Skip to content
Spring Grove Hospital Center in Catonsville is a 375-bed state-run facility that provides inpatient psychiatric care to adults and adolescents.
Casidy Cerkez/Baltimore Sun
Spring Grove Hospital Center in Catonsville is a 375-bed state-run facility that provides inpatient psychiatric care to adults and adolescents. (Casidy Cerkez/Baltimore Sun Media).
Author
PUBLISHED:

The Baltimore Sun recently reported on communities opposed to the presence of Psychiatric Rehabilitation Programs (“Baltimore officials, residents concerned psychiatric rehab sites will hurt neighborhoods,” July 23). This saddened me for two reasons. The first is that the stigma of mental illness is clearly still pervasive in our city. So are the not-in-my-backyard fears that come with it.

The second, though, pertains to those PRPs themselves. Last July, the Maryland Behavioral Health Administration had to place a moratorium on the growing number of PRPs because there are now so many of them that state oversight of quality was becoming problematic. The pause is still in effect in Baltimore and nine counties.

The first PRPs in Maryland were established in the late 1970s and early 1980s by visionaries who were convinced that, with the proper support, most men and women with even the most disabling mental illnesses could live productive lives in community settings and outside the back wards of state institutions. That has proven to be the case for thousands of Marylanders and for people with psychiatric disabilities across the country.

As PRP services grew over time, advocates, community providers and state agency staff collaborated year after year on enhanced regulations and outcome measures to maximize quality. One of the last jobs I had before retiring at the end of 2015 was to work with stakeholders on procedures to mandate national accreditation for all community behavioral health programs in Maryland.

In my experience back then, achieving national accreditation was rigorous and arduous but, according to the PRPs and other community-based programs that went through it, the process resulted in improved quality and service outcomes and, most importantly, higher consumer satisfaction.

So, 10 years later, I have to ask: What happened? Did all the new PRPs endure the same accreditation challenges as PRPs of the past? Did accreditation standards weaken? Were state quality monitors asleep at the switch? Above all, are Marylanders with behavioral health conditions receiving the services they need and deserve?

A witty colleague once said: If you’re making money in community mental health, you’re not doing it right. I hope money is not the reason there are so many PRPs today.

— Herb Cromwell, Catonsville

Add your voice: Respond to this piece or other Sun content by submitting your own letter.

RevContent Feed