As ACT is one of the more intensive, wrap-around models to help people with serious mental illness succeed in independent living settings, ACT is often viewed as a 鈥渓east restrictive鈥� alternative to many other institutional settings, and a state of homelessness.
As such, ACT should be a service option available in many locations, as part of a broader service system of care.
Read more about the Olmstead Decision here:聽
Enforcement of the Olmstead Decision has led to many state lawsuits and settlements.聽 What happens is a state is found to be relying on institutional setting options at a rate that out-balances the investment in community-based (鈥渓east restrictive鈥�) options.聽 These settlements typically include many evidence-based programs and treatments found to help people in their recovery.
Curious as to who is in such a settlement?聽 Check this out:聽
The Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law is also a great resource.聽 Check out their own Resource page, which includes many helpful links:聽
NAMI is often a good source for staying up to date with relevant legislature:聽
The Treatment Advocacy Center is often keeping its finger on current laws relevant to those with serious mental illness, in particular involuntary commitment laws.聽 Although we believe a high-fidelity ACT team is capable of helping many people avoid involuntary and coercive treatments, it is one tool that often remains relevant to their work.聽 Check out this resource map: