Newsom threatens CARE Court funds after ranking 10 counties “underperforming” on mental-health court rollout
On March 3, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom warned 10 California counties he could redirect CARE Court funds after low petition rates, citing statewide shortfalls in petitions, approved treatment agreements and court-ordered CARE plans, and slow program rollout statewide.
Key takeaways
- State benchmark: Counties were judged against ~6.2 CARE Court petitions per 100,000 residents; 10 counties were placed in the state’s “CARE ICU.”
- Low statewide usage: Since launch the state recorded 3,817 petitions, 893 approved treatment agreements and only 32 people ordered into CARE plans.
- Incentives and penalties: Newsom threatened to redirect funding to better-performing counties while offering hands-on support and new housing investments.
- Metric controversy: Counties and experts warn a petition-based scorecard can miss prevention, diversion and community-care efforts that reduce court filings.
Main content
Key information
Governor Newsom identified 10 counties as the state’s Improvement and Coordination Unit — nicknamed the “CARE ICU” — for falling short of a benchmark of roughly 6.2 CARE Court petitions per 100,000 residents. He warned that state funding could be redirected if counties do not improve their petition rates. Source reporting is available via KFI AM 640.
CARE Court background and performance
CARE Court was launched as a major reform to California’s behavioral health system to connect people with severe mental illness to treatment. The law allows family members, first responders and some providers to file petitions so judges can link people to voluntary treatment or a court-ordered care plan. Newsom rolled the program out across all 58 counties by December 2024 (see the governor’s remarks in the state press briefing video).
Usage so far: Since the statewide launch the state recorded 3,817 CARE Court petitions. Judges approved 893 treatment agreements and ordered just 32 people into CARE plans — far below earlier projections that the program could serve 7,000 to 12,000 Californians. The state used the 6.2-per-100,000 benchmark to evaluate county rollout. (Source: KFI AM 640.)
Who are the “CARE ICU” counties?
The governor identified the following 10 counties as underperforming the benchmark: Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Monterey, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Francisco, Santa Clara and Yolo. Newsom used blunt language at the March 2 press conference, saying,
“I’m happy to redirect every damn penny in these programs to the counties that are getting things done, period, full stop.”
That roster includes both large urban counties and smaller jurisdictions, framing the issue as a statewide policy question and a local implementation challenge. The state also released a public dashboard at accountability.ca.gov to let residents track county progress.
CARE Champions
By contrast, Newsom named 10 “CARE Champions” that the state says successfully integrated the program: Alameda, Humboldt, Imperial, Marin, Merced, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Sutter and Tuolumne. (Source: KFI AM 640.)
County responses and critics of the metric
Several counties and experts pushed back, arguing the single scorecard misses important local work:
- Orange County: Local officials said county data show 79 participants receiving housing, medication and services through CARE-related efforts and that the county ranks fifth in petitions statewide — disputing the state’s placement of Orange among underperformers. (Source: KFI AM 640.)
- Santa Clara: County Executive James Williams warned against reducing complex public-health work to “a single scorecard,” noting prevention efforts can lower petition counts.
- San Francisco: Officials pointed to record-low street encampments and increased shelter connections recently, which may not appear in petition-based metrics.
- Experts: Michelle Doty Cabrera of the County Behavioral Health Directors Association said the metric overlooks diversion, prevention and community-based care. Observers also noted San Diego’s high CARE Court graduations didn’t place it among the state’s listed champions.
What state support is offered — and what could be taken
Newsom framed the funding threat as a push for results while also announcing new investments to expand housing and treatment capacity: $131.8 million in Homekey+ awards funded by Proposition 1 to create 443 homes, plus $159 million in Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention dollars from the 2024–25 budget. His office said it will offer hands-on support to lagging counties even as he signaled potential May budget proposals to reallocate CARE Court funding to better-performing counties (any reallocation would require legislative approval).
The administration’s public dashboard at accountability.ca.gov is intended to boost transparency and public pressure on local officials to meet the benchmark. (Source: KFI AM 640.)
Investigative note: data gaps and questions
The petition-based benchmark raises several policy questions: a higher petition count may indicate more court involvement but not necessarily better prevention or quality of post-petition services. The low numbers of court-ordered CARE plans and approved agreements suggest either limited use of the law, administrative hurdles, or successful diversion — possibilities that carry different implications for families, first responders and taxpayers.
Implications for Redding, California
Economic impact
State funding shifts could alter the flow of housing and mental-health dollars that reach Shasta County and Redding-area service providers. If Sacramento redirects CARE Court funds away from underperforming counties, nearby regions could face increased competition for resources or a reallocation favoring counties with stronger petition numbers. Local agencies dependent on state grants should monitor proposed budget moves in May.
Public safety and services
Redding residents concerned about encampments and drug activity will watch whether CARE Court leads to more people receiving treatment, housing or supervised care. If local courts and behavioral health teams increase petition throughput, more residents could enter treatment programs and supportive housing — outcomes some voters link to improved public safety. Conversely, counties emphasizing prevention and diversion risk lower petition counts and potential penalties under the state scorecard.
Political consequences
The matter highlights tensions between state mandates and local control. Conservative voters in Redding who prefer strict accountability may welcome Newsom’s threat to pull funds for underperforming programs, while local officials and law enforcement may press for metrics that reflect real-world outcomes such as fewer encampments and treatment placements.
Social effects
Families caring for loved ones with severe mental illness seek reliable pathways to care. CARE Court promises clearer paths, but uneven implementation or the threat of funding reallocation may delay access. The state’s Homekey+ and homelessness prevention dollars could support local housing for people leaving hospitals or needing stable supports — if counties secure and match those investments.
Practical applications for residents
Residents can review county performance at accountability.ca.gov and raise concerns with local supervisors or judges if progress lags. Local officials should explain whether low petition counts reflect effective prevention or true underuse of a state tool designed to help Californians in crisis.
Reporting sources
This article draws on the governor’s March 2 press briefing and state-published performance figures reported by local outlets. See reporting at KFI AM 640, the governor’s remarks in the state press briefing video, and the public dashboard at accountability.ca.gov.
