DRUG-FREE 

COMMUNITIES 

SUPPORT 

PROGRAM

Agencies Have 

Strengthened 

Collaboration but 

Could Enhance 

Grantee Compliance 

and Performance 

Monitoring

Report to Congressional Committees

February 2017

GAO-17-120

United States Government Accountability Office
United States Government Accountability Office

Highlights of GAO-17-120, a report to 

congressional committees

February 2017

DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUPPORT 

PROGRAM

Agencies Have Strengthened Collaboration but Could 

Enhance Grantee Compliance and Performance 

Monitoring

What GAO Found

The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration (SAMHSA) employ leading collaboration practices to administer 

the Drug Free Communities (DFC) Support Program and have funded a range of 

drug prevention activities. Both agencies have improved their collaboration since 

GAO last reported on the DFC program in 2008. Their current efforts to jointly 

manage the DFC Support program are consistent with GAO’s relevant key 

collaboration practices. For example, ONDCP and SAMHSA defined and agreed 

upon common outcomes, such as prioritizing efforts to increase participation 

from under-represented communities. The two agencies have also funded a 

range of DFC grantees’ activities and report on these activities in their annual

evaluation reports. For example, ONDCP reported that from February through 

July 2014, grantees educated more than 156,000 youth on topics related to the 

consequences of substance abuse. To illustrate, the 10 grantees GAO

interviewed described their specific efforts, including programs for

• Enhancing Skills: To enhance the skills of those in the community, one 

grantee sponsored a session for local realtors on precautions to take 

when preparing for open houses—warning them that leftover 

prescriptions in medicine cabinets present the potential for abuse among 

those walking through the home for sale.

• Enhancing Access/Reducing Barriers: To reduce cultural barriers, 

another grantee developed signs with text in the multiple languages 

spoken throughout the community that shopkeepers could display to 

emphasize the legal purchase age for alcohol. 

• Providing Information: To provide greater information to parents on the 

consequences of providing alcohol in their homes, a grantee created a 

slogan to remind parents of their children’s needs, “Be my Parent, not 

my Bartender.”

The agencies have operating procedures in place, but could enhance grantee 

compliance and performance monitoring. In particular, SAMHSA does not 

consistently follow documentation and reporting procedures to ensure grantees’ 

compliance with governing statutes. SAMHSA also has not been accurately 

reporting to ONDCP on grantee compliance. Specifically for the files GAO

reviewed, SAMHSA followed all processes for ensuring that initial applicants had 

submitted required documentation before awarding them initial grant funding. 

However, SAMHSA was less consistent in adhering to procedures for confirming 

documentation in later years of the program. For example, 14 of the 18 grantees 

that should have had sustainability plans in their files did not. These plans 

outline how the grantee intends to maintain necessary resources to achieve 

long-term goals after exiting the program. Prior to GAO’s review, ONDCP and 

SAMHSA officials were not aware of the missing data in the grant files. Without 

close adherence to existing procedures, and a mechanism to ensure that the 

documentation it reports to ONDCP is accurate and complete, SAMHSA’s 

performance monitoring capacity is limited and it cannot be certain that grantees 

are engaging in intended activities and meeting long-term goals. 

View GAO-17-120. For more information, 

contact Diana Maurer at (202) 512-8777 or 

maurerd@gao.gov

Why GAO Did This Study

In 2015, approximately 2.2 million 

adolescents aged 12 to17 were current 

users of illicit drugs. The Drug-Free 

Communities Act of 1997 established 

the DFC Support Program—a federal 

grant program supporting drug abuse 

prevention efforts that engage schools, 

law enforcement, and other sectors of 

a community. The program targets 

reductions in the use of alcohol, 

tobacco, marijuana, and the illicit use 

of prescription drugs. The Office of 

National Drug Control Policy

Reauthorization Act of 2006 includes a 

provision that GAO routinely assess 

ONDCP’s programs and operations.

This report addresses: (1) the extent to 

which ONDCP and SAMHSA use 

leading practices to coordinate 

program administration and the types 

of activities funded; and (2) the extent 

to which ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s’

operating procedures both ensure DFC 

grantees comply with governing 

statutes and provide a basis for 

performance monitoring. To conduct 

this work, GAO analyzed agency 

policies from 2013-2015 (most recent 

available); interviewed agency officials; 

and analyzed coordination efforts 

against relevant key practices GAO

identified previously. GAO reviewed 

files obtained from a non-generalizable

random sample of 30 grantees and 

interviewed a random subset of 10.

What GAO Recommends

GAO recommends that SAMHSA

develop an action plan with time 

frames to strengthen DFC grant 

monitoring and ensure it sends

complete and accurate information to 

ONDCP. SAMHSA concurred with 

these recommendations and identified 

actions to address them.
Page i GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Letter 1

Background 4

ONDCP and SAMHSA Employ Leading Collaboration Practices 

and Have Funded a Range of Drug Prevention Activities 12

Agencies Have Established Operating Procedures but Could 

Enhance Grantee Compliance and Performance Monitoring 20

Conclusions 26

Recommendations for Executive Action 27

Agency Comments and Our Evaluation 27

Appendix I Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program Statutory and 

Program Requirements 31

Appendix II Drug-Free Communities Four Core Measures and 

Examples of Trends 33

Appendix III Comments from the Department of Health and Human Services 36

Appendix IV GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgements 38

Tables

Table 1: Drug-Free Communities Support Program Funding and 

Grants, by Type, Fiscal Years 2013 through 2015 9

Table 2: Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program 

Statutory Requirements for Eligibility 31

Table 3: Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program 

Requirements for Continuation 32

Table 4: The Drug-Free Communities Support Program’s Four 

Core measures 33

Figures

Figure 1: Composition of Coalitions Receiving Grants through the 

Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program 6

Contents
Page ii GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Figure 2: General Grants Management Processes in the Federal 

Grant Life Cycle 10

Figure 3: Drug-Free Communities Support Program Goals, 

Strategies, and Examples of Grantee Activities 15

Figure 4: A Multilingual Sign that a Drug-Free Communities 

Support Program Grantee Developed for Vendors to 

Display that Reinforces the Legal Purchase Age for 

Alcohol 17

Figure 5: Stickers that a Drug-Free Communities Support Program 

Grantee Developed and Affixed to Alcoholic Beverages 

Sold in Stores to Reinforce the Legal Purchase Age for 

Alcohol 19

Figure 6: Percentage Change in Middle School and High School 

Youth Who Reported Drug Use at Least Once in the Past 

30 Days, Fiscal Years 2002 through 2014a 34

Figure 7: Percentage Change in Middle School and High School 

Youth Who Reported Drug Use at Least Once in the Past 

30 Days, Fiscal Year 2013a 35
Page iii GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

List of Abbreviations

CADCA Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America

DFC Drug-Free Communities Support Program

HHS Department of Health and Human Services

ONDCP Office of National Drug Policy Control

SAMHSA Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services 

Administration

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright protection in the 

United States. The published product may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety 

without further permission from GAO. However, because this work may contain 

copyrighted images or other material, permission from the copyright holder may be 

necessary if you wish to reproduce this material separately.
Page 1 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

441 G St. N.W.

Washington, DC 20548

February 7, 2017

Congressional Committees

In 2015, approximately 2.2 million adolescents aged 12 to 17 were 

current users of illicit drugs, which represented nearly 9 percent of 

adolescents in America.1 To help curb youth substance abuse, the DrugFree Communities Act of 1997 established the Drug-Free Communities 

(DFC) Support Program—a federal program providing grants for the 

establishment of community-based, youth-focused, drug abuse 

prevention efforts.2 The DFC Support Program focuses its efforts on the 

prevention and reduction of the use of four primary substances, referred 

to in this report as drugs: (1) alcohol, (2) tobacco, (3) marijuana, and (4) 

the illicit use of prescription drugs. The Office of National Drug Control 

Policy (ONDCP) administers the DFC Support Program, in coordination 

with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance 

Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA). In addition, 

ONDCP is responsible for, among other things, overseeing and 

coordinating the implementation of the Administration’s national drug 

control strategy.

The Office of National Drug Control Policy Reauthorization Act of 2006 

includes a provision that we routinely assess ONDCP’s programs and 

operations.3 In 2008, we reported on the DFC Support Program and 

found weaknesses in grant program administration.4 We recommended 

 1

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Substance Abuse and Mental 

Health Services Administration’s (SAMHSA) annual National Survey on Drug Use and 

Health is a yearly survey on illicit drug use. The 2015 survey obtained information on the 

use of 10 categories of illicit drugs: marijuana; cocaine (including crack); heroin; 

hallucinogens; methamphetamines; and inhalants, as well as the misuse of prescription 

pain relievers, tranquilizers, stimulants, and sedatives. See Center for Behavioral Health 

Statistics and Quality, Key Substance Use and Mental Health Indicators in the United 

States: Results from the 2015 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, U.S. Department 

of Health and Human Services’ Publication No. SMA 16-4984, NSDUSH Series H-51 

(September 2016).

2

Pub. L. No. 105-20, 111 Stat. 224 (1997).

3

Pub. L. No. 109-469, § 203, 120 Stat. 3502, 3517-18 (codified as amended at 21 U.S.C. 

§ 1708a). 

4

GAO, Drug-Free Communities Support Program: Stronger Internal Controls and Other 

Actions Needed to Better Manage the Grant-Making Process, GAO-08-57 (Washington, 

D.C.: Jul 31, 2008).

Letter
Page 2 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

that ONDCP (1) strengthen internal controls; (2) ensure that funded grant 

applicants satisfy statutory eligibility criteria; and (3) more clearly define 

its own and SAMHSA’s roles and responsibilities. ONDCP agreed and 

has made significant improvements and implemented all three 

recommendations. This report addresses: (1) the extent to which ONDCP 

and SAMHSA use leading practices to coordinate program administration 

and the types of activities the DFC Support Program recently funded; and 

(2) the extent to which ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s operating procedures 

both ensure DFC grantees comply with governing statutes and provide a 

basis for performance monitoring.

To assess the extent to which ONDCP and SAMHSA use leading 

practices to coordinate program administration, we analyzed relevant 

documentation, such as policies and procedures including ONDCP’s and 

SAMHSA’s inter-agency agreements for fiscal years 2013, 2014, and 

2015 (the most recent data available). In addition, we interviewed officials 

responsible for the management of the DFC Support Program to discuss 

ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s collaboration practices and assessed them 

against leading practices from prior GAO work.5 We used a subset of 

three key practices among the eight key practices previously reported 

because we identified these three as the most relevant to the scope and 

nature of ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s partnership.6 To determine the types 

of activities the DFC Support Program has recently funded, we reviewed 

grant files from a non-generalizable random sample of 30 grantees from 

fiscal year 2015. (See below for more specific details about sample 

selection.) We reviewed documents in these files to identify the nature 

and frequency of key activities that grantees reported semi-annually to 

SAMHSA in their progress reports. We also analyzed an evaluation 

summary report for grantees funded in fiscal year 2013 that an ONDCP 

contractor produced to gather additional detail on grantees’ activities and 

spoke with the contractor for more details on how the information was 

collected and summarized.7 In addition, we interviewed a subset of 10 

 5

Results Oriented Government: Practices That Can Help Enhance and Sustain 

Collaboration among Federal Agencies, GAO-06-15 (Washington, D.C.: Oct. 21, 2005) 

and GAO, Managing for Results: Key Considerations for Implementing Interagency 

Collaborative Mechanisms, GAO-12-1022 (Washington, D.C.: Sept 27, 2012).

6

The three we selected are (1) defining a common outcome, (2) agreeing on roles and 

responsibilities, and (3) establishing compatible policies, procedures, and other means to 

operate across agency boundaries.

7

At the time of our review, the 2014 National Evaluation Report, based on data grantees 

provided in fiscal year 2013, was the most recent report available. 
Page 3 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

grantees that we selected at random from our file review sample to gain 

greater insights into the specific activities and initiatives in which they 

engaged, as well as to learn more about their interactions with agency 

officials who oversee the DFC Support Program.

To assess the extent to which ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s grant 

administration procedures ensure grantees comply with governing 

statutes and the agencies have program controls in place to provide a 

basis for monitoring and reporting on grantee performance, we reviewed 

and analyzed agency policies, guidance documents, and procedures that 

were in effect for fiscal years 2013, 2014, and 2015. We then assessed 

these procedures and controls against Standards for Internal Control in 

the Federal Government.8 Further, we reviewed the files we obtained 

from the non-generalizable sample of 30 out of 697 grantees awarded 

funds in fiscal year 2015. Additionally, since in any given year, some 

grantees will be first time grant recipients and others will be more tenured, 

we widened our review to include the files for fiscal years 2013 and 2014 

for any selected grantee in continuation status. Overall, our review 

included 79 individual grant files for the 30 selected grantees. Since an 

individual DFC Support Program grantee can be in any year of two 5-year 

cycles, we divided grantees into three categories—years 1 and 6 of the 

grant; years 2 through 5; and years 7 through 10. This categorization also 

aligned with how the program establishes grantee documentation 

requirements, since for each category the program requires different 

forms and reports from grantees. We then randomly selected 10 grantees 

from each category. Specifically, we reviewed and analyzed the more 

than 20 types of required documents to assess the extent to which the 

agencies follow their policies and procedures and ensure grantee 

compliance. We also assessed the reliability of data included in the grant 

files by interviewing agency officials responsible for maintaining and 

managing the systems that store and produce the data. We determined 

that the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our reporting 

objectives.

We conducted this performance audit from January 2016 to February 

2017 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing 

standards. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to 

obtain sufficient, appropriate evidence to provide a reasonable basis for 

 8

GAO, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1 

(Washington, D.C.: November 1999). 
Page 4 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

our findings and conclusions based on our audit objectives. We believe 

that the evidence obtained provides a reasonable basis for our findings 

and conclusions based on our audit objectives.

The DFC Support Program’s two major goals are to:

1. establish and strengthen collaboration among communities, private 

non-profit agencies, and federal, state, local, and tribal governments 

to support the efforts of community “coalitions” to prevent and reduce 

substance abuse among youth; and 

2. reduce substance abuse over time among youth and adults by 

addressing the factors in a community that increase the risk of 

substance abuse and promoting the factors that minimize the risk of 

substance abuse.9

Coalitions receiving grant funds through the program are obliged to make 

progress toward four core outcome measures. These relate to the 

prevalence of drug use among youth in their communities over the past 

30 days, youth’s perceptions of the risk, and the separate perceptions of 

parental and peer disapproval of drug use—each of which is discussed 

later in the report.

Under the DFC Support Program, ONDCP provides federal grants to 

coalitions that have established sustainable and accountable anti-drug 

efforts involving every major sector of a community, such as law 

enforcement and schools. For the purposes of this report we refer to 

coalitions as grantees. According to ONDCP officials, a DFC coalition is 

established through a locally‐based arrangement for cooperation and 

collaboration among groups, such as parents and businesses who agree 

to work together toward a common goal of building a safe, healthy, and 

drug‐free community. DFC grants are intended to support community 

based coalitions and the activities they carry out. Funds are granted to 

the coalition, not a particular sector or sector member.

 9

See 21 U.S.C.§1522 (listing the purposes of the program).

Background

DFC Support Program 

Goals

Coalition Composition 
Page 5 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

DFC coalitions are broad-based groups consisting of representatives of 

youth, parents, businesses, the media, law enforcement, religious or 

other civic groups, health care professionals, and other organizations 

involved in reducing substance abuse in their communities, especially 

among youth—as illustrated in figure 1.
Page 6 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Figure 1: Composition of Coalitions Receiving Grants through the Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program
Page 7 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

ONDCP funds four types of DFC Support Program grants: (1) New; (2) 

Continuation; (3) Mentoring; and (4) Mentoring Continuation. For the 

purposes of this review, we focused on New and Continuation DFC 

grants as they constitute the majority of grants awarded. 

1. New grants represent those openly competing for their 1st or 6th year 

of DFC funding.

2. Continuation grants represent annual “in-cycle” grants for years 2 

through 5, or 7 through 10 of DFC funding.

3. Mentoring grants represent the first in a 2-year grant awarded to 

existing coalitions to support their work to create new DFC coalitions. 

Mentoring Continuation grants represent the second year of the 2-

year award.

4. Each new and continuation grant awards up to $125,000 per fiscal 

year and mentoring grants limit awards to $75,000 per fiscal year.

By statute, eligible coalitions may receive a new grant for 1 year and then 

apply for a 1-year continuation grant in each of the subsequent 4 years—

for a total first round grant period of 5 years. After the first 5 years, 

grantees can apply again for a second 5 year round—the maximum 

allowable term is 10 years—and the 6th year begins with another new 

grant.10 Grantees can apply for continuing grants again in each of the 4 

years thereafter.11 According to ONDCP, it bases decisions on whether or 

not to continue a grant on the extent to which the coalition has (1) made 

satisfactory progress in its efforts to reduce youth substance abuse and 

(2) complied with all the terms and conditions of its award.

To meet the statutory requirements of the DFC Support Program for initial 

eligibility—years 1 and 6—a coalition must:

12

• submit an application to the ONDCP Administrator;

 10For a coalition applying for a grant for a 6th year, by statute, the ONDCP Administrator 

may not afford a higher priority in the award of the 6th year grant than the Administrator 

would afford the applicant for an initial grant. 21 U.S.C. § 1532(b)(3)(C).

11For purposes of this report, “new” grant applicants refer to those applying for year 1 or 

year 6 of funding or who have had a lapse in their funding in the previous fiscal year. 

“Continuation” grant applicants received funding in the previous year and are applying for 

1 fiscal year of funding, either year 2 through 5 or year 7 through10.

1221 U.S.C. § 1532(a)(1)-(6).

DFC Support Program 

Grant Types

Applicant Eligibility Criteria 

and Program 

Requirements
Page 8 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

• consist of one or more representatives from each of the 12 sectors—

at least one representative per sector—as illustrated in figure 1;13

• demonstrate that the representatives of the coalition have worked 

together on substance abuse reduction initiatives for at least 6 months 

(prior to applying);

• demonstrate substantial participation from volunteer leaders in the 

community;

• have as its principal mission the reduction of substance abuse in a 

comprehensive and long-term manner, with a primary focus on youth 

in the community;

• describe and document the nature and extent of the substance abuse 

problem in the community;

• provide a description of the substance abuse prevention and 

treatment programs and activities underway at the time of the grant 

application and identify substance abuse programs and service gaps 

in the community;

• develop a strategic plan to reduce substance abuse among youth; 

and work to develop a consensus regarding the priorities of the 

community to combat substance abuse among youth;

• establish a system to measure and report outcomes;

• conduct an initial benchmark survey of drug use among youth and 

provide assurances that the entity conducting the evaluation has 

sufficient experience in gathering data related to substance abuse 

among youth or in evaluating the effectiveness of community anti-drug 

coalitions; and

• demonstrate that the coalition is an “ongoing concern” by 

demonstrating that it has established itself as an appropriate legal 

entity or organization that receives financial support from non-federal 

sources and has a strategy to solicit substantial financial support from 

non-federal sources after the expiration of the grant term.14

For additional information on the statutory requirements for the DFC 

Support Program, see table 2 in appendix I.

 13An individual who is a member of the coalition may serve on a coalition as a 

representative of not more than 1 of the sectors.

14 21 U.S.C. § 1532(a)(5).
Page 9 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

In addition to meeting statutory eligibility requirements, grantees must 

also comply with DFC Support Program terms and conditions. For 

example, the program requires that grantees must develop a 

comprehensive 12-Month Action Plan that includes an appropriate 

strategy for each drug they will be addressing—as well as a mechanism 

for demonstrating their progress along the way. Further, two grantees 

may not serve the same zip code, unless both have clearly demonstrated 

a plan for collaboration. For more information on the additional program 

requirements for the DFC Support Program, see table 3 in appendix I.

In fiscal year 2015, the DFC Support Program’s appropriated budget was 

approximately $93.5 million, representing just under a quarter of 

ONDCP’s total budget of about $375 million. As table 1 shows, the total 

number of DFC Support Program grants increased each fiscal year from 

2013 to 2015.

Table 1: Drug-Free Communities Support Program Funding and Grants, by Type, Fiscal Years 2013 through 2015

Dollars in millions

Total Funding Total Grants New Awards Continuing Mentoring-New Mentoring 

Continuing

2013 $87.5 643 147 473 19 4

2014 $92 680 197 463 3 17

2015 $93.5 697 188 486 20 3

Source: GAO analysis of Office of National Drug Control Policy data. | GAO-17-120

According to ONDCP, since the passage of the Drug-Free Communities 

Act in 1997, the DFC Support Program has funded more than 2,000 

coalitions and mobilizes nearly 9,000 community volunteers across the 

country.

ONDCP and SAMHSA have operated the grant program through an interagency agreement since 2005 that they update annually. Specifically, 

ONDCP oversees the strategic planning, bi-annual progress reporting,

funding of the DFC Support Program, and SAMHSA conducts day-to-day 

administration, such as interacting with grantees on a regular basis and 

reviewing their activities. SAMHSA, as directed by ONDCP also awards a 

grant to the Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America (CADCA), which 

provides technical assistance and training to grantees in order to enhance 

their capacity. For example, CADCA trains grantees in effective 

community problem-solving strategies and teaches them how to assess 

Total DFC Support 

Program Spending and 

Grants Management 

Structure and Processes
Page 10 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

their local substance abuse-related problems and develop responsive 

action plans.

The DFC Support Program operates on a yearly grant cycle, working 

through a given calendar year. The DFC grant life cycle follows a typical 

federal grant life cycle, as shown in figure 2.

Figure 2: General Grants Management Processes in the Federal Grant Life Cycle
Page 11 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

ONDCP and SAMHSA require grantees to submit semi-annual progress 

reports through an ONDCP system called DFC Management and 

Evaluation (DFC Me). These reports contain descriptions of the activities 

the grantees conducted in supporting the program’s two broad goals, as 

well as their progress against the program’s four core measures:

1. Past 30-Day Prevalence of Use—youth who reported use of alcohol, 

tobacco, marijuana, or illicit use of prescription drugs at least once in 

the past 30 days.

2. Perception of Risk—youth who reported that the use of alcohol, 

tobacco, marijuana, or illicit use of prescription drugs is harmful.

3. Perception of Parental Disapproval—youth who reported their parents 

feel the regular use of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana, or illicit use of 

prescription drugs is wrong or very wrong.

4. Perception of Peer Disapproval—youth who reported their friends 

thought it would be “wrong or very wrong” for them to drink alcohol, 

engage in any tobacco or marijuana use, or illicit prescription drug 

use. See appendix II for additional details on ONDCP’s core 

measures.

As we have previously reported, conducting grant management 

processes like those illustrated above, in accordance with internal control 

standards, statutory requirements, and leading practices for collaborating 

agencies is essential for achieving program outcomes.15

 15GAO, Grants Management: Actions Needed to Address Persistent Grant Closeout 

Timeliness and Undisbursed Balance Issues, GAO-16-362 (Washington D.C., Apr. 14, 

2016) and GAO-06-15. 
Page 12 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s efforts to jointly manage the DFC Support 

Program are consistent with relevant, key collaboration practices. 

Specifically, in our prior work, we have found that collaboration is 

enhanced when partners follow certain key practices, such as (1) defining 

a common outcome, (2) agreeing on roles and responsibilities, and (3) 

establishing compatible policies, procedures, and other means to operate 

across agency boundaries.16 We have also recognized in prior work that 

collaborating agencies should work together to define and agree on their 

respective roles and responsibilities, including how the collaborative effort 

will be led, designating a lead body, establishing oversight for the 

initiative, and employing mechanisms to implement their efforts.17

ONDCP and SAMHSA defined and agreed upon common outcomes 

related to their administration of the DFC Support Program. For example: 

(1) they agreed to take efforts to enhance their grants management 

capability through implementation of a new data system, and (2) they 

agreed on prioritizing efforts to increase participation from underrepresented communities.

To enhance their communication capacity with grantees, in 2015, ONDCP 

officials created a new interactive website with input from SAMHSA. This 

website is designed to improve communication with grantees for 

submitting reports, sharing best practices, receiving the latest program 

 16GAO-06-15. 

17We used a subset of three key practices among the eight key practices previously 

reported in GAO-06-15 because we identified these three as the most relevant to the 

scope and nature of the partnership between ONDCP and SAMHSA. We also applied 

GAO-12-1022, which focused on key considerations for implementing collaborative 

mechanisms, such as interagency task forces or interagency liaison positions.

ONDCP and 

SAMHSA Employ 

Leading Collaboration 

Practices and Have 

Funded a Range of 

Drug Prevention 

Activities

ONDCP and SAMHSA 

Use Leading Practices for 

Interagency Collaboration

Defining a common outcome
Page 13 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

and training updates, and requesting technical assistance from ONDCP 

or SAMHSA. To increase participation among under-represented 

communities—specifically rural and tribal communities—the agencies 

agreed to offer tailored training and provide additional outreach to 

encourage coalitions in these communities to apply for DFC grants. The 

agencies also adjusted the time frames for all coalitions to prepare their 

applications given some of the challenges tribal communities face in 

accessing the internet to submit electronic applications.

ONDCP and SAMHSA officials outline and adhere to their roles and 

responsibilities through interagency agreements and routine meetings.

We reviewed interagency agreements (IAA) for fiscal years 2013, 2014, 

and 2015 and found that each IAA specifies each agency’s roles and 

responsibilities in terms of fiscal oversight, program oversight, and the 

DFC Support Program funding process. In addition, the fiscal year 2015 

IAA outlined types of communications (e.g., meetings and status reports), 

as well as the frequency of communications and reporting requirements, 

among other things. ONDCP and SAMSHA officials also told us they 

have conducted monthly meetings to discuss the management of the 

program with respect to the agencies’ specific roles, responsibilities, and 

outcomes, and provided us with copies of agendas and minutes that 

demonstrate that such discussions occurred over the last 3 years.

According to ONDCP and SAMHSA officials, the discussions at these 

routine meetings are typically about programmatic issues, such as ways 

to improve the DFC Support Program and the agencies’ processes. 

CADCA officials also stated that they attend separate monthly meetings 

where programmatic and technical issues are discussed and that they 

work with the agencies, where applicable, to develop joint communication 

or solutions. To further strengthen communication between the two 

agencies SAMHSA designated an individual to serve as the 

SAMHSA/ONDCP liaison position—another collaborative mechanism our 

prior work identified. According to SAMHSA’s position description, the 

liaison’s role includes executing policies and planning initiatives by 

interfacing with all levels of SAMHSA and ONDCP, and communicating 

directly with the ONDCP Administrator on behalf of SAMHSA managers.

ONDCP and SAMHSA have established compatible policies, procedures, 

and other means to operate across agency boundaries. For example, the 

agencies provided evidence that they (1) jointly developed and 

communicated guidance; (2) strengthened the grant application review 

process—specifically, they made improvements to the guidance on 

evaluating the applications; and (3) offered joint coalition training 

sessions.

Agreeing on roles and 

responsibilities

Establishing compatible 

policies and means to operate 

across boundaries
Page 14 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

To develop unified guidance, each year the agencies jointly published a 

handbook for all coalitions that outlines, in part, ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s 

roles and responsibilities and grantees’ reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements.18 Representatives from the grantees with whom we spoke 

said that ONDCP’s and SAMHSA’s collaborative efforts enhance the 

effectiveness of the DFC Support Program. Specifically, 8 out of the 10 

grantees we interviewed said that the guidance the agencies jointly 

provided to them was helpful. Also, to strengthen the grant application 

review process, the agencies revised and updated their procedures for 

screening grant applications, detailed their peer review process, and 

established time frames for application reviews and decisions.

Additionally, the agencies co-sponsored semi-annual meetings and 

training sessions for grantees that leaders from ONDCP, SAMHSA, and 

CADCA also typically attend. At these meetings, the leaders discuss 

current trends on youth drug use and perceptions and how best to 

incorporate them into the grantees’ activities and outcomes. For example, 

in February 2016, a professor from Harvard Medical School presented the 

keynote address on the importance of using science to inform the public 

about the harmful effects of marijuana use among youth.

DFC grantees have engaged in a range of activities, including drug abuse 

education campaigns and efforts to enhance enforcement, and they 

report on these activities in their semi-annual progress reports to 

SAMHSA. ONDCP, through its contractor, routinely reviews the nature 

and scope of these activities to ensure they fit within one of the Seven 

Strategies for Community Change.19 For example, according to ONDCP, 

one of these seven strategies is “providing information.” As ONDCP 

reported, from February 2014 through July 2014, to execute this strategy, 

grantees held 7,338 face-to-face information sessions on topics such as 

the consequences of youth substance abuse and the importance of drug 

abstinence, reaching almost 138,000 adults and more than 156,000 

youth. Figure 3 illustrates the DFC Support Program’s overarching goal, 

its specific program goals, ONDCP’s seven strategies for goal attainment, 

and examples of grantees’ activities aligned with each.

 18SAMHSA, Drug-Free Communities Support Program, Grant Award Recipient Handbook 

2015. 

19The University of Kansas Work Group on Health Promotion and Community 

Development, a World Health Organization Collaborating Center, developed the list of 

strategies.

DFC Grantee Activities 

Include Drug Abuse 

Education Campaigns and 

Efforts to Reduce Access 

and Strengthen 

Enforcement
Page 15 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Figure 3: Drug-Free Communities Support Program Goals, Strategies, and Examples of Grantee Activities

a

These are strategies that the program associates with supporting community change.
Page 16 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Our review of grant files from 30 grantees also revealed diversity in terms 

of specific activities within the seven strategic categories. For example, 

grantees reported conducting alcohol prevention outreach activities and 

events for parents; implementing a county-wide marijuana prevention 

media campaign; and implementing prescription drug take-back, or 

collection, events. We also spoke with 10 of the 30 grantees to discuss, 

among other things, how they are using their funds to implement one or 

more of the seven program strategies. Some examples include the 

following.

• Providing Support: To provide support to youth working on 

prevention and education efforts, a grantee sponsors a “Yearly Youth 

Summit,” which is organized partially by their 20 member youth 

coalition. The youth coalition selects the topics and guest speakers for 

the summit and invites up to 75 peers who discuss and brainstorm 

ideas for activities and ways to address a specific substance abuse 

problem at their school. Additionally, tables are assigned to 

encourage communication outside an individual’s immediate peer 

group.

• Enhancing Skills: To enhance the skills of those in the community to 

be on alert for and vigilant against potential drug abuse, one grantee 

sponsored a session for local realtors on precautions to take when 

preparing for open houses—warning realtors that leftover prescription 

drugs in medicine cabinets present the potential for abuse among 

those walking through the home for sale.

• Enhancing Access/Reducing Barriers: To reduce cultural barriers, 

one grantee developed signs emphasizing the legal purchase age for 

alcohol in multiple languages to respect the diversity of languages 

spoken across its community—as seen in figure 4. The grantee then 

provided these signs to local business owners.
Page 17 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Figure 4: A Multilingual Sign that a Drug-Free Communities Support Program 

Grantee Developed for Vendors to Display that Reinforces the Legal Purchase Age 

for Alcohol 

• Providing Information: To provide greater information to parents on 

what drug prevention steps they could take, one grantee chose to 

address the challenges parents may face when hosting teenage 

parties at their home. Specifically, this grantee worked with its youth 

group to identify house parties as a concern in the community and 

provided parents with information on the consequences of providing 

alcohol and youth alcohol consumption. The grantee used the slogan 

to remind parents of their children’s needs: “Be my Parent, not my 

Bartender,” which they told us parents found particularly compelling.
Page 18 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

• Changing Consequences: To change consequences for adults who 

host underage drinking parties, another grantee launched an 

anonymous tip line called “QuikTip,” which led to tips coming in daily 

to their local 911 call center. One outcome resulting from the QuikTip 

line was that a New Year’s underage drinking party was reported, 

which led to law enforcement being dispatched to the party.

• Modifying/Changing Policies: To modify or enforce policies among 

its local businesses, one grantee partnered with the District Attorney’s 

office to create a task force that included business owners, local 

policy makers, and youth coalition members. This task force made it a 

priority to ensure that all clerks selling alcoholic beverages were 

taking mandatory beverage service training and also worked to gain 

buy-in among task force participants for an increase in alcohol policy 

compliance checks. The grantee drew upon its 18- to 20-year old 

members to assist in testing store clerks’ adherence to the under 

aged drinking laws.

• Changing Physical Design: To change the appearance of alcoholic 

beverage packages, another coalition reported that its youth group 

created stickers as part of a “Keep It Legal” campaign. The group 

designed and helped place approximately 540 stickers on alcoholic 

items sold throughout the community that contained a message about 

the legal drinking age and the consequences of alcohol 

consumption—as shown in figure 5.
Page 19 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Figure 5: Stickers that a Drug-Free Communities Support Program Grantee 

Developed and Affixed to Alcoholic Beverages Sold in Stores to Reinforce the Legal 

Purchase Age for Alcohol
Page 20 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

ONDCP and SAMHSA have developed standard operating procedures to 

collect relevant information from new applicants and current grantees and 

to document grantees’ compliance with eligibility requirements in 

governing statutes.20 Per the IAA between ONDCP and SAMHSA, 

SAMHSA is charged with collecting, analyzing, and reporting the status of 

grantees’ compliance to ONDCP. The agencies require substantial 

documentation from grantees in terms of initial and continuing grant 

applications. Some examples include:

• A grant application, which includes a grantee’s mission statement, 

description of its projects, and a 12-month action plan outlining its 

focus areas and planned activities;

• Detailed budget narrative and budget sections that accompany the 

application. These documents, in part, identify sources of non-federal 

matching funds that grantees receive to meet the DFC funds matching 

requirement;

• Resumes and job descriptions for key personnel, such as the program 

director and project coordinator;

• Coalition involvement agreements from representatives for all 12 

sectors to indicate compliance with the statutory requirement;

• Two sets of coalition meetings minutes per year, with attendees listed 

out, to demonstrate coalition membership involvement;

• Submission of documentation and verification of the organization’s 

non-profit status, such as maintaining a 501(c)(3) status;

 20See app, I for statutory and program requirements.

Agencies Have 

Established 

Operating Procedures 

but Could Enhance 

Grantee Compliance 

and Performance 

Monitoring

ONDCP and SAMHSA 

Developed Procedures to 

Help Ensure Compliance 

with Statutory 

Requirements
Page 21 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

• Semi-annual progress reports through DFC Me to provide accurate 

and meaningful statistical representation of youth surveyed on the 

core measures and activities in each of the geographical areas served 

by the coalition;

• Quarterly and annual Federal Financial Reports that demonstrate 

compliance with the grant’s purposes by accurately documenting its 

funds transactions;

• Sustainability plans—required for grantees in year 3 or year 7 of the 

grant life cycle to show progress to achieve self-sustainment after 

completing the DFC Support Program; and

• Letter of Mutual Cooperation between the coalitions with the 

identification of zip codes served (if applicable) that requires grantees 

to outline their collaborative efforts.

According to ONDCP and SAMHSA officials, their procedures require that 

all of this documentation is to be stored and safeguarded in SAMHSA’s 

databases to preserve the record of the grant. The procedures also 

require that SAMHSA grant management officials review these grantee 

files to continually monitor grantees’ compliance with eligibility criteria and 

for SAMHSA to report to ONDCP on any grantee compliance issues. 

According to the officials, collecting these documents and ensuring that 

files are complete and accurate also assists with monitoring the grantees’

progress in implementing their stated strategies and action steps. 

In addition to the documentation required to help ensure grantees’

statutory compliance, ONDCP and SAMHSA developed specific DFC 

Support Program terms and conditions. They also have procedures in 

place to help ensure grantees are meeting these requirements. For 

example, one term and condition of the grant is that grantees must agree 

in writing to comply with federal grant requirements through the use of a 

checklist from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services—

SAMHSA’s parent agency. ONDCP and SAMHSA then developed a 

process to track submission of this checklist, which likewise applies to the 

submission of all other required documents. Specifically, SAMHSA is to 

monitor grantees to ensure receipt of the document and when a grantee 

has not submitted it, SAMHSA’s grant management specialists are to 

reach out to request it again. If grantee noncompliance becomes an 

issue, then SAMHSA is to report the concern to ONDCP during routine 

meetings and by documenting it in a tracking spreadsheet for ONDCP’s 

review.
Page 22 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

In addition to procedures in place to help monitor grantees’ compliance 

with statutory provisions and other terms and conditions of the grant, 

performance measures and procedures were established to obtain and 

analyze grantee performance. The procedures include (1) a system to 

collect data from the grantees on performance measures, and (2) a 

contract with an evaluation agency to analyze and summarize the 

performance measures data. Specifically, ONDCP, through its contractor, 

conducts and issues a national evaluation report based on data collected 

by grantees. The evaluation report, published annually, provides 

information on two sets of data: (1) the activities grantees reported, and 

(2) the outcome data reflecting change on the DFC four core measures, 

using both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis. See 

appendix II for additional details on the four core measures and trends in 

grantees’ outcomes.

Based on our file review and analysis of the files encompassing the more 

than 20 types of required documents from 30 grantees, we found that 

SAMHSA does not consistently follow documentation and reporting 

procedures to ensure grantees’ compliance with both the statutory 

provisions and established grant program terms and conditions. 

Specifically, we found that SAMHSA followed all processes for ensuring 

that initial applicants had submitted the required documentation before 

awarding these applicants their initial grant funding. However, SAMHSA 

was less consistent in its adherence to procedures for confirming 

documentation for grantees in later years of their grants. We also found 

that SAMHSA did not effectively track grantee compliance and therefore, 

had not been accurately reporting to ONDCP on the status of grantees’

required documentation.

To conduct our analysis, we reviewed the official grant files for 30 

randomly selected grantees that received DFC Support Program funding 

in fiscal year 2015. Since in any given year, some grantees will be first 

time grant recipients and others will be more tenured, we widened our 

review to include the files for fiscal years 2013 and 2014 for any selected 

SAMHSA Has Not 

Consistently Followed 

Documentation and 

Reporting Procedures
Page 23 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

grantee in continuation status.21 Such a mix of grantees in different years 

of funding allowed us to see variation in the content and depth of the 

grant documents that ONDCP and SAMHSA require to be on file. For 

example, all grantees, regardless of their tenure in the program, are 

required to have progress reports on file. In contrast, only grantees who 

recently applied for year 3 or year 7 funding, for example, are required to 

have sustainability plans.

We found that SAMHSA adhered inconsistently to its documentation and 

reporting procedures at different stages of grantees’ tenure. For example, 

during our file review, we found that all of the 22 grantees in our sample 

that should have had a complete initial application package in the official 

grantee file generally had one.22 However, we also found that:

• While all 30 grantees in our sample were required to submit progress 

reports every 6 months, at least one report was missing for 26 

grantees. Specifically, for the 30 grantees, a total of 128 semi-annual 

reports should have been submitted and filed in the official grantee 

file, but 83 were missing.23 According to SAMHSA officials, these 

reports were missing because grantees lacked access to designated 

databases where progress reports are uploaded. Specifically, 

SAMHSA’s database—COMET—went offline in December 2014 and 

was replaced by the DFC Management and Evaluation Tool (DFC 

Me), which became operational in February 2016. SAMHSA officials 

said they did not request progress reports from grantees during the 

transition period between Coalition Online Management and 

Evaluation Tool (COMET) and DFC Me, which lasted approximately 

 21Among the 30 grantees selected, the files for 4 grantees—2 grantees in year 1 and 2 

grantees in year 6—contained only initial applications, as was expected. There were no 

continuation applications for the year 1 grantees because they had received no DFC 

funding prior to fiscal year 2015. The two grantees in year 6 had a change in the legal 

entity acting on their behalf. According to SAMHSA officials, this resulted in a new grantee 

number and therefore no prior continuation year files were provided to us for review. 

Overall, our review included 79 individual grant files for the 30 selected grantees in our 

review period.

22Among the 30 grantees, the files from 22 grantees contained initial applications that 

were submitted to SAMHSA during the period of this review, from fiscal year 2013 through 

fiscal year 2015. Initial applications for the remaining 8 grantees were submitted to 

SAMHSA prior to fiscal year 2013 and thus, were not provided for the purposes of this 

review.

23For the 30 grantees, we determined there should have been 46 reports for fiscal year 

2013, 52 reports for fiscal year 2014, and 30 reports for fiscal year 2015 for a total of 128 

reports. 
Page 24 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

18 months. However, they were aware that ONDCP’s contractor 

provided DFC grantees with an electronic template that allowed the 

grantees to collect data and document their progress as required, 

outside of the designated databases. In February 2016, ONDCP 

requested all grantees to input their progress report information into 

DFC Me, to include information covering the transition period. Prior to 

that date however, SAMHSA staff did not request this information 

from grantees and therefore, did not have it to conduct their 

monitoring efforts. SAMHSA officials acknowledged that their staff did 

not conduct the necessary follow up to ensure that the files were 

stored in the updated system for record keeping purposes. SAMHSA 

officials also acknowledged that they were not aware of the number of 

reports from grantees that were omitted from the record. 

• Of the 26 grantees that should have had continuation application 

packages in their official grantee files, 9 were missing the required 

Federal Financial Report.24 The Federal Financial Report is a 

document in which the grantee details its expenditures, 

disbursements, and cash receipts. SAMHSA requires grantees to 

submit the Federal Financial Report within 90 days of the fiscal year’s 

end. SAMHSA officials acknowledged that the Federal Financial 

Reports were likely missing because the grantees did not provide 

them and SAMHSA staff did not follow up to obtain them. When we 

discussed this finding with SAMHSA officials, they were unaware of 

the omission.

• Of the 18 grantees that should have had sustainability plans in their 

official grantee files, 14 were missing the required plans.25 These 

sustainability plans are to outline how the grantee intends to maintain 

the resources necessary to achieve its long-term goals and continued 

progress after exiting the DFC Support Program. According to 

SAMHSA officials, 12 of the 14 grantees were missing the 

sustainability plans because SAMHSA staff had not uploaded them to 

the system of record, and the remaining 2 grantees never submitted 

them and the grants management specialist did not follow up to obtain 

the document. SAMHSA officials were unaware of these omissions.

 24The remaining 4 grantees—2 grantees in year 1, and 2 grantees in year 6 with a change 

in their grant number—would not have been expected to have continuation applications in 

their fiscal year 2013 and 2014 files and would not have this form in their files.

25The DFC Support Program requires grantees to develop and provide sustainability plans 

in year 3 or year 7 funding cycle.
Page 25 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

SAMHSA’s policies and procedures require that the official award file 

contain the formal, complete record of the history of an award, such as 

documents that support verification of statutory eligibility. SAMHSA 

officials also told us that its staff is responsible for ensuring that all files 

are stored in a shared database system, in accordance with SAMHSA 

policy. In addition, the IAA between ONDCP and SAMHSA outlines that 

SAMHSA is responsible for ensuring grantees have submitted all required 

documents, following up as needed, and reporting to ONDCP on 

grantees’ status. According to ONDCP and SAMHSA officials, SAMHSA 

did routinely relay reports to ONDCP on grantees’ status. However, 

SAMHSA officials acknowledged that they were unaware that files were 

missing, which calls into question the effectiveness of their program 

monitoring. It also challenges the accuracy and validity of the grantee 

status reports that SAMHSA provided to ONDCP. In particular, ONDCP 

officials told us they were never made aware that any required grantee 

documents were not included in the official record.

SAMHSA officials said that in March 2016, to strengthen their grants 

administration process, they instituted a new internal review process in 

which they randomly select 50 grant files per month from their various 

grant programs to assess the completeness and accuracy of grantees’

documentation. As part of the internal review process, SAMHSA has also 

taken other steps including enhancing training, developing policies and 

procedures, and implementing a step-by-step guide and training for grant 

managers on entering information into the official grant file. While this 

review process had not included the DFC Support Program initially, in 

November 2016, while our audit work was nearing completion, officials 

said they were planning to expand their focus to incorporate all of 

SAMHSA’s grant programs. While officials provided information on how 

they planned to address particular deficiencies on a case by case basis, 

they did not explain how they planned to ensure systemic remediation of 

any issue found repeatedly or a timeframe for implementing the changes. 

According to Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government, 

managers are to (1) promptly evaluate findings from audits and other 

reviews, including those showing deficiencies and recommendations, (2) 

determine proper actions in response to these findings and 

recommendations, and (3) complete, within established time frames, all 

actions that correct or otherwise resolve the matters brought to 

management’s attention. 26 Ensuring this new review process is fully 

 26 GAO/AIMD-00-21.3.1.
Page 26 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

implemented in a sustainable manner will be critical for SAMHSA as it 

aims to strengthen DFC grants monitoring. Further, developing an action 

plan with time frames for addressing any deficiencies it finds through its 

reviews and making systemic changes to mitigate deficiencies on a 

prospective basis will also help its management of the DFC program.

Further, Standards for Internal Control in the Federal Government states 

that all transactions and other significant events need to be clearly 

documented and should be readily available for examination. For the DFC 

Support Program, such transactions include SAMHSA’s collection, 

storage, and review of grantee documentation. It also includes 

SAMHSA’s documentation and reporting of grantee status to ONDCP. 

Additionally, control activities—policies, procedures, and mechanisms—

should enforce management’s directives and help ensure that actions are 

taken to address risks, such as ensuring DFC grantees are not remiss in 

meeting statutory and program requirements. Related, internal controls 

for monitoring should generally be designed to assure that ongoing 

monitoring occurs in the course of normal operations. This includes 

regular management and supervisory activities, comparisons, and 

reconciliations. Deficiencies found during ongoing monitoring or through 

separate evaluations should be communicated to the individual 

responsible for the function and serious matters should be reported to top 

management. Control activities like these should be an integral part of an 

entity’s accountability for stewardship of government resources. 

SAMHSA’s lack of follow up with grantees and its lack of visibility over 

omitted documents resulted in incomplete and inaccurate documentation 

of status in its reports to ONDCP. Without a method to ensure that 

grantee status reporting to ONDCP is complete and accurate, SAMHSA 

cannot be certain that grantees are engaging in intended activities, that 

funds are being used in accordance with program requirements, and that 

all other statutory requirements and grant program terms and conditions 

have been met.

Since 2008, ONDCP and SAMHSA have taken steps to improve the DFC 

Support Program by employing leading collaboration practices and 

funding a variety of drug prevention activities. However, SAMHSA’s 

inconsistent adherence to some procedures, particularly with respect to 

grantees that are funded year after year, has resulted in the persistence 

of missing or incomplete documentation in the official grantee files, which 

has limited performance monitoring. Developing an action plan that 

includes time frames for addressing deficiencies found through its grant 

file reviews and making systemic changes based on its findings, as well 

Conclusions
Page 27 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

as developing a method for ensuring complete and accurate grantee 

status reporting to ONDCP, would position SAMHSA officials to further 

strengthen monitoring efforts. As the number of youth who engage in illicit 

drug use remains a public health concern, the continued focus on funding 

grantees and monitoring them for both progress and compliance is vital.

To better ensure grantees’ compliance with the Drug-Free Communities 

Support Program’s statutory requirements and to strengthen monitoring of 

grantee activities, we recommend that SAMHSA take the following two 

actions:

• develop an action plan with time frames for addressing any 

deficiencies it finds through its reviews and making systemic changes 

to mitigate deficiencies on a prospective basis to strengthen the grant 

monitoring process, and

• develop and implement a method for ensuring that the grantee status 

reports it provides to ONDCP are complete and accurate.

ONDCP and the Department of Health and Services (HHS) provided 

written comments on a draft of this report. In their comments, both 

agencies concurred with our recommendations. In HHS’s written 

comments, reproduced in appendix III, HHS stated SAMHSA will 

implement a targeted review focusing on the DFC files and strengthen its 

grants management processes to ensure that the reports it provides to 

ONDCP are timely and accurate. HHS also provided technical comments 

which we incorporated where appropriate.

Recommendations for 

Executive Action

Agency Comments 

and Our Evaluation
Page 28 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

We are sending copies of this report to the Director of the Office of 

National Drug Control Policy, the Secretary of Health and Human 

Services, and appropriate congressional committees and members, and 

other interested parties. In addition, this report is available at no charge 

on GAO’s website at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions, please contact Diana Maurer at 

(202) 512-8777 or maurerd@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of 

Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page 

of this report. GAO staff that made significant contributions to this report 

are listed in appendix IV.

Diana Maurer

Director, Homeland Security and Justice Issues
Page 29 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

List of Committees

The Honorable Chuck Grassley

Chairman

Committee on the Judiciary

Co-Chairman

Caucus on International Narcotics Control

United States Senate

The Honorable Dianne Feinstein

Ranking Member

Committee on the Judiciary

Co-Chairman

Caucus on International Narcotics Control

United States Senate

The Honorable Ron Johnson

Chairman

The Honorable Claire McCaskill

Ranking Member

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs

United States Senate

The Honorable Shelly Moore Capito

Chairman

The Honorable Christopher Coons

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government 

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate

The Honorable Roy Blunt

Chairman

The Honorable Patty Murray

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and 

Related Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations

United States Senate
Page 30 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

The Honorable Bob Goodlatte

Chairman

The Honorable John Conyers, Jr.

Ranking Member

Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

The Honorable Mark Meadows

Chairman

The Honorable Gerald E. Connolly

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Government Operations

Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

House of Representatives

The Honorable Tom Graves

Chairman

The Honorable Mike Quigley

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Financial Services and General Government 

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives

The Honorable Tom Cole

Chairman

The Honorable Rosa DeLauro

Ranking Member

Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and 

Related Agencies 

Committee on Appropriations

House of Representatives
Appendix I: Drug-Free Communities (DFC) 

Support Program Statutory and Program 

Requirements

Page 31 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Table 2: Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program Statutory Requirements for Eligibility

Statutory Requirements Years 1 and 6

The coalition must submit an application to the Administrator of the Office of National Drug Control Policy.

The coalition must consist of one or more representatives from each of statutorily defined categories with each representative serving 

on the coalition representing only one category.

The coalition must demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the Administrator:

(a) that the representatives of the coalition have worked together on substance abuse reduction initiatives,

which, at a minimum, includes initiatives that target drugs, including substances listed in schedules I through V of the Controlled 

Substances Act,a for a period of not less than 6 months; and

(b) substantial participation from volunteer leaders in the community.

The coalition must have as its principal mission the reduction of substance abuse in a comprehensive and long-term manner, with a 

primary focus on youth in the community.

The coalition must describe and document the nature and extent of the substance abuse problem in the community.

The coalition must provide a description of substance abuse prevention and treatment programs and activities, which, at a minimum, 

includes programs and activities relating to the use and abuse of drugs in existence at the time of the grant application and identify 

substance abuse programs and service gaps in the community.

The coalition must develop a strategic plan to reduce substance abuse among youth in a comprehensive and long-term fashion.

The coalition must work to develop a consensus regarding the priorities of the community to combat substance abuse among youth.

The coalition must establish a system to measure and report outcomes: consistent with common indicators and evaluation protocols 

established by the Administrator; and approved by the Administrator.

The coalition must conduct for an initial grant, an initial benchmark survey of drug use among youth (or use local surveys or 

performance measures available or accessible in the community at the time of the grant application) and provide assurances that the 

entity conducting the evaluation, or from which the coalition receives information, has experience in gathering data related to 

substance abuse among youth or in evaluating the effectiveness of community anti-drug coalitions.

The coalition must demonstrate that the coalition is an ongoing concern by demonstrating that the coalition is a nonprofit organization; 

or an entity that the Administrator determines to be appropriate; or part of, or is associated with, an established legal entity.

The coalition must demonstrate that the coalition is an ongoing concern by demonstrating that the coalition receives financial support 

(including, in the discretion of the Administrator, in-kind contributions) from non-Federal sources; and has a strategy to solicit 

substantial financial support from non-Federal sources to ensure that the coalition and the programs operated by the coalition are selfsustaining.

Source: GAO analysis of statute - 21 U.S.C. § 1532 │GAO-17-120

a

Drugs, substances, and certain chemicals used to make drugs are classified into five distinct 

schedules within the Act.

In addition, for initial grant awards, the Office of National Drug Control 

Policy’s Administrator requires that:

• Two coalitions may not serve the same community unless both have 

clearly demonstrated a plan for collaboration, and

Appendix I: Drug-Free Communities (DFC) 

Support Program Statutory and Program 

Requirements
Appendix I: Drug-Free Communities (DFC) 

Support Program Statutory and Program 

Requirements

Page 32 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

• The coalition must attest that it is not receiving any other funds from 

the DFC Support Program under a different name.1

In addition, coalitions in continuation must adhere to additional program 

requirements—as shown in table 3.

Table 3: Drug-Free Communities (DFC) Support Program Requirements for Continuation

DFC Program Requirements for Continuation—Years 2 to 5 and 7 to 10

The coalition is required to include a budget and work-plan to SAMHSA. SAMHSA reviews these applications to gather required 

information on the grant applicant’s progress. Then, ONDCP determines whether to continue federal grant support. The budget for 

award years 7 and 8 must provide evidence for a 125 percent match in funds; the budget for award years 9 and 10 must provide 

evidence for 150 percent match in funds.a

The coalition must conduct biennial surveys (or incorporate local surveys in existence at the time of the evaluation) to measure its 

progress and effectiveness and provide assurances that the entity conducting an evaluation, or from which the grantee receives 

information, has experience in gathering data related to substance abuse among youth; or in evaluating the effectiveness of 

community anti-drug efforts.

The coalition is required to submit the annual federal financial report.

Source: GAO analysis. | GAO-17-120

a

By statute, 21 U.S.C. § 1532(b), the Administrator may award grants in an amount not to exceed an 

amount equal to 80 percent of the non-Federal funds, including in-kind contributions, raised by the 

coalition for award years 7 and 8, and not to exceed an amount equal to 67 percent of the nonFederal funds, including in-kind contributions, raised by the coalition for award years 9 and 10. These 

awards may not exceed $125,000 for a fiscal year.

 1

ONDCP cannot grant more than $125,000 to a coalition per fiscal year and no coalition 

can receive DFC Support Program funding for more than 10 years.
Appendix II: Drug-Free Communities Four Core 

Measures and Examples of Trends

Page 33 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

The Office of National Drug Control Policy’s (ONDCP) Drug-Free 

Communities (DFC) Support program requires grantees to report on four 

core measures in progress reports semiannually as listed in table 4.

Table 4: The Drug-Free Communities Support Program’s Four Core measures 

Core measures Explanation

Past 30-Day Prevalence of Use The percentage of survey respondents who reported using alcohol, tobacco, marijuana, or (illicit 

use of) prescription drugsa at least once in the past 30 days.

Perception of Risk The percentage of survey respondents who reported that regular use of alcohol, tobacco, or 

marijuana has moderate risk or great risk. Regular use of alcohol was defined as 1 or 2 drinks 

nearly every day. Regular use was defined for tobacco as one or more packs of cigarettes a day. 

Regular use for marijuana was defined as using once or twice a week. The “perception of risk of 

prescription drug use” core measure covers any illicit prescription drug use. 

Perception of Parental 

Disapproval

The percentage of survey respondents who reported their parents feel regular use of alcohol (1-2 

drinks nearly every day) is wrong or very wrong. The percentage of survey respondents who report 

their parents feel any use of tobacco, marijuana, or illicit prescription drug use is wrong or very 

wrong.

Perception of Peer Disapproval The percentage of survey respondents who reported that their friends thought it would be “wrong”

or “very wrong” for them to drink alcohol regularly (1-2 drinks nearly every day), or engage in any 

tobacco use, marijuana use, or illicit prescription drug use.

Source: GAO Analysis of Office of National Drug Control Policy Measures. | GAO-17-120

a

The program has included the use of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana since 2002; in 2012, the 

program added the illicit use of prescription drugs.

Grantees collect these core measure data and ONDCP provides it to its 

contractor for national-level evaluation and reporting. For example, in the 

National Evaluation of Drug-Free Communities Support Program 

Summary of Findings through 2014, the percentage change in the past 30 

days of drug use among middle school and high school youth is 

evaluated and reported bi-annually. Figure 6 shows the trend in drug use 

from 2002 through 2014.

Appendix II: Drug-Free Communities Four 

Core Measures and Examples of Trends
Appendix II: Drug-Free Communities Four Core 

Measures and Examples of Trends

Page 34 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Figure 6: Percentage Change in Middle School and High School Youth Who 

Reported Drug Use at Least Once in the Past 30 Days, Fiscal Years 2002 through 

2014a

a

According to the Drug-Free Communities Support Program 2014 National Evaluation Report, the 

most recently available evaluation at the time of our report, the data results for “grantees ever funded”

are an average of “past 30 day use” as reported every 2 years from 2002 through 2014 by Drug-Free 

Communities Support Program grantees.

Since the program added prescription drugs to the core measures in 

2012, figure 7 captures the prevalence of prescriptions drugs in 

comparison to alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana in fiscal year 2013.
Appendix II: Drug-Free Communities Four Core 

Measures and Examples of Trends

Page 35 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Figure 7: Percentage Change in Middle School and High School Youth Who 

Reported Drug Use at Least Once in the Past 30 Days, Fiscal Year 2013a

a

According to the Drug-Free Communities Support Program 2014 National Evaluation Report, the 

most recently available evaluation at the time of our report, data results for grantees funded in fiscal 

year 2013 include the 2012 revised core measures, which reflect the addition of the prescription 

drugs measure by Drug-Free Communities Support Program grantees.
Appendix III Comments from the Department of 

Health and Human Services

Page 36 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Appendix III Comments from the Department 

of Health and Human Services
Appendix III Comments from the Department of 

Health and Human Services

Page 37 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgements

Page 38 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

Diana Maurer, (202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov

In addition to the contact named above, Joy Booth (Assistant Director), 

Aditi Archer (Analyst-in-Charge), David Alexander, Lyle Brittain, Willie 

Commons III, Dominick Dale, Eric Hauswirth, Anna Maria Ortiz, Jeffrey 

Paulk, and Justin Snover made key contributions to this report.

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgements

GAO Contact

Staff 

Acknowledgments

(100548)
Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff 

Acknowledgements

Page 39 GAO-17-120 Drug-Free Communities Support Program

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and investigative 

arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 

responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability of the 

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public 

funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses, 

recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed 

oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO’s commitment to good government 

is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no cost is 

through GAO’s website (http://www.gao.gov). Each weekday afternoon, GAO 

posts on its website newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence. To 

have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products, go to http://www.gao.gov

and select “E-mail Updates.”

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of production and 

distribution and depends on the number of pages in the publication and whether 

the publication is printed in color or black and white. Pricing and ordering 

information is posted on GAO’s website, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or 

TDD (202) 512-2537.

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card, MasterCard, 

Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional information.

Connect with GAO on Facebook, Flickr, LinkedIn, Twitter, and YouTube.

Subscribe to our RSS Feeds or E-mail Updates. Listen to our Podcasts.

Visit GAO on the web at www.gao.gov and read The Watchblog.

Contact:

Website: http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470

Katherine Siggerud, Managing Director, siggerudk@gao.gov, (202) 512-4400, 

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125, 

Washington, DC 20548

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov, (202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 

Washington, DC 20548

James-Christian Blockwood, Managing Director, spel@gao.gov, (202) 512-4707

U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7814, 

Washington, DC 20548

GAO’s Mission

Obtaining Copies of 

GAO Reports and 

Testimony

Order by Phone

Connect with GAO

To Report Fraud, 

Waste, and Abuse in 

Federal Programs

Congressional

Relations

Public Affairs

Strategic Planning and 

External Liaison

Please Print on Recycled Paper.