Alcohol and other drug (AOD) use disorders affect a significant proportion of New Zealanders and Australians, with substantial flow-on effects on families, communities, and the health system. Services that support people into recovery, provide harm reduction, and support affected families receive funding from a range of sources — but the sector is often chronically underfunded relative to need.
Te Whatu Ora / Health New Zealand. The primary government funder for addiction treatment services — residential rehabilitation, community-based treatment, opioid substitution therapy, and specialist services. Most significant AOD providers operate under contracts with regional health entities.
Ministry of Social Development. Funds family and social services including family support for addiction-affected families and some community AOD education.
Ministry of Justice and Corrections. Funds AOD programmes connected to the justice system — court-mandated treatment, prison-based rehabilitation programmes.
Gaming and community trusts. Fund community AOD services not covered by government contracts — particularly harm reduction, peer support, family services, and early intervention in communities where clinical services are limited.
Alcohol Foundation. A Crown entity with dedicated funding for alcohol harm reduction — research, community programmes, and public education. Has a contestable grant fund for community alcohol harm reduction initiatives.
Harm reduction vs. abstinence approaches. The AOD sector contains philosophical diversity about the best approach to supporting people with addiction — from abstinence-based programmes to harm reduction approaches. Funders should have a clear view on their position (or explicitly fund both), as this affects which organisations are appropriate grantees.
Lived experience leadership. Recovery-oriented and peer support services are increasingly led by people with lived experience of addiction. Funders committed to authentic practice should value lived experience expertise in their grantees, not just professional credentials.
Intersectionality with mental health, housing, and justice. AOD issues rarely occur in isolation — most people with severe AOD problems also have mental health needs, housing instability, and often justice involvement. Effective services work across these intersecting needs. Funders should assess whether organisations understand and address this complexity.
Stigma. People with addiction experience significant stigma — from services, from communities, and sometimes from funders. Applications for AOD services should not be held to higher proof-of-concept standards than other social services simply because of the stigma associated with drug use.
Māori and Pacific dimensions. AOD issues affect Māori and Pacific communities at higher rates than the general population, partly due to historical trauma, social disadvantage, and the health effects of colonisation. Kaupapa Māori and Pacific-specific AOD services are important and should be actively supported.
Recovery housing. Transitional and recovery housing — sober living environments for people in early recovery — is chronically underfunded. This gap is particularly relevant for gaming trusts and community trusts, which can fund housing-related services that health funders can't.
Family services. Addiction affects families, not just individuals. Services supporting children, partners, and parents of people with AOD issues are an important part of the recovery ecosystem and are often underfunded relative to direct treatment services.
Evidence of effective practice. Well-evidenced approaches in AOD treatment include motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioural therapy, medication-assisted treatment, and peer support. Funders should look for organisations using evidence-aligned approaches.
Cultural responsiveness. For Māori and Pacific applicants, assessment should recognise the validity and effectiveness of kaupapa Māori and Pacific-led approaches — which may look different from Western clinical models but are often more effective for their communities.
Staff training and supervision. AOD work is emotionally demanding. Organisations with strong supervision, staff support, and professional development practices are more sustainable and provide better services.
Connections to the wider system. AOD organisations that work collaboratively — referring to other services, participating in local networks, connecting clients to housing and income support — provide more comprehensive care than siloed providers.
Measuring outcomes in AOD services is complex:
Funders should use outcome frameworks that recognise the non-linear nature of recovery, avoid punishing relapse (a normal part of recovery), and capture the full picture of wellbeing change.
Tahua supports health and social service funders including those investing in AOD and recovery services — with configurable outcome frameworks, wellbeing-oriented reporting, and grant management suited to health and social sector grantmaking.