Toward a Functional Drug Abuse Program Management Theory

  • Leslie Brown


With the passage of Public Law 92–255 in 1972, the federal government established the legislative framework for the development, articulation, and promulgation of a national strategy for drug abuse prevention. The legislation spearheaded the federal financial and programmatic involvement in drug abuse prevention on a large scale. Drug abuse prevention within the context of P.L. 92–255 is any “program or activity relating to drug abuse education, training, treatment, rehabilitation, or research ... ” Thus the nature and potential scope of drug abuse prevention was defined as quite broad and far-reaching. In anticipation of the myriad administrative, management, and coordination problems and contingencies inherent to the implementation of legislation of the magnitude of P.L. 92–255, the Act created the Special Action Office for Drug Abuse Prevention to “coordinate federal activities and agencies, implement short-term plans, devise long-term strategies, and assist the states in their management of federal money... (P.L. 92–255)” With a federal policy commitment, financial support, and an organizational focal point for overall planning and policy responsibility, drug abuse prevention was “birthed” as a broad range, viable element of the nation’s human and health services delivery industry.


Drug Abuse General Management Drug Abuse Prevention Drug Abuse Program Accountability Management 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Bennis, W.G. 1972. Organizational Developments and the Fate of the Bureaucracy. Contemporary Readings in Organizational Behaviot,Fred Luthans (ed.). New York: Mcgraw-Hill Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  2. Churchman, C.W. 1968.The Systems Approach. New York: Dell Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  3. Gilman, G. 1969. The Manager and the Systems Concept. Business Horizons. 25.Google Scholar
  4. Hoos, Ida R. 1973. Systems Techniques for Managing a Society: A Critique. Public Administration Review. 157–164Google Scholar
  5. Longnecker, J.G. 1969. Systems: Semantics and Significance. S.A.M. Advanced Management Journal. 63.Google Scholar
  6. National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse. 1973. Drug Abuse in America: Problem in Perspective. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office. 283Google Scholar
  7. Naylor, M. and Willock, A. 1974. Unification and Its Implications For Local Organization and Management of Health Services. Challenge for Change, Gordon McLachlan (ed.). London: Oxford University Press. 188–197.Google Scholar
  8. Sarnoff, Robert W. 1969. The Social Uses of Computer Forecasting. Michigan Business Review. 21:28Google Scholar
  9. Schaefer, Morris. 1974. Administration of Environmental Health Programmes—A Systems View. Geneva: World Health Organization.Google Scholar
  10. The Domestic Council Drug Abuse Task Force. 1975. White Paper on Drug Abuse. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  11. The Strategy Council on Drug Abuse. 1975. Federal strategy for Drug Abuse and Drug Traffic Prevention. Washington: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
  12. Young, S.D. 1966. Organization as a Total System. Proceedings of the 9th Annual Midwest Management Conference. 20.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Leslie Brown
    • 1
  1. 1.Greensboro Drug Action CouncilUSA

Personalised recommendations