Skip to main content

Mobile Navigation

  • National
    • Policy
      • High Expectations
      • Quality Choices
      • Personalized Pathways
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Gadfly Newsletter
      • Flypaper Blog
    • Events
    • Scholars Program
  • Ohio
    • Policy
      • Priorities
      • Media & Testimony
    • Research
    • Commentary
      • Ohio Education Gadfly Biweekly
      • Ohio Gadfly Daily
  • Charter Authorizing
    • Application
    • Sponsored Schools
    • Resources
  • About
    • Mission
    • Board
    • Staff
    • Career
Home
Home
Advancing Educational Excellence

Main Navigation

  • National
  • Ohio
  • Charter Authorizing
  • About

National Menu

  • Topics
    • Accountability & Testing
    • Advanced Education
    • Career & Technical Education
    • Charter Schools
    • Curriculum & Instruction
    • ESSA
    • Evidence-Based Learning
    • Facilities
    • Governance
    • Personalized Learning
    • Private School Choice
    • School Finance
    • Standards
    • Teachers & School Leaders
    • Think Again
  • Research
  • Commentary
    • Gadfly Newsletter
    • Flypaper Blog
    • Gadfly Podcast
  • Events
  • Scholars Program

Options for Restructuring the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Act: Report with Background Papers and Focus Group Summary

Judy Goss
8.29.2001

RAND 2001

RAND's Drug Policy Research Center has recently completed a project aimed at reviewing the structure and performance of the Safe and Drug Free Schools and Communities Act (SDFSCA), which was signed into law in 1986 as the first coordinated federal effort to curtail teen drug use and is up for renewal as part of ESEA this year. This report contains material drawn from a literature review, focus groups, commissioned papers, and a conference, all focused on the strengths and weaknesses of the Act and its implementation. Some problems with the enactment of SDFSCA that are identified by the researchers include: a severe lack of funds, poor appropriation of resources, vague goals and evaluative criteria, poor training for teachers dealing with drug abuse and prevention, and a lack of coordination with other federal and state programs. The authors credit the Clinton administration with improving accountability in the program, but note that the reforms failed to boost program capacity, the targeting of resources, or cost effectiveness. The study recommends a range of reforms, including changes in the way funds are allocated to states, efforts to assess the need and capacity of the districts receiving funds, enhancements to the content of individual programs, and clear standards to judge program performance. To read a summary of the findings, go http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1328.1/MR1328.1.pref.pdf. Paper copies of this 187-page report can be ordered for $20 by surfing to http://www.rand.org/publications/MR/MR1328.1/ or contacting RAND at (310) 451-7002 (phone); (310) 451-6915 (fax); or e-mail, [email protected]

Tags: RAND Corporation
Judy Goss
Fordham Logo

© 2026 The Thomas B. Fordham Institute
Privacy Policy
Usage Agreement

National

P.O. Box 110
Burke, VA 22009

202.223.5452

[email protected]

Ohio

P.O. Box 82291
Columbus, OH 43202

614.223.1580

[email protected]

Sponsorship

130 West Second Street, Suite 410
Dayton, Ohio 45402

937.227.3368

[email protected]