California peer-to-peer – As California districts issue pink slips and cut counselors to close budget gaps driven by falling enrollment and rising costs, educators and students are pointing to one alternative already operating in eight high schools. A peer-to-peer youth mental health p
For the third month, the office at Serrano High School in San Bernardino County kept a steady rhythm—restorative circles before lunch, structured activities during the day, and one-on-one peer support when students needed somewhere to land.
The Diamondback Den, run with students at the center, is part of California’s peer-to-peer youth mental health pilot. It’s the kind of support that can look optional when budgets tighten—until districts start moving fast to cut the people who used to hold that work.
Across California. at least 5. 000 school employees received preliminary pink slips this spring as districts scramble to close budget gaps caused by falling enrollment and rising costs. Oakland Unified is planning to eliminate counselors. case managers and attendance clerks as part of sweeping layoffs intended to address a $103 million deficit. Counselors and mental health staff are high on the list of cuts across the state.
Educators say the timing could not be worse. A fall 2025 survey from the EdWeek Research Center found nearly half of educators surveyed say students have expressed increased fear or anxiety related to immigration enforcement. Twenty-four percent reported declines in attendance. Twenty-one percent said more students are seeking counseling support—just as districts move to reduce counselor positions through budget cuts.
In districts implementing those cuts, school counselors are already managing caseloads far beyond recommended ratios, and the pressure doesn’t pause for the school day to catch up.
California’s state leaders have taken steps aimed at protecting students, including strengthening safe-haven school policies intended to keep immigration enforcement off campus. Those policies matter because they send a clear message about school values and students’ rights.
But day-to-day safety isn’t built by policy language alone. It doesn’t come from a reassuring statement when a student is scanning the hallway. wondering whether a peer. parent. family member. or community member might be at risk. It doesn’t automatically restore the feeling of belonging that makes it possible to walk into class and stay.
A peer-to-peer model aims to operate where that sense of safety is made or broken: inside the daily rhythms of school life. In the pilot implemented across eight high schools, students are trained to serve as peer mentors and wellness ambassadors. They run school-based wellness centers and provide structured support to classmates throughout the day.
The approach borrows from what’s already known—peer support is established as an evidence-based intervention in the adult mental health space. What makes the school version stand out is the belief that teens. when supported by a network of caring adults. can provide culturally affirming support and connection.
At Serrano High School. a 12th-grade peer leader described leading a bilingual circle for Spanish-speaking students: “They had a place where they could speak in their native tongue and have a good time.” For newcomer students in particular. that space can be more than stabilizing; the pilot’s students frame it as something that helps them navigate a world that can feel uncertain.
At El Cerrito High School, one first-year student said the peer program “gave me more fun and experience in my first year of living in the United States and helped me adapt to life here faster.”
At Oakland Technical High School. a ninth grader applying to become a peer wellness mentor wrote. “I know what it feels like to be in pain. and I don’t want anyone else to go through it alone.” Multiple students reported they sought help at the wellness center because it felt safer talking to another student first. before seeking assistance from an adult.
That detail lands differently in a year when attendance is dropping and fear is rising. If help-seeking becomes easier—if students can find entry points while they’re still on campus—then the limited capacity of adult counselors has a chance to stretch farther.
Schools in the pilot report that peer counselors help address everyday challenges, including conflict resolution, vaping prevention and attendance check-ins. That, in turn, allows the limited number of school counselors to focus on students with more complex needs.
Peer support does not replace counselors or psychologists. It extends the ecosystem of care at a moment when that ecosystem is under strain. Students in the pilot are describing a system that’s close enough to matter in real time: on school campuses. during the school day. lowering the threshold for students to ask for support.
The core question now is whether California treats that ecosystem as infrastructure—or as something districts can afford to lose.
Peer support programs in the pilot are funded through the state’s Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative. That funding will sunset this year. meaning schools could face a double squeeze: counselors disappearing through budget cuts and peer programs losing funding at the same time. As demand for counseling rises and budgets tighten, peer programs cannot be treated as optional enrichment, the article argues. They are part of the structure that helps students feel safe and welcome.
The point is not abstract. Research cited in the commentary notes that when students feel safe and connected, attendance improves and academic outcomes follow. In a climate where immigration enforcement actions can shape student behavior nationwide. the peer-based model’s advantage isn’t just services—it’s proximity. trust and immediacy.
California is testing what may be an answer to a national challenge. But sustaining and scaling it requires money, not goodwill.
Raven Jones-McKinney. the director of peer-to-peer youth mental health at The Children’s Partnership. writes that state leaders must act now to sustain and fund these models—at the moment students need them most—before fear and loss of staffing combine to make attendance and belonging harder to protect.
California schools school counselors budget cuts Oakland Unified pink slips youth mental health peer-to-peer support school wellness centers safe-haven policies immigration enforcement fear attendance Children and Youth Behavioral Health Initiative
Pink slips again… just lay people off and call it “mental health”.
Wait so they cut counselors but then have students doing peer support? That sounds like it could work until someone says the wrong thing. Also how is that supposed to replace trained counselors?
I’m confused, is the peer-to-peer thing like a substitute teacher or what? Because if it’s optional and “already operating,” then why not just fund it instead of cutting staff? Seems backwards to me, like they’re treating kids’ anxiety as a budget line.
Falling enrollment, rising costs, $103 million deficit… so they cut the actual professionals and rely on a “Diamondback Den” with restorative circles? I’ve seen these programs get put in place then the funding disappears next year. And Oakland getting rid of counselors sounds like they’re basically saying mental health is optional. Doesn’t sit right.