Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Alcohol and Drug Program Administration

Transcription

1 Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Alcohol and Drug Program Administration Annual Review of Adult Participants in Alcohol and Drug Programs Contracted by the Alcohol and Drug Program Administration Prepared by Planning Division

2 Los Angeles County Department of Public Health Alcohol and Drug Program Administration Annual Review of Adult Participants in Alcohol and Drug Programs Contracted by the Alcohol and Drug Program Administration Introduction Executive Summary The tenth Annual Review is a comprehensive descriptive report on the adult participants who received various types of treatment/recovery services from alcohol and drug programs contracted with the Los Angeles County Alcohol and Drug Program Administration (ADPA) during the. Note that the majority of information and statistics presented in the Annual Review is based on participant admission and discharge information collected through ADPA s Los Angeles County Participant Reporting System (LACPRS). LACPRS is an ongoing, standardized, computer-supported system sustained by a close working relationship between ADPA and contracted alcohol and drug program providers. The Annual Review is composed of the following five chapters: Chapter 1 provides statistical information on participants in ADPA-contracted alcohol and drug treatment/recovery programs over five fiscal years ( to ). This includes program admission, participant demographic, primary drug problem, and treatment outcome statistics. Chapter 2 starts with a description of treatment services by division and program type. For each program type, a description of participants who were served in the Fiscal Year is provided along with key trend statistics that occurred over five fiscal years, to Chapter 3 provides admission, participant, and outcome trend statistics by special programs designed to serve the following special populations: criminal justice defendants, homeless individuals, needle users, persons with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse problems, pregnant and parenting women, and public assistance recipients. Chapter 4 provides participant-related demographic statistics for each of the 150 community-based agencies contracted with ADPA to provide alcohol and drug treatment/recovery services during the. Chapter 5 is composed of numerous Fact Sheets which cover key Los Angeles County alcohol and drug-related indicators and outcomes. -i-

3 ADPA-Funded Alcohol and Drug Treatment/Recovery Program Admissions During the, ADPA contracted with 150 community-based agencies that provided the following types of alcohol and drug treatment programs in Los Angeles County. Table 1 - Type and Number of Treatment Programs, Non-Residential Programs Number Residential Programs Number Day Care 43 Residential Detoxification 5 Outpatient Counseling 186 Residential Services 94 Narcotic Treatment Detoxification 8 Narcotic Treatment Maintenance 26 During the, 150 ADPA contracted community-based agencies provided treatment/recovery services to a total of 44,853 participants who accounted for 56,016 program admissions Table 2 shows the number of annual participants and program admissions from to fiscal years. Over the five fiscal years, the annual number of admissions to programs increased by 24.8% and the individual participants increased by 23.4%. Table 2 - Total Number of Admissions and Participants by Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Treatment/Recovery Programs Admissions Participants ,861 36, ,148 38, ,911 45, ,964 47, ,016 44,853 Treatment/Recovery admissions to programs increased by 24.8% over five fiscal years ( to ) -ii-

4 Participant Characteristics Participant demographics have remained relatively constant over the five fiscal years ( to ). During the, most of the treatment/recovery program participants were male (65.4%); Hispanic/Latino (34.2%), White (29.8%), or Black/African American (25.4%); between 25 and 44 years of age (57.5%); had 9 to 12 years of education (75.4%); and unemployed (68.4%). Methamphetamine (30.8%) was the most frequently reported primary drug problem followed by cocaine/crack (23.0%) and alcohol (19.7%). Over five fiscal years ( to ), the number of participants reporting methamphetamine as their primary drug problem has increased each year. Methamphetamine use has increased each fiscal year, 17.4% to 30.8% ( to ) Participant Discharge Status Participants with Positive Compliance are those who completed treatment or left before completing treatment with satisfactory progress. Over half of the program participants had positive treatment outcomes four out of five fiscal years ( to ). The five year-year average for positive treatment compliance was 52.3%. Over five fiscal years ( to ), an average of 52.3% of the participants received a positive treatment compliance assessment at program discharge. They successfully complied with their individualized treatment plans. Treatment Services by Division and Program Type Program participant characteristics were relatively similar across program types. Regardless of program type, the majority of participants were male, between 25 and 44 years of age, had 9 to 12 years of education, and were unemployed. Most participants were Hispanic/Latino, White, or Black/African American. The notable exceptions for the were: Of the six program types, only day care programs provided services primarily to female participants (86.2%). Narcotic treatment programs served the largest proportion of older program participants. Among the narcotic treatment programs (detoxification and maintenance), over half of the participants were between 45 and 64 years of age, 54.9% and 55.8%, respectively. Narcotic Treatment Programs served the largest proportion of older adult participants, 45 to 64 years of age. -iii-

5 Treatment Services by Division and Program Type - Continued Methamphetamine was the most frequently reported primary drug problem for three program types; day care (41.2%), outpatient counseling (33.1%), and residential services (36.5%). Over 90% of participants in narcotic treatment programs reported heroin as their primary drug problem. This is to be expected since by design narcotic treatment programs provide services to individuals addicted to heroin or other morphine-like drugs. Heroin (43.3%) also ranked as the number one drug problem for participants who received residential detoxification services. Table 3 shows positive treatment compliance by program type for the. Positive outcomes varied among program types. However, residential programs had higher percentages of positive compliance. The majority of participants in residential detoxification (79.3%), residential services (61.6%), and NTP detoxification (50.6%) complied with their treatment plans. Table 3 Positive Treatment Compliance Program Type Discharges Positive Compliance Number Percent Non-Residential Day Care Outpatient Counseling 13,477 5, NTP Detoxification NTP Maintenance Residential Detoxification 4,266 3, Residential Services 9,686 5, Overall 29,507 16, The majority of participants in residential detoxification (79.3%), residential services (61.6%), and NTP detoxification (50.6%) had positive treatment outcomes. Special Populations ADPA-contracted treatment/recovery programs address specific needs of certain populations such as criminal justice defendants, homeless individuals, needle users, persons with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse problems, pregnant and parenting women, and public assistance recipients. -iv-

6 Special Populations - Continued Table 4 provides a summary of the special populations who received services during the Fiscal Year. Table 4 Special Population Admissions and Participants Special Population Admissions Participants Target Group CalWORKs Recipients 2,325 2,049 CalWORKs (welfare reform) recipients with alcohol/drug problems Co-Occurring Disorders 12,263 10,395 Drug Court Defendants 2,317 1,886 Non-violent drug offenders Individuals with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse problems Female Offenders Project Female inmates from California Institute for Women in Frontera General Relief Recipients 3,921 3,637 General Relief (indigent adults) recipients with alcohol/drug problems Individuals 11,882 10,509 Needle Users 9,134 7,088 Intravenous drug users Individuals living on the street or in an emergency shelter due to lack of financial resources or community ties Prenatal Services Network 1,326 1,240 Pregnant and parenting women and their children Pregnant Women 1, Pregnant women Prison Parolee Network Male and female offenders, paroled to Los Angeles County Proposition 36 Defendants 17,252 13,720 Non-violent drug offenders Salient findings regarding special population outcomes are: During the, the most frequently reported primary drug problem for CalWORKs recipients was methamphetamine. The prominence of methamphetamine has grown from 25.4% in to 45.5% in The average percent of CalWORKs participants with positive treatment compliance each of the five fiscal years was 51.0%. More specifically, over five fiscal years, 3,213 of the 6,311 CalWORKs recipients discharged from alcohol and drug treatment/recovery programs successfully complied with their treatment plans. Admissions for participants with co-occurring mental illness and substance abuse problems more than doubled over five fiscal years; 5,632 in to 12,263 in Over five years, most program participants reported alcohol, cocaine/crack, or methamphetamine as their primary drug problem. Over five fiscal years ( to ), the majority of drug court participants reported cocaine/crack or methamphetamine as their primary substance abuse problem. Each of the past five fiscal years, the majority (66.0% to 71.0%) of the drug court program participants were discharged with a positive treatment compliance status. During the five fiscal year time period, cocaine/crack remained the most prominent primary drug problem for female offenders despite the dropped from 70.7% in to 39.8% in During the, 53.3% of the female offender participants were discharged with a positive treatment compliance status. -v-

7 Special Populations - Continued Alcohol was the most frequently reported primary drug problem for general relief participants for the first four fiscal years ( to ). In , methamphetamine became the number one drug problem for general relief recipients. Methamphetamine use has increased each fiscal year, from 15.0% in to 30.4% in A total of 49,950 homeless participants have been admitted to ADPA-funded alcohol and drug treatment/recovery programs over the last five fiscal years ( to ). The percent of homeless participants reporting mental health concerns has increased slightly over the five-year period, from 15.0% in to 23.3% in In , the most prominent drug problems reported by homeless participants were methamphetamine (30.7%), cocaine/crack (28.8%), and alcohol (19.0%). Each fiscal year, the majority (56.4% to 62.3%) of homeless participants successfully complied with their treatment plan. Each fiscal year, heroin was the primary drug problem for two-thirds of needle users. Noteworthy is the increase in needle users reporting methamphetamine as their primary drug problem, from 11.0% in to 19.2% in Over the five fiscal years ( to ), the majority (58.2% to 79.7%) of perinatal program participants received services from a day care program. Perinatal participants were most likely to report cocaine/crack or methamphetamine as their primary drug problem. While cocaine/crack (40.1% to 21.7%) has declined each fiscal year; methamphetamine (30.2% to 43.6%) use has increased. The number of pregnant women in alcohol and drug treatment/recovery programs has increased by 29% (734 to 947) over the five fiscal years. During the, 6.1% (947 of 15,534) of female participants reported being pregnant. Since , methamphetamine has been the most frequently reported primary drug problem followed by cocaine/crack. In , one-third of the PPN participants reported methamphetamine as their primary drug problem. Methamphetamine use doubled during the five year period (16.8% in to 34.7% in ). Since implementation in July 2001, Proposition 36 participants have increased from 3,550 in to 13,720 in Since , methamphetamine ranked as the number one drug problem. Over the five fiscal years, approximately 4 out of 10 Proposition 36 participants were discharged with a positive treatment compliance status. -vi-

8 Table of Contents Executive Summary... i Introduction... 1 Chapters 1 Los Angeles County (LAC) Alcohol and Drug Treatment Program 2 Table 1.1 Program Admissions and Participants by Fiscal Year (FY)... 2 Table 1.2 Program Participant and FY... 3 Table 1.3 Program Participant Demographics by FY... 4 Table 1.4 Program Participant by FY... 5 Table 1.5 Program Participant Discharge Status by FY LAC Alcohol and Drug Treatment Program by Division and Program Type 7 Table 2.1 Number of Non-Residential and FY... 8 Table 2.2 Number of Residential and FY... 9 Table 2.3 Admissions by Division and Program Type, FY... 9 Table 2.4 Day Care Program Participant Demographics, FY Table 2.5 Day Care Program Participant by FY Table 2.6 Day Care Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 2.7 Outpatient Counseling Program Participant Demographics, FY Table 2.8 Outpatient Counseling Program Participant by FY Table 2.9 Outpatient Counseling Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 2.10 Narcotic Treatment Program (NTP) Detoxification Participant Demographics, FY Table 2.11 NTP Detoxification Program Participant by FY Table 2.12 NTP Detoxification Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 2.13 NTP Detoxification Participant Demographics, FY Table 2.14 NTP Maintenance Program Participant by FY Table 2.15 NTP Maintenance Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 2.16 Residential Detoxification Program Participant Demographics, FY Table 2.17 Residential Detoxification Program Participant by FY Table 2.18 Residential Detoxification Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 2.19 Residential Services Program Participant Demographics, FY Table 2.20 Residential Services Program Participant by FY Table 2.21 Residential Services Program Participant Discharge Status by FY vii-

9 Table of Contents 3 LAC Alcohol and Drug Treatment Program Special Populations 22 Table 3.1 Total Number of California Work Opportunity and Responsibility to Kids (CalWORKs) Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.2 CalWORKs Program Participant and FY Table 3.3 CalWORKs Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.4 CalWORKs Program Participant by FY Table 3.5 CalWORKs Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.6 Total Number of Co-Occurring Disorder Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.7 Co-Occurring Disorder Program Participant and FY Table 3.8 Co-Occurring Disorder Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.9 Co-Occurring Disorder Program Participant by FY Table 3.10 Co-Occurring Disorder Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.11 Total Number of Drug Court Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.12 Drug Court Program Participant and FY Table 3.13 Drug Court Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.14 Drug Court Program Participant by FY Table 3.15 Drug Court Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.16 Total Number of Female Offender Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.17 Female Offender Program Participants and FY Table 3.18 Female Offender Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.19 Female Offender Program Participant by FY Table 3.20 Female Offender Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.21 Total Number of General Relief Program Admissions and Participant by FY Table 3.22 General Relief Program Participant and FY Table 3.23 General Relief Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.24 General Relief Program Participant Primary Problem by FY Table 3.25 General Relief Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.26 Total Number of Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.27 Program Participant and FY Table 3.28 Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.29 Program Participant Primary Drug Program by FY Table 3.30 Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.31 Total Number of Needle User Program Admissions and Participant by FY Table 3.32 Needle User Program Participant and FY Table 3.33 Needle User Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.34 Needle User Program Participant by FY viii-

10 Table of Contents Chapter 3 Continued Table 3.35 Needle User Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.36 Total Number of Perinatal Program Admissions and Participant by FY Table 3.37 Perinatal Program Participant and FY Table 3.38 Perinatal Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.39 Perinatal Program Participant by FY Table 3.40 Perinatal Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.41 Total Number of Pregnant Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.42 Pregnant Program Participant and FY Table 3.43 Pregnant Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.44 Pregnant Program Participant by FY Table 3.45 Pregnant Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.46 Total Number of Prison Parolee Network (PPN) Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.47 PPN Program Participant and FY Table 3.48 PPN Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.49 PPN Program Participant by FY Table 3.50 PPN Program Participant Discharge Status by FY Table 3.51 Total Number of Proposition 36 Program Admissions and Participants by FY Table 3.52 Proposition 36 Program Participant and FY Table 3.53 Proposition 36 Program Participant Demographics by FY Table 3.54 Proposition 36 Program Participant by FY Table 3.55 Proposition 36 Program Participant Discharge Status by FY LAC Participant Statistics by ncy 66 Table 4.0 Number of Program Participants and Admissions by ncy, FY Table 4.1 Able Family Support, Inc Table 4.2 Addiction Research and Treatment, Inc Table 4.3 Aegis Medical System, Inc Table 4.4 Alcoholism Center for Women, Inc Table 4.5 Alcoholism Council of Antelope Valley/NCA Table 4.6 AltaMed Table 4.7 American Asian Pacific Ministries, Inc Table 4.8 American Indian Changing Spirits Table 4.9 Antelope Valley Rehabilitation Centers Table 4.10 Apex Foundation ix-

11 Table of Contents Chapter 4 Continued Table 4.11 Arms of Grace Humanitarian Services Table 4.12 Asian American Drug Abuse Program, Inc Table 4.13 Atlantic Recovery Services Table 4.14 Avalon - Carver Community Health Center Table 4.15 BAART Behavioral Health Services, Inc Table 4.16 Beacon House Association of San Pedro (The) Table 4.17 Behavioral Health Services, Inc Table 4.18 Bernie s Lil Women Center Table 4.19 Bienvenidos Children s Center, Inc Table 4.20 Blessed Drug and Alcohol Treatment and Research Program, Inc Table 4.21 Calabasas Treatment Center Table 4.22 California Drug Consultants, Inc Table 4.23 California Drug Treatment Program, Inc Table 4.24 California Graduate Institute Table 4.25 California Health Alcohol and Drug Program, Inc Table 4.26 California Hispanic Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, Inc Table 4.27 Cambodian Association of America Table 4.28 Canon Human Services, Inc Table 4.29 Caring Residential Care, Inc Table 4.30 Casa de Hermandad, Inc Table 4.31 Casa de Las Amigas Table 4.32 Chabad of California, Inc Table 4.33 Changing Steps Table 4.34 Charles R. Drew University of Medicine and Science Table 4.35 Children s Institute International Table 4.36 Circle Friends Outpatient Services, Inc Table 4.37 Circle of Help Foundation Table 4.38 City of Compton Table 4.39 City of Long Beach, A Municipal Corporation Table 4.40 City of Pasadena Table 4.41 CLARE Foundation, Inc Table 4.42 Clinica Monsenor Oscar A. Romero Table 4.43 Community Alcohol and Drug Treatment Table 4.44 Cri-Help, Inc Table 4.45 Cultural Bridges Treatment Center x-

12 Table of Contents Chapter 4 Continued Table 4.46 Dare U to Care Outreach Ministry Table 4.47 Didi Hirsch Psychiatric Service Table 4.48 Do It Now Foundation Table 4.49 Driver Safety Schools, Inc Table 4.50 East Los Angeles Health Task Force, Inc Table 4.51 El Centro del Pueblo Table 4.52 El Proyecto del Barrio Table 4.53 Epidaurus Table 4.54 Family Service of Long Beach Table 4.55 Found, Inc Table 4.56 Fred Brown s Recovery Services, Inc Table 4.57 Goretti Health Services, Inc Table 4.58 Grandview Foundation, Inc Table 4.59 Guidance Health Services, Inc Table 4.60 Help the People Foundation Table 4.61 His Sheltering Arm, Inc Table 4.62 Health Care Los Angeles, Inc Table 4.63 House of Hope Foundation, Inc Table 4.64 I-ADARP, Inc Table 4.65 Independence Community Treatment Clinic Table 4.66 Interconnection Center, Inc Table 4.67 Jeff Grand Clinic, Inc Table 4.68 Joint Efforts, Inc Table 4.69 La Clinica del Pueblo, Inc Table 4.70 Laws Support Center Table 4.71 Little House Table 4.72 Live Again Recovery Home, Inc Table 4.73 Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute at Harbor-UCLA Medical Center Table 4.74 Los Angeles Centers for Alcohol and Drug Abuse Table 4.75 Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Community Service Center Table 4.76 Los Angeles New Life Center, Inc Table 4.77 Mary-Lind Foundation Table 4.78 Maternity House, LLC Table 4.79 Matrix Institute on Addictions Table 4.80 MELA Counseling Services Center, Inc xi-

13 Table of Contents Chapter 4 Continued Table 4.81 Mid Valley Recovery Service, Inc Table 4.82 Mini Twelve Step House, Inc Table 4.83 MJB Transitional Recovery, Inc Table 4.84 Mount Sinai Health Center, Inc Table 4.85 NCADD Long Beach Area Table 4.86 NCADD of East San Gabriel & Pomona Valleys, Inc Table 4.87 NCADD of the San Fernando Valley Table 4.88 Ness Counseling Center, Incorporated (The) Table 4.89 New Beginnings Recovery Treatment Center, Inc Table 4.90 New Destiny, Inc (The) Table 4.91 New Directions Table 4.92 New Hope Health Services, Inc Table 4.93 New Millennium Counseling Table 4.94 New Way Foundations, Inc Table 4.95 Noble Heart Services Inc Table 4.96 Options A Child Care and Human Services ncy Table 4.97 Outreach Health Services, Inc Table 4.98 Pacific Clinics Table 4.99 Pajo Corporation (The) Table Palm House, Inc Table Palm Residential Care Facility (The) Table Pasadena Council on Alcoholism and Drug Dependency Table Pasadena Recovery Center, Inc Table People Coordinated Services of Southern California Table People in Progress, Inc Table Phoenix Houses of Los Angeles, Inc Table Plaza Community Center Table Pomona Alcohol and Drug Recovery Center, Inc Table Pomona Community Crisis Center, Inc Table Pom-Pom s Castle D.B.A Clean and Free Substance Abuse Center Table Pride Health Services, Inc Table Principles, Inc Table Prototypes Table R.A.P. Community Recovery Services Table Reseda Substance Abuse Treatment Center, Inc xii-

14 Table of Contents Chapter 4 Continued Table Roy s National Health Services, Inc Table Salvation Army, A California Corporation Table Santa Anita Family Services Table Santa Monica Bay Area Drug Abuse Council Table Shields for Families Project, Inc (The) Table Social Model Recovery Systems, Inc Table South Bay Alcoholism Services, DBA NCADD of the South Bay Table South Bay Human Services Coalition Table Southern California Alcohol and Drug Program, Inc Table Special Service for Groups Table SPIRTT Family Services, Inc Table Stepping Stones Home Table Substance Abuse Foundation of Long Beach, Inc Table Sunrise Community Counseling Center Table Tarzana Treatment Center Table T.E.A.M. One Stop Table Total Family Support Clinic Table Transcultural Health Development, Inc Table Twin Palms Recovery Center Table Twin Town Corporation Table United American Indian Involvement, Inc Table United States Veterans Initiative, Inc Table United Women in Transition Table URDC Human Services Corporation Table U Turn Alcohol and Drug Program, Inc Table Valley Women s Center, Inc Table Van Ness Recovery House Table Verdugo Mental Health Center Table Volunteers of America of Los Angeles Table Walden House, Inc Table Watts Healthcare Corporation Table We Can Help Foundation Table Western Pacific Med Corp Table Wilshire Treatment Center, Inc Table Wings of Refuge xiii-

15 Table of Contents 5 LAC Alcohol and Drug Statistical Fact Sheets 220 Fact Sheet 5.1 LAC Indicators of Alcohol and Drug Abuse, 1995 to Fact Sheet 5.2 LAC 2005 Population Estimates by Service Planning Area and Fact Sheet 5.3 Adult Outcome Statistics, FY Fact Sheet 5.4 Adult Participants Reported Times Arrested at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.5 Adult Participants Report Days in Jail at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.6 Adult Participants Reported Days in Prison at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.7 Adult Participants Reporting of Physical Health Problems at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.8 Adult Participants Reported Days in Hospital at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.9 Adult Participants Reported Emergency Room Visits at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.10 Adult Participants Reported Days in Psychiatric Facility at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.11 Adult Participants Reporting Use of Prescribed Medication for Mental Health-Related Needs at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.12 Adult Participants Reported Outpatient Emergency Services for Mental Health-Related Needs at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.13a Adult Participants Diagnosed with Tuberculosis at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.13b Adult Participants Diagnosed with Hepatitis C at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.13c Adult Participants Diagnosed with Sexually Transmitted Infection at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.14a Adult Participants Tested for HIV/AIDS at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.14b Adult Participants Who Received HIV/AIDS Test Results at Program Admission and Discharge, FY Fact Sheet 5.15 Adult Participants Length of Enrollment by Non-Residential Program Type and FY Fact Sheet 5.16 Adult Participants Length of Stay (LOS) by Residential Program Type and FY Fact Sheet 5.17 Adult Participant by FY xiv-

16 Table of Contents Chapter 5 Continued Fact Sheet 5.18 Adult Program Participant Discharge Status by Average LOS and FY Fact Sheet 5.19 LAC Alcohol and Drug Adult Treatment Program Summary Statistics by FY Fact Sheet 5.20 Adult Participant Demographics by, FY Fact Sheet 5.21 Adult Program Participant Demographics by, FY Fact Sheet 5.22 Adult Male Program Participant Demographics by, FY Fact Sheet 5.23 Adult Female Program Participant Demographics by, FY xv-

17 Introduction The tenth Annual Review is a comprehensive description of adult participants who received alcohol and drug treatment/recovery services during the. Adult treatment services are traditional ADPA-contracted residential and non-residential alcohol and drug treatment/recovery program services (day care, detoxification, outpatient, and residential) provided to individuals who are 18 years of age and older. The Annual Review is composed of the following five chapters: Chapter 1 provides statistical information on participants in ADPA-contracted alcohol and drug treatment/recovery programs over five fiscal years ( to ). Chapter 2 provides a description of treatment services by division and program type. For each program type, a description of participants who were served in the Fiscal Year is provided along with key trend statistics that occurred over five fiscal years, to Chapter 3 provides admission, participant, and outcome trend statistics for special populations. Chapter 4 provides participant-related demographics for each of the 150 community-based agencies contracted with ADPA during the. Chapter 5 is composed of numerous Fact Sheets which cover key Los Angeles County alcohol and drug-related indicators and outcomes. The majority of the information found in the Annual Review is based on participant admission and discharge data collected through ADPA s Los Angeles County Participant Reporting System (LACPRS). LACPRS is an ongoing, standardized, computer-supported system sustained by a close working relationship between ADPA and contracted alcohol and drug program providers. For the purposes of this report, participant and program admission are defined, as follows: (1) A participant is an individual who is admitted and becomes actively engaged in an alcohol or drug treatment program. (2) A program admission is a treatment event that starts when the program admits the participant. The Annual Review includes all adult participants who received services in ADPA-contracted treatment/recovery programs. This review does not include information on participants who received substance abuse services at facilities operated by federal agencies in Los Angeles County (e.g., the Veterans Administration), crisis intervention facilities (e.g., hospital emergency departments), private entities, and other publicly funded non-adpa contracted programs. The Annual Review does not include information on ADPA-contracted youth/adolescent and prevention programs. Acknowledgments: Special thanks are extended to program providers for their submission of information to ADPA. Without their cooperation and support, the information necessary for the preparation of the Annual Review would not have been possible. -1-

18 Chapter 1 LAC Alcohol and Drug Treatment Program Introduction Alcohol and Drug Program Administration (ADPA) contracted with community-based agencies to provide a range of treatment and recovery services to County residents with alcohol and other drug problems. Consistent with federal, State, and County reporting requirements, each time an individual enters or departs from a treatment program, standardized admission or discharge information is collected. Since a participant may be admitted to more than one program during a fiscal year, or return to the same program more than once, the number of participant program admissions can be greater than the number of individual participants. LAC Program Admission and Participant Trends Table 1.1 shows the number of annual participants and program admissions from to fiscal years. During the, ADPA-contracted alcohol and drug treatment programs provided services to a total of 44,853 participants who accounted for 56,016 treatment/recovery program admissions. Over the first four fiscal years ( to ), the number of program admissions and participants increased by 31.4% and 30.8%, respectively. From the fourth to fifth fiscal year ( to ), there was a slight decline in both admissions (-4.9%) and participants (-5.6%). Overall, program admissions increased by 24.8% and individual participants increased by 23.4%. Table 1.1 Program Admissions and Participants by Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Treatment/Recovery Programs Admissions Participants ,861 36, ,148 38, ,911 45, ,964 47, ,016 44,853-2-

19 Chapter 1 LAC Program Participant Table 1.2 shows the type of programs that provided alcohol and drug treatment/recovery services to participants over five fiscal years ( to ). During the five-year period, most participants received services from an outpatient counseling program. More than half of the participants were admitted to an outpatient counseling program during the last two fiscal years ( and ). In the first fiscal year ( ), a third of the participants received services from a residential service program. For the remaining fourth fiscal years ( to ), approximately 1 out of every 4 admission was to a residential service program. Day care program admissions remained constant; the five-year average was 3.4%. Admissions to residential detoxification programs fluctuated slightly, ranging from a high of 11.1% in to a low of 8.0% in With the exception of , there has been a downward trend in the percent of admissions (from 5.7% to 1.3%) to narcotic treatment detoxification programs. Over the five fiscal years, narcotic treatment maintenance programs accounted for approximately 4.0% to 6.0% of the admissions. Table Program Participant and Fiscal Year 1 Program Type # % # % # % # % # % Day Care 1, , , , , Narcotic Treatment Detoxification 2, , , , Narcotic Treatment Maintenance 2, , , , , Outpatient Counseling 19, , , , , Residential Detoxification 4, , , , , Residential Services 14, , , , , Total 44, , , , , Percents found in this table and subsequent tables do not always sum to 100% due to rounding. -3-

20 Chapter 1 LAC Program Participant Demographic Trends Table 1.3 shows the demographics for program participants over five fiscal years ( to ). Participant demographics have remained relatively constant during this period. The majority of participants were male (63.9% to 66.4%); between 25 and 44 years of age (57.2% to 63.6%); had 9 to 12 years of education (74.9% to 78.8%); and unemployed (68.4% to 85.1%). Most participants were Hispanic/Latino (33.7% to 36.1%), White (29.8% to 32.0%), or Black/African American (25.4% to 30.3%). Table 1.3 Program Participant Demographics by Fiscal Year Demographics # % # % # % # % # % Admissions 44, , , , , Participants 36, , , , , Male 23, , , , , Female 13, , , , , White 11, , , , , Black/African American 10, , , , , Hispanic/Latino 12, , , , , Native American Asian/Pacific Islander , , Other , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , Over None , years 1, , , , , years 28, , , , , or more years 6, , , , , Employed 5, , , , , Unemployed 30, , , , , Not in the labor force 3, ,

21 Chapter 1 LAC Program Participant Trends The primary drug problems reported by program participants over five fiscal years ( to ) are shown in Table 1.4. During the five fiscal years, approximately 1 out of 5 participants reported alcohol as their primary drug problem. Heroin use fluctuated annually during the five-year period, ranging from a high of 20.8% in to a low of 13.1% in From the first to the second fiscal year ( to ), cocaine/crack was the most frequently reported primary drug problem. In the third fiscal year ( ), both cocaine/crack and methamphetamine ranked as the most prominent primary drug problems reported by participants. Beginning with the fourth fiscal year ( ), methamphetamine surpassed cocaine/crack and became the most frequently reported participant primary drug problem. One notable change in participant reported primary drug problems over these five fiscal years has been the steady increase in methamphetamine use; from 17.4% in to 30.8% in During the, the majority of methamphetamine users were White (37.3%) or Hispanic/Latino (45.4%). The average age for marijuana/hashish (31.3 years) and methamphetamine (31.8 years) users was considerably younger than the average age of other primary drug user groups. Methamphetamine users had the highest percent (38.9%) of female participants. Table 1.4 Program Participant by Fiscal Year # % # % # % # % # % Alcohol 8, , , , , Cocaine/Crack 9, , , , , Heroin 7, , , , , Marijuana/Hashish 2, , , , , Methamphetamine 6, , , , , Other 1, , , , , Total 36, , , , ,

22 Chapter 1 LAC Program Participant Discharge Status Trends Table 1.5 shows treatment compliance over five fiscal years ( to ). Participants with Positive Compliance are those who completed treatment or left before completing treatment with satisfactory progress. Negative Compliance refers to those participants who left before completing treatment with unsatisfactory progress. The majority of program participants had positive treatment outcomes four out of the five fiscal years. In Fiscal Year, slightly less than half (49.4%) of the participants had positive treatment outcomes. The five-year average for positive treatment compliance was 52.3% During the, 52.9% of participants who departed from programs with a negative compliance assessment were in treatment for less than 31 days. This outcome is consistent with current literature which states that better or positive outcomes are associated with longer treatment durations. Table 1.5 Program Participant Discharge Status by Fiscal Year Participant Discharge Status # % # % # % # % # % Number of Discharges 32, , , , , Positive Compliance 17, , , , , Completed Treatment 8, , , , , Left - Satisfactory 8, , , , , Negative Compliance 15, , , , , Left Unsatisfactory 15, , , , ,

23 Chapter 2 LAC Alcohol and Drug Treatment Program by Division And Program Type Introduction Chapter 2 describes the participants in alcohol and drug treatment/recovery program by division and program type. During the, 150 individual community-based agencies operated 362 treatment programs at 295 different facility sites located throughout Los Angeles County. Alcohol and drug treatment/recovery programs are classified as either non-residential or residential and as one of the following six program types: Non-Residential Participants reside outside of the program facility while receiving treatment/recovery services. Day Care Programs provide counseling and recovery services to persons who have drug and/or alcohol-related problems. The primary purpose of these services is to provide a planned treatment program in a social setting structured to maximize recovery and rehabilitation of participants. These programs services are more intensive than a visit (person-to-person contact) but less extensive than 24-hour residential services. The services are usually available a minimum of six hours per day, six days per week. Outpatient Counseling Programs provide crisis intervention, counseling, and participant referral services to individuals affected by alcohol and/or drug-related problems. Services may include participant screening and assessment, development of treatment plans, individual and group counseling, hosting mutual self-help groups, coordination of services with other agencies, and referral to other resources. Outpatient counseling is designed to provide an alcohol and drug-free structured environment that encourages and supports a participant s effort to improve his/her level of functioning. Narcotic Treatment Detoxification Programs administer or furnish methadone and/or levo-alphaacetylmethadol (LAAM) in decreasing doses for a period not to exceed 21 days to assist an individuals withdrawal from dependency on heroin or other morphine-like drugs. Services may include intake and physical examination, casework services, an individualized treatment plan, body fluid testing, coordination of additional services with other agencies, and referrals to other resources. Narcotic Treatment Maintenance Programs administer methadone/laam, at relatively stable dosage levels for a period in excess of 21 days, as an oral substitute narcotic drug. The treatment protocol is accompanied by ancillary social and medical services for individuals 18 years of age or older who have a history of two or more years of dependence on heroin or other morphine-like drugs and two or more failures in alternative treatment programs. Services may include intake and assessment, body fluid testing, group and family counseling, crisis intervention, coordinating additional services with other agencies, and participant follow-up. Residential Participants reside in a drug-free program facility, operating on a 24-hour per day basis, receiving food and shelter as part of the treatment/recovery service. Residential Detoxification Services provide care and treatment for person suffering from the withdrawal symptoms of alcohol and/or other drugs in a non-medical setting. These services are generally offered as preparation for entry into a treatment and recovery program, therefore, the medical and psychological supports are provided. Services may include physical examination and medical history, medication as needed, recidivism counseling, referrals to other resources, and after care planning. Residential Services is a 24-hour live-in, drug-free treatment environment for persons with drug and/or alcohol-related problems. Participants are involved in no less than six hours of planned treatment activities per day under the supervision of trained staff. Services may include intake and participant screening, room and meals, crisis intervention, individual and group counseling, host mutual self-help group discussions, and social and recreational activities. -7-

24 Chapter 2 Non-Residential Program Admission Trends Table 2.1 shows admission trends over five fiscal years by the four non-residential program types and the overall non-residential program. The number of non-residential program admissions increased over the first four fiscal years, from a low of 25,651 admissions in the Fiscal Year to a high of 39,061 admissions in the Fiscal Year. Then in , non-residential program admissions dropped to 36,294 (2,767 fewer). As shown, outpatient counseling programs account for the majority (71.9% to 86.1%) of non-residential admissions each fiscal year. From to fiscal years, outpatient counseling admissions increased by 65.2% and decreased by 1.5% in Day care admissions increased 38.1% from the first to third fiscal year ( and ). From the third to the fifth fiscal year, day care program admissions deceased by 3.1% (1,971 to 1,909). Narcotic treatment detoxification program admissions were relatively constant the first two fiscal years (2,562 to 2,303). Then, in the third fiscal year, program admissions more than doubled to 5,216. Over the remaining two fiscal years, narcotic treatment detoxification admissions decreased by 70.2% (1,553) in and by another 54.5% (706) in The narcotic treatment maintenance program admissions have fluctuated over the five fiscal years, ranging from a low of 1,794 in to a high of 3,834 in Essentially the same number of narcotic treatment maintenance program admissions was reported in and fiscal years, 2,463 and 2,425, respectively. Table Number of Non-Residential Admissions by Program Type and Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Day Care Non-Residential Admissions Outpatient NTP Detox NTP Maint Overall ,427 19,199 2,562 2,463 25, ,858 22,797 2,303 1,794 28, ,971 27,756 5,216 3,658 38, ,941 31,733 1,553 3,834 39, ,909 31, ,425 36,294 Residential Program Admission Trends Table 2.2 shows admission trends over five fiscal years by the two residential program types and the overall residential program. The admissions to the overall residential program decreased by 4.2% from to Conversely, over the next two fiscal years ( to ), reported residential program admissions increased by 8.1%. A decrease of less than 1.0% was seen in. The residential services program, the larger of the two types of residential programs, had an 11.6% decrease in reported admissions from to , followed by a steady increase over the remaining three fiscal years ( to ). There was a 27.2% increase in residential detoxification program admissions over the first three fiscal years ( to ). A downward trend occurred in the remaining two fiscal years ( to ), 6.0% and 12.7%, respectively. -8-

25 Chapter 2 Residential Program Admission Trends - Continued Table Number of Residential Admissions by Program Type and Fiscal Year Fiscal Year Residential Admissions Detoxification Residential Overall ,317 14,893 19, ,235 13,161 18, ,495 13,815 19, ,161 14,742 19, ,504 15,218 19,722 Admissions by Division and Program Type As shown in Table 2.3, a total of 56,016 admissions were reported during the. Approximately two-thirds of participant admissions were to non-residential programs. The majority (86.1%) of non-residential participant admissions was to outpatient counseling programs. The remaining one-third of participant admissions was to residential programs with the majority (77.2%) of participants being admitted to residential services programs. Table Admissions by Division and Program Type Division/Program Type Number Admissions Percent Non-Residential Division 36, Day Care 1,909 (5.3%) Narcotic Treatment Detoxification 706 (1.9%) Narcotic Treatment Maintenance 2,425 (6.7%) Outpatient Counseling 31,254 (86.1%) Residential Division 19, Detoxification 4,504 (22.8%) Residential Services 15,218 (77.2%) Total 56,

26 Chapter 2 Day Care Program Participant Demographics During the, 1,759 unique participants accounted for 1,909 admissions to day care programs; 141 (8.0%) of these participants had two or more admissions. According to Table 2.4, several key day care program participant findings are 86.2% were female; 65.5% were between 25 and 44 years of age; most were Hispanic/Latino (31.6%) or Black/African American (35.7%); and 41.2% reported methamphetamine as their primary drug problem. Table 2.4 Day Care Program Participant Demographics Admissions 1, Participants 1, Male Female 1, White Black/African American Hispanic/Latino Native American Asian/Pacific Islander Other , Over None years years 1, or more years Employed Unemployed 1, Not in the labor force Alcohol Cocaine/Crack Heroin Marijuana/Hashish Methamphetamine Other