Newsom Warns He’ll Redirect CARE Court Funding From 10 Counties; Riverside and San Bernardino Among Those Flagged as Underperforming
Gov. Newsom warned March 2, 2026, he may redirect state CARE Court funding from ten counties labeled underperforming, including Riverside and San Bernardino, unless counties increase petitions and connections to treatment and housing for people with severe mental illness.
- Key takeaways:
- Ten counties were placed in a special improvement unit for low CARE Court petition rates, potentially risking redirected funds.
- The state set a benchmark of 6.2 petitions per 100,000 residents as a baseline measure of implementation.
- State data show far fewer approved CARE Court treatment agreements and court-ordered plans than early projections.
- The administration launched accountability.ca.gov and named both underperforming counties and “CARE Champions.”
Key information
Counties named as underperforming: Fresno, Kern, Los Angeles, Monterey, Orange, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Francisco, Santa Clara and Yolo. (Source: KFI AM 640)
Benchmark: The state set a 6.2 CARE Court petitions per 100,000 residents standard as a measure of basic implementation. (Source: KFI AM 640)
State tallies: Since launch the state recorded 3,817 petitions, 893 approved treatment agreements and 32 court-ordered plans — well below earlier projections of 7,000–12,000 eligible people. (Source: KFI AM 640)
Accountability tools: The state named 10 “CARE Champions” for strong rollout and launched a public dashboard at accountability.ca.gov to track county progress. (Sources: KFI AM 640; accountability.ca.gov)
What is CARE Court and why it matters
CARE Court — shorthand for Community Assistance, Recovery, and Empowerment Court — is Gov. Newsom’s signature program to connect people with serious mental illness to housing and treatment. Announced in 2019, the program allows family members, first responders or providers to ask a civil court to help a person enter voluntary treatment or a court-supervised care plan. The state piloted CARE Court in select counties in 2023 and completed a statewide rollout by 2024–25. (Sources: KFI AM 640; YouTube press conference)
Why the governor threatened funding cuts
At a March 2 press event in Alameda County, Newsom said some counties are too slow to use CARE Court and to link people to treatment and housing. He established the 6.2 petitions-per-100,000 benchmark and placed counties below that mark into a special unit called the Improvement and Coordination Unit, or “CARE ICU.”
“I’m happy to redirect every damn penny…to the counties that are getting things done.”
Newsom warned funds could be reallocated from underperforming counties to those meeting the standard, while saying the state would offer help to accelerate local implementation first. (Sources: KFI AM 640; YouTube)
State data and shortfalls
State figures show the CARE Court rollout has not matched early expectations. Officials reported 3,817 petitions statewide, with judges approving 893 treatment agreements and issuing 32 court-ordered plans. More than 4,000 referrals were redirected to other services rather than resulting in a CARE Court plan. Those figures fall short of the 7,000–12,000 people state leaders once projected might qualify, prompting a push for clearer county accountability. (Source: KFI AM 640)
County reactions and critiques
Several counties named in the “CARE ICU” list pushed back quickly:
- Orange County officials noted it ranked fifth in petitions statewide and said 79 people were participating in CARE Court-linked housing and services, arguing implementation is underway. (Source: KFI AM 640)
- Santa Clara County leaders said they have been building treatment and housing capacity and warned a single petition-based metric does not capture prevention work or outreach. (Source: KFI AM 640)
- San Francisco officials pointed to lower street encampments and improved safety measures, while noting a recent case — Connor Keith, who died of an overdose 10 days after his CARE Court case was dismissed — has prompted review of practices. (Source: KFI AM 640)
State and local associations also weighed in: the County Behavioral Health Directors Association criticized the petition metric as narrow, while the California State Association of Counties said counties are complying with the law and need flexibility to implement locally appropriate strategies. (Sources: KFI AM 640; YouTube)
State actions, funding and next steps
The Newsom administration launched an online dashboard at accountability.ca.gov so residents can review county CARE Court performance and other metrics. The administration also announced housing and homeless assistance awards tied to behavioral health goals, distributing $131.8 million in Homekey+ awards for 443 homes and $159 million from the Homeless Housing, Assistance and Prevention program; some counties on the “ICU” list received portions of that funding.
Newsom said his revised May 2026 budget could propose redirecting funds if counties do not show improvement, but emphasized the state would first provide support to accelerate implementation. (Source: KFI AM 640)
Who the state praised
The administration named 10 “CARE Champions” for stronger early adoption: Alameda, Humboldt, Imperial, Marin, Merced, Napa, San Mateo, Santa Barbara, Sutter and Tuolumne. The list is intended to highlight models for other counties to study. (Source: KFI AM 640)
Investigative questions raised
The dispute highlights several areas for closer reporting and public scrutiny:
- Does the petition rate accurately measure how well a county is serving people with severe mental illness?
- Are counties getting clear guidance and enough resources from the state to meet the benchmark?
- How do CARE Court outcomes compare with other interventions, such as outreach, crisis teams or conservatorship?
- What are the long-term results for people who enter CARE Court versus those steered to other services?
Implications for the Inland Empire
Economic impact
Funding shifts could change state money Riverside and San Bernardino receive for housing and treatment programs. Newsom signaled possible redirection of CARE Court-related funds in his May budget if counties remain below benchmarks, which could affect local contracts with providers and developers working on behavioral health housing. Some state awards already went to San Bernardino County; withheld or redirected funds could force local reallocation or project delays. (Source: KFI AM 640)
Political consequences
Local leaders in the Inland Empire will face scrutiny from voters and the governor. Riverside and San Bernardino officials must document plans to meet CARE Court benchmarks and show outreach, housing placements and treatment linkages. The debate may intensify during budget negotiations in Sacramento as counties press lawmakers to protect funding or adjust performance metrics. (Source: KFI AM 640)
Social effects
Residents dealing with homelessness and severe mental illness may see changes in program offerings. Increased CARE Court activity could move some people into treatment and housing more quickly, but critics warn the petition metric risks prioritizing numbers over long-term care and recovery. Families and first responders will likely receive more outreach about how to petition for CARE Court help, affecting crisis response and street engagement.
Cultural relevance
The Inland Empire’s mix of urban and suburban communities and its tradition of local control over social services may fuel political pushback. County leaders and advocates will need to balance local autonomy with measurable steps to reduce homelessness and support residents with mental illness.
Practical applications for residents
Residents can use the state dashboard at accountability.ca.gov to check local CARE Court progress and to see how Riverside and San Bernardino are performing. Families, advocates and first responders should learn how to petition CARE Court and check county behavioral health office guidance. Community groups may see new contract opportunities if counties scale up outreach, housing navigation and treatment services — or if the state reallocates funds to counties that demonstrate quick results. (Sources: KFI AM 640; accountability.ca.gov)
