Appendix B
Data Sources

This appendix provides detailed descriptions of several of the more prominent, federally supported data sources on drug use and treatment. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) has identified 25 federal sources of drug data produced by 16 different agencies (see Table B.1 at the end of this appendix). The sources described below are highlighted because of their potential to help improve the empirical foundations for policy on illegal drugs. However, no analysis of methodology similar to that found for the data collections discussed in Chapter 3 was conducted on these data systems. They are included to give the reader a better idea of the breadth of the data sources on drug abuse listed by ONDCP and referenced in this report.

DATA ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE POPULATIONS

Research has documented high levels of illegal drug use among certain institutional populations, especially people held in prisons and jails (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994c).1 These drug users are not covered in the general population surveys described in Chapter 3. However, the

1  

In general, prisons are defined as state or federal facilities where inmates whose cases have been adjudicated by the courts are incarcerated for longer than one year. Jails are defined as holding facilities for prisoners awaiting trial or where shorter-term sentences are served by offenders.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us Appendix B Data Sources This appendix provides detailed descriptions of several of the more prominent, federally supported data sources on drug use and treatment. The Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) has identified 25 federal sources of drug data produced by 16 different agencies (see Table B.1 at the end of this appendix). The sources described below are highlighted because of their potential to help improve the empirical foundations for policy on illegal drugs. However, no analysis of methodology similar to that found for the data collections discussed in Chapter 3 was conducted on these data systems. They are included to give the reader a better idea of the breadth of the data sources on drug abuse listed by ONDCP and referenced in this report. DATA ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE POPULATIONS Research has documented high levels of illegal drug use among certain institutional populations, especially people held in prisons and jails (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1994c).1 These drug users are not covered in the general population surveys described in Chapter 3. However, the 1   In general, prisons are defined as state or federal facilities where inmates whose cases have been adjudicated by the courts are incarcerated for longer than one year. Jails are defined as holding facilities for prisoners awaiting trial or where shorter-term sentences are served by offenders.

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) conducts a range of continuous censuses and surveys of federal, state, and local correctional facilities and their populations, as well as of probation populations. These systems collect data on the number of people sentenced to incarceration (and probation) nationwide, as well as on a wide variety of the features, programs, and services of all correctional facilities in the United States. The systems provide information on the personal characteristics and criminal histories of adjudicated adults, including information on their patterns of past drug use and its proximity to the offense for which they are currently sentenced. The number of state and federal prisoners in the United States are counted semiannually, through an interagency agreement with the Bureau of the Census. A complete count of state and federal prison facilities is made every five years, also using the Bureau of the Census as the collection agent. A similar jail census and several prison and jail inmate surveys are carried out every five years. The inmate surveys are conducted through in-person interviews with large national probability-based samples of inmates. In addition to past drug use patterns, these data provide information on the availability and characteristics of drug testing and treatment programs in correctional facilities. Facilities that conduct drug tests are able to report on current drug use for some inmate samples. Information on inmate exposure to treatment, both before and during incarceration, is also available. BJS integrates data from these and other sources to develop detailed reports of trends and descriptive information on the drug involvement of offender populations under correctional supervision (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2000a, 2000b, 1999b, 1999c, 1998, 1997a, 1997b, 1994a, 1994b, 1993). The most important of the BJS correctional data collections, for purposes of this report, are described below. Correctional Data Collections The National Prisoner Statistics program produces semiannual (June 30 and December 31) data on the numbers of prisoners in state and federal prison facilities (Beck, 2000a, 2000b). The federal government has published data annually on the prisoner count in each State, the District of Columbia, and the Federal prison system since 1926. This census is an effort to collect comparable data from all states and federal facilities. The data collection form, although brief, provides relatively rich detail. For example, the questionnaire distinguishes among 10 categories of new admissions and 19 categories of release circumstances. Data are also collected on sentence status, the racial and ethnic composition of the inmate

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us population, and their HIV status. In addition to the semiannual prisoner counts, BJS also conducts a periodic Census of State and Federal Prisons every five years. This prison facility census provides the sampling frame for the two nationwide inmate surveys described below: The Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities, conducted every five years, provides information on individual characteristics of prison inmates (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1993). In addition to standard elements such as current offenses and sentences, criminal histories, family background, and education level, data are collected on previous drug and alcohol abuse and on exposure to treatment and other in-prison services. Data for this survey are collected through personal interviews with a nationally representative sample of 14,000 inmates in about 300 state prisons and exist for the years 1974, 1979, 1986, 1991, and 1997. The Survey of Inmates in Federal Correctional Facilities, first conducted in 1991 and again in 1997, collects data on the same variables used in the Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997b). These are also self-report data, elicited through personal interviews with a probability-based sample of 4,041 federal inmates. Based on the completed interviews, estimates for the entire correctional population are developed. Data from the combined inmate surveys are reported as the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities. The interview completion rate exceeds 90 percent for both the federal and state surveys. The Census of Jails, conducted every five years, furnishes the sampling frame for the nationwide Survey of Inmates in Local Jails (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1995). Similar to the Census of State and Federal Prisons described above, these data provide detailed information on each facility, including admissions and releases, court orders, programs that offer alternatives to incarceration, use of space and crowding, staffing, and health care (including prevalence of HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis). The Census of Jails also provides information on drug testing policies and practices. Data exist for the years 1970, 1972, 1978, 1983, 1988, 1993, and 1999. The Annual Survey of Jails collects intercensal estimates of the number of inmates in the nation’s local jails and data on the relationship between jail populations and capacities. These data have been collected annually since 1982, except in the years when the complete Census of Jails, described above, was conducted. The Survey of Inmates in Local Jails is periodically administered to collect data on the family background and personal characteristics of jail

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us inmates. It includes detailed data on past drug and alcohol use and history of contact with the criminal justice system. The survey relies on personal interviews with a nationally representative sample of about 6,100 jail inmates. Data are available from this series for years 1972, 1978, 1983, 1989, and 1996. The National Survey of Adults on Probation was conducted for the first time in 1995 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997c). The survey collected data from a nationally representative sample of 5,867 administrative records and conducted follow-up interviews with offenders. The administrative records provide detailed information on current offenses and sentences, criminal histories, levels of supervision and contacts, participation in treatment programs, and disciplinary hearings and outcomes. The offender interviews provide the same information on offender characteristics and drug involvement as that furnished by the jail and prison surveys described above. The questionnaires for all three inmate surveys and the probation survey include lifetime prevalence for illegal drug use, drug use at the time of the crime (current offense) for which the inmate is currently sentenced, and past-year and past-month prevalence at the time of the current offense. Data also are collected on frequency of drug use prior to both the current offense itself and the arrest for the current offense. BJS also biennially collects data on courts and sentencing for both federal and state courts. These collections contain detailed information on the demographic characteristics of felons, conviction offenses, type of sentences, sentence lengths, and time from arrest to conviction and sentencing. The National Judicial Reporting Program surveys a nationwide sample of felony trial courts in 344 counties (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1996b, 1999a). State Court Processing Statistics are data on the processing of felony defendants in a representative sample of state courts in the nation’s 75 most populous counties, which account for about half the serious crimes nationwide. The Federal Justice Statistics Program collects information associated with federal criminal cases. All of the court-related data series collect information on drug felonies, which are divided into two broad offense categories—drug trafficking and other drug offenses. Drug trafficking is defined as trafficking, sales, distribution, possession with intent to distribute or sell, manufacturing, and smuggling of controlled substances. The category Other drug

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us offenses includes possession of controlled substances, prescription violations, possession of drug paraphernalia, and other drug law violations. The other types of felonies detailed in these data systems include a variety of violent offenses, property offenses, and certain serious public order offenses (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1999a, 1999b). BJS uses all of these data collections to develop descriptive statistics and trend data across a number of important domains related to illegal drugs, for example the relationship of drug use to criminal offending, the use of treatment services by offenders, and trends in drug enforcement. The following examples provide a small indication of the voluminous statistical information that is available from these series on these subjects. The figures cited are the latest available. Drug Use and Crime In 1997 the Survey of Inmates in State and Federal Correctional Facilities found that 83 percent of all state inmates reported past drug use, a figure more than double the reported lifetime prevalence in the general population for 1997 (Mumola, 1999; Research Triangle Institute, 1997). However, only one-third of state inmates and one-fifth of federal prisoners admitted using drugs while actually committing their offense. Among state inmates, a substantially higher proportion of violent and property offenders reported using alcohol at the time of their offense than reported illegal drug use. The reverse was true for drug offenders, however. Moreover, only 19 percent of state prisoners reported that they committed their offense to get money for drugs in 1997 (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1999e). Only 16 percent of federal prisoners reported committing their offense to get money for drugs in 1997. Drug Treatment According to the 1997 Survey of State and Federal Prisoners, as many as one-third of state and one-quarter of federal prisoners reported past participation in alcohol or drug abuse treatment (defined as residential treatment, professional counseling, detoxification, or use of a maintenance drug), and about one in eight state prisoners had participated in these types of treatment regimes while in prison. Another two-fifths of state prisoners had participated in some type of self-help program in the past and one-quarter had taken part in such programs since their admission to prison (Mumola, 1999). Among probationers, more than two in five were required as a condition of probation to enroll in some form of substance abuse treatment, and nearly one-third were subject to mandatory drug testing (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1997c).

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us Drug Enforcement BJS prison data show that by 1998, the number of state and federal prisoners serving a sentence for a drug offense had grown by nearly 120,000 since 1990. Drug offenders in 1998 accounted overall for 21 percent of state and an astounding 58 percent of federal prisoners (Beck, 2000). For jail inmates, BJS reported that in 1998, 26 percent of all inmates in local facilities had committed a drug offense, and 64 percent of jail inmates had used drugs regularly in the past (Wilson, 2000). State Court Processing Statistics for 1997 also reflect the policy emphasis on enforcement. Drug offenses made up the largest proportion of all felony cases filed in the courts of the nation’s largest counties—37 percent of all felonies, compared with 25 percent for violent offenses and 31 percent for property offenses. Drug offenders on pretrial release also engaged in pretrial misconduct at higher rates than other felony offenders (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1996b). State trial court statistics show similar trends (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1999d). Integrated Databases BJS also develops composite descriptions from their own and other datasets on subjects of special interest. For example, Greenfeld (1998) conducted a new analysis of national data on the impact of alcohol abuse on crime. The report, Alcohol and Crime, drew on all of the BJS data series described above, plus the National Crime Victim Survey, the Uniform Crime Reporting Program, and the National Incident Based Reporting Program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Fatal Accident Reporting System of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The findings from this analysis leave no doubt about the magnitude of the public safety problems related to alcohol abuse (Greenfeld, 1998). Similar efforts could be mounted to develop better information for policy formation on both drug and crime control. One example of the potential for conducting integrated analyses can be found in a current BJS effort to study recidivism among 1994 releasees in 15 states. BJS is integrating a number of datasets to obtain a sample that will be representative of nearly 300,000 persons released from prison. Among other issues, the study will attempt to determine whether drug-involved inmates who were treated in prison have fared better in terms of reoffending than their untreated counterparts upon release (personal communication with Lawrence Greenfeld, Deputy Director, BJS, May 22, 2000). This information will be helpful in developing treatment policies and programs for both active and incarcerated offender populations.

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us DATA ON YOUTH POPULATIONS As part of its overall mission to protect the nation’s health, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has developed programs to prevent the most serious health risk behaviors among children, adolescents, and young adults. One part of a four-pronged strategy to accomplish this is the identification and monitoring of both critical health problems among youth and school health policies and programs to reduce them. The Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System (YRBSS) provides national, state, and local-level data on the prevalence of six categories of priority health risk behaviors. The CDC, individual states, and the public can use this vital information to support the design and evaluation of targeted interventions to help young people avoid these high-risk behaviors, one of which is substance abuse. The school-based components of the Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance system were first implemented in 1990–1991 and conducted biennially during odd-numbered years thereafter. The 1999 survey employed a three-stage cluster design, based on an original sampling frame of 1,270 large counties or groups of smaller adjacent counties, to produce a nationally representative sample of students in grades 9–12. At the second stage of sampling, 187 schools were selected, with probability proportional to school enrollment size. To enable separate analysis by race or ethnicity, schools in the sample with substantial numbers of black and Hispanic students were sampled at higher rates than other schools. The final stage of sampling consisted of randomly selecting one or two intact classes of a required subject, such as English or social studies, from grades 9–12 at each chosen school. The final sample in the 1999 national survey consisted of 15,349 questionnaires completed in 144 schools. The school response rate was 77 percent and the student response rate was 80 percent, for an overall response rate of 66 percent. All students in classes selected for inclusion in the sample are eligible to participate in the survey. Survey procedures are designed to protect students’ privacy by allowing for anonymous and voluntary participation. State and local jurisdictions participating in this program with their own separate surveys employ the same questionnaire (with some additional or deleted questions based on local needs) and similarly rigorous methods in an attempt to obtain data representative of their public school population in grades 9–12. In the 1999 survey, 22 states and 14 large cities succeeded in obtaining a response rate that allows them to generalize their findings to all public schools in their jurisdiction. Findings from these surveys are subject to two limitations: (1) the data apply only to

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us youth enrolled in school and are not representative of all people in this age group and (2) as with other self-report surveys, the extent of under- or overreporting of behaviors cannot be determined. The YRBSS survey contains 14 questions about drug use. Self-report information is collected about lifetime, past-year, and past-month use of marijuana, cocaine, heroin, inhalants, methamphetamines, hallucinogens, steroids, and prescription drugs. In addition, there are questions about age of onset for marijuana, about injecting drug use, about drug use at last sexual intercourse, and about access to and use of drugs on school property. These questions measure the level, frequency, and circumstances surrounding youthful drug use, which research has found to be related to a variety of harmful outcomes—teen suicide, early unwanted pregnancy, school failure, delinquency, and transmission of sexually transmitted diseases, including HIV. While they collect similar information on drug use prevalence and follow nearly identical protocols for administering their questionnaires, there are significant differences between the YRBSS and Monitoring the Future (MTF). The surveys have different foci. The YRBSS measures risk behaviors of which drug use is only a single example. MTF’s major focus with regard to risk behaviors historically has been on drugs, measuring trends in drug use, the levels of perceived risk, and the degree of personal disapproval associated with each drug.2 Attitude toward drugs has been shown to be particularly important in explaining trends in use (Johnston et al., 2000). The sample size for the MTF is roughly twice that for the YRBSS, and the MTF survey asks 100 questions on drug use compared with 14 for the YRBSS. The age range covered is similar but not identical: MTF collects data on 8th, 10th, and 12th graders, whereas the YRBSS samples students in grades 9–12. Both surveys collect drug use data on college students and young adults. Although both surveys utilize a nationally representative sample of youth attending school, the surveys report substantially different prevalence rates for marijuana and cocaine use (see Table B.2). Prevalence rates measured by these surveys for other drugs also may differ. It is not clear whether sampling differences, reporting differences, or some other unknown factors are responsible for the variation in drug use found in these two surveys. 2   MTF also includes about 200 questions on subjects such as attitude toward government, social institutions, race relations, changing roles for women, occupational aims, and marital and family plans.

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us DATA ON TREATMENT POPULATIONS The Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services collects data on drug treatment under its Drug and Alcohol Services Information System (DASIS). DASIS has three components: (1) the National Master Facility Inventory, a continuously updated census of all known substance abuse treatment facilities, serves as the sampling frame for the second and third components; (2) the Treatment Episodes Data Set (TEDS) tracks approximately 1.5 million annual admissions to treatment for abuse of alcohol and drugs in facilities that report to individual state administrative data systems; (3) the Uniform Facility Data Set (UFDS) annually collects data on the location and use of treatment facilities for alcoholism and drug abuse. Together these three datasets “provide national and state-level information on the numbers and characteristics of individuals admitted to drug treatment and describes the facilities that deliver care to those individuals” (Substance Abuse Mental Health Services Administration, 2000:15). Here the focus is on TEDS, a continuous data series, in which information on clients receiving substance abuse treatment is collected and analyzed. The goal of TEDS is to monitor the characteristics of treatment episodes. An event-based system, it identifies the primary as well as secondary substances that lead to each admission and reports the proportion of admissions for each drug including those of greatest interest to the committee—cocaine, opiates, and methamphetamines. It also reports the demographic characteristics of those admitted to drug treatment. It does not, however, represent individuals; thus it cannot measure the total national demand for treatment for any substance of abuse. Measurement of the unmet need for treatment can be accomplished only through comprehensive national and state prevalence surveys. Analysis of the TEDS data shows that, in 1998, almost half of admissions were for primary abuse of alcohol and 30 percent for primary abuse of cocaine and opiates. Proportions of admissions for cocaine and opiate abuse were equal. Co-occurring abuse of alcohol and hard drugs surfaced as a significant problem, characterizing 42 percent of all admissions (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2000). Demographic characteristics of admissions are also of interest. In 1998, most of those admitted to drug treatment were male (70 percent), white (60 percent, although blacks were overrepresented in the admissions sample), and unemployed (65 percent). Those admitted to drug treatment also had less education than the U.S. population as a whole. Over one-third had not graduated from high school, and only 21 percent had attended school beyond the high school years (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 2000).

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us The 1998 TEDS data indicate changes in substance abuse patterns, but these may merely reflect changing priorities in the treatment system rather than changes in drug abuse behavior. In addition, the TEDS data are aggregated through state systems that have unique characteristics. For example, while TEDS includes a large proportion of treatment facilities, it does not include all such facilities. Most but not all states are able to report admissions to public and private facilities, but some only report admissions supported by public funds. State-to-state variations in data also may include differences in the completeness of reporting, as well as in the ability to distinguish between initial admissions and transfers from one service to another in the course of a single treatment episode. Thus, admission rates for each drug type are available for each state and by geographic region, but state-by-state or regional comparisons must be made with extreme caution. Special topics can be explored through analysis of TEDS data. Examples include adolescent admissions and their characteristics, multiple drug use and implications for treatment, patterns of use in racial and ethnic subgroups whose members present themselves for treatment, and routes of drug administration, especially for heroin and cocaine. In addition to TEDS, SAMHSA conducts the Uniform Facility Data Set Survey, which provides information on location, characteristics, services, and use of drug and alcohol treatment facilities throughout the United States. It also conducts a single-day census of people in treatment. Data elements that form the core of the survey include organizational setting, service orientation, services available, clients in treatment by type of care, capacity, and annual revenue sources and amounts. The data are used to analyze general treatment services trends and to conduct comparative analyses among regions and states and the nation as a whole. In 1998, these analyses were based on the responses of 13,455 facilities (an increase of 35 percent over the previous year’s response rate), and the 1,038,738 people found to be in treatment on the referent date for the single-day census. SAMHSA and the National Institute on Drug Abuse have also sponsored a series of treatment outcome studies since 1976. These have been single studies conducted over an extended period of time. None of these studies, however, was of clients drawn from a nationally representative sample of treatment facilities. In 1995, the ONDCP asked SAMHSA to conduct a study that would involve a nationally representative sample of the treatment system. This request was addressed in two stages, the first of which involved a representative probability sample survey drawn from a comprehensive list of organized substance abuse treatment programs, the Drug Services Research Survey (DSRS). The second stage was the Services Research Outcome Study,

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us designed as a client outcome study based on the DSRS sample. Extensive data was collected on the programs and on a representative sample of discharged clients. The client data included completed interviews and urine specimens. Questions were asked about drug use patterns, criminal activity, employment, health, social support, and other behavior related to treatment goals. The interview covered the life span but focused on the five-year period prior to treatment admission and the period between discharge and the interview. The interview and other aspects of the research were designed to shed light on who enters treatment, what types of treatment are effective for different types of clients, whether criminal behavior declines and employment increases with treatment, correlates of treatment outcomes, differences in death rates with those of the general population, and characteristics associated with posttreatment mortality (Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, 1998). The Services Research Outcome Study provides nationally representative data with an extended time perspective to address the question of whether or not treatment works. REFERENCES Beck, A. 2000a Prison and Jail Inmates at Mid-year 1999. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2000b Prisoners in 1999. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. Bureau of Justice Statistics 1990 National Judicial Reporting Program. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1993 Survey of State Prison Inmates, 1991. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1994a Comparing Federal and State Prison Inmates, 1991. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1994b Correctional Populations in the United States, 1993. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1994c Drugs and Crime Facts, 1994. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1995 Jails and Jail Inmates, 1993–94. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1996a Prison and Jail Inmates, 1995. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice 1996b Federal Pre-Trial Release and Detention. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice 1997a Correctional Populations in the United States, 1995. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1997b Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities, 1995. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1997c Characteristics of Adults on Probation, 1995. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1998a Correctional Populations in the United States, 1996. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1999a Federal Criminal Case Processing, 1998: With Trends 1982–1998, Reconciled Data. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice. 1999b Probation and parole in the United States, 1998. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Justice.

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us TABLE B.1 Federal Sources of Drug Data   Coverage by Title of Dataset Sponsoring Agency Information Available Population Geographic Areas Frequency/ Year Started Prevalence of Use   1999 National Household Survey on Drug Abuse Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Presents prevalence for drug and alcohol by age, sex, and region Household population age 12 and older National Annual Started 1976 Monitoring the Future (MTF) National Institute on Drug Abuse Reports estimates of drug, alcohol, and tobacco use and attitudes toward drugs of abuse among American youth 6th, 8th, 10th, and 12th graders and young adults age 19 National Annual Started 1972 Worldwide Survey of Substance Abuse and Health Behaviors Among Military Personnel U.S. Department of Defense Measures substance use and health behaviors among military personnel Active-duty military personnel in the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force U.S. military bases worldwide Every two to four years Started 1980 Hispanic Health and Nutrition Examination Survey III (HHANES) National Center for Health Statistics Assesses health status and drug and alcohol use of Hispanics Hispanic household members ages 12 to 74 National 1988 to 1994 (last survey was in 1994) Started 1988

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us National Longitudinal Survey of Youth U.S. Department of Labor Tracks employment, vocational achievement, family composition, and alcohol and drug use Individuals ages 14 to 22 National Annual Started 1979 National Youth Survey National Institute of Mental Health and the National Institute on Drug Abuse Assesses family, peer, and other influences on delinquent behaviors and substance abuse Youths and one parent National Annual Started 1976 Community Epidemiology Work Group (CEWG) National Institute on Drug Abuse Provides early warning and epidemiology of drug use patterns, trends, and consequences, including risk factors and stages of use Data gathered from public health agencies, medical and treatment facilities, criminal justice and correctional offices, law enforcement agencies, and other sources unique to local areas Local, multijurisdictional Semiannual Started 1976 Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring Program (ADAM) (formerly Drug Use Forecasting [DUF]) data 1996 National Institute of Justice Monitors the extent of drug use among arrestees by demographic characteristics, charge at arrest, treatment history, and socioeconomic characteristics Adult arrestees and juvenile detainees Local, multijurisdictional Annual Started 1997 (DUF 1986 to 1996)

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us   Coverage by Title of Dataset Sponsoring Agency Information Available Population Geographic Areas Frequency/ Year Started Consequences of Drug Use The Economic Costs of Alcohol and Drug Abuse in the United States National Institute on Drug Abuse and the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Estimates costs for health care, lost productivity, and criminal justice costs due to drug and alcohol abuse N/A National Initial study started 1992 National Maternal and Infant Health Survey follow up survey 1991 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Center for Health Statistics Monitors maternal nutrition and substance abuse as well as infant health Mothers and infants National 1988 and 1991 Started 1988 Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Monitors priority health risk behaviors which contribute to the leading causes of mortality and morbidity among youths and adults School-age youth grades 9 through 12 National Every two years Started 1990

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) Drug Abuse Warning Network Year-End 1999 Emergency Department Data 1997 Annual Medical Examiner 1998 Detailed Emergency Department Tables Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Monitors drug abuse patterns and trends and assesses the health hazards associated with drug abuse by involvement of drugs in deaths and emergency department episodes Drug-related deaths and emergency department episodes Multijurisdictional Annual Started 1972 Substance Abuse Treatment and Prevention Uniform Facility Data Set (UFDS) Survey Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration Identifies and describes drug abuse and alcoholism treatment facilities, providing data on facility characteristics, services provided, and single-day census of people in treatment All alcohol and drug abuse treatment facilities listed on SAMSHA’s National Master Facility Register (NMFI). National Annual from 1980, excluding 1994

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us   Coverage by Title of Dataset Sponsoring Agency Information Available Population Geographic Areas Frequency/ Year Started Treatment Episode Data Set (TEDS) Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration A minimum dataset, reported by states, of demographic and drug history variables on clients admitted to substance abuse treatment. Some states also submit a discharge data set Admissions to substance abuse treatment, primarily at facilities receiving public funds. Excludes federally-owned facilities National Continuous Started 1992 Census of State and Federal Correctional Facilities Bureau of Justice Statistics Describes state-operated confinement and community-based facilities including the number of inmates or residents in counseling for drug dependence State correctional facility inmates National Every 5 to 7 years Started 1974

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us Services Research Outcomes Study (SROS) Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration and the Department of Health and Human Services Presents treatment outcomes of persons completing substance abuse treatment programs Drug abusers discharged from drug abuse treatment facilities National One-time study Started 1995 Source and Volume of Illegal Drugs 1999 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, U.S. Department of State U.S. Department of State Provides production estimates for a variety of illegal drugs by source country   International Annual National Narcotics Intelligence Consumers Committee (NNICC), 1997 Drug Enforcement Administration and multiple federal agencies Collects, analyzes, and disseminates strategic national and international intelligence on the availability of drugs from selected source countries and the supply of illegal drugs to the United States   International Annual Started 1978

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us   Coverage by Title of Dataset Sponsoring Agency Information Available Population Geographic Areas Frequency/ Year Started Pulse Check Office of National Drug Control Policy Describes current trends in illegal drug use and drug markets based on nationwide interviews conducted with ethnographers and epidemiologists, law enforcement officials, and drug treatment providers Ethnographers, epidemiologists, law enforcement officials, and drug treatment providers Multijurisdictional Quarterly until 1996, currently biannual Started 1992 Law Enforcement Uniform Crime Reports: Crime in the United States (UCR) Federal Bureau of Investigation Presents data on the number of offenses, including drug-related offenses known to the police, arrests, and clearances 98 percent of the total population Local, state, national Monthly Started 1930

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Analyzes drugs bought or seized by DEA and several states and local agencies Substances seized or bought by DEA National Ongoing Started 1971 Law Enforcement Management and Administrative Statistics (LEMAS) Bureau of Justice Statistics Provides national data on the management and administration of law enforcement agencies including the existence of laboratory testing facilities, drug enforcement units, and drug education units Law enforcement agencies National Periodical Started 1987 Processing Drug Offenders National Corrections Reporting Program (NCRP) Bureau of Justice Statistics Tracks prisoners entering and leaving custody or supervision whose most serious offense was drug trafficking or possession Prison and parole admissions and releases Multijurisdictional, federal and state Annual Started 1983

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us   Coverage by Title of Dataset Sponsoring Agency Information Available Population Geographic Areas Frequency/ Year Started Juvenile Court Statistics Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Describes the cases and juveniles processed for drug-related delinquency by the juvenile courts in the United States Cases disposed of by juvenile courts National Annual Started 1929 Institutionalized Offenders and Drugs Survey of Inmates in Local Jails Bureau of Justice Statistics Describes the characteristics of inmates in local jails by drug and alcohol use, criminal history, current offense, health care, and socioeconomic status Jail inmates National Every 5 to 6 years Started 1972

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us Survey of Inmates in State Correctional Facilities Bureau of Justice Statistics Describes the characteristics of inmates in state correctional facilities by drug and alcohol use, criminal history, current offense, health care, and socioeconomic status State prison inmates National Every 5 to 7 years Started 1974 Juveniles Taken Into Custody Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Monitors juvenile custody facilities and residents with drug-related offenses Private and public juvenile custody facilities National Annual Started 1988   Source: U.S. Office of National Drug Control Policy, “Federal Drug Data Sources,” Available at: http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/sources.html [Accessed March 16, 2001].

OCR for page 296
Informing America’s Policy on Illegal Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us TABLE B.2 1999 Lifetime and Past-Month Prevalence of Marijuana and Cocaine Use for 10th and 12th Graders   Lifetime Use Past Month Use Year in School Drug MTF YRBSS MTF YRBSS 10th grade Marijuana 40.9 49.1 19.4 27.8 Cocaine 7.7 9.9 1.8 3.7 12th grade Marijuana 49.7 58.4 23.1 31.5 Cocaine 9.8 13.7 2.6 4.8 NOTE: MTF=Monitoring the Future. YRBSS=Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System. SOURCES: Monitoring the Future: National Results on Adolescent Drug Use, Overview of Key Findings. National Institute on Drug Abuse: Washington DC. Available on-line October 9, 2000 at http://monitoringthefuture.org/new.html; and Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance—1999. Centers for Disease Control: Washington DC. Available on-line October 9, 2000 at http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss4905a1.htm.