FONTANA, CA— Michelle Riggs, director of institutional advancement at Crafton Hills College (CHC), was appointed in June to the Network of California Community College Foundations (NCCCF) board of directors for a three-year term.

The NCCCF’s mission is to advance and increase philanthropy to California’s community colleges. Community colleges receive less state funding per student than all other types of California public schools and the NCCCF’s efforts hope to bridge the gap.

“I am honored to join the NCCCF board of directors and contribute to the vital work of advancing philanthropy for California’s community colleges,” said Riggs. “I see firsthand the transformative impact that financial support can have on our students’ lives. I look forward to collaborating with my peers across the state to help bridge the funding gap and ensure that all students have access to the resources they need to succeed.”

In her current role at CHC, Riggs oversees the college’s fundraising efforts, alumni relations and community engagement initiatives. With a deep commitment to student success, she has been instrumental in securing financial support to enhance educational opportunities at the college.

NCCCF represents 56 foundations supporting community colleges or districts throughout California. There are 116 California community colleges serving 1.8 million students collectively. To strengthen philanthropy in California’s community colleges, the NCCCF provides members with professional development, peer support, access to resources, and collaborative opportunities.

For more information about NCCCF, visit https://ncccfweb.org/Home.aspx.

SAN BERNARDINO, CA— Nearly 500 Parkside Elementary School students received a special surprise on August 27, just as the new school year is getting underway. Thanks to a generous donation from Toyota of San Bernardino, every Parkside student received a brand-new backpack filled with essential school supplies. This thoughtful gift ensures that students are well-prepared and excited to kick off the academic year.

The surprise donation was met with smiles and excitement throughout the school, but perhaps no one was more appreciative than sixth-grader Henry Sanchez, 12. Henry, a standout student and natural leader in his class, expressed his gratitude for the new backpack, which he says will help him stay organized and focused during the school year.

“I lose my pencils all the time and having everything I need to succeed in one place really makes a difference,” Henry said as he checked out his new school supplies. “It feels great to know that our community cares about us and wants us to do well in school.”

Toyota of San Bernardino has a long history of supporting local education initiatives, and this donation is just the latest example of their commitment to the San Bernardino community.

“By providing students with the tools they need to thrive, we are helping to set the stage for a successful school year for every child at Parkside Elementary,” said the San Bernardino dealership’s General Manager, Eli Rivera. “I see myself in the faces of these students, and that’s why I want them to succeed.”

Parkside Principal Dr. Khaleelah Lewis-Wilkins expressed her heartfelt thanks to Toyota of San Bernardino, noting the positive impact this contribution will have on her students.

“Our students are so excited to receive these backpacks and supplies,” she said. “This generous donation will make a tremendous difference in their lives, giving them the confidence and resources they need to excel in their studies.”

The entire Parkside Elementary School community extends its gratitude to Toyota of San Bernardino for their kindness and continued support of local education. With the help of generous partners like Toyota, students like Henry Sanchez are more motivated than ever to achieve their academic goals and build a bright future.

About San Bernardino City Unified School District:

The San Bernardino City Unified School District is California’s eighth-largest school district and is dedicated to providing a high-quality education that prepares students for college, career and life. With a focus on equity, excellence and empowerment, the District serves a diverse student population in the San Bernardino and Highland communities. For more information about SBCUSD, visit www.sbcusd.com and follow the District @SBCityUSD on Facebook, Instagram, X, YouTube and LinkedIn.

By Edward Henderson | California Black Media

In less than two months, Californians will vote on Proposition (Prop) 32. This voter guide is one in a series of articles that will help you understand what supporters and opponents of each of California’s 10 ballot initiatives are saying about each one.

Prop 34 would permanently allow Medi-Cal, California’s version of the federal Medicaid program, to pay pharmacies directly for prescription drugs.

California started doing this in 2019 after Gov. Newsom signed an executive order allowing the payments. This initiative would codify the executive order into state law. The measure would also require healthcare providers to spend almost all the money (98%) they get from a federal prescription drug program directly on patient care — instead of having the leverage to use it on other things.

Prop 34 would increase the money that comes to California for Medi-Cal prescription drugs with a matching federal subsidy. However, it will restrict healthcare organizations and non-profits from spending that money on other health care-related social services.

Supporters of the proposition argue that, if approved, providers would be held accountable for their spending and provide more affordable care to individuals who need it. California Black Media (CBM) spoke to Elizabeth Helms, President and CEO of the California Chronic Care Coalition (CCCC), who has endorsed a YES vote for Prop 34.

The CCCC is an alliance of multiple patient organizations and provider groups with a focus on access to quality, affordable health care, wellness and prevention, and coordinated care.

“We are patient-centric,” said Helms. “We care that people are able to access the care that they need, including their medications, seeing physicians. And when we see that not happening, or we start hearing it from the field that (people are) having problems, (people) can’t do this, (people) can’t afford this, (people) can’t get timely care; you know, (people are) having to choose food over medicine or all these other things. Proposition 34 is important. Especially to people who need care, who can’t get it.”

Some of those opposed to the proposition argue that the only reason it is on the ballot is to personally target The AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) and its CEO Michael Weinstein, who supports rent control legislation. The California Apartment Association Issues Committee has provided $21.3 million in campaign support for the measure.

CBM spoke to David Kline, Vice President of Communications & Research at California Taxpayers Association who supports a NO vote for Prop 34.

“This is 100% financed by billionaire landlords and the California Apartment Association, and they don’t have an interest in health care,” said Kline. “This is a revenge initiative, a revenge against AIDS Healthcare Foundation for supporting rent control. And they’ve been very explicit on their website and videos they’ve put out about that have had at. But they don’t mention the AIDS Healthcare Foundation in their argument because they know how popular the organization is. This is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.”

The proposition only applies to providers who spend at least $100 million on expenses other than direct care, that also own and operate buildings and that least 500 severe health and safety violations in the last 10 years. These stipulations have led many to believe it is aimed at The AIDS Healthcare Foundation because they are one of few organizations who meet these criteria

“(Passing Prop. 34) would have a terrifying chilling effect,” said Kline. “What organization, you know, nonprofit would be safe who was speaking truth to power? I mean, taking on these billionaires, if they knew that all that they had to do was to put something on the ballot to take away their nonprofit status and remove their licenses?”

When asked about their thoughts on the involvement of Prop 34 and a focus on Weinstein, the CCCC did not have a comment, reiterating that their focus is “100% on patients” and directing as much funding as possible to their wellbeing.

“The proposition does several things,” said Helms. It protects up to $2 billion in prescription drug rebates for the state of California annually. And these rebates will help offset the cost of the Medi-Cal program, protect access to critical services for millions of low-income patients. It prevents the worst abusers of the 340B program from misusing money that is supposed to be used to help patients.”

A YES vote on this proposition would require Organizations like the AHF to spend nearly all of their money only on healthcare and no other endeavors.

A NO vote would repeal the proposition and keep things the way they already are.

By Edward Henderson | California Black Media

Prop 36 would Increase drug crime and theft penalties and allow a new class of crime to be called “treatment-mandated felonies,” which also require some offenders to participate in drug and mental health treatment.

It would also make the crime of shoplifting a felony for repeat offenders and increase penalties for some drug charges, including those involving the synthetic opioid fentanyl. It would also give judges the authority to order those with multiple drug charges to get treatment.

Supporters of the proposition say that it is a good balance between California’s ‘tough on crime’ days and the passing of prop 47 which they blame for creating loopholes in state law that criminals use to avoid accountability for drug trafficking and retail theft. They also claim it will combat homelessness which has risen 50% since the passing of prop 47.

The intent of Prop 47 was to reduce spending on imprisonment in California and reduce the state’s prison population as mandated by a United States Supreme Court in 2011.

During the pandemic, the rate of shoplifting and commercial burglaries increased statewide. The Public Policy Institute of California found that reported shoplifting of merchandise worth up to $950 increased 28% over the past five years.

Assemblymember Freddie Rodriguez (D-Pomona), a supporter of prop 36, made his stance clear in a press release in August.

“As a strong advocate for both public safety and comprehensive treatment programs, I am proud to support Proposition 36. This measure strikes a necessary balance between accountability and rehabilitation, ensuring that repeat offenders of retail theft and serious drug crimes are held responsible while also offering a path to recovery for those struggling with addiction,” Rodriguez wrote.

“It’s time we prioritize the safety of our communities and provide the resources needed to help individuals turn their lives around,” he added.

Opponents of the proposition argue that it is misleading to present idea tough-on-crime policies as a solution to homelessness. They, instead, directly link so-called “tough” polices of the “War on Drugs” to the overcrowding of prisons in the state and the over-incarceration of Black Californians.

California Black Media spoke with Eric Harris and Carolina Valle of Disability Rights California who strongly oppose the Prop 36.

“The kind of rush to panic at this time is misplaced and misguided based on the actual data,” said Harris. “The first folks who are going to get penalized by these types of policies – and we know this based on our long history of criminal justice work in this state – will be Black people, Latinos, and people with disabilities – with intersections among the groups.”

While supporters claim crime is increasing in California, Valle points to statistics that say otherwise. The Center on Juvenile & Criminal Justice released a study that shows the latest crime trends for 48 California cities clearly show significant declines. The data show crime declines across almost every major crime category, including an 11% decline in theft and a 17% drop in burglary, in the first three months of 2024 compared to the first three months of 2023.

“Having a felony on your record has very drastic consequences for public safety and family togetherness,” said Valle. “Because of Prop 47, they were able to avoid a felony conviction. That person is able to get a job that they need, housing that they need, they’re able to vote, all these things that we really value for stability here in California. So, a few years ago, there was actually a ballot initiative to do exactly what Prop 36 aims to do: roll back Prop 47.”

“And voters, again, really affirmed their commitment to preserving Prop 47 and rejected that ballot initiative because you really can’t throw a rock in California without hitting somebody who has been positively affected,” continued Valle. “We want to, as voters, recommit our votes to preserving Prop 47, and we can do that by rejecting Prop 36.”

A “yes” vote on Prop 36 supports making changes to Proposition 47, which was approved in 2014, including:

• classifying certain drug offenses as treatment-mandated felonies;
• increasing penalties for certain drug crimes by increasing sentence lengths and level of crimes;
• requiring courts to warn individuals convicted of distributing illegal drugs of their potential future criminal liability if they distribute deadly drugs like fentanyl, heroin, cocaine, and methamphetamine; and
• increasing sentences for theft based on the value of the property stolen.

A “no” vote opposes changes to Proposition 47 (2014), thereby maintaining certain drug and theft crimes for items valued below $950 as misdemeanors.

By Dr. Le Ondra Clark Harvey | Special to California Black Media Partners

The opioid crisis, once perceived as predominantly affecting rural, White communities, disproportionately impacts Black Americans. This is a result of long-standing health equity barriers, documented in both local reports and federal studies.

As overdoses continue to rise statewide and fentanyl continues to wreak havoc in our communities, California policymakers must take action. Slight declines or plateaus are not “wins.” We need proactive, comprehensive solutions that improve education, provide wraparound services, and increased access to proven treatment methods like medication assisted treatment and overdose reversal agents.

As an advocate, psychologist, and mother of two young children, today’s fentanyl crisis is difficult to process. On one hand, I understand how challenging it can be to pass meaningful policies that will save more lives — whether those of individuals injecting drugs on sidewalks or suburban teenagers poisoned by counterfeit pills they bought on Snapchat. These challenges are compounded by critical deficits, such as workforce shortages, minimal treatment beds and facilities, and a lack of culturally competent care, all of which disproportionately affect Black Californians.

On the other hand, I’m also just tired of waiting.

I have witnessed the devastating impact of fentanyl on Black families. These deaths shatter families, destabilize communities, and perpetuate cycles of trauma and socio-economic hardship. For Black Californians specifically, grief is compounded by helplessness and frustration, knowing that more could – and should – have been done to prevent these tragedies. This crisis isn’t just about numbers; it’s about the lives of our children, our brothers and sisters, and our community.

As I sit in numerous health policy workgroups, task forces, and legislative hearings, I hear policymakers request more studies to better understand how vulnerable communities are impacted. This is critical, and it is not enough.

We don’t have time to waste.

Naloxone, a well-known opioid reversal medication, has saved hundreds of thousands of lives. However, as the opioid landscape evolves, so too must our response. California must adopt flexible policies that evolve with the rapidly changing drug landscape. We cannot rely on outdated, product-specific policies when the illicit drug landscape is changing faster than we can blink.

Efforts to do just that at the statewide level have been aggressively rebuffed by the Administration. Last year, Senate Bill 641, authored by Sen. Richard Roth (D-Riverside) would have expanded California’s statewide standing order for naloxone to encompass all FDA-approved opioid reversal agents. It passed out of the Legislature unanimously, yet Governor Newsom vetoed the bill.

Several months after the veto, Assemblymember Jasmeet Bains, (D-Delano), a physician who treats substance use disorder (SUD), led a sign-on letter among her colleagues calling on the California Department of Public Health to update the statewide standing order to no avail.

Fortunately, Los Angeles County has stepped up in the absence of statewide legislation being signed into law.

For decades, Dr. Brian Hurley, Medical Director of the Bureau of Substance Abuse Prevention and Control for the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health and President of the American Society of Addiction Medicine, has taken a comprehensive approach to addressing substance use disorder.

He has increased access to proven treatment models and implemented innovative initiatives to save lives. His department’s efforts have contributed to the plateau in overdose rates, and we hope to see further improvement through the expanded standing orders for the Los Angeles Unified School District and the LA County Sheriff’s Department, ensuring access to all FDA-approved reversal agents. By equipping first responders and schools with a full range of reversal agents, Dr. Hurley has enhanced Los Angeles’ ability to save lives and reduce the impact of overdoses.

The time for action is now. With a united and informed approach, we can turn the tide on the devastating impact of opioid overdoses in Black communities.

About the Author

Dr. Le Ondra Clark Harvey is the Chief Executive Officer of the California Council of Community Behavioral Health Agencies and Executive Director of the California Access Coalition.

By Antonio Ray Harvey | California Black Media

For more than two weeks now, members of the California Legislative Black Caucus (CLBC) have been facing sharp criticisms from frustrated advocates and other Black Californians after the State Assembly failed to bring up two reparations bills for a floor vote on August 31.

On Sept. 14, Assemblymembers Mia Bonta (D-Alameda), Corey Jackson (D-Moreno Valley), and Kevin McCarty (D-Sacramento) participated in the “State of Black California 2024: Listening Session Tour” in Sacramento. During the session they heard from people who said they felt let down that the bills did not pass the Legislature and advance to Newsom’s desk for his consideration.

The three-hour event was held at the Secretary of State’s office building, one block south of the State Capitol. Amid interruptions and disruptions from the attendees during the event, Bonta said she appreciated the feedback.

“I got out of it what I expected. We have a lot of diverse thoughts and opinions about how to proceed,” Bonta told California Black Media (CBM). “It was helpful to hear directly from people without the constraints of hearing rooms and formalities. I heard a lot of frustration and concerns. I also got out of it a call to action, as we shared, to do better and I am certainly committed to doing that.”

On Sept. 12, CLBC member Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas (D-Los Angeles) called-in to Dominique di Prima’s radio show on KBLA 1580 AM in Los Angeles to share her perspective on reasons the CLBC did not to bring the bills to the Assembly floor. She also shared that going forward there needs to be better communications with the community to ensure passage of bills in the future.

“I want to say that the CLBC has laid a strong foundation to build upon. I think what this experience, this dialogue we are in with our community has shown us that we need to address our communication channels,” Smallwood-Cuevas said. “I think we attempted to do that by having the State of (Black) California convening across California.”

The State of Black California Listening Session tour is a community conversation on reparations and the state of the Black community. The tour is an opportunity for the public to learn more about the 2024 legislative report that is an initiative of the University of California, Los Angeles’s Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American Studies, and the reparations package.

In collaboration with the California Black Freedom Fund (CBFF) in partnership with the tour has made stops in San Diego, Santa Barbara, and Fresno. The next destinations for the Listening Session are Oakland on Sept. 28 and Moreno Valley on Oct. 5.

The CBFF is a five-year, $100 million initiative to ensure power building and “movement-based organizations” have the sustained investments and resources they need to eradicate systemic and institutional racism according to their website.

Marc Philpart, the Executive Director who oversees CBFF’s five-year-long initiative to raise and distribute $100 million, was the moderator in Sacramento.

Philpart, who has worked closely with the CLBC and whose organization was the benefactor of  $3.5 million in state funds last year, has also been under fire from advocates.

The night before the State of Black California event, Chris Lodgson, a reparations advocate and member of the Coalition for a Just and Equitable California (CJEC) questioned Philpart about allegations that the CBFF had been designated by the CLBC to receive $6 million in state funds, requested by the CLBC, to fund reparations legislation implementation.

(The CBFF granted CBM $25,000 of that money to fund its Capitol Correspondent.)

Lodgson asked Philpart,“What is your relationship to that funding” and whether CBFF has made any attempts to get any of the money.

“No, we don’t have any relationship with that,” Philpart told Lodgson at the meeting.

However, Lodgson asserted that he had a discussion with Smallwood-Cuevas and she confirmed that “there was a plan” to fund CBFF $6 million. Lodgson also shared with Philpart that he contacted Bradford’s office and was told that there was a letter sent to Newsom’s office from the CLBC that requested the Governor to direct $6 million to the proposed California African American Freedmen’s Affairs Agency (CAFAA) and $6 million to CBFF.

In a letter obtained by CBM and dated May 24, the CLBC requested that the state provide $6 million to assist funding efforts related to SB 1403 and direct the remaining $6 million to the CBFF. That CLBC letter stated that the money would be “utilized for community-level outreach and engagement efforts and to provide organizational support essential for the effective implementation of Reparations initiatives.”

“Yeah, there’s a letter with my organization’s name on it but it is not an agreement between our organization and the (Black) Caucus, or the legislature,” Philpart said.

In a telephone conversation with CBM, Philpart said CBFF was “not getting the money” and he “had no idea” what his organization would have been doing in terms of reparations implementation had it received any funds. He added that the CLBC can still decide where the funds could be directed to fulfill what it is intended for

“They have power. That is their discretion,” Philpart said. “They are lawmakers. and they have done the work to ensure that this money exists for (implementation) and they have decision-making authority over those dollars.”

Jackson said that the CLBC did make a collective decision to fund the agency and CBFF. Since the bills were held up with the expectations that will be brought during the next legislative session, Jackson said there will have to be another conversation among CLBC members about how the $12 million will be allocated.

“We still have to spend the $12 million,” Jackson said. “We have not gathered yet because we are all in our different districts right now to try to see what that $12 million looks like. Does it need to shift because things have shifted? Does our strategy need to shift? Those are the discussions we still have to have.”

By Lou K. Coleman | WSS News Contributor

If not, then today is the day of salvation [2 Corinthians 6:2]. Do not delay another moment. Make preparation today. Receive Christ as your Savior today. If you do not you will be left behind in the Rapture and those left behind in the Rapture will face a quickly changing world—and the change will not be for the better. For [2 Thessalonians 2:11], says that the “power of lawlessness” is currently being held in check by the Holy Spirit. But after the Rapture the Holy Spirit’s restraint will be “taken out of the way.” Don’t be left behind. Make sure you are ready for the rapture and since the rapture is for believers, it is vital that you place your faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as your Savior [Acts 16:31].

Repent of your sins. Believe in Jesus, and you will not perish [John 3:16]. For today is the day of salvation. Do not delay another moment. The matter is urgent. Trust Christ now for there is no debate of whether or not a rapture will occur; the Bible is clear on that question. As to when the rapture will take place, no one knows the exact timing of the event. Jesus confirms this in Luke when He says, “You also must be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect” [Luke 12:40].

Now understand that the Rapture is different from Christ’s Second Coming. The Rapture sets in motion the End-Time events leading to Christ’s Second Coming. The two stages, Rapture and Return, will be separated by a seven-year Tribulation on earth. The purpose of the Rapture is to spare Christ’s own from the horrors of the Tribulation according to [Revelation 3:10].

Now there are forty-four significant Bible verses about the Rapture and the Second Coming of Christ. The Bible teaches that the next major event in God’s plan for the future is the Rapture of the church. Then the tribulation will follow. At the end of the tribulation, the Battle of Armageddon will occur and during that battle, the Second Coming of Christ will occur. After Christ victoriously defeats the armies of the world that seek to destroy Israel, Christ will establish His millennial kingdom. I ask you, “Are You Ready for The Rapture?”

There are forty-four significant Old and New Testament passages that refer to the Rapture and Second Coming. We are now waiting of the Rapture of the church from the earth to occur.

As [Revelation 22:20] says, “Amen. Come, Lord Jesus!”

By Joe W. Bowers Jr. | California Black Media

From Los Angeles to Oakland, Black voters gathered at watch parties in living rooms, community centers, and restaurants across California to witness Vice President Kamala Harris face off against former President Donald Trump in a much-anticipated debate. For many, this was more than just a political event — it was a moment to witness Harris, the first Black woman vice president, go toe-to-toe with Trump, whose bombastic debate style has dominated headlines in previous election cycles.

Trump’s decision to rule out another debate against Harris has left the upcoming election more contentious than ever. With both candidates presenting starkly different visions for the future, voters will have to weigh their options before November’s election.

When Harris took the debate stage, she approached Trump, extended her hand, and said firmly “Kamala Harris,” setting a deliberate tone for the evening. Moderated by David Muir and Linsey Davis of ABC News, the debate provided a clear contrast in vision, temperament, and leadership style as the candidates addressed key issues.

The debate opened with discussions on the economy. Harris focused on the Biden administration’s achievements and outlined plans to support small businesses, reduce costs for working families, and create what she called an “opportunity economy.” She proposed down payment assistance for first-time homebuyers and tax deductions to help young families. “I intend to create an opportunity economy, investing in small businesses, in new families, and in what we can do around protecting seniors,” Harris said.

Trump, in contrast, offered a more apocalyptic view of the country’s state, repeatedly claiming that the nation was in decline under the Biden-Harris administration. He said the country was being “laughed at” on the world stage and criticized Harris for not accomplishing more during her time as vice president. However, his criticisms lacked concrete solutions. At one point, Trump claimed that 21 million people had crossed the border illegally. Harris quickly rebutted, reminding viewers that Trump had blocked a bipartisan immigration reform bill during his presidency.

As the debate shifted to healthcare, Harris, speaking passionately emphasized the administration’s work to lower prescription drug costs and cap insulin prices. “We have allowed, for the first time, Medicare to negotiate drug prices on behalf of you, the American people,” she said.

Trump struggled to provide specific details about his healthcare plan, despite having promised for years to replace the Affordable Care Act (ACA). When pressed, he said that he was “working on concepts of a plan,” a vague response that mirrored similar statements from his previous campaigns.

On the issue of abortion, the contrast between the candidates became even sharper. Harris strongly condemned the “Trump abortion bans” in more than 20 states, which she said criminalized healthcare providers and offered no exceptions for rape or incest. “It is immoral for a survivor of a crime, a violation to their body, to not have the right to make a decision about what happens to their body next,” Harris said.

Trump defended his role in appointing Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade and repeated false claims about late-term abortions, which Harris dismissed as “lies.”

As the debate moved into foreign policy, the conversation turned to the ongoing war in Ukraine. Trump claimed that the war “would have been over within 24 hours” had he been president, suggesting that his relationship with Vladimir Putin would have prevented the conflict altogether.

Harris countered by emphasizing the work she and the Biden administration have done to support Ukraine and build a coalition of allies to defend democracy. Harris said that world leaders are “laughing at Donald Trump” and that she has talked with military leaders who have worked with Trump, and they say, “You’re a disgrace.” She accused Trump of favoring dictators like Putin, reminding viewers that Trump had attempted to negotiate directly with the Taliban in Afghanistan, bypassing the Afghan government entirely. Harris’s sharp rebuttal – “If Donald Trump were president, Putin would be sitting in Kyiv right now” —seemed to visibly unsettle Trump, whose demeanor shifted as he interrupted her multiple times despite the muted microphone rule.

Throughout the debate, Harris adhered to the rules, delivering focused, policy-driven responses. In contrast, Trump frequently interrupted and avoided direct responses, visibly frustrated by the format and Harris’s composure. At one point when he found himself backed into a corner, he went off the rails and made a bizarre claim that illegal immigrants in Ohio were eating pets, which Muir swiftly refuted, noting there was no evidence to support the assertion.

The debate concluded with the candidates delivering a closing statement. Harris’s remarks focused on unity and optimism, reflecting her belief in what America could achieve with the right leadership. “We all have so much more in common than what separates us, and we can chart a new way forward,” she said. Trump, in contrast, offered a grim vision of a nation in decline, recycling many of the same talking points from earlier in the night about economic failure and foreign policy missteps.

After watching the debate, pop star Taylor Swift endorsed Harris on social media, writing, “I will be casting my vote for Kamala Harris because she fights for the rights and causes I believe need a warrior to champion them.” Swift’s endorsement, which quickly gained over a million likes, added a cultural moment to the post-debate discussions, particularly among younger voters. She signed her post “Childless Cat Lady.”

Despite the attention the debate received, Trump announced that there would be no third debate. Posting on Truth Social, he wrote, “THERE WILL BE NO THIRD DEBATE!” He referred to the first debate as his June encounter with President Joe Biden and the second as the debate with Harris. Trump argued that Harris only wanted a rematch because he “clearly won” the first debate.

However, in a rally in North Carolina just minutes after Trump’s announcement, Harris said, “We owe it to the voters to have another debate.” Several instant polls taken after the debate indicated that voters felt Harris had outperformed her opponent.

While Trump called his performance in Philadelphia “my best debate”, some Republicans and allies expressed disappointment with his performance. Sen. Lindsey Graham called it “a missed opportunity.”

Sunrise: 07/04/1952

Sunset: 08/26/2024

“We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body,  and to be present with the Lord.” – II Corinthians 5:8

Home Going Celebration

Friday, October 4, 2024

11:00am-1:00pm

Green Acres Memorial Park & Mortuary

11715 Cedar Avenue

Bloomington, California

Officiating: Dr. Jason Welsh Amazing Church, Lake Elsinore

Launched in 2018, the Medically Tailored Meals pilot program was designed to help Medi-Cal patients with congestive heart failure by reducing hospital readmissions and emergency department visits by providing tailored meals meeting specific dietary needs.

The program’s success in improving health outcomes and reducing costly emergency room visits encouraged the Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to expand the Medically Tailored Meals program to all 58 counties through Medi-Cal transformation and a new set of services called Community Supports.

Medically Tailored Meals are one of 14 new services offered through Medi-Cal that provide members with access to new and improved services to get well-rounded care that goes beyond the doctor’s office or hospital.

Medically Tailored Meals: Overview

Malnutrition and poor nutrition can lead to severe health outcomes, especially among Medi-Cal patients with chronic health conditions. Medically Tailored Meals aim to improve health outcomes, reduce hospital readmissions, and enhance patient satisfaction by providing essential nutrition.

Key Features:

1. Post-Discharge Delivery: Meals are delivered to patients’ homes immediately following discharge from a hospital or nursing home.
2. Customized Nutrition: Meals are tailored to meet the dietary needs of those with chronic diseases, designed by registered dietitians (RD) or certified nutrition professionals based on evidence-based guidelines.
3. Comprehensive Services: Includes medically tailored groceries, healthy food vouchers, and food pharmacies.
4. Educational Support: Behavioral, cooking, and nutrition education is included when paired with direct food assistance.

Key Benefits:

• Address Food Insecurity: Mitigates poor health outcomes linked to food insecurity.
• Support Complex Care Needs: Tailored to individuals with chronic conditions.
• Improve Health Outcomes: Studies show improvements in diabetes control, fall prevention, and medication adherence.

Patient Testimonial:

“Three days a week, I come home from dialysis tired and hungry. In less than five minutes from fridge to plate, I have a great tasting meal ready to eat. My husband has diabetic needs and I have renal diet needs, so we order our meals and put them in the fridge separately. Mom’s Meals makes mealtime a lot easier in our household.”

Eligibility:

• Eligible Populations: Eligible Medi-Cal members include those with chronic conditions like diabetes, cardiovascular disorders, congestive heart failure, stroke, chronic lung disorders, HIV, cancer, gestational diabetes, and chronic mental or behavioral health disorders. Also, those being discharged from a hospital or skilled nursing facility or at high risk of hospitalization or nursing facility placement are also eligible.
• Service Limitations: Up to two meals per day for up to 12 weeks, extendable if medically necessary. Meals eligible for reimbursement by alternate programs are not covered.

Cost Savings and Improved Health Outcomes:

• Health Outcomes: Research indicates a 22% to 58% decrease in emergency department visits and a 27% to 63% decrease in inpatient admissions among Medically Tailored Meals recipients, translating to significant health care cost savings.

Mom’s Meals: A Success Story

Mom’s Meals has partnered with Medi-Cal to deliver medically tailored meals to patients in the Inland Empire, focusing on individuals with severe and chronic illnesses such as diabetes and kidney disease. These meals, aligned with Medi-Cal’s mission to improve health outcomes and reduce healthcare costs, provide nutritious, balanced meals directly to patients’ homes. The goal is to help patients develop healthier eating habits, reduce hospital admissions, and lessen the strain on the healthcare system.

Inland Empire Health Plan, one of the Medi-Cal managed-care insurers, has contracted with Mom’s Meals to provide these services. Patients receive weekly deliveries of meals that are customized to their dietary needs. The meals are convenient, microwave-ready, and delivered within 48 hours of processing.

The program aims to empower patients to sustain a healthy diet long after the meal deliveries end. By making medically tailored nutrition accessible, Mom’s Meals is helping Medi-Cal to support some of its sickest and costliest patients in the Inland Empire, ultimately contributing to better health outcomes and advancing Medi-Cal’s mission to provide comprehensive, patient-centered care.

Join Us in Our Mission

You can experience the profound impact of Medically Tailored Meals by joining the Medi-Cal Community Supports services initiative. Your involvement can make a difference in promoting your health through nutrition.

Learn More

For more information about Medically Tailored Meals and how to get involved, call the state’s Medi-Cal Health Care options at 800-430-4263 or contact your local managed care plan.

In Riverside County and San Bernardino County, Medi-Cal recipients can contact the following managed care plans:
*   Inland Empire Health Plan: 800-440-4347

*   Kaiser Permanente: 855-839-7613

*   Molina HealthCare of California Partner Plan, Inc.: 888-665-4621

Your health and well-being are your health care provider’s top priority. Medically Tailored Meals are designed to enhance quality of life by advancing health care through the power of nutrition. Experience the benefits today and take the first step toward a healthier you.