Abstract:Policy Points Earmarked tax policies for behavioral health are perceived as having positive impacts related to increasing flexible funding, suggesting benefits to expand this financing approach. Implementation challenges related to these earmarked taxes included tax base volatility that impedes long-term service delivery planning and inequities in the distribution of tax revenue. Recommendations for designing or revising earmarked tax policies include developing clear guidelines and support systems to manage the administrative aspects of earmarked tax programs, cocreating reporting and oversight structures with system and service delivery agents, and selecting revenue streams that are relatively stable across years. Context: Over 200 cities and counties in the United States have implemented policies earmarking tax revenue for behavioral health services. This mixed-methods study was conducted with the aim of characterizing perceptions of the impacts of these earmarked tax policies, strengths and weaknesses of tax policy designs, and factors that influence decision making about how tax revenue is allocated for services. Methods: Study data came from surveys completed by 274 officials involved in behavioral health earmarked tax policy implementation and 37 interviews with officials in a sample of jurisdictions with these taxes-California (n = 16), Washington (n = 12), Colorado (n = 6), and Iowa (n = 3). Interviews primarily explored perceptions of the advantages and drawbacks of the earmarked tax, perceptions of tax policy design, and factors influencing decisions about revenue allocation. Findings: A total of 83% of respondents strongly agreed that it was better to have the tax than not, 73.2% strongly agreed that the tax increased flexibility to address complex behavioral health needs, and 65.1% strongly agreed that the tax increased the number of people served by evidence-based practices. Only 43.3%, however, strongly agreed that it was easy to satisfy tax-reporting requirements. Interviews revealed that the taxes enabled funding for services and implementation supports, such as training in the delivery of evidence-based practices, and supplemented mainstream funding sources (e.g., Medicaid). However, some interviewees also reported challenges related to volatility of funding, inequities in the distribution of tax revenue, and, in some cases, administratively burdensome tax reporting. Decisions about tax revenue allocation were influenced by goals such as reducing behavioral health care inequities, being responsive to community needs, addressing constraints of mainstream funding sources, and, to a lesser degree, supporting services considered to be evidence based. Conclusions: Earmarked taxes are a promising financing strategy to improve access to, and quality of, behavioral health services by supplementing mainstream state and federal financing.

Operational and organizational variation in determinants of policy implementation success: the case of policies that earmark taxes for behavioral health services

A Mixed-Methods Exploration of the Implementation of Policies That Earmarked Taxes for Behavioral Health

The role of the outer setting in implementation: associations between state demographic, fiscal, and policy factors and use of evidence-based treatments in mental healthcare

Quantitative measures of health policy implementation determinants and outcomes: a systematic review

Organizational Factors Influencing Implementation of Evidence-Based Practices for Integrated Treatment in Behavioral Health Agencies

Outer-context determinants in the sustainment phase of a reimbursement-driven implementation of evidence-based practices in children’s mental health services

Advancing a Conceptual Model of Evidence-Based Practice Implementation in Public Service Sectors

Design considerations for developing measures of policy implementation in quantitative evaluations of public health policy

Community stakeholder preferences for evidence-based practice implementation strategies in behavioral health: a best-worst scaling choice experiment

A systematic review of experimentally tested implementation strategies across health and human service settings: evidence from 2010-2022

Translating Medicaid policy into practice: policy implementation strategies from three US states’ experiences enhancing substance use disorder treatment

Bridging the Gap in Policy Implementation through a Health Equity Lens: Insights from a 2-Year Study on Measurement Development

What Really Matters in the Implementation of Evidence-based Practices in Community Mental Health? Insight and Recommendations from Experts, Providers, and Clients

Policy implementation: Implications for evaluation

Influence of provider openness and leadership behaviors on adherence to motivational interviewing training implementation strategies: Considerations for evidence-based practice delivery

Going Above and Beyond: Bridging the Gap Between Equitable Outcomes and Procedural Fairness in Health Policy Administration

Mixed-method study of a conceptual model of evidence-based intervention sustainment across multiple public-sector service settings

A mixed-methods study of system-level sustainability of evidence-based practices in 12 large-scale implementation initiatives

Private Practice, Private Insurance, and Private Pay Mental Health Services: An Understudied Area in Implementation Science

Determinants of inter-organizational implementation success: A mixed-methods evaluation of Veteran Directed Care

Implementation leadership and implementation climate in context: A single organization intrinsic case study for implementation of digital measurement-based care