Mental health and substance abuse treatment services for dually diagnosed clients: Results of a statewide survey of county administrators

Brief Reports


Findings are presented from a survey of administrators of county departments of mental health and alcohol and drug programs in California regarding services for individuals with co-occurring mental and substance abuse disorders. A total of 47 counties responded (84% response rate). The survey findings indicate that collaboration across county mental health and alcohol and drug services primarily occurs through information sharing, coordination of services, and joint projects. Fewer than one-half of the counties responding provide integrated programs, and the most frequently provided services are outpatient counseling and case management. Administrators cited historical differences between the two service systems and societal stigma as the greatest barriers to service delivery. Two opposing strategies for state action were suggested, either establishing specific funding set-asides or blending funding for services. Counties varied widely in their ability to estimate unmet service needs. Implications for policy development related to the dually diagnosed are discussed.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Case N: The dual-diagnosis patient in a psychiatric treatment program: A treatment failure.Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment 1991; 8:69–73.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Helzer JE, Pryzbeck TR: The co-occurrence of alcoholism with other psychiatric disorders in the general population and its impact on treatment.Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1988; 49:219–224.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    McLellan AT: “Psychiatric severity” as a predictor of outcome from substance abuse treatments. In: Meyer RE (Ed.):Psychopathology & Addictive Disorders. New York: Guilford, 1986, pp. 97–139.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, et al.: Predicting response to alcohol and drug abuse treatments.Archives of General Psychiatry 1983; 40:620–625.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Osher FC, Kofoed LL: Treatment of patients with psychiatric and psychoactive substance abuse disorders.Hospital & Community Psychiatry 1989; 40:1025–1030.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Howland RH: Barriers to community treatment of patients with dual diagnoses.Hospital & Community Psychiatry 1990; 41:1134–1135.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schmidt L: Specialization in alcoholism and mental health residential treatment: The “dual diagnosis” problem.Journal of Drug Issues 1991; 21:859–874.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wallen MC, Weiner HD: Impediments to effective treatment of the dually diagnosed patient.Journal of Psychoactive Drugs 1989; 21:161–168.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pulice RT, Lyman SR, McCormick LL: A study of provider perceptions of individuals with dual disorders.Journal of Mental Health Administration 1994; 21:92–99.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ridgely S, Goldman HH, Willenbring M: Barriers to the care of persons with dual diagnoses: Organizational and financing issues.Schizophrenia Bulletin 1990; 16:123–132.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thacker W, Tremaine L: Systems issues in serving the mentally ill substance abuser: Virginia's experience.Hospital & Community Psychiatry 1989; 40:1046–1049.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rohrer GE, Schonfeld L: The mentally ill substance abuser: Challenges for the administrator.Journal of Mental Health Administration 1990; 17:217–221.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Frank RG, McGuire TG: Introduction to the economics of mental health payment systems. In: Levin BL, Petrila J (Eds.):Mental Health Services: A Public Health Perspective. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 23–37.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Osher FC: A vision for the future: Toward a service system responsive to those with co-occurring addictive and mental disorders.American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 1996; 66:71–76.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ries R: Clinical treatment matching models for dually diagnosed patients.Psychiatric Clinics of North America 1993; 16:167–175.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Association of Behavioral Healthcare Management 1998

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.UCLA Drug Abuse Research Center, UCLA Neuropsychiatric Institute and HospitalLos Angeles
  2. 2.Children and Family FuturesIrvine

Personalised recommendations