They're still around, apparently, but their funding is way down. They changed their program back in 2010 in an effort to improve effectiveness, but the wiki page doesn't list any studies since 2009, so, I have no idea if they are any more effective in their main goal. The opioid addiction crisis seems to indicate otherwise.
Without looking into it too much, my guess is that DARE took credit for the big drop in crime / deaths /drugs / gangs that occurred after 1992. But everywhere in the USA had the same drop at the same time, so like "broken windows policing" in New York, DARE cannot have been everywhere, so any credit they've taken could also just be coincidence.
NOTE: A common problem with these sorts of programs is their voluntary nature, which they then conflate as an
achievement:
- Alcoholics Anonymous measures the number of members who've been sober for 1 year, which
looks good, but staying for 1 year is entirely a voluntary choice, so when they do controlled studies,
sending people to AA turns out to be no better than a placebo treatment.
- The Duluth program hits batterers with "male privilege" literature (e.g. they take the single-factor stance that the solution to domestic violence is to deprogram men from the patriarchy), and they report those who stuck out the whole program have lower repeat offending behavior.
However again, when they do controlled studies, the benefits vanish: e.g. those who complete the program were the people less likely to re-offend in thr first place.
- the same with DARE. Signing a voluntary pledge that you won't join a gang and take drugs is meaningless. People who are going to do that shit anyway aren't the ones signing the pledge.
In all three cases, they can claim "success" by recruit only those
least at risk, and that's ultimately why they fail: Those
least likely to relapse into drinking tend to stick with AA better, those
least likely to beat their wives do the best with the Duluth program, those
least likely to join a gang are the most likely to sign the DARE pledge. In all cases, they fail to have a solution for those
most likely to fall. e.g. AA completely writes off those who can't or won't stick with AA as destined for prison, mental institutions or the grave: e.g. "unhelpable". This is how they skirt their obvious failures: blaming the victim.