Drug Policy Research Grants

Drug Policy Research Grant Program 2020 Grant Recipients

DEPC has awarded over $40,000 across six winning proposals as part of the 2020 Drug Policy Research Grant Program. Recipients include researchers from several Ohio universities including The Ohio State University, Cleveland State University, Wright State University, and Miami University.

Proposals addressed a range of topics including the efficacy of drug courts, prosecutorial discretion and racial inequities, the impact of drug laws on the lived experiences of African American mothers who are or have been incarcerated and their families, the impact of psychiatrists’ perceptions of psychoactive drugs on drug policy, and the implementation of medical marijuana regimes in Ohio and Pennsylvania.

2020 CALL FOR RESEARCH PROPOSALS

2020 AWARDS

Sobriety Checkpoint Laws in the USA: Effects on Driving While Intoxicated, Traffic Fatalities, and Arrests

Sobriety Checkpoint Laws in the USA: Effects on Driving While Intoxicated, Traffic Fatalities, and Arrests

Lauren Jones, Phd, assistant professor, Department of Human Science and John Glenn College of Public Affairs, The Ohio State University

This project aims to systematically collect, codify and describe the state sobriety checkpoint laws for each year between 1980 to 2020. The data collected will be used in later projects to link it with existing national administrative data to document the effectiveness of the laws in reducing alcohol- and drug-related traffic crashes and fatalities at the national scale and to document the effect of the laws on racialized arrests for driving under the influence, and other crimes.

Award amount: $9,795
Racial Inequities in Drug Case Processing: The Role of Prosecutorial Discretion

Racial Inequities in Drug Case Processing: The Role of Prosecutorial Discretion

Russell S. Hassan, associate professor, John Glenn College of Public Affairs, The Ohio State University
Daniel Baker, postdoctoral scholar, John Glenn College of Public Affairs, The Ohio State University

Laws and criminal justice processes aimed at regulating the use of drugs in the United States have contributed to the mass incarceration of people and racial inequities throughout the criminal justice system. This project aims to examine the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in the early stages of drug prosecution and to what extent they contribute to the racial disparities in drug cases. Understanding where inequity occurs across multiple stages of case processing will allow us to design policy changes that reduce inequities in the processing of drug cases.

Award amount: $9,732
Examination of Drugs Courts and Court-Ordered Treatment for Substance Use

Examination of Drugs Courts and Court-Ordered Treatment for Substance Use

Miyuki Fukushima Tedor, associate professor, Department of Criminology, Anthropology, and Sociology, Cleveland State University
Patricia Stoddard-Dare, professor, School of Social Work, Cleveland State University
Ilya Yaroslavsky, associate professor, Department of Psychology, Cleveland State University
James Chriss, Professor, Department of Criminology, Anthropology, and Sociology, Cleveland State University

A previous needs assessment study in the fall of 2017 found that substance users and their family members are often left on their own to look up treatment facilities and must engage in a time-consuming, and often fruitless, task of contacting each provider agency in the hope that one of them can offer an assessment and appropriate treatment immediately. This project is a follow-up needs assessment study to focus specifically on examining the needs of drug courts and their participants to determine how drughelp.care could help bring together disparate agencies, including bridging the coordination between drug courts, substance use treatment providers, and other public agencies like homeless shelters.

Award amount: $8,275
Perceptions of Psychoactive Drugs Among Psychiatrists in the United States: The Impact of National Drug Policy

Perceptions of Psychoactive Drugs Among Psychiatrists in the United States: The Impact of National Drug Policy

Alan K Davis, PhD, Assistant Professor, College of Social Work, The Ohio State University
Adam Levin, MD, PGY-1 Psychiatry Resident, Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Health, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University
Paul Nagib, BS, Medical Student, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University

The American Psychiatric Association has a long history of advocating for evidence-based policy changes related to psychoactive drugs. Given this precedent, addressing the contradictions in the current drug schedule represents an ideal area of advocacy for psychiatrists. However, no prior studies have directly explored psychiatrists’ attitudes about drug scheduling and the effects of a drug’s schedule on their beliefs about drug harms, benefits, or clinical care. This project aims to conduct a survey of psychiatrists to: 1) examine whether psychiatrists’ perceptions about the acceptability, potential harms and therapeutic benefits of different psychoactive drugs differ as a function of the drug's schedule in the US, and 2) explore perspectives about the impact of drug policies on psychiatry training and psychiatrists’ attitudes/beliefs about psychoactive drugs. Elucidating psychiatrists’ perceptions and attitudes in these two areas would represent a critical first step in building consensus among psychiatrists towards advocating for a more coherent and scientifically grounded drug policy.

Award amount: $6,000
The Implementation of Medical Marijuana in the United States: A Case Comparison of Ohio and Pennsylvania

The Implementation of Medical Marijuana in the United States: A Case Comparison of Ohio and Pennsylvania

Lee Hannah, Associate Professor of Political Science, Wright State University

Medical cannabis laws have now been adopted by 35 states and the District of Columbia. Yet the policies vary significantly and some policies have been viewed as more effective than others. This research project aims to take a deeper look at the implementation of medical marijuana programs in Pennsylvania and Ohio. Specifically, the project will focus on understanding how the states’ differing institutional structures, political control of key institutions, and approaches to policy design shaped differences in implementation outcomes. The research aims to better understand the intra-state dynamics of implementation and clarify how program design affects patient access.

Award amount: $5,000
The Impact of Drug Laws on the Lived Experiences of Currently Jailed and Previously Jailed African American Mothers, their Children and Caregivers

The Impact of Drug Laws on the Lived Experiences of Currently Jailed and Previously Jailed African American Mothers, their Children and Caregivers

Yvette R. Harris, PhD, professor of psychology and director, Center for the Study and Support of Children and Families of the Incarcerated, Department of Psychology, Miami University
Cricket Meehan, PhD, director, Center for School-Based Mental Health Programs and associate director, Center for the Study and Support of Children and Families of the Incarcerated, Department of Psychology, Miami University

The research project investigates the impact of drug laws on the ”lived experiences” of African American mothers incarcerated in jails or who have been previously incarcerated in jails, their children and families. Specifically, the researchers will focus on identifying the unique parenting and health challenges of currently jailed mothers and previously jailed African American mothers, the availability and assessment of available social support networks and pre-release planning and post jail support, assessing the quality of the relationship between mothers and caregivers and the caregivers’ evaluation of the children’s academic and social-emotional functioning when the mother was jailed and when the mother was released.

Award amount: $2,250

2019 AWARDS

The impact of national drug policies on the acceptability and availability of non-abstinent treatment interventions among clinical social workers in the United States | Alan K. Davis

The impact of national drug policies on the acceptability and availability of non-abstinent treatment interventions among clinical social workers in the United States

Alan K. Davis, Ph.D., Assistant Professor and Yitong Xin, MBA, MSW, Ph.D. candidate, College of Social Work, The Ohio State University

Approximately 21 million people have a substance use disorder (SUD) in the United States (US), but only 11% of these individuals will receive treatment. National drug control policies prohibiting possession of most drugs inhibit the personal freedoms of people who consume illegal substances and create a situation in which most SUD treatment professionals have been unable/unwilling to accommodate SUD clients who want to continue but reduce their use of illegal substances. This lack of support for non-abstinence goals is contrary to scientific evidence showing that when people reduce/moderate use they can achieve improvements in functioning.

Given that social workers comprise a large proportion of providers in the SUD treatment field, they are in prime positions to provide non-abstinence interventions and to advocate for changes in SUD treatment agencies’ practices and national/local drug policies. However, it is unclear to what extent social workers’ training, and their attitudes and beliefs about drug use, have been affected by national drug policies and whether their beliefs have influenced their willingness to provide non-abstinence interventions or advocate for changes to these policies. This project aims to use an internet-based survey to gain a better understanding of the attitudes and beliefs among social workers to help inform educational and training needs in the social work profession and help support short- and long-term changes in treatment settings. Data from this study will be used as pilot data for a larger grant submission that aims to develop a training/education intervention to help social workers understand the influence of national drug policies on clinical practices, and to address this influence in learning the skills needed to use non-abstinence interventions in SUD treatment.
Award amount: $10,000

Causes and Consequences of Illicit Substance Use and Drug Enforcement for LGB Individuals | Laura Frizzell

Causes and Consequences of Illicit Substance Use and Drug Enforcement for LGB Individuals

Laura Frizzell, Ph.D. candidate, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University

Lesbian, gay, and bisexual (LGB) individuals are more than twice as likely as heterosexual individuals to misuse illicit substances, including prescription pain relievers such as opiates. This leads to higher rates of substance use disorders than heterosexual individuals, as well as more severe disorders. In turn, LGB individuals have increased rates of risky sexual practices, exposure to HIV/AIDS, and morbidity and mortality. Further, LGB individuals are incarcerated at more than three times the rate of the general adult U.S. population, with many of these individuals convicted of drug crimes. In addition to the direct health consequences of illicit substance misuse, there is an additional array of negative consequences associated with arrest and incarceration, including housing instability, further negative health outcomes, and family disruption.

Despite the host of negative outcomes, virtually no research has examined the consequences of LGB drug-related incarceration. While researchers have paid more attention to substance misuse among LGB individuals, the majority of this research is focused on individual-level covariates and much of it serves to pathologize LGB drug users. As a response, this project has three primary aims. (1) First, this project will identify structural causes of LGB drug misuse. Specifically, it will examine how the extent of (a) state-level legal protections for and (b) social acceptance of LGB individuals impacts their likelihood to use and sell illicit substances. (2) Second, this project will quantify the extent of disparities in drug-related arrests of LGB individuals. (3) Third, this project will identify the consequences of drug enforcement which are exacerbated or unique to LGB individuals.

Award amount: $9,347

Crime and the opioid epidemic: A mixed-methods examination of changing communities and criminal justice contact | Eric LaPlant

Crime and the opioid epidemic: A mixed-methods examination of changing communities and criminal justice contact

Eric LaPlant, Ph.D. candidate, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University

In 2016, opioid-related overdose deaths accounted for over two thirds of all poisonings in the United States, representing the largest share of deaths attributed to the drugs in our country’s history. While the public health impact of the opioid epidemic is well-known, the economic ramifications are also substantial. It has been estimated that the annual value of the lives lost to opioid deaths is $504 billion, representing 2.8 percent of our GDP. Further, the increase in opioid-related policing and incarceration places substantial burden on criminal justice entities that are already under pressure to reduce spending. In response to this far-reaching issue, policymakers have sought to limit illicit opioid use in hopes of reducing the number of opioid overdose deaths. However, research has done little to investigate the underlying factors influencing continual increases in overdose deaths, limiting policymakers’ ability to develop targeted solutions capable of effecting change.

Criminology theory has demonstrated the importance of economic factors, such as employment, inequality, and perceptions of success, as they relate to the likelihood of criminal activity; however, research has yet to utilize these theoretical frameworks to study the opioid epidemic. In this study, I draw on these concepts to formulate hypotheses that examine how changing economic conditions, especially signals of economic decline, have influenced counties’ opioid overdose death rates.

Award amount: $9000

2018 AWARDS

Deterrence or indifference?: Opioid users’ perceptions of anti-drug laws | Eric LaPlant

Deterrence or indifference?: Opioid users’ perceptions of anti-drug laws

Eric LaPlant, Ph.D. candidate, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University

Since 1980, the number of drug poisoning deaths in the United States has increased nearly eight-fold, rising from 6,100 per year to 47,500 in 2014. In response to this ongoing public health crisis, policymakers have sought to limit the supply of illicit opioids by increasing law enforcement focus on the distribution and possession of the drugs while also seeking to reduce prescription opioid misuse by implementing prescription drug monitoring programs (PDMPs).

However, as overdose figures continue to rise, the capacity of each of these strategies to effect meaningful change remains a relative unknown. From a deterrence perspective, law makers might expect that harsher legal consequences and increased drug regulation would dissuade the illicit use of opioids. Alternatively, the increased threat of criminal justice contact or stricter drug regulations may not be effective deterrents of opioid use among addicts, whose chemical dependencies are likely to have compromised their ability to rationally analyze risk versus reward. The project seeks to study how opioid users perceive increased law enforcement efforts and legal changes and what, if any impact, these efforts have on their decision making in respect to drug use.

Award amount: $4520

Moral Panics, Race, and the Criminalization of Marijuana in the Early 20th Century | Michael Vuolo

Moral Panics, Race, and the Criminalization of Marijuana in the Early 20th Century

Michael Vuolo, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Sociology, The Ohio State University

In this study, we apply a social science lens to the processes that led to the criminalization of marijuana in the early 20th century. Although examined within the historical literature on drugs, systematic empirical and statistical analyses remain underdeveloped. We will establish empirical evidence for the role that both race and perceptions of morality played in these efforts. As we are at a critical juncture in terms of criminal justice reform, our analysis provides context for how we got here, with a degree of scientific rigor that has not been applied previously. Understanding how race and false claims about marijuana’s effects contributed to the substance’s criminalization could inform the current debate regarding legalization. Exposing the roots of criminalization could demonstrate the weak scaffolding on which similar arguments in the modern era sit.

Award amount: $9600