The Czech Republic Annual Report 2010 Drug ... - Drogy-info.cz

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Table 1-3: Drug policy expenditures from Czech regional budgets in 2002–2010 (€ thousand) Regions 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Prague 399 391 820 1,029 1,147 1,463 2,006 1,852 2,046 Central Bohemia 114 251 432 495 505 625 713 473 645 South Bohemia 95 88 181 175 212 223 408 379 331 Pilsen 0 31 47 113 82 65 256 250 274 Karlovy Vary 3 16 16 35 29 41 53 23 232 Ústí nad Labem 47 237 248 232 242 174 203 189 184 Liberec 0 86 181 271 285 233 459 314 325 Hradec Králové 24 30 63 69 102 244 277 364 273 Pardubice 49 47 56 185 58 198 224 200 269 Vysočina 0 57 129 233 109 285 157 134 134 South Moravia 97 63 157 249 300 306 341 713 636 Olomouc 3 10 41 67 72 90 334 333 346 Zlín 36 110 75 71 49 170 178 334 696 Moravia- Silesia 74 94 112 147 157 505 921 968 1,267 Total 952 1,510 2,558 3,369 3,349 4,624 6,530 6,528 7,660 Note: Average exchange rates in respective years were used for re-calculation of expenses from CZK to €. 2010 drug policy expenditures from the state, regional, and municipal budgets are shown in Table 1-7. The detailed summary of the data on funding at the regional level is divided according to the locations where resources were utilised by the providers of projects and programmes. The 2010 drug policy expenditures from the state and local budgets designated for use on regional levels are depicted by regions in Map 1-1. The trends in drug policy expenditure on drug demand reduction (prevention, treatment, aftercare, and harm reduction) and drug supply reduction (law enforcement) in the Czech Republic in 2002–2010 are summarised in Table 1-4. 31 An overview of expenditures from state and local budgets in 2010 by service category 32 is provided in Table 1-8. Out of labelled 2010 drug policy expenditures amounting to a total of CZK 627.4 million (€ 24,807 thousand), CZK 166.2 million (€ 6,572 thousand, 26.5%) was earmarked for harm reduction services, CZK 108.9 million (€ 4,304 thousand, 17.4%) for treatment, CZK 62.3 million (€ 2,463 thousand, 9.9%) for primary prevention, and CZK 31.3 million (€ 1,238 thousand, 5.0%) was allocated to aftercare. The sobering-up stations, which consumed CZK 87.2 million (€ 3,449 thousand, 13.9%), were funded almost exclusively from the regional budgets, and CZK 149.4 million (€ 5,906 thousand, 23.8%) was earmarked for law enforcement. A comparison of expenditures from public budgets from 2007 to 2010, by service category, is provided in Table 1-5. 31 Until 2006 the expenditure on demand reduction included resources expended by the GCDPC, the Ministry of Education, Youth, and Sports, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, and the Ministry of Health, while expenditure on supply reduction included resources consumed by the Ministry of Justice, the General Customs Headquarters, and the National Drug Headquarters. Since 2007 the data have been more accurate, and the Ministry of Justice’s expenditures have been divided between the two areas to reflect their actual purpose. As a result, the consistency of the data over time is impaired. 32 The categories and their subcategories include: Prevention, Harm Reduction (low-threshold drop-in centres, low-threshold day care centres, and outreach streetwork programmes), Treatment (encompasses both health care – substitution programmes, detoxification, outpatient and inpatient alcohol/drug treatment services, social services provided in institutional care – and non-health outpatient care – crisis intervention, social counselling, non-medical outpatient treatment provided by NGOs, and therapeutic communities), Sobering-up Stations, Aftercare, Law Enforcement, Coordination (including monitoring and research, the evaluation of services, the dissemination of information, and training) and Others (not specified above). page 19
Map 1-1: 2010 drug policy expenditures from state and local budgets in regions of the Czech Republic (CZK thousand per 100,000 inhabitants aged 15–64) Table 1-4: Drug policy expenditures from state and local budgets in 2002–2010 (€ thousand) Demand reduction* Supply reduction** Year Regional Municipal Total State budget Total State budget budgets budgets 2002*** 5,397 952 n.a. 6,349 1,204 7,553 2003 5,785 1,510 n.a. 7,295 4,172 11,467 2004 5,731 2,558 1,972 10,261 3,430 13,691 2005 6,666 3,369 1,699 11,733 4,909 16,642 2006 6,780 3,349 1,699 11,828 6,041 17,869 2007 7,425 4,624 2,243 14,292 5,792 20,084 2008 8,812 6,530 2,505 17,847 6,100 23,947 2009 8,345 6,528 2,249 17,122 5,851 22,973 2010 8,788 7,660 2,454 18,901 5,906 24,807 Note: * Expenditures indicated for the period 2002–2006 are those of the GCDPC, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Labour and Social Affairs, the Ministry of Education, and the Ministry of Defence; since 2007 a part of the Ministry of Justice’s expenditures has also been included; ** The amounts indicated for the period 2002–2006 represent the expenditures for the operation of the National Drug Headquarters and the General Customs Headquarters and those from the budget of the Ministry of Justice; since 2007 the expenditures of the Ministry of Justice have been divided into those intended for demand reduction and those intended for supply reduction in order to reflect their actual purposes; *** Expenditures of the National Drug Headquarters are not included. Average exchange rates in respective years were used for re-calculation of expenses from CZK to €. Table 1-5: Comparison of expenditures provided from public budgets by service category from 2007 to 2010 2007 2008 2009 2010 Service category € thousand % € thousand % € thousand % € thousand % Prevention 1,753 8.7 2,340 9.8 2,078 9.0 2,463 9.9 Harm reduction 5,078 25.3 6,389 26.7 6,616 28.8 6,572 26.5 Treatment 5,496 27.4 7,399 30.9 6,699 29.2 7,754 31.3 Aftercare 739 3.7 999 4.2 1,201 5.2 1,238 5.0 Coordination, research, evaluation 605 3.0 504 2.1 5,851 1.8 749 3.0 Law enforcement 5,792 28.8 6,100 25.5 421 25.5 5,906 23.8 Others, unspecified 620 3.1 217 0.9 106 0.5 125 0.5 Total 20,084 100.0 23,947 100.0 22,973 100.0 24,807 100.0 Note: Average exchange rates in respective years were used for re-calculation of expenses from CZK to €. page 20
Page 1: Annual Report The Czech Republic 20
Page 5 and 6: Annual Report: The Czech Republic -
Page 7 and 8: PART B: SELECTED ISSUES............
Page 9 and 10: In 2010 the very first representati
Page 11 and 12: In the Czech Republic, the treatmen
Page 13 and 14: PART A: NEW DEVELOPMENTS AND TRENDS
Page 15 and 16: ange applies to addictologists who
Page 17 and 18: Republic has been reporting the hig
Page 19 and 20: Wenceslas Square and in the surroun
Page 21 and 22: Regions of the Czech Republic to ca
Page 23 and 24: Region Pardubice Vysočina South Mo
Page 25: educe drug supply (particularly to
Page 29 and 30: Total state budget Regions Table 1-
Page 31 and 32: 1.3.2 Drug Treatment Costs Incurred
Page 33 and 34: Table 1-9: Costs incurred by health
Page 35 and 36: 2 Drug Use in the General Populatio
Page 37 and 38: Table 2-2: Prevalence rates of use
Page 39 and 40: The M-CIDI questionnaire, containin
Page 41 and 42: Table 2-6: Prevalence rates of use
Page 43 and 44: Figure 2-2: Attitudes towards crimi
Page 45 and 46: Table 2-7: Prevalence of use of can
Page 47 and 48: Table 2-8: 2010 Safer Party clients
Page 49 and 50: school curriculum and school rules;
Page 51 and 52: partly also by regional public heal
Page 53 and 54: 3.4 Indicated prevention Indicated
Page 55 and 56: 4 Problem Drug Use The EMCDDA defin
Page 57 and 58: Table 4-2: Prevalence estimates of
Page 59 and 60: Table 4-4: Prevalence estimates of
Page 61 and 62: The general population studies (see
Page 63 and 64: Information on treatment and counse
Page 65 and 66: 5.2.1 Professional Competency of Se
Page 67 and 68: Table 5-6: Number of outpatient hea
Page 69 and 70: Table 5-8: Number of healthcare fac
Page 71 and 72: The proportions found for prescribi
Page 73 and 74: Map 5-2: Sobering-up station networ
Page 75 and 76: Table 5-14: Network of inpatient fa
Page 77 and 78:
care centres report to diagnostic i
Page 79 and 80:
cannabis, especially among adolesce
Page 81 and 82:
Map 5-4: Number of all treatment de
Page 83 and 84:
Figure 5-8: Selected characteristic
Page 85 and 86:
5.3.3.2 Clients in Opiate Substitut
Page 87 and 88:
Figure 5-10: Trends in the capacity
Page 89 and 90:
Table 5-23: Number of hospitalisati
Page 91 and 92:
Table 6-1: Number of newly detected
Page 93 and 94:
Figure 6-5: Reported incidence of s
Page 95 and 96:
The monitoring of testing for infec
Page 97 and 98:
Table 6-8: Results of testing for H
Page 99 and 100:
Table 6-9: Sharing of needles and s
Page 101 and 102:
tests for cannabis; see Table 6-12.
Page 103 and 104:
Pervitin was the cause of a fatal o
Page 105 and 106:
Table 6-15: Deaths with the presenc
Page 107 and 108:
Table 6-17: Fatal drug overdoses in
Page 109 and 110:
Figure 6-13: Comparison of trends i
Page 111 and 112:
7 Responses to Health Correlates an
Page 113 and 114:
Table 7-2: Selected services of low
Page 115 and 116:
Map 7-2: Number of needles and syri
Page 117 and 118:
Table 7-8: History of HBV, HCV, and
Page 119 and 120:
8 Social Correlates and Social Rein
Page 121 and 122:
Altogether, 987 clients (610 of the
Page 123 and 124:
9 Drug-Related Crime, Prevention of
Page 125 and 126:
Table 9-2: Number of persons arrest
Page 127 and 128:
Figure 9-1: Total number of persons
Page 129 and 130:
Table 9-7: Sentences and other meas
Page 131 and 132:
Table 9-9: Drug-related misdemeanou
Page 133 and 134:
in custody, and 8 being the inmates
Page 135 and 136:
(approximately 0.5%). However, only
Page 137 and 138:
Table 9-15: NGOs providing drug ser
Page 139 and 140:
Supported by the National Focal Poi
Page 141 and 142:
was rather bizarre. For example, th
Page 143 and 144:
shut down by the authorities. The l
Page 145 and 146:
the regional police headquarters on
Page 147 and 148:
conduct research in the area of pen
Page 149 and 150:
Republic for the Period 2011-2012 f
Page 151 and 152:
departments) or by the external pro
Page 153 and 154:
more than 10 clients, etc. This is
Page 155 and 156:
12 Drug Users with Children The aim
Page 157 and 158:
Childbirth and the National Registe
Page 159 and 160:
Table 12-2: Total number of mothers
Page 161 and 162:
(diagnostic institutions), and reha
Page 163 and 164:
12.3.2 Helping Services Help to chi
Page 165 and 166:
13 Cross-border Travel, Drug Use, a
Page 167 and 168:
ethnic minorities in the Czech Repu
Page 169 and 170:
LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1: Overview
Page 171 and 172:
Table 9-10: Criminal offences commi
Page 173 and 174:
SELECTED DRUG-RELATED WEB PAGES ON
Page 175 and 176:
2005-2009 National Strategy - Natio
Page 177 and 178:
ministry, 18, 41, 42, 115 ministry
Page 179 and 180:
Generální ředitelství Vězeňsk
Page 181 and 182:
Mravčík, V., Zábranský, T., Kor
Page 183 and 184:
Policie ČR (2011) Statistické př
Page 185 and 186:
Van den Berg, C., Smit, C., Van Bru
show all

The Czech Republic Annual Report 2010 Drug ... - Drogy-info.cz

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?