Sign up here to
receive our e-alerts




Prop 36 Reports & Data

Choose a category below to view available reports.

Major Reports
State & County Data
Legislation
Legal Affairs/Litigation
Prop. 36 History
Other

Major Reports
 
Drug Policy Alliance
   
>
Prop. 36 Improving Lives, Delivering Results
Released March 2006
   
Justice Policy Institute
   
>
Proposition 36: Five Years Later
Released April 2006
   
UCLA
 
>
Adequate Funding Study/Year 5 Report
The first Prop. 36 report to estimate the amount of funding adequate for Prop. 36--$228.6 million. Provides detail on clients entering in the fifth year (July 1, 2004-June 30, 2005). Released April 2007.
   

>

State/County Split of Prop. 36 Cost Savings
Follow up to the Cost-Benefit Analysis breaking out saving that accrue to the sate and county governments. Over the long term, state share of savings is 93%. Released May 2006
 

>

Cost-Benefit Analysis of Prop. 36
A rigorous, comprehensive cost-benefit analysis of Prop. 36, focusing on savings from the first two years' worth of treatment clients. Shows how California saved over $173 million on the first-year cohort alone. Released April 2006
 
>
Year 3 Report
The first Prop. 36 report with comparative tracking data (recidivism, employment, etc) for clients and non-clients, showing the impact of treatment. Provides detail on clients entering in the third year (July 1, 2003-June 30, 2004). Released August 2005. Read the Q&A about the report here.
 
>
Year 2 Report
The first Prop. 36 report with treatment completion rates (for Year 1 clients). Provides detail on clients entering in the second year (July 1, 2002-June 30, 2003). Also some discussion of offender management strategies. Released September 2004
 
>
Year 1 Report
First-ever annual report from UCLA providing detail on clients who entered treatment in the first year (July 1, 2001-June 30, 2002). Released July 2003
   
Avisa Group
   
>
Proposition 36 Today: A Study of California Stakeholders in 10 Counties
Released April 2005
 
>
Comparing California's Proposition 36 (SACPA) with Similar Legislation in Other States and Jurisdictions
Released March 2005
 
CJCJ
   

>

An Examination of California Drug Policy, Prop. 36
Study reveals that California continues to lead the nation in drug offender imprisonment and that California counties that most vigorously pursued harsh enforcement strategies did not experience greater declines in drug use or crime. Released November 2002
 

>

Prop. 36 Reduces Felony Drug Possession Prison Admissions
Study shows substance abuse treatment increasingly utilized in place of incarceration for an increasing number of low-level drug offenders, leading to a 30% decrease in the rate of felony drug possession prison admissions. Released October 2002
 
Back to Top
 
 
State & County Data
 
State  
   
>
County-by-County Treatment Show Rates & Completion Rates (Year 4)
 
>
Year 4 Annual Report (Final)
 
>
Year 4 Annual Report (Interim)
 
>
Year 3 Annual Report
 
>
County-by-County Treatment Completion Rates (Years 1 & 2)
 
>
Year 2 Annual Report
 
>
Year 1 Annual Report
   
Counties
   
Los Angeles County
 
>
Year 4 Annual Report
July 1, 2004-June 30, 2005
 
>
Year 3 Annual Report
July 1, 2003-June 30, 2004
 
>
Year 2 Annual Report
July 1, 2002-June 30, 2003
 
>
Year 1 Annual Report
July 1, 2001-June 30, 2002
 
Alameda County
 
>
Year 3 Annual Report
July 1, 2003-June 30, 2004
 
>
Year 2 Annual Report
July 1, 2002-June 30, 2003
 
>
Year 1, Annual Report
July 1, 2001-June 30, 2002
 
Santa Clara County
 
>
Academic Study Covers a 9-Month Sample of 1,190 Clients
Focuses on lower arrest rates and jail time during and after Prop. 36 treatment. Released June 2004
   
Legislative Analyst's Office
   
>
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Prop. 36
An overview of the key fiscal provisions of Proposition 36, factors for legislative consideration, and fiscal issues for future consideration by policy committees. Released November 2005
 
Back to Top
 
 
Legislation
 
Hostile Legislation (Senate Bill 803/SB 1137)
 
The most aggressive attempt to amend Prop. 36 to date took place in the 2005-06 legislative session. The legislature was responsible for funding Prop. 36 for the first time in the budget produced in June and July 2006, so changes to Prop. 36 became part of the budget process, ultimately enacted as a budget "trailer bill". The legislation began as Senate Bill 903 introduced by Sen. Ducheny, and was enacted as Senate Bill 1137. (The law was immediately blocked from implementation by court action, however. See Legal Affairs Section below for more information.)
   
>
Full Text As Enacted
This is the final bill as approved by both houses and signed by the governor. Due to convetions of the Legislature's bill production process, this final version does not show how the bill changes the original text of Prop. 36. Released July 2006
 
>
Legislative Website for Detailed Bill Status
SB 803 went through many iterations over 18 months. A full legislative history, with committee analyses, is posted here. 2005-2006
 
>
Full Text As Originally Introduced
The first version of the bill, provided here, was entirely the product of a coalition of law enforcement groups. This legislation was circulated in late 2004 among Prop. 36 stakeholders as the "law enforcement working draft." San Diego District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis urged Sen. Ducheny to file the draft as a bill. Released February 2005
 
Back to Top
 
Legal Affairs/Litigation
 
>
Constitutional Challenge to SB 1137
 
>
Second Annual Review of Proposition 36 in California's Courts
The first Prop. 36 report with treatment completion rates (for Year 1 clients). Provides detail on clients entering in the second year (July 1, 2002-June 30, 2003). Also, some discussion of offender management strategies. Released October 2003
 
Back to Top
 
 
Prop. 36 History
 
>
Original Full Text of Proposition 36
 
>
Final Vote Totals
Released November 2000
 
>

Ballot Pamphlet Materials
Released 2000

 
>
Yes on Prop. 36 Campaign Website
 
Prop. 36 Statewide Advisory Group
 
  For five and a half years, the Statewide Advisory Group (SAG) provided a forum for stakeholders to advise the state Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs (DADP) on the implementation of Prop. 36. A wide range of specialties were represented (see member list as of May 2005), including county program administrators, law enforcement, physicians, judges, treatment associations and the original proponents of Prop. 36. The group was disbanded in July 2006 after a contentious legislative battle over Senate Bill 1137 that had divided the group. Meeting summaries were prepared by the state DADP.
   
Meeting Summaries:
 
 
Apr. 21, 2006 Feb. 3, 2006 Oct. 27, 2005
Aug. 5, 2005 Apr. 22, 2005 Feb. 18, 2005
Dec. 2, 2004 Oct. 22, 2004 Aug. 27, 2004
June 18, 2004 Apr. 2, 2004 Feb. 6, 2004
Dec. 12, 2003 Oct. 29, 2003 Sept. 19, 2003
May 30, 2003 Mar. 21, 2003 Dec. 13, 2002
Oct. 11, 2002 Sept. 16, 2002 May 10, 2002
Feb. 8, 2002 Dec. 14, 2001 Oct. 5, 2001
Sept. 6, 2001 July 11-12, 2001 May 15, 2001
Apr. 11, 2001 Mar. 14, 2001 Feb. 14, 2001
 
Back to Top
 
Other
 
Progress Reports
   
>
Prop. 36 and Drug Court Comparison
Despite significant differences between the systems, drug courts and Prop. 36 have produced similar, favorably comparable results. Released June 2005
 
>
Prop. 36 Year 1 Progress Report
Report summarizes impact of Prop. 36, which, since July 1, 2001, has been successfully diverting tens of thousands of low-level, non-violent drug offenders convicted solely of possession for personal use into community-based treatment instead of incarceration. Released July 2002
 
>
Prop. 36 Implementation Update
This updated progress report describes developments in implementation at the state level and in the largest counties. Released April 2002
 
>
Prop. 36 Implementation Report
This preliminary progress report describes how the state and the largest counties first implemented Prop. 36. Released March 2002
 
>
Prop. 36 Report Cards
These 'report cards' grade 11 counties, encompassing 75% of the state population, on the quality of their implementation plans. Released June 2001
 
California Drug Courts Reports
 
>
Comprehensive Drug Court Implementation Act of 1999: Final Report
Released March 2005
   
>
Comprehensive Drug Court Implementation Act of 1999: Interim Report
Released March 2004
   
>
Drug Court Partnership Act of 1998: Technical Report
Released June 2002
   
>
Drug Court Partnership Act of 1998: Final Report to Legislature
Released March 2002
   
>
Drug Court Effectiveness: A Review of California Evaluation Studies, 1995-1999
Written by Joseph Guydish, Ellen Wolfe, Barbara Tajima, and William J. Woods Released Fall 2001
 
Back to Top
   

 
Common Sense for Drug Policy
 
California Society of Addiction Medicine
 
California State Association of Counties
 

Read commentary from Oliver H., a Prop 36 graduate.

 
Get the Facts
Over a dozen Proposition 36 fact sheets are available for download. Topics include: the Effectiveness of Drug Treatment, Drug Courts/Deferred Entry, and the California Correctional System.
 
County-by-County
breakdowns of the 2000 initiative votes
 
For background on the Prop. 36 campaign and other votes nationwide for drug policy reform, see:

Contact Lists
County Lead Agencies
and Contacts
Parole Region Contact
Probation Contacts

 

     

 
HOME | ABOUT PROP 36 | REPORTS | PRESS RELEASES | NEWS | FAQ | TREATMENT NOT JAIL
Drug Policy Alliance · (916) 444-3751 · sacto@drugpolicy.org