Here are the entities that ultimately decide how each of New York’s opioid settlement shares are spent:
46.11% local share: local officials for counties and New York City
36.39% Opioid Settlement Fund share: New York state legislature, Office of Addiction Services and Supports (OASAS), and Local Government Units
17.5% state share: the “State”
The Opioid Settlement Fund holds the Office of Addiction Services and Supports’ (OASAS) combined 36.39% share:[1]
20% is set aside for OASAS’ discretionary spending[2]
16.39% is set aside for regional spending across 8 regions, five large cities, and various municipalities (excluding New York City and Nassau and Suffolk counties) according to Schedule B of New York’s state-local agreement.[3] This portion of the Fund share is distributed through counties’ Local Government Units.[4]
In general, and with limited exceptions,[5] monies in the Opioid Settlement Fund must be spent on “eligible expenditures,”[6] which state law limits to a specific list of eight eligible services and programs that include youth-focused prevention campaigns, statewide anti-stigma campaigns, treatment and recovery programs, harm reduction services, recovery and supportive housing, community-based programs to reduce involvement with the criminal legal system, support for pregnant women and new parents (including babies with neonatal abstinence syndrome), and vocational and educational trainings for people with or at risk for a substance use disorder.[7] The Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board may recommend additions to or deletions from this list to the legislature and governor.[8]
The Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board has expressed its own priority funding categories as “Priority Areas” that include regional abatement, harm reduction, “investments across the continuum,” “priority populations,” treatment, recovery, housing, prevention, transportation, public awareness, and research.[9] In its 2023 report, the Board also reaffirmed and expanded upon its principles and overarching themes of spend, which include service integration to treat co-occurring disorders and the need to prioritize communities of color.[10]
Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board recommends Fund uses; state legislature, Office of Addiction Services and Supports (OASAS), and Local Government Units decide. The Opioid Settlement Fund is appropriated by the legislature for use on programs and services overseen by the Office of Addiction Services and Supports (OASAS) and other state agencies.[11]
The Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board, established under OASAS, provides the governor and legislature with non-binding recommendations on Fund appropriations through its annual report,[12] which OASAS is required to publish online.[13] If the state chooses not to follow a Board recommendation, it must provide a public, written explanation for its decision and provide the Board an opportunity to respond.[14] Fund expenditures must prioritize programs that are culturally, linguistically, and gender competent; trauma-informed; evidence-based; and employ people with lived experience “where appropriate.”[15]
16.39% regional spending: Board recommends, Local Government Units (LGUs) decide. This 45% slice of the Fund is distributed across “8 regions, 5 large cities, and 21 other municipalities” (excluding New York City and Nassau and Suffolk counties) through counties’ Local Government Units.[18] As a condition of receipt, each must comply with reporting requirements and annually certify that all funds were spent on approved uses.[19] The Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board may provide non-binding recommendations on spend,[20] and the Board refers to its identified Priority Areas as “available to inform the local subdivisions” and a list that “should be considered when utilizing settlement dollars.”[21] Counties may subgrant their regional shares to local organizations.[22]
Yes, supplantation is prohibited. New York state law explicitly prohibits supplantation uses of monies from the Opioid Settlement Fund.[23] This means that funds from New York’s 36.39% “Opioid Settlement Fund” share must be spent in ways that that supplement — rather than replace (or “supplant”) — existing resources.
Yes (public reporting required). View OASAS’ Opioid Settlement Fund Tracker.[24] The commissioner of addiction services and supports, the commissioner of mental health, and the commissioner of health must report Opioid Settlement Fund expenditures to the governor, various legislative leaders, and the Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board. These reports will then be published as a "consolidated dashboard" on various offices' websites.[25]
Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s Expenditure Report Tracker for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.
New York State Governor Kathy Hochul has faced criticism for allegedly seeking to circumvent the state’s prohibition on supplantation uses of monies from the Opioid Settlement Fund by proposing to reduce the money OASAS receives from the state’s general fund while simultaneously increasing the amount of opioid settlement funds directed to OASAS.[26]
N.Y. State Fin. Law. Sec. 99-nn(1) (creates “opioid settlement fund”), New York Opioid Settlement Sharing Agreement (Agreement) II.B(2)-(3) (allocates 16.39% and 20% “to the Lead State Agency to be placed in the Opioid Settlement Fund”). ↑
Agreement II.B(2) (“In combination, the amount of Regional Spending of the Opioid Settlement Fund committed to cities other than New York City with a 2020 population of more than 90,000 shall not be less than 1.89% of the total Opioid Settlement Funds”) and IV.A(1) (“Schedule B”). See also Opioid Settlement Fund Regional Abatements. Office of Addictions Services and Supports (OASAS). Accessed August 12, 2024. New York City, Nassau County, and Suffolk County receive settlement monies directly through other shares. Agreement II.B(6)-(8). ↑
Opioid Settlement Fund Regional Abatements. OASAS. Accessed August 12, 2024. (“The LGU is the unit of government with authority under New York State Mental Hygiene Law to provide local addiction and mental health services”). ↑
Agreement II.B(3) (allowing administrative uses for OASAS’ 20% Discretionary Spending share) and IV.A(2) (“No more than 5% of the total Opioid Settlement Fund may be used in any fiscal year for oversight and administrative costs of the Opioid Settlement Fund and the Advisory Board”). ↑
N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(b) (“The legislature shall appropriate funds to be used for eligible expenditures that are consistent with the approved uses and terms of the statewide opioid settlement agreement. Such expenditures shall be distributed regionally and in accordance with the statewide opioid settlement agreements to ensure adequate geographic disbursement across the state”). State law defines “eligible expenditures” as “services and programs that are consistent with the approved uses and terms of the statewide opioid settlement agreement as defined in this section,” but then limits this to a list of eight (8) interventions/areas. See N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(a)(1)(i)-(viii). See also Agreement II.B(2)-(3) and IV.A(1)-(2) (allocating Regional and Discretionary Spending amounts for “Approved Uses”). ↑
N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(a)(1)(i)-(viii). ↑
But may only recommend deletions with approval from ¾ of present Board members. N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(c)(2). ↑
Opioid Settlement Fund Tracker. OASAS. Accessed September 1, 2024. See also Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board Annual Report. November 1, 2023. Accessed August 12, 2024 (“After careful deliberation, for FY 2025, the Board has felt it is important to clarify and reprioritize their prior recommendations. The following section serves as an Addendum to the Board’s initial report, dated November 1, 2022. In this Addendum, the Board hereby reprioritizes and clarifies its funding categories as follows, beginning with the recommended highest priority.” This reprioritization took place by Board vote). ↑
Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board Annual Report. November 1, 2023. Accessed August 12, 2024. ↑
N.Y. State Fin. Law. Sec. 99-nn(5). These agencies include “the department of health, the office of mental health, the division of housing and community renewal or any other agency that may oversee an appropriate program or service that is considered an eligible expenditure.” See also N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(a)(4), (b)(1)-(3). ↑
N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(c)(1), (c)(9) and Agreement V.A. See also Agreement V.B (“The Advisory Board shall have additional advisory responsibilities, including reporting on projects and programs related to addressing the opioid epidemic, developing priorities, goals and recommendations for spending on such projects and programs, working with the Lead State Agency to develop measurable outcomes for such projects and programs, and making recommendations for policy changes”). ↑
Agreement IV.E. See, e.g., Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board Annual Report. November 1, 2023. Accessed August 12, 2024. In developing its recommendations, the Board must account for gaps in access to services, incorporate mechanisms to assess the effectiveness of spending, and suggest areas of opioid remediation research. N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(c)(1). The Board also “may take into consideration federal, state or local initiatives and activities that have shown to be effective in preventing and treating substance use disorders as well as maintaining recovery and assisting with the collateral effects of substance use disorders for individuals and their families or support system.” N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(c)(1). See also Agreement V.B. ↑
N.Y. State Fin. Law Sec. 99-nn(5). ↑
Agreement II.B(3). It can also be used for costs associated with administration of the Opioid Settlement Fund. ↑
Agreement IV.A(2) (in addition to funding Approved Use Projects, OASAS can use this slice of funds to “carry out the duties of the Lead State Agency and Advisory Board under this Agreement, including oversight and administration of the Opioid Settlement Fund and the Advisory Board”). The Board also monitors these “permitted administrative expenses.” Agreement V.B. ↑
Opioid Settlement Fund Regional Abatements. OASAS. Accessed August 12, 2024 ((“The LGU is the unit of government with authority under New York State Mental Hygiene Law to provide local addiction and mental health services”). See Agreement II.B(2) (“In combination, the amount of Regional Spending of the Opioid Settlement Fund committed to cities other than New York City with a 2020 population of more than 90,000 shall not be less than 1.89% of the total Opioid Settlement Funds”), IV.A(1) (“Schedule B”), and Agreement, Schedule B. See also Opioid Settlement Fund Regional Abatement County, Five Large Cities, and Other Litigating Entities Planned Use of Funds Request. OASAS. February 6, 2024. Accessed August 12, 2024. ↑
N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(b)(2)-(3) and Agreement IV.A(1). ↑
Agreement V.B. See also Opioid Settlement Fund Regional Abatements. OASAS. Accessed August 12, 2024. (“OASAS holds regular calls with Local Government Units (LGUs) to address questions related to regional abatements”) and Opioid Settlement Funding Initiatives. OASAS. Accessed August 12, 2024. (“As specified in the Settlement Agreement, State Statute and in the 2023 Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board report, the allowable use of funds and identified priority areas are available to inform the local subdivisions and should be considered when utilizing settlement dollars”). ↑
Opioid Settlement Fund Tracker. OASAS. Accessed September 1, 2024. ↑
See, e.g., Westchester County Distributes Millions in Opioid Settlement Funds for Treatment, Prevention, Harm Reduction, and Recovery. Office of the Westchester County Executive. May 30, 2024. Accessed August 12, 2024. ↑
N.Y. State Fin. Law Sec. 99-nn(3) (“Moneys of the fund shall be used to supplement and not supplant or replace any other funds, including federal or state funding, which would otherwise have been expended for substance use disorder prevention, treatment, recovery or harm reduction services or programs”). See also N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(c)(10)(F) (requiring annual reporting to include “any other information the commissioner deems necessary to help inform future appropriations and funding decisions, and ensure such funding is not being used to supplant local, state, or federal funding”) (emphasis added). ↑
This site is unrelated to OpioidSettlementTracker.com. ↑
N.Y. Mental Hyg. Law Sec. 25.18(c)(10). ↑
See, e.g., Spencer Norris. As Overdoses Soar, Addiction Treatment Funding Stagnates. New York Focus. February 13, 2024. Accessed June 24, 2024. ↑
This share is allocated to the state, and a portion may be allocated to localities at the Attorney General’s discretion.[1]
No, supplantation is not prohibited. New York does not explicitly prohibit supplantation uses of opioid settlement funds from the 17.5% state share. This means that the state share 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.
Not applicable.
New York's Opioid Settlement Sharing Agreement does not require this share be spent on opioid abatement uses.[2] However, at least a portion of monies in this share must inevitably be spent on abatement uses (as illustrated by the national settlement agreements’ non-exhaustive , which includes prevention, harm reduction, treatment, recovery, and other strategies) for the state to meet its minimum opioid remediation spending requirements under the different agreements.[3]
The “State” decides. The “State of New York” will ultimately decide specific expenditures for this share. The may opt to direct a portion of this share to localities.[4]
Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.
(“17.5% to the State of New York, unless not in accordance with state law. The Office of the Attorney General shall have the discretion to allocate a portion of these funds to local governments not listed in the annexed allocation chart”). The Agreement does not further define “the State of New York.” ↑
(providing merely “17.5% to the State of New York, unless not in accordance with state law. The Office of the Attorney General shall have the discretion to allocate a portion of these funds to local governments not listed in the annexed allocation chart”). The Agreement does not further define “the State of New York.” ↑
See, e.g., Distributor Settlement Agreement, (minimum 85% opioid remediation spending); CVS Settlement Agreement, (minimum 95.5% opioid remediation spending); Walgreens Settlement Agreement, (minimum 95% opioid remediation spending); Walmart Settlement Agreement, (minimum 85% opioid remediation spending). ↑
(“17.5% to the State of New York, unless not in accordance with state law. The Office of the Attorney General shall have the discretion to allocate a portion of these funds to local governments not listed in the annexed allocation chart”). The Agreement does not further define “the State of New York.” ↑
This combined 46.11% share is distributed directly to certain localities as follows:[1]
6.68% to Nassau County[2]
8.63% to Suffolk County[3]
10.8% to all participating counties (“Direct Share Subdivisions”) except Nassau and Suffolk according to the percentages in Schedule A of New York’s state-local agreement,[4] with non-participating counties’ amounts reallocated amongst participating counties[5]
20% to New York City[6]
With limited exceptions,[7] the local share is restricted to spending on approved uses.[8] New York defines approved uses to mean “any opioid or substance use disorder related projects or programs that fall within the list of uses in Schedule C.”[9] Schedule C of New York’s state-local agreement is similar to the national settlement agreements’ (non-exhaustive) Exhibit E’s approved uses list and includes treatment, prevention, harm reduction, recovery supports, and other strategies.[10] The Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board may recommend additions to or deletions from the list of approved uses to the legislature and governor.[11]
Notably, half of the 10.8% of funds going to the “Direct Share Subdivisions” (i.e., counties other than Suffolk and Nassau) are unrestricted funds that are not required to be spent on approved uses.[12]
Local governments decide autonomously (but must certify proper uses). The participating counties, Nassau and Suffolk counties, and New York City will ultimately decide for themselves how to spend their monies on abatement projects and programs,[13] but each must also annually certify to the New York Office of Addiction Services and Supports (OASAS) and the Opioid Settlement Fund Advisory Board that their shares were expended on approved uses.[14] This certification requirement does not apply to counties’ unrestricted 5.4% share.[15]
A 2024 Opioid Settlement Funds Report from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene provides examples of the city’s independent abatement efforts.[16]
No, supplantation is not prohibited. New York does not explicitly prohibit supplantation uses of opioid settlement funds from the 46.11% local share. This means that the local share may be spent in ways that replace (or “supplant”) — rather than supplement — existing resources.
Up to each locality (no public reporting required, only some intrastate). The counties and New York City must provide a detailed accounting of their spending to each year to OASAS and the Advisory Board,[17] but New York’s agreement does not require publication of these reports online. (This requirement does not apply to the unrestricted half of the funds going to the Direct Share Subdivisions, i.e., counties other than Suffolk and Nassau.) New York City has voluntarily published its FY 2023-24 Opioid Settlement Funds report.
Visit OpioidSettlementTracker.com’s Expenditure Report Tracker for an updated collection of states’ and localities’ available expenditure reports.
Not applicable.
Agreement II.B(4)-(5) (“to the Direct Share Subdivisions”), Agreement I.D (defining “Direct Share Subdivision” to mean “every county of the State of New York other than the County of Nassau, the County of Suffolk, and the City of New York”), and Agreement III.A (“The Direct Unrestricted Funds and the Direct Restricted Funds shall be paid to the Direct Share Subdivisions that execute a release for a given Statewide Opioid Settlement Agreement, pursuant to Section II.B.4 and 5, and will be fully distributed among them pursuant to the allocation set forth in Schedule A to this Agreement”). ↑
Agreement II.E (“Attorneys’ fees and expenses will be determined and paid according to each Direct Share Subdivision’s and New York Subdivision’s contracts with its respective counsel. This does not prevent counsel for New York subdivisions to agree to recover solely from: (1) the common benefit and contingency fee funds if established pursuant to settlements with Opioid Supply Chain Participants; or (2) payment of attorneys’ fees and costs directly from Opioid Supply Chain Participants”). ↑
Agreement II.B(6) (6.68% to Nassau County “for spending on Approved Uses”), II.B(7) (8.63% to Suffolk County “for spending on Approved Uses”), II.B(4)-(5) (requiring participating counties to spend of half of their amounts, their “Direct Restricted Funds” (5.4%), on approved uses), and II.B(8) (20% to New York City “for spending on Approved Uses”). ↑
Distributor Settlement Agreement I.SS (“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”). New York’s Schedule C adds a “Post-Mortem” section to its “Other Strategies” category that includes approved uses like autopsies and synthetic opioid toxicology tests. Agreement, Schedule C III.E. ↑
But may only recommend deletions with approval from ¾ of present Board members. Agreement IV.B. ↑
Compare II.B(4) (“5.4% to the Direct Share Subdivisions as ‘Direct Unrestricted Funds’”) with Agreement II.B(5) (“5.4% to the Direct Share Subdivisions for spending on Approved Uses”). ↑
Agreement III.B (“These certifications shall be made by August 1 of each year following the year in which such funds were spent and shall be accompanied by a detailed accounting of the spending of such funds as well as analysis and evaluation of the projects and programs they have funded”). ↑
Compare II.B(4) (“5.4% to the Direct Share Subdivisions as ‘Direct Unrestricted Funds’”) with Agreement II.B(5) (“5.4% to the Direct Share Subdivisions for spending on Approved Uses”). The certification requirement applies to funds distributed to local governments pursuant to sections II.B(5)-(8) of the Agreement. Agreement III.B. ↑
Opioid Settlement Funds Report. NYC Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. March 2024. Accessed August 12, 2024. See also Mayor Adams to Ramp Up Annual Support to $50 Million for Opioid Prevention, Treatment, From Major Settlements Secured by City of New York, Attorney General James. Office of the New York Mayor. September 10, 2024. Accessed September 10, 2024. ↑