Oregon ranks among the worst states for youth substance use disorder, with overdoses increasing and public schools receiving minimal support from the state to implement effective, research-backed drug prevention programs. Despite laws requiring schools to reduce substance use, the state offers little guidance to help schools meet these standards and lacks accountability for districts that fail to comply.

This article, part of an investigative series, shows how Oregon’s education system has failed to adapt to the rising dangers students face from increasingly potent substances and external pressures. Effective school prevention programs aim to reduce substance use disorders later in life by educating students about drugs, addressing risk factors, and offering healthy alternatives to substance use. When done correctly, these programs work. But a review of school districts across Oregon reveals that many schools struggle to implement evidence-based programs, often only meeting the state’s minimal health instruction requirements.

The Oregon Department of Education (ODE) is responsible for overseeing schools and implementing statewide standards, but it has limited authority and funding when it comes to substance use prevention. The department’s role is mostly limited to approving general health programs, but it does not offer specific guidance on what makes an effective substance use prevention curriculum. It does not track which programs are used in schools, and only gets involved when districts self-report failures to meet state standards—a process that can take years to resolve.

Meanwhile, the Oregon Health Authority (OHA) partners with the ODE on health education but has struggled to maintain relationships with local partners since a 2015 reorganization. The restructuring hurt its substance use prevention program, and many experts believe its efforts have yet to recover. Alanna Russell, a district nurse in Sheridan, Oregon, believes that more guidance is needed to help schools select evidence-based programs. “If we’re not selecting an evidence-based program, at worst we could cause harm. At best, we could be wasting important resources,” she said.

Since 2021, Oregon has poured over $1 billion into its behavioral health system, which is focused on providing care after issues arise, but very little has been directed toward prevention. “When there is such a desperate need to keep people from dying, you can understand why resources get focused on harm reduction and treatment,” said Janet Welsh, a prevention scientist at Pennsylvania State University. “But in the end, that’s kind of short-sighted. Prevention is cost-effective, while treatment is very expensive, and relapse is common.”

In Oregon, school districts are left to decide which prevention materials to use, so prevention efforts vary drastically across the state. Prior to a new database created for this reporting project, there was no easy way to track what prevention materials each district used. Some districts have administrative staff specifically tasked with reviewing and adopting curricula, while in smaller districts, staff like Russell are responsible for this job. The state compiles a list of approved teaching materials, but the review process is outdated, with the last health curriculum review conducted in 2017, long before the current substance use challenges became prevalent.

Despite the law requiring comprehensive, evidence-backed prevention programs, the state offers little guidance. Many districts rely on local partners for substance use education, such as the Yamhill County Public Health and the Confederated Tribes of Grand Ronde, but the state does not direct schools to expert clearinghouses like Blueprints for Healthy Youth Development or CrimeSolutions, which evaluate the effectiveness of curricula. Most educators, when looking for evidence-based materials, turn to What Works Clearinghouse, which does not focus on substance use prevention.

Records show that 29 districts have reported being out of compliance with state standards for substance use prevention education since 2017. For example, the Eugene 4J School District first reported non-compliance in 2020 because it only taught prevention in 9th grade, instead of annually as required. Despite extensions and multiple meetings with the state, the district only recently met state standards after adopting a new curriculum. Some districts remain out of compliance for years with no consequences.

The Oregon Health Authority is tasked with promoting substance use prevention, but funding for prevention programs is limited. Most funds come from federal sources, and state funding has not increased to meet the growing need. Prevention leaders in Oregon have had to make do with limited resources, competing for grants that only reach a handful of communities. For example, in Wasco County, a prevention program called “What’s Strong With You” led to a 68% decrease in juvenile referrals at The Dalles Middle School, but this kind of success is not widespread due to limited funding.

The shift of substance use prevention from the Department of Human Services to the Oregon Health Authority in 2015 has been a significant factor in the decline of the state’s prevention efforts. Caroline Cruz, a top health official for the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, believes that the move “destroyed” the state’s previously robust prevention system. The reorganization led to a loss of relationships with local advocates and weakened the focus on community-based prevention strategies.

The Oregon Alcohol and Drug Policy Commission has recommended increased funding for substance use prevention in Oregon’s counties and tribes and suggested creating a statewide hub for prevention strategies. These recommendations mirror successful strategies in Washington state, which works with community organizations and schools to promote evidence-backed prevention programs. However, it is unclear whether Oregon will adopt similar strategies, as the state’s existing coalitions and partnerships are limited.

In conclusion, Oregon’s current approach to substance use prevention in schools is failing to address the growing crisis. With minimal state guidance and limited funding, school districts are left to fend for themselves. If Oregon is to effectively combat the rising rates of youth substance use, it must prioritize prevention and allocate resources to evidence-backed programs. Without significant changes, the state will continue to fall short in protecting its youth from the dangers of substance use.