Oregon
Missing Native American women an 'emergency' but progress limited, Oregon report finds • Oregon Capital Chronicle
Carolyn DeFord was hoping for change. She was hoping for answers. She’s been hoping for 24 years.
On Feb. 18, 2019, DeFord was making the long trip from her home in central Washington to Oregon — a drive she had made many times to search for her missing mother, Leona Kinsey, who disappeared from her home in La Grande in 1998. This time the drive was different. DeFord was traveling to testify in the Oregon Capitol.
A first-of-its-kind bill in Oregon would declare missing Native American women a statewide emergency, launch an investigation into the crisis and produce a report to decipher the underpinnings of the problem. DeFord, a citizen of the Puyallup Tribe of Indians, thought it could make a real difference.
“I went just hoping to have a couple of minutes to share,” DeFord said.
She discussed the story of her mother’s disappearance, how she seemed to vanish. The coffee pot was on, the beloved dogs in the yard — but Kinsey was gone. Nearly 25 years later, Kinsey remains missing and police have made no arrests related to her case.
The 2019 bill, sponsored by Rep. Tawna Sanchez, passed, but it hasn’t made the difference DeFord hoped.
Five years after DeFord made that drive to Salem, there have been state and federal reports examining the problem of missing and murdered Indigenous people, a series of proposed improvements and a handful of public events and photo ops. But there has been little progress on the main recommendations to improve data management and information sharing among law enforcement and the public, and to improve trust between tribal communities and law enforcement.
Key leaders have had little to say about the lack of progress. Oregon Gov. Tina Kotek — who was speaker of the House when DeFord testified — said in December that she had not had a conversation about the issue since she was in the Legislature or read the four-year-old recommendations of a task force in the report bearing her signature.
“I’m just brutally upfront, I have not read those recommendations,” Kotek said. “To be honest, I haven’t had a conversation about this topic, probably since the Legislature. I know in 2019, I was supportive of the work that Representative Sanchez was doing. The Legislature did move forward on the recognition of the issue, how serious it is, asked for a report. And my guess is, it kind of got lost in the COVID conversation.”
Despite defining the ongoing disappearances of Native American women as a “statewide emergency,” the pandemic sidelined a “listening and understanding” tour to gauge the scope of the crisis. There is still no centralized system for sharing data or coordinating investigative efforts, and no single agency or official is accountable for implementing the report’s recommendations. Tribal advocates criticize the state for including few Native American voices in their efforts, and they emphasize that the cascading effects of long-standing failures of trust between Indigenous people, government systems and law enforcement remain.
Desiree Coyote, a family violence prevention manager for the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation and an anti-trafficking and missing and murdered Indigenous persons advocate, said the process is failing Indigenous communities. Coyote said that after 25 years of advocating for Indigenous women, she’s not surprised by the lack of awareness.
“The United States continuously makes us invisible, systems continually don’t include us at the table, and that continues to make us invisible,” Coyote said. “Could be lack of time, lack of energy, could be that none of the people surrounding (Kotek) and … addressing what’s going on in Oregon is keeping her up to date on tribal nations. So, I’m not surprised, I’m not angry — it’s just what it is.”
Sanchez, D-North Portland, said she’s disappointed that there hasn’t been more concrete progress. Sanchez, who is the second Indigenous person to serve in the Oregon Legislature, said she is considering proposing legislation to press forward on efforts to improve data collection and coordination.
“For now, (addressing missing and murdered Indigenous people) will have to be legal issues around how we do the work, how criminal justice responds to communities of color — but the long term, the deeply embedded systemic racism and oppression in this country, has to be addressed at some point,” Sanchez said. “It’s like picking with one little pickax at an iceberg — it’s going to take some time.”
Identifying the crisis
In the past decade, there’s been growing awareness and acknowledgment of a long-standing crisis — the disproportionate disappearances and murders of Indigenous people, particularly women.
Nationally, estimates of unsolved cases of missing and murdered Indigenous people number in the thousands. For Indigenous females between the ages of 1 and 45, homicide is one of the top 10 causes of death. More than four in five Native American and Alaska Native people report experiencing violence in their lifetimes, with more than 30% reporting violence in the prior year, according to a 2022 study by the National Institute of Justice.
Oregon’s legislation called for the Oregon State Police to conduct a study on “how to increase and improve protective, responsive and investigative resources and systems for reporting, identification, investigation and rapid response to future and past cases” of missing and murdered Indigenous women in Oregon.
The bill passed unanimously — somewhat of a rarity in the often-fractured Oregon Legislature — and the report was published in September 2020.
The report made four major recommendations: establishing a partnership between Oregon law enforcement agencies and the federal task force Operation Lady Justice to address cold cases and identify patterns and links between cases; providing education to officers on Native American history, cultural awareness and jurisdictional complexities; strengthening partnerships between law enforcement and Indigenous communities; and improving data collection and information sharing among agencies.
Oregon State Police has complied with some recommendations in the report. OSP appointed Capt. Cord Wood, who participated in the work group that produced the report, as coordinator for the agency’s response.
Wood said Oregon is “doing a lot of things right” when it comes to addressing missing and murdered Indigenous people and that data gathering is improving. Wood said OSP sees higher numbers of missing Indigenous people today than at the time of the report because increased cooperation with tribal law enforcement leads to more reports to OSP.
In 2023, OSP hired its first tribal liaison, Glendon Smith, a citizen of the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs, to work with tribes, including on the issue. Smith did not respond to requests for an interview with InvestigateWest.
The Department of Public Safety Standards and Training, which covers all county, local, state and tribal law enforcement officers in Oregon, began offering training on jurisdictional responsibilities and working with tribal populations to all new officers in 2021. In that year, OSP offered a one-time, one-day training program on Indian Country policing and jurisdictional considerations to all sworn staff.
Smith is conducting visits with each of the nine federally recognized tribal governments within Oregon’s geographic boundaries, but not specifically to discuss missing and murdered Indigenous people or meet with community members.
Wood points to Smith’s hiring as the agency’s primary effort for improving communication with tribal communities and governments.
In a June 13 statement to InvestigateWest in response to her December comments, Kotek’s office emphasized her recent declaration of May 5 as Missing and Murdered Indigenous Persons Awareness Day and the efforts of Kotek’s tribal affairs director, Shana McConnville Radford, a citizen of the Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation. Kotek’s office says Radford participates in a federal MMIP work group and is tasked with “understanding where the state of Oregon currently is — across the enterprise — as it relates to Murdered or Missing Indigenous People (MMIP), what needs exist, and where to get engaged.”
The year after the Oregon report was published, the U.S. Attorney’s Office produced an expanded report on the problem in Oregon, including people identified as male, and found similar problems — poor data makes the crisis impossible to quantify, enforcement agencies need to improve coordination and communication, and agencies need to strengthen and expand their relationships with Indigenous peoples and groups. The office’s regional coordinator for addressing the crisis was not available for an interview before publication.
Despite both reports, advocates on the ground say change moves at a glacial pace as working groups discuss the issues every few months.
Listening tour cut short
Coyote and others say that poor communication with tribal communities and the exclusion of Indigenous voices and tribal perspectives — some of the very problems worsening the crisis — were built into the preparation of the state report.
On May 19, 2019, Gov. Kate Brown signed House Bill 2625 into law, in a room filled with Indigenous community leaders and advocates dressed in red, the color associated with missing and murdered Indigenous women’s awareness.
To conduct the study mandated by the bill, the Oregon State Police convened a work group made up of members of primarily federal, tribal and Oregon law enforcement officers, in addition to state and federal lawyers, a federal judge, a medical examiner and Sanchez.
A key component of the effort was a “listening and understanding tour” with Native American community members to “grasp the breadth and magnitude of the crisis.”
The effort included two stops before a separate meeting in Pendleton, where an attendee highlighted that there were no community-based advocates in the work group. Coyote subsequently became the only Indigenous community member of the group.
Coyote said the most valuable information for the report came from the tour, though not all of the stops were advertised equally well, resulting in poor turnout at some sessions.
The listening tour’s law enforcement-dominant makeup posed further difficulties, given many Native American communities’ long-standing distrust of law enforcement, according to Coyote.
Eventually, the group held five listening sessions in late 2019 and early 2020 — one each at the Confederated Tribes of Umatilla Indian Reservation, the Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs Reservation, the Burns Paiute Reservation and the longhouses that are home to Native American student groups at the University of Oregon and Oregon State University — before the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic halted it.
The report was published without visiting the remaining six federally recognized tribes within the geographic boundaries of Oregon or any urban Indigenous communities off of tribal lands.
Wood said there are no plans for future Oregon State Police-coordinated efforts to discuss the issue directly with tribal communities in a similar fashion as the abbreviated tour.
Sanchez, who sponsored the 2019 bill, acknowledged that the effects of the report fell short of the desired outcome.
“My hopes were a little bit broader than they ended up being, unfortunately,” Sanchez said. “I was really hoping that we would be able to work on a much more cohesive level with other states around building a data system.”
Pervasive distrust
The moment a person goes missing, critical questions arise for their loved ones — who can they trust and where can they get help?
For Indigenous peoples, this isn’t necessarily straightforward. If a missing person is Indigenous, filing a police report can be a complex and confusing process exacerbated by a historic distrust of law enforcement and negative perceptions of criminal investigations involving Indigenous peoples as both the victims and offenders — a finding echoed in the OSP report.
On tribal lands, investigations occur amid a complex jurisdictional patchwork that may involve local, state, tribal or federal law enforcement, which can leave family members confused about who to report their missing loved one to or which agency is responsible. Indigenous peoples face disproportionate violence at the hands of law enforcement, and a litany of historical abuses against Indigenous peoples by state and federal government agencies leaves many reluctant to trust, especially in the vulnerable state of looking for a missing family member.
Beyond confusion during the reporting process, the OSP report found that Indigenous community members didn’t expect to be taken seriously or believe that police would act.
The pervasive distrust contributes to witnesses’ reluctance to work with law enforcement for fear of the negative associations within their own communities of working with police. Speaking out is also daunting — several family members of missing Indigenous peoples in Oregon declined to speak with InvestigateWest for fear of negative impacts on their loved ones’ case should they make unfavorable characterizations of police efforts.
This means Indigenous peoples often primarily rely on their fellow community members in the search for a missing loved one.
Coyote said that she advocated, in both the state and federal work groups she is a part of, for the inclusion of community-based tribal advocates to be directly involved in addressing missing and murdered cases as they are reported and investigated, but that she was ignored.
“When we have to rely on law enforcement who have been as bad as they are (during) our entire living experiences, since the great United States, then how can we expect them to do right by us now with the current federal and state laws?” Coyote said.
Coyote is a part of a work group under the U.S. Attorneys Office’s missing and murdered Indigenous persons coordinator, Cedar Wilkie Gillette, and the assigned assistant U.S. attorney, Tim Simmons.
During one work-group session in late 2023, she felt she was ignored when she asked how many members of the work group made an effort to speak with community members about the problem.
“So many law enforcement officers … aren’t in the community and talking about MMI and what we’re doing with this,” Coyote said. “Not in the community about arresting people, not in the community talking to tribal leaders.”
Simmons suggested forming a subcommittee to discuss community-related issues. Coyote said the discussion process has been frustrating and slow.
“Like six months’ work and we’re still addressing whether law enforcement needs to be in community or not,” Coyote said. “We’ve gone nowhere in regards to community issues, we’re still just doing law enforcement talking to law enforcement. It’s kind of disappointing.”
Wood, the OSP coordinator, said the law enforcement groups are working to build strong relationships with Native American communities.
“I think the trust is an ongoing, continuous process, right?” Wood said. “Trust is built on relationships, and you have to continue to grow and meet those relationships to keep them going. So I don’t think the work ever stops.”

Sketchy data
The 2020 OSP report identified poor and inconsistent data collection and sharing methods as a major barrier to determining the true scope of the crisis. The methods for collecting crime data and information across local, state, tribal and federal agencies on missing Indigenous persons cases were inconsistent or not occurring at all.
There is no centralized database to house information regarding missing Indigenous peoples — a fact that law enforcement, community advocates and legislators agree is a problem. As a result, it’s impossible to definitively determine how many Indigenous people in Oregon are missing.
Both the state and federal reports attempted to quantify the problem in Oregon while noting flaws in the data.
The Oregon State Police report included state and federal data from Jan. 23, 2020. It found 13 active missing persons cases on that date. The report did not request data from individual tribes.
The federal report included all missing Indigenous persons and identified 11 active missing cases at the time of its publication in February 2021. It also identified eight active murder cases of Indigenous victims.
One critical issue that persists in Oregon and across the nation is that of racial misclassification of Indigenous peoples when law enforcement complete a missing persons report. Racial misclassification further complicates accurate accounting of the numbers of missing Indigenous peoples.
Without centralized data, it’s impossible to determine any trends or links in disappearances, one of the key recommendations in the OSP report.
Sanchez notes that media coverage of missing Indigenous persons cases has improved in the Portland area, but not in other areas of the state.
“Those alerts about a missing person have gone out, and they are far more impactful than they have been past, but that doesn’t mean that it really has picked up in more rural areas in for tribal populations, nor is there a system that gives you feedback to let you know that someone either has been found or that there are concerted efforts being made,” Sanchez said.
Although collecting more centralized, uniform data wouldn’t be a panacea, lawmakers, law enforcement and advocates agree it would be an important step — one that Washington state has already taken.
Though a direct comparison is complicated by discrepancies in jurisdictional responsibilities between the two states, Washington has a more robust centralized data system. When an endangered Indigenous person goes missing, Washington state issues Amber Alert-like notifications, and it also produces weekly statewide reports listing active missing Indigenous persons cases across all jurisdictions.
Tim Addleman, chief of the Umatilla Tribal Police Department, said implementing a similar system in Oregon would be helpful in his work addressing missing people who often travel between different reservations and legal jurisdictions.
“I think (Washington) has done a very good job of getting all the information and putting it in a central spot and releasing it out,” Addleman said. “I think that would be very beneficial here in Oregon.”
Sanchez believes legislation mandating a better data collection system is the next necessary step, though she said she is still mapping out what that would look like. The North Portland representative said she is also part of ongoing efforts to build out a process for providing a broader display of notifications to tribal populations when a person goes missing.
While legislators and advocates agree Oregon needs to improve data gathering on MMIP, how the data would be handled and used is a matter of debate. Indigenous advocates say a shift toward community-led efforts is essential to meaningfully address MMIP, as police-led initiatives are insufficient.
Wood notes the benefits of equitable information sharing capabilities for tribal law enforcement, the hiring of a tribal liaison and OSP’s 3-year-old Indian Country-specific education for officers as evidence of Oregon’s improvements, and that OSP is “pretty well hitting the mark” responding to the report’s recommendations.
“I would say that in Oregon, we really do a lot of things right,” Wood said.
Leona Kinsey
A challenge complicating law enforcement response in MMIP cases is the fact that disappearing isn’t a crime in and of itself — and reporting systems don’t necessarily take into account the vulnerabilities of a particular missing person. Without signs of foul play or criminal activity, investigative responses and resources are not robust.
Leona, who was initially misclassified as white after her disappearance, was a victim, not a perpetrator — which limited the initial response from law enforcement.
Although Oregon State Police and federal law enforcement both reviewed the case after DeFord’s testimony in Salem, there’s been no progress in the case.
DeFord, in collaboration with a missing persons’ advocacy organization, learned of multiple instances of communication delays between law enforcement agencies regarding the primary person of interest in her mother’s disappearance.
DeFord believes that major escalations in the investigation into her mother’s disappearance, like official searches for her mother’s remains, only occurred because of extensive advocacy on her mother’s behalf. She’s grateful for additional reviews of her mother’s case file, though they haven’t yielded answers yet.
“I’ve taken these answers and responses in her case for so long, as like, I’m grateful for peanuts, like throw me scraps, throw me crumbs and I’ll dance for you,” DeFord said. “I’ve just been so grateful for every little bit, and I’ve got to a place right now where I’m not ungrateful. But I’m also bitter.”
Oregon
Lawyers claim repeated denial to clients at Oregon ICE facilities
Learn about emergency declarations in Salem, Woodburn over ICE arrests
The cities of Salem and Woodburn declared states of emergency after dozens of ICE arrests occured in both communities.
U.S. District Court Judge Ann Aiken heard additional testimony during a two-hour hearing on Dec. 18 in Innovation Law Lab’s lawsuit against U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, Customs and Border Protection, and the Department of Homeland Security over what they say is a systemic denial of access to counsel at Oregon ICE facilities.
Attorneys with Innovation Law Lab first filed the suit in October on behalf of CLEAR Clinic and the farmworker union Pineros y Campesinos Unidos del Noroeste. An amended complaint was filed on Nov. 13, adding “Leon X” as a plaintiff and seeking class action status.
The suit asks Aiken to issue a preliminary injunction requiring the federal government to grant access to counsel before someone is transferred out of state.
In a Dec. 15 court filing, Innovation Law Lab said ICE, CBP and DHS’s system for access to counsel is “no system at all.”
Director of Legal Advocacy at Innovation Law Lab Tess Hellgren again told Aiken that the federal government has been making mass arrests and detaining people across Oregon to meet quotas disclosed in other cases.
“What defendants have not made efforts to increase, as established by their own declaration, is access to counsel at the Oregon field offices,” Hellgren said. “Individuals detained at these Oregon field offices are allowed to access counsel only if it is convenient for defendants.”
Hellgren said access to counsel at Oregon field offices is crucial.
“What happens at these Oregon facilities before transfer may result in irreversible consequences for an individual case,” Hellgren said.
Surge of ICE arrests in Oregon in recent months
Civil immigration arrests increased 1,400% since October and 7,900% compared to 2024, according to Innovation Law Lab.
Emily Ryo, a professor at Duke University Law School, submitted research in a declaration for the lawsuit using data released by ICE in response to a Freedom of Information Act request.
That dataset revealed that the average daily ICE arrest rate in Oregon rose from 0.3 to 1.39 per day in the summer of 2025. In October, daily arrests in Oregon surged to 17.45 arrests per day.
The Portland Immigrant Rights Coalition said that during October, the hotline received reports of more than 292 detentions, at a rate of 15 to 45 per day. PIRC received reports of at least 35 people detained in Woodburn in a single day.
Woodburn declared a state of emergency on Nov. 21. Other nearby cities, like Salem, have also declared emergencies.
In November, PIRC received reports of 373 detentions, and the hotline received reports of 94 detentions in the first week of December, according to court documents.
Organizing Director for PCUN Marlina Campos said the organization has had to stop focusing on key campaigns to be in “rapid response mode.”
Staff patrol the streets to monitor ICE activity and notify PCUN members if they cannot leave their homes or go to work. Staff have also canvassed door-to-door and heard directly about ICE’s impact, Campos said. At least four PCUN members have been arrested, she said.
Campos described Oct. 30 on the stand, saying she saw masked agents cross the street as she made her way to PCUN’s office in Woodburn. Campos said she got out of her car, started recording and contacted PIRC.
“There was a lot of panic,” Campos said. “It was unbelievable.”
Lawyers detail difficulties contacting Oregon detainees before transfer
Aiken heard testimony from CLEAR Clinic staff attorney Josephine Moberg and Eugene immigration attorney Katrina Kilgren about their recent difficulties in meeting with clients at ICE offices in Portland and Eugene. Both submitted more than one declaration in support of the case.
Moberg said she’s been to the Portland field office approximately 20 times since she began working at the CLEAR Clinic in June.
She said “oftentimes” officials say there is a problem that prevents her from meeting with prospective or current clients at the facility. Moberg said it takes a “few exchanges” before officers permit her entrance.
She spoke further about her experience of being denied access to the facility on July 30. According to a declaration, Moberg was at the facility, waiting in the lobby for more than an hour to meet with prospective clients, but was never able to do so. Her clients were transported out of Oregon, presumably while she was waiting, she said. Moberg submitted another declaration about a similar experience on Nov. 11 when she attempted to meet with seven prospective clients who had been arrested.
Officers came outside and told her and another attorney that the building was closed for Veterans’ Day. Large vans with tinted windows entered and left the facility as Moberg was outside.
Kilgren said attorneys have been told to wait outside the Eugene building since May and June of 2025. She said three dates stood out: Oct. 15, Nov. 5 and Nov. 19, when several people were arrested in the Eugene area.
In a Nov. 4 declaration, she said she had appointments with two people she was representing but was refused permission to join them. A building security guard threatened to trespass her if she did not exit, she said.
She said access at the Eugene office keeps getting “more and more limited.”
Both Moberg and Kilgren spoke of difficulties scheduling meetings with clients at the Tacoma, Washington detention center and other facilities.
Moberg said she went to attend a video call with a client at the Louisiana detention center last week and learned he had already signed voluntary departure paperwork and had been deported before he was able to receive any advice about his rights.
Federal government limits hearing response, denies claims
U.S Department of Justice attorney Michael Velchik did not provide an opening statement and called only CLEAR Clinic executive director Elena Tupper as a witness.
Velchik asked how many CLEAR Clinic attorneys she supervises and whether CLEAR Clinic is registered to have itself listed at ICE offices. Tupper said CLEAR Clinic is not, but the Equity Core of Oregon, which CLEAR Clinic is part of, is.
ICE, CBP and DHS denied that they regularly restrict access to lawyers and also asked the court not to grant class-action certification.
They said limitations exist at all three of ICE’s field offices in Oregon, located in Portland, Eugene, and Medford, because individuals cannot be held longer than 12 hours at the offices under land use agreements. Those limitations mean it is not always possible to accommodate immediate in-person visitation with attorneys before transport, lawyers for ICE, CBP, and DHS said in a Dec. 15 filing.
They said Innovation Law Lab presented “no evidence” that Leon X was likely to be arrested and subsequently unlawfully denied access to an attorney while in custody. They also pushed back against the existence of a uniform policy or practice as a reason Aiken should decline class-action certification.
Velchik said the government was concerned that the lawsuit could be used “to leverage the machinery of the judiciary” to interfere with and affect the safety of ICE facilities and enforcement of immigration law.
“I can’t stress enough that the government emphatically opposes any injunction that would restrict our ability to protect the safety of federal officers and detainees by limiting where and how long they must be detained,” Velchick said.
He said the plaintiffs would want a CLEAR Clinic attorney to sign off before DHS could perform a transfer, a notion he called “insane.”
Aiken said she would take the court filings and testimony into consideration.
She said she would issue an opinion “as quickly as possible,” but did not provide a projected date for that decision.
Dianne Lugo covers the Oregon Legislature and equity issues. Reach her at dlugo@statesmanjournal.com on X @DianneLugo or Bluesky @diannelugo.bsky.social.
Oregon
Who Could Contend for Top Honors in Oregon Boys Basketball? Here Are Six Contenders
We’ve just tipped off the 2025-26 high school basketball season in Oregon, but it’s never too early to start thinking about who might win state player of the year honors when the nets are cut down in March.
Here are six players who are among the contenders for Oregon’s Mr. Basketball title come season’s end.
Gaines’ coach with the Hawks, Daniel Blanks, called his star point guard “the ultimate competitor and winner,” and Gaines led the team to a share of its first Mt. Hood Conference title last year when he averaged 21.5 points, 5.9 assists and 2.8 steals. He has drawn interest from Idaho, Oregon State, Seattle University and Utah and received an offer from Portland State.
Khyungra led the Falcons to the 5A state championship last year, averaging 23.5 points. He worked over the summer to add bulk to his slight frame to better endure the pounding coach Sean Kelly expects him to take this season.
Lake, like older brother Josiah (Oregon State), will play Division I ball next year after signing with Montana last month. Now, the 6A all-state second-team selection will look to build upon a junior season during which he averaged 21.1 points, 4.5 assists and 3.9 rebounds per game. “He is a complete player in all facets of the game,” said Timberwolves assistant coach Thomas Duggan.
Montague, better known as Fuzzy, received 6A all-state honorable mention list while averaging close to 17 points, five rebounds and five assists per game as a junior for Roosevelt before transferring across town to join the burgeoning Northeast Portland power — ranked No. 1 in the initial High School On SI Oregon rankings — over the summer.
Paschal broke out for the Rams during their run to the 6A state title in 2024, flashing the potential to become one of the top guards in the Northwest. He suffered a season-ending knee injury in January that derailed both a promising junior campaign (14.8 ppg, 6 rpg) and Central Catholic’s hopes of repeating as champion.
After a breakout junior season during which he averaged 20 points and six rebounds, Rigney seeks to lead the Lakers back to the 6A state tournament and bolster his hopes of going to a D-1 school. “Liam is a three level scorer who has to be accounted for on every possession,” said coach Tully Wagner.
Oregon
Critical audit says Oregon’s Measure 110 efforts lack stability, coordination and clear data on results
SALEM, Ore. (KTVZ) — Measure 110 is still far from achieving its promise to help Oregonians struggling with addiction due to frequent policy changes and a lack of stability, coordination and data at the Oregon Health Authority, according to an audit released Wednesday by the Secretary of State Audits Division.
“Oregon has struggled to respond to substance use for decades, and fentanyl is only making the problem worse. Enough is enough. We can and should do better,” said Secretary of State Tobias Read.
“With a consistent, long-term strategy, stronger coordination, and better data, Oregon can help more people get the care they need, and we’ll all have safer, healthier communities. These recommendations don’t require new resources, just a commitment to providing basic oversight, common-sense governance, and accountability.”
Here’s the rest of the news release highlighting key findings in the audit:
Measure 110 faced serious headwinds from the start. Oregon reports some of the highest rates of substance use disorder in the nation. The pandemic, the rapid spread of fentanyl, and Oregon’s historically poor access to treatment only made the crisis worse. When voters passed Measure 110 in 2020, Oregon ranked 50th in the nation for access to treatment.
However, auditors found issues with frequently shifting legislative policies and uneven program implementation at OHA that contributed to the lack of results.
For example, legislators changed parts of Measure 110 nearly every year since it passed, making it hard for OHA to build or evaluate long-term strategies. Inside OHA, leadership changes, reorganizations, and unclear accountability weakened the program from the start. Measure 110 services are still not well integrated into Oregon’s broader behavioral health system, leaving them fragmented and harder to manage.
Auditors also found OHA lacks reliable information to track basic metrics — demographic data such as race, ethnicity, age, and gender is often missing or inconsistent, making it hard to know whether funding is reaching communities most harmed by the “war on drugs.”
Even determining whether the number of treatment providers has increased since 2020 is difficult, based on available OHA data. Without better data, neither OHA nor lawmakers can tell if policies, services, or millions of dollars in grant funding are improving access to treatment.
Auditors issued six recommendations to OHA to strengthen Measure 110, including:
- Develop an implementation roadmap with timelines, accountability, and clear deliverables.
- Require all Measure 110-funded providers to participate in standardized data reporting.
- Complete an analysis to create a baseline that can be compared to new data to measure progress.
“If OHA follows these recommendations, and the Legislature avoids the temptation to make further significant changes for some time, Measure 110 will be stronger and more likely to help Oregonians struggling with addiction,” said Secretary of State Read. “Clearer laws, better coordination, and better data will help ensure tax dollars actually get people into treatment.”
Read the full report on the Secretary of State website.
Oregon Health Authority responds to Measure 110 audit from the Oregon Secretary of State
PORTLAND, Ore. — Historically, Oregon’s behavioral health system has gone underfunded and overburdened. Today, with renewed focus and broad alignment, the Oregon Health Authority (OHA), is working to change that, reimagining what treatment can look like across the state when accountability meets action. An audit released by the Secretary of State shows that the agency has taken significant steps to strengthen program oversight and ensure responsible, effective use of Measure 110 dollars.
This important work is underway and producing meaningful results. As of today, there are 234 Behavioral Health Resource Network (BHRN) grantees across the state, with one in each county. These services include culturally and regionally specific care that connects or re-connects patients with the communities they call home. With each step taken to improve Oregon’s behavioral health system, lives are saved, bonds are rebuilt, and barriers to care are lowered for those who need it most.
“OHA appreciates the results of this audit and is acting with urgency on the findings,” said OHA’s Behavioral Health Division Director Ebony Clarke. “We are committed to ongoing work to strengthen oversight, responsible stewardship of Measure 110 dollars, and ensuring that every person in Oregon has access to the behavioral health services they need.”
OHA acknowledges initial implementation of Measure 110 was challenged by tight timelines and insufficient staffing. However, in the last year OHA has significantly grown and stabilized the Measure 110 program through improved leadership, management, and staffing.
As noted by the SOS Audits Division, regular legislative changes since 2020 have impacted OHA’s ability to establish and stabilize BHRN programming and oversight.
OHA acknowledges past Measure 110 data limitations and has invested in Measure 110 data improvements. The data collected by the 234 grantees and submitted to OHA has increased dramatically. Through implementation of the Strategic Data Plan, OHA is already charting a forward-looking evaluative approach that emphasizes ongoing performance measures and BHRN provider-reported indicators. This method better captures program outcomes through programmatic and client-level metrics collected quarterly. These metrics will be publicly available via the BHRN program quarterly dashboard, which will provide aggregate data on program activities and service level metrics.
History of What Was Audited
Measure 110 was a ballot measure passed by Oregonians in 2020 to expand addiction services and social supports through redirected marijuana tax revenue and law enforcement savings.
As noted by the Secretary of State’s Audits Division, several legislative changes since 2020 have impacted OHA’s ability to establish and stabilize the Behavioral Health Resource Network’s (BHRN) programming and oversight. During its first years, these changes altered timelines, expectations and funding formulas. Most notably, HB 4002 (2024) shifted one of the foundational tenants of the original legal framework by recriminalizing drug possession and changed how people access BHRN services. Declining cannabis tax revenue and criminal justice cost savings have also reduced available funds.
Despite these shifts, OHA remains focused on maintaining statewide access to treatment, harm reduction and recovery services. Even with funding instability for Measure 110’s BHRNs, OHA has ensured available funds are used efficiently and effectively to support essential behavioral health services statewide.
OHA Implementation and Program Improvements
Following two previous audits, OHA continues to take clear action – responding to past findings and addressing key issues raised in the most recent review. From 2022-2025, programs receiving Measure 110 funding reported 3 million encounters with people in need of addiction and social support services. , More than 80% of the funded BHRN providers performed outreach at least once per week and approximately 40% of these providers performed outreach five or more times weekly, resulting in thousands of new clients accessing critical BHRN services.
This work is made possible in part by OHA’s substantial process improvements, including:
Leadership and Structure
- Hiring a dedicated Measure 110 Executive Director (October 2024), program manager (February 2025) and additional leadership staff (2025).
- Expanding the M110 program team from three to 18 full-time positions, providing stability and expertise.
- Embedding project management, grant administration and cross-division coordination into daily operations.
Governance and Oversight
- Reorganizing the program to ensure alignment with the OHA Director, Behavioral Health Division Director and Governor’s Office priorities and strategies.
- Successfully completing the 2025 grant process and incorporating lessons learned for the upcoming funding cycle.
- Preparing for the shift of grant-making authority from the Oversight and Accountability Council (OAC) to OHA in 2026 under Senate Bill 610 (2025).
Data and Accountability
- Launching enhanced Behavioral Health Resource Network (BHRN) grant reporting in 2025, including client-level reporting.
- Implementing standardized expenditure and staffing reporting to ensure the responsible use of every Measure 110 dollar.
- Utilizing a public facing dashboard to ensure robust data is collected and shared, including plans for additional data reporting for the current grant cycle.
Additionally, while the Audits Division recommends OHA conduct a baseline study to determine the impact of Measure 110 funded services, data limitations and the availability of appropriate data comparisons significantly hinder OHA’s ability to conduct such a study, possibly to the point of rendering it impossible. However, OHA has invested in many data improvements that will allow the agency to report out on BHRN program impact and client outcomes by 2027.
Work to Improve Access to Behavioral Health Services Continues
“We have built a responsive high performing team overseeing M110 implementation to help build a system that is coordinated, evidence-based and responsive,” Clarke said. “OHA is committed to collaborating with partners to ensure we are leading with stability, collaboration and compassion.”
OHA continues to advance the equity goals at the heart of Measure 110 by improving culturally specific services, strengthening funding processes and ensuring that communities disproportionately harmed by past drug policies have access to care.
Substance use disorder is a long-term public health challenge. OHA will continue strengthening Measure 110 implementation and ensuring that public funds are used effectively to support treatment and recovery to reduce harm and save lives across Oregon.
House Republican Leader Lucetta Elmer Responds to State Audit on Measure 110
SALEM, Ore. — Today, House Republican Leader Lucetta Elmer (R-McMinnville) released the following statement in response to the audit released by the Secretary of State showing Ballot Measure 110 (2020) — which aimed to replace criminalization of substance use disorder with a public health approach — failed due to poor strategies, inadequate data, and wasted resources:
The Secretary of State’s audit confirms what too many Oregon families have already lived through: Measure 110 failed to deliver on its promise to help people struggling with addiction, and the state failed to provide the leadership and oversight needed to prevent that failure.
Measure 110 was sold as a compassionate, public health approach. Instead, it became a system with no clear direction, no meaningful accountability, and no urgency — even as overdose deaths continued to rise. In 2023 alone, more than 1,700 Oregonians died from drug overdoses. While overdose deaths declined in nearly every other state, Oregon fell further behind.
The audit makes clear that the Oregon Health Authority lacked stability, coordination, and measurable goals. Funds were distributed without consistent oversight, data was insufficient to show whether programs were working, and services were not integrated into Oregon’s broader behavioral health system. The result was wasted time, wasted resources, and lives lost that did not need to be.
This was not a failure of compassion — it was a failure of leadership.
Oregonians expect their government to act when policies aren’t working, especially when lives are on the line. Instead, warning signs were ignored, repeated requests for improvement went unanswered, and accountability was absent.
We owe it to families, first responders, and people battling addiction to do better. A public-health approach must be focused on saving lives, getting people into treatment, and delivering results — not protecting a broken system. Oregonians deserve urgency, transparency, and leadership that is willing to admit when something isn’t working and course-correct immediately.
-
Iowa4 days agoAddy Brown motivated to step up in Audi Crooks’ absence vs. UNI
-
Washington1 week agoLIVE UPDATES: Mudslide, road closures across Western Washington
-
Iowa6 days agoHow much snow did Iowa get? See Iowa’s latest snowfall totals
-
Maine3 days agoElementary-aged student killed in school bus crash in southern Maine
-
Maryland4 days agoFrigid temperatures to start the week in Maryland
-
Technology1 week agoThe Game Awards are losing their luster
-
South Dakota5 days agoNature: Snow in South Dakota
-
Culture1 week agoCan You Identify Where the Winter Scenes in These Novels Took Place?
