Rating the Quality and Consistency of Local Opioid Settlement Expenditure Data.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess whether states requiring public reporting of local opioid settlement expenditures make these data available in a detailed, consistent, timely, and analyzable format.

Methods: We reviewed state websites to extract information on the quality of reported settlement data across 7 dimensions: (1) interest earned on settlement funds was reported, (2) nonremediation spending was reported separately, (3) expenditures were tied to specific programs or activities, (4) expenditures were reported at the sub-county level, (5) expenditures for each local government were consolidated into a single report, (6) all entities in a state report in a combined tracker, and (7) data from the most recent reporting year were available. States were coded dichotomously (1 = criterion met; 0 = not met).

Results: Of the 21 states requiring local reporting, 5 (23.8%) report interest earned on disbursements, while most document nonremediation expenditures (n = 17; 81.9%). Over half tied expenditures to specific program activities (n = 12; 57.1%), and all but 3 consistently report the most recent year. Local governments in 17 states (80.9%) report all expenditures in a single report, and 12 states (57.1%) consolidate all local spending within a single public tracker. Two states (9.5%) have not yet made these data publicly available.

Conclusions: Among states with reporting requirements, there is substantial variation in the quality and detail of settlement expenditure data. Strengthening reporting standards and enforcement of standards would support rigorous research and enhance accountability for ensuring that funds are allocated in alignment with the goals of opioid remediation.