Pubdate: Tue, 22 Jul 2003
Source: Argus, The (CA)
Copyright: 2003, ANG Newspapers
Contact:  http://www.theargusonline.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/1642
Author: Josh Richman, Staff Writer
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/prison.htm (Incarceration)
Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/rehab.htm (Treatment)

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."
- ---
MAP posted-by: Jay Bergstrom