1998 Annual Report

on Methamphetamine

Use Among Arrestees

A Program of the National Institute of Justice

Research Report
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

810 Seventh Street N.W.

Washington, DC 20531

Janet Reno

Attorney General

Raymond C. Fisher

Associate Attorney General

Laurie Robinson

Assistant Attorney General

Noel Brennan

Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Jeremy Travis

Director, National Institute of Justice

Office of Justice Programs 

World Wide Web Site

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Justice Information Center

World Wide Web Site

http://www.ncjrs.org

National Institute of Justice

World Wide Web Site

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij

ADAM Program

World Wide Web Site

http://www.adam-nij.net

..
1998 Annual Report

on Methamphetamine

Use Among Arrestees

A Program of the National Institute of Justice

Research Report
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

Jeremy Travis

Director

K. Jack Riley, Ph.D.

ADAM Director

NCJ 175660

The National Institute of Justice is a component of 

the Office of Justice Programs, which also includes the

Bureau of Justice Assistance, Bureau of Justice Statistics,

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, and

the Office for Victims of Crime.
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use iii

Acknowledgments

NIJ

K. Jack Riley, ADAM Director

Christine Crossland

Nora Fitzgerald

Tom Hay

Natalie Lu

Gerald Soucy

Bruce Taylor

ABT ASSOCIATES

Dana Hunt, Project Director

Phyllis Newton, Project Manager

Kyla Carrigan

Sarah Kuck

Quentin McMullen

Carol Putnam

William Rhodes

Tom Rich

George Yacoubian

Sylvia Young

DBA D ESIGN

Patricia L. Blake

Pearl Jusem

Jude Menz
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use v

Contents

Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .iii

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1

Methamphetamine Trends, 1990-98 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Regional Variation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

Variation of Methamphetamine Use by Age . . . . . . . .15

Va r i ation of Methamphetamine Use by Race and Gender .15

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20
Introduction

In 1998, the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program expanded

from 23 to 35 urban sites across the United States. Many new sites included

in the expansion are in urban areas West of the Mississippi. Sites include

Albuquerque, Anchorage, Des Moines, Laredo, Las Vegas, Minneapolis,

Oklahoma City, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, Seattle, Spokane, and Tucson.

For many of the new sites, this report represents the first look at methamphetamine use in their arrestee populations. 

Perhaps more than any other drug monitored in ADAM, methamphetamine

prevalence varies across sites. There are sites in which virtually no methamphetamine is found among arrestees and others in which it is the first or second most prevalent drug detected. For example, there are 7 sites where no

arrestees tested positive for methamphetamine in 1998 (Anchorage, Atlanta,

Birmingham, Cleveland, Ft. Lauderdale, Laredo, and New York City). In all,

18 sites reported less than 2 percent of male or female arrestees testing positive for methamphetamine. In contrast, there are 9 sites where in 1998 as

much as one-fifth of the male or female arrestees tested positive for the presence of methamphetamine, rates comparable to those more typically found

with cocaine and marijuana. The 9 sites with methamphetamine prevalence

rates exceeding 20 percent in the male or female arrestee population are Des

Moines, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Portland, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, San

Diego, San Jose, and Spokane.

Several of the sites new to ADAM show some of the highest levels of

methamphetamine use reported in the ADAM system. Des Moines, for

example, reports 10.2 percent positive for males and 24.2 percent positive for

females; Las Vegas reports 13.8 percent positive for males and 24.3 percent

positive for females; Salt Lake City reports 20.3 percent positive for males

and 31.4 percent positive for females; Spokane reports 15.8 percent positive

for males and 22.0 percent positive for females; and Sacramento reports 24.6

percent positive for males and 29.2 percent positive for females. Other new

sites, some even in close proximity to areas reporting high methampheta1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 1
mine use, show far lower rates. Near the Southwest border, for example, Tucson reports only 4.0 percent positive among males and 2.5 percent among

female arrestees even though it is in the same region as San Diego, the ADAM

site where approximately one-third of both male and female arrestees test positive for methamphetamine. 

For the 23 veteran sites we are able to compare 1998 methamphetamine use

with that found in previous years1(see Table 1). Data indicate that the high

methamphetamine-positive rates reported in some areas are not declining

appreciably. Only in San Diego has there been a decline of more than 5 percentage points for both male and female arrestees. However, it is important to

note that even this decline still places San Diego with the highest methamphetamine rate in the ADAM system. In another veteran site (Portland) where

methamphetamine positive levels are already high, there appears to be a slight

increase; levels are up approximately 2 percentage points in Portland for both

males and females.

It is important to preface the discussion which follows with the caveat that the

numbers involved in the methamphetamine data at some sites, particularly

those new sites in which only one quarter of data are represented, are quite

small and that differences which appear from year to year may not in fact be

statistically significant. Significance cannot be computed because ADAM samples are currently not selected using methods that allow for such computation.

Moreover, extra caution should be taken this year with comparisons to previous

years. As part of ADAM’s transition toward probability-based county-level sampling, some sites have expanded their collection to include cases from additional

jail facilities, often in more rural or suburban county areas. For example, New

York City has expanded its effort to include data collection in the five boroughs,

rather than just Manhattan, while in Los Angeles data collection occurred in

both city and county jails in the third and fourth quarters of 1998 (see

2 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

1 Data for 1990-1993 represent specimens that screened positive for amphetamine and did not confirm

positive for over-the-counter medications. Although the overwhelming majority of these specimens

are likely methamphetamine positive, a small (less than 2 percent) portion of the 1990-1993 methamphetamine data may consist of specimens that were not methamphetamine. Beginning in 1994 the

data reflect true methamphetamine positives because of a change in laboratory reporting practices.
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 3

Table 1. Percentage of Male and Female Arrestees Testing Positive for 

Methamphetamine by Site, 1990-98

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

% % % % % % % % %

Albuquerque*

Male – – – – – – – – 3.4

Female – – – – – – – – 2.4

Anchorage*

Male – – – – – – – – 0.0

Female – – – – – – – – 0.0

Atlanta

Male 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.0 0.6 0.0

Female 0.0 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.3 0.6 0.0 0.7 –

Birmingham

Male 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.0

Female 0.3 0.3 2.1 0.6 1.2 0.0 1.0 0.5 0.0

Chicago

Male 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.2 0.3 0.2

Female – – – – – – – – 0.0

Cleveland

Male 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Female 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Dallas

Male 1.9 1.4 0.6 3.5 2.0 2.2 1.2 2.6 3.3

Female 4.0 2.2 2.4 5.2 3.3 3.7 1.5 2.8 4.0

Denver

Male 0.7 0.4 1.0 1.1 2.1 4.1 2.9 5.0 5.2

Female 1.6 1.5 1.7 3.1 2.1 3.2 0.7 4.6 4.6

Des Moines*

Male – – – – – – – – 10.2

Female – – – – – – – – 24.2

* New site in 1998
4 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

Table 1. Percentage of Male and Female Arrestees Testing Positive for 

Methamphetamine by Site, 1990-98 (continued)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

% % % % % % % % %

Detroit

Male 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2

Female 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.5 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0

Ft. Lauderdale

Male 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0

Female 1.3 0.0 0.8 1.2 0.2 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.0

Houston

Male 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.2

Female 3.2 0.2 0.0 1.4 0.2 0.9 0.7 0.5 0.0

Indianapolis

Male 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.8 0.3 0.2 0.8

Female 0.3 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.2 0.2 0.0

Laredo*

Male – – – – – – – – 0.0

Female – – – – – – – – 0.0

Las Vegas*

Male – – – – – – – – 13.8

Female – – – – – – – – 24.3

Los Angeles

Male 5.7 4.0 4.5 8.0 7.7 5.8 4.1 4.7 8.0

Female 6.4 6.3 7.0 8.3 9.8 11.3 12.3 8.9 11.8 

Miami

Male – 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2

Female – – – – – – – – –

Minneapolis*

Male – – – – – – – – 0.8

Female – – – – – – – – 0.0

* New site in 1998
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

% % % % % % % % %

New Orleans

Male 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2

Female 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3

New York City

Male 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0

Female 0.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 0.0 0.0

Oklahoma City*

Male – – – – – – – – 8.0

Female – – – – – – – – –

Omaha

Male 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.9 3.3 7.8 4.3 9.7 10.2

Female – – – 3.7 2.7 10.3 4.9 13.3 13.6

Philadelphia

Male 0.9 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.6

Female 1.1 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.7 1.1 0.0 0.0 0.3

Phoenix

Male 6.7 4.1 5.0 13.7 25.4 22.0 11.1 16.4 16.4

Female 6.6 3.9 7.1 15.1 26.0 21.7 14.0 25.6 22.4

Portland

Male 10.9 6.6 5.1 10.2 16.3 18.1 11.8 15.9 18.1

Female 10.9 10.5 6.6 14.9 21.4 19.7 13.5 20.7 22.3

Sacramento*

Male – – – – – – – – 24.6

Female – – – – – – – – 29.2

St. Louis

Male 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.6 0.3 0.4 0.3

Female 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.9 2.1 2.5

* New site in 1998

1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 5
6 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

Table 1. Percentage of Male and Female Arrestees Testing Positive for 

Methamphetamine by Site, 1990-98 (continued)

1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998

% % % % % % % % %

Salt Lake City*

Male – – – – – – – – 20.3

Female – – – – – – – – 31.4

San Antonio

Male 2.1 1.4 0.6 0.5 1.0 1.1 1.7 1.7 2.0

Female 2.3 1.6 1.3 1.3 0.7 2.5 2.8 2.4 1.7

San Diego

Male 27.3 14.1 22.2 32.0 41.0 36.0 29.3 39.6 33.2

Female 31.8 21.5 25.3 32.2 53.0 40.2 31.3 42.2 33.3

San Jose

Male 8.9 5.1 4.8 13.4 19.9 16.3 12.1 18.4 19.7

Female 5.4 6.1 10.3 15.6 23.3 23.6 22.2 24.9 21.1

Seattle*

Male – – – – – – – – 6.4

Female – – – – – – – – 5.2

Spokane*

Male – – – – – – – – 15.8

Female – – – – – – – – 22.0

Tucson*

Male – – – – – – – – 4.0

Female – – – – – – – – 2.5

Washington, D.C.

Male 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.3 0.0

Female 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.5

* New site in 1998
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 7

“Methodology,” page 8). Given that domestic production of methamphetamine may occur in more rural areas, inclusion of county facilities may

increase the likelihood of capturing more methamphetamine-positive

arrestees.

Methamphetamine Trends, 1990-982

Between 1990 and 1998, approximately 250,000 adult arrestees3 were surveyed through the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program. It

also should be kept in mind that arrestees testing positive for methamphetamine may also test positive for other drugs. In San Diego, for example, of

the 33.2 percent of males who test positive for methamphetamine in 1998,

41.1 percent also tested positive for marijuana and 9.6 percent also tested

positive for cocaine.

The use of methamphetamine has increased in many veteran sites over the

last nine years. The percentage of arrestees testing positive for methamphetamine has increased 7.2 percentage points for males and more than doubled

for females in Portland from 10.9 percent to 22.3 percent positive since 1990.

P revalence more than doubled for both sexes in Phoenix and San Jose during

that time period. In Omaha, less than one percent of males tested positive in

1990; in 1998, 10.2 percent tested positive. In San Jose 5.4 percent of female

a rrestees and 8.9 percent of male arrestees tested positive for methamphetamine in 1990; by 1998 the rates had risen to 21.1 and 19.7 percent, re s p e ct i v e l y. San Diego shows a slightly diff e rent pattern. Starting at a very high

point in 1990 (27.3 percent positive for males and 31.8 percent positive for

females) use levels remained high, peaking at 41.0 percent positive for males

and 53.0 percent positive for females in 1994 and dropping back to appro x imately one-third methamphetamine positive for each gender in 1998. 

2 Because it is not possible to calculate standard errors for samples at this time, we offer these trend

data for descriptive purposes only.

3 We will use the term “arrestee” throughout this report. However, since no identifying data are collected in the interview setting, the data represent numbers of arrests rather than an unduplicated

count of persons across quarters. 
8 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

4 National Institute of Justice. (1999). “ADAM: 1998 Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult and

Juvenile Arrestees.” Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice.

What is notable across sites is the steady increases in those areas where

methamphetamine has taken hold, and the virtual absence of the drug in other

areas. Of the 23 veteran sites, 8 sites (Denver, Los Angeles, Omaha, Phoenix,

Portland, St. Louis, San Diego, and San Jose) have all seen an increase in positive tests for methamphetamine since 1990, though, as noted above, some are

far more dramatic than others. In direct contrast are those sites where methamphetamine has virtually never appeared. In Atlanta, Chicago, Cleveland,

Detroit, Indianapolis, Miami, New Orleans, New York City, and Washington,

METHODOLOGY

To gauge drug use trends in urban areas,

the National Institute of Justice established the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF)

program in 1987. A modified version of

DUF, the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring

(ADAM) program, was initiated in 1997.

To date, 35 jurisdictions participate in

ADAM. ADAM involves administration of a

survey instrument, which measures historical and current drug use patterns

among arrestees, and collection of a urine

sample which is tested for 10 drugs.

A more detailed overview of data collection methods can be found in the 1998

Annual Report on Drug Use Among Adult

and Juvenile Arrestees.

4 This box discusses how data collection methods have

affected reporting methods and two

significant reporting changes that will

appear in next year’s reports.

The first and most important change

relates to sampling. Data collected after

the mid-point of 1999 in all sites will be

collected under probability sampling

plans. This means that confidence intervals can be attached to estimates derived

from ADAM data which in turn means

that analysts can assess whether year-toyear changes in drug prevalence rates are

significant. For example, this year in New

York City, the cocaine prevalence for

males fell from 57.6 percent in 1997 to

47.1 percent in 1998. ADAM cannot

report that as a statistically significant

decline because of limits to the current

sampling plans. The 1999 reports will

introduce reporting on standard errors

and confidence intervals.

The second important change re l ates to

weighting the dat a . Each case collected

re p resents similar respondents (age, r a c e ,

and booking charge to name a few characteristics of interest) that we re not

selected for interv i ew. If a certain cat eg o ry of offender is re p resented out of

p ro p o rtion to the actual occurrence in

the arrest populat i o n , weighting can be

used to correct the dispro p o rt i o n a l i t y.

T h e re are numerous factors that introduce dispro p o rtion into the dat a . T h e
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 9

D.C. less than 1 percent of arrestees tested positive for methamphetamine

throughout the 1990-98 time period. Ft. Lauderdale, Houston, and Philadelphia show a period in which methamphetamine positives among females were

just above 1 percent (1993), though they seem to have disappeared since that

reporting period. 

Regional Variation

Perhaps more than any other drug, methamphetamine shows clear regional

variation. For comparison purposes, we have assigned each ADAM site to one

jails included in the program have

changed over time, most recently as a

result of standardizing site cat c h m e n t

a reas at the county leve l . In add i t i o n , t h e

DUF program operated according to a

c h a rge priority system that emphasize d

i n t e rv i ewing and testing felony offenders

over misdemeanants. D rug offenders, w h o

a re more likely to test positive for dru g s

than their non-drug-offending counterp a rt s , we re limited to 20 percent of the

total sample to prevent drug offenders

f rom dominating the dat a . Traffic offenses

( e . g . , DUI and DWI) we re generally ex c l u ded from the sample. These practices we re

revised in the second quarter of 1998

d ata collection so that all arre s t e e s ,

reg a rdless of charg e , a re eligible for inclusion in the A DAM study.

This year’s data, as well as data collected

during previous years, could be weighted

by local arrest data to adjust for the

data collection methods. We chose not

to weight the data for two reasons.

First, there may be additional changes in

the data collection protocol this year

that would change the weighting process,

forcing us to revise the entire weighted

data series. Second, since confidence

intervals and quantification of uncertainty cannot be applied to the data series

until next year, it seemed appropriate to

do all of the design and reporting

changes in one year.

In add i t i o n , it is important that the current analysis be read with an understanding that the weighting and sampling issues

limit pre s e n t ation and interpre t at i o n . I n

p a rt i c u l a r, small changes from year to ye a r

in prevalence figures should not be viewe d

as definitive . It should be stressed that

the arrestee population is a difficult one

to access, and one not adequately cove re d

in other data collection efforts that , f o r

ex a m p l e , t a rget households, s c h o o l s , o r

t re atment populat i o n s . The data are most

i n f o r m at i ve over multiple years when

longer term trends can be discern e d .
10 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

of five geographic regions: East, South, Midwest, West/Southwest, and Northwest. Tables 2 and 3 indicate the percentage of male and female arrestees testing positive for methamphetamine, opiates, cocaine, and marijuana in each site.

We include the test results for other drugs to highlight the unique regional

variation found with methamphetamine not seen with other substances. As

these tables indicate, cocaine and marijuana are the most commonly reported

substances everywhere. The percentage of cocaine positives among males, for

example, ranges from approximately 8 percent in one site to as high as 40 or 50

percent in other sites. Each region, however, has similar variation in percent

positives across sites. With marijuana, one-fourth or more of male arrestees test

positive in all sites in all regions.

By contrast, the distribution of methamphetamine use is skewed to sites in the

West and Northwest. None of the sites in the Northeast report methamphetamine-positive rates of more than one percent, and, in fact, New York City

reports no use among any arrestees. In the South, only Dallas and Oklahoma

City report use of three percent or higher. In Dallas levels are fairly low: 3.3

percent of males test positive and 4.0 percent of females test positive. Levels are

higher in Oklahoma City where 8.0 percent of male arrestees test positive. The

rest of the Southern sites, however, have virtually no use detected. In the Midwest, there is very little use reported in most sites (less than one percent) with

the exceptions of Des Moines and Omaha. In both sites the levels for males is

approximately 10 percent. For female arrestees the levels are higher: 24.2 percent positive in Des Moines and 13.6 percent positive in Omaha. 

Sites in the West and Northwest are where levels are far higher than anywhere

else. Los Angeles, Phoenix, Portland, San Diego, and San Jose show higher levels than other sites and steady increases in those levels over time. Among the

new sites, Las Vegas, Sacramento, Salt Lake City, and Spokane show equally

high rates of methamphetamine-positive rates. Of the veteran sites in the

West/Southwest and Northwest, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Portland, San Diego,

and San Jose report methamphetamine rates that are equal to or greater than 8

percent for both males and females in 1998. The most active region appears to

be California and areas to the North and West. Portland, Seattle, and Spokane
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 11

Table 2. Percentage of Adult Male Positives By Drug and Site, 1998

Cocaine Opiates Marijuana Methamphetamine

% % % %

NORTHEAST

New York City 47.1 16.2 38.7 0.0

Philadelphia 44.5 18.4 44.9 0.6

Washington, D.C. 33.3 9.7 38.0 0.0

SOUTH

Atlanta 51.3 1.3 26.0 0.0

Birmingham 41.2 3.7 39.2 0.0

Dallas 29.0 2.3 43.1 3.3

Ft. Lauderdale 50.2 2.0 43.5 0.0

Houston 35.8 7.5 35.8 0.2

Miami 47.3 2.4 29.2 0.2

New Orleans 46.0 12.9 38.3 0.2

Oklahoma City* 27.3 1.9 53.1 8.0

MIDWEST

Chicago 44.9 18.3 41.5 0.2

Cleveland 36.8 6.0 36.8 0.0

Des Moines* 18.1 2.8 41.8 10.2

Detroit 28.2 6.8 46.5 0.2

Indianapolis 34.2 1.8 45.1 0.8

Minneapolis* 26.7 4.7 45.4 0.8

Omaha 25.1 2.0 43.9 10.2

St. Louis 34.8 10.9 50.2 0.3

WEST/SOUTHWEST

Albuquerque* 38.7 8.2 35.9 3.4

Denver 39.6 4.2 41.3 5.2

Laredo* 37.1 11.2 39.3 0.0

Las Vegas* 24.2 2.6 25.8 13.8

Los Angeles 42.7 5.6 27.3 8.0

Phoenix 31.1 5.7 32.2 16.4

Sacramento* 18.2 3.2 44.1 24.6

Salt Lake City* 20.3 8.2 36.8 20.3

* New site in 1998
all report rates among both males and females over 5 percent; and female positive rates in Portland and Spokane are a remarkable 22 percent. In California,

Sacramento, San Diego, and San Jose report rates for both males and females of

20 percent or higher; only Los Angeles shows somewhat lower rates with 8.0

percent of males and 11.8 percent of females testing positive. 

Only San Diego has had high levels of methamphetamine positives close to their

c u rrent levels over the past nine-year period. Most, like Portland or San Jose,

had far lower methamphetamine levels in 1990 than in 1998. Still others like

Omaha saw the appearance of methamphetamine in the early 1990s, then experienced substantial increases among both males and females in the past five years. 

The spread of methamphetamine use still appears to be geographically confined, however. While it grew rapidly in areas like the West and Northwest, it

has remained at marginal levels most everywhere else. The ADAM system continues to show no sign of methamphetamine’s spread to the Eastern United

States. Sites such as Atlanta, Ft. Lauderdale, and New York City showed no

12 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

Table 2. Percentage of Adult Male Positives By Drug and Site, 1998 (continued)

Cocaine Opiates Marijuana Methamphetamine

% % % %

WEST/SOUTHWEST (continued)

San Antonio 27.0 9.6 41.1 2.0

San Diego 19.1 9.3 36.4 33.2

San Jose 8.0 4.4 24.8 19.7

Tucson* 39.4 6.8 39.2 4.0

NORTHWEST

Anchorage* 19.5 2.3 33.3 0.0

Portland 29.2 15.5 36.9 18.1

Seattle* 35.9 17.4 35.4 6.4

Spokane* 18.3 8.5 42.9 15.8

* New site in 1998
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 13

Table 3. Percentage of Adult Female Positives By Drug and Site, 1998

Cocaine Opiates Marijuana Methamphetamine

% % % %

NORTHEAST

New York City 67.0 21.8 23.4 0.0

Philadelphia 60.9 14.9 23.7 0.3

Washington, D.C. 40.4 9.8 28.5 0.5

SOUTH

Atlanta – – – –

Birmingham 56.8 17.6 17.6 0.0

Dallas 29.5 4.8 24.2 4.0

Ft. Lauderdale 53.4 4.7 24.5 0.0

Houston 37.3 7.0 20.1 0.0

Miami – – – –

New Orleans 38.7 3.4 22.1 0.3

Oklahoma City* – – – –

MIDWEST

Chicago 55.5 27.0 19.7 0.0

Cleveland 40.5 1.4 27.0 0.0

Des Moines* 24.2 6.1 15.2 24.2

Detroit 46.2 21.5 21.5 0.0

Indianapolis 43.2 4.5 31.2 0.0

Minneapolis* 28.6 6.0 22.6 0.0

Omaha 35.5 4.5 28.2 13.6

St. Louis 43.6 4.9 31.9 2.5

WEST/SOUTHWEST

Albuquerque* 59.1 15.4 24.0 2.4

Denver 49.9 3.4 29.9 4.6

Laredo* 33.3 0.0 13.3 0.0

Las Vegas* 35.1 13.5 21.6 24.3

Los Angeles 44.7 8.8 21.8 11.8

Phoenix 39.6 7.3 24.9 22.4

Sacramento* 30.7 8.4 28.2 29.2

Salt Lake City* 19.6 13.7 29.4 31.4

* New site in 1998
14 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

methamphetamine use among arrestees for 1998. If methamphetamine use is

occurring in these cities, it is doing so either in populations that are not getting

arrested or populations that are found outside the program’s county-level data

collection boundaries.

P e rhaps the most counterintuitive results are those found along the Mexican bord e r. Sites along the Southwest border (with the obvious exception of San Diego)

and in Texas show considerably lower levels of methamphetamine use than sites

e l s e w h e re in the West and Northwest, a surprising finding given re p o rts of active

methamphetamine production in and trafficking from Mexico (ONDCP, 1998;

Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, 1998). Albuquerque, Dallas,

Houston, San Antonio, and Tucson indicate rates of less than 5 percent for either

male or female arrestees. Laredo, in fact, does not re p o rt a single arrestee of either

gender testing positive for methamphetamine in its first data collection in 1998.

Table 3. Percentage of Adult Female Positives By Drug and Site, 1998

(continued)

Cocaine Opiates Marijuana Methamphetamine

% % % %

WEST/SOUTHWEST (continued)

San Antonio 20.0 8.6 17.5 1.7

San Diego 20.4 6.7 26.7 33.3

San Jose 9.5 4.8 13.6 21.1

Tucson* 41.3 7.4 21.5 2.5

NORTHWEST

Anchorage* 50.0 3.8 23.1 0.0

Portland 36.7 25.1 23.2 22.3

Seattle* 56.9 17.2 37.9 5.2

Spokane* 31.7 17.1 26.8 22.0

* New site in 1998
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 15

Variation of Methamphetamine Use by Age

Analyses of methamphetamine trend data yielded several interesting findings

with respect to age cohorts. If we examine sites with substantial but changing

levels of methamphetamine use over the past eight years, there are indications

that increases have occurred among both the oldest and the youngest users. 

Figures 1 and 2 show the percentage of male and female arrestees aged 15-20 or

36 and older testing positive for methamphetamine in Portland and San Jose in

1990 and 1998. Both sites experienced increases in the percentage of male and

female arrestees, in general, testing positive over those years. However, San

Jose’s youthful arrestees tested positive for methamphetamine at a rate of less

than 4 percent in 1990, which rose to 21.0 percent by 1998, an increase of over

17 percentage points. In Portland, 10.2 percent of arrestees aged 15-20 tested

positive for methamphetamine in 1990, rising to 16.1 percent in 1998. In these

two sites the increase was not confined to the youthful cohort, though this is

where the most dramatic increases occurred. Each site also witnessed marked

increases of methamphetamine positives within their oldest cohort. In Portland, the methamphetamine-positive rate for the oldest cohort (36 and older)

increased from 10.5 percent in 1990 to 15.0 percent in 1998, an increase of 4.5

percentage points. In San Jose, methamphetamine positives among arrestees

aged 36 and older increased by 8.2 percentage points. 

Variation of Methamphetamine Use by Race and Gender

Previous ADAM data have suggested that the use of methamphetamine may be

higher among white arrestees than African-American or Hispanic arrestees

(Feucht and Kyle, 1996), a finding which continues in the 1998 data. Among

San Diego males, 42.6 percent of white arrestees test positive for methamphetamine compared to 35.9 percent of Hispanics and 13.3 percent of African Americans. In Phoenix the numbers are similar: 25.7 percent of the white males, 8.3

percent of Hispanic males, and 7.4 percent of African-American males test positive for methamphetamine. Similarly, prevalence is higher among white females

than any other racial or ethnic group. This is a pattern which is repeated across
16 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

Figure 1. Variation in Methamphetamine Use by Age Cohort for San Jose,

1990 and 1998

Figure 2. Variation in Methamphetamine Use by Age Cohort for Portland,

1990 and 1998
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 17

those ADAM sites in other areas of the country where methamphetamine is

detected. In Denver 14.1 percent of white male arrestees test positive for

methamphetamine compared to less than 1 percent of African-American male

arrestees and 2.3 percent of Hispanic male arrestees. Regardless of region,

there appears to be a greater likelihood of methamphetamine use among white

arrestees than any other ethnic group. 

Though the use of methamphetamine among arrestees appears to be dominated

by whites, there are some notable recent trends in methamphetamine use

among Hispanics. Looking at three veteran sites with high levels of use (Portland, San Diego, and San Jose) over the last nine years, it is evident that the

proportion of Hispanic arrestees testing positive for methamphetamine has

risen dramatically, most noticeably over the last four years. For example, in

Portland only 3.0 percent of male Hispanic arrestees and no Hispanic female

arrestees tested positive for methamphetamine in 1990. In 1997 levels among

Hispanic males arrestees at that site had risen to 9.3 percent testing positive;

and in 1998, 11.4 percent of male and 11.1 percent of female Hispanic arrestees

test positive. In San Diego, where over one-third, and San Jose, where over

one-fifth, of white arrestees test positive for methamphetamine, percentages

among Hispanic arrestees testing positive have grown almost as rapidly. In San

Diego 18.2 percent of Hispanic males arrestees and 16.4 percent of Hispanic

female arrestees tested positive for methamphetamine in 1990. Those numbers

rose to 37.7 percent (males) and 43.5 percent (females) in 1994 then declined

somewhat to 35.9 percent (males) and 27.3 percent (females) in 1998. 

San Jose data indicate a similar increase in the proportion of male and female

Hispanic arrestees testing positive for methamphetamine beginning in 1993 and

1994. At that site, for example, the percentage of male Hispanic arrestees testing positive went from 2.7 percent in 1992 to 8.8 percent in 1993 and 19.7 percent in 1998. The 1998 rates for Hispanic males (19.7 percent) and females

(25.5 percent) are similar to that found among white arrestees testing positive;

22.5 percent for white males and 25.0 percent for white female arrestees.
18 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use

Omaha shows similar increases for Hispanics, though not as dramatic as in the

other sites. In the early 1990s, no Hispanic male arrestees tested positive for

methamphetamine.5 In 1995, 9.1 percent of Hispanic male arrestees tested positive, 5.8 percent in 1996 and 4.3 percent in 1998. Among female Hispanic

arrestees, after 1993 there were no positive methamphetamine tests until 1998,

when 14.3 percent of female Hispanic arrestees test positive. 

While the methamphetamine prevalence rates for Hispanics are typically lower,

and in some cases, much lower, than the rates for whites, the numbers also indicate an increasing use of the drug among Hispanics. In many cases, the numbers for Hispanics represent a doubling of the proportion of both male and

female arrestees testing positive from as recently as six years prior. Perhaps of

equal importance, the numbers for Hispanics show that the growth in methamphetamine use has been comparable to that found among whites. 

One of the most prominent variations found in the use of methamphetamine in

ADAM sites is the level of use among female arrestees. Again the reader is cautioned that the number of methamphetamine positives is often small in sites, as

is the sample of females. However, the discrepancy between men and women

in those sites where methamphetamine is found is notable. In Des Moines and

Omaha, for example, about 10 percent of the male sample test positive for

methamphetamine in 1998. Among female arrestees in Omaha, 13.6 percent

test positive and in Des Moines 24.2 percent test positive. In Las Vegas, a similar disparity is evident: almost twice as many females as males test positive for

methamphetamine. Some sites have particularly high levels for female

arrestees: San Diego (33.3 percent), Salt Lake City (31.4 percent), Sacramento

(29.2 percent), Spokane (22.0 percent), and San Jose (21.1 percent). For more

information on how female prevalence rates may be affected by arrest patterns,

see the 1998 Annual Report on Cocaine Use Among Arrestees (NIJ, 1999).

5 Omaha did not begin testing females until 1993.
1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use 19

Summary

The findings in the current analysis suggest that the use of methamphetamine

among national arrestee populations has increased substantially since 1990, but

that the prevalence is still fairly geographically confined. In 7 of the 23 veteran

ADAM sites, positive methamphetamine rates have increased by at least 4 percentage points for both men and women arrestees over the past 9-year period,

some as much as 20 percentage points. Of the 12 new sites, for which longitudinal data are unavailable, 7 reported a positive methamphetamine rate greater

than 5 percent in 1998 and two report levels among males and females of 20

percent or more. 

While the prevalence of methamphetamine in the ADAM system appears to be

localized to the West and Northeast, other areas like Des Moines, Oklahoma

City, and Omaha are showing striking results. Omaha, the only veteran site in

this group, while still lower than some sites with 10.2 of male arrestees and 13.6

percent of female arrestees testing positive in 1998, has shown a doubling then

tripling of the numbers in the years since 1990. It will be of particular interest

to see if the numbers of male and female arrestees testing positive in the two

new sites, Des Moines and Oklahoma City, will remain as high as in this first

data report. 

Methamphetamine has a greater likelihood of use among women and among

white arrestees than other drugs detected. Regardless of the area of the country, in those sites where any methamphetamine is detected, it appears to be

more prevalent among white arrestees. It is also a drug for which a greater proportion of female arrestees test positive in most sites than male arrestees,

though the samples of female arrestees are small in all sites. A similar pattern is

found in the female samples with regard to cocaine in many sites; that is, female

arrestees are more likely to test positive for cocaine than their male counterparts in many sites (NIJ, 1999).

Methamphetamine continues to be a serious problem in large sections of the

country. Information on methamphetamine use by age suggests that in many
communities large proportions of young offenders are involved in methamphetamine. Thus, though methamphetamine’s movement to other areas is slower

than might be expected, the levels of use among young offenders suggest that

the problem will be durable. Recent evidence indicates that although the rapid

growth in methamphetamine use among arrestees has abated, it nevertheless

has a broad and strong hold in areas where it appeared a decade ago.

References

Feucht, T.E. and G.M. Kyle. (1996). “Methamphetamine Use Among Adult

Arrestees: Findings from the Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) Program.” Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice.

National Institute of Justice. (1999). “1998 Annual Report on Cocaine Use

Among Arrestees.” Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice.

O ffice of National Drug Control Policy. (Spring 1998). “Pulse Check: National

Trends in Drug Abuse.” Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the Pre s i d e n t .

Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse. (December 1998). “TCADA

Research in Brief: Substance Abuse Trends in Texas.” Dallas: Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse.

20 1998 Annual Report on Methamphetamine Use
For Information on the National Institute of Justice, please contact:

National Criminal Justice Reference Service

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, Maryland 20849-6000

(800) 851-3420

(301) 519-5500

E-mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org

You can view or obtain an electronic version of this 

document from the NIJ World Wide Web site. 

To access the site, go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij

If you have any questions, call or e-mail NCJRS.