California’s Proposition 36 was introduced as a landmark shift in criminal justice policy, aiming to divert individuals with drug-related offenses from incarceration into treatment programs. The measure was designed to expand drug treatment access, reduce recidivism, and alleviate burdens on the prison system regardless of medicare eligibility. However, despite its ambitious goals, implementation challenges, infrastructure gaps, and regional disparities have complicated its rollout just as in non-criminal treatment programs across the country.

Counties across California are grappling with limited treatment availability, funding constraints, and workforce shortages, making it challenging to meet the increasing demand for drug treatment servicesin addition to the new “treatment-mandated felony” policy. While some regions have made strides in integrating Prop. 36 into their justice systems, others are struggling to build the necessary infrastructure to support large-scale treatment efforts.

Key Findings:

Infrastructure Gaps: Many counties lack sufficient licensed treatment providers–which due to longer wait times to see a professional–delays services for eligible individuals. This shortage is particularly severe in rural areas, where access to behavioral health services remains limited.
Funding and Oversight Challenges: Prop. 36 secured initial funding, but long-term financial sustainability and program oversight remain uncertain. Many counties report inconsistent funding streams, which makes maintaining and expanding services difficult.
Regional Disparities in Access: Urban areas have scaled up services expeditiously. Meanwhile, rural communities are struggling to even establish treatment networks. The uneven distribution of resources means that some individuals have few to no treatment options despite being eligible for services under Prop. 36.
Workforce Shortages: Prop. 36 depends on trained healthcare professionals. The demand for licensed counselors, addiction specialists, and case managers continues to outpace availability, which hinders select counties from providing consistent, quality care.

The Future of Drug Treatment Under Prop. 36

For Prop. 36 to fulfill its original promise, state and local governments must continue to invest strategically in policy reforms. Key areas of focus include:

Strengthening Provider Networks: Counties are expanding funding for training and recruiting licensed behavioral health professionals to meet growing demand.
Expanding Treatment Capacity: Regions are developing more community-based treatment centers and increasing the availability of outpatient services to accommodate diverse patient needs.
Ensuring Long-Term Funding: State and local governments are co-founding sustainable financial models to prevent service disruptions and allow counties to build scalable, long-term solutions.
Equity in Access: Local governments are directing targeted resources to rural and underfunded counties, thereby ensuring access to treatment is not determined by geographic location.

The success of Prop. 36 depends on strategic improvements in funding, workforce expansion, and treatment capacity in tandem with medicare’s response to overwhelming need across the state of California. While the initiative represents a critical step toward a rehabilitation-first approach, counties must still overcome systemic challenges to make treatment a viable alternative compared to incarceration. Ensuring long-term infrastructure support will be crucial for achieving Prop. 36’s goals and will allow policymakers to fairly evaluate its impact.

Sources:
US News: https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/california/articles/2025-02-11/prop-36-promised-mass-treatment-for-drug-offenses-some-counties-arent-ready
CalMatters: https://calmatters.org/justice/2025/02/prop-36-arrests-treatment/