January 7, 2022

Many states, most recently New York, have settled with large opioid manufacturers in a series of ongoing lawsuits that have claimed companies like Johnson & Johnson were irresponsible in a way that resulted in an opioid crisis. Early settlements date back to 2016, and those states, including Kentucky and West Virginia, have worked out agreements regarding the distribution of funds that will go towards rehabilitation and harm reduction strategies. North Carolina is one of the most recent states to release a memorandum of agreement for distributing funds, and we discussed these plans in a blog published in September 2021.

As more states are slated to be working on their settlement agreements in 2022, the interaction between opioid-related public health issues, the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, data transparency, and health equity concerns will be essential to monitor when considering the success of settlement agreements. 

Last month, we published a blog that discussed the current state of the Covid-19 pandemic. In the blog, we briefly explained how the opioid crisis has been affected by the addition of a second public health crisis. While increased isolation and economic instability have led to worrying numbers of opioid overdoses, any plan related to opioid settlement funding should be done in conjunction with pandemic relief efforts. Local governments must focus on data transparency among independent task forces and organizations to successfully coordinate efforts in these two public health areas. Effective data sharing can benefit all parties by creating a data focus/coordination culture and strengthening relationships with backbone organizations and community members.

By committing to a culture of transparency and collaboration, public health departments can ensure that the dual health crises are adequately addressed and that the interconnected nature of opioids and Covid-19 can be recognized. The opportunity for increased funding resulting from settlement negotiations could be an advantage in addressing public health concerns, and transparency will be a crucial area of focus in creating a healthier population.

The use of opioid funds should also be carefully considered through a health equity lens. Much like racial equity, health equity occurs when conditions such as race, disability, class, gender identity, sexual identity, and other factors do not affect the quality of life and healthcare that an individual receives. To ensure that the settlement funds are distributed in a way that promotes health equity, governments and organizations must be dedicated to using disaggregated data to track and predict trends in public health and relief.

By using a Results-Based Accountability framework, public health departments will be able to analyze, plan, and revise funding strategies to ensure that relief is going to those who need it most and prioritize underserved populations. Both the opioid epidemic and Covid-19 are generally regarded as class-based issues, with low-income Americans being more likely to suffer from either of these problems. Using an intersectional framework and focusing on equitable outcomes will allow organizations to pinpoint the deeper issues in their communities. With that in mind, class is often a multi-dimensional issue, and other factors of identity are necessary to determine which populations are considered lower income in your community. 

Opioid settlement funds are beginning to be implemented into some states’ public health plans for 2022, and it will be important to keep RBA, health equity, and data transparency, among other factors, in mind as we begin to see the results. Visit the Opioid Litigation Global Settlement Tracker to stay up-to-date with opioid-related lawsuits. For more information on how Clear Impact can assist in public health efforts, visit our Public Health Departments homepage.