Supplemental SOR grants released to states

Last month, the federal Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) released an additional $487 million to states and territories in its State Opioid Response (SOR) grant program, bringing the 2019 total to $1.4 billion, including the $933 million in second‐year, continuation SOR grants to be provided later this year. The SOR grants increase access to medication‐assisted treatment (MAT), reduce unmet treatment need and reduce opioid‐related overdose deaths.     

Senators call for $2 billion in supplemental SAMHSA funding

As the fourth stimulus bill, the HEROES Act, awaits action by the Senate, 19 senators sent a letter last week to Senate and House leadership calling for increased investments in substance use disorder programs during the COVID‐19 pandemic. The letter, from Senators Tammy Baldwin (D‐Wisconsin) and Jeanne Shaheen (D‐New Hampshire), along with 17 other senators (all Democrats), calls for “$2 billion in funding for the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) to administer supplemental grant allocations under the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) Block Grant program and the State Opioid Response (SOR) grant program.”     

SAMHSA to write new application for new SOR with stimulants included

The addition of stimulants as an allowable use for State Opioid Response (SOR) grants will require a new application, which the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) is working on, ADAW has learned. The change was in the FY 2020 appropriations bill passed last month by Congress (see ADAW, Dec. 23, 2019; “FY 2020 Appropriations: Stimulants added to SOR's $1.5 billion,” https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adaw.32573 ), along with funding for other SAMHSA programs, including the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment block grant (SAPT BG). After the bill passed before Christmas, Washington went away for the holidays.     

FY 2020 Appropriations: Stimulants added to SOR's $1.5 billion

Appropriations bills for FY 2020 released last week detail some good news for the field. In the State Opioid Response (SOR) grants, there would be more flexibility: specifically, these could be used for stimulants.     

SAMHSA refers to streamlining in proposed budget cuts

Last week, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) released its Congressional Justification (CJ), issued by agencies in conjunction with the White House budget request for the next fiscal year. For FY 2020, the White House budget did not request additional money for SAMHSA's Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) block grant, and included cuts to substance abuse prevention (see ADAW, March 18).     

Proposed bill for HEROES Act would give $1.5 billion to SAPT block grant

With the House of Representatives planning to vote last Friday on the fourth COVID‐19 stimulus package, substance use treatment stands a chance of being included — if the Senate, which at press time was still opposing the measure, as was the White House, goes ahead to approve it as well. The Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act, for about $2 trillion, would finally give some money to states, counties and health care. So far, more than $2 trillion has been spent on stimulus funding, with the field trying hard to be included in each bill (see “NASADAD requests $250 million for Phase 4 stimulus,” ADAW April 13, https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/adaw.32688 ).     

RB agrees to pay U.S. $1.4 billion for avoiding prosecution over Suboxone marketing scheme; Indivior trial next year

Reckitt Benckiser (RB) Group, previously Reckitt Benckiser Pharmaceuticals, former owner of Indivior, and maker of Suboxone, has agreed to pay the U.S. government $1.4 billion in exchange for not being prosecuted for marketing of the medication. In 2014, Reckitt Benckiser spun off Indivior, and the two companies are no longer connected. A separate trial will proceed against Indivior starting in May 2020.     

STR grants: How one physician in rural Florida is trying to help

If the State Targeted Response (STR) and State Opioid Response (SOR) grants from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) grants are like an elephant — large, especially relative to funding for addiction treatment in general — they are also almost impossible to generalize about. But seeing one piece in context of the whole is essential in trying to find out where the money is actually going. The money goes to the single state authority (SSA) in charge of the Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) block grant in each state, the person who knows most about what is needed in that state. The funding comes from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). These grants added $2 billion‐plus to addiction treatment services for opioid use disorders for four years — and many expect this number to be doubled. For perspective, the entire SAPT block grant is under $2 billion and has been for decades.     

Approaches to civil society in authoritarian states: The case of China

Both civil society in China and research on Chinese civil society have developed profoundly over the last three decades. Research on Chinese civil society can be classified into two categories: a structure‐oriented approach and an agency‐oriented approach. Both approaches acknowledge the state's dominant position in restricting the political space for civil society engagement, but they differ in their understanding of state–civil society relations. A key concern within the structure‐oriented approach is to analyze how the autonomy of civil society organizations is shaped by their structural position vis‐à‐vis the state. Agency‐oriented scholars, on the other hand, reject the analytical focus on structural autonomy. Instead, they build on a more nuanced understanding of the authoritarian yet nonmonolithic context in China and analyze how civil society organizations develop specific strategies to be able to operate within their restricted political space. In particular, agency‐oriented scholars have analyzed two ways in which organizations exercise agency: by strategically developing formal or informal ties with state actors and by bringing their engagement into the public sphere to raise awareness and express their voice. What could be further developed in the agency‐oriented approach is, however, a deeper understanding of the political dimensions of civil society agency.     

Cities, states, and trust networks: chapter 1 of Cities and States in World History

An introduction to a vast but uncompleted survey of world history, this article argues that the study of the changing relationships among cities, states and trust networks can help us understand key elements of the emergence of our modern world. Beginning in ancient Uruk in modern-day Iraq, roughly five thousand years ago, the essay defines each of its central categories: city, state and trust network. It poses four questions to be pursued throughout the rest of the study. What determines the degree of segregation or integration of cities and states? What determines the relative dominance of cities and states? What determines the extent of separation or integration between cities or states, on one side, and trust networks on the other? What difference do these variable configurations make to the quality of ordinary people’s lives?