When You Assume … the Reality of Implementing a Legally Mandated Substance Abuse Treatment Program

Abstract

In 2000, the voters of California approved the Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act (SACPA), mandating that substance-abusing offenders who met the eligibility criteria receive treatment and not jail time. In preparation for implementation, the Santa Clara County Department of Alcohol and Drug Services Research Institute worked to identify the number and type of clients who would be eligible to receive treatment. The purpose of this article is to analyze the differences between a profile of SACPA-eligible clients that was based on pre-SACPA implementation clients and assumptions that were made concerning eligibility for ttie program and the reality of post-SACPA implementation clients. This article examines causes and consequences of the discrepancies between policy and implementation in the area of substance abuse treatment.

Keywords:

• criminal justice
• drug offense
• implementation
• program development
• Proposition 36
• Substance Abuse and Crime Prevention Act of 2000