Shasta Schools Building Mental Health Empire: community Schools Part 2

Written by Katie Elizabeth Gorman

Shasta County Office of Education (SCOE) employs400 individuals, with the top 140 bureaucrats making between $100K-$270K without any direct classroom instruction responsibilities. SCOE is now veering farther away from their academic mission by seizing control of student mental health.

In Part 1 of this 3 part analysis, we examined how the Community Schools concept is an imbedded objective of Marxist ideology to shift control of children away from parents, and into the hands of state-managed social services. Under the guise of “wraparound care” for students, parental rights are undermined in favor of government control over family life.

In Part 2, we investigate how Community Schools are creating a bloated, expensive, and subpar healthcare infrastructure—one that duplicates existing medical services, lowers the quality of care, and forces schools to function as state-run behavioral health clinics all at taxpayer expense.

Community School conversions are funded through California’s “Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative (CYBHI), that claims to be “part of the Master Plan for Kids’ Mental Health, a historic investment by the State of California that takes a “whole child” approach to address the factors that contribute to the mental health and well-being of our children and youth.”

CYBHI trumpets that it is built on a “foundation of equity and accessibility” to create a “youth-centered system” that unites the efforts of health programs, education and social services. But this master-plan excludes the traditional equity and accessibility role of parents and family doctors.

Shasta County is a Major Demonstration Site

SCOE received $42 million to implement “Community Schools” to empower public school administrators to control gatekeeper access to federally-funded mental health services. Given schools are directly compensated for each student mental health diagnosis, parents and doctors fear Community Schools create a clear conflict-of-interest for schools to maximize the number of student mental health diagnosis to maximize reimbursements.

Who Will Be Treating Your Child?

One of the most alarming aspects of CYBHI is the lowering of standards for who can provide and bill for mental health services. Instead of ensuring children receive high-quality care from licensed psychiatrists or psychologists, the Community Schools are designed to prioritize accessibility. Schools under the CYBHIplan design are eligible to bill for:

· Associate therapists still in training (AMFTs, ASWs, APCCs);

· School counselors and social workers, who lack medical licensing;

· Behavioral interventionists with minimal psychological training.

Rather than receiving care from licensed professionals,children are being funneled into a system where school-based mental health staff—who may have limited clinical experience—are making serious diagnoses and treatment decisions.

Example: SCOE encouraged the Shasta County Board of Supervisors enter into a personal service agreement for “Community Connectors,” a program aimed at providing school-based social services.

In the original proposal, most of the funds were designated to pay for certificated staff (licensed professionals). But according to a public records request, just before the contract was set to expire on July 15, 2024, SCOE arranged for $74,686.00 to be shifted from compensating certificated school staff, to compensating less qualified non-certificated staff.

This last-minute reallocation allowed non-qualified personnel to take on mental health-related roles. This raises serious concerns about whether children are receiving appropriate care, or merely being placed into a system where any staff can make mental health treatment decisions.

The Mission Creep—Education or Social Services?

Community Schools drastically redefines the very purpose of public schools from educational attainment to primary providers of social services. The impact is visible in deteriorating Shasta County educational test scores:

· English proficiency rate is 46.56%, below the statewide rate of 47.04%;

· Math proficiency rate is 35.67%, just above statewide rate of 35.54%.

While Shasta County performs slightly above the state average in Math proficiency overall, fewer students exceed the standard (14.56%) compared to the state (17.89%), suggesting a weaker performance at the highest levels.

Parental Rights and the Kelvin Survey Problem

School-based mental health services are increasingly moving beyond traditional therapy and into data-driven behavioral tracking tools like Kelvin, an online survey program deployed in schools across the country.

SCOE listed that they had spent $21,982.50 on KelvinSurveys to ask children invasive questions about their emotional state, sense of belonging, gender identity, and perceived safety at school.

Although Anderson schools implemented parental opt-out notices because of the sensitive nature of these questions, most Shasta County schools are not providing parents with transparent information about what surveys are asking, and what will be the consequences of their children’s responses.

Community Schools and programs like CYBHI are rapidly transforming the role of public education. Instead of reinforcing academic excellence, these initiatives embed a bureaucratic, government-run social services model within schools.

What Can Parents Do?

· Review all school consent forms carefully, especially during enrollment.

· Ask about opt-out policies for surveys and mental health programs.

· Attend school board meetings and demand full transparency on funding and services.

· Push for more focus on academics, rather than expanded social services.

Shasta County schools were meant to educate—not operate as social service agencies. It’s time to reclaim the classroom.