1 of 7

District of Columbia

District of Columbia’s Opioid Settlements

This Community Guide will describe how D.C. is spending its opioid settlements and whether D.C. is working to ensure community access to opioid settlement funds. Last revised September 1, 2024.

Ultimate Decisionmaker

Generally, the , which is part of the D.C. .

Sometimes, the .

Decision-making Process

The Office of Opioid Abatement distributes funds from the Opioid Abatement Fund with input and recommendations from the .

However, the D.C. City Council has the authority to directly appropriate settlement funds if it chooses to do so.

The D.C. Attorney General directs spending of this share after notifying the Mayor, Chief Financial Officer, and D.C. City Council.

Supplantation

Prohibited

Not prohibited

Grant Funding

Yes. For live opportunities, see Opioid Settlement Tracker’s .

Public Input

Yes (facilitation of public involvement required)

No opportunities available (not required)

Advisory Body

Yes (required). See the .

The Commission is required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience.

No (not required)

Expenditures

Public reporting required. Expenditures from this share will likely be published on the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission’s .

Neither public nor intrastate reporting required

Updates

For updates on the Opioid Abatement Fund share, visit the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission’s , which includes information on its previous and upcoming meetings.

A single resource containing updates on the Litigation Support Fund share could not be found.

Decision Making

Here are the entities that ultimately decide how each of the District of Columbia’s opioid settlement shares are spent:

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund share: generally, D.C. Department of Behavioral Health’s Office of Opioid Abatement; sometimes, D.C. Council
0-10% Litigation Support Fund share: D.C. Attorney General

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund

Where do these monies live?

At least ninety percent (90%) of D.C.’s opioid settlement funds are transferred from the Litigation Support Fund to the (Abatement Fund).[1] D.C.’s remaining monies “may” be retained in the Litigation Support Fund if the D.C. Attorney General gives the Mayor, Chief Financial Officer, and D.C. Council written notice.[2] The administers the Abatement Fund and serves as D.C.’s lead opioid response agency.[3]

Uses of Opioid Abatement Fund monies are restricted to:[4]

’s and ’s operations and personnel
District-wide needs assessments[5]
Grants for evidence-based and evidence-informed prevention, recovery, treatment, or harm reduction activities[6]
Substance use disorder infrastructure[7]
Evaluations of the Abatement Fund’s effectiveness and outcomes (including access to harm reduction services)[8]
Publicly available data interfaces to report the impact of the crisis and program outcomes[9]
Audits of the Abatement Fund[10]
“[A]ny other opioid abatement activities authorized by any settlement, judgment, or consent decree resulting in funds being deposited into the Fund”[11]

Abatement Fund monies must be spent on forward-looking abatement uses only and may not be used to reimburse expenditures incurred prior to March 10, 2023.[12] The Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission (Commission) is additionally tasked to ensure that Abatement Fund monies are spent on “evidence-based and evidence-informed harm reduction, prevention, recovery, and treatment [interventions] for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders” that “have the effect of preventing, treating, and reducing [such disorders] and reducing fatalities.”[13]

Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission guides, Office of Opioid Abatement (and sometimes D.C. City Council) decides. In general, the ultimately decides specific Abatement Fund expenditures after consulting the (Commission).[14] The Office of Opioid Abatement, which is established within D.C.’s , supports the Commission’s work.[15]

The Office of Opioid Abatement must conduct a district-wide needs assessment, support the Commission’s activities and integrate its work with existing district planning, develop grantmaking procedures, prepare an annual report, and generally oversee expenditures from the fund, including any awards made.[19]

Although the Office of Opioid Abatement typically determines expenditures of Abatement Fund monies in consultation with the Commission, the D.C. City Council also has the authority to directly appropriate these funds.[20]

Yes, supplantation is prohibited. D.C. law explicitly states that monies from the Opioid Abatement Fund “shall supplement, and not supplant, any other funds . . . that would otherwise have been expended for such purposes.”[21] This means that the vast majority of D.C.’s opioid settlement funds, including all monies in the Opioid Abatement Fund, must be spent in ways that supplement — rather than replace (or “supplant”) — existing state or local government resources.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

D.C. Code Secs. 1-301.86b(d)(3)(D), 7-3221(e)(1)-(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(1)-(8). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(2) (“District-wide needs assessments to identify structural gaps and needs related to opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(3) (“Awards and grants for evidence-based and evidence-informed prevention, recovery, treatment, or harm reduction activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders, including evidence-informed pilot programs or demonstration studies”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(4) (“Infrastructure required for evidence-based and evidence-informed prevention, recovery, treatment, or harm reduction activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(5) (“Evaluations of effectiveness and outcomes for activities, practices, programs, services, supports. and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders for which monies from the Fund were disbursed, such as the impact on access to harm reduction, services, or treatment for disorders, or reduction in drug-related mortality”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(6) (“Publicly available data interfaces, including to aggregate, track, and report: (A) Data on opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders, overdoses, and drug-related harms; and (B) Outcomes of activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for which monies from the Fund were disbursed”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(7). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-2) (“Unless otherwise required by court order”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3212(b)(1), (3). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(b)(7) (“The office shall have the power and duty to: Issue, manage, and oversee awards and grants from the Fund”), 7-3212(i) (“The Commission’s recommendations for the awarding of monies and grants”). But see D.C. Code Sec.7-3212(h)(2)(C) (providing that the “Commission shall have the power and duty to: Make recommendations to the Mayor and Council regarding: Awards of monies and grants from the Fund”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(a)(1) (establishing the Office of Opioid Abatement within the Department of Behavioral Health), (b)(2) (the Office must “[s]upport the Commission’s activities by providing staffing, research and policy expertise, facilities, technical assistance, and other resources”), (b)(3) (the Office must “[a]ssist the Commission in preparing its recommendations regarding goals, objectives, and performance indicators pursuant to § 7-3212(h)(2)(A)”), (b)(4) (the Office must “[i]ntegrate the work of the Office and Commission and Fund expenditures with existing District strategic planning related to opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)-(F). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(i)(1)-(3). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(c)(1) (“If the Office decides not to follow a Commission recommendation in whole or in part, the Office shall provide the Commission with a written explanation for its decision within 14 days after the decision is made”), (2) (“The Commission shall have at least 7 days after receipt of the Office’s written explanation provided pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection to provide a written response before the Office proceeds with its decision”) (emphasis added). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(b)(1)-(8). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-3) (“including insurance benefits or District or federal funding”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3221(f)(1) (“No later than December 31 of each year, the Department of Behavioral Health shall provide a report to the Mayor, Council, and Attorney General detailing the District's use of monies in the Fund during the prior fiscal year”), (f)(2)(A) (requiring the annual report be posted on the Office of Opioid Abatement’s website), (f)(2)(B) (specifying the required contents of the report, including “[a] listing of all applications received for awards and grants of monies from the Fund,” “[t]he name and a description of each awardee or grantee of monies from the Fund, and the amount disbursed to each awardee or grantee,” “[a] description of the intended use of each award or grant from the Fund, including the activity, practice, program, service, support, or strategy funded, population served, and measures that the awardee or grantee will use to assess the impact of the award,” “[t]he primary criteria used to select each awardee or grantee and its respective award or grant amount,” and “[t]he progress toward achieving the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission, Office of Opioid Abatement, and Fund's purposes, such as metrics on improving outcomes and reducing mortality and other harms related to opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑

0-10% Litigation Support Fund

Where do these monies live?

The D.C. Attorney General may retain a maximum of 10% D.C.’s opioid settlement funds in the Litigation Support Fund if the Attorney General gives the Mayor, Chief Financial Officer, and D.C. Council written notice.[1]

Litigation Support Fund monies may only be spent on:

Litigation expenses[2]
Personnel costs (up to $7 million annually)[3]
Non-personnel costs related to the administration of specified grant initiatives[4]
“Crime reduction, violence interruption, and other public safety initiatives”[5]

In a December 2022 report, D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine described the Litigation Support Fund as allowing his office to “use the proceeds from our lawsuits and reinvest them in the community,” stating that they will “use the money to build up our legal efforts and contribute $7 million annually towards the city’s violence prevention efforts.”[6]

D.C. Attorney General decides. The Litigation Support Fund is administered by the D.C. Attorney General’s Office.[7]

No, supplantation is not prohibited. D.C. law does not explicitly prohibit supplantation uses of opioid settlement funds from its Litigation Support Fund. This means that up to 10% of D.C.’s opioid settlement funds may be spent in ways that replace (or “supplant”) — rather than supplement — existing resources.

No (neither public nor intrastate reporting required). Opioid settlement expenditures are not officially published in a centralized location for this share.

Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s Expenditure Report Tracker for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

D.C. Code Secs. 1-301.86b(d)(3)(D), 7-3221(e)(1)-(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 1-301.86b(c)(1)(A) (“Supporting general litigation expenses associated with prosecuting or defending litigation matters on behalf of the District of Columbia”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 1-301.86b(c)(1)(B) (“Funding staff positions, personnel costs, and employee retirement and separation incentives, up to a maximum amount of $7 million per year”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 1-301.86b(c)(1)(B) (“non-personnel costs related to administering any grant issued pursuant to the authority provided in §§ 1-301.88f(a) and 1-301.88g(a)”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 1-301.86b(c)(1)(C) (“Crime reduction and violence interruption programming”), (c)(2) (“Beginning in Fiscal Year 2020, up to $9 million deposited into the Fund each fiscal year may be used for the purposes of crime reduction, violence interruption, and other public safety initiatives”). ↑
Breaking Ground: Building the First Independent Office of Attorney General. District of Columbia Office of Attorney General. December 2022. Accessed August 14, 2024. ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 1-301.86b(a). ↑

Community Access

Can I provide input on spending?

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund share: Yes (required). Under D.C. law, a primary purpose of the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission (OAAC) is to “[p]rioritize and facilitate public involvement, accountability, and transparency in allocating and accounting for [opioid settlement] monies.”[1] The OAAC is required by law to hold public meetings at least quarterly,[2] though in practice it has convened more frequently. Meeting minutes from the OAAC show that it has included time for public comments prior to the adjournment of each meeting, with members of the community participating both in person and virtually. OAAC meetings must be held in compliance with D.C’s Open Meetings Act.[3] The OAAC’s first meeting was held on October 25, 2023.
- Opioid Abatement Public Forum. The OAAC has also held public forums to hear “the public’s suggestions, lessons, and other information on how to address the opioid epidemic in the District” and to share information with the public about current funding opportunities.[4]
0-10% Litigation Support Fund share: No opportunities available (not required). The District has not established recurring opportunities for the public to provide input on uses of this 10% share.[5]

Can I apply for grants?

Yes. D.C. has previously established settlement-funded grant opportunities for which community organizations were eligible to apply. Visit the Opioid Settlement Community Grants Portals (OpioidSettlementTracker.com and Legal Action Center) for the most up-to-date information on settlement grant opportunities for community organizations.

Where do I go for updates?

For updates on the Opioid Abatement Fund share, visit the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission’s website, which includes information on its previous and upcoming meetings.
A single resource containing Litigation Support Fund share updates could not be found.[6]

What else should I know?

The D.C. law establishing the Office of Opioid Abatement within the Department of Behavioral Health requires the Office to maintain a public website to host expenditure details, annual reports, and other critical information.[7] As of September 1, 2024, this website could not be found.

Citations

D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(b)(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(f). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(f). Note that the D.C. Open Meetings Act does not give the public a right to comment at public meetings. ↑
Opioid Abatement Public Forum. Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission and Office of Opioid Abatement. April 24, 2024; Opioid Abatement Public Forum II. Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission and Office of Opioid Abatement. May 8, 2024. See also Upcoming Meetings of the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission. Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission. D.C. Department of Behavioral Health website. Accessed September 1, 2024. ↑
If you see this change, email tips@opioidsettlementtracker.com. There is no legal requirement for decision-makers to seek public input on uses of this share. ↑
If you see this change, email tips@opioidsettlementtracker.com. ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3213(b)(9)(A)-(E). ↑

Advisory Bodies

Has the state established an advisory body for settlement funds?

Yes. The (OAAC) was created by D.C. law in 2023.[1] The OAAC’s purpose is threefold:

To make sure that the Opioid Abatement Fund’s 90-100% share is used for “evidence-based and evidence-informed harm reduction, prevention, recovery, and treatment” strategies.[2]
To prioritize and facilitate “public involvement, accountability, and transparency.”[3]
To ensure that the Opioid Abatement Fund’s monies “have the effect of preventing, treating, and reducing opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders and reducing fatalities.”[4]

The OAAC is empowered to establish its own procedures and recommend District-wide goals and indicators to D.C.’s Mayor and Council regarding:

”Prevention, recovery, treatment, and harm reduction infrastructure, activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders.”[5]
Ways to reduce disparities in access to such resources[6]
Improvements in outcomes and reduced mortality in “traditionally underserved populations, including communities of color and current or formerly incarcerated individuals”[7]

The OAAC must also recommend grantmaking policies and procedures and specific grants for the Opioid Abatement Fund and the “performance and outcomes” of funding recipients.[8] When recommending grant awards from the Opioid Abatement Fund, the OAAC is required by D.C. law to consider, with respect to the area an applicant or grantee seeks to serve, the number of individuals with OUD and fatal overdoses, disparities in access and outcomes, and currently available infrastructure and supports.[9] Members of the OAAC generally serve three-year terms, up to a maximum of two full terms.[10]

Is the state advisory body required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

Yes. Two members of the OAAC must be individuals who have “experienced opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders and recovery,” one of whom is appointed by the Mayor and the other by the Chairman of the D.C. Council.[11] The Mayor is also responsible for appointing a member who is the family member of “a person or decedent who experienced opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use disorder and mental health disorders.”[12]

What is the overall membership of the state advisory body?

The composition of the (OAAC) is established by D.C. law, and each may select a designee to serve in their stead:[13]

Director of the Department of Behavioral Health[14]
Director of the Department of Health[15]
Director of the Department of Health Care Finance[16]
Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services[17]
Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice[18]
Chief Medical Examiner[19]
Attorney General[20]
Chairperson of the D.C. Council Committee that oversees health issues[21]
Five (5) Mayoral appointees:
- Member with experience in providing harm reduction, prevention, treatment, or recovery services[22]
- Member with professional expertise and educational backgrounds in medicine[23]
- Member with professional expertise in educational backgrounds in mental health services[24]
- Member who has “experienced opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders and recovery”[25]
- Family member of a person or decedent with lived experience of opioid use disorder or co-occurring substance use and mental health conditions[26]
Four (4) representatives, one each from the D.C. Behavioral Health Association, Medical Society of D.C., D.C. Primary Care Association, and the D.C. Hospital Association[27]
Four (4) appointees by the Chairman of the D.C. Council:
- Two members with current experience of providing harm reduction, prevention, treatment, or recovery services[28]
- Member with expertise and education in “public health policy or research”[29]
- Member who has “experienced opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders and recovery”[30]

Are local governments required to establish a settlement advisory body? If so, are local advisory bodies required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

Not applicable.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(a). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(b)(1). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(b)(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(b)(3). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)(i). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)(ii). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)(iii). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(B)-(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(i)(1)-(3). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(e)(1)-(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(1). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(3). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(4). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(5). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(6). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(7). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(8). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(A). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(B)(i). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(B)(ii). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(C). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(10)(A)-(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(11)(A). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(11)(B). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(11)(C). ↑

Additional Resources

D.C. Department of Behavioral Health

Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission

Live.Long.D.C.

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund

Where do these monies live?

Uses of Opioid Abatement Fund monies are restricted to:[4]

’s and ’s operations and personnel
District-wide needs assessments[5]
Grants for evidence-based and evidence-informed prevention, recovery, treatment, or harm reduction activities[6]
Substance use disorder infrastructure[7]
Evaluations of the Abatement Fund’s effectiveness and outcomes (including access to harm reduction services)[8]
Publicly available data interfaces to report the impact of the crisis and program outcomes[9]
Audits of the Abatement Fund[10]
“[A]ny other opioid abatement activities authorized by any settlement, judgment, or consent decree resulting in funds being deposited into the Fund”[11]

The makes recommendations on district-wide goals, grant application policies and processes, and grant awards from the Abatement Fund.[16] The Commission’s grant award recommendations must consider the impact of the overdose crisis, care access and health outcome disparities, and existing infrastructure and interventions in the areas that a prospective grantee seeks to serve.[17] If the Office of Opioid Abatement declines to implement a Commission’s recommendation, the Commission is entitled to a written explanation and an opportunity to respond.[18]
The Office of Opioid Abatement must conduct a district-wide needs assessment, support the Commission’s activities and integrate its work with existing district planning, develop grantmaking procedures, prepare an annual report, and generally oversee expenditures from the fund, including any awards made.[19]

Eventually (public reporting required). Expenditures from this share will likely be published on the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission’s . The Department of Behavioral Health is required to annually report on the Abatement Fund’s expenditures and related information for the prior year, and this report then must be published on the Office of Opioid Abatement’s website.[22]

Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

D.C. Code Secs. 7-3221(a) (“There is established as a special fund the Opioid Abatement Fund”), 1-301.86b(d)(3)(D) (“The Attorney General shall transfer to the Opioid Abatement Fund, established by , at least 85% of any payment received prior to October 1, 2022, in settlement of the cases and settlements, judgments, and consent decrees specified in and , that was deposited into the Fund, and at least 90% of any payment received thereafter”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 1-301.86b(d)(3)(D), 7-3221(e)(1)-(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(a) (“There is established as a special fund the Opioid Abatement Fund (‘Fund’), which shall be administered by the Department of Behavioral Health in accordance with this section”); . Department of Behavioral Health website. Accessed August 14, 2024 (“Using a public health approach, the District of Columbia, led by the Department of Behavioral Health, is implementing evidence-based practices in prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery to save and change lives”) (emphasis added). See also Jenna Portnoy and Meagan Flynn. . Washington Post. November 7, 2023. Accessed August 14, 2024 (describing the Department of Behavioral Services as D.C.’s “[l]ead opioid response agency”). Prior to its amendment by D.C. Law 24-315 Title II Sec. 202(a), D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(a) originally tasked the Mayor with administering funds. See D.C. Law 24-167 (Fiscal Year 2023 Budget Support Act of 2022, Sec. 5012(a) (“There is established as a special fund the Opioid Abatement Fund (‘Fund’), which shall be administered by the Mayor in accordance with this section”) (emphasis added). See also . Accessed August 14, 2024 (D.C. Councilmember Charles Allen expressing concerns about the Mayor’s proposal to sweep roughly $2 million dollars in the Opioid Abatement Fund into an unspecific account for unknown purposes in the 2024 budget proposal). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(1)-(8). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(2) (“District-wide needs assessments to identify structural gaps and needs related to opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(3) (“Awards and grants for evidence-based and evidence-informed prevention, recovery, treatment, or harm reduction activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders, including evidence-informed pilot programs or demonstration studies”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(4) (“Infrastructure required for evidence-based and evidence-informed prevention, recovery, treatment, or harm reduction activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(5) (“Evaluations of effectiveness and outcomes for activities, practices, programs, services, supports. and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders for which monies from the Fund were disbursed, such as the impact on access to harm reduction, services, or treatment for disorders, or reduction in drug-related mortality”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(6) (“Publicly available data interfaces, including to aggregate, track, and report: (A) Data on opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders, overdoses, and drug-related harms; and (B) Outcomes of activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for which monies from the Fund were disbursed”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(7). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-1)(8). See also Distributor Settlement Agreement , Sec. (“Exhibit E provides a non-exhaustive list of expenditures that qualify as being paid for Opioid Remediation. Qualifying expenditures may include reasonable related administrative expenses”). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-2) (“Unless otherwise required by court order”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3212(b)(1), (3). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(b)(7) (“The office shall have the power and duty to: Issue, manage, and oversee awards and grants from the Fund”), 7-3212(i) (“The Commission’s recommendations for the awarding of monies and grants”). But see D.C. Code Sec.7-3212(h)(2)(C) (providing that the “Commission shall have the power and duty to: Make recommendations to the Mayor and Council regarding: Awards of monies and grants from the Fund”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(a)(1) (establishing the Office of Opioid Abatement within the Department of Behavioral Health), (b)(2) (the Office must “[s]upport the Commission’s activities by providing staffing, research and policy expertise, facilities, technical assistance, and other resources”), (b)(3) (the Office must “[a]ssist the Commission in preparing its recommendations regarding goals, objectives, and performance indicators pursuant to § 7-3212(h)(2)(A)”), (b)(4) (the Office must “[i]ntegrate the work of the Office and Commission and Fund expenditures with existing District strategic planning related to opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)-(F). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(i)(1)-(3). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(c)(1) (“If the Office decides not to follow a Commission recommendation in whole or in part, the Office shall provide the Commission with a written explanation for its decision within 14 days after the decision is made”), (2) (“The Commission shall have at least 7 days after receipt of the Office’s written explanation provided pursuant to paragraph (1) of this subsection to provide a written response before the Office proceeds with its decision”) (emphasis added). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3213(b)(1)-(8). ↑
See, e.g., (Fiscal Year 2025 Budget Support Act of 2024), (specifying that the “subtitle may be cited as the ‘Opioid Abatement Directed Funding Amendment Act of 2024’”), (amending D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221 to direct $1.125 million of monies from the Opioid Abatement Fund to specified uses, including $400,000 for “behavioral health and substance abuse targeted outreach services at locations in Wards 5 and 6,” $325,000 “to implement the School-Based Behavioral Health Student Peer Education Pilot Amendment Act of 2024,” and $400,000 “to the Office of the Chief Medical Officer for the purpose of enabling the testing of illicit drug misuse and the development of novel testing methods for opioids within the agency’s Forensic Toxicology Lab and Data Fusion Center”) (as of August 14, 2024, D.C. Act 25-550 was enacted without the Mayor’s signature but still pending Congressional review, with a projected law date of December 7, 2024). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3221(b-3) (“including insurance benefits or District or federal funding”). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3221(f)(1) (“No later than December 31 of each year, the Department of Behavioral Health shall provide a report to the Mayor, Council, and Attorney General detailing the District's use of monies in the Fund during the prior fiscal year”), (f)(2)(A) (requiring the annual report be posted on the Office of Opioid Abatement’s website), (f)(2)(B) (specifying the required contents of the report, including “[a] listing of all applications received for awards and grants of monies from the Fund,” “[t]he name and a description of each awardee or grantee of monies from the Fund, and the amount disbursed to each awardee or grantee,” “[a] description of the intended use of each award or grant from the Fund, including the activity, practice, program, service, support, or strategy funded, population served, and measures that the awardee or grantee will use to assess the impact of the award,” “[t]he primary criteria used to select each awardee or grantee and its respective award or grant amount,” and “[t]he progress toward achieving the Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission, Office of Opioid Abatement, and Fund's purposes, such as metrics on improving outcomes and reducing mortality and other harms related to opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders”). ↑

Advisory Bodies

Has the state established an advisory body for settlement funds?

Yes. The (OAAC) was created by D.C. law in 2023.[1] The OAAC’s purpose is threefold:

To make sure that the Opioid Abatement Fund’s 90-100% share is used for “evidence-based and evidence-informed harm reduction, prevention, recovery, and treatment” strategies.[2]
To prioritize and facilitate “public involvement, accountability, and transparency.”[3]
To ensure that the Opioid Abatement Fund’s monies “have the effect of preventing, treating, and reducing opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders and reducing fatalities.”[4]

The OAAC is empowered to establish its own procedures and recommend District-wide goals and indicators to D.C.’s Mayor and Council regarding:

”Prevention, recovery, treatment, and harm reduction infrastructure, activities, practices, programs, services, supports, and strategies for opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders.”[5]
Ways to reduce disparities in access to such resources[6]
Improvements in outcomes and reduced mortality in “traditionally underserved populations, including communities of color and current or formerly incarcerated individuals”[7]

Is the state advisory body required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

What is the overall membership of the state advisory body?

The composition of the (OAAC) is established by D.C. law, and each may select a designee to serve in their stead:[13]

Director of the Department of Behavioral Health[14]
Director of the Department of Health[15]
Director of the Department of Health Care Finance[16]
Deputy Mayor for Health and Human Services[17]
Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice[18]
Chief Medical Examiner[19]
Attorney General[20]
Chairperson of the D.C. Council Committee that oversees health issues[21]
Five (5) Mayoral appointees:
- Member with experience in providing harm reduction, prevention, treatment, or recovery services[22]
- Member with professional expertise and educational backgrounds in medicine[23]
- Member with professional expertise in educational backgrounds in mental health services[24]
- Member who has “experienced opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders and recovery”[25]
- Family member of a person or decedent with lived experience of opioid use disorder or co-occurring substance use and mental health conditions[26]
Four (4) representatives, one each from the D.C. Behavioral Health Association, Medical Society of D.C., D.C. Primary Care Association, and the D.C. Hospital Association[27]
Four (4) appointees by the Chairman of the D.C. Council:
- Two members with current experience of providing harm reduction, prevention, treatment, or recovery services[28]
- Member with expertise and education in “public health policy or research”[29]
- Member who has “experienced opioid use disorder and co-occurring substance use and mental health disorders and recovery”[30]

The current roster of the OAAC is available .

Are local governments required to establish a settlement advisory body? If so, are local advisory bodies required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

Not applicable.

What else should I know?

Not applicable.

Citations

D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(a). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(b)(1). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(b)(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(b)(3). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)(i). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)(ii). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(A)(iii). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(h)(2)(B)-(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(i)(1)-(3). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(e)(1)-(2). ↑
D.C. Code Secs. 7-3212(c)(9)(C) (emphasis added), (c)(11)(C) (emphasis added). This language may be interpreted as excluding someone in active use. This reading is supported by language on the that the Commission includes “people in recovery from these diseases” (emphasis added). Opioid Abatement Advisory Commission (“”). D.C. Department of Behavioral Health website. Accessed September 1, 2024. ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(1). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(2). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(3). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(4). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(5). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(6). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(7). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(8). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(A). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(B)(i). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(B)(ii). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(C). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(9)(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(10)(A)-(D). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(11)(A). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(11)(B). ↑
D.C. Code Sec. 7-3212(c)(11)(C). ↑

District of Columbia

District of Columbia’s Opioid Settlements

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund Share

0-10% Litigation Support Fund Share

Decision Making

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund

Where do these monies live?

What can this share be spent on?

Who ultimately decides how to spend this share (and how)?

Are supplantation uses prohibited for this share?

Can I see how this share has been spent?

What else should I know?

Citations

0-10% Litigation Support Fund

Where do these monies live?

What can this share be spent on?

Who ultimately decides how to spend this share (and how)?

Are supplantation uses prohibited for this share?

Can I see how this share has been spent?

What else should I know?

Citations

Community Access

Can I provide input on spending?

Can I apply for grants?

Where do I go for updates?

What else should I know?

Citations

Advisory Bodies

Has the state established an advisory body for settlement funds?

Is the state advisory body required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

What is the overall membership of the state advisory body?

Are local governments required to establish a settlement advisory body? If so, are local advisory bodies required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

What else should I know?

Citations

Additional Resources

D.C. Department of Behavioral Health

Live.Long.D.C.

Decision Making

0-10% Litigation Support Fund

Where do these monies live?

What can this share be spent on?

Who ultimately decides how to spend this share (and how)?

Are supplantation uses prohibited for this share?

Can I see how this share has been spent?

What else should I know?

Citations

Community Access

Can I provide input on spending?

Can I apply for grants?

Where do I go for updates?

What else should I know?

Citations

Additional Resources

D.C. Department of Behavioral Health

Live.Long.D.C.

District of Columbia’s Opioid Settlements

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund Share

0-10% Litigation Support Fund Share

90-100% Opioid Abatement Fund

Where do these monies live?

What can this share be spent on?

Who ultimately decides how to spend this share (and how)?

Are supplantation uses prohibited for this share?

Can I see how this share has been spent?

What else should I know?

Citations

Advisory Bodies

Has the state established an advisory body for settlement funds?

Is the state advisory body required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

What is the overall membership of the state advisory body?

Are local governments required to establish a settlement advisory body? If so, are local advisory bodies required to include member(s) with lived and/or living experience?

What else should I know?

Citations

Total Funds

Allocation

Mechanism