Testimony Before the Council of the District of Columbia Committee on Health Budget Oversight Hearing: Department of Behavioral Health (DBH)
By Nicole Travers
Senior Director of Strategic Partnerships, DC Charter School Alliance
Good morning, Chairperson Henderson and members of the Committee. My name is Nicole Travers, and I serve as the Senior Director of Strategic Partnerships at the DC Charter School Alliance, the local nonprofit that advocates on behalf of public charter schools to ensure every student can choose a high-quality public school that prepares them for lifelong success. I also serve as Co-chair of the School Behavioral Health Coordinating Council. Before this role, I was a Ward 7 high school principal, working directly with students, families, and school-based mental health teams.
For the past five years, the DC Charter School Alliance has testified before the Committee on Health to advocate for equitable access to mental health resources for public charter schools across the District. Given the growing mental health needs of students, it remains critical that we continue to elevate the supports necessary to improve service delivery and access. Therefore, we want to extend our appreciation to Erica Barnes, Branch Chief of the School-Based Behavioral Health Program, and to Dr. Charneta Scott and her team for initiating collaborative conversations that create space for charter LEA leaders to share the specific needs of their school communities. Schools are widely recognized as the primary access point for youth mental health services in the United States. Data from the 2024 School Pulse Panel Survey conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) show that 58% of public schools have seen an increase in the number of students seeking mental health services. Additionally, only 48% report being able to meet all student needs effectively, a 10 percentage point drop from SY2021-22—highlighting a significant and widening gap between demand and available support. School communities in the District of Columbia are experiencing similar trends. 40% of charter campuses lack a DBH-provided mental health professional, and the new School Behavioral Health Program Comprehensive Plan does not increase the number of providers in schools.
Despite these disparities, public charter schools continue to support students by supplementing their mental health teams and providing wraparound services. For example, charter LEAs like DC Prep hired additional clinicians through The Momentum Residency and partner with local universities for tiered clinical support to meet the rising needs of their community. Ingenuity Prep PCS created a robust, integrated student support clinical model that relies on internal staff and community partnerships to support their students.
Overall, mental health is health, and while we commend school leaders for their commitment, it is important to acknowledge the difficult tradeoffs they face. Many leaders face the challenging decision of whether to hire additional mental health support staff or academic interventionists. Both are necessary for students to thrive, but for many schools, the UPSFF alone cannot cover both while also ensuring sufficient funds for rising fixed costs, such as utilities. This is likely why the Mayor has moved nearly $60M to DGS to cover fixed costs for DCPS, so DCPS can afford both the clinician and the academic interventionist, while also keeping the lights on in their buildings. No such additional funding for utilities was provided for charter schools. We acknowledge the fiscal constraints facing the District – there is simply not enough money for every program. But fairness and equity must prevail in our support for our students’ mental health needs. Some important steps can be taken to ensure that (1) resources are equitably allocated and (2) changes to the existing School-based Behavioral Health program, outlined in the School Behavioral Health Program Comprehensive Plan, are rolled out smoothly and are student-centered. We raised many of these steps during our February 2 performance oversight hearing.
First, we understand DBH intends to end their contracts with CBOs who they are not engaging next school year, before they start the hiring process for in-house clinicians. Sudden changes and gaps in coverage will cause major disruptions for already underserved students. We must learn from the School Health Services program's transition to an in-house program earlier this school year. DC Health ended its contract with Children’s before the start of the school year and has not been able to hire at the rate they expected. At this time last year, schools had 40 hours of coverage in their health suites; today, many schools are operating with only 20 hours and no additional medical coverage support to make up the difference. The School Behavioral Health Program Comprehensive Plan needs a more thoughtful, phased approach to this transition that includes retaining high-quality providers who deliver specialized support for student subgroups, including those requiring bilingual services.
This approach would allow time to prepare students and families for the wind-down of existing services while also supporting school staff and leadership in adapting to new mental health service models. It would include thoughtful planning for the realignment of school-based systems and processes, as well as the onboarding and integration of newly hired DBH clinicians and staff into the school community and culture.
Second, it is critical that DBH use accurate data when making decisions about how to allocate resources for this new model. While we appreciate the Committee’s release of the environmental scan data, our schools found numerous errors and inconsistencies. We are therefore concerned about how this data will be used.
We recommend that DBH provide greater transparency by sharing a clear timeline for model assignments, publishing the rubric used to make those determinations, and using accurate data to make those decisions. As needs evolve, we also recommend creating a process for schools to appeal for additional resources. A clear appeals process would also allow school leaders to present updated student enrollment data and make a strong case for the level of support needed to effectively meet their students’ mental health needs.
Third, as we previously raised during the February 2 performance hearing, we have serious concerns about the telehealth model currently being implemented for prioritized high school and adult education LEAs. Through follow-up discussions with DBH, we learned that this service is only available to students during before- or after-school hours.
As a former high school teacher and principal, I know firsthand how challenging it can be to engage teenagers with a clinician they have never met—especially outside of school hours. Students who most need these supports often require a more personal, relationship-based approach. Many are navigating multiple pressures, including caring for younger siblings, coping with trauma related to community violence, or experiencing fear connected to federal law enforcement. These realities underscore the importance of having a trusted, in-person connection with a clinician. And even if students were interested in engaging, this plan also requires families and school staff to manage scheduling outside of school hours and to access reliable internet, appropriate devices, and private spaces for these calls.
Therefore, we continue to recommend that the telehealth model include a hybrid option for high schools, allowing students to build trust and establish a relationship with clinicians during the school day before transitioning to fully virtual sessions. Without this in-person connection, many adolescents will not engage consistently with providers they have never met.
Most importantly, we must be realistic and recognize that this model will not adequately meet students' mental health needs in the District. As a result, schools will need to fill these gaps using their UPSFF funding. At the same time, the current budget proposal provides $96 million less to charter schools—approximately $2,000 less per student. This will make it increasingly difficult for charter schools to continue supporting students’ needs and sustaining the positive outcomes we have delivered over the past thirty years.
Acknowledging the fiscal constraints, we urge the Council to focus on (1) a thoughtful rollout of the School Behavioral Health Program Comprehensive Plan grounded in transparency, mutual trust, and collaborative problem-solving, and (2) equity for students, regardless of which school those students choose to attend.
In closing, the DC Charter School Alliance remains committed to working alongside the District to ensure all students—particularly those most vulnerable—have timely and equitable access to high-quality mental health supports.
Thank you for your time and consideration. I welcome your questions.
