The Argus (Fremont, CA)
July 22, 2003 Tuesday
BYLINE: By Josh Richman, STAFF WRITER
SECTION: MORE LOCAL NEWS
LENGTH: 568 words
Study: Prop. 36 has good first year; Treatment-not-jails plan improving health, saving money, co-author says
California's treatment-not-jails law for nonviolent drug offenders placed 30,469 people in treatment programs during its first year, according to its first official audit.
University of California, Los Angeles researchers -- chosen by the state to track results of Proposition 36 of 2000, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act -- reported last week that:
About half those offenders were getting treatment for the first time;
86 percent went into outpatient drug-free programs, 10 percent into long-term residential programs and the rest into other treatment;
About half cited methamphetamine as their main problem, about 15 percent cited cocaine or crack and about 11 percent cited heroin;
About half were white, about 31 percent were Latino and about 14 percent were African-American, while 72 percent were men;
Proposition 36 clients were just about as likely to stay in treatment as other people.
The study covers all of California for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2002.
The participation is notable considering how local agencies had to cooperate on planning and administration, assessment coordination, offender treatment and supervision, training and troubleshooting, said Douglas Longshore, a behavioral scientist and the study's lead author.
"Despite the challenges and ongoing concerns over funding, most county representatives offered favorable reports on local implementation," he said.
Proposition 36 lets adults convicted of nonviolent drug crimes and meeting certain other requirements be sentenced to probation with drug treatment instead of imprisonment. Also eligible are some probationers or parolees who violate drug-related conditions of their release.
The report says state courts found 53,697 drug offenders eligible for Proposition 36 placement in that first year, of whom 44,043 -- 82 percent -- chose to participate. Of those, 37,495 -- 85 percent -- had their needs
assessed and 81 percent of those -- 30,469 -- entered treatment. The study noted that to have 69 percent of offenders who opt for it in court actually enter treatment is a good "show" rate compared with other drug treatment referral studies.
"The UCLA study proves that Proposition 36 works," said Daniel Abrahamson, the law's co-author and the Drug Policy Alliance's legal affairs director. "Tens of thousands of people who were previously denied treatment are getting it; hundreds of millions of dollars are being saved. And as a result, individuals, their families and their communities continue to get healthier."
The UCLA study didn't gauge the law's fiscal impact, but the Drug Policy Alliance tried to do so by assuming about three quarters of the 37,495 people assessed for treatment otherwise would've gone to county jails for an average of 23 days, and the rest would have gone to state prison for an average of 16 months. Based on a $28,000 annual cost of incarceration, they figured Proposition 36 helped avoid an average cost of$10,640 per offender --about $399 million total -- less $120 million in treatment costs, for a net savings of about $279 million.
The state Legislative Analyst's Office had predicted savings from Proposition 36 wouldn't top $250 million until the law's third or fourth year, Abrahamson noted. "We've exceeded those predictions in the first year."
Contact Josh Richman at jrichman@angnewspapers.com .
Copyright 2003 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers
July 22, 2003 Tuesday
BYLINE: By Josh Richman, STAFF WRITER
SECTION: MORE LOCAL NEWS
LENGTH: 568 words
Study: Prop. 36 has good first year; Treatment-not-jails plan improving health, saving money, co-author says
California's treatment-not-jails law for nonviolent drug offenders placed 30,469 people in treatment programs during its first year, according to its first official audit.
University of California, Los Angeles researchers -- chosen by the state to track results of Proposition 36 of 2000, the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act -- reported last week that:
About half those offenders were getting treatment for the first time;
86 percent went into outpatient drug-free programs, 10 percent into long-term residential programs and the rest into other treatment;
About half cited methamphetamine as their main problem, about 15 percent cited cocaine or crack and about 11 percent cited heroin;
About half were white, about 31 percent were Latino and about 14 percent were African-American, while 72 percent were men;
Proposition 36 clients were just about as likely to stay in treatment as other people.
The study covers all of California for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2002.
The participation is notable considering how local agencies had to cooperate on planning and administration, assessment coordination, offender treatment and supervision, training and troubleshooting, said Douglas Longshore, a behavioral scientist and the study's lead author.
"Despite the challenges and ongoing concerns over funding, most county representatives offered favorable reports on local implementation," he said.
Proposition 36 lets adults convicted of nonviolent drug crimes and meeting certain other requirements be sentenced to probation with drug treatment instead of imprisonment. Also eligible are some probationers or parolees who violate drug-related conditions of their release.
The report says state courts found 53,697 drug offenders eligible for Proposition 36 placement in that first year, of whom 44,043 -- 82 percent -- chose to participate. Of those, 37,495 -- 85 percent -- had their needs
assessed and 81 percent of those -- 30,469 -- entered treatment. The study noted that to have 69 percent of offenders who opt for it in court actually enter treatment is a good "show" rate compared with other drug treatment referral studies.
"The UCLA study proves that Proposition 36 works," said Daniel Abrahamson, the law's co-author and the Drug Policy Alliance's legal affairs director. "Tens of thousands of people who were previously denied treatment are getting it; hundreds of millions of dollars are being saved. And as a result, individuals, their families and their communities continue to get healthier."
The UCLA study didn't gauge the law's fiscal impact, but the Drug Policy Alliance tried to do so by assuming about three quarters of the 37,495 people assessed for treatment otherwise would've gone to county jails for an average of 23 days, and the rest would have gone to state prison for an average of 16 months. Based on a $28,000 annual cost of incarceration, they figured Proposition 36 helped avoid an average cost of$10,640 per offender --about $399 million total -- less $120 million in treatment costs, for a net savings of about $279 million.
The state Legislative Analyst's Office had predicted savings from Proposition 36 wouldn't top $250 million until the law's third or fourth year, Abrahamson noted. "We've exceeded those predictions in the first year."
Contact Josh Richman at jrichman@angnewspapers.com .
Copyright 2003 MediaNews Group, Inc. and ANG Newspapers
Comments
Post a Comment
Kritik yang membangun akan membantu di masa yang akan datang 😁😁😁