California’s claim that CARE Court has reached more than 10,000 people relies on a broad measure that combines petitions with referrals outside the formal program and may count some individuals twice. The distinction matters because only 1,470 people had entered a voluntary CARE agreement or court-ordered CARE plan through June 2026.

Gov. Gavin Newsom’s office announced the milestone Oct. 1 as it released new statewide behavioral-health data. According to the administration’s breakdown, counties received more than 5,400 CARE petitions; 1,414 led to voluntary agreements and 56 produced court-ordered plans. Nearly 4,900 other people who first engaged through CARE were referred to services outside its formal court process.

The state reached its headline number by adding 5,484 petitions to 4,887 outside referrals. A California Health and Human Services spokesperson acknowledged to CalMatters that the calculation could double-count people who were petitioned and later referred elsewhere. The total also includes petitions that were dismissed without services and cases still being processed.

That does not mean the program has produced no measurable benefits. The state’s 2026 CARE Act annual report found that the share of participants in temporary or permanent housing rose from 53% at entry to 71%. After five months, 87% were accessing a mental-health service and 61% were receiving medication. Those outcomes apply to enrolled participants, not the full group used in the 10,000-plus claim.

CARE Court is a civil process for a narrowly defined population with schizophrenia-spectrum or related psychotic disorders. Under the state’s description of the program, a judge may approve an individualized agreement or plan that includes counseling, medication, social-service connections and housing support. Plans generally last one year and can be extended for another year. All 58 counties were required to operate the program by December 2024.

Implementation remains uneven. The San Francisco Chronicle reported that Newsom’s office originally estimated 7,000 to 12,000 people would qualify, while the formal agreement-and-plan count stood at 1,470. State officials argue that petitions and outside referrals capture CARE Court’s wider role as an entry point to services. Critics counter that outside referrals do not receive the same judicial check-ins and that counties lack a standard definition for what counts as a completed referral.

The latest data also identify gaps alongside progress. CalMatters reported that nearly three-quarters of people whose cases were dismissed received no county mental-health or addiction service, and that median petition decisions took as long as three months in some populous counties. Those measures provide a more useful accountability baseline than a single aggregate reach figure.

For lawmakers and counties, the next question is not whether the administration can defend the 10,000 figure mathematically. It is whether California can separately report unique people petitioned, formally enrolled, referred elsewhere and actually connected to services. Clear, nonoverlapping categories would let the public judge both CARE Court’s courtroom performance and its broader function in the behavioral-health system.