The drafted criteria is so overly cumbersome that it makes it very difficult to navigate and some ways the criteria negates itself. For example, In criterion 2. “The individual has demonstrated a level of acuity indicating that they are at risk for crisis-cycling or dangerous decompensation in functioning and additional support in the form of community stabilization is required to prevent an acute inpatient admission”.  This criterion to me states that the individual can be at risk of crisis cycling or decompensating in a way that community stabilization is required to PREVENT acute admission, however later in the criteria (#3)  it implies that only individuals stepping down from higher level of care (ie acute psychiatric inpatient, ER, 23-hour crisis stab ect) will meet the full criteria and does not allow someone who is simply “crisis cycling or decompensating” to access the services unless they are assessed by SDA. So we send those that are simply decompensating and at risk for acute hospitalization through either SDA or Emergency Services, which are already programs that are overwhelmed with the influx of consumers and lack of mental health providers to connect consumers to.