Three years post-launch, the Mobile Assistance Community Responders of Oakland (MACRO) program reports positive progress, yet faces scrutiny regarding its data metrics and future funding necessities. Elliott Jones, the MACRO Program Manager, noted that while it requires approximately $4 million annually to maintain operations beyond the expiration of a $10 million state grant in 2026, the city of Oakland is grappling with a budget shortfall.
Jones expressed their urgency in securing funding, stating, “The budget is top of mind for us.” This sentiment was shared during an interview on Tuesday as he prepared to present a report to Oakland’s Public Safety Committee that reviews the MACRO program’s achievements throughout 2024 and the first quarter of 2025.
With MACRO’s mission originating as a response to the deaths of individuals like George Floyd, the program aims to dispatch crisis counselors and paramedics instead of police to mental health and substance abuse emergencies. Jones asserted, “We’re doing more. The volume is up, the dispatches are up. We’re able to address pretty much every call that comes in.”
Some notable successes from the MACRO program include a nearly 98% resolution rate of calls onsite without police intervention and a reported 34% diversion of calls from law enforcement, which they claim demonstrates a reduced burden on police services in Oakland. The program’s operational hours have expanded to encompass a longer timeframe, now running from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. with plans for a potential midnight shift as early as this summer.
Currently, MACRO employs 17 community intervention specialists and nine EMTs, with plans to add five more EMT positions. Last year, MACRO teams addressed more than 6,300 incidents, with 58% of calls coming through dispatch, marking a significant shift as only 6% of calls stemmed from 911 for the first time in the program’s history.
Despite these accomplishments, critics from the Coalition for Police Accountability have raised concerns regarding the integrity of MACRO’s data. One member, Millie Cleveland, questioned the methodologies employed, especially regarding the 98% resolution rate, suggesting it does not accurately reflect the necessity for police involvement in the cases addressed by MACRO.
Furthermore, critics contest the validity of the 34% diversion statistic, asserting it is derived from a convoluted university study rather than direct data from meaningful sources. Cleveland remarked on the council’s oversight issues, indicating that the program seems to be straying from its initial goals.
Responding to these critiques, Jones defended MACRO’s approach, emphasizing that their high resolution rate suggests a cost-effective system that alleviates the pressure on law enforcement resources. He stated, “If MACRO is not there to answer them, they will be left on the system for police or fire to address.”
He used the example of providing simple necessities, like a bottle of water, to underscore the importance of their interventions in potentially preventing more severe health emergencies that would require police, firefighters, and medical responders.
When addressed about the 34% diversion statistic, Jones clarified that this figure is derived from Oakland police stop data and reflective of a thorough study by a researcher from the University of Oregon, where a similar MACRO-like program was pioneered in Eugene, Oregon.
Critics are not only troubled by the discrepancies in data interpretation but also question the program’s operational capacity and service demographics. They observed that MACRO responds to only three to four 911 calls daily, raising concerns about the criteria that restrict their involvement in higher-risk situations. Cleveland added that these limitations hinder their effectiveness in de-escalating critical scenarios.
Jones maintained the stance that MACRO cannot engage in potentially violent situations, underscoring that these types of calls are appropriately handled by police.
As discussions regarding call response numbers continued, Jones dismissed claims regarding inflated figures, asserting that critics misinterpret the calculations of calls responding solely to 911 contacts without considering other avenues the program may operate through.
Cleveland further highlighted that MACRO’s service demographics do not align with its original goal of aiding the most underserved communities in Oakland. Presently, 48% of calls originate from North Oakland along College Avenue and downtown, with 39% from East and West Oakland. She expressed that these numbers reveal a need for more tailored responses to other community areas.
However, Jones countered that downtown Oakland is the city’s most active district, leading to a higher volume of calls from that area. Both the program manager and the critics concurred on one point: the necessity for an independent audit of MACRO’s operations to ensure accountability and accuracy in reporting.
While Jones indicated that conducting such an audit could financially strain the city, he proposed reaching out to the University of Chicago for a free evaluation, noting that they are currently in the process of fundraising for this review.
As MACRO approaches a critical juncture in its funding and operational strategy, the outcome of ongoing discussions with city leaders and potential independent evaluations remains pivotal in shaping its future path.
image source from：https://www.ktvu.com/news/oaklands-macro-touts-improvements-despite-criticism-needs-4m-year-survive
