Early public service announcements created by the organization have been called iconic,[1][2] and during their initial release were part of the largest privately run public-service campaign in history.

[5][6] An analysis of the Partnership's efforts by Forbes magazine suggested that it had earned "a single-brand advertising clout" during the Reagan era comparable to that of McDonald's.

[8] [11] The organization was loosely modeled along the lines of a standard advertising agency, with a creative director post[12] and "account executives" to head specific effort.

Liken potential addicts to a group of consumers whose buying habits can be manipulated by celebrity endorsements, catchy slogans, and powerful images.

If the approach works, drugs will finally lose their cool.The agency solicited help from copywriters, media planning and placement experts often competed to submit advertising assignments without charge.

[8][13] The agency gained free exposure from print media and broadcast networks, including spots during prime time.

[19] In 1992, the Partnership switched focus to targeting inner-city youth, where the drug problem had been more severe, and ran a campaign led by Ginna Marston.

[14] Marston explained the utility of depicting young people "resisting drugs in real situations":[20] The new campaign addresses kids' feelings and their sense of emotional isolation on this issue.

[8] In 1994, an independent assessment from the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine suggested that the anti-drug campaign was having a measurable "deterrence effect" on American adolescents: No one presumes advertising is going to stop all drug abuse in America ...

[21] Marston and other executives adjusted their media strategy accordingly as fast-moving trends made one drug "hot" while others fell out of favor.

[14] PDFA was the subject of criticism when it was revealed by Cynthia Cotts of The Village Voice that their federal tax returns showed that they had received several million dollars worth of funding from major pharmaceutical, tobacco and alcohol corporations including American Brands (Jim Beam whiskey), Philip Morris (Marlboro and Virginia Slims cigarettes, Miller beer), Anheuser Busch (Budweiser, Michelob, Busch beer), R.J. Reynolds (Camel, Salem, Winston cigarettes), as well as pharmaceutical firms Bristol Meyers-Squibb, Merck & Company and Procter & Gamble.

In 1997, it discontinued any direct fiscal association with tobacco and alcohol suppliers, although it still receives donations from pharmaceutical and opioid companies.

[19] He stated, "The resulting campaign is far too complex, calling as it does for the lockstep shuttling in and out, at 6 to 8 week intervals, of TV, radio, print, outdoor and interactive messages in multiple languages against 36 different strategies aimed at eleven different targets.

[28] He raised concerns of improper interpretations of survey data as well as the federal government shifting $50 million away from other media purchases.

[31] A 2013 article by the Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice describes The Partnership as "...always felt free to lie — blatantly, openly, stupidly — about drugs.

In fact, lying to obscure the realities of drug abuse in order to protect powerful interests and constituencies is the reason the Partnership exists.

The Partnership is the latest in America's long history of phony lobbies — the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) is the White House branch — that revel in misinformation and misdirected policies that perpetuate the social crises they claim to be attacking because they tacitly profit from making them worse.

[38] Partnership executive Sean Clarkin suggests that parents sit down with their teens and ask "what's going on" as a possible beginning for a conversation about drug use.

[13] The agency is making a $55 million three-year commitment with cable operator Comcast including its "Time to Talk" campaign.