DEPARTMENT

of HEALTH

and HUMAN

SERVICES

 

 

 

Substance Abuse and Mental Health 

Services Administration 

 

 

 

FY 2012 Online Performance Appendix
- 2 - 

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
- 3 - 

INTRODUCTION

The FY 2012 Online Performance Appendix is one of several documents that fulfill the Department of 

Health and Human Services’ (HHS) performance planning and reporting requirements. HHS achieves full 

compliance with the Government Performance and Results Act of 1993 and Office of Management and 

Budget Circulars A-11 and A-136 through the HHS agencies’ FY 2012 Congressional Justifications and 

Online Performance Appendices, the Agency Financial Report, and the HHS Summary of Performance 

and Financial Information Report (SPFI). These documents are available at http://www.hhs.gov/budget/. 

 

The FY 2012 Congressional Justifications and accompanying Online Performance Appendices contain 

the updated FY 2010 Annual Performance Report and FY 2012 Annual Performance Plan. The Agency 

Financial Report provides fiscal and high-level performance results. The HHS SPFI summarizes key past 

and planned performance and financial information. 
- 4 - 

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
- 5 - 

MESSAGE FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR

I am pleased to present the FY 2012 Online Performance Appendix for the Substance Abuse and Mental 

Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). The report represents the monitoring and management of 

SAMHSA programs in the area of substance abuse prevention, substance abuse treatment, and mental 

health services programs. 

This justification and accompanying Online Performance Appendix includes a more direct link between 

the budget discussion and program performance. Performance measurement and reporting at SAMHSA 

provide a comprehensive set of outcomes in major program areas enabling SAMHSA to share with 

stakeholders its progress toward achieving three overarching aims:

• Transforming Health Care 

• Improving the Nation's Behavioral Health 

• Achieving Excellence in Operations

The FY 2012 Budget includes substantial revisions to SAMHSA’s performance measures reported in the 

Annual GPRA Plan and Annual GPRA Report. The resulting set of measures seeks to capture the 

following key items for each program: the number of services delivered or people served, a specific 

measure or two for each individual program area, and a measure that captures client recovery. Further, 

SAMHSA spent a good deal of time reviewing existing measures to ensure that they were meaningful and 

met the needs of both program management and policy-makers. This effort resulted in a reduction of 

measures from almost 200 (as published in the FY 2011 President’s Budget) to around 100 measures in 

the FY 2012 President’s Budget. Although this reduction changes the display of measures in the Annual 

GPRA Report/Plan, the majority of the measures that have been removed (including NOMS) will 

continue to be collected and used for program management purposes. 

Work on SAMHSA’s GPRA measures and other data collection activities are ongoing. SAMHSA is 

working with internal and external stakeholders on developing appropriate measures of recovery for those 

with mental or substance use disorders. As these efforts become more defined, the GPRA measures 

reported in the budget as well as those used for program management may be altered to bring them in line 

with other cross-cutting efforts. 

As with the FY 2011 Appendix, SAMHSA has expanded the display of its performance tables to include 

targets for FY 2013. As many of SAMHSA’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance 

targets and results for any given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with 

activities supported by funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, the performance tables throughout 

the two documents includes targets for the year impacted by the FY 2012 funding proposed here. 

To the best of my knowledge, the performance data reported by SAMHSA for inclusion in the FY 2012 

Online Performance Appendix is accurate, complete, and reliable.

//s//

Pamela S. Hyde, J.D. 
- 6 - 

PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
- 7 - 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................. - 3 -

MESSAGE FROM THE ADMINISTRATOR .................................................................................... - 5 -

SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE TARGETS AND RESULTS .................................................... - 9 -

PERFORMANCE DETAIL ................................................................................................................ - 10 -

Mental Health Block Grant ................................................................................................................. - 10 -

Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant .............................................................. - 14 -

Treatment Activities ............................................................................................................................... - 14 -

Synar Amendment ................................................................................................................................. - 17 -

Prevention Grants ................................................................................................................................ - 21 -

Substance Abuse-State Prevention Grants ............................................................................................. - 21 -

Behavioral Health-Tribal Prevention Grants ......................................................................................... - 22 -

Mental Health-State Prevention Grants ................................................................................................. - 23 -

Innovation and Emerging Issues – Agency-wide Initiatives ............................................................ - 25 -

Military Families Initiative .................................................................................................................... - 25 -

Prevention Prepared Communities ......................................................................................................... - 26 -

Innovation and Emerging Issues - CMHS ......................................................................................... - 28 -

Youth Violence Prevention .................................................................................................................... - 28 -

National Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSI) ........................................................................................ - 31 -

Mental Health System Transformation Grants ...................................................................................... - 33 -

Mental Health Homelessness Prevention Programs .............................................................................. - 37 -

Mental Health - Other Capacity Activities ............................................................................................ - 40 -

Mental Health - Science and Service Activities ..................................................................................... - 42 -

Innovation and Emerging Issues - CSAP ........................................................................................... - 45 -

Minority AIDS Initiative ........................................................................................................................ - 45 -

Sober Truth on Preventing Underage Drinking (STOP ACT) ............................................................... - 48 -

Prevention - Science and Service Activities .......................................................................................... - 50 -

Innovation and Emerging Issues - CSAT .......................................................................................... - 54 -

Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment ....................................................................... - 54 -

Access to Recovery ................................................................................................................................ - 55 -

Treatment System for Homelessness (GBHI) ........................................................................................ - 58 -

Criminal Justice - Juvenile and Adult Problem Solving Drug Courts ................................................... - 60 -

Criminal Justice - Ex-Offender Re-Entry Program ................................................................................ - 64 -

Treatment - Other Capacity ................................................................................................................... - 66 -

Treatment - Science and Service Activities ........................................................................................... - 69 -

Children's Mental Health Services ..................................................................................................... - 72 -

Projects to Assist in the Transition from Homelessness ................................................................... - 75 -

Regulatory and Oversight Functions ................................................................................................. - 79 -

Protection & Advocacy .......................................................................................................................... - 79 -
- 8 - 

Public Awareness and Support Activities .......................................................................................... - 83 -

Performance and Quality Improvement Systems ............................................................................. - 85 -

Discontinued Performance Measures ................................................................................................. - 87 -

Mental Health Block Grant .................................................................................................................... - 87 -

National Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSI) ...................................................................................... - 102 -

Mental Health System Transformation Grants .................................................................................... - 103 -

Mental Health Homelessness Prevention Programs ............................................................................ - 107 -

Mental Health/Substance Abuse Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment ................ - 108 -

Other Mental Health Capacity Activities ............................................................................................. - 108 -

Mental Health - Science and Service Activities, .................................................................................. - 110 -

Minority AIDS Initiative,, .................................................................................................................... - 111 -

Prevention - Science and Service Activities ........................................................................................ - 116 -

Treatment System for Homelessness (GBHI) ...................................................................................... - 121 -

Treatment - Other Capacity ................................................................................................................. - 122 -

Treatment - Science and Service .......................................................................................................... - 123 -

Children's Mental Health Services ....................................................................................................... - 124 -

Projects to Assist in the Transition from Homelessness ...................................................................... - 126 -

Protection & Advocacy ........................................................................................................................ - 126 -

Public Awareness and Support ............................................................................................................ - 129 -

SAMHSA's Health Information Network (SHIN) ............................................................................... - 129 -

Performance and Quality Improvement Systems ................................................................................. - 130 -

Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant - National Surveys .................................... - 130 -

Overview of Performance .................................................................................................................. - 132 -

Statement of Mission ........................................................................................................................... - 132 -

Strategic Plan ....................................................................................................................................... - 134 -

SAMHSA Linkages to HHS Strategic Plan ..................................................................................... - 136 -

Additional Items ................................................................................................................................. - 141 -

Full Cost Table ..................................................................................................................................... - 141 -

Evaluations Included in HHS Evaluations Database for FY 2010 ...................................................... - 143 -
- 9 - 

SUMMARY OF PERFORMANCE TARGETS AND RESULTS

The FY 2012 Budget includes substantial revisions to SAMHSA’s performance measures reported in the 

Annual GPRA Plan and Annual GPRA Report. The resulting set of measures seeks to capture the 

following key items for each program: the number of services delivered or people served, a specific 

measure or two for each individual program area, and a measure that captures client recovery. Further, 

SAMHSA spent a good deal of time reviewing existing measures to ensure that they were meaningful and 

met the needs of both program management and policy-makers. This effort resulted in a reduction of 

measures from almost 200 (as published in the 2011 President’s Budget) to around 100 measures in the 

FY 2012 President’s Budget. Although this reduction changes the display of measures in the Annual 

GPRA Report/Plan, the majority of the measures that have been removed (including NOMS) will 

continue to be collected and used for program management purposes. 

Work on SAMHSA’s GPRA measures and other data collection activities are ongoing. SAMHSA is 

working with internal and external stakeholders on developing appropriate measures of recovery for 

those with mental or substance use disorders. As these efforts become more defined, the GPRA 

measures reported in the budget as well as those used for program management may be altered to 

bring them in line with other cross-cutting efforts. 

Table 1: Summary of Performance Targets and Results1

Fiscal 

Year

Total 

Targets

Targets with 

Results Reported

Percent of Targets with 

Results Reported

Total 

Targets Met

Percent of 

Targets Met

2007 144 142 99% 99 70%

2008 162 160 99% 110 69%

2009 184 180 98% 106 59%

2010 179 82 46% 50 61%

2011 93 0 N/A 0 N/A 

2012 106 0 N/A 0 N/A 

2013 832 0 N/A 0 N/A 

 

1 Table completed using HHS Program Performance Tracking System, 1/19/2011 2 Total does not include targets for measures that have yet to be established. In most circumstances this includes new 

programs where baseline data has not yet been collected. 
- 10 - 

PERFORMANCE DETAIL

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH BLOCK GRANT 

Table 2: Measure 2.3.14: Number of people served by the public mental health system3 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 6,340,320 Sep 30, 2014 

2012 6,300,000 Sep 30, 2013 

2011 6,300,000 Sep 30, 2012 

2010 6,300,000 Sep 30, 2011 

2009 6,250,000 6,430,635

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 6,200,000 6,332,983

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 5,753,633 6,121,641

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 3: Measure 2.3.11: Number of evidence based practices (EBPs)

4 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 4.2 per State Sep 30, 2014 

2012 4.2 per State Sep 30, 2013 

2011 4.2 per State Sep 30, 2012 

2010 4.1 per State Sep 30, 2011 

2009 4.0 per State 4.3 per State

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 4.0 per State 4.2 per State

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 4.0 per State 4.0 per State

(Target Met) 

 

3

The FY 2010, FY 2011 and FY 2012 targets have been set at 6.3 million persons served (slightly lower than the most recent actual) based on the 

expectation that the current recession will impact the service delivery systems of the State Mental Health Authorities and may result in fewer 

persons receiving mental health care nationally.

4

National average of evidence-based practices per state, based on 35 States reporting. Excludes Medication Management and Illness SelfManagement, which continue to undergo definitional clarification
- 11 - 

Table 4: Measure 2.3.15: Rate of consumers (adults) reporting positively about outcomes (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 72% Sep 30, 2014 

2012 72% Sep 30, 2013 

2011 72% Sep 30, 2012 

2010 72% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 72% 71.6%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 72% 72%

(Target Met) 

2007 73% 71%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 5: Measure 2.3.16: Rate of family members (children/adolescents) reporting positively about outcomes

(Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 67% Sep 30, 2014 

2012 73% Sep 30, 2013 

2011 73% Sep 30, 2012 

2010 73% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 73% 65.2%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 73% 64%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 6: Measure 2.3.81: Percentage of service population receiving any evidence based practice (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 7.2 % Sep 30, 2014 

2012 7.2 % Sep 30, 2013 

2011 7.2 % Sep 30, 2012 

2010 7.2 % Sep 30, 2011 

2009 6.6 % 7.2 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 7.9 % 6.6 %

(Target Not Met) 

2007 7.7 % 7.9 %

(Target Exceeded) 
- 12 - 

Table 7: Data Source and Validation for Mental Health Block Grant

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.14 Data on children's outcomes were reported 

in the grantees' ED524 Bi-Annual Report 

submitted to their GPO every six months. 

The methods for collecting these measures 

varied by grantee, but were generally 

student self-report for the violence and 

substance use measures and school records 

for attendance and mental health services. 

Grantees implement various forms of data validation as 

part of their local evaluations. To establish the accuracy 

and reliability of data used to measure the outcome 

performance, local evaluators require double entry of 

data; range checks coded into the data entry program; or 

assessing concurrent validity with other measure of the 

same indicator among other things. 

2.3.11 

2.3.15

2.3.16

2.3.81 

Uniform Reporting System. See http://www.mentalhealth.samhsa.gov/

cmhs/MentalHealthStatistics/about_u

rs2002.asp 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The evidence-based practices measure reflects the program’s efforts to improve the efficiency and 

effectiveness of mental health services. The use of EBPs allows mental health providers and programs to 

more reliably improve services, achieve optimal outcomes and has demonstrated a consistent, positive 

impact on the lives of people who have experienced mental health problems. For FY 2009, the target for 

the number of evidence based practices implemented was again exceeded (2.3.11). The percentage of 

service population receiving any evidence based practice (2.3.81) was also exceeded. Measure 2.3.14 

provides a measure of the number of consumers served by the public mental health system. Targets for 

FY 2007, FY 2008, and FY 2009 were exceeded. 

Measures 2.3.15 and 2.3.16 reflect the rate of consumers (adults) and family members (children) reporting 

positively about the outcomes of the services that they received in helping to the problems that brought 

them into treatment. The target for adults was slightly missed; the target for children was not met. The 

future target for children has been reduced on the basis of prior year performance.

Steps to improve the program performance for the MHBG Program are in place and in use, such as the 

Program Peer Review process for the Annual Plan and Implementation Report which assesses and 

provides specific feedback regarding strengths and weaknesses of the program as well as specific 

recommendations for ongoing quality improvement. Also, the State Mental Health Authorities within 

each State are monitored via on-site reviews on a regular schedule. These on-site monitoring reviews are 

conducted by independent consultants and provide an assessment of key areas of service delivery and 

infrastructure. Following these site visits, the consultants issue a report that summarizes its program 

findings and when appropriate, may include recommendations for technical assistance. All of these 

activities allow SAMHSA to identify areas of under-performance and target improvement through 

provision of technical assistance and training. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 
- 13 - 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of MHBG measures was reduced leaving five measures in place. 

Measures 2.3.07 through 2.3.10 were all dropped given that the current rate of hospitalization is relatively 

infrequent given community alternatives. Measures 2.3.12 and 2.3.13 were combined (now measure 

2.3.81) and reflects the evidence base practice coverage for both children and adults. Measure 2.3.17 was 

dropped due to the fact that many populations do not have established EBPs. Subsequently, some 

grantees had relatively little success with this measure despite having excellent consumer outcomes. The 

FY 2009 performance data were used to set the baselines for future targets.
- 14 - 

MACRO PROGRAM SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT BLOCK 

GRANT

PROGRAM TREATMENT ACTIVITIES

Table 8: Measure 1.2.43: Number of admissions to substance abuse treatment programs receiving public funding

(Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 1,937,960 Nov 30, 2015 

2012 1,881,515 Nov 30, 2014 

2011 1,881,515 Nov 30, 2013 

2010 1,881,515 Nov 30, 2012 

2009 1,881,515 Nov 30, 2011 

2008 1,881,515 2,272,250

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 2,003,324 2,372,302

(Target Exceeded)5

Table 9: Measure 1.2.48: Percentage of clients reporting no drug use in the past month at discharge (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 74% Nov 30, 2014 

2012 70% Nov 30, 2013 

2011 70.3% Nov 30, 2012 

2010 70.3% Nov 30, 2011 

2009 69.3% 75.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 69.3% 73.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 68.3% 73.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

 

5

Prior to FY 2007, the data for this measure came from the Treatment Episode Data Set component of the Drug and Alcohol Services 

Information System. Beginning in FY 2007, the data source is the State drug repository of the Web Block Grant Application System. 
- 15 - 

Table 10: Measure 1.2.49: Percentage of clients reporting no alcohol use in the past month at discharge (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 78% Nov 30, 2014 

2012 75% Nov 30, 2013 

2011 74.7% Nov 30, 2012 

2010 74.7% Nov 30, 2011 

2009 74.7% 81.5%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 74.7% 78.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 73.7% 80.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 11: Measure 1.2.50: Percentage of clients reporting being employed/in school at discharge (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 43% Nov 30, 2014 

2012 43% Nov 30, 2013 

2011 43.9% Nov 30, 2012 

2010 43.9% Nov 30, 2011 

2009 42.9% 42.9%

(Target Met) 

2008 42.9% 37.2%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 N/A 42.9%

(Historical Actual) 

Table 12: Measure 1.2.51: Percentage of clients reporting no involvement with the Criminal Justice System 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 92% Nov 30, 2014 

2012 89% Nov 30, 2013 

2011 88.9% Nov 30, 2012 

2010 88.9% Nov 30, 2011 

2009 88.9% 92%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 88.9% 92%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 N/A 88.9%

(Historical Actual) 
- 16 - 

Table 13: Measure 1.2.85: Percentage of clients receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 92.0 % Nov 30, 2014 

2012 92.0 % Nov 30, 2013 

2011 92.0 % Nov 30, 2012 

2010 92.0 % Nov 30, 2011 

2009 92.0 % 92.0 %

(Target Met) 

2008 N/A 91.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 14: Data Source and Validation for Treatment Activities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.2.43 Data are collected through standard 

instruments and submitted through the 

Treatment Episode Set. Data are then 

uploaded to SAMHSA's State data 

repository, the Web Block Grant 

Application System (WEBBGAS). In 

addition, States can make direct updates to 

data in WebBGAS and are required to 

verify that the data in the system are 

correct. 

All data are automatically checked as they are submitted 

through the internal control processes in the Treatment 

Episode Data Set. Validation and verification checks run 

on the data as they are being entered. The system will not 

allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

1.2.48

1.2.49

1.2.50

1.2.51

1.2.85 

Data are collected through standard 

instruments and submitted through the 

Treatment Episode Set. TA data are 

collected through an annual customer 

satisfaction survey with the 

States/territories on the Block Grant 

activities. 

All data are automatically checked as they are submitted 

through the internal control processes in the Treatment 

Episode Data Set. Validation and verification checks run 

on the data as they are being entered. The system will not 

allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

There are two measures of client abstinence. One reflects no past month use of from drugs at discharge 

and the other one reflects no past month use of alcohol at discharge. Discharge is defined as the date of 

last service and abstinence is defined as no reported use of either alcohol or drugs in the past 30 days. 

Baseline data have been reported and both measures exceeded their FY 2007 targets.

The target of number of admissions was exceeded in FY 2008 with a total of 2.3 million admissions 

reported. The number of admissions reflects the number of entrances into services provided under the 

block grant program.
- 17 - 

Prior to FY 2007, the data for this measure (1.2.43) came from the Treatment Episode Data Set 

component of the SAMHSA Drug and Alcohol Services Information System. Beginning in FY 2007, the 

data source is the State data repository of the Web Block Grant Application System. This system contains 

more comprehensive and verified information on the measure. 

The remaining outcome measures for this program had varied results. In FY 2008, the criminal justice 

measure exceeded the target. During the same year, the employment target was not met. A newly added 

measure of housing did not have a target set for FY 2009, but data show 91% of clients reported stable 

housing at discharge. 

Data show promising outcomes for 2009. All targets were either met or exceeded for FY 2009.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. SAMHSA believes 

this new group of GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended 

outcomes for SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA is focusing on client-level outcomes as a measure of 

effectiveness for this Program. The measures which have been retained provide an appropriate 

assessment of whether the Program has met its goals/objectives.

PROGRAM SYNAR AMENDMENT 

Table 15: Measure 2.3.49: Number of States (including Puerto Rico) whose retail sales violations is at or below 

20% (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 52 Aug 31, 2014 

2012 52 Aug 31, 2013 

2011 52 Aug 31, 2012 

2010 52 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 52 52

(Target Met) 

2008 52 52

(Target Met) 

2007 52 52

(Target Met) 
- 18 - 

Table 16: Measure 2.3.62: Number of States (excluding Puerto Rico) reporting retail tobacco sales violation rates 

below 10% (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 346 Aug 31, 2014 

2012 347 Aug 31, 2013 

2011 26 Aug 31, 2012 

2010 25 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 28 34

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 29 22

(Target Not Met) 

2007 28 26

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

Table 17: Data Source and Validation for Synar Amendment

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.49 

2.3.62 

The data source is the Synar report, part of 

the SA Block Grant application submitted 

annually by each State. 

States must certify that Block Grant data are accurate. The 

validity and reliability of the data are ensured through 

technical assistance, conducting random unannounced 

checks, and the confirmation of the data by scientific 

experts, site visits and other similar steps. SAMHSA is 

able to provide leadership and guidance to States on 

appropriate sample designs and other technical 

requirements, based on scientific literature and 

demonstrated best practices for effective implementation 

of Synar. Data sources for the baseline and measures are 

derived from State project officers’ logs and from 

organizations that were awarded State technical assistance 

contracts. The analysis is based upon the actual 

requests/responses received, therefore providing a high 

degree of reliability and validity. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

 

6

The target rate for 2012 and 2013 have been increased. Although States continue to face funding cuts to their youth tobacco access enforcement 

programs due to weak economic conditions, SAMHSA anticipates that new funding available to States from the FDA as a result of the Tobacco 

Control Act will help to offset State budget cuts and greatly increase the amount and reach of enforcement of youth access laws taking place in 

States, which SAMHSA expects to result in lower RVRs.

7

The target rate for 2012 and 2013 have been increased. Although States continue to face funding cuts to their youth tobacco access enforcement 

programs due to weak economic conditions, SAMHSA anticipates that new funding available to States from the FDA as a result of the Tobacco 

Control Act will help to offset State budget cuts and greatly increase the amount and reach of enforcement of youth access laws taking place in 

States, which SAMHSA expects to result in lower RVRs.
- 19 - 

The Synar Regulation requires the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the 8 U.S. territories to: 1) 

have in effect a law prohibiting any manufacturer, retailer, or distributor of tobacco products from selling 

or distributing such products to any individual younger than age 18; 2) enforce this law; 3) conduct 

annual, unannounced inspections (referred to as the Synar survey) in a way that provide a valid 

probability sample of tobacco sales outlets accessible to minors; 4) negotiate interim targets and a date to 

achieve a noncompliance rate (or retailer violation rate) of no more than 20 percent (SAMHSA required 

that each state reduce its retailer violation rate (RVR) to 20 percent or less by FY 2002); and 5) submit an 

annual report detailing state activities to enforce its law. The measures in these tables refer to the results 

of each state’s Synar survey and reflect the percentage of retail outlets in the survey that sold tobacco to 

youth. 

The Synar program has been successful in reducing youth access to tobacco through retail sources. While 

the national weighted average retailer violation rate for the 50 states and the District of Columbia 

(weighted by state population) was 40.1 percent in FY 1996, the rate steadily fell to 9.9 percent in FY 

2007. However, the national weighted average retailer violation rate slightly rebounded in FY 2008 to 

10.9 percent. 

The increase in the RVR between FY 2007 and FY 2008 was most likely due to state budget cuts which 

resulted in a reduction in the number of enforcement inspections states conducted and reductions in the 

budgets of state comprehensive tobacco control programs. SAMHSA worked with states to address this 

issue. For example, SAMHSA held sessions at the 10th National Synar Workshop on topics such as how 

to maintain outcomes with less money and how to use local tobacco licensing to help fund enforcement. 

Additionally, Congress recognized the importance of funding rigorous enforcement of youth tobacco 

access laws by including a mechanism in the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act for 

the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to contract with States to fund the enforcement of youth access 

laws. This funding will help to alleviate some of the barriers States face in enforcing youth access laws as 

a result of budget cuts. FDA began contracting with States to enforce youth tobacco access laws in the 

summer of 2010. 

Because of these efforts and state efforts to focus attention on the issue of youth tobacco access, the 

national weighted average retailer violation rate fell in FY 2009, to 9.3 percent, the lowest reported level 

in the history of the Synar program. 

Since FY 2005, all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico have been in compliance with the 

Synar requirements. (In FY 2006, although one State reported a RVR of 22.7 percent, which is 2.7 

percent above its target RVR of 20 percent, the reported rate fell within the +/- 3 percent margin of error 

allowed for States that conduct a sample.)

Since each State has met the 20 percent requirement for the past five years, SAMHSA set a new program 

goal to encourage all states to reduce the sales rate to less than 10 percent which is in keeping with the 

initial intent of the Synar legislation, to reduce minors’ access to tobacco products. It is also consistent 

with research8

 

8

Jason LA, Ji PY, Anes MD, Birkhead SH. Active enforcement of cigarette control laws in the prevention of cigarette sales to minors. JAMA. 

1991; 266:3159-3161.Forster JL, Murray DM. Wolfson M, Blaine TM, Wagenaar AC, Hennrikus DJ. The effects of community policies to 

reduce youth access to tobacco. AM J Public Health. 1998; 88:1193-1198.

suggesting that effectively reducing youth access requires rates lower than the 20 percent 

target.

While this does not change the legally required target rate of 20 percent, it provides SAMHSA and States 

with a program goal that fits the legislative intent. The number of States reporting rates below 10 percent 

over the last four years are as follows: 25 States in FY 2006, 26 States in FY 2007, 22 States in FY 2008, 
- 20 - 

and 34 States in FY 2009. 

 

Figure 1: Synar Amendment data FY 1999-FY 2009

In addition to setting targets for States, the Synar Amendment established penalties for noncompliance. 

The penalty for a State is loss of up to 40 percent of its Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SA) 

Block Grant funds. In lieu of this penalty, in every year since 2000, Congress has provided an alternative 

penalty (Section 214/Section 218/Section 213/Section 212) mechanism by which a State can avoid the 40 

percent reduction in its SA Block Grant if the State stipulates that it will spend its own funds to improve 

compliance with the law. The alternative penalty also stipulates that SA Block Grant funds cannot be 

withheld from a U.S. territory that receives less than $1,000,000 in SA Block Grant funds for failing to 

meet the Synar requirements. The first measure (retailer violation rate of 20 percent or less) includes 

Puerto Rico because Puerto Rico is subject to a monetary penalty for failing to meet the Synar 

requirements because it receives more than $1,000,000 in SA Block Grant funds, while the other U.S. 

territories are not. The second measure (retailer violation rate of less than 10 percent) only includes the 50 

States and DC because these are the entities included when SAMHSA publishes the annual national 

weighted retailer violation rate. 
- 21 - 

MACRO PROGRAM PREVENTION GRANTS

PROGRAM SUBSTANCE ABUSE-STATE PREVENTION GRANTS 

Table 18: Measure 2.3.85: Number of persons served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 

Table 19: Measure 2.3.90: Percentage of youth age 12-20 who report drinking in the past month (HHS Strategic 

Plan measure) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2015 23.8 % N/A 

2012 23.8 % Aug 31, 2013 

2009 N/A 27.2 %

(Historical Actual) 

2008 N/A 26.4 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 20: Measure 2.3.97: Percentage of youth age 12-25 who report misuse of prescription drugs

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 

Table 21: Data Source and Validation for Substance Abuse-State Prevention Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.85 Data source has not been finalized at this 

time, but most likely will be collected by 

the Prevention Management Reporting and 

Training System (PMRTS) online data 

reporting and collection system for 

prevention grantees. 

All PMRTS data are automatically checked by the Data 

Information Technology Infrastructure Contract (DITIC) 

for completeness and accuracy as they are input and then 

they are submitted to the Data Analysis Coordination and 

Consolidation Center (DACCC) Data Management Team 

for additional completeness and accuracy checks, analysis 

and reporting. The Substance Abuse-State Prevention 

Grant (SA-SPG) data will be reviewed by SAMHSA’s 

CSAP project officers for accuracy and compliance. 

Project officers and States and their grantees will discuss 

and resolve ambiguities or inconsistencies in the data 

prior to approval. 
- 22 - 

Table 22: Data Source and Validation for Substance Abuse-State Prevention Grants (continued)

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.90 

2.3.97

National Survey on Drug Use and Health Information on methodology and data verification for the 

NSDUH is available at 

http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nhsda/met

hods.cfm.

In FY 2012, SAMHSA proposes to launch a new, consolidated prevention grant program for States. 

Known as the Substance Abuse-State Prevention Grant (SA-SPG), this new competitive grant program 

will build upon and expand the work previously funded under the 20 percent Prevention Set-Aside of the 

Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment Block Grant (SABG); the Strategic Prevention Framework 

State Incentive Grants (SPF SIG); and the Partnerships for Success Grants (PFS).

The SA-SPGs will allow States to plan, implement, and evaluate comprehensive and integrated 

prevention programs targeting behavioral health goals such as State-wide reductions in substance use. 

States will use data-driven, community-focused strategic planning processes when creating and 

implementing their new SA-SPG programs. As a result, States will be required to allocate most of their 

SA-SPG funds to local communities that can organize and carry out activities that are in line with 

achieving each State's behavioral health goals.

The new SA-SPG program will hold States accountable for achieving targets associated with their goals. 

Performance measures included in this appendix are preliminary. As plans for the implementation of the 

new SA-SPG program are finalized, additional measures--including those used by previously funded 

program--will be evaluated and, if appropriate, added to this appendix. 

PROGRAM BEHAVIORAL HEALTH-TRIBAL PREVENTION GRANTS 

Table 23: Measure 2.3.92: Number of persons served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 

Table 24: Measure 2.3.93: Percentage of youth age 12-20 who report drinking in the past month (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 

Table 25: Measure 2.3.98: Percentage of persons aged 12 and older who report suicidal ideation

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 
- 23 - 

Table 26: Data Source and Validation for Behavioral Health-Tribal Prevention Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.92

2.3.93 

Data source has not been finalized at this 

time, but most likely will be collected by 

the Prevention Management Reporting and 

Training System (PMRTS) online data 

reporting and collection system for 

prevention grantees. 

All PMRTS data are automatically checked by the Data 

Information Technology Infrastructure Contract (DITIC) 

for completeness and accuracy as they are input and then 

they are submitted to the Data Analysis Coordination and 

Consolidation Center (DACCC) Data Management Team 

for additional completeness and accuracy checks, analysis 

and reporting. The Behavioral Health-Tribal Prevention 

Grant (BH-TPG) data will be reviewed jointly by 

SAMHSA’s CSAP and CMHS project officers for 

accuracy and compliance. Project officers and tribes will 

resolve ambiguities or inconsistencies in the data prior to 

approval. 

2.3.98 TBD TBD

In FY 2012, SAMHSA proposes to launch a separate consolidated prevention grant program for Tribes. 

This competitive grant program will build upon and expand the work previously funded under the 

Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grants (SPF SIG). The Behavioral Health-Tribal 

Prevention Grant (BH-TPG) will allow Tribal grantees to plan, implement, and evaluate comprehensive 

and integrated prevention programs that target specific behavioral health goals such as population-specific 

reductions in substance abuse and mental illness. Tribes will use data-driven strategic planning processes 

to create their BH-TPG programs and will be required to allocate of the majority of funds toward 

organizing and implementing activities that will enable each Tribe to achieve their specific behavioral 

health goals.

The BH-TPG program will hold Tribes accountable for achieving targets associated with their behavior 

health goals. Performance measures included in this appendix are preliminary and reflect one of 

SAMHSA's priority areas. As plans for the implementation of the new BH-TPG program are finalized, 

additional measures--including those used by previously funded programs--will be evaluated and, if 

appropriate, added to this appendix. 

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH-STATE PREVENTION GRANTS 

Table 27: Measure 2.3.94: Number of persons served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 
- 24 - 

Table 28: Measure 2.3.95: Number of persons in the mental health and related workforce trained in specific 

mental-health related practices/activities as a result of the grant (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 

Table 29: Measure 2.3.96: Percentage of clients receiving services who report improved functioning (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 

Table 30: Measure: 2.3.99: Young people age 12-25 who experienced a Major Depressive Episode in the past 12 

months

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 

Table 31: Data Source and Validation for Mental Health-State Prevention Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.94

2.3.95

2.3.96

TBD TBD

2.3.99 National Survey on Drug Use and Health Information on methodology and data verification for the 

NSDUH is available at 

http://www.oas.samhsa.gov/nhsda/methods.cfm.

In FY 2012, SAMHSA proposes to launch a separate mental health prevention grant program. This 

competitive grant program will build upon and expand the work previously funded under the Strategic 

Prevention Framework State Incentive Grants (SPF SIG) and Project LAUNCH. 

The MH-SPG program will hold States accountable for achieving targets associated with their behavior 

health goals. Performance measures included in this appendix are preliminary and reflect one of 

SAMHSA's priority areas. As plans for the implementation of the new MH-SPG program are finalized, 

additional measures may be added to this appendix.
- 25 - 

MACRO PROGRAM INNOVATION AND EMERGING ISSUES – AGENCY-WIDE 

INITIATIVES

PROGRAM MILITARY FAMILIES INITIATIVE

Table 32: Measure 3.4.26: The number of behavioral health outcomes for military personnel and their families 

served through SAMHSA supported programs (HHS Strategic plan Measure) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 

Table 33: Measure 3.4.27: Percentage of adults receiving services who report improved functioning (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 

Table 34: Measure 3.4.28: Percentage of children receiving services who report improved functioning (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 

Table 35: Measure 3.4.29: Percentage of adults receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2012 

Table 36: Data Source and Validation for Military Families Initiative

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.4.26 TBD TBD

3.4.27

3.4.28

3.4.29 

TRAC on-line data reporting and 

collection system. 

All TRAC data are automatically checked as they are 

input into TRAC. Validation and verification checks are 

run on the data as they are being entered. The system will 

not allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

SAMHSA proposes funding in FY 2012 to address the behavioral health needs of military service 

personnel and their families served through the public health service system. This initiative supports the 

HHS Strategic Plan Objectives responding to the mental health and substance abuse needs of military 
- 26 - 

families and builds on the recent work at SAMHSA including a national conference on the behavioral 

health needs of returning veterans, returning veteran State policy academies and collaboration with the 

National Guard Bureau to address the behavioral health needs of guardsman and their families. The twophased funding approach would support infrastructure development, including coordination and capacity 

building as well as direct service supports for prevention, treatment and recovery services for those 

communities most impacted by the needs of service members, veterans, and their families. A number of 

activities have already been implemented under the SAMHSA Military Families Strategic Initiative to 

improve access to and quality of behavioral health services offered to military members and their 

families. These activities include: 

• Promotion of a public health model for psychological health services for military families that 

emphasizes prevention, resilience and when necessary, delivery of high quality recovery-oriented 

and specialized behavioral health care

• Coordination with TRICARE, Department of Defense, or Veterans Health Administration 

services to improve Military Families’ access to community-based behavioral health care

• Improving the quality of behavioral health prevention, treatment, and recovery support services 

by helping providers respond to the needs and culture of Military Families through work with 

State and Territorial Mental Health and Substance Abuse Authorities to focus attention on needs 

of service members, veterans, and their families

• Promoting the behavioral health of Military Families with programs and evidence-based practices 

that support their resilience and emotional health

Baseline and targets will be set at the end of the first year of program operations, which is the end of FY 

2012. 

PROGRAM PREVENTION PREPARED COMMUNITIES 

Table 37: Measure 3.3.04: Percent of funded communities with reduced school dropout rates (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 

Table 38: Measure 3.3.05: Percent of funded communities with reduced rates of domestic violence (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 

Table 39: Measure 3.3.06: Number of youth in funded communities who report that they talk with one or more 

parent/guardian at least 15 minutes everyday (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Aug 31, 2014 

2012 Set Baseline Aug 31, 2013 
- 27 - 

Table 40: Data Source and Validation for Prevention Prepared Communities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.3.04

3.3.05 

3.3.06 

TBD TBD 

The Prevention Prepared Communities (PPC) is a new coordinated prevention effort between multiple 

federal agencies in conjunction with States, Tribes and prevention prepared communities. The PPC 

program will fund communities within States that have established collaborations, data collection and 

technical assistance infrastructure to enhance their current capacity for strategic planning and operation. 

 

Performance measures for the PPC program are preliminary and reflect significant predictors of substance 

use. For example, dropout rates and domestic violence have been documented as significant risk factor for 

behaviors such as substance use, while family bonding continues to serve as a significant protective 

factor. As plans for the PPC are finalized, performance measures and targets will be re-evaluated and 

refined as necessary. As a result, baseline measures and subsequent targets will be established during the 

first year of the grant and performance data will be available no later than the end of the second year of 

the grant—thereby allowing for appropriate planning and implementation of the program. 
- 28 - 

MACRO PROGRAM INNOVATION AND EMERGING ISSUES - CMHS

PROGRAM YOUTH VIOLENCE PREVENTION 

Table 41: Measure 3.2.04: Number of children served (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 2,328,500 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 2,328,500 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 2,328,500 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 2,328,500 2,328,500

(Target Met) 

2009 2,328,500 3,154,305

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 1,062,963 2,328,500

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 1,062,963 1,845,110

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 42: Measure 3.2.10: Percentage of students who receive mental health services (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 66% Dec 31, 2013 

2012 66% Dec 31, 2012 

2011 66% Dec 31, 2011 

2010 66% 59.3%

(Target Not Met)9

2009 66% 74.4%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 46% 66%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 46% 46%

(Target Met) 

 

9

This number includes data from a large cohort of grantees funded in 2009. The 2010 result is derived from 60 new grantees and 27 continuing 

grantees. Full implementation of services does not occur until later in 1st year of program. Thus decrease may reflect the impact of the larger new 

cohort.
- 29 - 

Table 43: Measure 3.2.29: Percentage of middle and high school students who have been in a physical fight on 

school property (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 27.0 % Dec 31, 2013 

2012 27.0 % Dec 31, 2012 

2011 27.0 % Dec 31, 2011 

2010 27.0 % 19.0 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 N/A 21.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

2008 N/A 31.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

2007 N/A 34.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 44: Measure 3.2.30: Percentage of middle and high school students who report current substance abuse 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 20.0 % Dec 31, 2013 

2012 20.0 % Dec 31, 2012 

2011 20.0 % Dec 31, 2011 

2010 20.0 % 24.0 %

(Target Not Met) 

2009 N/A 19.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

2008 N/A 20.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

2007 N/A 22.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 45: Data Source and Validation for Youth Violence Prevention

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.2.04 Grantee reports Grantees implement various forms of data validation as 

part of their local evaluations. To establish the accuracy 

and reliability of data used to measure the outcome 

performance, local evaluators require double entry of 

data; range checks coded into the data entry program; or 

assessing concurrent validity with other measure of the 

same indicator among other things. 
- 30 - 

Table 46: Data Source and Validation for Youth Violence Prevention (continued)

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.2.10

3.2.29

3.2.30 

Data on children’s outcomes were reported 

in the grantees’ ED524 Bi-Annual Report 

submitted to their GPO every six months. 

The methods for collecting these measures 

varied by grantee, but were generally 

student self-report for the violence and 

substance use measures and school records 

for attendance and mental health services. 

Grantees implement various forms of data validation as 

part of their local evaluations. To establish the accuracy 

and reliability of data used to measure the outcome 

performance, local evaluators require double entry of 

data; range checks coded into the data entry program; or 

assessing concurrent validity with other measure of the 

same indicator among other things. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

Since the baseline was set in 2006, the performance targets for measure 3.2.04, number of children 

served, have been consistently exceeded. Since the targets were set, more grants were awarded than had 

been anticipated and the resulting number of children served was significantly higher than the targets. The 

2010 result can be attributed to the fact that the 2009 is made up of 60 new and 27 continuing grantees 

which SAMHSA expects to increase as this cohort becomes fully operational in its violence prevention 

activities in the future. 

Targets for student outcomes in reduction in violence were exceeded in FY 2010. Violent incidents 

(3.2.08, 3.2.09, and 3.2.29) are defined by the percentage of students that have experienced violence at 

least once in the past 12 months as measured by a student survey item. This percentage has decreased 

from 2006 to 2010 by 34% for middle school students and 38% for high school students. Substance use 

(3.2.07, 3.2.08, and 3.2.30) is defined as the percentage of students that report having used alcohol in the 

past 30 days, increased slightly in 2010. For the “percentage of students who receive mental health 

services (3.2.10)” measure, the definition of mental health services is determined by the grantee with 

guidance from their project officer. This measure represents the percentage of students that receive 

services following a mental health referral and has decreased significantly in 2010 and can be attributed to 

the fact that the 2010 result is derived from 60 new grantees and 27 continuing grantees. Full 

implementation of services does not occur until later in first year of program. Thus this decrease may 

reflect the impact of the larger new cohort. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, 

and consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group 

of GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The Youth Violence Prevention targets for 2013 reflect the 2012 budget allocation. 

The overall number of Youth Violence Prevention measures was reduced. Measures 3.2.05 and 3.2.06 

were combined (new measure 3.2.29) and measures 3.2.07 and 3.2.08 (new measure 3.2.30) to include 

both middle and high school students. Measure 3.2.09 had already been slated for retirement in 2010. 

Measures 3.2.21 and 3.2.22 were both dropped as the data source is not maintained by SAMHSA and the 

performance for these measures was at an acceptable level. 
- 31 - 

PROGRAM NATIONAL TRAUMATIC STRESS NETWORK (NCTSI) 

Table 47: Measure 3.2.02: Percentage of children receiving services showing clinically significant improvement 

(HHS Strategic Plan Measure) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2015 79% Dec 31, 2015 

2013 43%10 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 43%11 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 43%12 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 69% 43%13

2009 

(Target Not Met) 

69% 47%14

2008 

(Target Not Met) 

37% 42%15

2007 

(Target Exceeded) 

37% 38%16

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 48: Measure 3.2.23: Unduplicated count of the number of children and adolescents receiving traumainformed services (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 480 17 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 1,92218 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 3,217 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 3,217 1,959

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 2,925 1,922

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 Set Baseline 975

(Baseline) 

 

10 Target reset from previously published actual. In 2010, an error was discovered in the syntax used to calculate the 

data for this measure. As a result of the error, actuals were inflated artificially. Targets have been revised to reflect 

these revised actuals. 11 Ibid. 12 Ibid.

13 Actuals revised from previously reported results. In 2010, an error was discovered in the syntax used to calculate 

the data for this measure. As a result of the error, actuals were inflated artificially. Previous data for this measure has 

been rerun utilizing the corrected syntax.

14 Ibid. 15 Ibid. 16 Ibid. 

17Target has been reduced to reflect the reduced program funding expected in FY 2012. 

18Target adjusted reflect 2009 actual.
- 32 - 

Table 49: Measure 3.2.24: Number of child-serving professionals trained in providing trauma-informed services 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 23,80019 Dec 31, 2014 

2012 95,18620 Dec 31, 2013 

2011 100,800 Dec 31, 2012 

2010 100,800 Dec 31, 201121

2009 96,000 95,186

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 Set Baseline 91,517

(Baseline) 

Table 50: Data Source and Validation for NCTSI

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.2.02

3.2.23 

TRAC on-line data reporting and 

collection system. 

All TRAC data are automatically checked as they are 

input into TRAC. Validation and verification checks are 

run on the data as they are being entered. The system will 

not allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

3.2.24 Data for number of professionals trained is 

reported quarterly by grantees utilizing a 

program-wide Online Performance 

Monitoring Report (OPMR). 

The contractor performs significant validation on data 

reported by the NCTSI Centers for the OPMR within 

NICON. “Validation” includes, but is not limited to range 

checks and checks on logical consistency across variables. 

In addition, many data entry forms only appear to NCTSN 

centers when the form is relevant. For example, data entry 

forms on financing will only appear at the end of the 

fiscal year. Similarly, there are numerous supplemental

forms, such as information about direct services and 

training, that only appear based on answers to screening 

questions. This prevents the entry of invalid or 

inconsistent data. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The National Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) is a nationwide collaborative network of organizations 

involved in the evaluation, treatment, and support of children and their families impacted by traumatic 

stress. The Network includes three components: (A) the National Center for Child Traumatic Stress 

 

19Target has been reduced to reflect the reduced program funding expected in FY 2012. 

20Target adjusted reflect 2009 actual.

21

FY 2010 data is not available due to transfer to TRAC system data collection. Data will be available for FY 2011.
- 33 - 

(NCCTS, Category 1), (B) Intervention Development and Evaluation Centers (Category 2), and (C) 

Community Treatment and Services Centers (Category 3). The NCTSN is currently comprised of 61 

funded Centers. 

The NCTSI began using a web-based GPRA data collection system called Transformation Accountability 

(TRAC) System in FY 2008 which ensures the capture of an unduplicated count of children served. For 

Measure 3.2.01, this shift to the TRAC system led to the unavailability of the FY 2010 estimated number 

served data. In FY 2008, the baseline for the replacement number served (3.2.23) was 975. The FY 2010 

target was not met. This result is significantly lower than the previously reported estimated number served 

due to the fact that not all grantees are fully utilizing the TRAC system. This is the result of factors such 

as delays in human subjects review at some sites and various staffing/budget constraints. SAMHSA 

expects compliance to continue to improve considerably over time as we are providing additional 

technical assistance and working aggressively with grantees to improve compliance with TRAC. The 

outcome for Measure 3.2.24, is not able to be reported this year as SAMHSA does not have this data for 

FY 2010 due to the fact that the grantee stopped collecting the data when it was discovered that OMB 

clearance had not been obtained for collecting this information. The 2013 target was decreased by 

approximately 75 percent to reflect the reduced program funding expected in 2012. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of NCTSI measures was reduced by two; leaving three measures in 

place. The two measures that were dropped had already been slated for retirement by 2010.

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION GRANTS22,23,24

Table 51: Measure 1.2.11: Number of persons in the mental health and related workforce trained in specific 

mental-health related practices/activities as a result of the grant (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 2,000 25 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 4,095 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 746 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 16,557 60,924

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 8,218 52,748

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 34,629 50,850

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 3,276

(Baseline) 

 

22

Program was formerly known as Mental Health State Incentive Grants for Transformation

23This program is still under development and performance measures will be added once the program is finalized. In the interim, targets for FY 

2012 and FY 2013 have been included and are subject to change.

24

FY 2011 targets for this program drop off due to grants coming to a natural end.

25Target has been reduced to reflect the reduced program funding expected in FY 2012. 
- 34 - 

Table 52: Data Source and Validation for Mental Health System Transformation Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.2.11

 

TRAC on-line data reporting and 

collection system. 

All TRAC data are automatically checked as they are 

input into TRAC. Validation and verification checks are 

run on the data as they are being entered. The system will 

not allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

In an effort to reach a larger number of States and communities, the FY 2010 Mental Health Systems 

Transformation (MHT) grant awards will be smaller than the earlier grant awards and allow the grantees 

the flexibility to identify and address critical system and capacity reform needs in their respective 

communities. The new grants will build on existing infrastructure by supporting States, counties and local 

communities in implementing activities such as workforce training, implementation of evidence-based 

practices, and improving access to quality mental health services. Necessary changes to policies and 

organizational structures to support improved mental health services will also be supported. In addition, 

the FY 2010 grants will provide States and communities the opportunity to expand the much needed 

treatment capacity and allow grantees to identify emerging treatment needs, especially those emerging in 

the context of the economic crisis. 

Performance target for Measure 1.2.11, the number of persons in the mental health care and related 

workforce who have been trained in service as a result of the grant, has increased significantly and targets 

have been exceeded each year since baseline. The variability in the MHT SIG program targets and results 

are due to the fact that one cohort is ending and another is beginning with a new focus on services with 

less emphasis on infrastructure development. The target set for 2013 reflects changes in program 

emphasis, beginning in 2010, to expand treatment capacity. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The Mental Health System Transformation Grants targets for FY 2013 reflect the 

FY 2012 budget allocation. The number of Mental Health System Transformation Grants measures was 

reduced; leaving one measure in place. The measures selected for deletion were those that no longer were 

appropriate for the redesigned program that focuses on consumer services.
- 35 - 

PROGRAM SUICIDE PREVENTION 

Table 53: Measure 2.3.59: Total number of individuals trained in youth suicide prevention (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 35,371 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 35,371 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 35,371 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 35,371 35,371

(Target Met) 

2009 29,323 83,724

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 97,742 101,669

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 75,186

(Baseline) 

Table 54: Measure 2.3.60: Total number of youth screened (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 3,360 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 3,360 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 3,360 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 3,360 3,729

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 3,360 27,132

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 3,182

(Baseline) 

Table 55: Measure 2.3.61: Number of calls answered by the suicide hotline (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 555,132 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 555,132 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 555,132 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 555,132 664,932

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 538,963 619,813

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 513,298

(Baseline) 
- 36 - 

Table 56: Data Source and Validation for Suicide Prevention Activities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.59 Training Exit Survey (TES) and a Training 

Activity Report (TAR) as part of the GLS 

cross-site evaluation 

Evaluation coordinators have built multiple types of data 

validation techniques into the cross-site evaluation to 

establish the accuracy and reliability of data used to 

measure the outcome measures. These techniques include 

double entry of data; range checks coded into the data 

entry program; and assessing concurrent validity with 

other measures of the same indicator. 

2.3.60 Data for the number of youth screened are 

reported in the Early Identification 

Referral and Follow-up (EIRF) Aggregate 

and Individual Forms for all grantees

Evaluation coordinators have built multiple types of data 

validation techniques into the cross-site evaluation to 

establish the accuracy and reliability of data used to 

measure the outcome measures. These techniques include 

double entry of data; range checks coded into the data 

entry program; and assessing concurrent validity with 

other measures of the same indicator. 

2.3.61 The number of calls answered is reported 

in the National Suicide Prevention 

LifeLine Monthly Report 

Specialists in information technology at the National 

Suicide Prevention LifeLine evaluation center validate 

phone records received from Sprint to determine the 

number of calls received and answered at 1-800-273-

TALK. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

SAMHSA’s Suicide Prevention portfolio includes campus, State, and tribal activities related to the 

Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act, as well as the Suicide Prevention Hotline, Suicide Prevention Resource 

Center and an American Indian/Alaska Native Suicide Prevention Initiative.

The number of individuals trained in youth suicide prevention (2.3.59) is also an important indicator of 

program penetration as well as increased suicidal awareness. The 2012 target has been reset to reflect the 

2009 actual. 

All targets for which data were available were exceeded for this program in 2010, except for Measure 

2.3.57, which is to be discontinued in FY 2011 as the measure is a national measure of all suicides and 

too distant from program activities and outcomes of the SAMHSA Suicide Prevention Program which 

focuses on youth. 

 

The FY 2013 target for 2.3.60 reflects proposed flat program funding in 2012. 

SAMHSA’s Suicide Prevention Hotline is monitored using the Number of Calls Answered by the Suicide 

Hotline (2.3.61). Baseline for this measure was captured in FY 2008 and exceeded its target in 2009 and 

2010. There are plans to expand data collection for this program to capture client outcomes in the future. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 
- 37 - 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Suicide Prevention measures were reduced; leaving two measures in 

place. Measure 2.3.57 was discontinued as the measure was considered too distant from program 

activities and outcomes. Measure 2.3.58 was discontinued as it did not provide important information 

about the core purpose of the program.

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION PROGRAMS26

Table 57: Measure 3.4.01: Number of clients served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 2,734 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 2,223 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 2,262 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 2,223 3,491

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 2,145 878

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 Set Baseline 548

(Baseline) 

Table 58: Measure 3.4.02: Percentage of adults receiving services who report improved functioning (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 68.4 % Dec 31, 2013 

2012 68.4 % Dec 31, 2012 

2011 68.4 % Dec 31, 2011 

2010 68.4 % 63.9 %

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 68.4 % 54.8 %

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 68.4 %

(Baseline) 

 

26Prior to FY 2010 president's Budget, Homelessness data was reported in the CMHS Other Capacity table
- 38 - 

Table 59: Measure 3.4.03: Percentage of adults receiving services who were currently employed (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 15.6 % Dec 31, 2013 

2012 15.6 % Dec 31, 2012 

2011 15.6 % Dec 31, 2011 

2010 15.6 % 13.7 %

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 15.6 % 9.1 %

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 15.6 %

(Baseline) 

Table 60: Measure 3.4.05: Percentage of adults receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 74.2 % Dec 31, 2013 

2012 60.6 % Dec 31, 2012 

2011 60.6 % Dec 31, 2011 

2010 60.6 % 79.4 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 60.6 % 74.2 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 60.6 %

(Baseline) 

Table 61: Measure 3.4.06: Percentage of adults receiving services who had improved social support (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 78 % Oct 31, 2013 

2012 78 % Oct 31, 2012 

2011 78 % Oct 31, 2011 

2010 78 % 70 %

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 78 % 70 %

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 78 %

(Baseline) 
- 39 - 

Table 62: Data Source and Validation for Mental Health Homelessness Prevention Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.4.01

3.4.02 

3.4.03

3.4.05

3.4.06

Data are collected through standard 

instruments and submitted through the 

TRAC on-line data reporting and 

collection system. 

All TRAC data are automatically checked as they are 

input into TRAC. Validation and verification checks are 

run on the data as they are being entered. The system will 

not allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The purpose of Services in Supportive Housing (SSH) program is to help prevent or reduce chronic 

homelessness by funding services for individuals and families experiencing chronic homelessness in 

coordination with existing permanent supportive housing programs and resources. Supportive housing 

provides consumers with long-term, community-based housing options by providing individuals and 

families who experience chronic homelessness the appropriate services and treatment needed to stay 

housed in a permanent setting. This housing approach combines housing assistance and intensive 

individualized support services to people with serious psychiatric conditions and those with co-occurring 

mental and substance use disorders. The SSH program began with the funding of nine sites in 2007 and 

five additional in 2008. The GPRA baselines were based on these 14 grantees. In 2009, an additional 43 

grantees were funded, followed by five additional grantees in 2010. SAMHSA has now funded 62 

grantees in 25 states. 

The target for measure 3.4.01, number of clients served, was exceeded given this increase in the number 

of grantees. The targets for measures 3.4.02 and 3.4.03 were both not met but improved over FY 2009 

performance. The target for measure 3.4.04, percentage of adults receiving services who had no/reduced 

involvement with the criminal justice system, was missed by just 0.7% and performance for the measure 

is showing nearly 100% of SSH consumers have had no criminal justice system contact in the past year. 

The target for measure 3.4.05, permanent housing, was exceeded. The target for measure 3.4.06, social 

connectedness, was not met by the largest margin compared to the other measures, but improved slightly 

over 2009 data. Improving and maintaining social connectedness in this population is challenging, but by 

providing housing and supportive services, the SSH program enables participants to grow and thrive in 

permanent housing which also facilitates the opportunity for increasing social connection and support. 

SAMHSA’s technical assistance plan to SSH grantees for 2011 includes training on social connectedness 

via webinar and dedicated time on this topic during the annual grantee conference to be held April 26-28, 

2011. SAMHSA expects that future data should show improvement as new grantees become fully 

operational. In addition, the SSH Technical Assistance Center has worked with SAMHSA and consumer 

leaders to develop the Services in Supportive Housing Consumer and Peer-Specialist Network (SSH 

CPN) to ensure consumer input into SSH programs and services. SSH programs nominate consumers 

who are receiving or have received services from an SSH program to participate in the SSH CPN. The 

Network schedules regular conference calls and plans to develop a Mission Statement, as well as to 

provide program guidance on consumer issues such as social connectedness. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 
- 40 - 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Services in Supportive Housing measures was reduced; leaving five 

measures in place. Measure 3.4.04 was discontinued due to the fact that criminal justice was considered 

not to be a primary focus of the program. Measure 3.4.07 was discontinued due to the method of data 

collection which had been having the provider ask the consumer how he or she felt about the provider’s 

services. Data collection protocols have been revised for less bias.

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH - OTHER CAPACITY ACTIVITIES27 

Table 63: Measure 1.2.05: Percentage of clients receiving services who report improved functioning (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 54% Dec 31, 2013 

2012 54% Dec 31, 2012 

2011 54% Dec 31, 2011 

2010 54% 52.7%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 54% 52.8%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 93% 50.5%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 93%

(Baseline)28

Table 64: Measure 1.2.82: Percentage of clients receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 67.7 % Oct 31, 2013 

2012 67.7 % Oct 31, 2012 

2011 67.7 % Oct 31, 2011 

2010 67.7 % 74.4 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 63.1 % 67.7 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 60.9 % 63.1 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 60.9 %

(Baseline) 

 

27Includes the following programs: Jail Diversion, Older Adults, HIV/AIDS, Primary and Behavioral Health Care Integration, and Healthy 

Transitions

28In December 2007, the TRAC reporting capability was incomplete. Once the system was completed, SAMHSA noted that the earlier manual 

calculation was done incorrectly. The correct formula is now programmed into the reporting system, which should minimize future reporting 

errors.
- 41 - 

Table 65: Measure 1.2.83: Percentage of clients receiving services who are currently employed (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 14.0 % Oct 31, 2013 

2012 14.0 % Oct 31, 2012 

2011 14.0 % Oct 31, 2011 

2010 14.0 % 17.2 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 21.1 % 13.1 %

(Target Not Met) 

2008 17.7 % 21.1 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 17.7 %

(Baseline) 

Table 66: Data Source and Validation for Mental Health – Other Capacity Activities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.2.05

1.2.82

1.2.83 

TRAC on-line data reporting and 

collection system. 

All TRAC data are automatically checked as they are 

input into TRAC. Validation and verification checks are 

run on the data as they are being entered. The system will 

not allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

Measure 1.2.05 is the percentage of clients receiving services who report improved functioning. The 

target was not met for FY 2010. This outcome is comprised of responses to questions about how 

effectively the consumer is able to deal with daily problems, the ability to control his or her life, the 

ability to deal with crisis, how well he or she is getting along with family members, how well he or she 

handles social situations and at work or school; and if symptoms are bothersome.

Measure 1.2.82, percentage of clients receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community (Outcome), and Measure 1.2.83, percentage of clients receiving services who are currently 

employed (Outcome), have been added to the Other Mental Health Capacity reporting. Both targets were 

exceeded in FY 2010. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Other Mental Health Capacity Activities measures was reduced 

leaving three measures in place. Measures 1.2.03, 1.2.06, 1.2.07, 1.2.08 and 1.2.09 were discontinued as 

these measures are too distant from actual program activities and the data sources are not maintained by 

SAMHSA. 
- 42 - 

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH - SCIENCE AND SERVICE ACTIVITIES

Table 67: Measure 1.4.06: Number of people trained by CMHS Science and Service Programs (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 3,390 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 4,237 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 4,237 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 4,237 5,835

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 4,237 3,534

(Target Not Met) 

2008 N/A 4,036

(Historical Actual) 

2007 N/A 4,852

(Historical Actual) 

Table 68: Measure 1.4.08: Percentage of participants who report implementing improvements in treatment methods 

on the basis of information and training provided by the program (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Oct 31, 2013 

2012 TBD Oct 31, 2012 

2011 Set Baseline Oct 31, 2011 

Table 69: Measure 1.4.09: Number of individuals trained by SAMHSA's Science and Services Program (HHS 

Strategic Plan Measure) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2015 49,746 December 31, 2015

2010 N/A 38,624

(Historical Actual)29

2009 N/A 45,462

(Historical Actual) 

2008 N/A 48,415

(Historical Actual) 

 

29NOTE: Data are preliminary and do not reflect all program accomplishments during FY 2010. Reporting periods for component programs vary 

and, therefore, are complete for only a portion of them. Final data for all programs will be available in August 2011. 
- 43 - 

Table 70: Data Source and Validation for Mental Health – Science and Service Activities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.4.06 Participant's direct report on standardized 

questionnaires administered at the 

completion of each training course. 

Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) 

data are automatically checked as they are input to SAIS. 

Validation and verification checks are run on the data as 

they are being entered. The system will not allow any data 

that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be saved 

into the database. HIV/AIDS Education and Statewide 

Family Network Training and Technical Assistance 

Center data validation procedures involve initial review 

and consultation with the site representative to resolve 

obvious discrepancies; double data entry and comparison; 

and several rounds of logical and edit checks. Note: These 

measures should be available through the TRAC system 

starting next year. 

1.4.08 TRAC on-line data reporting and 

collection system. 

All TRAC data are automatically checked as they are 

input into TRAC. Validation and verification checks are 

run on the data as they are being entered. The system will 

not allow any data that are out of range or violate skip 

patterns to be saved into the database. 

1.4.09 SAMHSA Performance Measure 

Measurement System(s) (TRAC, SAIS, 

PMART) 

To be determined

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

SAMHSA’s Science and Service programs are complements to the Capacity programs. The mental health 

programs within Science and Service include Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) 

Center of Excellence. This program disseminates best-practices information to grantees and the field, 

helping to ensure that SAMHSA’s Capacity programs build and improve services capacity in the most 

efficient, effective and sustainable way possible. The Science and Service programs are also an essential 

and cost-effective support to building effective capacity in communities that do not receive grant funds 

from SAMHSA. SAMHSA hopes to include additional data from more of its science and service 

activities in the future.

The purpose of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU) Center of Excellence is to continue 

the effort to network the 103 HBCUs throughout the United States and promote workforce development 

through expanding knowledge of best practices, leadership development and encouraging community 

partnerships that enhance the participation of African-Americans in the substance abuse treatment and 

mental health professions. The comprehensive focus of the HBCU – Center for Excellence will 

simultaneously expand service capacity on campuses and in other treatment venues.

The target for Measure 1.4.06 was exceeded. The number trained includes the Mental Health Care 

Provider Education (MHCPE) HIV/AIDS education training and the Historically Black Colleges and 

Universities (HBCU) National Resource Center for Substance Abuse and Mental Health training. 

MHCPE provides the majority of the number trained for this measure.
- 44 - 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Science and Service measures was reduced; leaving one measure in 

place while a new measure was added. Measure 1.4.07, a client satisfaction measure, was discontinued 

as SAMHSA has determined that client satisfaction is not useful in assessing the impact of TA efforts. 

The FY 2010 performance data were used to set the baselines for future targets. One measure has also 

been added which captures training efforts across SAMHSA Science and Service programs.
- 45 - 

MACRO PROGRAM INNOVATION AND EMERGING ISSUES - CSAP

PROGRAM MINORITY AIDS INITIATIVE30,31,32

Table 71: Measure 2.3.56: Number of individuals exposed to substance abuse/hepatitis education services (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 1,535 Aug 31, 2014 

2012 1,535 Aug 31, 2013 

2011 1,53533 Aug 31, 2012 

2010 2,327 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 2,305 3,431

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 2,283 3,298

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 2,260

(Baseline) 

Table 72: Measure 2.3.82: Percent of program participants that rate the risk of substance abuse as moderate or 

great (all ages) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 94.4 % Aug 31, 2014

2012 94.4 % Aug 31, 2013 

2011 94.4 % Aug 31, 2012 

2010 94.4 % Aug 31, 2011 

2009 Set Baseline 94.4 %

(Baseline) 

 

30Previously, data collected in a given FY were reported in the following year. For example, results for 2008 would reflect data collected in 

2007. In order to achieve consistency across SAMHSA, reporting has been revised so that results for a given FY reflect data actually collected in 

that year, except where otherwise noted.

31HIV Cohort 7 serves different population groups so baseline data from this cohort will be established and entered in FY 2011.

32The out years of this program are under development and performance measures will be added once the program is finalized. In the interim, 

targets for FY 2011 and FY 2012 have been included and are subject to change. 

33This measure is expected to decline and change from substance abuse/hepatitis education to substance abuse/HIV education in FY 2011 

following the close–out of Cohort 6 grants and newer Cohorts not yet functioning at optimum levels. Cohort 7 and later cohorts are not focusing 

on hepatitis education, but rather focusing on HIV education.
- 46 - 

Table 73: Measure 2.3.83: Percent of program participants who report no use of alcohol at pre-test who remain 

non-users at post-test (all ages) (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 91.2 % Aug 31, 2014 

2012 91.2 % Aug 31, 2013 

2011 91.2 % Aug 31, 2012 

2010 91.2 % Aug 31, 2011 

2009 Set Baseline 91.2 %

(Baseline) 

Table 74: Measure 2.3.84: Percent of participants who report no illicit drug use at pre-test who remain non-users at 

post-test (all ages) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 92.6 % Aug 31, 2014 

2012 92.6 % Aug 31, 2013 

2011 92.6 % Aug 31, 2012 

2010 92.6 % Aug 31, 2011 

2009 Set Baseline 92.6 %

(Baseline) 

Table 75: Data Source and Validation for Minority AIDS Initiative Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.82

2.3.83

2.3.84 

Data are provided by grantees. A webbased data collection and reporting 

mechanism has been implemented and all 

grantees have received training in using 

the system. 

Data are carefully collected, cleaned, analyzed, and 

reported by SAMHSA’s integrated Data Analysis 

Coordination and Consolidation Center (DACCC). After 

data are entered, the DACCC Data Management Team 

reviews the data for completeness and accuracy. 

Information on any data problems identified is transmitted 

through the use of "cleaning sheets" to the Government 

Project Officer (GPO) and the grantee to resolve. The 

Data Management Team then makes any required edits to 

the files. The edited files are then sent to SAMHSA staff 

and the DACCC Data Analysis Team for analysis and 

reporting. 
- 47 - 

Table 76: Data Source and Validation for Minority AIDS Initiative Grants (continued)

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.56 The number of persons provided direct 

technical assistance (TA) includes those 

served by several initiatives. These 

include: 1) the Center for the Application 

of Prevention Technology (CAPT) which 

provide TA to the SAMHSA CSAP 

discretionary program grantees, including 

the SPF-SIG, HIV and Methamphetamine 

grantees; and 2) the Fetal Alcohol 

Spectrum Disorders (FASD) Center of 

Excellence which provides TA to the 

FASD program. 

Each of these activities uses a quality control protocol for 

collecting and submitting its data and is overseen 

by SAMHSA staff. These data are then submitted to the 

Data Analysis Coordination and Consolidation Center 

(DACCC) for cleaning, editing and analysis before being 

used by SAMHSA for performance reporting and other 

analyses. More information can be found on the following 

websites: http://captus.samhsa.gov/home.cfm; 

http://www.fasdcenter.samhsa.gov/. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The goal of the Minority AIDS Initiative (MAI) is to prevent and reduce the onset of substance abuse and 

transmission of HIV among at-risk minority populations by delivering evidence-based substance abuse 

and HIV prevention interventions34

 

34Examples of HIV EBP’s include Voices/Voces and the Sista Program which is listed in the CDC Directory of Evidence Based Interventions 

(DEBI). More information on EBPs can be found in Identifying and Selecting Evidence-Based Interventions. Revised Guidance document for the 

Strategic Prevention Framework State Incentive Grant Program. HHS Pub. No. (SMA-4205). CSAP/SAMHSA, 2009. 

"

 and building local community capacity. The target populations 

include reentry (i.e., racial/ethnic minorities who have been released from prisons and jails within the past 

2 years); men having sex with men (MSM); Black, Latina, or Hispanic women; adolescents (age 12-17); 

young adults (age 18-24); and older adults (i.e. ages 50 and over). 

 

The MAI GPRA measures are designed to assess the program’s success in educating participants about 

the risks of substance abuse and its relation to HIV, improving participants’ perceptions of risk, 

maintaining non-user stability and reducing past 30-day use among participants who are already using 

substances. Exposure to education and improving perceptions of risk are monitored by the MAI program 

as there is a growing body of evidence suggesting that awareness and perceptions are antecedents to 

usage. Rates of nonuser stability (i.e. participants who were nonusers at pretest and continued as nonuser 

at posttest) and user decrease (i.e. participants who were users at pretest and reported decrease in use at 

posttest) serve as proxies for determining the short-term impact of program activities on participant-level 

substance use. 

 

 Data for FY 2009 showed mixed results. The program was successful in meeting its targets of exposing 

individuals to education services and improving perceptions of risk among participants. The program met 

only one of its targets related to participant-level substance use. Data showed that the MAI program was 

able to meet its target of decreasing alcohol use between pretest and posttest among participants ages 21 

and older. However, the MAI program did not meet the remaining targets related to improving rates of 

nonuser stability for alcohol or illicit drugs and decreasing illicit drug use between pretest and posttest. 

 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

http://www.samhsa.gov/shin”
- 48 - 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. For the MAI 

Program, measures were reduced by consolidating several of the youth and adult measures into a single 

measure. As a result, the perceived risks from substance abuse youth and adult measures (2.3.35 and 

2.3.38) have been merged into one new measure: 2.3.82; the alcohol non-user stability youth and adult 

measures (2.3.41 and 2.3.42) have been merged into one new measure: 2.3.83; and the illicit drug nonuser stability youth and adult measures (2.3.45 and 2.3.46) have been merged into one new measure: 

2.3.84. Baselines and targets for the new consolidated measures are based on FY 2009 performance data.

PROGRAM SOBER TRUTH ON PREVENTING UNDERAGE DRINKING (STOP ACT)

Table 77: Measure 3.3.01: Percentage of coalitions that report at least 5% improvement in the past 30-day use of 

alcohol in at least two grades35 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 46.7% Aug 31, 2014 

2012 46.7% Aug 31, 2013 

2011 41% Aug 31, 2012 

2010 41% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 40% 53.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 40%

(Baseline) 

Table 78: Measure 3.3.02: Percentage of coalitions that report improvement in youth perception of risk from 

alcohol in at least two grades (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 63.4% Aug 31, 2014 

2012 63.4% Aug 31, 2013 

2011 63.4% Aug 31, 2012 

2010 63.4% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 62.2% 53.8%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 60.9%

(Baseline) 

 

35The FY 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013 targets were based on the baseline number calculated last year using FY 2008 data (40.0%). This baseline 

is based on data submitted by these coalitions before they were awarded a STOP Act grant. Starting with FY 2009, CSAP is evaluating the impact 

of STOP Act funds on the outcome measures. To do this for the FY 2009 calculation, CSAP selected coalitions that submitted data collected after 

their STOP funds had a chance to make an impact. The cutoff point was 3 months after receipt of the grant award. Any data collected before that 

date were considered inappropriate for assessing the impact of STOP funds. Only 17 coalitions met this criterion in FY 2009 so the 53.3% is 

based on that very small number of grantees. Conversely, the baseline figure (40%) was based on data from a larger number of grantees, so CSAP 

has higher confidence in that number. Altering the targets through 2013 based on the small N in the 2009 data reported to date would probably 

result in targets that are not as realistic as the 41% based on a more representative sample of coalitions. For this reason, CSAP recommends 

keeping the targets as they are until more robust actuals can be collected.
- 49 - 

Table 79: Measure 3.3.03: Percentage of coalitions that report improvement in youth perception of parental 

disapproval on the use of alcohol in at least two grades (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 56.7% Aug 31, 2014 

2012 56.7% Aug 31, 2013 

2011 56.7% Aug 31, 2012 

2010 56.7% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 55.6% 42.9%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 

54.5%

(Baseline) 

Table 80: Data Source and Validation for STOP Act

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.3.01

3.3.02 

3.3.03

The STOP Act program provides 

additional funds to current or prior Drug 

Free Community Program (DFC) grantees 

to support activities targeting underage 

alcohol. As is the case with the DFC 

grantees, STOP ACT Grantees collect 

alcohol-related performance data using a 

variety of school and community surveys 

and report them online with the COMET 

(Coalition Online Management and 

Evaluation Tool) system every two years. 

According to the Act, STOP Act grantees 

cannot be required to collect data other 

than already being collected for DFC 

program. 

The baseline measures for three alcohol use measures, 

namely, past 30 day use, perception of risk and parent 

disapproval were developed as follows: each grantees was 

scored as a success (improved as described) or not a 

success for each of these alcohol measures. The number 

of successes was divided by the number of grantees for 

whom data were available and multiplied by 100 to arrive 

at these baseline numbers. Additional information on 

COMET can be found at 

http://www.ondcp.gov/dfc/comet.html. These data are 

submitted to DACCC for cleaning, editing and analysis 

before being used by SAMHSA for performance 

requirements and additional analyses. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The Sober Truth on Preventing Underage Drinking (STOP Act) program provides current or previously 

funded Drug Free Community (DFC) grantees with an additional $50,000 funding to support the 

implementation of environmental strategies aimed at preventing and reducing alcohol use among youth. 

The initial program, funded in FY 2008, provided 79 four-year grants to local communities. In FY 2009, 

22 more grants were awarded. STOP Act grantees are required to report performance on core measures 

that are consistent with those used for the Drug Free Community program—as instructed by 

Congressional language. These measures include 30-day alcohol use; perception of risk of harm from 

alcohol use; and parental disapproval of alcohol use. 

In FY 2009, results showed that the STOP Act program exceeded its performance target related to 
- 50 - 

reducing underage drinking. Based on available data, results showed that 53.3% of coalitions reported at 

least a 5% decrease of past 30-day use of alcohol in at least two grade levels—exceeding the target by 

over 13 percentage points (Target 40%; Actual 53.3%). However, the STOP Act program did not meet 

the remaining two performance targets regarding increasing youth perception of risk of harm from alcohol 

use (Target 62.2%; Actual 53.8%); as well as increasing youth perception of parental disapproval of 

alcohol use (Target 55.6%; Actual 42.9%).

To address participants’ perception of risk, as well as rates of parental disapproval of alcohol use, STOP 

Act grantees have begun implementing community-wide information dissemination campaigns, town hall 

meetings with public and private partners, and are working collaboratively with other local organizations 

to implement a number of activities such as sobriety check points, parent-student education forums, and 

new social hosting ordinances. It is expected that, over time, these activities will increase participants’ 

perceptions of risk, as well as rates of parental disapproval.

It is important to note that STOP Act grants are awarded annually and, as a result, stagger the years that 

grantees report their data. Therefore, performance data for FY 2009 reflect only a small number of 

grantees and, in turn, are not representative of the entire program (please see relevant footnotes for further 

details related to performance and future targets). 

PROGRAM PREVENTION - SCIENCE AND SERVICE ACTIVITIES 

Table 81: Measure 2.3.71: Number of people provided technical assistance (TA) services36 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 13,143 Aug 31, 2014 

2012 13,143 Aug 31, 2013 

2011 21,420 Aug 31, 2012 

2010 21,117 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 21,117 18,985

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 22,889

(Baseline)37

 

36Updated to include Center for the Application of Prevention Technology (CAPT), Native American Center of Excellence (NACE), Fetal 

Alcohol Spectrum Disorders Center of Excellence (FASD), MEI, and Prevention Fellowships.

37Actual has been updated from previously reported and now contains data from the additional science and service activities. 
- 51 - 

Table 82: Measure 2.3.74: Percentage of TA recipients who reported that the TA recommendations have been fully 

implemented38 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 60.2% Aug 31, 2014 

2012 60.2% Aug 31, 2013 

2011 54% Aug 31, 2012 

2010 54% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 54% 65.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 55.4%

(Baseline)39

Table 83: Measure 2.3.75: Number of persons receiving prevention information directly40 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 368 41 Aug 31, 2014 

2012 73,768 Aug 31, 2013 

2011 55042 Aug 31, 2012 

2010 120,223 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 120,223 505

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 122,992

(Baseline)43

 

38Includes only the CAPT.

39Actual has been updated from previously reported and now contains data from the additional science and service activities. 

40Includes Town Hall Meetings and FASD.

41

The Town Hall Meetings (THM) are conducted only in even–numbered years, so the targets in odd–numbered years reflect only the direct TA 

activities of FASD.

42

The Town Hall Meetings (THM) are conducted only in even–numbered years, so the targets in odd–numbered years reflect only the direct TA 

activities of FASD.

43Actual has been updated from previously reported and now contains data from the additional science and service activities. 
- 52 - 

Table 84: Measure 1.4.09: Number of individuals trained by SAMHSA's Science and Services Program (HHS 

Strategic Plan Measure) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2015 49,746 December 31, 2015 

2010 N/A 38,624

(Historical Actual)44

2009 N/A 45,462

(Historical Actual) 

2008 N/A 48,415

(Historical Actual) 

Table 85: Data Source and Validation for Prevention – Science and Service Activities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.71 The number of persons provided direct 

technical assistance (TA) includes those 

served by several initiatives. These 

include: 1) the Center for the Application 

of Prevention Technology (CAPT) which 

provide TA to the SAMHSA CSAP 

discretionary program grantees, including 

the SPF-SIG, HIV and Methamphetamine 

grantees; and 2) the Fetal Alcohol 

Spectrum Disorders (FASD) Center of 

Excellence which provides TA to the 

FASD program. 

Each of these activities uses a quality control protocol for 

collecting and submitting its data and is overseen 

by SAMHSA staff. These data are then submitted to the 

Data Analysis Coordination and Consolidation Center 

(DACCC) for cleaning, editing and analysis before being 

used by SAMHSA for performance reporting and other 

analyses. More information can be found on the following 

websites: http://captus.samhsa.gov/home.cfm; 

http://www.fasdcenter.samhsa.gov/. 

2.3.74 The CAPT collects data 2 months after TA 

completion either on site or electronically. 

These data are then submitted to the DACCC for 

cleaning, editing and analysis before being used 

by SAMHSA for performance reporting and other 

analyses. 

2.3.75 The participating Community-based 

Organizations (CBOs) collect this 

information by using an OMB approved 

evaluation form. 

These forms are sent with a coded postage-paid envelope, 

used for receipt tracking. Clarification of fields entered on 

the evaluation form is sought from the respondents and/or 

the website: http://www.stopalcoholabuse.gov/tow

nhallmeetings/. The data are entered into SPSS and MS 

Word for analysis and then submitted to DACCC for 

cleaning, editing and analysis before being used 

by SAMHSA for analyses. 

1.4.09 SAMHSA Performance Measure 

Measurement System(s) (TRAC, SAIS, 

PMART) 

To be determined

The Science and Services Activities program is an essential and cost-effective mechanism of providing 

information, training, and technical assistance (TA) aimed at increasing capacity among grantees and 

other prevention practitioners. While these activities are not always construed as direct services programs, 

 

44

NOTE: Data are preliminary and do not reflect all program accomplishments during FY 2010. Reporting periods for component programs vary 

and, therefore, are complete for only a portion of them. Final data for all programs will be available in August 2011. 
- 53 - 

they play an important role in advancing the field of substance abuse prevention and treatment. 

 

In FY 2009, available data show that the Science and Service Activities program has been successful in 

exceeding a number of performance targets related to satisfaction (Target 69.1%; Actual 84.3%), as well 

as implementation of recommendations (Target: 54%; Actual 65.1%). However, these data must be 

interpreted with caution as some activities (e.g. Town Hall Meetings) do not take place on an annual basis

and, therefore, contribute to differences in targets and program performance between even and oddnumbered fiscal years (please see relevant footnotes). In addition, a shift toward the training of trainers 

over the direct training of grantees and providers may also contribute to differences in performance 

targets during upcoming fiscal years.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. For the Science and 

Service Activities program, two measures were discontinued — leaving three measures in 

place. Specifically, measure 2.3.72 (Percentage of TA recipients who reported that there are very satisfied 

with the TA they received) was discontinued because it is not useful in assessing the impact of TA efforts. 

Also, measure 2.3.73 (Percentage of TA recipients who reported their ability to provide effective services 

improved a great deal) was also discontinued because self-assessment of effectiveness is not useful in 

capturing the impact of TA efforts. One measure has also been added which captures training efforts 

across SAMHSA Science and Service programs. Currently, the Science to Service Activities program is 

under administrative review at SAMHSA’s CSAP. Starting in FY 2012, measures may be changed and/or 

revised to reflect significant changes in this program. 
- 54 - 

MACRO PROGRAM INNOVATION AND EMERGING ISSUES - CSAT

PROGRAM SCREENING, BRIEF INTERVENTION AND REFERRAL TO TREATMENT 

Table 86: Measure 1.2.40: Number of clients served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 139,650 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 139,650 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 139,650 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 139,650 275,473

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 139,650 185,648

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 139,650 192,840

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 184,597 138,267

(Target Not Met) 

Table 87: Measure 1.2.41: Percentage of clients receiving services who had no past month substance use 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 50% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 50% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 50% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 50% 34%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 50% 34%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 48% 46.5%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 48% 45.7%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 88: Data Source and Validation for Screening, Brief Intervention and Referral to Treatment

Measure Data Source Data Validation

1.2.40

1.2.41 

Services Accountability Improvement 

System 

All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

SAIS. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow 

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 
- 55 - 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The target for numbers served in FY 2008, FY 2009, and FY 2010 were substantially exceeded. This 

measure reflects the number of clients who were screened through the SBIRT program. These clients may 

have screened negative, required a brief intervention, a brief treatment or a referral to treatment.

The target for number of clients receiving services who had no past month substance use, i.e., reported no 

use of alcohol or illegal drugs in the past 30 days at the six month follow-up assessment, was set at an 

appropriate target level, and the deviation from that level is slight. There was no effect on overall program 

or activity performance. 

Data show a general positive trend in number of clients served by year. From FY 2005 to FY 2006, there 

was an increase of approximately 27,000; from FY 2007 to FY 2010, there was a significant increase in 

the number of clients served. While FY 2008 to FY 2009 shows a decrease in number served, this is 

expected as a cohort of grantees ended during this time period. The outcome measure of abstinence has 

also had a general positive trend from FY 2005 to FY 2008; though this is not seen in FY 2009. In 2010, 

however, there was a decrease in the percent reporting abstinence at follow-up; data show that substance 

use rates upon intake to services was higher for clients served in this year as compared to previous years 

which serves to explain to trend.

PROGRAM ACCESS TO RECOVERY 

Table 89: Measure 1.2.32: Number of clients gaining access to treatment45 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 70,750 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 70,75046 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 33,500 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 65,000 69,552

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 65,000 89,595

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 30,000 50,845

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 50,000 79,150

(Target Exceeded) 

 

45Initial Access to Recovery grants were made in August 2004, close to the end of FY 2004. Services were not necessarily provided in the same 

year Federal funds were obligated. Thus, although the baseline reported for FY 2005 represented people served in FY 2005, most of the funding 

consisted of FY 2004 dollars. With the FY 2004 grants, it was estimated that 125,000 clients would be served over the three year grant period. 

The second cohort of grants was awarded in September 2007.

46The targets for numbers served for ATR were determined based on previous funding information for the third cohort of this Program. They 

have been published in the most recent RFA. As a result, FY 2012 targets have remained as published and not been adjusted based on funding 

levels in FY 2011.
- 56 - 

Table 90: Measure 1.2.33: Percentage of adults receiving services who had no past month substance use (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 83% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 83% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 82% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 82% 82.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 81% 81%

(Target Met) 

2008 80% 82.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 81% 84.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 91: Measure 1.2.35: Percentage of adults receiving services who had no/reduced involvement with the 

criminal justice system (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 96% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 96% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 96% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 96% 96.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 96% 96%

(Target Met) 

2008 96% 96%

(Target Met) 

2007 97% 97.6%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 92: Measure 1.2.36: Percentage of adults receiving services who had improved social support (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 91% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 91% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 91% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 91% 91.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 90% 91%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 90% 91.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 90% 75.1%

(Target Not Met) 
- 57 - 

Table 93: Data Source and Validation for Access to Recovery

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.2.32

1.2.33 

1.2.35 

1.2.36

Services Accountability Improvement 

System 

All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

SAIS. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow 

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

SAMHSA's CSAT uses a series of key output and outcome measures to assess the effectiveness of its 

Services Programs. The primary key output measure used is the number of clients served. This measure 

represents an unduplicated count of individuals who have received services through grants in Access to 

Recovery grants. All outcome measures are based on a follow-up assessment conducted six months post 

admission to the program. Abstinence from substance use is a key outcome of the program. This measure 

examines the substance use patterns of the clients. The percent reported reflects the percent of individuals 

who have reported no use of alcohol or illegal drugs in the past 30 days at follow-up six months post 

intake. The criminal justice measure refers to those clients who have reported no arrests in the past 30 

days. The social connectedness/support measure tracks the percent of people who attend self-help or 

support groups in support of their recovery. These measures combined provide a holistic view of the 

effectiveness of the services being provided by this program. 

The target for number of clients served was exceeded. Grantees performed exceptionally well once 

infrastructure and program processes were fully in place. Eleven (out of 24) Cohort 2 grantees had 

experience implementing ATR as they had also received Cohort 1 grants. This accounted for a very quick 

start-up for these 11 grantees. Grantees were able to begin serving clients within three months post award, 

which accounts for the spike in client numbers as compared to the original target set. The first cohort of 

grantees ended in FY 2007. The second cohort of ATR grantees began providing services in FY 2008. 

Targets for FY 2008 were set lower to allow the new grantees to develop the appropriate infrastructure for 

a voucher-based system. In addition, the focus on methamphetamine users in the second cohort may have 

led to more significant barriers to service than the ATR population at large; therefore, targets have been 

kept at levels that are achievable but still ambitious. Targets for FY 2008 and FY 2009 were set during 

ATR’s performance assessment in CY 2007. 

Data in FY 2010 show that targets were met or exceeded for criminal justice status, number served, social 

support and abstinence from use. While the employment target was not met, there was an upward trend in 

employment from FY 2009 to FY 2010. 

Data for the second cohort of ATR shows a positive trend in its key measure of number of clients served. 

This measure shows an increase in clients served of over 38,000 clients. Data show a decrease in number 

served from 2009 to 2010 though this is expected given the cohort of grantees in their last year of the 

program. Though data are available from FY 2005, trend data from that time through the present do not 

yield an appropriate comparison as a new cohort began in FY 2007. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 
- 58 - 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA continued to report number of clients served, abstinence from use, 

criminal justice involvement and social support. These measures provide a comprehensive view of the 

program. The housing, employment, and cost per client measures will no longer be reported for ATR as 

the remaining measures provide a comprehensive assessment of the program. 

PROGRAM TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR HOMELESSNESS (GBHI) 

Table 94: Measure 3.4.22: Percentage of clients receiving services who had no past month substance use 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 67.4 % Oct 31, 2013 

2012 67.4 % Oct 31, 2012 

2011 67.4 % Oct 31, 2011 

2010 67.4 % 66 %

(Target Not Met) 

2009 66.9 % 66.4 %

(Target Not Met) 

2008 N/A 66.9 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 95: Measure 3.4.23: Number of clients served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 7,005 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 7,005 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 7,005 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 7,005 5,398

(Target Not Met) 

2009 5,730 6,935

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 N/A 5,730

(Historical Actual) 
- 59 - 

Table 96: Measure 3.4.24: Percentage of clients receiving services who were currently employed or engaged in 

productive activities (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 32.7 % Oct 31, 2013 

2012 32.7 % Oct 31, 2012 

2011 32.7 % Oct 31, 2011 

2010 32.7 % 32 %

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 34.7 % 31.7 %

(Target Not Met) 

2008 N/A 34.7 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 97: Measure 3.4.25: Percentage of clients receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 25.6 % Oct 31, 2013 

2012 25.6 % Oct 31, 2012 

2011 25.6 % Oct 31, 2011 

2010 25.6 % 29.4 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 23.6 % 24.6 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 N/A 23.6 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 98: Data Source and Validation for GBHI

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.4.22

3.4.23

3.4.24

3.4.25 

Services Accountability Improvement 

System 

All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

SAIS. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow 

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. The target for number served in FY 2013 has been set in accordance with funding 

for FY 2012. 

SAMHSA’s CSAT manages two grant portfolios under its Grants for the Benefit of Homeless Individuals 

(GBHI) program, both of which provide focused services to individuals with a substance use disorder or 

who have co-occurring disorders. 
- 60 - 

The data show a positive trend in housing from FY 2008 through FY 2010 with an increase from 23.6% 

to 29% in the percent reporting being stably housed. Data also show that the target for abstinence was 

met and the target for employment was nearly met (missed by less than 1%). The number of clients 

served target was not met; however, this is due to a cohort of grantees ending in FY 2010 and using this 

year as a wind-down period. Since the final year of the grant is typically spent working toward successful 

close-out, it is not unusual for fewer clients to be served.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA will continue to report clients served, abstinence from use, housing, and 

employment. These measures serve to demonstrate the program goals and objectives. The social support 

and criminal justice involvement measures have been discontinued as they do not reflect key goals of the 

program. 

PROGRAM CRIMINAL JUSTICE - JUVENILE AND ADULT PROBLEM SOLVING DRUG 

COURTS 

Table 99: Measure 1.2.63: Percentage of juvenile clients receiving services who were currently employed or 

engaged in productive activities (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 88% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 88% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 88% Oct 31, 2011 

2009 88% 89%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 87% 86%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 87% 86%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 100: Measure 1.2.64: Percentage of juvenile clients receiving services who had a permanent place to live in 

the community (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 82% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 82% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 82% Oct 31, 2011 

2009 82% 79%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 81% 81%

(Target Met) 

2007 78% 80%

(Target Exceeded) 
- 61 - 

Table 101: Measure 1.2.65: Percentage of juvenile clients receiving services who had no involvement with the 

criminal justice system (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 95% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 95% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 95% Oct 31, 2011 

2009 93% 92%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 92% 94.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 91% 91%

(Target Met) 

Table 102: Measure 1.2.67: Percentage of juvenile clients receiving services who had no past month substance use 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 73% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 73% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 73% Oct 31, 2011 

2009 73% 73%

(Target Met) 

2008 72% 69%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 69% 71%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 103: Measure 1.2.70: Number of juvenile clients served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 1463 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 1463 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 1463 Oct 31, 2011 

2009 449 376

(Target Not Met) 

2008 929 783

(Target Not Met) 

2007 821 856

(Target Exceeded) 
- 62 - 

Table 104: Measure 1.2.72: Percentage of adult clients receiving services who were currently employed or engaged 

in productive activities47 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 57% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 57% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 57% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 57% 57%

(Target Met) 

2009 88% 63%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 105: Measure 1.2.73: Percentage of adult clients receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community48 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 43% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 43% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 42% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 42% 42.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 82% 41%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 106: Measure 1.2.74: Percentage of adult clients receiving services who had no involvement with the 

criminal justice system (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 93% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 93% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 93% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 93% 93%

(Target Met) 

2009 93% 95%

(Target Exceeded) 

 

47

Targets set for this measure in the FY 2010 President's Budget were based on Juvenile Drug Court data. Data for Adult Drug Courts clients is 

now available. As a result, the targets for FY 2010, 2011 and 2012 have been revised to be more appropriate to the population of this program. 

48Targets set for this measure in the FY 2010 President's Budget were based on Juvenile Drug Court data. Data for Adult Drug Courts clients is 

now available. As a result, the targets for FY 2010, 2011 and 2012 have been revised to be more appropriate to the population of this program. 
- 63 - 

Table 107: Measure 1.2.76: Percentage of adult clients receiving services who had no past month substance use 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 73% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 73% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 73% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 73% 85.4%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 73% 89%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 108: Measure 1.2.79: Number of adult clients served49 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 5,265 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 5,265 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 5,265 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 2,832 3,533

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 960 1,183

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 109: Data Source and Validation for Juvenile and Adult Problem Solving Drug Court Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.2.63

1.2.64

1.2.65

1.2.67

1.2.70

1.2.72

1.2.73

1.2.74

1.2.76

1.2.79 

Services Accountability Improvement 

System 

All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

SAIS. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The Drug Court program funds several types of grants including those specifically for juvenile or adult 

 

49Targets set for this measure in the FY 2010 President's Budget were based on Juvenile Drug Court data. Data for Adult Drug Courts clients is 

now available. As a result, the targets for FY 2010, 2011, and 2012 have been revised to be more appropriate to the population of this program.
- 64 - 

clients and those focused on families. SAMHSA reports performance data for the adult and juvenile drug 

courts separately. As a result, the juvenile and adult measures are both included in this document, but data 

and targets are reported separately based on which grants are currently funded (adult or juvenile). The last 

cohort of adult problem-solving court grants was funded in FY 2005 and FY 2006. During FY 2007 and 

FY 2008, no adult problem-solving courts were funded by SAMHSA. The current juvenile drug court 

grantees have been funded since FY 2006, but that funding ended in FY 2009 and a new cohort of grants 

for both juvenile and adult drug courts were awarded. 

SAMHSA's CSAT uses a series of key output and outcome measures to assess the effectiveness of its 

Services Programs. The primary output measure used is the number of clients served. This measure 

represents an unduplicated count of individuals who receive services through grants in Drug Court 

Program. All outcome measures are based on a follow-up assessment conducted six months post 

admission to the program. Abstinence from substance use is a key outcome of the program. This measure 

examines the substance use patterns of the clients. The percent reported reflects the percent of individuals 

who have reported no use of alcohol or illegal drugs in the past 30 days at follow-up. The measure of 

employment/education shows the percent of people employed or in school or a job training program. The 

criminal justice measure refers to those clients who have reported no arrests in the past 30 days. Stability 

in housing refers to the percent of people who own/rent their own house or apartment. These measures 

combined provide a holistic view of the effectiveness of the services being provided by this program. 

In the Adult Courts, targets for number served, criminal justice involvement, abstinence, and housing 

were all met or exceeded in FY 2010. Data show an upward trend in the number of clients served from 

FY 2009 to FY 2010 with over 3,000 clients being served in FY 2010. 

For Juvenile Drug Courts, the trend in number served from FY 2006 is consistent with expectations based 

on funding of juvenile drug court cohorts. The trend seen is positive from FY 2006 to FY 2007. From FY 

2008 to FY 2009, there was an expected decrease as the grant cohort ended. Abstinence increased over 

time with a 68% rate in FY 2006 and a 73% rate in FY 2009. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA has chosen to highlight key measures of the program which clearly 

illustrate the programs goals and objectives. The following measures have been selected for ongoing 

reporting: number served, abstinence from use, housing, employment and criminal justice involvement. 

PROGRAM CRIMINAL JUSTICE - EX-OFFENDER RE-ENTRY PROGRAM 

Table 110: Measure 1.2.80: Number of clients served (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 2,912 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 2,912 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 2,912 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 1,312 1,772

(Target Exceeded) 
- 65 - 

Table 111: Measure 1.2.81: Percentage of clients who had no past month substance use (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 69% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 69% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 70% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 68.9% 77.5%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 112: Measure 1.2.84: Percentage of clients receiving services who had no involvement with the criminal 

justice system (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 96 % Oct 31, 2013 

2012 95 % Oct 31, 2012 

2011 95 % Oct 31, 2011 

2010 97 % 94.9 %

(Target Not Met) 

Table 113: Data Source and Validation for Ex-Offender Re-Entry Grants

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.2.80

1.2.81

1.2.84 

Services Accountability Improvement 

System 

All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

SAIS. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

SAMHSA's CSAT uses a series of key output and outcome measures to assess the effectiveness of its 

Services Programs. The key output measure used is the number of clients served. This measure represents 

an unduplicated count of individuals who have received services through grants in Ex-Offender Re-Entry 

Program. All outcome measures are based on a follow-up assessment conducted six months post 

admission to the program. Abstinence from substance use is a key outcome of the program. This measure 

examines the substance use patterns of the clients. The percent reported reflects the percent of individuals 

who have reported no use of alcohol or illegal drugs in the past 30 days at follow-up. In addition, 

SAMHSA is measuring criminal justice as a key measure for this program.

Baseline data for these two measures has been determined based on the previous cohort of grantees. 

Targets for FY 2010 have been set in accordance with the baseline data.
- 66 - 

FY 2010 data show that targets for abstinence and clients served were exceeded. While the target for 

criminal justice involvement was not met, data still yield a very positive outcome with 95% of clients 

reporting no criminal justice involvement at follow-up. 

PROGRAM TREATMENT - OTHER CAPACITY50

Table 114: Measure 1.2.25: Percentage of adults receiving services who had no past month substance use 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 66% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 62% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 62% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 62% 67.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 61% 66%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 63% 62%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 63% 59%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 115: Measure 1.2.26: Number of clients served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 34,784 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 34,784 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 34,784 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 34,784 37,365

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 31,659 32,939

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 35,334 33,446

(Target Not Met) 

2007 35,334 35,516

(Target Exceeded) 

 

50Includes TCE General, HIV/AIDS Outreach, Addiction Treatment for Homeless Persons, Assertive Adolescent and Family Treatment, Family 

and Juvenile Drug Courts, Young Offender Re-Entry Program, Pregnant and Post-Partum Women, Recovery Community Service – Recovery, 

Recovery Community Service – Facilitating, and Child and Adolescent State Incentive Grants. 
- 67 - 

Table 116: Measure 1.2.27: Percentage of adults receiving services who were currently employed or engaged in 

productive activities (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 47% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 47% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 47% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 51% 46%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 50% 44%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 52% 54.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 52% 57%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 117: Measure 1.2.28: Percentage of adults receiving services who had a permanent place to live in the 

community (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 49% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 49% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 49% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 49% 49%

(Target Met) 

2009 49% 44%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 51% 47%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 53% 46%

(Target Not Met) 
- 68 - 

Table 118: Measure 1.2.29: Percentage of adults receiving services who had no involvement with the criminal 

justice system (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 96% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 95% Oct 31, 2012 

2011 95% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 95% 96%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 94% 96%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 96% 96%

(Target Met) 

2007 96% 96%

(Target Met) 

Table 119: Data Source and Validation for Treatment – All Other Capacity Activities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.2.25

1.2.26

1.2.27

1.2.28

1.2.29

Services Accountability Improvement 

System 

All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

SAIS. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow 

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

SAMHSA's CSAT uses a series of key output and outcome measures to assess the effectiveness of its 

Services Programs. The key output measure used is the number of clients served. This measure represents 

an unduplicated count of individuals who have received services through grants in Other Capacity 

programs. All outcome measures are based on a follow-up assessment conducted six months post 

admission to the program. Abstinence from substance use is a key outcome of these programs. This 

measure examines the substance use patterns of the clients. The percent reported reflects the percent of 

individuals who have reported no use of alcohol or illegal drugs in the past 30 days at six month followup. The measure of employment/education shows the percent of people employed, in school, or in a job 

training program. The criminal justice measure refers to those clients who have reported no arrests in the 

past 30 days. Stability in housing refers to the percent of people who own/rent their own house or 

apartment. These measures combined provide a holistic view of the effectiveness of the services being 

provided by the Other Capacity Programs.

The targets for housing, abstinence, criminal justice status, number served and negative consequences 

were either met or exceeded. 

Data on number served show a positive trend from FY 2005 to FY 2007. There was a slight downward 

trend from FY 2007 to FY 2008 and an increase from FY 2009 to FY 2010. Data on abstinence shows a 
- 69 - 

positive trend from FY 2005 to FY 2010 with a rate of 64.1% in FY 2005 and of 68% in FY 2010. While 

the target for employment was not met, data also show a positive trend in employment from 44% in 2009 

to 46% in 2010. Given the national situation with respect to unemployment, this upward trend is 

encouraging despite the targets being missed.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The social consequences and cost band measures are being discontinued as these 

measures do not meaningfully reflect the program goals. 

PROGRAM TREATMENT - SCIENCE AND SERVICE ACTIVITIES51

Table 120: Measure 1.4.01: Percentage of participants who report implementing improvements in treatment 

methods on the basis of information and training provided by the program (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 90% Oct 31, 2013 

2012 90% Oct 31, 2012

2011 90% Oct 31, 2011 

2010 90% 96.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 90% 82%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 90% 92%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 93% 90%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 121: Measure 1.4.02: Number of individuals trained per year (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 20,516 Oct 31, 2013 

2012 20,516 Oct 31, 2012 

2011 20,516 Oct 31, 2011 

2010 20,516 23,034

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 20,516 22,943

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 20,516 21,490

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 23,141 20,516

(Target Not Met) 

 

51Includes Knowledge Application Program, Faith Based Initiatives, Strengthening Treatment Access and Retention, Addiction Technology 

Transfer Centers, and SAMHSA Conference Grants. 
- 70 - 

Table 122: Measure 1.4.09: Number of individuals trained by SAMHSA's Science and Services Program (HHS 

Strategic Plan Measure) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2015 49,746 December 31, 2015 

2010 N/A 38,624

(Historical Actual)52

2009 N/A 45,462

(Historical Actual) 

2008 N/A 48,415

(Historical Actual) 

Table 123: Data Source and Validation for Treatment – Science and Service

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

1.4.01

1.4.02

Services Accountability Improvement 

System 

All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

SAIS. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow 

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 

1.4.09 SAMHSA Performance Measure 

Measurement System(s) (TRAC, SAIS, 

PMART) 

To be determined

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The output measure used for this program is number of participants trained, which reflects the total 

number of participants who attended a SAMHSA CSAT-funded training, meeting, or received technical 

assistance. The outcome measure used reflects whether or not information from the event has been used 

to make practice changes. The output and outcome targets were either met or exceeded, including: 

implementing improvements in treatment methods and increasing the number of clients served. 

From FY 2005, there was a downward trend in number of clients served to the number served in FY 2006 

and FY 2007. However, this is consistent with the number of programs included in this reporting group. 

From FY 2007 to FY 2009, there is a positive trend with 22,943 participants trained as compared to 

20,516. FY 2010 data show that targets for application of information and number of participants trained 

were met. Data show that there was an upward trend in the number trained from 2007 through 2010 with 

the numbers increasing from over 20,000 to over 23,000. Data also show that there was stability in the 

percentage of those reporting satisfaction with the event with a consistent 95% reporting being satisfied 

with the quality of the event.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

 

52NOTE: Data are preliminary and do not reflect all program accomplishments during FY 2010. Reporting periods for component programs vary 

and, therefore, are complete for only a portion of them. Final data for all programs will be available in August 2011. 
- 71 - 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA has elected to retain two key program measures: number of participants 

trained and application of the information. These measures will clearly indicate the extent to which 

information gained from trainings has been put to practical use. One measure has also been added which 

captures training efforts across SAMHSA Science and Service programs.

 
- 72 - 

MACRO PROGRAM CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 

Table 124: Measure 3.2.16: Number of children receiving services (Output)53 

FY Target Result 

2013 4,930 Dec 24, 2013 

2012 4,93054 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 13,051 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 13,051 4,930

(Target Not Met) 

2009 13,051 10,762

(Target Not Met) 

2008 10,000 13,051

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 9,120 10,871

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 125: Measure 3.2.25: Percentage of children receiving services who report social support (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 87.6 % Dec 31, 2013 

2012 87.6 % Dec 31, 2012 

2011 87.6 % Dec 31, 2011 

2010 87.6 % 85.7 %

(Target Not Met) 

2009 82.5 % 87.6 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 82.5 %

(Baseline) 

 

53 FY 2010 source for this measure has been transferred from the cross-site evaluation to the TRAC data collection system. The lower actual and 

subsequent targets are due to the fact that grantee use of the TRAC system is slower than expected. 54Target has been reset to reflect 2010 actual.
- 73 - 

Table 126: Measure 3.2.26: Percentage of children receiving services who report improved functioning (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 50.2 % Dec 31, 2013 

2012 50.2 % Dec 31, 2012 

2011 50.2 % Dec 31, 2011 

2010 50.2 % 51.3 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 49.6 % 50.2 %

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 49.6 %

(Baseline) 

Table 127: Measure 3.2.27: Number of people in the mental health and related workforce trained in specific mental 

health-related practices/activities as a result of the program (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 TBD Dec 31, 2012 

2011 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2011 

Table 128: Measure 3.2.28: Number of organizations that entered into formal written tier/intra-organizational 

agreements (e.g. MOUs/MOAs) to improve mental health-related practices/activities as a result of the grant (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 TBD Dec 31, 2013 

2012 TBD Dec 31, 2012 

2011 Set Baseline Dec 31, 2011 

Table 129: Data Source and Validation for Children’s Mental Health Services

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.2.16 

3.2.25

3.2.26

3.2.27

3.2.28 

TRAC All data are automatically checked as they are input to 

TRAC. Validation and verification checks are run on the 

data as they are being entered. The system will not allow 

any data that are out of range or violate skip patterns to be 

saved into the database. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The FY 2010 target for the number of children served (3.2.16) was not met, which reflects the data 
- 74 - 

collection moving from the cross-site evaluation to the SAMHSA TRAC system. In addition, in FY 2008, 

16 grantees completed their grant funding cycle and SAMHSA awarded 18 new grants. In FY 2009, 6 

grantees completed their grant funding cycle, and SAMHSA awarded 20 new grants. The first year of the 

grant is a planning year, and grantees do not enroll children in services. In addition, the communities 

funded in FY 2004 were in the final year of their funding cycle in FY 2010, when historically, enrollment 

into services declines. These trends in the currently funded group of grantees are likely to have a 

significant impact on the number of children and youth served in the CMHI program. The 2013 target 

reduction reflects data collection efforts moving from the cross-site evaluation to the SAMHSA 

Transformation Accountability (TRAC) system. This result is significantly lower than the previously 

reported estimated number served due to the fact that not all grantees are fully utilizing the TRAC system. 

This is the result of factors such as delays in human subjects review at some sites and various 

staffing/budget constraints.

The CMHI cross site evaluation has found that twenty-four months after enrollment in CMHI services, 

children and youth demonstrated a variety of improved clinical and functional outcomes. Many caregivers 

(40.3%) reported that their children’s overall behavioral and emotional strengths had increased, and 47.7 

percent reported that their children exhibited decreased maladaptive emotional and behavioral symptoms. 

In fact, the percentage of children and youth aged 6–18 whose emotional and behavioral problems were in 

the clinical range dropped from 83.1 percent at intake to 62.5 percent after 24 months. 

In addition, many youth aged 11 and older (23.3%) reported that they experienced fewer symptoms of 

depression and 30.7 percent reported fewer symptoms of anxiety. The percentage of caregivers reporting 

that their children and youth had contemplated attempting suicide during the previous 6 months fell from 

29.0 percent at intake to 14.0 percent at 24 months. Similarly, the percentage of caregivers reporting their 

children and youth had attempted suicide in the previous 6 months fell from 9.4 percent at intake to 2.8 

percent at 24 months. 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of CMHI measures was reduced to a total of five remaining measures. 

Of these five measures, four are new measures for the program as all GPRA data collection has been 

moved from the cross-site evaluation to the SAMHSA TRAC system. The FY 2010 performance data 

were used to set the baselines for future targets.
- 75 - 

MACRO PROGRAM PROJECTS TO ASSIST IN THE TRANSITION FROM 

HOMELESSNESS 

Table 130: Measure 3.4.15: Percentage of enrolled homeless persons who receive community mental health 

services (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 50% Jul 31, 2014 

2012 47% Jul 31, 2013 

2011 47% Jul 31, 2012 

2010 47% Jul 31, 2011 

2009 46% 49%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 45% 47%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 45% 37%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 131: Measure 3.4.16: Number of homeless persons contacted (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 182,000 Jul 31, 2014 

2012 182,000 Jul 31, 2013 

2011 182,000 Jul 31, 2012 

2010 160,000 Jul 31, 2011 

2009 151,000 165,954

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 150,000 134,932

(Target Not Met) 

2007 157,500 142,352

(Target Not Met) 
- 76 - 

Table 132: Measure 3.4.17: Percentage of contacted homeless persons with serious mental illness who become 

enrolled in services (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 55% Jul 31, 2014 

2012 55% Jul 31, 2013 

2011 55% Jul 31, 2012 

2010 55% Jul 31, 2011 

2009 55% 50%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 55% 54%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 45% 55%

(Target Exceeded)55

Table 133: Measure 3.4.20: Number of PATH providers trained on SSI/SSDI Outreach, Access, Recovery (SOAR) 

to ensure eligible homeless clients are receiving benefits (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 5,420 Dec 31, 2013 

2012 5,420 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 5,420 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 4,927 10,267

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 4,927 5,104

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 4,927

(Baseline) 

Table 134: Data Source and Validation for PATH

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.4.15

3.4.16

3.4.17

3.4.20 

Data are submitted annually to SAMHSA 

by States, which obtain the information 

from local human service agencies that 

provide services. 

SAMHSA's CMHS has developed additional error checks 

to screen data and contacts States and local providers 

concerning accuracy when data is reported outside 

expected ranges. CMHS has also issued guidance to all 

States and localities on data collection and monitors 

compliance with data collection through increased site 

visits to local PATH-funded agencies. 

 

55Revised from previously reported result. In order to more accurately reflect the true outcome of the measure Percentage of contacted persons 

with SMI who are enrolled in services, the calculation has been revised. Prior calculations used the entire number contacted as the denominator. 

The revised calculation will use only those who are eligible for services as the denominator. Eligibility criteria are defined as consumers who are 

experiencing homelessness or are at imminent risk of homelessness and have Serious Mental Illness (SMI) including co-occurring substance use 

disorders
- 77 - 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

The PATH legislation mandates that the program targets persons with serious mental illness (SMI) who 

may also experience a co-occurring substance use disorder who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. 

Measure 3.4.15 reflects the PATH program’s legislative intent to provide a link to mental health and 

community-based services.

In 2009, SAMHSA initiated efforts to change the way PATH grantees report on persons served/enrolled 

for the PATH annual report. Grantees reported on all persons served with Federal and State match funds 

and not just persons served with Federal PATH funds only (as was done in the past). This change was 

initiated in order to better align PATH data collection efforts with the U.S. Department of Housing and 

Urban Development’s (HUD) Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), an outcome-based 

reporting system. This change in calculation resulted in exceeding the FY 2009 target. 

Measure 3.4.16 captures the number of homeless persons contacted by PATH providers. Persistent and 

consistent outreach and the introduction of services at the client's pace are important steps to engaging 

homeless persons with serious mental illness (SMI) and to beginning the process of linking them to 

housing, mental health, substance abuse, case management and other supportive services. In FY 2009, 

the target was exceeded for this measure using the revised calculation referenced above.

Measure 3.4.17 is an indicator of the rate of enrollment for PATH-eligible individuals. PATH enrollment 

is defined as: The individual is determined to be “PATH Eligible,” (i.e. experiencing Severe Mental 

Illness and homelessness or imminent risk of homelessness); the PATH worker established engagement 

with the individual (the individual has agreed to work towards a goal with the PATH worker); the PATH 

worker opened an individual file that contains demographic information, documentation of PATH 

eligibility, mutual agreement for the provision of services, and services provided. 

 

In 2007, the calculation for this measure was revised to more accurately reflect only those eligible for 

services: persons who are experiencing serious mental illness and who are homeless or at imminent risk 

of homelessness. The new target was set at 55% and was not met in FY 2009 due in large part to staff 

reductions and stricter State definitions of enrollment. The calculation for this measure was revised to 

more accurately reflect the true outcome. Prior calculations used the entire number contacted in the 

calculation. The revised calculation uses only those eligible for services, which explains why the 2007 

target was exceeded by 10 percent. The 2008 target was missed by one percent.

Measure 3.4.20 is a measure of a key output of the program: The number of PATH providers trained on 

Supplemental Security Income/Social Security Disability Insurance (SSI/SSDI) Outreach, Access, and 

Recovery (SOAR). The target for 2009 was exceeded, and 19,220 have been trained since the initiative 

began. This output is important in that once trained, PATH providers are better able to assist PATH 

clients in applying for and getting the income benefits for which they are eligible.56

 

56Supplemental Security Income (SSI) and Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) are disability income benefits administered by the Social 

Security Administration (SSA) that generally also provide either Medicaid and/or Medicare health insurance to individuals who are eligible. 

Accessing these benefits is often a critical first step in recovery. For people, who are homeless with mental health problems that impair cognition 

or who are returning to the community from institutions (jails, prisons or hospitals), access to these programs can be extremely challenging. The 

application process for SSI/SSDI is complicated, detailed, and often difficult to navigate. Typically, about 10-15 percent of individuals who are 

homeless have these benefits. Fifteen percent of individuals who are homeless have these benefits.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 
- 78 - 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of PATH measures was reduced leaving four measures in place. 

Measure 3.4.18 was deleted as SAMHSA is reviewing its efficiency measures to determine the best 

approach to achieve meaningful efficiency outcomes.
- 79 - 

MACRO PROGRAM REGULATORY AND OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS

PROGRAM PROTECTION & ADVOCACY 

Table 135: Measure 3.4.12: Number of people served by the PAIMI program (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 17,90057 Jul 31, 2014 

2012 22,325 Jul 31, 2013 

2011 22,325 Jul 31, 2012 

2010 22,325 Jul 31, 2011 

2009 22,325 16,951

(Target Not Met) 

2008 22,325 17,468

(Target Not Met) 

2007 23,500 18,694

(Target Not Met) 

Table 136: Measure 3.4.19: Number attending public education/constituency training and public awareness 

activities (Output)

FY Target Result 

2013 92,95358 Oct 31, 2014 

2012 92,95359 Oct 31, 2013 

2011 120,000 Oct 31, 2012 

2010 120,000 Oct 31, 2011 

2009 120,000 92,953

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 120,000 83,070

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 119,423

(Baseline) 

 

57Target was reduced to reflect most recent actual given previous two years of performance results were off nearly 30 percent and is not related 

to 2012 budget levels.

58Target was reduced to reflect most recent actual given previous two years of performance results were off nearly 30 percent and is not related 

to 2012 budget levels.

59Target was reduced to reflect most recent actual given previous two years of performance results were off nearly 30 percent and is not related 

to 2012 budget levels. 
- 80 - 

Table 137: Measure 3.4.21: Increase percentage of complaints of alleged abuse, neglect, and rights violations

substantiated and not withdrawn by the client that resulted in positive change through the restoration of client rights, 

expansion or maintenance of personal decision-making, or elimination of other barriers to personal decision-making, 

as a result of PAIMI involvement (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2013 87.0 % Jul 31, 2014 

2012 87.0 % Jul 31, 2013 

2011 87.0 % Jul 31, 2012 

2010 87.0 % Jul 31, 2011 

2009 N/A 88.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

2008 N/A 87.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

2007 N/A 86.0 %

(Historical Actual) 

Table 138: Data Source and Validation for Protection and Advocacy

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

3.4.12

3.4.21 

Data are derived from standardized annual 

Program Performance Reports in which 

grantees estimate the potential number of 

individuals impacted through a predefined list of 7 possible interventions 

(e.g., group advocacy non-litigation, 

facility monitoring services, class 

litigation). 

The information provided in the annual reports is checked 

for reliability during on-site PAIMI Program visits, 

annual reviews, and budget application reviews. 

3.4.19 Data are derived from standardized annual 

Program Performance Reports in which 

grantees estimate the potential number of 

individuals impacted through a predefined list of 7 possible interventions 

(e.g., group advocacy non-litigation, 

facility monitoring services, class 

litigation). The cost measure is calculated 

by using the total PAIMI allotment as the 

numerator and the total number of persons 

served/impacted as the denominator. 

The information provided in the annual reports is checked 

for reliability during on-site PAIMI Program visits, 

annual reviews, and budget application reviews. 

As this program’s grant awards are made late in the fiscal year, performance targets and results for any 

given fiscal year primarily reflect the outputs and outcomes associated with activities supported by 

funding from the prior fiscal year. Therefore, FY 2012 appropriated funding will be reflected in the 

targets set for FY 2013. 

Measure 3.4.21 the percentage of complaints of alleged abuse, neglect and rights violations not 
- 81 - 

withdrawn by the client that resulted in positive change for the client in the safety or welfare of their 

environment, as a result of PAIMI involvement. This new measure is a combination of the three areas of 

focus. 

Measure 3.4.12 is the number of people served by the PAIMI program. The FY 2009 target was not met. 

Performance for this measure is the most erratic because of the number of factors that can influence the 

outcome that are inherent in the nature of the PAIMI Program which includes both an individual case and 

systemic focus. This balance shifts over time from a more individual case emphasis to a more systemic 

emphasis not only within individual programs but nationally across all programs as well. Also, the casemix can impact this outcome, as individuals with more complex and extensive needs will require more 

time and resources which will reduce the total number of persons that can be served. Finally, although the 

program provides education and outreach, the number of persons served is ultimately determined by the 

number of persons who seek services which may vary over time. Because of all of these factors, the target 

for FY 2013 has been adjusted downward. Our expectation, which appears to have been incorrect, was 

that individual PAIMI programs would continue to increase the number of individual clients that they 

serve. What appears to be happening is that with little additional funding and increasing demands, they 

are focusing more on systemic activities which impact a much broader population than the individual case 

work. 

Steps are being taken to improve the program performance for the PAIMI Program. A PAIMI Program 

Peer Review process is in place for the Annual Program Performance Report which assesses and provides 

specific feedback regarding strengths and weaknesses of the program as well as specific 

recommendations for ongoing quality improvement. Also, the PAIMI Programs within each State 

Protection & Advocacy (P&A) agency are monitored via on-site reviews on a regular schedule. These onsite monitoring reviews are conducted by independent consultants and provide SAMHSA with an 

assessment of key areas: governance, legal, fiscal and consumer/constituent services/activities of the 

State’s PAIMI Program. Following these site visits, the consultants issue a report that summarizes its 

program findings and when appropriate, may include recommendations for technical assistance and/or 

corrective action. These steps are expected to improve performance so that annual and long-term targets 

can be met.

A baseline was set for measure 3.4.19, the number attending public education/ constituency training and 

public awareness activities, in FY 2007. The FY 2009 target was not met, although performance 

improved nearly 12% over FY 2008 performance. The FY 2012 and FY 2103 targets have been revised 

to reflect the most recent actual.

The first external evaluation in the 24-year history of the PAIMI program was completed in 2010. The 

evaluation found that individual PAIMI Programs provide those with psychiatric disabilities a voice in the 

exercise of their rights and are highly successful in achieving client and system goals and objectives. The 

PAIMI Program contributes to the transformation of this Nation’s mental health system into a more open, 

adaptive system that promotes recovery. The PAIMI Act60

 

60The Protection and Advocacy Act for Individuals with Mental Illness (PAIMI) Act of 1986, Public Law 99-319 

allows each PAIMI Program to establish its 

own priorities and activities, as long as those activities further the cause of ensuring the rights of 

individuals with psychiatric disabilities under the U.S. Constitution and Federal and state statutes. 

Grantees report a high degree of goal achievement. Twenty percent of grantees sampled report that they 

met or partially met all projected goals and objectives. Overall, grantees reported having met 93 percent 

of targeted goals and objectives. However, only four of 20 P&A executive directors reported no cutbacks 

in goals due to insufficient resources.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 
- 82 - 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. Measures 3.4.08, 3.4.09, and 3.4.10 were combined into one measure (now 3.4.21) 

as the results of the separate measures were similar. Measure 3.4.11 was deleted as performance was at a 

high level for the past several fiscal years. Measures 3.4 13 and 3.4.14 were deleted as SAMHSA is 

reviewing its efficiency measures to determine the best approach to achieve meaningful efficiency 

outcomes. 
- 83 - 

PROGRAM PUBLIC AWARENESS AND SUPPORT ACTIVITIES 

Table 139: Measure 2.3.76: Number of persons receiving prevention information indirectly from advertising, 

broadcast, or website61 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2013 1,250,000 Aug 31, 2014 

2012 1,250,000 Aug 31, 2013 

2011 906,707 Aug 31, 2012 

2010 906,707 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 906,707 1,443,077

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 1,211,382

(Baseline)62

Table 140: Measure 4.4.06: Percentage of persons reporting knowledge of how to find treatment services for 

mental and substance use disorders (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2012 TBD Jun 1, 2013 

2011 TBD Jun 1, 2012 

2010 Set Baseline Jun 1, 2011 

Table 141: Measure 4.4.07: Percentage of persons indicating they were screened by a health care provider for 

mental and substance use disorder (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2012 TBD Jun 1, 2013 

2011 TBD Jun 1, 2012 

2010 Set Baseline Jun 1, 2011 

Table 142: Measure 4.4.09: Percentage of parents reporting they are comfortable talking to their children about 

alcohol and drugs (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2012 TBD Jun 1, 2013 

2011 TBD Jun 1, 2012 

2010 Set Baseline Jun 1, 2011 

 

61Includes Town Hall Meetings, FASD, and MEI (Community Outreach).

62Actual has been updated from previously reported and now contains data from the additional science and service activities. 
- 84 - 

Table 143: Data Source and Validation for Public Awareness and Support Activities

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

2.3.76 Participating Community-based 

organizations (CBOs) collect this 

information from the media. 

These forms are sent with a coded postage-paid envelope, 

used for receipt tracking. Clarification of fields entered on 

the evaluation form is sought from the respondents and/or 

the website: http://www.stopalcoholabuse.gov/tow

nhall/. The data are entered into SPSS and MS Word for 

analysis and then submitted to DACCC for cleaning, 

editing and analysis before being used by SAMHSA for 

analyses. 

4.4.06

4.4.07

4.4.08

4.4.09 

Data source under development. SAMHSA will work with the contractor to ensure 

sufficient checks are in place to ensure the quality of the 

data. Details will be provided at a later date. 

The use of communications and marketing principles and techniques is a well-established, science-based 

strategy capable of influencing a target audience to voluntarily accept, reject, modify, or abandon a 

behavior for the benefit of individuals, groups, or society as a whole. Opportunities for preventing or 

intervening early to mitigate the morbidity and mortality associated with mental and substance use 

disorders are often missed. Behavioral health is essential to health and public understanding of this 

concept is key to improving health status and reducing costs to families, communities, and governments. 

A transmedia approach will be used to reach diverse US populations, each having a distinct set of wants, 

needs, and communication channels in order to obtain these measurements.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures (measures 4.4.04 

and 4.4.05 were deleted and measures 4.4.06, 4.4.07, 4.4.08, and 4.4.09 were added). This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. A summary table detailing these changes is attached to this document.
- 85 - 

PROGRAM PERFORMANCE AND QUALITY IMPROVEMENT SYSTEMS 

Table 144: Measure 4.4.10: Combined count of webpage hits, hits to the locator, and hits to SAMHDA for 

SAMHSA-supported data sets (Output)

FY Target Result 

2012 6,000,300 Dec 31, 2012 

2011 5,585,000 Dec 31, 2011 

2010 5,195,000 3,716,660

(Target not met)

2009 Set Baseline 4,833,000

(Baseline) 

Table 145: Measure 4.4.11: Number of evidence-based programs or practices in review (Output)

FY Target Result 

2012 44 Aug 1, 2012 

2011 42 Aug 1, 2011 

2010 40 40

(Target Met) 

2009 Set Baseline 40

(Baseline) 

Table 146: Data Source and Validation for Performance and Quality Improvement Systems

Measure Data Source Data Validation 

4.4.10 Data is collected from the contractors who 

manage the Treatment Locator and 

SAMHDA websites via standard tracking

software measuring unique hits 

These numbers are provided to the COTRs via email at 

the end of each month and on January second of the next 

year. Validation checks are reviewed at that time. Data 

are maintained by the COTRs for each project. 

4.4.11 The number of evidence based practices 

under review are provided to the COTR 

via monthly progress reports and totaled at 

the end of each year. 

Data are reviewed and filed in the COTRs working file 

with the original reports sent to the Government project 

file. 

The National Surveys are implemented using multi-year or base and option year contracts and as a result 

have different funding schedules than grants. There is no delay between fiscal year funding and the 

performance year. As a result, FY 2013 targets have not been set for these performance measures as they 

have been for programs that are funded using grants.

CBHSQ has developed two new measures that focus on key activities within CBHSQ. 4.4.10 is a 

combined count of webpage hits to the treatment locator and Substance Abuse and Mental Health Data 

Archive (SAMHDA). Our baseline target for these combined measures is 4.5 million hits during calendar 

year 2010 ending December 31. This output provides information into a critical function of CBHSQ in 
- 86 - 

terms of disseminating information on where and what kinds of treatment are available across the nation 

and access to data collected through the National Surveys. Measure 4.4.11 is a new area for CBHSQ and 

provides information on the productivity of SAMHSA in relation to providing information to the public 

on evidence based programs and practices. The target of 40 new programs and practices was met 2010 

and we expect to achieve a 5 percent increase each year. By FY 2012, we expect that this will set a 

maintenance target where we will not fall below 44 new programs and practices under review each year.

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. CBHSQ eliminated three GPRA measures on timeliness because they did not 

accurately reflect the mission of the Center.
- 87 - 

DISCONTINUED PERFORMANCE MEASURES

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH BLOCK GRANT 

Table 147: Measure 2.3.07: Reduce rate of adult readmissions to State psychiatric hospitals within 30 days 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 9.3% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 8.5% 9.3%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 8.5% 9.4%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 8.7% 9.8%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 148: Measure 2.3.08: Reduce rate of adult readmissions to State psychiatric hospitals within 180 days 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 20% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 19% 21.5%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 19% 21.8%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 19.1% 20.3%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 149: Measure 2.3.09: Reduce rate of Child/adolescent readmissions to State psychiatric hospitals within 30 

days63 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 6.5% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 5.8% 7.5%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 5.8% 8.2%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 5.9% 6.7%

(Target Not Met) 

 

63Successful result is below target.
- 88 - 

Table 150: Measure 2.3.10: Reduce rate of Child/adolescent readmissions to State psychiatric hospitals within 180 

days64 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 14.5% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 13.9% 16.1%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 13.9% 17.1%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 14% 15.3%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 151: Measure 2.3.12: Adult: Percentage of adult population coverage for each (reported as percentage of 

service population receiving any evidence based practice)65 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 10.5% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 10.5% 8.6%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 10.5% 8%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 10.4% 9.4%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 152: Measure 2.3.13: Children: Percentage of population coverage for each (reported as percentage of 

service population receiving any evidence based practice)66 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 3.5% Sep 30, 2011 

2009 3.5% 3.2%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 3.5% 3%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 3.4% 3.2%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

 

64Successful result is below target.

65National average of evidence-based practices per state, based on 35 States reporting. Excludes Medication Management and Illness SelfManagement, which continue to undergo definitional clarification

66National average of evidence-based practices per state, based on 35 States reporting. Excludes Medication Management and Illness SelfManagement, which continue to undergo definitional clarification.
- 89 - 

Table 153: Measure 2.3.17: Number of persons receiving evidence-based practices per $10,000 of mental health 

block grant dollars spent (Efficiency)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 7.0 Sep 30, 2011 

2009 6.5 7.2

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 4.0 6.7

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 4.0 6.5

(Target Exceeded) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. SAMHSA believes 

this new group of GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended 

outcomes for SAMHSA programs. The number of MHBG measures was reduced leaving five measures 

in place. Measures 2.3.07 through 2.3.10 were all dropped given that the current rate of hospitalization is 

relatively infrequent given community alternatives. Measures 2.3.12 and 2.3.13 were combined (now 

measure 2.3.81) and reflects the evidence base practice coverage for both children and adults. Measure 

2.3.17 was dropped due to the fact that many populations do not have established EBPs. Subsequently, 

some grantees had relatively little success with this measure despite having excellent consumer 

outcomes. 

MACRO PROGRAM SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT BLOCK 

GRANT

PROGRAM TREATMENT ACTIVITIES 

Table 154: Measure 1.2.45: Increase the percentage of States and Territories that express satisfaction with 

Technical Assistance (TA) provided (Output)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 97% Nov 30, 2010 

2008 97% Nov 30, 200967

2007 97% 92%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

 

67The data for the final years of this measure are unavailable. 
- 90 - 

Table 155: Measure 1.2.47: Increase the percentage of States in appropriate cost bands (Efficiency)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 68% Nov 30, 2011 

2009 68% 77%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 67% 77%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 67% 65%

(Target Not Met) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. SAMHSA believes 

this new group of GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended 

outcomes for SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA is focusing on client-level outcomes as a measure of 

effectiveness for this Program. The measures which have been retained provide an appropriate 

assessment of whether the Program has met its goals/objectives.

PROGRAM PREVENTION SET-ASIDE

Table 156: Measure 2.3.53: Number of evidence-based policies, practices, and strategies implemented (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 7,000 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 7,000 17,290

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 7,000 10,393

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 11,000 17,056

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 157: Measure 2.3.54: Number of participants served in prevention programs (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 17,482,060 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 17,482,060 112,716,508

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 17,482,060 70,647,674

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 17,482,060 25,258,287

(Target Exceeded) 
- 91 - 

Table 158: Measure 2.3.63: Percent of states showing an increase in state level estimates of survey respondents 

who rate the risk of substance abuse as moderate or great (age 12-17) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 45.1% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 45.1% 58.8%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 45.1% 47.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 45.1%

(Baseline) 

Table 159: Measure 2.3.64: Percent of states showing an increase in state level estimates of survey respondents 

who rate the risk of substance abuse as moderate or great (age 18+) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 27.5% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 27.5% 29.4%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 27.5% 37.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 27.4%

(Baseline) 

Table 160: Measure 2.3.65: Percent of states showing a decrease in state level estimates of percent of survey 

respondents who report 30 day use of alcohol (age 12-20) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 51% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 51% 72.5%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 51% 52.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 51%

(Baseline) 
- 92 - 

Table 161: Measure 2.3.66: Percent of states showing a decrease in state level estimates of percent of survey 

respondents who report 30 day use of alcohol (age 21+) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 37.3% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 37.3% 35.3%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 37.3% 47.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 37.3%

(Baseline) 

Table 162: Measure 2.3.67: Percent of states showing a decrease in state level estimates of percent of survey 

respondents who report 30 day use of other illicit drugs (age 12-17) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 52.9% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 52.9% 56.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 52.9% 64.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 52.9%

(Baseline) 

Table 163: Measure 2.3.68: Percent of states showing a decrease in state level estimates of percent of survey 

respondents who report 30 day use of other illicit drugs (age 18+) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 33.3% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 33.3% 60.8%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 33.3% 37.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 33.3%

(Baseline) 
- 93 - 

Table 164: Measure 2.3.69: Percent of program costs spent on evidence-based practices (EBP) (Efficiency)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 71% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 71% 63.5%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 70% 75%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 69%

(Baseline) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. As a result of this 

review, the 9 measures associated with the 20% Prevention Set-Aside for Other Activities of the SABG 

have been recommended for discontinuation as prevention activities will be part of a new, consolidated 

grant program in FY 2012 known as the Substance Abuse-State Prevention Grant. Measures used for the 

20% Prevention Set-Aside will be considered, as appropriate, for assessing performance of the new 

Substance Abuse-State Prevention Grant program; however, performance measures for this new program 

are developmental and contingent upon funding. 

MACRO PROGRAM PREVENTION GRANTS

PROGRAM STRATEGIC PREVENTION FRAMEWORK STATE INCENTIVE GRANTS68 

Table 165: Measure 2.3.19: 30-day use of alcohol among youth age 12-17 (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 Discontinued N/A 

2010 15% Dec 31, 2011 

Table 166: Measure 2.3.20: 30-day use of other illicit drugs age 12 and up (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2013 Discontinued N/A 

2010 5% Dec 31, 2011 

 

68Data have been revised from previously reported. Previously, data collected in a given year were reported as a result for the following year: for 

example, results reported for 2008 reflected data collected in 2007. In order to achieve consistency throughout SAMHSA, reporting has been 

revised so that results reported for a given year reflect data actually collected in that year, so that results for 2008 reflect data collected in 2008.
- 94 - 

Table 167: Measure 2.3.21: Percent of SPF SIG States showing a decrease in state level estimate of percent of 

survey respondents (age 12-20) who report 30-day use of alcohol (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued69 N/A 

2010 50.4% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 50.4% 70.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 51.8% 55.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 51.8% 47.1%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 168: Measure 2.3.22: Percent of SPF SIG States showing a decrease in state level estimate of percent of 

survey respondents (age 21 and up) who report 30-day use of alcohol (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued70 N/A 

2010 31.4% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 31.4% 36.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 32.3% 47.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 32.3% 41.2%

(Target Exceeded)71

Table 169: Measure 2.3.23: Percent of SPF SIG states showing a decrease in state level estimates of survey 

respondents (age 12-17) who report 30-day use of other illicit drugs (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued72 N/A 

2010 59.8% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 59.8% 59.6%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 61.5% 67.6%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 61.5% 55.9%

(Target Not Met) 

 

69Includes Cohorts 3 & 4. Cohort 4 began the SPF process in July 2009.

70Includes Cohorts 3& 4. Cohort 4 began the SPF process in July 2009.

71Data revised from previously reported.

72Includes Cohorts 3 & 4. Cohort 4 began the SPF process July 2009.
- 95 - 

Table 170: Measure 2.3.24: Percent of SPF SIG states showing a decrease in state level estimates of survey 

respondents (age 18 and up) who report 30-day use of other illicit drugs (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued73 N/A 

2010 47.2% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 47.2% 59.6%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 48.5% 38.2%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 48.5% 29.4%

(Target Not Met)74

Table 171: Measure 2.3.25: Percent of SPF SIG states showing an increase in state level estimates of survey 

respondents (age 12-17) who rate the risk of substance abuse as moderate or great (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued75 N/A 

2010 78.7% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 78.7% 55.3%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 80.9% 47.1%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 80.9% 50%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 172: Measure 2.3.26: Percent of SPF SIG states showing an increase in state level estimates of survey 

respondents (age 18 and up) who rate the risk of substance abuse as moderate or great (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued76 N/A 

2010 50.4% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 50.4% 29.8%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 51.8% 44.1%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 51.8% 29.4%

(Target Not Met) 

 

73Includes Cohorts 3 & 4. Cohort 4 began the SPF process July 2009.

74Data revised from previously reported.

75Includes Cohorts 3 & 4. Cohort 4 began the SPF process July 2009.

76Includes Cohorts 3 & 4. Cohort 4 began the SPF process July 2009. 
- 96 - 

Table 173: Measure 2.3.27: Percent of SPF SIG states showing an increase in state level estimates of survey 

respondents (age 12-17) who somewhat disapprove or strongly disapprove of substance use (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued77 N/A 

2010 84.9% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 84.9% 70.2%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 87% 76.5%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 87.3% 67.6%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 174: Measure 2.3.28: Number of evidence-based policies, practices, and strategies implemented78 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued79 N/A 

2010 234 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 234 1404

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 470 731

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 470 385

(Target Not Met) 

Table 175: Measure 2.3.29: Percent of grantee states that have performed needs assessments (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 97%80 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 100% 92%

(Target Not Met)81

2008 100% 100%

(Target Met) 

2007 100% 100%

(Target Met) 

 

77Includes Cohorts 3 & 4. Cohort 4 is began the SPF process July 2009. 

78 This measure has been revised for the FY 2011 President's Budget. Previously the measure was cumulative. It has been revised to report its 

data annually. As a result, targets and data provided here may appear to differ from those previously published in the FY 2010 President's Budget. 

79Includes Cohorts 3 & 4. Cohort 4 began the SPF process July 2009.

80Cohort 1: 100%; Cohort 2: 100%; Cohort 3: 94%

81Revised from previous reports.
- 97 - 

Table 176: Measure 2.3.30: Percent of grantee States that have submitted State plans (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 60%82 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 95.2% 84.3%

(Target Not Met)83

2008 100% 95.2%

(Target Not Met)84

2007 85% 96.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 177: Measure 2.3.31: Percent of grantee States with approved plans (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 54%85 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 85.7% 82.4%

(Target Not Met)86

2008 100% 85.7%

(Target Not Met)87

2007 85% 88.5%

(Target Exceeded) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. As a result of this 

review, the 11 measures associated with the SPF SIG program have been recommended for 

discontinuation as prevention activities will be part of a new, consolidated grant program in FY 2012 

known as the Substance Abuse-State Prevention Grant. Measures used for SPF SIG will be considered, as 

appropriate, for assessing performance of the new Substance Abuse State Prevention Grant program; 

however, performance measures for this new program are developmental and contingent upon funding. 

 

82Cohort 1: 100%; Cohort 2: 100%;Cohort 3: 63%

83Revised from previous reports.

84Includes 100% of Cohort I and 2 and 88% of Cohort 3

85Cohort 1: 100%; Cohort 2: 100%; Cohort 3: 63%

86Revised from previous reports.

87Includes 100% of Cohort 1 and 2 and 88% of Cohort 3
- 98 - 

PROGRAM PARTNERSHIPS FOR SUCCESS 

Table 178: Measure 2.3.77: Increase the number of sub-recipient communities funded through the Partnerships for 

Success grants (Output)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

Table 179: Measure 2.3.78: Increase the number of communities who report an increase in prevention activities 

that are supported by collaboration and leveraging of funding streams (Output)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

Table 180: Measure 2.3.79: Increase the number of EBPs implemented by sub-recipient communities (Output)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

Table 181: Measure 2.3.80: Increase the number of sub-recipient communities that improved on one or more 

targeted NOMs indicators (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

MACRO PROGRAM INNOVATION AND EMERGING ISSUES - CMHS

PROGRAM CO-OCCURRING STATE INCENTIVE GRANTS

Table 182: Measure 1.2.17: Increase the number of persons with co-occurring disorders served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 103,679 94,034

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 103,679

(Baseline) 
- 99 - 

Table 183: Measure 1.2.18: Increase the percentage of treatment programs that screen for co-occurring disorders 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 68% 29%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 96.1%

(Baseline)88

Table 184: Measure 1.2.19: Increase the percentage of treatment programs that assess for co-occurring disorders 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 32% 17%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 76.4%

(Baseline)89

Table 185: Measure 1.2.20: Increase the percentage of treatment programs that treat co-occurring disorders 

through collaborative, consultative, and integrated models of care (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 53% 6%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 50.4%

(Baseline)90

 

88Previously reported result was calculated using erroneous unit of analysis. It has been revised from the FY 2010 President's Budget.

89Previously reported result was calculated using erroneous unit of analysis. It has been revised from the FY 2010 President's Budget.

90Previously reported result was calculated using erroneous unit of analysis. It has been revised from the FY 2010 President’s Budget.
- 100 - 

PROGRAM YOUTH VIOLENCE PREVENTION 

Table 186: Measure 3.2.05: Decrease the percentage of middle school students who have been in a physical fight 

on school property91 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 34% 22.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 34.4% 23.8%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 36% 34.4%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 30% 36.6%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 187: Measure 3.2.06: Decrease the percentage of high school students who have been in a physical fight on 

school property92 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 23% 15%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 23.7% 16.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 29% 23.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 24% 29.8%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 188: Measure 3.2.07: Decrease the percentage of middle school students who report current substance use 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 13% 14.5%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 13.7% 13.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 16% 13.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 16% 16%

(Target Met) 

 

91Successful result is below target

92Successful result is below target
- 101 - 

Table 189: Measure 3.2.08: Decrease the percentage of high school students who report current substance use 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 33% 33.6%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 33% 31.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 35% 33%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 35% 35%

(Target Met) 

Table 190: Measure 3.2.09: Increase the percentage of students attending school93 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 93% 94.5%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 93% 93%

(Target Met) 

2007 93% 95.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 191: Measure 3.2.21: Percentage of grantees that provided screening and/or assessments that is coordinated 

among two or more agencies or shared across agencies. (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 69% 63.3%

(Target Not Met)94

2009 68.1% 73.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 67.1% 62.4%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 66.1%

(Baseline) 

 

93Measure 3.2.09 will be retired from public reporting in FY 2010. Please see explanation in the narrative for this program. 

94This number includes data from a large cohort of grantees funded in 2009. The 2010 result is derived from 60 new grantees and 27 continuing 

grantees. Full implementation of services does not occur until later in 1st year of program. Thus decrease may reflect the impact of the larger new 

cohort.
- 102 - 

Table 192: Measure 3.2.22: Percentage of grantees that provide training of school personnel on mental health 

topics (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 67% 62.1%

(Target Not Met)95

2009 66.4% 73.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 65.4% 64%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 64.4%

(Baseline) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, 

and consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group 

of GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The overall number of Youth Violence Prevention measures was reduced. 

Measures 3.2.05 and 3.2.06 were combined (new measure 3.2.29) to include both middle and high school 

students. Measures 3.2.07 and 3.2.08 were also combined (new measure 3.2.30) for the same reason. 

Measure 3.2.09 had already been slated for retirement in 2010. Measures 3.2.21 and 3.2.22 were both 

dropped as the data source is not maintained by SAMHSA and the performance for these measures was at 

an acceptable level.

PROGRAM NATIONAL TRAUMATIC STRESS NETWORK (NCTSI) 

Table 193: Measure 3.2.01: Increase the estimated number of children and adolescents receiving trauma-informed 

services96 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 29,000 Dec 31, 201097

2009 16,955 25,143

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 33,910 28,878

(Target Not Met) 

2007 33,910 31,446

(Target Not Met) 

 

95This number includes data from a large cohort of grantees funded in 2009. The 2010 result is derived from 60 new grantees and 27 continuing 

grantees. Full implementation of services does not occur until later in 1st year of program. Thus decrease may reflect the impact of the larger new 

cohort.

96 Measure 3.2.01 will be retired from public reporting in FY 2010. Please see explanation in the narrative for this program. 

97The NCTSI began using a web–based GPRA data collection system called Transformation Accountability (TRAC) System in FY 2008 and this 

shift to the TRAC system led to the unavailability of the FY 2010 estimated number served data.
- 103 - 

Table 194: Measure 3.2.03: Dollars spent per person served98,99 (Efficiency) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 $718 $20,827

(Target Not Met)100

2009 $718 $1,511

(Target Not Met) 

2008 $774 $948

(Target Not Met) 

2007 $480 $774

(Target Not Met) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of NCTSI measures was reduced by two; leaving three measures in

place. The two measures that were dropped had already been slated for retirement by 2010.

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH SYSTEM TRANSFORMATION GRANTS101,102,103

Table 195: Measure 1.2.10: Increase the number of policy changes completed as a consequence of the 

Comprehensive Mental Health Plan (CMHP) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 29 141

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 31 191

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 69 81

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 82

(Baseline) 

 

98Successful result is below target. 

99Measure 3.2.03 will be retired from public reporting in FY 2010. Please see explanation in the narrative for this program. 

100Result was derived from FY 2010 appropriation divided by the unduplicated number served (see Measure 3.2.23). Prior years used the 

duplicated numbers served.

101Program was formally known as Mental Health State Incentive Grants for Transformation

102This program is still under development and performance measures will be added once the program is finalized. In the interim, targets for FY 

2012 and FY 2013 have been included and are subject to change.

103FY 2011 targets for this program drop off due to grants coming to a natural end.
- 104 - 

Table 196: Measure 1.2.12: Increase the number of financing policy changes completed as a consequence of the 

CMHP (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 19 32

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 18 47

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 29 49

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 43

(Baseline) 

Table 197: Measure 1.2.13: Increase the number of organizational changes completed as a consequence of the 

CMHP (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 64 192

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 223 148

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 93 127

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 40

(Baseline) 

Table 198: Measure 1.2.14: Increase the number of organizations that regularly obtain and analyze data relevant to 

the goals of the CMHP (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 794 448

(Target Not Met) 

2009 239 6841

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 562 102

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 Set Baseline 37

(Baseline) 
- 105 - 

Table 199: Measure 1.2.15: Increase the number of consumers and family members that are members of Statewide 

consumer- and family-run networks (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 3,510 0104

2009 15,445 11,702

(Target Not Met)

105

2008 4,257 4,627

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 62,411

(Baseline) 

Table 200: Measure 1.2.16: Increase the number of programs implementing practices consistent with the CMHP 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 1,227 786

(Target Not Met) 

2009 633 1,256

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 587 1,238

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 175

(Baseline) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Mental Health System Transformation Grants measures was 

reduced; leaving one measure in place. The measures selected for deletion were those that no longer were 

appropriate for the redesigned program that focuses on consumer services.

 

104 During FY 2010, there was a loss of 7,134 participants from Statewide networks. 

105The 2009 result for 1.2.15 (82,113) was reported in error. The number reported was the target for the total number of consumers and family 

members that would be members of Statewide consumer– and family–run networks in 2009. The number should have been the number of 

consumers and family members added to the Statewide consumer– and family–run networks in 2009, which was 11,702.
- 106 - 

PROGRAM SUICIDE PREVENTION 

Table 201: Measure 2.3.57: Reduce the number of suicide deaths (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 30,684 Apr 30, 2013 

2009 30,784 Apr 30, 2012 

2008 30,984 Apr 30, 2011 

2007 31,084 34,598

(Target Not Met) 

Table 202: Measure 2.3.58: Increase the number of students exposed to mental health and suicide awareness 

campaigns on college campuses (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 681,425 684,525

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 662,774 1,037,974

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 662,774 681,425

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 662,774

(Baseline) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Suicide Prevention measures were reduced; leaving two measures in 

place. Measure 2.3.57 was discontinued as the measure was considered too distant from program 

activities and outcomes. Measure 2.3.58 was discontinued as it did not provide important information 

about the core purpose of the program.
- 107 - 

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH HOMELESSNESS PREVENTION PROGRAMS106

Table 203: Measure 3.4.04: Percentage of adults receiving services who had no/reduced involvement with the 

criminal justice system (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 98.2 97.5

(Target Not Met) 

2009 98.2 97.5

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 98.2

(Baseline) 

Table 204: Measure 3.4.07: Increase the percentage of adults receiving services who report positively about 

perception of care (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 96.1 % 92.5 %

(Target Not Met) 

2009 96.1 % 94.5 %

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 96.1 %

(Baseline) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Services in Supportive Housing measures was reduced; leaving 

five measures in place. Measure 3.4.04 was discontinued due to the fact that criminal justice was 

considered not to be a primary focus of the program. Measure 3.4.07 was discontinued due to the method 

of data collection which had been having the provider ask the consumer how he or she felt about the 

provider’s services. Data collection protocols have been revised for less bias.

 

106Prior to FY 2010 president's Budget, Homelessness data was reported in the CMHS Other Capacity table
- 108 - 

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH/SUBSTANCE ABUSE SCREENING, BRIEF 

INTERVENTION AND REFERRAL TO TREATMENT 

Table 205: Measure: Increase the number of individuals receiving a brief intervention for MH and/or SUD

FY Target Result 

2013 Discontinued N/A 

2012 Discontinued N/A

Table 206: Measure: Increase the number of individuals assessed and referred for specialty MH and/or SA 

treatment

FY Target Result 

2013 Discontinued N/A

2012 Discontinued N/A

PROGRAM OTHER MENTAL HEALTH CAPACITY ACTIVITIES107

Table 207: Measure 1.2.03: Rate of consumers reporting positively about perception of care (program 

participants)

108 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 98% 94.4%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 98% 95.2%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 98% 94.8%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 98%

(Baseline)109

 

107Prior to 2008, includes Jail Diversion, Older Adults, HIV/AIDS, and Services in Supportive Housing programs. Beginning in 2009, data from 

Services in Supportive Housing will be reported under Homelessness Activities. In 2010, Primary and Behavioral Health Care Integration and 

Healthy Transitions was added.

108Measure has been changed with OMB approval from Rate of consumers/family members reporting positively about outcomes (program

participants). SAMHSA dropped measure 1.2.04 and change measure 1.2.03 to “Rate of consumers reporting positively about perception of 

care.” 

109Due to the implementation of the TRAC reporting system midyear FY 2007, data reported for FY 2007 will only contain a partial year.
- 109 - 

Table 208: Measure 1.2.06: Number of evidence based practices (EBPs) implemented (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 4.1 per State Dec 31, 2011 

2009 4 per State 4.3 per State

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 4 per State 4.2 per State

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 3.8 per State 4 per State

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 209: Measure 1.2.07: Percentage of people in the United States with serious mental illnesses in need of 

services from the public mental health system who receive services from the public mental health system (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2015 Discontinued N/A 

Table 210: Measure 1.2.08: Number of Adults: percentage of population coverage for each (reported as percentage 

of service population receiving any evidence based practice) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 10.5% Dec 31, 2011 

2009 10.8% 8.6%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 10.8% 8%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 10.8% 9.4%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 211: Measure 1.2.09: Number of Children: percentage of population coverage for each (reported as 

percentage of service population receiving any evidence based practice) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 3.5% Dec 31, 2011 

2009 3.5% 3.2%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 3.5% 3%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 2.6% 3.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 
- 110 - 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Other Mental Health Capacity Activities measures was reduced; 

leaving three measures in place. Measures 1.2.03, 1.2.06, 1.2.07, 1.2.08 and 1.2.09 were discontinued as 

these measures are too distant from actual program activities and the data sources are not maintained by 

SAMHSA.

PROGRAM MENTAL HEALTH - SCIENCE AND SERVICE ACTIVITIES110,

111

Table 212: Measure 1.4.07: Percentage of those trained by the program who report they were very satisfied with 

training (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 80% 71.8%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 80% 81.4%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 N/A 76%

(Historical Actual) 

2007 N/A 79%

(Historical Actual) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of Science and Service measures was reduced; leaving one measure in 

place while a new measure was added. Measure 1.4.07, a client satisfaction measure, was discontinued 

as SAMHSA has determined that client satisfaction is not useful in assessing the impact of TA efforts. 

The FY 2010 performance data were used to set the baselines for future targets. One measure has also 

been added which captures training efforts across SAMHSA Science and Service programs.

 

110Prior to 2008, includes HIV/AIDS education and Historically Black Colleges and Universities National Resource Center for Substance Abuse 

and Mental Health.

111

In the FY 2010 President's Budget it was erroneously noted that Statewide Family/Consumer TA Center contributed to the Science and 

Services measures. This is not the case and thus has been removed from the list of participating programs. 
- 111 - 

MACRO PROGRAM INNOVATION AND EMERGING ISSUES - CSAP

PROGRAM MINORITY AIDS INITIATIVE112,113,114

Table 213: Measure 2.3.35: Percent of program participants (age 12-17) that rate the risk of substance abuse as 

moderate or great (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 87% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 76.6% 90%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 75.8% 90.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 89% 87.6%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 214: Measure 2.3.38: Percent of program participants (age 18 and up) that rate the risk of substance abuse as 

moderate or great (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 93% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 85.1% 95.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 84.2% 96.5%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 94.4%

(Baseline) 

 

112

Previously, data collected in a given FY were reported in the following year. For example, results for 2008 would reflect data collected in 

2007. In order to achieve consistency across SAMHSA, reporting has been revised so that results for a given FY reflect data actually collected in 

that year, except where otherwise noted.

113HIV Cohort 7 serves different population groups so baseline data from this cohort will be established and entered in FY 2011.

114

The out years of this program are under development and performance measures will be added once the program is finalized. In the interim, 

targets for FY 2011 and FY 2012 have been included and are subject to change. 
- 112 - 

Table 215: Measure 2.3.39: Percent of participants (age 12-20) who used alcohol at pre-test who report a decrease 

in use of alcohol at post-test (user decrease) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 76.6% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 76.6% 62.7%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 75.1% 58.1%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 74.4%

(Baseline) 

Table 216: Measure 2.3.40: Percent of participants (age 21 and up) who used alcohol at pre-test who report a 

decrease in use of alcohol at post-test (user decrease) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 60.8% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 60.8% 62.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 59.6% 60.4%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 59%

(Baseline) 

Table 217: Measure 2.3.41: Percent of participants (age 12-20) who report no alcohol use at pre-test who remain 

non-users at post-test (non-user stability) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 95.3% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 95.3% 90.4%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 93.4% 93.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 92.5%

(Baseline) 
- 113 - 

Table 218: Measure 2.3.42: Percent of participants (age 21 and up) who report no alcohol use at pre-test who 

remain non-users at post-test (non-user stability) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 92% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 92% 91.5%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 90.2% 90.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 89.3%

(Baseline) 

Table 219: Measure 2.3.43: Percent of participants (age 12-17) who used illicit drugs at pre-test who report a 

decrease in 30-day use at post-test (user decrease) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 92.3% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 92.3% 58.3%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 90.5% 67.3%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 89.6%

(Baseline) 

Table 220: Measure 2.3.44: Percent of participants (age 18 and up) who used illicit drugs at pre-test who report a 

decrease in 30-day use at post-test (user decrease) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 70.6% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 70.6% 62.2%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 69.2% 59.1%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 Set Baseline 68.5%

(Baseline) 
- 114 - 

Table 221: Measure 2.3.45: Percent of participants (age 12-17) who report no illicit drug use at pre-test who 

remain non-users at post-test (non-user stability) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 94.9% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 94.9% 90.9%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 93% 96%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 92.1%

(Baseline) 

Table 222: Measure 2.3.46: Percent of participants (age 18 and up) who report no illicit drug use at pre-test who 

remain non-users at post-test (non-user stability) (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 94.6% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 94.6% 93%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 92.7% 93.4%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 91.8%

(Baseline) 

Table 223: Measure 2.3.47: Percent of program participants (age 12-17) who somewhat disapprove or strongly 

disapprove of substance use (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 82.8% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 82.8% 76.4%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 81% 72.9%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 Set Baseline 70.3%

(Baseline) 
- 115 - 

Table 224: Measure 2.3.48: Number of evidence-based policies, practices, and strategies implemented by HIV 

program grantees115 (Output) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued116 N/A 

2010 270 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 160 132

(Target Not Met)117

2008 160 509

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline 162

(Baseline) 

Table 225: Measure 2.3.70: Cost per participant improved on one or more measures between pre-test and post-test 

(Efficiency) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 $20,167 Aug 31, 2011 

2009 $20,167 $5,599

(Target Exceeded)118

2008 $20,167 $10,890

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 Set Baseline $22,189

(Baseline)119

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. For the MAI 

Program, measures were reduced by consolidating several of the youth and adult measures into a single 

measure. As a result, the perceived risks from substance abuse youth and adult measures (2.3.35 and 

2.3.38) have been merged into one new measure: 2.3.82; the alcohol non-user stability youth and adult 

measures (2.3.41 and 2.3.42) have been merged into one new measure: 2.3.83; and the illicit drug nonuser stability youth and adult measures (2.3.45 and 2.3.46) have been merged into one new measure: 

2.3.84. Baselines and targets for the new consolidated measures are based on FY 2009 performance data.

 

115This measure has been revised for the FY 2011 President's Budget. Previously the measure was cumulative. It has been revised to report its 

data annually. As a result, targets and data provided here may appear to differ from those previously published in the FY 2010 President's Budget. 

116This measure is expected to decline in FY 2011 following the close-out of Cohort 6 grants and newer Cohorts not yet functioning at optimum 

levels. 

117Data revised from previously reported.

118Calculations have been adjusted from earlier years. Beginning in FY 2009, costs per participant improved were calculated only from 

programs lasting 30 days or more. Please see data validation table for more information.

119Calculations are extremely over-inflated due to exclusion of participant counts in other than direct services. Efforts are being made to gather 

those data which will then be used to provide more realistic projected targets. 
- 116 - 

PROGRAM PREVENTION - SCIENCE AND SERVICE ACTIVITIES 

Table 226: Measure 2.3.72: Percentage of TA recipients who reported that they are very satisfied with the TA 

received120 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 69.1% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 69.1% 84.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 69.6%

(Baseline)121

Table 227: Measure 2.3.73: Percentage of TA recipients who reported that their ability to provide effective services 

improved a great deal122 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 53.4% Aug 31, 2011 

2009 53.4% 44.4%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 65.4%

(Baseline)123

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. For the Science and 

Service Activities program, two measures were discontinued — leaving three measures in 

place. Specifically, measure 2.3.72 (Percentage of TA recipients who reported that there are very satisfied 

with the TA they received) was discontinued because it is not useful in assessing the impact of TA efforts. 

Also, measure 2.3.73 (Percentage of TA recipients who reported their ability to provide effective services 

improved a great deal) was also discontinued because self-assessment of effectiveness is not useful in 

capturing the impact of TA efforts. One measure has also been added which captures training efforts 

across SAMHSA Science and Service programs. Currently, the Science to Service Activities program is 

under administrative review at SAMHSA’s CSAP. Starting in FY 2012, measures may be changed and/or 

revised to reflect significant changes in this program.

 

120Includes CAPTs, NACE, and Prevention fellowships.

121

Actual has been updated from previously reported and now contains data from the additional science and service activities. 

122

Includes CAPTs and Prevention Fellowships.

123Actual has been updated from previously reported and now contains data from the additional science and service activities. 
- 117 - 

MACRO PROGRAM INNOVATION AND EMERGING ISSUES - CSAT

PROGRAM CO-OCCURRING STATE INCENTIVE GRANTS 

Table 228: Measure 1.2.17: Increase the number of persons with co-occurring disorders served (Output)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 103,679 94,034

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 103,679

(Baseline) 

Table 229: Measure 1.2.18: Increase the percentage of treatment programs that screen for co-occurring disorders 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 68% 29%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 96.1%

(Baseline)124

Table 230: Measure 1.2.19: Increase the percentage of treatment programs that assess for co-occurring disorders 

(Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 32% 17%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 76.4%

(Baseline)125

Table 231: Measure 1.2.20: Increase the percentage of treatment programs that treat co-occurring disorders 

through collaborative, consultative, and integrated models of care (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 53% 6%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 Set Baseline 50.4%

(Baseline)126

 

124

Previously reported result was calculated using erroneous unit of analysis. It has been revised from the FY 2010 President's Budget.

125Previously reported result was calculated using erroneous unit of analysis. It has been revised from the FY 2010 President's Budget.

126Previously reported result was calculated using erroneous unit of analysis. It has been revised from the FY 2010 President’s Budget.
- 118 - 

PROGRAM ACCESS TO RECOVERY 

Table 232: Measure 1.2.34: Increase the percentage of adults receiving services who had improved family and 

living conditions (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 53% 47%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 52% 47%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 52% 52.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 52% 59.9%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 233: Measure 1.2.37: Increase the percentage of adults receiving services who were currently employed or 

engaged in productive activities (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 54% 51%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 53% 49%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 53% 59.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 50% 61.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 234: Measure 1.2.39: Cost per client served127 (Efficiency) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 $1,572 $1,374

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 $1,588 $1,071

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 $1,605 $1,888

(Target Not Met) 

2007 N/A $1,605

(Historical Actual) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

 

127Successful result is below target.
- 119 - 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA continued to report number of clients served, abstinence from use, 

criminal justice involvement and social support. These measures provide a comprehensive view of the 

program. The housing, employment, and cost per client measures will no longer be reported. 

PROGRAM CRIMINAL JUSTICE - JUVENILE AND ADULT PROBLEM SOLVING DRUG 

COURTS 

Table 235: Measure 1.2.68: Juvenile: Percent of drug court participants who exhibit a reduction in substance use 

while in the drug court program (Developmental) (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

Table 236: Measure 1.2.77: Adult: Percent of drug court participants who exhibit a reduction in substance use 

while in the drug court program. Measured in conjunction with DOJ. (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

Table 237: Measure 1.2.62: Juvenile: Percentage of clients that complete treatment (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2009 75% N/A128

2008 74% 75.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 69% 73%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 238: Measure 1.2.66: Juvenile: Increase percentage of clients receiving services who experienced no/reduced 

alcohol or illegal drug related health, behavioral or social consequences (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2009 93% 99%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 92% 92%

(Target Met) 

2007 90% 91.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

 

128The treatment completion measure for juveniles is collected upon discharge from treatment. Due to the small number of grantees during FY 

2009, this measure could not be calculated with any reliability. 
- 120 - 

Table 239: Measure 1.2.69: Juvenile: Reduce cost-per-client served129 (Efficiency) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2009 $5,610 $5,215

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 $5,905 $6,790

(Target Not Met) 

2007 $6,742 $6,463

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 240: Measure 1.2.71: Adult: Percentage of clients that complete treatment130 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 53% 47%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 67% 51%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 241: Measure 1.2.75: Adult: Increase percentage of clients receiving services who experienced no/reduced 

alcohol or illegal drug related health, behavioral or social, consequences (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 93% 97.6%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 93% 89%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 242: Measure 1.2.78: Adult: Reduce cost-per-client served131 (Efficiency) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 $5,554 $4,179

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 $5,610 $4,320

(Target Exceeded) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

 

129Successful result is below target.

130Targets set for this measure in the FY 2010 President's Budget were based on Juvenile Drug Court data. Data for Adult Drug Courts clients is 

now available. As a result, the targets for FY 2010, 2011 and 2012 have been revised to be more appropriate to the population of this program. 

131Successful result is below target.
- 121 - 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA has chosen to highlight key measures of the program which clearly 

illustrate the programs goals and objectives. The following measures have been selected for ongoing 

reporting: number served, abstinence from use, housing, employment and criminal justice involvement. 

PROGRAM TREATMENT SYSTEM FOR HOMELESSNESS (GBHI) 

Table 243: Measure: Increase percentage of adults receiving services who had no/reduced involvement with the 

criminal justice system

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued Discontinued 

2010 96.8% 96.5%

(Target Not Met but Improved)

2009 96.2% 95.8%

(Target Not Met)

2008 N/A 96.2%

(Historical Actual)

Table 244: Measure: Increase percentage of adults receiving services who had improved social support

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A

2010 89.3% 87%

(Target Not Met)

2009 85.9% 88.3%

(Target Exceeded)

2008 N/A 85.9%

(Historical Actual)

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA will continue to report clients served, abstinence from use, housing, and 

employment. These measures serve to demonstrate the program goals and objectives. The social support 

and criminal justice involvement measures have been discontinued as they do not reflect key goals of the 

program. 
- 122 - 

PROGRAM TREATMENT - OTHER CAPACITY132 

Table 245: Measure 1.2.30: Increase percentage of adults receiving services who experienced no/reduced alcohol 

or illegal drug related health, behavioral or social, consequences (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 66% 87.6%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 65% 86%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 67% 68%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 67% 65%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 246: Measure 1.2.31: Increase the percentage of grantees in appropriate cost bands (Efficiency)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 79% Oct 31, 2011 

2009 78% 79%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 80% 80%

(Target Met) 

2007 80% 80%

(Target Met) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The social consequences and cost band measures are being discontinued as these 

measures do not meaningfully reflect the program goals. 

 

132Includes TCE General, HIV/AIDS Outreach, Addiction Treatment for Homeless Persons, Assertive Adolescent and Family Treatment, 

Family and Juvenile Drug Courts, Young Offender Re-Entry Program, Pregnant and Post-Partum Women, Recovery Community Service – 

Recovery, Recovery Community Service – Facilitating, and Child and Adolescent State Incentive Grants. 
- 123 - 

PROGRAM TREATMENT - SCIENCE AND SERVICE133

Table 247: Measure 1.4.03: Increase the percentage of drug treatment professionals trained by the program who 

would rate the quality of the events as good, very good, or excellent (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 96% 95%

(Target Not Met) 

2009 96% 95%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 96% 95%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 96% 95%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 248: Measure 1.4.04: Increase the percentage of drug treatment professionals trained by the program who 

shared any of the information from the events with others (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 92% 86%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2009 92% 85%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 90% 93.5%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 90% 89%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

Table 249: Measure 1.4.05: Increase the percentage of grantees in appropriate cost bands (Efficiency)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 100% Oct 31, 2011 

2009 100% 100%

(Target Met) 

2008 100% 100%

(Target Met) 

2007 100% 100%

(Target Met) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

 

133Includes Knowledge Application Program, Faith Based Initiatives, Strengthening Treatment Access and Retention, Addiction Technology 

Transfer Centers, and SAMHSA Conference Grants. 
- 124 - 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. SAMHSA has elected to retain two key program measures: number of participants 

trained and application of the information. These measures will clearly indicate the extent to which 

information gained from trainings has been put to practical use. One measure has also been added which 

captures training efforts across SAMHSA Science and Service programs.

MACRO PROGRAM CHILDREN'S MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 

Table 250: Measure 3.2.11: Increase the percent of funded sites that will exceed a 30 percent improvement in 

behavioral and emotional symptoms among children receiving services for 6 months134 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 60% 62.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 251: Measure 3.2.12: Increase percentage of children attending school 80% or more of time after 12 

months135 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 86.3% 91.1%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 86.3% 89.2%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 84% 86.3%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 84% 87%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 252: Measure 3.2.13: Increase percentage with no law enforcement contacts at 6 months (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 71.7% 76.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 71.7% 68.9%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 69% 71.7%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 70% 71%

(Target Exceeded) 

 

134

Long-term measure only. No annual targets have been set.

135This measure has been slightly revised. It was previously reported as “75% or more of the time.” However, the measure has been calculated 

using an 80% threshold since 2004. Therefore, this revision brings the measure text in line with the calculation. 
- 125 - 

Table 253: Measure 3.2.14: Decrease average days of inpatient facilities among children served in systems of care 

at 6 months136 (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 -2 -0.06

(Target Not Met) 

2009 -2 -0.12

(Target Not Met)

2008 -2 -1.05

(Target Not Met) 

2007 -2 -1.78

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

Table 254: Measure 3.2.15: Percent of systems of care that are sustained 5 years post Federal funding (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2010 Discontinued N/A 

2009 85% 64.1%

(Target Not Met) 

2008 80% 77.8%

(Target Not Met) 

Table 255: Measure 3.2.17: Increase total savings for in-hospital patient care costs per 1,000 children served 

(Efficiency)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 $2,376,000 -$82,857

(Target Not Met) 

2009 $2,376,000 $160,000

(Target Not Met) 

2008 $2,670,000 $1,401,750

(Target Not Met) 

2007 $2,670,000 $2,376,000

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of CMHI measures was reduced to a total of five remaining measures. 

Of these five measures, four are new measures for the program as all GPRA data collection has been 

moved from the cross-site evaluation to the SAMHSA TRAC system. The FY 2010 performance data 

were used to set the baselines for future targets.

 

136Successful result is below target. For example, FY 2007 the target was -2. To have achieved the target, the program would need a smaller 

number (i.e. -2.5 or -3). 
- 126 - 

PROGRAM PROJECTS TO ASSIST IN THE TRANSITION FROM HOMELESSNESS 

Table 256: Measure 3.4.18: Average Federal cost of enrolling a homeless person with serious mental illness in 

services137 (Efficiency) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 $668 Jul 31, 2011 

2009 $668 $552

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 $668 $669

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 $668 $674

(Target Not Met) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. The number of PATH measures was reduced leaving four measures in place. 

Measure 3.4.18 was deleted as SAMHSA is reviewing its efficiency measures to determine the best 

approach to achieve meaningful efficiency outcomes.

MACRO PROGRAM REGULATORY AND OVERSIGHT FUNCTIONS

PROGRAM PROTECTION & ADVOCACY 

Table 257: Measure 3.4.08: Increase percentage of complaints of alleged abuse not withdrawn by the client that 

resulted in positive change for the client in her/his environment, community, or facility, as result of PAIMI 

involvement (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 84% Jul 31, 2011 

2009 84% 85%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 84% 87%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 85% 83%

(Target Not Met) 

 

137Successful result is below target.
- 127 - 

Table 258: Measure 3.4.09: Increase percentage of complaints of alleged neglect substantiated not withdrawn by 

the client that resulted in positive change for the client in her/his environment, community, or facility, as a result of 

PAIMI involvement (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 88% Jul 31, 2011 

2009 85% 87%

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 85% 84%

(Target Not Met) 

2007 84% 88%

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 259: Measure 3.4.10: Increase percentage of complaints of alleged rights violations substantiated and not 

withdrawn by the client that resulted in positive change through the restoration of client rights, expansion or 

maintenance of personal decision-making, or elimination of other barriers to personal decision-making, as a result of 

PAIMI involvement (Outcome) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 90% Jul 31, 2011 

2009 90% 90%

(Target Met) 

2008 90% 89%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2007 90% 86%

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

Table 260: Measure 3.4.11: Percent of interventions on behalf of groups of PAIMI-eligible individuals that were 

concluded successfully (Outcome)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 97% Jul 31, 2011 

2009 95% 95%

(Target Met) 

2008 95% 97%

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 95% 97%

(Target Exceeded) 
- 128 - 

Table 261: Measure 3.4.13: Ratio of persons served/impacted per activity/intervention (Outcome)

FY Target Result

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 430 Jul 31, 2011 

2009 420 801

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 420 1,177

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 420 473

(Target Exceeded) 

Table 262: Measure 3.4.14: Cost per 1,000 individuals served/impacted138 (Efficiency) 

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 $1,950 Jul 31, 2011 

2009 $2,000 $1,422

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 $2,000 $1,886

(Target Exceeded) 

2007 $2,000 $1,989

(Target Exceeded) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. Measures 3.4.08, 3.4.09, and 3.4.10 were combined into one measure (now 3.4.21) 

as the results of the separate measures were similar. Measure 3.4.11 was deleted as performance was at a 

high level for the past several fiscal years. Measures 3.4 13 and 3.4.14 were deleted as SAMHSA is 

reviewing its efficiency measures to determine the best approach to achieve meaningful efficiency 

outcomes. 

 

138Successful result is below target. 
- 129 - 

MACRO PROGRAM PUBLIC AWARENESS AND SUPPORT

PROGRAM SAMHSA'S HEALTH INFORMATION NETWORK (SHIN)139

Table 263: Measure 4.4.04: Total number of SAMHSA knowledge products disseminated (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued140 N/A 

2010 13,909,297 19,525,378

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 13,909,297 16,360,389

(Target Exceeded) 

2008 Set Baseline 13,909,297

(Baseline) 

Table 264: Measure 4.4.05: Total number of individuals referred for treatment resources (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued141 N/A 

2010 373,916 377,428

(Target Exceeded) 

2009 Set Baseline 373,916

(Baseline) 

 

139The SAMHSA’s Health Information Network is completed using contracts instead of grants. As a result, they are awarded earlier in the fiscal 

year than grants. There is no delay between fiscal year funding and the performance year. As a result, FY 2012 targets have not been set for these 

performance measures as they have been for programs that are funded using grants. 

140Contract ends April 30, 2011, with final report due 30 days after. Target for 2011 is an estimate based on activity for 7 months (or 58 per 

cent) of FY 2011. 

141

Contract ends April 30, 2011, with a final report due 30 days after. Target for 2011 is an estimate based on activity for 7 months (or 58 

percent) of FY 2011. 
- 130 - 

MACRO PROGRAM PERFORMANCE AND QUALITY IMPROVEMENT SYSTEMS 

PROGRAM SUBSTANCE ABUSE PREVENTION AND TREATMENT BLOCK GRANT - 

NATIONAL SURVEYS142

Table 265: Measure 4.4.01: Availability and timeliness of data for the National Survey on Drug Use and Health 

(NSDUH) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 8 months 8 months

(Target Met) 

2009 8 months 8 months

(Target Met) 

2008 8 months 8 months

(Target Met) 

2007 8 months 8 months

(Target Met) 

Table 266: Measure 4.4.02: Availability and timeliness of data for the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) 

(Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 10 months Oct 31, 2011 

2009 10 months 12 months

(Target Not Met but Improved) 

2008 10 months 13 months

(Target Not Met but Improved)143

2007 12 months 22 months

(Target Not Met)144

 

142

The National Surveys are completed using contracts instead of grants. As a result, they are awarded earlier in the fiscal year than grants. 

There is no delay between fiscal year funding and the performance year. 143This was erroneously reported as 22 months in the FY 2010 President's Budget. 

144

This data was erroneously reported at 14 months in the FY 2010 President's Budget. 
- 131 - 

Table 267: Measure 4.4.03: Availability and timeliness of data for the Drug and Alcohol Services Information 

System (DASIS) (Output)

FY Target Result 

2011 Discontinued N/A 

2010 10 months 10 months

(Target Met) 

2009 10 months 10 months

(Target Met) 

2008 10 months 10 months

(Target Met) 

2007 15 months 8 months

(Target Exceeded) 

During the FY 2012 budget formulation process, SAMHSA underwent a comprehensive review of the 

190 measures listed in the FY 2011 President’s Budget. This review resulted in the deletion, revision, and 

consolidation of existing GPRA measures and the inclusion of several new measures. This new group of 

GPRA measures will more accurately capture key program activities and intended outcomes for 

SAMHSA programs. CBHSQ eliminated three GPRA measures on timeliness because they did not 

accurately reflect the mission of the Center.
- 132 - 

OVERVIEW OF PERFORMANCE

STATEMENT OF MISSION

FY 2012 Performance Overview

SAMHSA’s performance measures include outcomes and outputs which allow SAMHSA to 

effectively manage grants, contracts and data collection activities, and to report performance results 

to the President, Congress, and other stakeholders. 

 

The FY 2012 Budget includes substantial revisions to SAMHSA’s performance measures reported in the 

Annual GPRA Plan and Annual GPRA Report. The resulting set of measures seeks to capture the 

following key items for each program: the number of services delivered or people served, a specific 

measure or two for each individual program area, and a measure that captures client recovery. Further, 

SAMHSA spent a good deal of time reviewing existing measures to ensure that they were meaningful and 

met the needs of both program management and policy-makers. This effort resulted in a reduction of 

measures from almost 200 (as published in the 2011 President’s Budget) to around 100 measures in the 

FY 2012 President’s Budget. Although this reduction changes the display of measures in the Annual 

GPRA Report/Plan, the majority of the measures that have been removed (including NOMS) will 

continue to be collected and used for program management purposes. 

Work on SAMHSA’s GPRA measures and other data collection activities is ongoing. SAMHSA is 

working with internal and external stakeholders on developing appropriate measures of recovery for those 

with mental or substance use disorders. As these efforts become more defined, the GPRA measures 

reported in the budget as well as those used for program management may be altered to bring them in line 

with other cross-cutting efforts. 

 

Support for the HHS Strategic Plan and Other Federal Priorities

SAMHSA data efforts, including GPRA, support many of the priorities of the Secretary and the 

President. SAMHSA has ongoing activities that relate to each of the Secretarial priorities: 

• Transforming Health Care - Through its National Survey on Drug Use and Health, SAMHSA 

is monitoring the percentage of persons with a mental health or substance use disorder 

service needs and who have health insurance. 

• Advance Scientific Knowledge and Innovation – SAMHSA has established a new Office of 

Policy, Planning and Innovation to lead cutting edge efforts across SAMHSA and across 

government. 

• Advance the Health, Safety, and Well-Being of the American People - SAMHSA is 

monitoring trends in mental health and substance abuse disorders. One example is the 

percentage of youth age 12-20 who report drinking in the past month and taking steps to 

reduce that percentage to 23.8 percent by 2015 from 27.2 percent in 2009. 

• Increase Efficiency, Transparency, and Accountability of HHS programs – SAMHSA is 

working directly with the HHS Chief Technology Officer to make more SAMHSA data 

publicly available. 
- 133 - 

• Strengthen the Nation’s Health and Human Services Infrastructure and Workforce – 

SAMHSA is working with HRSA to examine ongoing technical assistance and training 

activities and incentives to see if there are more effective and efficient ways of expanding, 

supporting and reaching the behavioral health workforce. 

• SAMHSA is also preparing for implementation of the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 

which endorses improved accountability through quarterly performance data reporting, 

priority setting and regular senior leadership meetings. SAMHSA is awaiting guidance from 

OMB and HHS on how this law will be operationalized and has already begun thinking about 

how to take these new mandates and utilize them internally to improve transparency, 

accountability and leadership involvement. 

SAMHSA is also preparing for implementation of the GPRA Modernization Act of 2010 which endorses 

improved accountability through quarterly performance data reporting, priority setting and regular senior 

leadership meetings. 

 

Significant Accomplishments

 

Over the last several years, SAMHSA has maintained between 58-70 percent target achievement 

among its GPRA measures published in the budget. The most significant challenge to success was 

among the FY 2009 and 2010 data. Considering that many of these measures are outcomes (e.g., 

substance use, housing, and employment) which have been greatly impacted by the economic 

downturn, SAMHSA has been remarkably successful. 

SAMHSA’s Strategic Initiatives and a New Vision for Data, Outcomes, and Quality

SAMHSA has spent much of CY 2010 developing and refining a Strategic Plan focusing on eight 

priorities, which will take SAMHSA and its programs into the future. (See earlier section describing 

the eight initiatives.) The intent of the Data, Outcomes, and Quality initiative is to realize an 

integrated data strategy that informs policy, measures program impact, and results in improved 

quality of services and outcomes for individuals, families, and communities. SAMHSA is: 

• Implementing an integrated approach for SAMHSA’s collection, analysis, and use of data; 

• Creating common standards for measurement and data collection to better meet stakeholder 

needs; 

• Improving the quality of SAMHSA’s program evaluations and services research; and 

• Improving quality and accessibility of surveillance, outcome/performance, and evaluation 

information for staff, stakeholders, funders, and policymakers. 

This revised approach to data, outcomes, and quality is clearly a work in progress and will require 

continued discussions into CY 2011 and beyond as SAMHSA’s work on this initiative unfolds and as 

SAMHSA engages in discussions with other HHS agencies and stakeholder groups interested in 

quality and outcome measurement.

 
- 134 - 

 

STRATEGIC PLAN

SAMHSA has spent much of CY 2010 developing and refining a Strategic Plan focusing on eight 

priorities, to guide programmatic, policy, and management decisions and take SAMHSA and its

programs into the future. The eight priorities relate to three aims that align with the HHS Strategic 

Plan, as follows: 

Aim: Transforming Health Care in America 

Strategic Initiatives (4) Health Care Reform; and (6) Health Information Technology. 

Aim: Improving the Nation’s Behavioral Health 

Strategic Initiatives (1) Prevention of Substance Abuse and Mental Illness; (2) Trauma and 

Justice; (3) Military Families; and (5) Recover Support. 

Aim: Achieving Excellence in Operations

Strategic Initiatives (7) Data, Outcomes and Quality; and (8) Public Awareness and Support. 

SAMHSA programmatic activities are guided by these eight priorities and the HHS Strategic Plan. 

SAMHSA activities support at least one HHS strategic objective; many support more than one. 

Many of SAMHSA’s activities and its budget for FY 2012 are focused on the first of its eight 

priorities: the Prevention of Substance Abuse and Mental Illness. Prevention ties closely to the HHS 

Strategic Plan Objective 3.D, Promote Prevention and Wellness as well as several other objectives 

including 1.E, 3.A, 3.B, 3.C. The SA and CMHS Block Grants and the majority of the CSAP 

Innovation and Emerging Issues, including Prevention Prepared Communities, focus on these 

objectives. 

SAMHSA’s programs (Safe Schools/Healthy Students, National Traumatic Stress network, Project 

LAUNCH now included in the Mental Health State Prevention Grant, and Children and Families 

Programs) focus on Objective 3.A Ensuring the safety, well-being and healthy development of 

children and youth and are simultaneously being guided by SAMHSA’s Trauma and Violence and 

Prevention initiatives. 

SAMHSA recognizes the challenge of serving homeless individuals and understands the incredible 

need among this population for substance abuse and mental health services. As such, SAMHSA’s 

Recovery Support initiative and ongoing SAMHSA programs addressing services for persons who

are or are at risk of being homeless (including Services in Supportive Housing, Grants for the Benefit 

of Homeless Individuals, an ongoing collaboration with HUD, and the PATH formula grant) support 

Objectives 1.E, 3.B, and 3.C. SAMHSA further recognizes the changing face of health care service 

provision and increasing need to modify established programs to meet Health Reform and the 

development of Health Information Technology. As such, SAMHSA has established initiatives 

around both of these areas. Programs linked to the Health Reform Initiative are the CMHS and SA 

Block Grants, the Behavioral Health Community Initiative. Programs impacted by Health IT include 

an ongoing demonstration project as well as the Block Grants. 

Lastly, SAMHSA is working to both improve the outcomes of the people its programs serve through 

increasing quality of care and more effectively communicating its prevention message through 

refined Public awareness efforts. The ongoing activities around these two initiatives include health
- 135 - 

surveillance, other data collection efforts, information dissemination, and expanding the use of 

evidence-based practices through technical assistance and training. These programs are closely 

linked with HHS objectives 2.D, 3.D, 4.C, 5.C. 

As the nation moves toward mental health parity and health reform, SAMHSA will continue to 

examine its eight strategic initiatives to assure that they are consistent with national needs and 

priorities.

 
- 136 - 

SAMHSA LINKAGES TO HHS STRATEGIC PLAN

The table below shows the alignment of SAMHSA's strategic goals with HHS Strategic Plan 

goals.

Table 268: SAMHSA linkages with Goal 1: Transform Health Care

SAMHSA Strategic Initiatives

HHS Strategic 

Objectives

Prevention 

of SA/MI

Trauma 

and 

Justice

Military 

Families

Health

Care

Reform

Recovery 

Support

Health 

IT

Data, 

Outcomes, 

and 

Quality

Public 

Awareness 

and 

Support

1.A Make coverage 

more secure for those 

who have insurance, 

and extend affordable 

coverage to the 

uninsured

X 

1.B Improve health 

care quality and 

patient safety

X X 

1.C Emphasize 

primary and 

preventive care 

linked with 

community 

prevention services

X X X 

1.D Reduce the 

growth of health care 

costs while 

promoting highvalue, effective care

X 

1.E Ensure access to 

quality, culturally 

competent care for 

vulnerable 

populations

X X X X X X 

1.F Promote the 

adoption of health 

information 

technology

X 
- 137 - 

Table 269: SAMHSA linkages with Goal 2: Advance Scientific Knowledge and Innovation

SAMHSA Strategic Initiatives

HHS Strategic 

Objectives

Prevention 

of SA/MI

Trauma 

and 

Justice

Military 

Families

Health 

Care 

Reform

Recovery 

Support

Health 

IT

Data, 

Outcomes, 

and 

Quality

Public 

Awareness 

and 

Support

2.A Accelerate the 

process of scientific 

discovery to improve 

patient care

2.B Foster innovation 

at HHS to create 

shared solutions

2.C Invest in the 

regulatory sciences to 

improve food and 

medical product 

safety

2.D Increase our 

understanding of what 

works in public health 

and human service 

practice

X X X X X X 
- 138 - 

Table 270: SAMHSA linkages with Goal 3: Advance the Health, Safety and Well-Being of the American 

People

SAMHSA Strategic Initiatives

HHS Strategic 

Objectives

Prevention 

of SA/MI

Trauma

and 

Justice

Military 

Families

Health 

Care 

Reform

Recovery 

Support

Health 

IT

Data, 

Outcomes, 

and 

Quality

Public 

Awareness 

and 

Support

3.A Ensure the 

safety, well-being, 

and healthy 

development of 

children and youth

X X X X 

3.B Promote 

economic and social 

well-being for 

individuals, families 

and communities

X X X X 

3.C Improve the 

accessibility and 

quality of supportive 

services for people 

with disabilities and 

older adults

X X X X 

3.D Promote 

prevention and 

wellness

X X X X 

3.E Reduce the

occurrence of 

infectious diseases

3.F Protect 

Americans’ health 

and safety during 

emergencies, and 

foster resilience in 

response to 

emergencies

X X X 
- 139 - 

Table 271: SAMHSA linkages with Goal 4: Increase Efficiency, Transparency, and Accountability of HHS 

Programs

SAMHSA Strategic Initiatives

HHS Strategic 

Objectives

Prevention 

of SA/MI

Trauma

and 

Justice

Military 

Families

Health 

Care 

Reform

Recovery 

Support

Health 

IT

Data, 

Outcomes, 

and 

Quality

Public 

Awareness 

and 

Support

4.A Ensure program 

integrity and 

responsible 

stewardship of 

resources

4.B Fight fraud and 

work to eliminate 

improper payments 

4.C Use HHS data to 

improve the health 

and well-being of 

the American people

X 

4.D Improve HHS 

environmental, 

energy, and 

economic 

performance to 

promote 

sustainability
- 140 - 

Table 272: SAMHSA linkages with Goal 5: Strengthen the Nation's Health and Human Service 

Infrastructure and Workforce

SAMHSA Strategic Initiatives

HHS Strategic 

Objectives

Prevention 

of SA/MI

Trauma

and 

Justice

Military 

Families

Health 

Care 

Reform

Recovery 

Support

Health 

IT

Data, 

Outcomes, 

and 

Quality

Public 

Awareness 

and 

Support

5.A Invest in the 

HHS workforce to 

meet America’s 

health and human 

services needs today 

and tomorrow

5.B Ensure that the 

Nation’s health care 

workforce can meet 

increased demands

X X X X 

5.C Enhance the 

ability of the public 

health workforce to 

improve public 

health at home and 

abroad

X X X 

5.D Strengthen the 

Nation’s human 

services workforce 

5.E Improve 

national, state, and 

local surveillance 

and epidemiology 

capacity

X 
- 141 - 

ADDITIONAL ITEMS

FULL COST TABLE

Methodology: Reporting full cost involves two types of information. First, the full cost for each program 

is calculated. Second, SAMHSA sums those estimates by each Program’s alignment with the HHS 

Strategic Plan goals and objectives.

Each Program is reporting full cost information using the HHS standard methodology. SAMHSA’s 

application of the methodology involves assigning Program Management dollars across budget lines 

based upon the number of FTEs directly assigned to the program. 

Table 273: SAMHSA program full cost associated with HHS Strategic Goal 1: Transform Health Care 

(Dollars in Millions)

HHS Strategic Goals and Objectives FY 2010 

Actual

FY 2011 

CR

FY 2012 

Pres. 

Budget

1.A: Make coverage more secure for those who have insurance, and extend 

affordable coverage to the uninsured 0.000 0.000 0.000

1.B: Improve health care quality and patient safety 53.837 53.699 55.468

1.C: Emphasize primary and preventive care linked with community 

prevention services 65.613 110.102 89.963

1.D: Reduce the growth of health care costs while promoting high-value, 

effective care 109.768 108.698 106.926

1.E: Ensure access to quality, culturally competent care for vulnerable 

populations 530.114 530.027 546.094

1.F: Promote the adoption and meaningful use of health information 

technology 0.000 9.929 4.509

Agency Subtotal for Strategic Goal 1 759.332 812.456 802.960

Agency Total 3,582.701 3,636.959 3,649.248

Table 274: SAMHSA program full cost associated with HHS Goal 2: Advance Scientific Knowledge and 

Innovation (Dollars in Millions)

HHS Strategic Goals and Objectives FY 2010 

Actual

FY 2011 

CR

FY 2012 

Pres. 

Budget

2.A: Accelerate the process of scientific discovery to improve patient care 0.000 0.000 0.000

2.B: Foster innovation at HHS to create shared solutions 0.000 0.000 0.000

2.C: Invest in the regulatory sciences to improve food and medical product 

safety 0.000 0.000 0.000

2.D: Increase our understanding of what works in public health and human 

service practice 47.869 47.792 31.494

Agency Subtotal for Strategic Goal 2 47.869 47.792 31.494

Agency Total 3,582.701 3,636.959 3,649.248
- 142 - 

Table 275: SAMHSA program full cost associated with HHS Strategic Goal 3: Advance the Health, Safety 

and Well-being of the American People (Dollars in Millions)

HHS Strategic Goals and Objectives FY 2010 

Actual

FY 2011 

CR

FY 2012 

Pres. 

Budget

3.A: Ensure the safety, well-being, and healthy development of children and 

youth 239.786 240.011 210.635

3.B: Promote economic and social well-being for individuals, families, and 

communities 19.911 19.917 19.279

3.C: Improve the accessibility and quality of supportive services for people 

with disabilities and older adults 0.000 0.000 0.000

3.D: Promote prevention and wellness 2,453.719 2,454.018 2,547.174

3.E: Reduce the occurrence of infectious diseases 0.000 0.000 0.000

3.F: Protect Americans’ health and safety during emergencies, and foster 

resilience in response to emergencies 1.213 1.213 1.259

Agency Subtotal for Strategic Goal 3 2,714.629 2,715.159 2,778.346

Agency Total 3,582.701 3,636.959 3,649.248

Table 276: SAMHSA program full cost associated with HHS Strategic Goal 4: Increase Efficiency, 

Transparency, and Accountability of HHS Programs (Dollars in Millions)

HHS Strategic Goals and Objectives FY 2010 

Actual

FY 2011 

CR

FY 2012 

Pres. 

Budget

4.A: Ensure program integrity and responsible stewardship of resources 0.000 0.000 0.000

4.B Fight fraud and work to eliminate improper payments 0.000 0.000 0.000

4.C: Use HHS data to improve the health and well-being of the American 

people 40.242 40.857 13.442

4.D: Improve HHS environmental, energy, and economic performance to 

promote sustainability 0.000 0.000 0.000

Agency Subtotal for Strategic Goal 4 40.242 40.857 13.442

Agency Total 3,582.701 3,636.959 3,649.248

Table 277: SAMHSA program full cost associated with HHS Strategic Goal 5: Strengthen the Nation's Health 

and Human Service Infrastructure and Workforce (Dollars in Millions)

HHS Strategic Goals and Objectives FY 2010 

Actual

FY 2011 

CR

FY 2012 

Pres. 

Budget

5.A: Invest in the HHS workforce to help meet America’s health and human 

service needs today 0.000 0.000 0.000

5.B: Ensure that the Nation’s health care workforce can meet increased 

demands 20.629 20.694 23.007

5.C: Enhance the ability of the public health workforce to improve public 

health at home and abroad 

5.D: Strengthen the Nation’s human service workforce 0.000 0.000 0.000

5.E: Improve national, state, local, and tribal surveillance and epidemiology 

capacity 0.000 0.000 0.000

Agency Subtotal for Strategic Goal 5 20.629 20.694 23.007

Agency Total 3,582.701 3,636.959 3,649.248

 
- 143 - 

EVALUATIONS INCLUDED IN HHS EVALUATIONS DATABASE FOR FY 2010

Further details on SAMHSA's completed evaluations completed furing any fiscal year can be found at the 

HHS Policy Information Center website (http://aspe.hhs.gov/pic/performance).

Report Title: Evaluation of the Garrett Lee Smith Youth Suicide Prevention State, Tribal, and Campus 

Grants

 

Coordinating Center: SAMHSA’s Center for Mental Health Services

 

Background and Evaluation Questions:

Since being passed into law in 2004, the Garrett Lee Smith Memorial Act has authorized more than 

$120million to fund community-based suicide prevention initiatives in 65 different States, Tribes, and 

Territories, and on 78 different college and university campuses. Eighty-six (86) three-year grants have 

been awarded to States and Tribes, and 93 to campuses. The Cross-site evaluation questions focus on 5 

elements of the grant programs: program development and implementation, suicide prevention training, 

early identification, referral, and follow-up, outreach and awareness, and collaboration and management 

information systems (MIS) development.

 

Key Findings:

Program Development and Implementation:

• 98% of grantees engage in outreach and awareness activities.

• Policy and protocol development is being implemented in 88% of State sites, 68% of tribal sites, 

and nearly 55% of campus sites. 

• 46% implement screening activities or tools to identify youths at risk of suicide.

• 17% report a variety of products, services, and activities related to post-intervention. 

Suicide Prevention Training:

• As of the end of FY10, 335,653 individuals have received training or participated in an 

educational seminar sponsored by GLS Campus and State/Tribal grantees.

• The majority of individuals trained through Campus training programs were students (65.8% 

trainings, 67.7% seminars). Staff members were second (22.1%), followed by family members 

(9.8%). 32.8% of State/Tribal grantees were teachers and other secondary school staff, and 17.5% 

were mental health service providers.

• Most State/Tribal trainings occurred in schools (42.7% in primary/secondary schools, and 31.4% 

in higher education settings). 

• Analyses of interviews conducted with 450 participants of GLS training indicate that following 

training: 

• More than 50% of trainees reported assessing and/or responding to suicide risk.

• Approximately half of trainees reported that their awareness of the warning signs of 

suicide had been heightened. 

• Approximately half of trainees reported sharing information with others in order to 

increase general awareness about suicide and suicide prevention.

• By 12 months, all respondents reported that they had intervened, directly or indirectly, 

with an at-risk or suicidal youth. 

• By 12 months, 100% of respondents reported high levels of self-efficacy with regard to 

their ability to identify and respond to at-risk youths. 
- 144 - 

Early Identification, Referral, and Follow-up:

• 36 State/Tribal grantees used their funds to support mental health screenings. 

• 46 of Campus grantees used in-person or Web-based screening tools.

• As of July, 2010, State/Tribal grantees have tracked data on almost 8,900 at-risk youth. 

• The majority of youths were identified as at risk for suicide through screenings (84.7%) 

and gatekeepers (55.6%) were identified in school settings. 

• 77.1% of youths identified by gatekeepers and 81.8% through screening received mental 

health referrals.

• 47.2% of those youths who did not receive referrals were already receiving mental health 

services.

• 65.4% of youths identified as at risk for suicide received mental health referrals.

Outreach and Awareness:

• 89% of grantees created or acquired print and other awareness materials.

• 73% of grantees supported awareness activities, such as Out of the Darkness walks, 

booths/exhibits, and guest speakers. 

• Tribal sites often integrated awareness about suicide prevention into cultural activities.

• 65% of grantees developed or enhanced Web-sites with information about suicide prevention.

• Grantees also used new media such as Twitter, Facebook, MySpace, and YouTube.

• 60% implemented visual or audio media products, including radio ads and PSAs. 

• The use of visual or audio media was more common among Tribal grantees (68%) than States 

(61%) and Campus (58%). 

• 97% implemented outreach and awareness products and activities for the entire community.

• 58% developed outreach and awareness products and activities exclusively for youths (including 

69% of Campus grantees). 

• 88% of grantees reported outreach and awareness efforts directed toward increasing awareness 

about resources for help and 81% reported efforts for increasing knowledge about warning signs, 

risk factors, and how to help. 

• Nearly 70% of grantees described outreach and awareness efforts aimed at promoting health 

behaviors (77% among Tribes, 78% among Campuses, 58% among States). 

Collaboration and Management Information Systems (MIS) Development:

• 78.5% of State/Tribe grantees reported making referrals to other organizations for youths in need 

of service.

• 81.8% of State/Tribe grantees reporting having a procedure in place to refer youths who have 

been identified at risk for suicide. 45.8% have a formal procedure, 36% have an informal 

procedure and 8.1% have no procedure. 

• Campuses have developed their ability to report unduplicated counts of students receiving mental 

health services from campus counseling centers and other on-campus locations.

• 28 currently funded State/Tribal grantees reported access to epidemiologic data and provided 

specific examples.
- 145 - 

Report Title: Evaluation of the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline and the Crisis Center Follow-Up 

Grant Program

 

Coordinating Center: SAMHSA’s Center for Mental Health Services

 

Background and Evaluation Questions:

The National Suicide Prevention Lifeline (Lifeline) is a system of toll-free telephone numbers that routes 

calls from people in suicidal crisis or emotional distress to a network of 147 local crisis centers. Each 

month, over 50,000 calls are answered through the Lifeline. Evaluation of the Lifeline is crucial and has 

resulted in improvements in risk assessment, follow-up on suicidal callers, and is currently starting to 

assess crisis center follow-up with emergency department discharges. Specifically, the four major aims of 

the evaluation are to use findings to help crisis centers (1) improve risk assessments by counselors, (2) 

enhance follow-up services to callers, (3) optimize emergency interventions, and (4) expand linkages and 

outreach. This has been an iterative process between evaluation findings and practice. 

 

Initial evaluations of the Lifeline found that callers experienced a reduction in hopelessness and suicidal 

intent during their call. They also showed, however, that 43% of suicidal callers experienced some 

recurrence of suicidal ideation within the next several weeks, underscoring the importance of 

receiving follow-up behavioral healthcare or other appropriate services or interventions. However, the 

evaluations found that only a minority of suicidal callers had set up an appointment. Upon follow up, only 

22.5% of the suicidal callers had been seen by the behavioral healthcare system to which they had 

been referred and an additional 12.6% had an appointment scheduled but had not yet been seen. 

 

Since FY 2008, two cohorts of six grants each have been funded to promote systematic follow-up of 

suicidal persons who call the Lifeline. An evaluation of the first cohort is currently being conducted. As 

of September 30, 2010, 1,626 individuals received Crisis Center Follow-Up grant services. Suicide callers 

who receive clinical follow-up from a crisis center and who give permission for re-contact by evaluation 

staff are interviewed by evaluation staff between six weeks and three months after their initial crisis call.

 

Key Findings:

• Preliminary findings from 423 of the interviews conducted with participants in the Crisis Center 

Follow-Up evaluation suggest that at the time of their crisis call, many of the callers were at high 

risk for a suicide attempt. 

• 45.8% of the callers had a current suicide plan; 

• 10% were exhibiting preparatory behavior or an attempt was in progress at the time of the 

call; and 

• 55.6% reported previous attempts.

• Preliminary findings suggest that the clinical follow-up with callers is providing an invaluable 

service to these high-risk individuals.

•

• When asked to what extent the counselor’s call stopped them from killing themselves, 

53.7% indicated a lot, and 25.1%indicated a little;

• When asked to what extent the counselor call has kept them safe, 60.8% indicated a lot, 

and 29.3%indicated a little; and

• 59.8%reported that just getting or anticipating the call(s)/knowing someone cared was 

helpful to them.

• Some comments from respondents who reported that call(s) stopped them from killing 

themselves/kept them safe include the following: 
- 146 - 

“Yeah it was actually kind of strangely reassuring. I mean, this sounds ridiculous, but I felt really, 

really alone in the world, and it just felt that someone was out there for me, and they noticed that I 

needed help. It felt like they cared.”

“Just that there was follow-through—when you’re suicidal, you don’t really feel like anyone cares 

about you. So when somebody follows through like that, it makes an impression.”

“Yeah it made me feel like somebody really did care. It was just a positive thing, it made me feel 

not just like somebody cared but that someone would continue to look after you, even after the 

initial crisis is over with. It’s a lot more than the caring, it’s the stability that it helps you to feel.”

“I'm usually the one calling and I feel stupid, whereas she called and I felt cared about.”

Report Title: Evaluation of Native Aspirations

Coordinating Center: SAMHSA’s Center for Mental Health Services

Background and Evaluation Questions:

The Native Aspirations Project provides mental health assistance to children, youth and their families 

living on tribal reservations and in Alaska Native villages to (1) decrease the risk factors that contribute to 

suicide and school violence and (2) increase the protective factors that are linked to the healthy and safe 

development of children and their families. There are three major objectives for this evaluation: (1) to 

describe how the communities develop their plans, implement activities, and achieve outcomes; (2) to 

describe (and as appropriate) determine the key factors that influence program outcomes, and (3) to 

identify key factors in promoting the sustainability of efforts and outcomes. 

Key Findings: 

Program Development Activities and Outcomes

• NA Cohort 1 (2005) served 58,980 Tribal members in 6 communities and 2,029 AN in 3 villages. 

• NA Cohorts 2 and 3 (2006-7) served approximately 140,408 Tribal members in 14 communities 

and 733 AN in 2 villages. 

• For NA Cohort 1 communities, community readiness scores rose 36%, enabling successful 

suicide prevention programming. The three communities least ready to implement programs 

before NA increased readiness to 50–80% during their NA participation.

• Over 750 community members were trained in prevention and mental health promotion in 

communities serving over 200,000 American Indians and 3,000 Alaska Natives. 

• As of May, 2010, 45 communities have joined NA, with 65 anticipated by 2013. 

• By the end of the process, each community will have developed a prevention plan using cultural-, 

evidence-, or practice-based interventions as well as a sustainability plan to continue the efforts 

beyond their time as a NA Project site.

Factors that Influence Program Outcomes

 

• The Gathering of Native Americans (GONA) is considered a key activity in addressing issues 

related to historical trauma, and enabling communities to reach a point where they are able to 

work together to address current issues of suicide, violence, and bullying prevention. While 
- 147 - 

GONAs have been conducted in Native communities for over 10 years, this activity has never 

been evaluated in terms of either process or outcomes. As part of the cross-site evaluation, ICF 

Macro developed a participant-observation tool that has been used to conduct on-site evaluation 

of the GONA process, including adherence to the GONA curriculum and a qualitative assessment 

of the process in general. ICF Macro has conducted participant observation of 3 community 

GONAs. Key findings from this include the following: 

• GONA facilitators predominantly adhered to the GONA curriculum, thus ensuring the 

communication of consistent messages across communities.

• Key facets to ensuring participation and enthusiasm included utilization of humor, icebreakers, and interactive activities.

• The importance of community participation in ensuring a cohesive approach to 

developing a prevention plan and the ability to work together, successful strategies to 

maximize attendance included significant advertising of the event, frequent planning 

meetings, and targeting specific invitations to key community members. 

• The Community Researcher/Evaluation Liaison model is critical to building local capacity for 

evaluation. In this approach, ICF Macro assigns an evaluation staff person to work directly with 

the community as an evaluation liaison (EL). The EL works with the community to identify a 

community researcher (CR) – an individual living in the community who is responsible for 

working with the EL to assist with data collection and obtain training in all evaluation activities 

and techniques. The EL/CR team work together to collect data through focus groups, surveys, and 

individual in-depth interviews. The CR receives training in the conduct of qualitative data 

collection including focus groups and one-on-one in-depth interviews, sampling techniques, and 

survey implementation. The EL works closely with the CR to identify local data sources that map 

onto the outcomes developed through the concept mapping process. This approach is key to 

developing local capacity and ensuring that all evaluation activities are conducted with scientific 

rigor.

Factors that Promote Sustainability

This program is in its early stages and factors related to sustainability are inappropriate to assess at this 

stage of the evaluation. 

Report Title: Evaluation of the National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN)

 

Coordinating Center: SAMHSA’s Center for Mental Health Services

 

Background and Evaluation Questions:

The National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN) is comprised of over 60 currently and previously 

funded grantees, who are involved in improving access to care and raising the standard of care for 

children and families exposed to traumatic events and violence. The cross-site evaluation questions focus 

on the following elements of the grant program: (1) characteristics of the children and families served by 

NCTSN centers; (2) impact of the NCTSN-developed interventions on children and their families; (3) 

characteristics of interventions developed by NCTSN centers; (4) characteristics and impact of training 

provided by NCTSN centers; (5) level of collaboration among NCTSN centers.

 

Key Findings: 

Characteristics of children served by NCTSN 

• Data has been collected from a total of 14,888 children over the course of this evaluation through 

the descriptive and clinical outcomes study.

• Children served by NCTSN centers have experienced a variety of traumatic events. 
- 148 - 

• Three trauma types have been reported by the caregivers for greater than 40% of 

children: domestic violence (48.2%), traumatic loss or bereavement (47.1%), and 

impaired caregiver (41.4%).

• Emotional abuse or psychological maltreatment (37.3%), physical abuse (27.7%), neglect 

(26.2%), and sexual abuse (22.1%) were also represented in the trauma history for more 

than 20% of the children. 

• 30% of children were exposed to four or more traumas.

 

Clinical Outcomes for children receiving services 

• Statistically significant decreases have been found overtime in the clinical problems and disorders 

of children served by NCTSN services.

• Six-month follow-up results include the following. 

• There was a significant decrease in the percentage of children exhibiting PTSD 

symptoms between the baseline evaluation (67.0%), and the 6-moth follow up (50.4%). 

• Significant declines were also noted in percentages of children with symptoms of 

depression (from 51.3% at baseline to 38.5% at 6-month follow-up). 

• Similar significant decreases were also observed in the percentages of children with 

generalized anxiety symptoms (from 46.2% to 38.1%), as well as children with 

attachment problems (from 40.3% to 33.6%). 

• Twelve-month follow-up results include the following. 

• 50.7% of children were within clinical range at baseline based on their CBCL score. This 

percentage decreased to 29.0% at the 12 month follow-up. 

• The percentage of children with PTSD symptoms within clinical range decreased from 

23.0% to 8.5% over the 12-month timeframe.

• There was a 21.7% decline of behavioral problems at the 12-month timeframe.

• The percentage of children scoring within the clinical range on the TSCC-A anxiety, 

depression, anger, and dissociation subscales decreased from 11.6-15.6% to 4.0-6.2% by 

the 12-month follow-up. 

Most commonly used NCTSN-developed interventions 

As of the 3-month follow, the children participating in the longitudinal clinical outcomes study were 

receiving the following evidence-based treatments:

• Trauma Focused Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (TF-CBT)-63.8% 

• Attachment, Self Regulation, and Competence (ARC)-8.3% 

• Child Parent Psychotherapy (CPP)-4.5% 

• Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT)-3.5% 

• Structured Psychotherapy for Adolescents Responding to Chronic Stress (SPARCS)-2.5% 

 

Characteristics and Impact of NCTSN Training

• In FY 2009, more than 1,600 individuals have been trained through 60 trainings. 

• Psycho-education and clinical interventions were the two most common topics for trainings. 

• Since its inception in 2008, over 250 trainings have been implemented and more than 7,500 

people have been trained. 

• NCTSN provides training to providers in a variety of fields. 

• Mental health providers – 61.7% 
- 149 - 

• Child Welfare workers- 13.6% 

• Teachers – 12.4% 

• Childcare Providers – 3.9% 

• Disaster/crisis responders – 2.7% 

• Primary care – 2.5% 

• Faith-based – 2.3% 

• Probation officers – 2.1% 

• Police force – 0.7% 

• The results indicate that training participants gained knowledge on new treatments and practices 

in specialized areas as a result of the trainings. The top five areas in which knowledge was 

enhanced across training content were as follows: 

• Evidence-based interventions for trauma-exposed children. 

• Overall knowledge about child trauma and its impact. 

• Delivery of clinical interventions to trauma exposed children. 

• Screening for traumatic exposure. 

• Assessment of child traumatic stress.

 

Collaboration among NCTSN centers

NCTSN centers are involved in many collaborative activities that address the quality of care for 

traumatized children. Collaborative activities may involve centers partnering to develop and implement 

new products and interventions or joining interest groups that develop resources such as toolkits, 

manuals, and informational materials for specific trauma topics or populations. Activities may also 

include participating in workgroups to develop products or in Learning Collaboratives to increase clinical 

expertise in particular evidence-based interventions and products. 

 

• Of the key Network activities assessed, the collaboration on product development is the strongest 

• Shared interests between NCTSN centers, the willingness of the Network centers to learn and 

share expertise, and the willingness to participate on workgroup committees and collaborative 

groups were reported to have greatly enhanced the potential for successful collaboration. 

• Major challenges to collaboration included time and resource constraints, long-distance 

communication between centers, and limited opportunities for face-to-face meetings with staff 

members from other centers.

• Child welfare, juvenile, justice, education, and health care agencies also collaborate with NCTSN 

centers for information and referral activities, training, and service coordination. 
- 150 -

Report Title: Evaluation of the Safe Schools/Healthy Students Program

Coordinating Center: SAMHSA’s Center of Mental Health Services

Background and Evaluation Questions:

The Safe Schools/Healthy Students (SS/HS) Initiative is a unique multiagency response to the goal of 

using research-based programs and policies to promote safe and effective learning environments for 

children and youth. Established by Congress in 1999 as a joint program of the U.S. Departments of 

Education, Health and Human Services, and Justice, SS/HS has helped more than 350 school districts to 

develop and implement comprehensive plans in collaboration with local mental health, law enforcement, 

and juvenile justice agencies. The Safe Schools/Healthy Students (SS/HS) national evaluation seeks to 

quantify the results of the SS/HS Initiative and explore the factors that contributed to the grantees’ 

success. The current 5-year cross-site national evaluation of the SS/HS Initiative encompasses 175 

grantees in five successive cohorts that received grants beginning in 2005. The cross-site evaluation 

questions focus on three elements of the grant program: (1) impact of the program on students and 

schools; (2) characteristics of SS/HS programs and activities; and (3) level of coordination and service 

integration among SS/HS partners.

Key Findings:

Program Impact on Students and Schools

• Violent incidents decreased 11 percent.

• Fewer students reported that they had experienced violence (7 percent decrease) or witnessed 

violence (4 percent decrease).

• Ninety-six percent of school staff said SS/HS had improved school safety.

• More than 90 percent of school staff said SS/HS had reduced violence on campus.

• Almost 80 percent of school staff said SS/HS had reduced violence in the community.

• The number of students receiving school-based mental health services increased 263 percent.

• The number of students receiving community-based mental health services increased 519 percent.

• Almost 90 percent of school staff reported improved detection of mental health problems.

• More than 80 percent of school staff said they saw reductions in alcohol and other drug use.

Characteristics of SS/HS Programs and Activities

Safe Schools/Healthy Students provides communities with the following types of successful programs 

and services.

• SafeSchoolEnvironments and Policies

• Preparedness plan to address crises in schools (95% of grantees)

• Security measures for school grounds and facilities (93% of grantees)

• Reporting on school safety and security incidents (92%)

• Parental involvement (86%)

• Student disciplinary policy (98%)

• School resource officers (

• Plans to improve school climate

• Substance use, violence prevention, and early intervention

• Social and recreational student activities (88% of grantees)

• Mentoring (80%)

• School-wide substance use prevention curricula (99%)
- 151 -

• Schools and Community Mental Health Services

• Screening and assessment (100% of grantees)

• School-based mental health services (100%)

• Child and family support services (100%)

• Referral and follow-up in and outside school (98%)

• Early Childhood Social and Emotional Development 

• Screening for developmental milestones and school readiness (96% of grantees)

• Training of early childhood service providers (86%)

• Parent and caregiver training and support (100%)

• Pre- and post-natal home visits by nurses (64%)

• Supporting and Connecting Schools and Communities

• Parental and community involvement 96% of grantees)

• Staff bullying prevention, discipline, and drug and/or violence prevention training (86%)

• Family and community involvement in schools

• Mentoring (80%)

• Afterschool programs (86%)

Coordination and Systems Integration

• 61% of grantees established processes for identifying and linking students to services

• 66% established processes for sharing data to evaluate activities

• 71% fielded service delivery teams that include members from various systems

• 71% established process for monitoring quality of screening and assessment

• 76% established system for tracking student outcomes

• 97% established system where treatment plans are coordinated/shared across agencies

• 98% established treatment monitoring information system that is shared across agencies

Report Title: Evaluation of the 2008 National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services

Coordinating Center: SAMHSA’s Center for Behavioral Health Statistics and Quality

Background:

This report presents results from the 2008 National Survey of Substance Abuse Treatment Services (NSSATS), an annual census of facilities providing substance abuse treatment. Conducted by the Substance 

Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), N-SSATS is designed to collect data on 

the location, characteristics, and use of alcohol and drug abuse treatment facilities and services throughout 

the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and other U.S. jurisdictions.

• A total of 14,423 facilities completed the survey. The 13,688 facilities eligible for this report had 

a one-day census of 1,192,490 clients enrolled in substance abuse treatment on March 31, 2008.

• In the United States, there were 474 clients in treatment per 100,000 population aged 18 and older 

on March 31, 2008. The rate was highest for persons with both alcohol and drug problems (214 

per 100,000 population aged 18 and older), followed by drug problems only (171 per 100,000), 

and alcohol problems only (89 per 100,000).

• The total number of substance abuse treatment facilities remained relatively constant between 

2004 and 2008, while the number of clients in treatment increased slightly. The number of 

facilities increased by 2 percent, from 13,454 facilities in 2004 to 13,688 facilities in 2008. The 
- 152 -

number of clients in treatment on the survey reference date increased by 11 percent, from 

1,072,251 in 2004 to 1,192,490 in 2008.

• Clients in treatment for both alcohol and drug abuse made up 46 percent of all clients. Clients in 

treatment for drug abuse only made up 35 percent of all clients. Clients in treatment for abuse of 

alcohol only made up 19 percent of all clients.

• Thirty-nine percent of all clients in treatment had diagnosed co-occurring substance abuse and 

mental health disorders.

• Private non-profit organizations operated 58 percent of all facilities and were treating 53 percent 

of all clients. Private for-profit organizations operated 29 percent of all facilities and were treating 

30 percent of all clients. Local governments operated 6 percent of all facilities and were treating 7 

percent of all clients. State governments operated 3 percent of all facilities and were treating 4 

percent of all clients. The Federal government operated 2 percent of all facilities and was treating 

5 percent of all clients. Tribal governments operated 1 percent of all facilities and were treating 1 

percent of all clients.

• Outpatient treatment was offered by 80 percent of all facilities, and accounted for 90 percent of 

all clients in treatment. Residential (non-hospital) treatment was offered by 27 percent of all 

facilities, and accounted for 9 percent of all clients in treatment. Hospital inpatient treatment was 

offered by 6 percent of all facilities and accounted for 1 percent of all clients in treatment.

Report Title: Independent Evaluation of the Community Mental Health Services Block Grant

Coordinating Center: SAMHSA’s Center for Mental Health Services

Background:

This report presents the findings of an independent evaluation of the Community Mental Health Services 

Block Grant program (Block Grant). The evaluation used qualitative and quantitative data gathered from 

FY 2006 State applications and implementation reports, the Uniform Reporting System (URS), and 

interviews and surveys with State and Federal representatives.

The Block Grant is the principal Federal discretionary program supporting community-based mental 

health services for adults with serious mental illnesses and children with serious emotional disturbances. 

To receive a Block Grant award, States must submit an application prepared in accordance with the law 

for the fiscal year for which the State is seeking funds. The funds awarded are to be used to carry out the 

State Plan contained in the application; to evaluate programs and services set in place under the Plan; and 

to conduct planning, administration, and educational activities related to the provision of services under 

the Plan.

The purpose of the evaluation was to determine whether the Block Grant is effective in encouraging and 

facilitating development of effective community-based mental health service systems that promote 

Federal priorities and support recovery and resiliency for adults with serious mental illnesses and children 

with serious emotional disturbances.

By design, the Block Grant is a flexible source of funding that States can use to meet the unique needs of 

their community-based mental health systems. In most cases, Block Grant funds are blended with other 

Federal or State funds or are allocated directly to community-based provider agencies (termed 

“subrecipients”), where they are combined with other resources. As a result, it is often difficult to draw a 

direct line from Block Grant funding to a specific outcome. The evaluators sought to capture a 

combination of quantitative data on outcomes likely affected by Block Grant funding, plus qualitative 

input from those on the front lines of mental health services in the States who can speak to the impact of 

the Block Grant from firsthand experience.
- 153 -

This report presents considerable information on the Block Grant, the role it plays in driving change, and 

the way it fits into the larger context of mental health transformation. The broad lessons, stakeholder 

recommendations, activities, and specific examples herein may prove useful not only for policymakers 

and program administrators, but also for the mental health system’s other key stakeholders (e.g., service 

providers, consumers, family members, advocates, etc.).

State and Federal representatives interviewed in the course of the evaluation offered a number of 

suggestions for improving the Block Grant. Across all recommendations, State and Federal interviewees 

stressed the importance of involving States and subrecipients to support implementation and ensure that 

any adjustments are shaped in part by contributions from these important stakeholders.

Following is an overview of the highlights of this independent evaluation of the Block Grant. Taken 

together, these findings demonstrate that the Block Grant is meeting the requirements of its congressional 

mandate and has proven effective in helping develop a stronger mental health system both in individual 

States and nationwide.

Key Findings:

QUESTION 1 – Is the Block Grant being implemented according to congressional intent?

The evaluation indicates that the Block Grant is being implemented according to congressional intent. 

State and Federal stakeholders reported a high level of collaboration and information exchange that result 

in the development of effective State Plans serving adults and children with the most serious disorders.

Selected Outcomes

• Nearly 6 million adults and children accessed mental health services through state mental health 

agencies (SMHAs) in FY 2006. An average of 73 percent of adults and 76 percent of children met the 

criteria for serious mental illnesses and serious emotional disturbances, respectively. Twenty-three 

percent of adults and 6 percent of children receiving services had co-occurring mental and substance use 

disorders.

• All States have State Mental Health Planning and Advisory Councils (Planning Councils). Many 

Planning Councils played significant roles in statewide planning, advocacy, and outreach efforts that 

exceed what is required in the Block Grant’s authorizing legislation.

• The Block Grant application and guidance encourage States to create comprehensive State Plans that 

cover the full range of system needs and services for adults and children.

• The regional review process offers an opportunity for States to exchange information, hear about 

innovative programs or strategies, and learn from the experiences of other States.

• Monitoring site visits allow Federal staff to see Block Grant–funded programs in context and identify 

opportunities to provide targeted training and technical assistance (TA).

• Training and TA provided to States through the Block Grant expose SMHA staff to promising practices 

and efficient implementation methods.

• URS data collection and reporting activities have increased the extent to which States are able to 

comprehensively describe program outcomes and client services, and to identify service gaps.

QUESTION 2 – Is the Block Grant achieving the results it was created to achieve?

The Block Grant, through both its funding design and the application of its legislative requirements, 

empowers SMHAs to better address the needs of adults and children with serious mental illnesses and 

serious emotional disturbances. Stakeholders believe that increased funding would provide valuable 

support for implementation of evidence-based mental health practices, data infrastructure, and TA.
- 154 -

Selected Outcomes

• From 2004 to 2006, the vast majority of consumers of public mental health services said that they were 

satisfied with adult (84-86 percent) and child (76-79 percent) services.

• Representatives from more than two-thirds of States interviewed credited the Block Grant with 

contributing to an increase in consumer involvement and use of community- based treatment services, 

including evidence-based practices; they also credited the Block Grant with decreasing unmet need.

• Eighty-two percent of States reported implementing at least one evidence-based practice in FY 2006. 

Supported Housing, Supported Employment, and Assertive Community Treatment were the practices 

most commonly received by adults; Therapeutic Foster Care was the practice most commonly received by 

children.

• Representatives from more than 50 percent of States interviewed reported leveraging the Block Grant 

funds to achieve an impact greater than the size of individual State grants would suggest. States also used 

the Block Grant’s Maintenance of Effort (MOE) requirement to protect critical mental health funding 

from other sources.

QUESTION 3 – Does the Block Grant promotes innovation?

By using Block Grant funds as seed or startup monies, States can demonstrate effectiveness of new or 

expanded programs, which in turn makes them more effective in seeking additional financial resources 

such as Medicaid reimbursement or other government funds.

Selected Outcomes

• States have used Block Grant funds to initiate or supplement such promising practices as peer support, 

jail diversion, suicide prevention, information technology (including telemedicine), self-directed care, and 

disaster response.

• States have also used Block Grant funds to help build programs around outreach and education, 

reduction in bias and discrimination, and evaluation and consumer satisfaction, as well as to support 

programs directed toward rural, transitional, and veteran populations.