United States

General Accounting Office
Washington, D.C. 20548

Human Resources Division

B-214215

November 28, 1990

The Honorable John Glenn

Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs
United States Senate

Dear Mr. Chairman:

Because of your concern that substance abuse among our nation's youth poses serious dangers to society, you asked us to review implementation of the Drug-Free Schools and Communities Act of 1986. A major purpose of the act was to help schools and communities establish drug abuse education and prevention programs. Specifically, you asked that we

identify how school districts use funds provided under the act,
examine the extent to which educational programs include alcohol
abuse,

determine how school districts assess program effectiveness,

obtain students' views on the drug education provided, and

identify state and local program officials' views on the Department of Education's program direction.

Our testimony on these issues before your committee in Cleveland on February 13, 1990, was based on preliminary work in Ohio. This report discusses our work in five states (California, Florida, Michigan, Ohio, and Texas) and the District of Columbia. These jurisdictions accounted for $330 million, or 30 percent of the total program funds allocated to states and the District of Columbia since the program's inception in October 1986.

To respond to your request, we obtained information from the state edu-
cation agencies in the five states. In addition, we contacted each state's
largest school district-Los Angeles, Dade County (Miami), Detroit,
Cleveland, and Houston—as well as the public school system in Wash-
ington, D.C. In these six school districts, we discussed the Drug-Free
Schools program with principals, other school personnel, and students at
18 schools. We also obtained information from the Department of Edu-
cation and reviewed program evaluation and other research literature
on "what works" in drug education. (See app. I.)

School districts are using a wide range of approaches in their Drug-Free Schools programs. But, little is known at the local, state, or national level about what approach works best or how effectively the various

programs and curricula reduce or prevent drug and alcohol abuse among students.

Overall, the six districts we visited used more than 50 percent of the funds for student assistance (primarily counseling) programs geared to high-risk students' in junior and senior high school. They used the remaining funds primarily for training teams of school officials to develop drug prevention programs or on classroom curricula and materials. Each district covered alcohol abuse in its drug education programs. Districts often were unable to provide the Drug-Free Schools programs to all schools or all students within a school. The reason, they said, was that not enough teachers had yet been trained to teach drug education courses or new programs yet been fully implemented.