Skip to main content

The Ten Best and Ten Worst States for Your Mental Health

Connecticut spends four times more per capita on state mental health services than Texas.  In Florida, 25 percent fewer people report having mental illnesses than in Washington.

Across the nation, there are significant differences in the amounts states spend on mental health services.  Connecticut spends $189 per capita, while Texas spends only $39.

But there are also significant differences in the reported prevalence of mental illnesses.  For example, fewer than 18 percent of Floridians report having a mental illness during the past year, but in Washington almost 24 percent do.

But what happens when you put spending and prevalence together?  Some new rankings emerge that give you a measure of each state’s real commitment to protecting mental health – and treating mental illness – in their population. 

This week, I have ranked all fifty states using both spending and prevalence data.      

I have taken per capita mental health spending from Kaiser Family Foundation’s State Health Facts data, and prevalence data from SAMHSA’s Summary of the National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH).  Both data sets are from the 2010-2011 time period.

It turns out that some states spend more than ten times as much as others on behalf of people with mental illness.

You can review the full list of the states along with the full set of the data I used here

But for now, if the commitment of state government is your measure, here are the ten best and ten worst states for your mental health.

The Best:

1. Maine.  Maine spends almost $1,900 per person with mental illness – 25 percent more than the next closest state.  It is tops in spending per capita, and but also 7th best in percentage in percentage of people reporting mental illnesses.

2. Alaska.  Alaska is middle-of-the-pack in prevalence, but it is second in spending per capita.  The result?  Alaska spends just under $1,500 per person with mental illness.

3. Pennsylvania.  Pennsylvania is 3rd overall in spending, but only 16th best in prevalence.  That still results in spending of over $1,400 per person with mental illness.

4. New York.  New York is 4th in spending, and middle-of-the-pack in prevalence.  It spends over $1,200 per person with mental illness.

5. Vermont.  Like New York, Vermont is 23 places higher in spending than in prevalence.

6. New Jersey.  New Jersey is 3rd best in prevalence, but still spends over $1,100 per person with mental illness.

7. Arizona.  Arizona is only 36th best in prevalence, but it invests well in mental health services, spending $1,044 per person with mental illness.

8. Connecticut.  Connecticut is one of eight states that spend at least $1,000 per person with mental illness.  It pays off for a state that is tied with Georgia for 9th best in prevalence.

9. North Carolina.  North Carolina’s high ranking is driven by a 4th best ranking in prevalence, and top twelve spending per capita.

10. Hawaii.  Balance is the key to Hawaii’s ranking – 15th in prevalence and 10th in spending.

And the worst:

41. South Carolina. South Carolina ranks 23rd best in prevalence, but is 43rd in spending.

42. Louisiana.  Louisiana is 35th in prevalence, but it is not enough to nudge up its overall ranking.

43. Utah. Utah is 49th in reported prevalence of mental illness – a surprise for a state that regularly ranks near the top in other health categories.  It spends only $263 per person with mental illness.

44. Kentucky.  Kentucky is middle-of-the-pack in prevalence, but spends only $259 per person with mental illness.

45. Georgia.  Georgia is tied with Connecticut for 9th best in prevalence, but it by spends only one-quarter as much per person with mental illness.

46. Oklahoma.  Oklahoma earns its ranking by placing 40th in prevalence and 45th in spending.

47. Florida.  Florida ranks second in prevalence, but only 48th position in spending per capita.  As a result, it spends just $222 per person with mental illness.

48. Texas.  Texas – which has the lowest prevalence of mental illness – still spends only $221 for each person with mental illness.

49. Arkansas.  Arkansas is one of only two states spending less than $200 per person with mental illness.  It is among the worst in both spending and prevalence.


50. Idaho.  Idaho is far and away the worst state for your mental health.  It is worst in reported prevalence and worst in reported spending.  How bad is Idaho?  At $143 per person, it spends less than one-tenth as much per person with mental illness as do Maine, Alaska, and Pennsylvania.

Paul Gionfriddo via email: gionfriddopaul@gmail.com.  Twitter: @pgionfriddo.  Facebook: www.facebook.com/paul.gionfriddo.  LinkedIn:  www.linkedin.com/in/paulgionfriddo/

Comments

  1. why are the rankings different on the chart than in your article?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You may have been comparing this to the "overall health ranking" chart of the states. The MH ranking chart is the third chart down on that page.

      Delete
  2. just curious if it's an updated list. I didn't see it until today which is April 2014

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. These were the most recent data that were available as of last August, when I created it. There will be newer data reported later on this year, but the last time I checked (about a month ago) the data from the original sources had not yet been updated.

      Delete
    2. I would really beg to differ regarding Arizona and mental health care. Many psychatrists don't even accept insurance period. I have had issues with finding a provider in the past and know people who are currently having the same issues. I am on Ahcccs and I feel I am not getting the care I need, because I feel that I am not being heard. I feel I need some more intense care and have been struggling with providers for some time now and feel blown off.

      Delete
  3. Michigans mental health is horrible! Thanks to continual cuts! Im ready to pack up and move. Im livid, pissed, scared and angry! Time to revolt!

    ReplyDelete
  4. The problem with the spending data is that it is by the state's mental health authority. In some states the MHA and Medicaid are integrated, in some states they are not. Idaho, where they are not integrated, has a Medicaid Behavioral Health contract for over $100,000,000 per year--working out to be about $250 per person with mental illness, by this measure. Not defending Idaho, it's worth taking a look at the underlying data. The state spending data is not apples-to-apples.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My suggestion is to look at the Mental Health America chart books for more information. A new one will be out soon. They use more than the two indicators I had, and the results are fascinating.

      Delete
  5. Washington is HORRIBLE especially for a minor. We are fighting with services for my 16 you son. All most do is give out resource numbers and pass the buck. It's a sad sad situation.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Missing Mental Health Element in the Ferguson Story

By now, everyone has heard the news from Ferguson, Missouri.  An unarmed 18 year old named Michael Brown was shot and killed by a police officer.  Michael Brown was black. Some of the events surrounding the shooting are in dispute.  But what isn’t in dispute is that for the past two weeks, a community has been torn apart by race – a community that until recently was best known for its proximity to St. Louis and its designation as a Playful City, USA . Picture credit: Health Affairs Media reports since the August 9 th shooting have focused almost entirely on one angle – race relations.  We’ve heard about unrest in the city, the National Guard, police in riot gear, and danger in the streets.  We’ve heard about the District Attorney’s ties to law enforcement, and concerns that a too-white Grand Jury may be racially motivated not to indict the police officer involved in the deadly shooting. But the media have been strangely silent about a different angle – this comm

Celebrating Larissa Gionfriddo Podermanski Five Years Later

My daughter Larissa died of Metastatic Breast Cancer five years ago, in May of 2018.  She had only two wishes at the end. One was that we plant a tree for her. We did - in a Middletown CT city park - and it has grown straight and tall. The other was that she not be forgotten. Larissa's family and friends took pains to reassure that she could not be forgotten. If you were fortunate enough to know Larissa, you would know why. Still, I wondered how I might celebrate her a little more now that some years have passed, while sharing some of her memorable spirit with others (some who knew her and others who did not), while reminding us why she was such an extraordinary woman. In early 2017, Larissa started a blog called Metastatically Speaking, through which she chronicled her life with MBC. Unfortunately - and through no one's fault - her blog disappeared some time after her death. So, if you search for it now, you can't find it.  However, I was fortunate enough to see and retain

Judgment Day

Ironic. I was not as nervous as you would think on April 23 rd .  Martin, my mother and I drove up to Dana Farber.  All weekend I wanted plan for Poland, Barbados and Florida, as we brainstormed ideas of what could be attainable or possible. I started to realize I looked pregnant… but that couldn’t be. When the appointment began I noticed it felt like a routine visit. Everything went smoothly, but what were we focusing on? It was this: if I did nothing the outlook for me was living three weeks to a few months longer. So, is that my only option, I wanted to know?   No, I was told we can try a low dose chemo and see how it works.   Since it is low dose, they said, it won’t do much harm, but we truly don’t know how it will work. It’s not a treatment we have used a lot at low dose and technically you are in liver failure, leaving you with limited options.   Of course, the goal would still be to get you to be stable; however, this is a blind treatment. We don’t know if this approach w