Centralized national data on clients entering drug abuse treatment was initially required by the Drug Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972, P.L. 92-255, which began Federal funding for treatment and rehabilitation. The CODAP data system was developed to collect admission and discharge data directly from federally funded treatment programs and included quarterly reporting by 1,800 to 2,000 programs on over 200,000 admissions per year during 1975-1981 (1). The CODAP reported only for programs receiving federal funding, but did report on all clients in these programs, regardless of the source of funding. The CODAP, therefore, gave a representative picture of federally funded programs but not of the national treatment system, which includes both nonprofit and for-profit privately funded substance abuse treatment programs.
The CODAP contained national data from 1973 to 1981 before enactment of the Alcohol and Drug Abuse and Mental Health Services (ADMS) Block Grant, which passed federal funding of treatment programs through the States and included no data reporting requirement. Until the ADMS Block Grant, federal funding of individual treatment programs had depended to some extent on the adequacy of data reporting to the CODAP. Additional Block Grant legislation -- the Comprehensive Alcohol Abuse, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Amendments of 1988 (P.L. 100-690) -- established a revised Substance Abuse Prevention and Treatment (SAPT) Block Grant that required federal data collection on, among other things, clients seeking and receiving substance abuse treatment. The TEDS responds to this portion of the data requirement.
In comparing CODAP to TEDS, it should be remembered that the same data elements have been collected but in different ways. CODAP surveyed treatment programs directly; whereas TEDS collects the same information but as conveyed by the States, relying on a crosswalk from State administrative data systems to the elements defined for TEDS. Neither the TEDS nor CODAP is nationally representative of all substance abuse treatment programs, because privately funded programs are under represented in these publicly administered data systems. The TEDS, however, well represents State-monitored substance abuse programs. The data limitations of TEDS are listed in Appendix A. The data elements in TEDS (2) and in CODAP (3) are described in Appendix B.
This page was last updated on June 16, 2008