NCJ Number
195263
Journal
Journal of Psychoactive Drugs Volume: 33 Issue: 4 Dated: October-December 2001 Pages: 321-328
Date Published
2001
Length
8 pages
Annotation
This paper discusses California's Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000 (Proposition 36) and how it represents a paradigm shift from incarceration to treatment and collaboration for drug users.
Abstract
Proposition 36 diverts drug offenders from incarceration to treatment programs; preserves jails and prison cells for serious and violent offenders; addresses drug abuse as a public health problem; provides additional funding for needed drug treatment services in the State; and assumes treatment has proven effective and has a positive impact on public safety and health. It requires accountability from the Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs (ADP) and the counties in the implementation of the mandates. ADP's implementation of Proposition 36 is guided by three principles. First, the initial year of the program is to be a baseline period, providing the opportunity to build the system, gain experience, find out what works best, and make adjustments for subsequent years. Second, local control will be established during implementation and beyond, so as to sustain flexibility and allow for county-by-county differences in a State with considerable diversity. Third, the implementation will ensure that there is collaboration among all stakeholders and organizations, so that the system created will reflect a significant portion of each entity's needs. Proposition 36 will have a significant effect on how treatment is organized, managed, and delivered. Multidisciplinary teams that involve many entities, organizations, and individuals will now provide treatment. This team approach is also reflected at the State level. The challenges ahead involve collaboration, capacity building, the management of resources, the implementation of best practices, and the development of a strategy. 13 references