By Ned Presnall, LCSW
Editor’s note: Read the companion piece to this article here.
From 2012 to 2016, federal investment in substance use disorder (SUD) treatment remained virtually unchanged at about $2 billion in grant funding each year. In response to rising overdose death rates, this investment has more than doubled since 2017 (Table 1).
Most of this increase is accounted for by two grant programs: The State Targeted Response to the Opioid Crisis and the State Opioid Response. The 2021 American Rescue Plan Act generated $1.5 billion of extraordinary one-time funding.
Table 1. Increased federal investment to address opioid-involved deaths
|
Overdose Death |
SUD treatment |
CCBHC grants |
2015 |
|||
2016 |
$0 |
||
2017 |
$0 |
||
2018 |
|||
2019 |
$0 |
||
2020 |
|||
2021 |
|||
2022 |
** |
In addition to its investment in SUD treatment services, SAMHSA has ramped up its investment in community mental health centers certified to provide integrated SUD and mental health treatment (CCBHCs). Initiated in 2016 with $25 million in planning grants, SAMHSA’s 2023 budget request for CCBHCs exceeds $500 million.10
My colleagues at St. Louis University and I wanted to answer a very simple question: Has SAMHSA’s unprecedented investment in SUD treatment and CCBHCs led to widespread access to buprenorphine and methadone for persons with OUD?
These medications are the most effective treatments for preventing opioid-related death,11 and for many years they have been inaccessible to a large part of the SUD treatment population.12 There is some public data available to answer this question. Each year, SAMHSA’s National Survey on Substance Abuse Treatment Services (N-SSATS)13 provides agency-level service data, and its Treatment Episodes Data Set (TEDS)14 describes treatment episode characteristics, including the use of OUD medications. According to these sources, there has been a sharp increase since 2015 in the number of treatment programs offering buprenorphine or methadone, but the number and proportion of patients receiving MAT has remained fairly flat (Table 2).
Table 2. Agency and episode-level estimates of medications for OUD (MOUD) used in outpatient settings13,14
|
||||
2015 |
13% |
235 |
52% |
162,859 |
2016 |
13% |
234 |
49% |
155,467 |
2017 |
20% |
354 |
54% |
202,596 |
2018 |
26% |
476 |
55% |
223,016 |
2019 |
31% |
573 |
52% |
173,288 |
NSSATS and TEDS data are not collected on CCBHCs but the National Council on Mental Well Being published 201815 and 202116 reports indicating that 92 percent of CCBHCs have trained or hired clinicians who can prescribe buprenorphine and that 89% offer one or more forms of Medication Assisted Treatment.
To test the accuracy of these data sources and to characterize the lived experience of people seeking buprenorphine and methadone treatment, we conducted two “secret shopper studies” –one of publicly-funded SUD treatment programs17, and the other of CCBHCs.18 In each study, we posed as the family member of someone with OUD seeking treatment. We asked about the availability of buprenorphine in SUD treatment programs and of buprenorphine or methadone in CCBHCs. We called each agency twice during business hours (when necessary) and collected data on the agencies from our conversations and through any return messages.
In one study, we sampled and surveyed 520 of the 2350 publicly-funded SUD treatment programs listed as buprenorphine maintenance providers in SAMHSA's Treatment Locator. Among these programs, 26% did not answer or return our calls and another 19% did not offer buprenorphine treatment. Only 23% of the agencies we contacted offered a buprenorphine provider visit at intake (remember, we only contacted agencies listed as providing buprenorphine maintenance). Based on these results, we were able to adjust the overall estimate of buprenorphine availability in publicly funded SUD treatment programs from 35% to 26%, with only 6% offering buprenorphine prescriber visits on the day of intake.
At the time of our data collection, in 2021, there were 313 agencies listed as CCBHCs in SAMHSA’s treatment locator. Of the 83% (257) we contacted, 34% said that they offered buprenorphine or methadone treatment and 3% (7) indicated that a patient with OUD could see a buprenorphine or methadone provider at their first visit to the clinic.
There are two important take-aways from these results. First, the lived experience of OUD patients seeking treatment is considerably less optimistic than the agency-level reports. Buprenorphine availability is over-reported and there exist significant barriers between availability and access. Many agencies are difficult to reach, and many others require non-medical appointments prior to visits with a buprenorphine prescriber. Second, the massive investment in OUD treatment delivery since 2016 has not led to widespread buprenorphine and methadone availability. This latter point should give policy-makers significant pause. Why hasn’t doubling the federal block grant or using targeted CCBHC “integration” grants translated into widespread buprenorphine and methadone access?
We believe that the answer is fairly simple. The vast majority of OUD funding has been distributed through the same channels as the annual block grant–in non-competitive federal grants to Single State Agencies (SSAs). SSAs contract with treatment programs or regional entities which have wide discretion over the types of treatment they provide. In other words, much of the funding has gone to the same agencies which failed to adopt buprenorphine and methadone treatment in the decade prior to the OUD grants. In the case of CCBHCs, the provision of buprenorphine and methadone was strongly encouraged but not required as a condition of funding, and, as a result, only a minority of CCBHCs offer these medications.
For contrast, compare another much smaller SAMHSA grant: Medication Assisted Treatment – Prescription Drug and Opioid Addiction (MAT-PDOA). Initiated in 2016, MAT-PDOA was a competitive $11 million grant with clear and measurable requirements–to start patients with OUD on maintenance medication and to retain them in treatment.19 Expanded in 2018 and 2021, SAMHSA has invested $148 million in the MAT-PDOA program–a small fraction of the OUD dollars which have come to states in the form of largely non-competitive, unrestricted treatment grants.
Now that Congress has begun to appropriate funds to address the opioid crisis, it must hold SAMHSA, state SSAs, and treatment providers accountable for making buprenorphine and methadone universally accessible. This goal will likely require stricter grant requirements and increased investment in medical settings such as federally qualified health centers and rural health clinics – agencies with the medical workforce necessary to make buprenorphine and methadone universally available to persons with OUD.
Author Bio: Ned Presnall is the owner and director of Plan Your Recovery, an addiction treatment clinic in St. Louis, Missouri. He is a research collaborator at Washington University in St. Louis and St. Louis University.
References: