Crack, Powder Cocaine, and Heroin:  Drug Purchase and Use Patterns in Six Cities in the United States, 1995-1996

This study was designed to address the practical and policy
implications of various drug market participation patterns. In 1995,
the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) and the National
Institute of Justice (NIJ) collaborated on a project called the
Procurement Study. This study was executed as an addendum to NIJ's
Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program (DRUG USE FORECASTING IN 24 CITIES
IN THE UNITED STATES, 1987-1997 [ICPSR 9477]) with the goal of
extending previous research in which heroin users were interviewed on
various aspects of drug market activity. The present study sought to
explore additional features of drug market participation and use, both
within and across drug types and cities, and included two additional
drugs -- powder cocaine and crack cocaine. Data were collected from
recently arrested users of powder cocaine, crack cocaine, and heroin
in six DUF cities (Chicago, New York, Portland, San Diego, San
Antonio, and Washington, DC). Each of the three files in this
collection, Crack Data (Part 1), Heroin Data (Part 2), and Powder
Cocaine Data (Part 3), is comprised of data from a procurement
interview, urine test variables, and a DUF interview. During the
procurement interview, information was collected on purchase and use
patterns for specific drugs. Variables from the procurement interview
include the respondent's method of using the drug, the term used to
refer to the drug, whether the respondent bought the drug in the
neighborhood, the number of different dealers the respondent bought
the drug from, how the respondent made the connection with the dealer
(i.e., street, house, phone, beeper, business/store, or friends),
their main drug source, whether the respondent went to someone else if
the source was not available, how the respondent coped with not being
able to find drugs to buy, whether the respondent got the drug for
free, the means by which the respondent obtained money, the quantity
and packaging of the drug, and the number of minutes spent searching
for, traveling to, and waiting for their last purchase. Urine tests
screened for the presence of ten drugs, including marijuana, opiates,
cocaine, PCP, methadone, benzodiazepines (Valium), methaqualone,
propoxyphene (Darvon), barbiturates, and amphetamines (positive test
results for amphetamines were confirmed by gas chromatography). Data
from the DUF interview provide detailed information about each
arrestee's self-reported use of 15 drugs. For each drug type,
arrestees were asked whether they had ever used the drug, the age at
which they first used the drug, whether they had used the drug within
the past three days, how many days they had used the drug within the
past month, whether they had ever needed or felt dependent on the
drug, and whether they were dependent on the drug at the time of the
interview. Data from the DUF interview instrument also included
alcohol/drug treatment history, information about whether arrestees
had ever injected drugs, and whether they were influenced by drugs
when the crime that they were charged with was committed. The data
also include information about whether the arrestee had been to an
emergency room for drug-related incidents and whether he or she had
had prior arrests in the past 12 months. Demographic data include the
age, race, sex, educational attainment, marital status, employment
status, and living circumstances of each respondent.