1994-1999 Treatment Episode Data Set(TEDS)
Highlights | Description of TEDS | Trends in Admissions  | Characteristics of Admissions | State Data
Topics of Special Interest
 | Appendices

Title Page

Table of Contents

List of Tables

List of Figures

4. State Data: 1994-1999

TEDS aggregates data collected through the disparate data collection systems of the Single State Agencies (SSAs) for substance abuse treatment. States have cooperated with the Federal government in the data collection process, and substantial progress has been made toward developing a standardized data set. However, because each State system is unique and each State has unique powers and mandates, significant differences exist among States. These differences are compounded by evolving health care payment systems.

State-to-State comparisons must be made with extreme caution. Table 4.1 presents key characteristics of State data collection systems for 1999. However, these characteristics can change as State substance abuse treatment systems change, and thus may be responsible for some year-to-year variation within States. Sources of apparent variation in State-to-State substance abuse patterns include:
  • Completeness of reporting. Completeness of reporting at the cut-off date for preparation of this report varied from State to State. Future submissions of 1999 data are unlikely to affect the percentage distributions that are the basis of this report but may affect State-level counts and rates of admission. In addition, States review and improve their data collection and processing. Occasionally, States send revised data for earlier years to TEDS.

    Figure 26 shows individual State admissions reporting patterns by month.

  • Facilities included. Most States require facilities that receive State/public funding to report data to the State. “State/public funding” generally refers to funding distributed by the SSA, but may also include funding distributed through another public agency. Some States require that additional categories (e.g., private facilities, methadone clinics, etc.) also report. In some States, other categories of facilities report voluntarily. See Table 4.1 for additional details.

  • Clients included. Most States report data on all clients in a facility that is required to report to the State. However, some States report only those clients whose treatment is paid for with State/public funds. See Table 4.1 for additional details.

  • Admissions and transfers. Great variation is seen in the States’ ability to identify and report client admissions and transfers. The goal for the TEDS system is to identify treatment episodes. Thus a change in service type or a change in provider, without an interruption in treatment, would ideally be categorized as a transfer. This requires, however, that clients be assigned unique IDs that can be linked across providers; not all States are legally and/or technologically able to do this. About half of all States can identify transfers that occur when a client changes service type within the structure of a given provider. However, far fewer can identify a transfer that occurs when a client changes providers. Several States do not track transfers themselves, but report as transfers those clients who are discharged and readmitted within a specified time period (which may vary from State to State). See Table 4.1 for additional details. Annual counts of admissions, transfers, and codependents are shown in Table 4.2.

Highlights|Description of TEDS|Trends in Admissions |Characteristics of Admissions|State Data
Topics of Special Interest