As states across the country work to deploy opioid settlement funds responsibly and effectively, many are confronting the same challenge: how to ensure accountability while still enabling broad participation - especially among smaller and rural communities. While every state’s approach reflects local context, Colorado is frequently referenced for its regional governance structure and emphasis on local decision-making within statewide guardrails.

Rather than focusing on individual projects, Colorado’s experience offers insight into how opioid abatement systems can be designed to help communities translate funding into sustained impact.

A Regional Approach to Decision-Making

One of the defining features of Colorado’s opioid settlement framework is its regionalized distribution model. Under Colorado’s statewide Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), a significant portion of opioid settlement funds flows through Regional Opioid Abatement Councils, which are responsible for planning and allocating resources within their respective regions.

Colorado has established 19 regional opioid councils, each composed of local governments and stakeholders who collaborate to identify regional priorities while remaining aligned with approved abatement purposes and statewide oversight. This structure recognizes that the opioid crisis manifests differently across regions and that locally informed decision-making can strengthen the relevance and effectiveness of funded strategies.

Balancing Local Flexibility with State Oversight

Colorado’s framework demonstrates how states can empower regions while maintaining accountability. The Colorado Opioid Abatement Council (COAC) provides statewide oversight to ensure that settlement funds are used consistently with statutory requirements and approved abatement purposes.

Under the MOU, settlement proceeds are distributed across four defined shares—regional, local government, infrastructure, and state—creating clarity around how funds are managed and ensuring that investments support both immediate needs and long-term capacity. This balance allows regions to tailor interventions to local needs without fragmenting statewide strategy.

Investing in Capacity and Infrastructure

Another lesson from Colorado’s approach is the value of investing not only in direct services, but also in organizational and regional capacity. Infrastructure-focused allocations allow communities to strengthen the systems needed to support prevention, treatment, recovery, and harm-reduction efforts over time.

By supporting planning, coordination, and administrative readiness, Colorado’s model reflects an understanding that sustainable impact requires more than short-term program funding. Capacity investments help ensure that communities can manage funds responsibly, track outcomes, and adapt strategies as conditions evolve.

The Role of Technical Assistance

Colorado’s regional framework also underscores the importance of technical assistance in complex funding environments. Opioid settlement funds are governed by specific approved uses and reporting requirements, and navigating those expectations can be challenging—particularly for smaller jurisdictions.

States that pair funding availability with clear guidance, education, and support structures reduce barriers to participation while maintaining program integrity. This approach does not lower standards; rather, it equips more communities to meet them.

Implications for Oklahoma

Oklahoma’s Opioid Abatement Grant Program already reflects a strong commitment to evidence-based use, accountability, and statewide impact. As the program continues to evolve, lessons from states like Colorado highlight the importance of regional coordination, early capacity-building, and structured technical assistance as complements to funding availability.

When communities receive support before applications are submitted—rather than after awards are made—funding moves more efficiently, application quality improves, and long-term outcomes are strengthened.

Supporting Communities Through Complexity

At SOAR Partners, we work alongside public entities and community organizations to help bridge the gap between policy intent and on-the-ground execution. Our work supports the same principles reflected in successful state models nationwide: helping communities plan effectively, apply competitively, and administer funds responsibly.

Through needs assessments, grant development, and post-award compliance support, SOAR helps communities engage with opioid abatement funding in ways that are aligned, strategic, and sustainable.

If your organization is preparing to engage in Oklahoma’s Opioid Abatement Grant process—or seeking to strengthen readiness for future cycles—SOAR Partners is here to help. Contact us today at info@soar.partners.

Sources

• Colorado Attorney General’s Office – Opioid Settlement & Colorado Opioid Abatement Council
  https://coag.gov/opioids/
• Colorado Opioid Settlement Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
  https://bouldercounty.gov/departments/community-services/strategic-initiatives/boulder-county-region-opioid-settlement-background/

Regional Opioid Abatement Councils Overviewhttps://www.denverptc.org/roac-map/