The Journey Toward 988: A Historical Perspective on Crisis Hotlines in the United States.

This article reviews the historical trajectory of crisis hotlines in the United States from their 1960's inception as 24/7 alternatives to traditional mental health services to becoming "the front door" of the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline in 2022. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA's) 2001 effort to network, certify, and evaluate crisis hotlines laid the foundation for demonstrating the efficacy of crisis hotlines and their ability to reduce distress and suicidality in people accessing these services. SAMHSA-funded evaluations and the collective leadership of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline network established evidence-based standards, policies, and practices.

Market Factors Associated with Comprehensive Behavioral Health Crisis Care Availability: A Resource Dependence Theory Study.

Behavioral health crisis care (BHCC) is a care delivery model for individuals experiencing acute distress related to a mental health or substance use disorder. We examined market factors associated with comprehensive BHCC availability using 2022 data on mental health treatment facilities (n = 9385) obtained from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration. We aggregated facility-level data by county (n = 3142) and merged with county-level market factors. Logistic regression models were used to examine the adjusted associations between market factors and BHCC availability. We found that 468 (14.9%) counties had at least one mental health treatment facility offering comprehensive BHCC services. Specifically, counties with more mental health providers (Adjusted Odds Ratio = 2.26, Confidence Interval = 1.32-3.86) and metropolitan counties (AOR = 3.26, CI = 1.95-5.43) had higher odds of having a comprehensive BHCC facility. Our findings highlight the importance of developing the mental health workforce to increase BHCC availability and a need to address disparities in rural counties.

30 years of youth system of care lessons learned - a qualitative study of Hawai'i's partnership with the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

BACKGROUND: The Hawai'i State Department of Health, Child and Adolescent Mental Health Division (CAMHD) has maintained a longstanding partnership with Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to enhance capacity and quality of community-based mental health services. The current study explored CAMHD's history of SAMHSA system of care (SOC) awards and identified common themes, lessons learned, and recommendations for future funding. METHODS: Employing a two-phase qualitative approach, the study first conducted content analysis on seven final project reports, identifying themes and lessons learned based on SOC values and principles. Subsequently, interviews were conducted with 11 system leaders in grant projects and SOC award projects within the state. All data from project reports and interview transcripts were independently coded and analyzed using rapid qualitative analysis techniques. RESULTS: Content validation and interview coding unveiled two content themes, interagency collaboration and youth and family voice, as areas that required long-term and consistent efforts across multiple projects. In addition, two general process themes, connection and continuity, emerged as essential approaches to system improvement work. The first emphasizes the importance of fostering connections in family, community, and culture, as well as within workforce members and child-serving agencies. The second highlights the importance of nurturing continuity throughout the system, from interagency collaboration to individual treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The study provides deeper understanding of system of care evaluations, offering guidance to enhance and innovate youth mental health systems. The findings suggest that aligning state policies with federal guidelines and implementing longer funding mechanisms may alleviate administrative burdens.

Continuous Quality Improvement in the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Technology Transfer Center Network: A Process Evaluation.

In healthcare and related fields, there is often a gap between research and practice. Scholars have developed frameworks to support dissemination and implementation of best practices, such as the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation, which shows how scientific innovations are conveyed to practitioners through tools, training, and technical assistance (TA). Underpinning those aspects of the model are evaluation and continuous quality improvement (CQI). However, a recent meta-analysis suggests that the approaches to and outcomes from CQI in healthcare vary considerably, and that more evaluative work is needed. Therefore, this paper describes an assessment of CQI processes within the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) Technology Transfer Center (TTC) Network, a large TA/TTC system in the United States comprised of 39 distinct centers. We conducted key informant interviews (n = 71 representing 28 centers in the Network) and three surveys (100% center response rates) focused on CQI, time/effort allocation, and Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) measures. We used data from each of these study components to provide a robust picture of CQI within a TA/TTC system, identifying Network-specific concepts, concerns about conflation of the GPRA data with CQI, and principles that might be studied more generally.

How do the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Technology Transfer Centers Decide What Evidence-Based Practices to Disseminate and Determine How to Do So? A Cross-Sectional Study of a National Network.

It is important to use evidence-based programs and practices (EBPs) to address major public health issues. However, those who use EBPs in real-world settings often require support in bridging the research-to-practice gap. In the US, one of the largest systems that provides such support is the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA's) Technology Transfer Center (TTC) Network. As part of a large external evaluation of the Network, this study examined how TTCs determine which EBPs to promote and how to promote them. Using semi-structured interviews and pre-testing, we developed a "Determinants of Technology Transfer" survey that was completed by 100% of TTCs in the Network. Because the study period overlapped with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, we also conducted a retrospective pre/post-pandemic comparison of determinants. TTCs reported relying on a broad group of factors when selecting EBPs to disseminate and the methods to do so. Stakeholder and target audience input and needs were consistently the most important determinant (both before and during COVID-19), while some other determinants fluctuated around the pandemic (e.g., public health mandates, instructions in the funding opportunity announcements). We discuss implications of the findings for technology transfer and frame the analyses in terms of the Interactive Systems Framework for Dissemination and Implementation.

States' investment in recovery support services: An exploratory analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Recovery support services (RSS), while not yet precisely defined, nevertheless have a longstanding role in managing chronic illnesses including substance use disorders (SUDs). This exploratory study is the first to identify the amounts of money that states invest from Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Block Grants; SAMHSA discretionary grant and state-appropriated sources; the types of organizations from which RSS are purchased; and the non-financial supports states provide for RSS. METHODS: The study is a mixed method exploratory analysis, based on three data sources: content analysis of all 51 (Washington, D.C. included) Substance Abuse Block Grant (SABG) state applications; in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of ten states and one territory; and a structured electronic survey sent to all SABG recipients. Forty states and 2 territories returned a total of 42 questionnaires from 56 possible states and territories (75%). Thirty-two of the responding states provided complete FY2022 financial data. RESULTS: States reporting financial data spent $412 million from SABG, SAMHSA discretionary grants, and state appropriations for RSS. An estimate based on extrapolating regionally grouped per capita spending averages to non-responding state populations projected $775 million spent from these sources for all states. The study also calculated per capita and SUD prevalent population expenditures from these sources for each state. States purchase services from recovery community organizations and SUD treatment organizations in equal proportions, as well as from statewide recovery support organizations, educational institutions, hospitals, community health centers, and justice system organizations. Purchased services are not uniformly defined, but include community centers, peer staff, housing, and other support services. States provide non-financial support in forms that include technical assistance, community engagement, practice guidelines, and regulatory frameworks. CONCLUSIONS: This first report of states' investments establishes a baseline to serve as a reference point for future analysis of these expenditures, as well as a foundation to which other sources of RSS funding such as Medicaid and other state and federal (e.g. HRSA, CDC, DOJ) dollars may be added. Uniform definitions for RSS will be necessary to support future reporting, accountability, and research. Finally, newly formed peer-based provider organizations need particular attention in order to be sustainable.

Organizational Network Analysis of SAMHSA's Technology Transfer Center (TTC) Network.

Technology transfer centers (TTCs) facilitate the movement of evidence-based practices in behavioral healthcare from theory to practice. One of the largest such networks is the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's (SAMHSA) TTC Network. This brief report shares findings from an organizational network analysis (ONA) of the network conducted as part of an external evaluation. For non-supervisory TTCs (n = 36) across three focus areas (addiction, prevention, and mental health), the authors computed network density, harmonic closeness, and non-null dyadic reciprocity for five types of interactions (e.g., "collaborated in workgroups"), then, for each interaction type, used Welch's T-test to compare mean harmonic closeness of standalone TTC grantees versus multiple-TTC grantees. ONA identified potentially isolated regional TTCs as well as mismatches between some centers' desired scope and their network centrality and enabled investigation of broader questions around behavioral health support systems. The approach appears useful for evaluating TTCs and similar support networks.

Commentary on the Revision of SAMHSA's National Outcome Measures (NOMs) for Discretionary Programs.

Data collection is an integral part of government agencies like the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration (SAMHSA), for reporting program outcomes and accountability. SAMHSA-funded community behavioral health programs have been evaluated by the National Outcome Measures (NOMs) since 2007. NOMs collects data on important aspects of client health including but not limited to mental health symptoms, functioning, and social connectedness through interviews with clients. Since its inception, NOMs has gone through a number of revisions. The most recent revision in 2021 has significant implications for program evaluation and research. This commentary provides an overview of the history of the NOMs followed by a review and critique of the recent changes with a particular attention to revisions in how responses are recorded. Implications of the NOMs are discussed with respect to its utility in evaluation, practice, and research.

A health crisis within a health crisis: Opioid access in the COVID-19 pandemic.

The novel coronavirus has thrown large sections of our healthcare system into disarray, with providers overburdened by record breaking number of hospitalizations and deaths. The U.S., in particular, has remained the nation with one of the fastest growing case counts in the world. As a consequence, many other critical healthcare needs have not received the necessary resources or consideration. This commentary draws attention to substance use and opioid access during the ongoing crisis, given the potential for breakdowns in treatment access for addiction, the growing concern of mental health comorbidities, and the lack of access for those who require opioids for adequate pain management. Further, the commentary will offer policy and practice recommendations that may be implemented to provide more equitable distribution of care.

Sustainability planning in the US response to the opioid crisis: An examination using expert and text mining approaches.

Between January 2016 and June 2020, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration rapidly distributed $7.5 billion in response to the U.S. opioid crisis. These funds are designed to increase access to medications for addiction treatment, reduce unmet treatment need, reduce overdose death rates, and provide and sustain effective prevention, treatment and recovery activities. It is unclear whether or not the services developed using these funds will be sustained beyond the start-up period. Based on 34 (64%) State Opioid Response (SOR) applications, we assessed the states' sustainability plans focusing on potential funding sources, policies, and quality monitoring. We found variable commitment to sustainability across response plans with less than half the states adequately describing sustainability plans. States with higher proportions of opioid prescribing, opioid misuse, and poverty had somewhat higher scores on sustainment. A text mining/machine learning approach automatically rated sustainability in SOR applications with an 82% accuracy compared to human ratings. Because life saving evidence-based programs and services may be lost, intentional commitment to sustainment beyond the bolus of start-up funding is essential.

Support Services for Young Adults With Substance Use Disorders.

In summarizing the proceedings of a longitudinal meeting of experts in substance use disorders (SUDs) among young adults, this special article reviews principles of care concerning recovery support services for this population. Young adults in recovery from SUDs can benefit from a variety of support services throughout the process of recovery. These services take place in both traditional clinical settings and settings outside the health system, and they can be delivered by a wide variety of nonprofessional and paraprofessional individuals. In this article, we communicate fundamental points related to guidance, evidence, and clinical considerations about 3 basic principles for recovery support services: (1) given their developmental needs, young adults affected by SUDs should have access to a wide variety of recovery support services regardless of the levels of care they need, which could range from early intervention services to medically managed intensive inpatient services; (2) the workforce for addiction services for young adults benefits from the inclusion of individuals with lived experience in addiction; and (3) recovery support services should be integrated to promote recovery most effectively and provide the strongest possible social support.

Assessing public behavioral health services data: a mixed method analysis.

BACKGROUND: Measuring behavioral health treatment accessibility requires timely, comprehensive and accurate data collection. Existing public sources of data have inconsistent metrics, delayed times to publication and do not measure all factors related to accessibility. This study seeks to capture this additional information and determine its importance for informing accessibility and care coordination. METHODS: The 2018 National Survey for Substance Abuse and Treatment Services (N-SSATS) data were used to identify behavioral health facilities in Indiana and gather baseline information. A telephone survey was administered to facilities with questions parallel to the N-SSATS and additional questions regarding capacity and patient intake. Quantitative analysis includes chi-square tests. A standard qualitative analysis was used for theming answers to open-ended questions. RESULTS: About 20% of behavioral health facilities responded to the study survey, and non-response bias was identified by geographic region. Among respondents, statistically significant differences were found in several questions asked in both the study survey and N-SSATS. Data gathered from the additional questions revealed many facilities to have wait times to intake longer than 2 weeks, inconsistency in intake assessment tools used, limited capacity for walk-ins and numerous requirements for engaging in treatment. CONCLUSION: Despite the low response rate to this study survey, results demonstrate that multiple factors not currently captured in public data sources can influence coordination of care. The questions included in this study survey could serve as a framework for routinely gathering these data and can facilitate efforts for successful coordination of care and clinical decision-making.

Prevalence and perceived importance of racial matching in the psychotherapeutic dyad: a national survey of addictions treatment clinical practices.

BACKGROUND: Despite conflicting results in the literature concerning its efficacy in practice, racial matching has been identified as a component of culturally sensitive treatment. METHODS: This study examined the perceived importance and prevalence of racial matching by surveying a national sample of substance use disorder (SUD) centers from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). RESULTS: Using univariate statistical analysis, results for the prevalence of racial matching revealed that in 58% of the clinics, there was the potential to match a counselor with a racially similar client, while in 39% of the clinics, there was no potential to provide such a match. Among the agencies that displayed a potential for racial matching, 26% of the respondents indicated that they never racially matched clients and therapists, 71% reported that they sometimes practice racial matching, 15% indicated that they usually racially match, and only 7% purported to always racially match clients and therapists. Results for the perceived importance of racial matching revealed that in both situations where treatment centers had the potential for racial matching and did not have the potential for racial matching, supervisors reported that it was relatively important to provide culturally sensitive treatment but that it was not as important to match clients in SUD centers with racially/ethnically similar counselors. CONCLUSION: The topic of racial matching can be very complex and has shown variation amongst SUD centers; however, this study emphasizes the importance of providing culturally sensitive treatment and an appreciation of differences among members within each racial group.

Addressing opioid overdose deaths: The vision for the HEALing communities study.

The United States is facing two devastating public health crises- the opioid epidemic and the COVID-19 pandemic. Within this context, one of the most ambitious implementation studies in addiction research is moving forward. Launched in May 2019, the HEALing Communities Study (HCS) was developed by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) as part of the Helping to End Addiction Long-termSM Initiative (National Institutes of Health, 2020). The goal for this research was to reduce opioid overdose deaths by 40 % in three years by enhancing and integrating the delivery of multiple evidence-based practices (EBPs) with proven effectiveness in reducing opioid overdose deaths across health care, justice, and community settings. This paper describes the initial vision, goals, and objectives of this initiative; the impact of COVID-19; and the potential for knowledge to be generated from HCS at the intersection of an unrelenting epidemic of opioid misuse and overdoses and the ravishing COVID-19 pandemic.

Measurement of sustainment of prevention programs and initiatives: the sustainment measurement system scale.

BACKGROUND: Enhancing the sustainability of evidence-based prevention programs for mental and behavioral health requires tools for measuring both sustainability determinants and sustainment outcomes. The aim of this study was to develop the Sustainment Measurement System Scale (SMSS) and to assess its reliability and construct validity for measuring both determinants and outcomes of efforts to sustain prevention programs and initiatives. METHODS: A 42-item scale comprised of items identified from qualitative data collected from 45 representatives of 10 programs and 8 SAMHSA program officers was administered to 186 representatives of 145 programs funded by 7 SAMHSA prevention grant initiatives. Cronbach's alphas were used to determine inter-item reliability. Convergent validity was assessed by comparisons of a global measure of sustainment with current SAMHSA-funding status and continued operation in the same form. Discriminant validity was assessed by comparisons of sustainability determinants with whether or not the program had undergone adaptations. RESULTS: Confirmatory factor analysis provided support for a 35-item model fit to the data. Cronbach's alpha was .84 for the sustainment outcome construct and ranged from .70 to .93 for the sustainability determinant constructs. All of the determinant constructs were significantly associated with sustainment outcome individual and global measures for the entire sample (p < 0.01 to 0.001) and for community-based programs and programs with a substance abuse focus (p < 0.05 to 0.001). Convergent validity was supported by significant associations between the global sustainment measure and current SAMHSA funding status and continued operation in the same form (p < 0.001). Four of the sustainability determinant constructs (responsive to community needs; coalitions, partnerships, and networks; organizational staff capability; and evaluation, feedback, and program outcomes) were also significantly associated with current SAMHSA funding status (p < 0.5 to 0.01). With the exception of organizational staff capability, all sustainability determinants were unrelated to program adaptation as predicted. CONCLUSIONS: The SMSS demonstrated good reliability and convergent and discriminant validity in assessing likelihood of sustainment of SAMHSA funded prevention programs and initiatives. The measure demonstrates potential in identifying predictors of program sustainment and as a tool for enhancing the likelihood of successful sustainment through ongoing evaluation and feedback.

Defining trauma and a trauma-informed COVID-19 response.

The ubiquitous exposure to COVID-19 argues for governments to use a trauma-informed response as a universal precaution, with the goal of promoting the recovery and resilience of their residents. How a system defines trauma will drive its administrative policies, research, and clinical services. The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration's Concept of Trauma and Guidance for a Trauma-Informed Approach offers governments a framework to define trauma and incorporate trauma-informed principles and tasks into their COVID-19 responses. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

COVID-19, mental health, and opioid use disorder: Old and new public health crises intertwine.

The United States is facing both the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic and an ongoing epidemic of opioid overdose. Opioid use disorder is associated with other mental health problems, trauma, and social and health disparities. While the United States has acted to improve access to treatment for mental health and opioid use, research will be needed to understand the effectiveness of new policies in the context of COVID-19. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).