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

ABSTRACT

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.