When a board isn't peer run, there may still be a strong peer or consumer influence. When there is a large group or number of peers or people who have a mental illness/psychiatric diagnosis on a board or committee, it is said to be peer influenced.

When peers are on a board or committee, the input, thoughts and advice that they give are unique. Having the perspective of someone who has received mental health services and treatment through an agency can help:

A board set effective policy A committee be able to make changes that otherwise might not be addressed.

Peer influence is an important part of organizational change, especially when the organization is trying to accomplish system transformation, as mental health agencies have been instructed to do by the Michigan Department of Community Health.

When a board is consistently over 51% comprised of consumers who decide their own budget, and make all the decisions in hiring and firing, that board (and consequently the organization) is considered to be peer run. When a board is at 50% or less, or when financial decisions are made by a parent organization that has a board that is filled with 50% or fewer consumers, that organization is considered to be peer influenced.

There are several examples of peer-influenced boards in Michigan.

The USPRA Michigan board is considered to be peer influenced. There is a mixture of people on the USPRA Michigan board that are; professionals, consumers (people with a mental illness/psychiatric diagnosis), community members and others. The clubhouses that USPRA is associated with may or may not have a board that is peer influenced at the local level.  

The Michigan Recovery Council is considered to be a peer influenced advisory committee. There are a large number of consumers on the Michigan Recovery Council, but there is little opportunity for them to give valued fiscal input. Members are invited to make recommendations, but other people make all of the financial decisions.

Some peer influenced boards and committees build in protections that the numbers of people who have a mental illness/psychiatric diagnosis are held to a minimum number. How that is carried out will depend upon how the peer influence is valued. At times the numbers are right, but the attitude of the overseeing agency is wrong. Peers on boards and committees often say that overseeing agencies making meeting agendas so filled with information, and provide little time for reviewing information, that the overseeing agency is often fails to take advantage of the opportunity to listen to consumers and peers who have valuable advice to give.