreach, drop-in centers, and other parts of crisis response systems frequented by vulnerable people experiencing homelessness;
   2. Supportive services that emphasize engagement and problem-solving over therapeutic goals and service plans that are highly tenant-driven without predetermined goals;
   3. Participation in services or program compliance is not a condition of permanent housing tenancy;
   4. Tenants have a lease and all the rights and responsibilities of tenancy, as outlined in California’s Civil, Health and Safety, and Government codes; and
   5. The use of alcohol or drugs in and of itself, without other lease violations, is not a reason for eviction. (WIC 8255)
5. Defines “recovery residence” to mean a residential dwelling that provides primary housing for individuals who seek a cooperative living arrangement that supports personal recovery from a substance use disorder and that does not require licensure by the department or does not provide licensable services. Provides that a recovery residence may include, but is not limited to, residential dwellings commonly referred to as “sober living homes,” “sober living environments,” or “unlicensed alcohol and drug free residences.” (HSC 11833.05) 

FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.

COMMENTS:

Author’s Statement: According to the author, “AB 2893 would direct the California Department of Healthcare Services (DHCS) to create a statewide certification program for recovery houses that would be in compliance with housing first policies under the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) definition. This bill would instruct DHCS to create a certification program for these homes at a state level to standardize their care as well as reign in bad actors. This is a working model that the state can use housing funds for to solve its acute homelessness and addiction crisis.”

Homelessness in California: Based on the 2023 point in time count, California has the largest homeless population in the nation with 181,399 people experiencing homelessness on any given night. Many of those people (113,660) are unsheltered, meaning they are living outdoors and not in temporary shelters. Nearly half of all unsheltered people in the country were in California during the 2023 count. The homelessness crisis is driven in part by the lack of affordable rental housing for lower income people. In the current market, 2.2 million extremely low-income and very low-income renter households are competing for 664,000 affordable rental units. Of the six million renter households in the state, 1.7 million are paying more than 50% of their income toward rent. The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates that the state needs an additional 1.5 million housing units affordable to very-low income Californians.

Recovery Housing: Under existing law, “recovery housing” or “sober living homes” are residential dwellings that provide cooperative living in a residential dwelling that support an individual’s personal recovery from a substance use disorder. These homes are not licensed by DHCS or any other state or local government. This bill seeks to create a new category of “recovery home” for people who are homeless or at risk of experiencing homelessness or mental health or substance abuse issues. Recovery housing, as currently defined under existing law, is not required to comply with Housing First requirements, although some may do so. This bill would require a “recovery home” to comply with Housing First, which means that although the provider of the housing could emphasize abstinence, an individual would be offered options and would choose recovery housing over housing offering a harm-reduction approach; participation would be self-initiated; relapse is not a cause for eviction from housing and tenants receive relapse support; and policies and operations must ensure individual rights of privacy, dignity and respect, and freedom from coercion and restraint, as well as continuous, uninterrupted access to housing. By incorporating the principles of Housing First an evidence-based approach to housing, recovery homes will ensure greater success for individuals to remain housed.

Housing First: Decades of research demonstrate that evidence-based approaches like supportive housing – affordable housing coupled with wrap-around services – resolves homelessness for most individuals. In addition, the state has a policy of Housing First, which is an approach that prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness, thus ending their homelessness and serving as a platform from which they can pursue personal goals and improve their quality of life. Many state and local programs effectively utilize these evidence-based approaches to address homelessness; however, the number of people falling into homelessness continues to overwhelm the response system and surpasses the affordable housing stock in many communities. These factors lead to persistently high rates of homelessness despite recent state and local investments. Other strategies, such as rental assistance and help with identifying and securing housing (housing navigation) can also help with those individuals who need prevention tools to avoid homelessness.

Shifting Funding: SB 1380 (Mitchell), Chapter 847, Statutes of 2016 required the state to adopt a Housing First approach and required all state-funded programs to comply with Housing First. Traditional recovery housing does not necessarily conform to Housing First because it is an abstinence-based approach to addressing substance abuse. This bill would set new guidelines for how recovery homes could continue to provide an option for abstinence but also comply with Housing First. This bill would allow state programs to use 25% of available funding for homelessness for licensed recovery homes, as defined.

Arguments in Support: According to the sponsors, SHARE!, “AB 2893 (Ward) would require the Department of Healthcare Services to oversee certification of recovery houses that serve individuals experiencing, or who are at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues, with a housing first model. The bill would require the department to establish criteria for certification of recovery houses in order to allow a recovery house to receive referrals from the department as available housing for persons experiencing, or at risk of experiencing, homelessness or mental health issues.

AB 2893 would establish recovery houses at the end of the continuum of care that does not provide any licensed medical services onsite. This definitional bill is crucial to ensure that during these difficult budgetary times, only the most effective programs that have a certified and proven track record should gain access to our strapped state funds.”

Arguments in Opposition: None on file.

Committee Amendments: To further clarify the purpose of the bill, the committee may wish to consider amendments that do the following:

• Make clear that a recovery house is for an individual who is experiencing serious mental illness or substance use disorders.
• Allow a state program to fund recovery homes that use substance use-specific services, peer support, and physical design features supporting individuals and families on a path to recovery from addiction that emphasizes abstinence, so long as the state program requires 75% of funds in each county to be used for housing or housing-based services using a harm-reduction model.

Related Legislation:

AB 2479 (Haney) (2024) also adds requirements96 for recovery housing to Housing First. This bill is set for a hearing in Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee on April 24, 2024.

Double Referred: This bill was also referred to the Assembly Committee on Health, where it will be heard should it pass out of this committee.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

SHARE! (Sponsor)

Opposition

None on file.

Analysis Prepared by: Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085