OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG

CONTROL POLICY

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

WASHINGTON, DC 20503 
The Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs: 1981 

Through the Second Quarter of 2003 

Executive Office of the President 

Office of National Drug Control Policy 

Washington, D.C. 20503 

November 2004
Acknowledgements

This publication was sponsored by the Executive Office of the President, Office of National 

Drug Control policy (ONDCP). Jonathan P. Caulkins, Rosalie Liccardo Pacula, Jeremy Arkes, 

Peter Reuter, Susan Paddock, Martin Iguchi and Jack Riley produced this publication at RAND’s 

Drug Policy Research Center and Public Safety and Justice Division under a contract to ONDCP 

under DHHS prime contract number 282-00-0016, Task Order number 8. Michael Cala served 

as Project Manager for this publication. 

Disclaimer 

The opinions expressed herein are the views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the 

official policy of the Federal Government. 

Public Domain Notice 

All material appearing in this report is in the public domain and may be reproduced without 

permission from ONDCP or the authors. Citation of the source is appreciated. Suggested 

citation: 

Office of National Drug Control Policy (2004). The Price and Purity of 

Illicit Drugs: 1981 Through the Second Quarter of 2003. Washington DC: 

Executive Office of the President (Publication Number NCJ 207768) 

Electronic Access to Publication 

This document can be accessed electronically through the following World Wide Web address: 

http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/ 

Originating Office 

Executive Office of the President 

Office of National Drug Control Policy 

Washington DC 20503 

Publication Number NCJ 207768 

Printed in November 2004 
i

 Table of Contents 

Figures ..................................................................................................................................... ii 

Tables ..................................................................................................................................... iv 

Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ v 

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

 Methodological Changes ................................................................................................. 2 

 General Comments About the Presentation of the Results.............................................. 6 

2. Results: The Price and Expected Purity of Specific Drugs ..................................................... 7 

 Powder Cocaine ............................................................................................................... 7 

 Crack Cocaine.................................................................................................................. 9 

 Comparison of Powder Cocaine and Crack Cocaine Price Series................................... 10 

 Heroin .............................................................................................................................. 11 

 d-Methamphetamine ........................................................................................................ 12 

 Marijuana ......................................................................................................................... 14 

3. Purity of Drugs When Seizures Are Included ............................................................................ 15 

 Summary of Variation in Purity Across Quantity Levels................................................ 16 

 Variation in Purity Trends When Seizure Data Are Included ......................................... 17 

 Heroin ........................................................................................................................ 17 

 Powder Cocaine ......................................................................................................... 17 

 d-Methamphetamine .................................................................................................. 18 

4. Conclusions................................................................................................................................ 18 

Appendix: Estimated Quarterly Prices and Purity......................................................................... A-1 
ii

FIGURES 

Figure 1. Annual Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Powder Cocaine .....................................21 

Figure 2. Interquartile Range of Predicted Prices for One Expected Pure Gram of Powder 

 Cocaine..........................................................................................................................22 

Figure 3. Interquartile Range of Predicted Prices for Powder Cocaine Since 1990.....................23 

Figure 4. Expected Purity of Powder Cocaine..............................................................................24

Figure 5. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity for Powder Cocaine........................................25 

Figure 6. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity for Powder Cocaine— 

 Lowest Quantity Level (Q1). .........................................................................................26 

Figure 7. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity for Powder Cocaine— 

 Highest Quantity Level (Q4) .........................................................................................27 

Figure 8. City Trends in the Retail Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Powder Cocaine ........28 

Figure 9. City Trends in Retail Expected Purity of Powder Cocaine...........................................29 

Figure 10. Annual Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine........................................30 

Figure 11. Interquartile Range of the Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine .........31 

Figure 12. Expected Purity of Crack Cocaine .................................................................................32

Figure 13. Interquartile Range ofExpected Purity of Crack Cocaine.............................................33 

Figure 14. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity of Crack Cocaine— 

 Highest Quantity Level (Q3) .........................................................................................34 

Figure 15. City Retail Prices for One Expected Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine ..............................35 

Figure 16. City Retail Expected Purity of Crack Cocaine..............................................................36 

Figure 17. Annual Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Heroin ....................................................37 

Figure 18. Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Heroin Since 1990 ..............................................38 

Figure 19. Interquartile Range of Prices for Heroin .......................................................................39 

Figure 20. Expected Purity of Heroin..............................................................................................40 

Figure 21. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity of Heroin.........................................................41 

Figure 22. City Retail Prices of One Expected Pure Gram of Heroin ............................................42 

Figure 23. City Retail Expected Purity of Heroin ..........................................................................43 

Figure 24. Annual Price of One Expected Pure Gram of d-Methamphetamine ..............................44 

Figure 25. Interquartile Range of Prices for One Expected Pure Gram of d-Methamphetamine...45 

Figure 26. Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine........................................................................46 

Figure 27. Interquartile Range of Average Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine....................47 

Figure 28. Interquartile Range of Average Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine — 

 Lowest Quantity Level (Q1) ..........................................................................................48 

Figure 29. Interquartile Range for Average Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine— 

 Second Quantity Level (Q2) ...........................................................................................49 

Figure 30. Interquartile Range for Average Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine— 

 Highest Quantity Level (Q3) .........................................................................................50 

Figure 31. Inverse Relationship of D-Methamphetamine Price and Expected Purity— 

 Lowest Quantity Level (Q1) ..........................................................................................51 

Figure 32. City-Specific Average Prices for d-Methamphetamine—Second Quantity Level (Q2).52 
iii

Figure 33. City-Specific Average Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine— 

 Second Quantity Level (Q2) ...........................................................................................53 

Figure 34. Price of One Bulk Gram of Marijuana ...........................................................................54 

Figure 35. Interquartile Range of Average Price of One Bulk Gram of Marijuana ........................55 

Figure 36. Mean Purity of Heroin When Seizures Are Included. ...................................................56 

Figure 37. Mean Purity of Powder Cocaine When Seizures Are Included .....................................57 

Figure 38. Mean Purity of d-Methamphetamine When Seizures Are Included ..............................58 
iv

TABLES 

Table 1 Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Powder Cocaine ..............................................59 

Table 2 Annual Expected Purity of Powder Cocaine ..............................................................60 

Table 3 Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine .................................................61 

Table 4 Annual Expected Purity of Crack Cocaine .................................................................62 

Table 5 Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Heroin .............................................................63 

Table 6 Annual Expected Purity of Heroin ...............................................................................64 

Table 7 Price of One Expected Pure Gram of d-Methamphetamine .........................................65 

Table 8 Annual Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine .......................................................66 

Table 9 Price of One Bulk Gram of Marijuana .........................................................................67 

Table 10 Definitions of Quantity-Level Ranges and Numbers of Observations.........................68 

Table 11 Mean and Median Purity of Powder Cocaine When Seizures Are Included................69 

Table 12 Mean and Median Purity of Heroin When Seizures Are Included...............................70 

Table 13 Mean and Median Purity for d-Methamphetamine When Seizures Are Included .......71 

Table A.1. Estimated Quarterly Price per Expected Pure Gram of Powder Cocaine.................. A-2 

Table A.2. Estimated Quarterly Price per Expected Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine .................... A-5 

Table A.3. Estimated Quarterly Price per Expected Pure Gram of Heroin ................................. A-7 

Table A.4. Estimated Quarterly Price per Expected Pure Gram of d-Methamphetamine......... A-10 

Table A.5 Estimated Quarterly Price per Gram of Marijuana................................................. A-13 

Table A.6 Predicted Purity of Powder Cocaine, Quarterly Series............................................ A-16 

Table A.7 Predicted Purity of Crack Cocaine, Quarterly Series. ............................................. A-19 

Table A.8 Predicted Purity of Heroin, Quarterly Series........................................................... A-21 

Table A.9 Predicted Purity of d-Methamphetamine, Quarterly Series..................................... A-24 
v

Executive Summary

This report extends, improves, and augments previous estimates of trends in the price and purity 

of five major illicit drugs—powder cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin, d-methamphetamine, and 

marijuana—using data from the 1981–2003 Drug Enforcement Administration’s (DEA’s) 

System to Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE) database. Series are extended in 

this study through the second quarter of 2003, so data for 2003 reflect only one-half year. 

Estimates are provided for three or four quantity levels for each substance and, where sufficient 

data exist, for five specific cities. All prices are adjusted for inflation and reported in 2002 

dollars. Our primary national estimates for price and purity are based on formal econometric 

models used to analyze “purchase” transactions from STRIDE. Further analyses developing 

purity estimates are based on both “purchase” and “seizure” transactions from STRIDE. 

Since drugs are provided through markets, albeit illegal markets, it is natural to want to track 

data series pertaining to prices as well as more traditional indicators of demand, use, and 

quantities consumed. Suppliers do not, of course, report prices, but samples of market prices are 

obtained in the course of drug enforcement, particularly through undercover buys. Drug 

acquisitions sent to a DEA laboratory for analysis are registered in STRIDE. These data are 

used by policymakers and researchers to estimate the price and purity of specific drugs in 

various jurisdictions, including cities, states, and the nation. Small and irregular sample sizes 

for particular locations, together with the fact that drugs are not sold in standard package sizes 

with consistent purity, considerably complicates analysis, but these issues can be addressed by 

using appropriate statistical techniques. A more fundamental limitation is that the data are 

obtained through a nonrandom process. It is not possible to assess definitively what possible 

biases arise from nonrandom sampling, but the series generated here and in earlier studies using 

STRIDE correlate with external indicators such as emergency-room mentions and drug 

consumption, suggesting that price and purity series derived from STRIDE can reliably capture 

broad trends. Further exploration of such correlations would be valuable. 

Before describing trends in average price and purity observed in the STRIDE data, it is important 

to note that at any given place and time, a wide range of prices and purities can be observed for a 

particular drug. This report seeks to convey some sense of the magnitude of this dispersion by 

reporting estimates of the 25th and 75th percentiles of the distributions of prices and purities 

predicted by the model. These ranges do not reflect variability stemming from uncertainty 

concerning the model itself or the precision of the model estimates, so the true ranges may be 

even broader. 

Furthermore, there can be great variation in prices across cities. Therefore, “national” price 

estimates are simply weighted averages of price estimates obtained for particular cities and 

regions. Price levels and even trends in locations throughout the country do not necessarily 

match the “national” prices. The same is true for “national” estimates of purity. Thus it may be 

more appropriate to think of these “national” price and purity series as indices of prices and 

purity that behave in a manner similar to the S&P 500 for stock prices. 

Cocaine price and purity trends reported here mirror those reported in the past: very sharp 

(roughly 70 percent) price declines during the 1980s through 1989 at all quantity levels, a 

pronounced (22 to 35 percent) one-year increase from 1989 to 1990, and gradual declines during 

the 1990s, interrupted briefly in 1995. Hence, prices at the end of the 1990s were 30 to 40 
vi

percent below those in 1989. There was an apparent price jump between 1999 and 2000 that was 

sustained until 2001, at least at the lowest quantity level. Prices then declined uniformly from 

2001 to 2003, reaching all-time lows that are roughly 12 to 21 percent below prices in 1999. 

Cumulatively, powder cocaine prices have declined by roughly 80 percent since 1981. These 

broad trends are apparent at each quantity level and in each of the five cities for which cityspecific series are described. 

The average purity of powder cocaine in 2003 was high and was similar across quantity levels 

(60 to 80 percent) but was still well below the peak levels of the late 1980s. Through the late 

1980s, there were pronounced differences in average purity between the two lower quantity 

levels and the two higher quantity levels. Now those differences are quite small, suggesting that 

“cutting” or diluting powder cocaine as it moves from the higher (~100 gram) to the lower (~1 

gram) quantity levels is not as common as it used to be. 

The crack cocaine series display many of the same features as the powder cocaine series: sharp 

price declines through 1989, an even more pronounced (30 to 45 percent) one-year increase from 

1989 to 1990, and gradual, modest declines at higher quantity levels during the 1990s. There are 

some differences, however. Crack prices rose from 1998 to 1999 and from 1999 to 2000, 

whereas powder cocaine prices did not begin to increase until 2000, and, notably, crack prices at 

the lowest quantity level did not decrease during the 1990s. As a result, while crack prices at 

higher quantity levels reached all-time lows in 2003, crack prices at the lowest quantity level did 

not. In addition, there are some unique city-specific price and purity trends for crack cocaine 

that do not closely mimic the national pattern, at least not in the short run. 

The heroin series also share many features with the powder cocaine series, including very sharp 

(roughly 55 percent) price declines during the 1980s through 1989, a pronounced (30 to 50 

percent) increase from 1989 to 1990 at the larger quantities, and further declines during the 

1990s. Purity-adjusted prices were at or near all-time lows in 2003. Again, however, there are 

some important differences. For example, there was no spike in 1995 in the heroin price series, 

and there was at most perhaps a slight leveling but no increase in prices in 2000. As a result, 

heroin prices at the end of the 1990s were 55 to 65 percent lower than they were in 1989, a much 

larger decline than was observed for powder cocaine during the same period. Heroin prices have 

declined another 10 to 20 percent since the late 1990s. Variation in trends in average prices 

across cities is substantial, more akin to what is observed for crack cocaine than for powder 

cocaine. 

Heroin purity has been relatively stable since the early 1990s. For purchases, purity averages 

roughly 30 to 40 percent at the two lower quantity levels (<1 gram and 1 to 10 grams). For 

seizures and purchases combined, the average purity is about 60 percent for quantities of 10 to 

200 grams and 75 percent for quantities over 200 grams. The incrementally higher purity levels 

at higher quantity levels suggest that heroin is often cut when it is passed between quantity 

levels. 

Unlike the cocaine and heroin series, the d-methamphetamine series in this report differ 

substantially from those in previous reports. The preceding report described a more-or-less 

steady decline in methamphetamine prices from the mid-1980s onward (through 2000, the last 

year in that series). The series in this report show comparable declines overall, but with three 
vii

very large and noteworthy spikes in the year or years following three precursor control 

regulations in 1989, 1995, and 1997. Purity trends for d-methamphetamine have been the 

opposite, with troughs in purity occurring alongside spikes in prices, consistent with a hypothesis 

that these transients reflect some sort of market disruption. 

There are far fewer price observations for d-methamphetamine than for powder cocaine, crack, 

or heroin, and they are disproportionately concentrated in one city (San Diego). Furthermore, dmethamphetamine prices and purity have varied in more complicated ways over time, perhaps 

reflecting a relatively immature market that is still evolving. Hence, observations with regard to 

d-methamphetamine market trends are more tentative than those for the other substances, but 

they are intriguing and merit further analysis. 

In the case of marijuana, this report summarizes trends in the average price of a gram (rather 

than a pure gram) because STRIDE does not record information on the potency of this substance. 

Marijuana price trends are not correlated with trends in prices of the other drugs. While prices of 

the other drugs were falling in the 1980s, in some cases very dramatically, the average price of 

marijuana was rising, reaching a peak in 1991 for two of the three quantity levels. Prices then 

declined through 2000 but have since rebounded somewhat. At the two lower quantity levels 

(<10 grams and 10 to 100 grams), marijuana prices in 2003 were about one-third above their 

2000 troughs. This recent price increase leaves current marijuana prices near their 20-year 

averages. 

In summary, prices for powder cocaine, crack, and heroin declined sharply in the 1980s and have 

declined more gradually since then, with periodic interruptions by modest price spikes that have 

usually persisted for a year or less. For d-methamphetamine, the pattern is broadly similar, but 

the price spikes appear to be larger and longer-lasting, particularly for 1989–1991. Marijuana 

prices have followed a very different pattern, increasing from 1981 to 1991, then declining 

through 2000 and increasing over the past three years. 

The average purities of these drugs have varied substantially by drug, occasionally with 

divergent trends. Trends over time suggest that cutting, or diluting, across quantity levels occurs 

today primarily in the case of heroin. The data also show that the average purity of drugs 

obtained through seizures is generally higher than that of drugs observed through purchases, 

particularly at higher quantity levels. 

This report reflects several methodological changes from our previous reports. First, we have 

taken steps to avoid aggregating price data from distinct substances. Specifically, separate series 

are now produced for powder cocaine and crack cocaine; heroin series are based only on “heroin 

base” and “heroin hydrochloride” observations; and the methamphetamine series is specifically 

for d-Methamphetamine, not other forms. Second, this report uses a random coefficient 

regression model. This allows for the possibility that the extent of quantity discounts (or 

equivalently, the extent of price markups as one moves down the distribution chain) might vary 

from city to city. Third, estimates of the ranges of price and purity across cities are provided in 

the form of estimates of the 25th and 75th percentiles (interquartile range) of distributions. 

Fourth, several adjustments are made to account for the fact that buyers often do not discover the 

actual purity of what they purchase until after the price is agreed upon and the deal 

consummated. Specifically, quantity levels are defined in terms of the total or “raw” quantity, 

not pure quantity, and prices are standardized based on an estimate of the purity the buyer could 
viii

have expected to receive, not the assayed purity. Fifth, the city-specific weights used when 

computing national estimates as a weighted average of city-specific series are simply the cities’ 

population. Previous reports used a proxy for quantities consumed in various cities estimated 

from emergency-room data, but those estimates are not available for all cities, they have 

limitations, and they are less transparent. Finally, more information is provided on the variation 

of purity across quantity levels. 

Given these methodological changes, it is not appropriate to compare price levels in this report to 

those developed in previous reports. Comparisons in this report between cities and particularly 

over time are, however, valid and instructive. 
1

1. Introduction 

Illicit drugs are ultimately consumer goods, and like other goods in modern societies, they are 

provided primarily through markets. Prices play a prominent role in understanding, analyzing, 

and intervening in markets of all kinds, illicit as well as licit. Obtaining national or even local 

price and purity information for illicit drugs is challenging, however, for a variety of reasons. 

Some challenges are largely unavoidable, for example, the need to rely on administrative 

datasets not designed for tracking prices. Other problems, such as the fact that drugs are not 

generally sold in standardized quantities or qualities, can largely be resolved by using 

appropriate statistical techniques. Because of these complexities, greater effort has traditionally 

been devoted to collecting and reporting data related to demand and quantities consumed (e.g., 

National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA)-based estimates of numbers of users) than 

to data on prices. That is unfortunate, because (1) prices affect drug use and consumption; (2) 

many outcomes of interest relate to expenditure, which is the product of price and quantity 

consumed; and (3) price data are a potentially important tool for understanding the workings of 

drug markets and interventions intended to control those markets. 

This report continues a series produced by the Office of National Drug Control Policy (ONDCP) 

that seeks to improve understanding of trends in prices for five major illicit drugs. It provides 

updated estimates of the price and purity of powder cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin, and dmethamphetamine and of the price of marijuana in the United States from 1981 through the 

second quarter of 2003, using data from the Drug Enforcement Agency’s (DEA’s) System to 

Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE) database. 

Since the 1970s, the Intelligence Division of DEA has been recording in STRIDE information 

obtained from seizures, purchases, and other drug acquisition activities conducted by undercover 

agents and informants from federal and, in some locations, local law enforcement agencies. 

STRIDE is a forensic database, designed primarily to control the inventory of drug acquisitions 

in the laboratories and to provide scientific data regarding the quality and quantity of the 

substances collected, for judicial processes. The data included in the STRIDE database represent 

only those acquisitions that are sent to a DEA laboratory for analysis and thus exclude most of 

the very large number of purchases and seizures that are made by state and local agencies. 

Because the data are not collected for analytical purposes, they do not reflect a random sample of 

all drug transactions that occur within any geographic location.1,2 Instead they represent a 

“convenience sample,” or observations that are obtained in response to purposeful decisions 

made by law enforcement agencies investigating specific drug-related activities. The timing and 

location of encounters are not only unrepresentative they are erratic. The number of 

observations from a given location can vary dramatically from year to year. This has 

implications for how these data can be used, in terms of both which observations should be 

retained within a sample and the statistical methods that should be used to analyze them.3, 4 

 

1 Frank, R.S. (1987), “Drugs of Abuse: Data Collection Systems of DEA and Recent Trends,” Journal of Analytical 

Toxicology, Vol. 11, pp. 237–241 (Nov./Dec.). 2

 Manski, Charles F., John V. Pepper, and Carol V. Petrie (eds.) (2001), Informing America’s Policy on Illegal 

Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 3

 Horowitz, Joel L. (2001), “Should the DEA’s STRIDE Data Be Used for Economic Analysis of Markets for Illegal 

Drugs?” JASA, Vol. 96, No. 456, pp.1254–1271. 4

 Manski, Charles F., John V. Pepper, and Carol V. Petrie (eds.) (2001), Informing America’s Policy on Illegal 

Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 
2

Even with these limitations, the STRIDE database is the best source of information on illicit drug 

prices and purity currently available. No other database provides as much objective information 

on the characteristics of specific drug acquisitions over time or for as many geographic areas in 

the United States. Furthermore, although the data represent a convenience sample rather than a 

probability sample, they may still convey valid and useful information regarding changes in 

price and purity if they are used properly. Indeed, there are parallel examples in the business 

world of price indices constructed from convenience samples, including the ACCRA Local Cost 

of Living Index. Such indices are constructed and examined despite their known limitations, in 

large measure because they are highly correlated with other data that are drawn from 

independent, probabilistic samples. In the case of illicit drugs, there is a growing literature 

demonstrating that price series generated from the STRIDE data are also significantly correlated 

with related series constructed from independent probability samples, such as trends in drug use 

and drug-related consequences.5,6, 7 Further, the STRIDE data may also be quite informative 

about trends in purity. STRIDE’s limitations are most problematic for assessing absolute levels 

of prices and purities, rather than trends, but even in the case of absolute levels, STRIDE data 

can be informative. 

Methodological Changes 

In an effort to be responsive to criticisms raised by the National Research Council regarding past 

price indices constructed from STRIDE data8, we have made a number of methodological 

changes that enable us to use the data more carefully. First, in the development of price and 

purity indices, we have tried not to aggregate across different drug forms unless the drug forms 

are indistinguishable to the buyer at the time of the transaction. In addition, price and purity 

series are estimated only for drug forms for which sufficient data exist across time. For example, 

the current report presents price and purity series separately for cocaine hydrochloride 

(essentially powder cocaine) and cocaine base (predominantly crack cocaine). Observations 

pertaining to other forms of cocaine are dropped from the analysis because they (1) are 

physically distinguishable from the other two forms of cocaine and (2) are insufficient in number 

to permit estimates of their own price and purity series. A similar approach is taken with the 

other drugs. Thus it is important to clarify what is meant by specific drug names used in this 

report: 

• Powder cocaine refers to cocaine hydrochloride. 

• Crack cocaine refers to cocaine base. 

• Heroin refers only to heroin base and heroin hydrochloride. 

• Methamphetamine refers only to the d-forms of methamphetamine. 

 

5 Caulkins, Jonathan P. (1999), “Can Supply Factors Suppress Marijuana Use by Youth?” Federation of American 

Scientists’ Drug Policy Analysis Bulletin, Issue No. 7, pp. 3–5; Caulkins, Jonathan P. (2001), “The Relationship 

Between Prices and Emergency Department Mentions for Cocaine and Heroin,” American Journal of Public Health, 

Vol., 91, No. 9, pp. 1446–1448. 

6

 Saffer and Chaloupka (1999), “The Demand for Illicit Drugs” Economic Inquiry 37(3): pp. 401–411. 7

 DeSimone J. and M. Farrelly. 2003. “Price and Enforcement Effects on Cocaine and Marijuana Demand” 

Economic Inquiry 41(1): 98-115; DeSimone, J. (2001), “The Effect of Cocaine Prices on Crime,” Economic Inquiry

39(4), pp. 627–643. 

8

 Manski, Charles F., John V. Pepper, and Carol V. Petrie (eds.) (2001), Informing America’s Policy on Illegal 

Drugs: What We Don’t Know Keeps Hurting Us, National Academy Press, Washington, DC. 
3

• Marijuana refers to plant material (and not whole plants or seeds). 

A second methodological change from previous reports is the use of a random coefficient 

regression model, which enables observations from one city to have a unique relationship 

between price and quantity that is different from the price/quantity relationships in other cities. 

The justification for this model, which was empirically tested and validated, is the possibility 

that drug markets behave differently in different locations. Therefore, instead of imposing the 

same relationship between price and quantity across all locations for which we have data, the 

random coefficient model groups observations by cities and then estimates the relationship 

between price and quantity by city, using all the available data. Predicted standardized prices 

(and purities) for each city are calculated for each quarter or year from this model. These 

predicted standardized prices (and purities) are then weighted to generate the national price 

(purity) indices reported here. 

This report incorporates two further methodological changes in an attempt to capture and 

describe the considerable variability observed in the price and purity of illicit drugs. First, price 

and purity series for selected cities are presented, along with the national series. There can be 

clear and sometimes rather pronounced differences in price and purity across cities, just as there 

is geographic variation in prices for licit goods, such as houses. Examining only aggregate, 

national series that represent some composite or average of the city-specific series can obscure 

the extent of this spatial variation. City-specific series make it possible to evaluate how price 

and purity move in geographically smaller markets. They also help confirm whether apparent 

“national” trends in the aggregate series are really nationwide trends, and not merely trends in 

some regions, and even whether the apparent national trends might be spurious artifacts that 

emerge because of STRIDE’s nonrandom sampling. Second, estimates of the variation in 

predicted prices (and purities) across cities are represented by the identification of the 25th and 

75th percentile value of standardized predicted prices (purities) in addition to the average price 

(purity) index.9 Often the gap between the 25th and 75th percentile values, known as the 

interquartile range, is wide, showing that at any given point and time, a wide range of prices and 

purities can be observed. Hence, successive samples—say, from different quarters—can yield 

somewhat different averages even if there is no change in the underlying distribution of prices. 

The 25th and 75th percentile observations enable the reader to judge whether trends in these 

series are truly meaningful without imposing any sort of distributional assumptions on the series 

on which they are based. Changes in price (or purity) that remain within this interquartile range 

are more likely to reflect only sampling changes over time, rather than real movements in price 

(or purity), in contrast to changes that extend beyond the interquartile range. The interquartile 

range should not be interpreted as confidence intervals, because a substantial amount of variation 

(50 percent) still exists outside of these bands. 

A number of other improvements have also been made. Notably, distribution levels, referred to 

more accurately in this report as quantity levels, are identified on the basis of amounts 

purchased, unadjusted for potency, rather than on pure quantities. This change facilitates 

interpretation, since it is sometimes more natural to think of quantity levels in terms of actual 

quantities transacted rather than of quantities adjusted for purity. More fundamentally, it ensures 

that wholesale transactions with very low purities (including rip-offs) are not inadvertently 

 

9

 The construction of the interquartile range estimates is based on the model and only holds as far as the model 

holds. They do not represent actual data points. 
4

lumped together with smaller retail transactions. STRIDE observations span a continuum of 

quantities; there are not just a few well-defined transaction sizes, as there are in some licit 

markets (for example, milk in supermarkets is sold predominantly in pints, quarts, half-gallons, 

and gallons). Hence, boundaries between quantity levels are not well-defined, and their selection 

is somewhat arbitrary. Thus, it might be just as reasonable to include among “retail”-level 

cocaine transactions either transactions of 0.2 to 4.0 grams or transactions of 0.1 to 2.0 grams. 

We sought to define quantity levels with roughly equal numbers of observations in each level but 

with round-number boundaries. For all drugs except powder cocaine, three levels were 

identified, each of which in most cases contains between 25 and 50 percent of the total number 

of observations for that drug. In the case of powder cocaine, enough data were available to 

identify a fourth quantity level. Given that these boundaries were largely data-driven, little 

meaning should be assigned to the labels applied to them. 

Another improvement is the adoption of the expected purity hypothesis (EPH). Illicit drugs are 

what economists refer to as “experience goods”; purchasers often cannot readily assay the 

quality of the drug until it is consumed, which generally occurs after a price is negotiated and the 

deal is completed. Hence, the actual purity of the drug does not typically govern the negotiated 

price at the time of the transaction, but rather the supposed or expected purity of the drug. For 

example, it might be observed that most transactions of a particular drug at a particular time, 

place, and transaction size are 60 to 80 percent pure, but a minority have very low or even zero 

purity although the price paid for these very low-purity drugs is not noticeably lower. The view 

implicitly adopted by past statistical models was that purchasers of low-purity drugs were 

knowingly paying much more—sometimes ten or more times as much—per pure gram than were 

most customers because actual purity (and not expected purity) was included in the model. The 

view implicit in the EPH models is that these customers were “ripped off”; they paid a price 

typical of 60 to 80 percent pure transactions because they thought or expected that they were 

buying drugs that were 60 to 80percent pure. These low-purity transactions are not discarded; 

they represent a real cost to customers. In the EPH, they are incorporated into expectations of 

the pure quantity contained in purchases, on average, rather than being assumed to represent 

fully informed purchases. 

The adoption of the EPH has two important implications for the way the data get analyzed. First, 

observations involving low purity are retained in the analysis, provided they meet other general 

criteria for inclusion. Second, price is estimated through a two-step procedure where expected 

purity rather than actual purity is included in the price regression model. Expected purity is the 

predicted value obtained from a first stage regression where actual purity is estimated as a 

function of all other observable information available to the buyer that is reported in the database 

(e.g., amount, city, quarter, year).10 Because expected purity is far less volatile than actual 

purity, the EPH model generally produces smoother price series, even when relatively fewer data 

points are available (e.g., when estimating prices for a specific city). Failing to use the EPH 

model can either inflate or suppress the estimated price level somewhat, depending on the details 

of the distribution of purities observed and whether and how many low purity observations are 

discarded. Thus, it is not appropriate to compare the level of prices produced by an EPH method 

and a non-EPH method. 

 

10 For detailed information regarding the specification of the price and purity model see the accompanying report, 

Technical Report for the Price and Purity of Illicit Drugs Through 2003. 
5

Another, related change is that the price of the transaction, not the price per pure gram, is the 

dependent variable in the statistical regression models. This is an improvement for a technical, 

statistical reason. The old methods included amount and purity in the denominator of the 

dependent variable, which biases estimates of the coefficients on the amount and purity variables 

on the right-hand side of the equation and hence leads ultimately to biased price estimates. 

Predictions of the price of one expected pure gram can still be generated with this new approach 

simply by multiplying the coefficient estimates of the regression model by the value of the 

corresponding independent variable for each transaction, with purity set to 100 percent and 

amount set to 1 gram. However, because the current models are estimated for different quantity 

levels, amount is not actually set to 1 gram. Instead, the predicted price of an amount given by 

the midpoint for each range evaluated at 100 percent purity is calculated and then scaled up or 

down by a factor of proportionality to generate the equivalent price per expected pure gram. 

A final methodological change is the use of simpler weights when generating the national price 

and purity indices as a weighted average of the various city-specific series. Various weighting 

schemes can be used. Each has advantages and disadvantages, and the relative merits of each 

approach depend in part on the purpose for which the national price or purity series will be used. 

Past reports sought to weight city-specific prices by a proxy for the quantity of the drug 

consumed in each city, where that proxy was based on drug-specific emergency department 

episodes recorded by the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN). That approach is not 

unreasonable. However, the current report adopts the simpler and more transparent approach of 

weighting city-specific estimates by the relative size of the city as indicated by its population. 

This approach provides a national series that might be interpreted as the national average price 

seen by potential users (who reside in cities with enough data to estimate city-specific prices). 

The previous method attempted to estimate the national average price paid by current users (who 

reside in cities with enough data to estimate city-specific prices and DAWN rates). Neither 

average is intrinsically of greater interest than the other. We prefer the former because it can 

incorporate price data from any city, not just cities for which DAWN estimates can be created, 

and because population estimates are reliably and universally understood.11 

A number of minor technical adjustments have also been made; these adjustments are explained 

in detail in the accompanying technical report. The purpose of all of the revisions is to improve 

the scientific methodology employed so that more-accurate information can be obtained from the 

STRIDE data. Again, it is important to stress, that given these revisions, it is not appropriate to 

compare the level of price and purity estimates in this report with those presented in earlier 

reports, and users of this report are strongly advised not to draw inferences from such 

comparisons. Comparisons of levels within this report, however—e.g., between different cities 

or years—are, of course, appropriate. 

General Comments About the Presentation of the Results 

All prices in this report represent the standardized real price per one expected pure gram (or in 

the case of marijuana, one bulk gram), adjusted for inflation and expressed in 2002 dollars. As in 

previous reports in this series, results are presented in a series of graphs and tables. The 

 

11 Just to emphasize that there are many different reasonable definitions of a national price series, a third alternative 

would be constructing a series weighted by the number of teenagers in each city. That might be interpreted as the 

national average price seen by people vulnerable to initiating use of that drug (and who reside in cities with price 

data). 
6

statistical models underlying these graphs and tables are described in the accompanying 

technical report. Annual figures and tables of the price per expected pure gram and purity of 

powder cocaine, crack cocaine, heroin, and methamphetamine observed in purchase transactions 

are presented, as are annual figures and tables of the price per bulk gram of marijuana. (STRIDE 

does not include information on potency of marijuana in its observations.) Tables showing the 

predicted quarterly prices are presented in the Appendix to this report. All tables and figures are 

based on drug acquisitions within the 50 states and the District of Columbia, and only purchases 

and purchase attempts are used to estimate price and purity trends in Section 2. 

For each drug, the figures and tables present prices and purities at several quantity levels. It is 

clear from this and other research that prices vary dramatically across these levels; enforcement 

pressure creates substantial price markups at each stage of the distribution chain between source 

countries and consumers in the United States. Likewise, for some drugs in some times and 

places, it is not uncommon for purity to be diluted as the drugs move down the distribution 

chain. However, as mentioned earlier, definitions of quantity level boundaries and names are 

somewhat arbitrary. For example, DEA prefers to call the lowest market level the street level, 

reserving the term retail level for the next higher level of distribution (e.g., 2.0 to 10.0 grams, for 

cocaine). Academics prefer using the term retail for transactions between a seller and a user, not 

between two dealers. The data in STRIDE contain information on transactions that range 

substantially in size, from very small (e.g., 0.1 grams) to very large (multiple kilograms). Illicit 

drug transactions do not all occur in specific, round lot sizes.12 Hence, dividing this continuum 

into discrete levels to represent specific markets is inevitably somewhat arbitrary. To facilitate 

exposition, we use the terms Q1, Q2, Q3, and Q4 in this report to refer to incrementally higher 

quantity levels based on the amount of drug involved in the transaction. Readers are advised not 

to read too much into the labels, as they merely indicate natural breaks in the data and are not 

intended to convey any scientific meaning. 

Because ONDCP is also interested in knowing how purity varies as drugs move down the 

distribution chain, Section 3 describes the actual purity of powder cocaine, heroin, and dmethamphetamine in transactions reported in all the U.S. seizure and purchase acquisitions 

available in STRIDE. The inclusion of the seizure data dramatically increases the number of 

observations, particularly of large drug acquisitions, and, for some drugs, provides greater 

insights into purity differences across quantity levels. 

 

12 The accompanying technical report provides information plots of the quantities transacted for particular 

substances in Appendix A. 
7

2. Results: The Price and Expected Purity of Specific Drugs 

Powder Cocaine 

Four quantity levels are identified and examined for powder cocaine: 

• 0.1 to 2.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q1) 

• 2.0 to 10.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q2) 

• 10.0 to 50.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q3) 

• More than 50.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q4) 

Estimated annual cocaine price series for each of these levels, evaluated at the median amount 

for that quantity level, are shown in Figure 1. For example, the median quantity purchased in Q2 

observations across all years was 5 grams, so a price of $100 per expected pure gram at this 

quantity level would indicate that $500 was paid for 5 expected pure grams, and a smaller 

amount would have been paid for 5 grams of what was expected to be less than 100 percent pure 

cocaine. 

These price series share many features familiar from earlier reports: very sharp (roughly 70 

percent) declines during the 1980s through 1989 at all quantity levels, a pronounced (22 to 35 

percent) one-year increase from 1989 to 1990, and gradual declines during the 1990s so that 

prices at the end of the 1990s were 30 to 40percent below those in 1989. With the additional 

data for 2000 forward, the series show an apparent price jump between 1999 and 2000 that was 

sustained until 2001, at least at the lowest quantity level. Prices continued to decline uniformly, 

however, from 2001 to 2003, reaching all-time lows roughly 12 to 21percent below those in 

1999. Cumulatively, powder cocaine prices have declined by roughly 80 percent since 1981, 

with the average price of one expected pure gram of cocaine purchased at Q1 (i.e., 0.1 to 2.0 

bulk grams) costing approximately $107 in 2003. 

Figure 2 provides information on the interquartile range of prices for each of these powder 

cocaine series from 1981 through 2003. It shows that the decline observed in average prices 

throughout the 1980s substantially exceeds the variability in prices observed at any other point in 

time. Hence, the decline that occurred between 1981 and 1989 is likely to be real, not a 

statistical artifact. The increase in average prices observed in 1990 is accompanied by a 

substantial jump in the prices observed within the interquartile range for all quantity levels. 

These simultaneous shifts upward for all quantity levels stand in sharp contrast to the prevailing 

downward trend in prices prior to this period. That trend over the 1990s appears to be 

substantial relative to the variability in prices in any given year, particularly prices in 1990 or 

1991 are compared to those in 2003. This can be seen more clearly in Figure 3. 

The interquartile ranges for prices tend to be broader at lower quantity levels. Thus, there is less 

variability in STRIDE observations drawn from higher quantity levels, such as Q3 and Q4, than 

at lower levels. This could be because there is actually less price dispersion at the higher levels 

or it may reflect better knowledge on the part of law enforcement of reasonable transaction costs 

at higher quantity levels. 

A striking characteristic of the four powder cocaine price series is that they are very highly 

correlated, certainly in the long run, reflecting the common price variation between 1981 and 
8

1993 (minimum correlation of 0.99) but relatively greater price stability (correlations of 0.71 to 

0.91) even over the past ten years. In particular, prices at the lowest quantity level (Q1) are 

consistently 1.5 to 2.1 times those at the next higher level (Q2), 1.9 to 3.1 times the Q3 level 

prices, and 2.7 to 3.9 times those at the Q4 level. 

The all-time lows in prices (which, like prices throughout this report, are adjusted for expected 

purity and inflation) are not accompanied by all-time highs in expected purity, as can be seen by 

comparing the average predicted prices in Figure 1 to the average predicted purities in Figure 4. 

Powder cocaine purity peaked in 1987–1988. Expected purity at Q1 (the lowest quantity level) 

is near all-time highs, and at Q2, although well below peak levels, is still higher than it has been 

in the past five years. However, average expected purity at the highest quantity levels (Q3 and 

Q4) has not fully recovered from its extended slide since the late 1980s and appears to be below 

the expected purity seen at the lowest quantity level for the past four years. Still, Figure 5, 

which includes the interquartile range of expected purities for each year and each quantity level, 

shows that these differences in trend lines for average expected purity are generally not large 

compared with the variability at any one time, as indicated by the interquartile range. The one 

notable exception is the difference in expected purity observed between Q4 and Q1 and Q2 

during the mid-1980s, which suggests that the expected purity of cocaine at lower quantity levels 

rose more slowly than did that at the highest quantity level in the first part of the period and then 

rose more quickly than the highest quantity level in the mid-1980s. Indeed, considering the 

width of the interquartile ranges at the lowest quantity level (Figure 6), expected purity at this 

quantity level appears to have been fairly stable since the increases that occurred prior to 1987, 

except for a decline around the 1990 price spike and perhaps around the 2001 price increase as 

well. Figure 7 suggests that the Q4 level has experienced less stability and a greater decline 

since the late 1980s, which is why the expected purities converge across these levels. 

Unlike what was seen for expected purity-adjusted prices, the spread in the distribution of 

predicted purities does not diminish as quantity level increases. Even at the higher quantity 

levels, considerable variability remains in expected purities, making it important not to over 

interpret apparent trends in simple averages. 

Figures 8 and 9 provide city-specific time trends in average price and expected purity, 

respectively, for five regionally dispersed cities for which STRIDE contains a large number of 

powder cocaine observations in the lowest quantity level.13 Ninety-five percent confidence 

intervals for the city-specific standardized prices are available in Appendix D of the 

accompanying technical report. Figure 8 shows that the downward trend in powder cocaine 

prices during the 1980s occurred systematically across a sample of cities from different regions. 

Similarly, the upward trend in average expected purity during the mid-1980s followed by a 

leveling off appears fairly robust. This consistency in trends across cities suggests that the 

trends in the national aggregate series described above can reasonably be thought of as national, 

not as an artifact produced by variation over time in the number of observations from each city (a 

concern expressed by the NRC). Although the level of prices appears to differ substantially 

across cities, the confidence intervals around the price estimates are fairly large so these 

 

13 This report provides city-specific price information for only a small number of cities that are consistently 

observed in the data over most of the time period examined. The observed patterns and trends in these data can be 

viewed as fairly reliable. 
9

differences are not statistically significant. Some of the intercity differences in the level of 

purity of cocaine, however, are statistically significant for particular years and cities. 

Crack Cocaine

Crack cocaine price and expected purity series begin in 1986; in earlier years, insufficient data 

were available for estimation. Recall, as noted in the introduction, that technically the series 

labeled here as crack is derived from all cocaine base observations in STRIDE, the majority but 

not necessarily all of which are literally crack. Three quantity levels are identified and examined 

for crack: 

• 0.1 to 1.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q1) 

• 1.0 to 15.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q2) 

• More than 15.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q3). 

It is important to note that quantity levels Q1, Q2, and Q3 for crack differ from those levels for 

powder cocaine. For example, Q1 for powder cocaine includes observations up to 2.0 grams, a 

larger range than is specified for crack. Because drugs are sold with substantial quantity 

discounts, this depresses the average prices for powder at the Q1 level relative to what would be 

recorded if Q1 for powder cocaine matched the range identified for crack. Hence, direct 

comparisons should not be made of the levels of prices for crack and powder cocaine. 

The estimated annual average price of crack cocaine for each of the three quantity levels is 

shown in Figure 10. The crack series display many of the same prominent features as the 

powder cocaine series: sharp price declines during the 1980s through 1989, an even more 

pronounced (30 to 45 percent) one-year increase from 1989 to 1990, and gradual modest declines 

at levels Q2 and Q3 during the 1990s, with prices at the end of the 1990s about 10 percent below 

those in 1989. There are some differences, however. Crack prices rose from 1998 to 1999 and 

from 1999 to 2000, whereas powder cocaine prices did not begin to increase until 2000. All 

three crack series increased from 1996 to 1997, whereas for powder cocaine, two increased and 

two decreased. Notably, prices at the lowest quantity level (Q1) did not trend downward during 

the 1990s. As a result, while Q2 and Q3 crack prices reached all-time lows in 2003, Q1 crack 

prices did not. 

The variability surrounding these estimates of average price per expected pure gram of crack is 

illustrated by the spread within the interquartile range of estimates shown in Figure 11. The 

decline in the reported average price of crack during the 1980s was likely to reflect a real 

decline, particularly at the higher two quantity levels. Further, the increases in average price in 

1990 and 1999–2000 were accompanied by rather large shifts in the interquartile distribution of 

prices for those years, suggesting that these spikes could be statistically meaningful particularly 

at the lowest quantity level (Q1). In general, the results presented in Figure 11 reinforce the 

conclusion that the average price of crack cocaine has remained fairly stable since the beginning 

of the 1990s, particularly at the two highest quantity levels. 

As was the case with powder cocaine, there is a fairly stable ratio of crack prices at different 

quantity levels. Crack prices at Q1 are 1.8 to 2.6 times those at Q2, which in turn are 

consistently 1.4 to 1.7 times those at Q3. The ratio of Q1 prices to those at Q2 and Q3 has 
10

increased somewhat over time, since Q1 crack prices did not fall during the 1990s, but the ratio 

of Q2 and Q3 prices is strikingly stable. 

The average expected purity of crack—although increasing since 2000—is still, like that of 

powder cocaine, well below the record levels seen in the late 1980s (see Figure 12). However, 

as shown in Figure 13, there is considerable variability in these estimated purities at all quantity 

levels. This can be seen more readily in Figure 14, which shows the interquartile range of 

estimates for the highest quantity level (Q3), revealing a clear decline in expected purity during 

the 1990s before the recent rise. This variability during the 1990s is particularly surprising in 

light of the relative stability in expected purity-adjusted prices for this quantity level during the 

same period. Another interesting finding from Figure 13 is the extensive overlap in interquartile 

ranges of expected purity between Q1 and Q2. Given that there is substantial overlap in the 

interquartile range of these two series, one should not put too much credence in the finding that 

the average expected purity is lower at the second quantity level than it is at the first; these 

differences could reflect sampling variability or spatial-aggregation issues. 

Geographic differences in crack cocaine market prices for specific cities in the STRIDE dataset 

can be seen clearly in Figure 15. For example, the downward trend in prices during the mid1980s occurred to very different degrees in different markets. In Washington, DC, the price of 

one expected pure gram of crack cocaine dropped by 32 percent between 1986 and 1987, while it 

went up by 67 percent in New York City. And while New York, Chicago, and, to a lesser 

degree, Washington DC experienced increases in the price of crack between 1999 and 2000, the 

price in San Diego appeared to increase a year earlier and fall back in 2000. More generally, the 

average correlation among Q1-level crack prices in Atlanta, Chicago, New York, San Diego, and 

Washington, DC, was only 0.15, while that for powder cocaine was 0.65 over the same years and 

cities. Thus, except for the broad decline in the 1980s, the national average trends for crack are 

truly nothing more than an average of sometimes divergent city-specific trends; many cities 

experienced year-to-year fluctuations that differed from those shown in Figure 10. Similar 

idiosyncratic differences in the expected purity of crack cocaine can be seen in particular years 

for each of these cities (see Figure 16); however, the general trend across all the cities appears to 

be fairly robust: All show a decline in expected purity between 1988 and 1999. 

Comparison of Powder Cocaine and Crack Cocaine Price Series 

As mentioned above, the powder cocaine and crack cocaine price series share some dominant 

features: sharp price declines through 1989; spikes in 1990 and 2000, as well as a smaller bump 

in 1995; and substantial declines from 2000 to 2003. (Alone among the seven series, crack 

prices at the lowest quantity level increased between 2002 and 2003.) Hence, since the first year 

of the crack series (1986), the various crack and powder cocaine series generally display a fairly 

high correlation. The average correlation coefficient across all these series is 0.93, with the 

lowest correlation coefficient, 0.87, occurring for the lowest quantity levels (Q1).14 However, 

this apparent correlation stems in part from the shared dramatic changes between 1986 and 1991 

and common trends in prices at higher quantity levels. Over the past ten years, the Q1 crack 

series diverged from the other six cocaine-related price series; its correlation with the Q1 powder 

cocaine series was only 0.29 over that time. That is, retail powder cocaine series are more highly 

correlated with wholesale crack series than with retail crack series. These differences in trends 

 

14 Average correlations were calculated as pair wise correlations across both substances and all quantity levels. 
11

across drug forms support the National Research Council’s recommendation to disaggregate 

drug products by form, when possible. 

The finding that crack prices are typically higher than powder cocaine prices at the lowest 

quantity level appears to contradict previous work by Caulkins (1997), which showed that, on 

average, retail crack and powder cocaine were equally expensive.15 However, the lowest quantity 

levels for crack and powder cocaine are not defined identically in this report, as was explained 

previously, and they are evaluated at different quantities. Thus the apparent difference in prices 

may not be real, and further analysis is needed before any conclusions can be drawn. 

Heroin 

As noted above, the heroin price and expected purity series are generated using observations 

identified in STRIDE as either heroin base or heroin hydrochloride. Three quantity levels are 

identified and examined in this report: 

• 0.1 to1.0 gram, unadjusted for purity (Q1) 

• 1.0 to 10.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q2) 

• More than 10.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q3). 

Heroin price series for each of these quantity levels are shown in Figure 17. The trends in these 

series share many features with the powder cocaine price series shown in Figure 1, including 

very large (roughly 55 percent) price declines during the 1980s through 1989, a pronounced (30 

to 50 percent) increase from 1989 to 1990 for the two larger quantity levels, and further declines 

during the 1990s, with expected-purity-adjusted prices at or near all-time lows in 2003. There 

are some important differences between the heroin and powder cocaine series, however. For 

example, the 1989–1990 price spike did not occur at the Q1 level for heroin, while the spike for 

the Q2 level for heroin was much more pronounced than the Q2 spike for powder cocaine, and it 

lasted two years. Further, there was no spike or other disruption in the heroin price series in 

1995 at any quantity level and at most perhaps a slight leveling in prices in 2000. As a result, 

heroin prices at the end of the 1990s were 55 to 65 percent lower than they were in 1989; the 

corresponding decline for powder cocaine was 30 to 40 percent. Heroin prices have declined 

another 10 to 20 percent since the late 1990s, as have powder cocaine prices. 

Heroin prices reached all-time lows in 2002 and stabilized at roughly those levels in 2003. 

Cumulatively, heroin prices have fallen roughly 85 percent since the beginning of the price 

series, so prices in 2002–2003 were only about one-sixth of what they were in 1981. These 

tremendous price declines occurred at all quantity levels. Indeed, the three heroin price series 

are highly correlated not only over the full range of years but even for just on the past ten years. 

During the past ten years, heroin prices at the Q1 level were consistently 1.1 to 1.6 times those at 

the Q2 level, and prices at that level were in turn 1.3 to 2.1 times higher than those at the Q3 

level (see Figure 18). 

The interquartile range of predicted prices is shown in Figure 19 for each year ; the ranges 

suggest that the decline in average quality-adjusted price over the 22-year period exceeds the 

within-period interquartile variability for most of the quantity levels. However, there appears to 

 

15 Caulkins J. 1997. “Is Crack Cheaper than (Powder) Cocaine?” Addiction 92(11): 1437-1443. 
12

be significant overlap in the interquartile ranges across quantity levels for most time periods 

throughout the full period, suggesting that differences in prices across specific quantity levels 

may not be meaningful. Finally, as was the case with powder and crack cocaine, the variability 

in predicted prices at the Q1 level is substantially greater than that at the higher quantity levels, 

suggesting that there may be less variability in prices at higher quantity levels or that 

enforcement agents have better knowledge about these prices. 

The average expected purity of heroin is shown in Figure 20. Unlike powder cocaine, the 

expected purity of heroin generally rose throughout the period when prices were falling. 

Expected purity levels today, however, are not at their all-time highs; they appeared to peak in 

the mid- to late-1990s, depending on quantity level. The rise in average expected purity from 

1981 through the early 1990s is very pronounced, even when one considers the uncertainty in the 

point estimates (see Figure 21). The variability in expected purity between 1992 and 2000, 

however, may reflect noise caused by differences in samples over time rather than true 

variability in the average expected purity, perhaps with the exception of 1996. Since 2000, there 

has been a modest shift downward in the interquartile range of predicted purity at all levels. 

City-specific heroin price series for the lowest quantity level (Q1) are shown in Figure 22. There 

are pronounced differences in the level of average prices across cities, differences that are 

statistically significant in particular years.16 Those differences became substantially smaller 

during the 1990s, so that by 2003, the differences in price per expected pure gram across cities 

were relatively small. Large differences in average expected purities across cities remain, 

however, as can be seen in Figure 23. New York City has a much higher average expected 

purity for heroin than do Washington DC and Chicago, which have the lowest purities, although 

all three cities show a general rise in expected purity since the early and mid-1980s. The trends 

in expected purity differ across cities since the mid-1990s, however, with some cities, 

specifically New York and Washington DC, experiencing a leveling off in average expected 

purity, while others (Atlanta, Chicago and San Diego) had moderate declines. Thus, as shown in 

Figures 22 and 23, differences exist across geographic markets for heroin, and care should be 

taken in interpreting trends in simple averages in the national indices. Spurious trends can be 

generated by the inclusion or exclusion of observations from particular cities in a given year. 

d-Methamphetamine

As noted earlier, only the d-forms of methamphetamine are considered in this report . The three 

quantity levels identified and examined for d-methamphetamine are as follows: 

• 0.1 to 10.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q1) 

• 10.0 to 100.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q2) 

• More than 100.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q3) 

Price and expected purity trends for cocaine, crack, and heroin are relatively easy to describe: 

long-term trends are interrupted by occasional modest price spikes, and trends at all quantity 

levels are generally highly correlated. Series for d-methamphetamine prices are far more 

irregular in two respects, as shown in Figure 24. First, in the 1980s, trends are not concordant 

 

16 See Appendix D in the accompanying technical report for tables that present the 95 percent confidence intervals 

for these estimates. 
13

across quantity levels. For example, Q1 prices through 1984 were declining, while Q2 prices 

were increasing. Second, although the price series for the three quantity levels are concordant 

with each other after 1988, they are still highly variable, with pronounced spikes in 1990–1991, 

1995 perhaps extending into 1996, and in 1998. The distinct trends at each quantity level exceed 

the associated interquartile ranges of predicted values for each year, as shown in Figure 25. 

Although there is some minor overlap between the interquartile ranges for the two lowest 

quantity levels, the markets remain fairly distinct, as do the pattern in prices prior to 1988. 

Trends in the average expected purity of d-methamphetamine display the same irregularities as 

those for expected-purity-adjusted price, as shown in Figure 26. Each quantity level exhibits a 

different pattern between 1981 and 1988, then after 1988, the trends move concordantly, with 

troughs in 1990–1991, 1995, and 1998 across all quantity levels. Unlike expected-purityadjusted prices for d-methamphetamine, however, the difference in expected purity trends prior 

to 1988 are modest relative to the great variability within each quantity level, as indicated by the 

interquartile ranges in Figure 27. Indeed, it is not clear that there is a substantial difference in 

average expected purity across quantity levels for d-methamphetamine until 1995, at which point 

the interquartile range of predicted purities for the Q1 and Q3 levels begin to separate. The peak 

and troughs since 1988 suggested by Figure 26 represent substantial shifts relative to withinperiod variability, as is more readily apparent in Figures 28 through 30, which show the 

interquartile range of predicted average purities for each quantity level separately. 

There is tremendous volatility in the price and expected purity of d-methamphetamine, with the 

average expected purity following trends that mirror those observed in the price series for the 

two lowest quantity levels. Figure 31 shows how expected purity troughs correspond with price 

spikes in the Q1 level. The estimated correlation coefficient between these two series is –0.82, 

slightly higher in absolute value than that observed for the Q2 level (estimated correlation of –

0.63). Today, d-methamphetamine prices are at or near all-time lows, with current prices 

approximately 40 percent lower than their average during the 1990s. Average purities have also 

been rising quite steadily since their trough in 1998 but have not yet reached their 1994 peak 

levels. 

The d-methamphetamine series merit focused follow-up research for at least two reasons. First, 

unlike cocaine and heroin observations, d-methamphetamine observations are highly 

concentrated in one region of the country (the Southwest). Indeed, one city (San Diego) 

accounts for nearly 25 percent of all the d-methamphetamine price observations. (See Figures 32 

and 33 for city-specific estimates of expected purity-adjusted price and expected purity, 

respectively.) Varying numbers of observations made over time in other cities and at different 

rates at different quantity levels could generate spurious trends and other artifacts, such as the 

inversions in predicted purities observed across quantity levels. 

A second reason for further follow-up research on the d-methamphetamine series is the fact that 

patterns identified in this report differ sharply from those presented in previous reports. It may 

be that the methodological changes made in the modeling used for this report, including focusing 

on only one type of methamphetamine, make it easier to see real trends in the volatile and sparse 

methamphetamine data. Nonetheless, before attributing substantial meaning to these dmethamphetamine series, their external validity should be explored by examining how well they 

correlate with trends in methamphetamine-related outcomes obtained from other data sources. 

For example, the price and expected purity spikes and troughs reported in Figures 24, 26, and 31 
14

appear to overlap with the introduction of methamphetamine precursor chemical regulation 

introduced in 1989, 1995, and 1997. Precursor regulations are intended to restrict supply, so one 

would expect to see price spikes and possibly expected purity troughs following these precursor 

control interventions. Cunningham and Liu (2003) have examined the extent to which hospital 

admissions for methamphetamine use and/or abuse in the Southwest correlate with the adoption 

of these laws, and a similar investigation could be performed for methamphetamine prices. 17 

Marijuana

Marijuana trends are in some sense simpler than those of the other drugs, because they pertain 

only to price. Information on the potency of marijuana observations is not available through 

STRIDE. Furthermore, the quantity levels identified and examined in this report correspond to 

those employed in previous reports, allowing for some basic comparison in trends across reports. 

The three quantity levels examined are: 

• 0.1 to10.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q1) 

• 10.0 to 100.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q2) 

• More than 100.0 grams, unadjusted for purity (Q3) 

The marijuana price trends, shown in Figure 34, are not highly correlated with trends in prices of 

other drugs over time. While the price of powder, heroin, and, to a lesser extent, crack were 

falling during the 1980s, the average price of marijuana generally rose, reaching a peak in 1991 

for two of the quantity levels. The peak for Q2 occurred in 1993–1994. Prices then declined 

through 2000, at which time they began a slight upward trend. At quantity levels Q1 and Q2, 

2003 marijuana prices were about one-third above their 2000 troughs. This recent price increase 

leaves current marijuana prices at Q1 and Q2 near their 20-year averages. The prices for Q3, on 

the other hand, are near all-time lows. 

Marijuana prices at different quantity levels range from 0.62 to 0.84 and are thus not as highly 

correlated over time as those for other drugs, particularly powder cocaine and heroin. Figure 35 

shows that there is not a lot of overlap in the distribution of prices across the three quantity 

levels, suggesting that quantity discounts/price markups across quantity levels exceed variability 

in prices within a quantity level. However, it would be misleading to speak of ratios of prices 

between quantity levels for marijuana, as the apparent ratios sometimes seem to depend on the 

level of prices. For example, roughly speaking, marijuana prices at level Q1 are about three 

times those at Q3 plus $3/gram, not just three times the Q3 prices. On the other hand, Q2 prices 

are roughly 1.3 to 2.6 times the Q3 prices. 

3: Purity of Drugs When Seizures Are Included 

In the previous section drug-specific expected purity trends were discussed alongside the 

corresponding price trends because price and purity often move in tandem, as was illustrated 

 

17 Cunningham, J., and LM. Liu (2003), “Impacts of federal ephedrine and pseudoephedrine regulations on 

methamphetamine hospital admissions,” Addiction, Vol. 98, 2003. 
15

explicitly for d-methamphetamine in Figure 31, and expected purity is a very important 

component of price. The purity analysis presented previously, however, is limited in that it 

considers the purity only of observations that were obtained through purchases (so price 

information was available), not of those obtained through seizures and other enforcement 

activities. 

In this section we explore in more detail how the average purity of powder cocaine, heroin, and 

d-methamphetamine varies across different quantity levels by examining both purchase and 

seizure data from STRIDE. Actual purities, instead of predicted purities, for each of these drugs 

are evaluated, although observations with zero purity are not included in these analyses. 

Analyses are not conducted for marijuana or crack cocaine for different reasons. Information on 

marijuana purity is not available in STRIDE, which precludes conducting such an analysis. 

STRIDE does contain purity information on crack cocaine, or more accurately, cocaine base, but 

purity series are not examined because of the possibility that a heterogeneous mix of different 

drugs is included in the cocaine-base seizure data. Unlike the cocaine-base purchase data, which 

apparently predominantly reflect crack cocaine, the seizure data may contain a sizable number of 

observations of other forms of cocaine base.18 For example, cocaine base may be imported from 

South America and converted into powder cocaine in the United States. Thus, although it is 

reasonable to presume that virtually all of the purchase observations involving cocaine base 

reflect crack cocaine, this may not be the case for cocaine-base seizure observations. 

The inclusion of the seizure data dramatically increases the number of observations available for 

each drug, making it possible to identify four quantity levels for each drug. Again, these 

quantity levels were identified based on the distribution of the data, and we attempted to spread 

the number of observations evenly across levels. However, once the quartiles of the data were 

determined, quantity boundaries were rounded off to make the levels easier to interpret. Table 

10 defines the quantity levels used for this analysis and indicates the number of observations 

falling into each level for each drug over the entire 1981–2003 time period. Note that, for all 

three drugs, the quantity levels defined in Table 10 differ from those analyzed previously in the 

purchase data. For example, the third quantity levels in the purchase data analyses of heroin and 

d-methamphetamine have been broken up into two levels for the current analysis. In the case of 

powder cocaine, three of the four quantity levels have changed: The two lowest quantity levels in 

the purchase analysis (<=1 gram and 1g to 10g) are now combined into the lowest level, and the 

highest level has been broken up into two different quantity levels. 

The analysis considers all domestic observations collectively, not by location. This introduces 

the possibility of variation over time in the composition (spatial distribution) of observations, 

confounding trends over time, so minor fluctuations in the time series should be examined in 

greater detail before strong conclusions are drawn about them. However, including all of the 

data gives the best sense of general trends experienced by the nation as a whole. 

To summarize, purity trends in this section differ from those in the previous section in the 

following ways: (1) they include data from seizures; (2) they include all U.S. observations in one 

pool, rather than aggregating city-specific trends for certain cities; (3) they are based on actual, 

not predicted, purities; (4) they are determined for more and somewhat different ranges of 

transaction sizes; and (5) they are not determined for crack. 

 

18 This information was obtained through a project meeting with representatives from DEA on November 24, 2003. 
16

Summary of Variation in Purity Across Quantity Levels 

It is known that traffickers sometimes dilute or adulterate drugs as the drugs move through the 

distribution chain, and there is little evidence that traffickers refine or otherwise increase purity 

after the drugs are first produced. Hence, it would not be surprising for purity to decrease as the 

drug moves from higher quantity levels down toward retail transactions. That is indeed what the 

data often indicate, as shown in Tables 11 through 13 and Figures 36 through 38, but there are 

interesting exceptions and caveats. 

For example, there are only very modest differences in average heroin purity between quantity 

levels Q1(<=1 g) and Q2 (1g –10g), but average purity at the higher levels (10g to 200g and > 

200g) is substantially higher (see Figure 36). This suggests that heroin is more often diluted or 

“cut” between the two top quantity levels and between Q2 and Q3 (i.e., between quantities <10 g 

and those >10 g) than between Q2 and Q1. 

In contrast, as shown in Figure 37, there was a regular progression of purity across quantity 

levels for powder cocaine in the 1980s, suggesting that dilution could occur between each pair of 

quantity levels. However, inasmuch as the average purity even at the lowest levels has almost 

always been at least 50 percent, the total dilution of cocaine has not been that substantial, on 

average. (A single “one-for-one cut” would reduce even perfectly pure cocaine to 50 percent 

purity.) By the 1990s, these purity differences for cocaine across the lowest three quantity levels 

had largely disappeared, in part as purities at the highest quantity levels fell, suggesting that 

cutting or diluting cocaine was not as common a practice in the 1990s as it was in the previous 

decade. The difference in purity between the third and fourth quantity levels remained. From 

about 1998 on, average purity was higher for the lowest quantity level (Q1) than for the second 

quantity level (Q2), and even the third (Q3) in 2002 (see Figure 37). Such inversions could 

occur because of compositional effects stemming from aggregating varying numbers of 

transactions from higher- and lower-purity regions or markets, not because distributors are 

refining cocaine inside the United States. However, this inverse trend further underscores the 

conclusion that, except at the highest quantity levels, most cocaine is no longer commonly 

diluted in the United States. Certainly some is still diluted; cocaine samples with very low 

purities, containing a variety of diluents and adulterants, can still be found. But such samples are 

now the exception rather than the norm. 

Historically, there has been little variation in average d-methamphetamine purity across quantity 

levels, but since the late 1990s, the highest purities have been observed at the lowest quantity 

levels. This purity inversion was also seen for predicted average purity from the purchase 

observations and extends to the entire interquartile range of values for the purchase and seizure 

data (results are not shown here). It is not clear why this happens. Conceivably, for dmethamphetamine, this may indicate difficulty controlling purity when converting large batches 

of precursor chemicals into methamphetamine or it may be an indication of some variation in the 

type of precursor chemicals that are used at specific quantity levels. 

Overall, the purchase and seizure data reveal that differences in purity across quantity levels 

exist only for heroin and, to a modest degree, cocaine during the early 1980s. Thus, the “classic” 
17

understanding of dilution/adulteration may not be a useful construct for thinking about the purity 

of powder cocaine and d-methamphetamine at different quantity levels. Additional analysis is 

needed to provide new insights into the variability of purity at different quantity levels for each 

of these drugs. 

Variation in Purity Trends When Seizure Data Are Included

Heroin 

As discussed above, average (and even median) purity calculated from the heroin seizure and 

purchase data sort neatly by quantity level, with 10 to 20 percent differences between quantity 

levels. The one exception is average purity at the two lowest quantity levels, between which 

there is relatively little difference in purity until about 1995. These differences in average purity 

across quantity levels, particularly between the higher and lower quantity levels, are consistent 

with what was observed for average purity in the purchase data shown in Figure 20. The general 

trend of rising purity during the 1980s and early 1990s and the leveling off during the mid1990s, followed by a moderate decline in the 2000s, is also consistent with what was observed 

from the purchase data alone. Indeed, even the spike in average purity observed in 1989 and the 

trough in 1991 can be seen in Figure 36. 

However, some differences in the level of average purity at certain quantity levels are revealed 

when seizure data are included. Specifically, the average purity at the two highest quantity 

levels (between 10 and 200 grams and > 200 grams), as shown in Figure 36, are generally higher 

than those observed in the purchase data (Figure 20). The observed increase in average purity is 

not entirely due to a breaking out of the highest quantity level in Figure 20, as even the third 

quantity level in Figure 36(which has a smaller range of amounts than is included in the third 

quantity level in Figure 20) generally has higher average purity than is found in the third 

quantity level of purchase observations. This suggests that seized heroin at the two highest 

quantity levels generally has higher purity than corresponding purchased heroin. The data 

demonstrate a similar pattern for the two lower quantity levels, but the differences are not nearly 

as consistent or as large as those observed for the higher levels. 

Powder Cocaine

As with heroin, the trends in average purity for powder cocaine over time and across quantity 

levels are generally consistent with those observed for the purchase data (Figure 4) when seizure 

data are included in the analysis (Figure 37). Like Figure 4, Figure 37 shows a substantial 

decline in average purity across quantity levels in 1985 and 1990 and a trough in 2000 and 2001. 

It is interesting to note that the overlapping of purity trends at specific levels during the late 

1990s and early 2000s that was observed in the purchase data alone is also seen in the seizure 

and purchase data for the three lowest quantity levels. Purity at the highest quantity level (> 750 

grams), however, remains substantially higher than that for the other three markets. 

Once again, the average purity reflected in the combined seizure and purchase data is generally 

higher than that observed in the purchase data alone. The differences are much more substantial 

at the higher quantity levels than at the lower levels, where the result is not consistent across all 

years. 
18

d-Methamphetamine

The inclusion of seizure data in an examination of d-methamphetamine purity dramatically 

increases the number of observations available for analysis. Thus, it is not surprising that trends 

reported in the seizure and purchase data (Figure 38) are far less volatile than those reported in 

the purchase data alone. However, the underlying trends of the combined purchase and seizure 

purity data are generally consistent with those observed in the purchase data (Figure 26), with 

troughs in purity in 1990/1991, 1996, and 1998 and a local peak in purity in 1994. The data also 

show higher average purity at the lowest quantity level than at the higher quantity levels from 

1996 on. 

The inclusion of seizure data in the analysis produces two primary differences: First, the rise in 

average purity from 1985 to 1989 is generally more pronounced than that shown in the purchase 

data alone, and the average levels of purity across each of the four quantity levels during this 

time period are more similar. Second, the levels of average purity reported in the seizure and 

purchase data are consistently higher than those indicated by the purchase data alone at all 

quantity levels, showing again that the typical purity in seized observations is generally higher 

than that in purchase observations. 

4. Conclusions

Perhaps the most striking observation about illicit drug prices is simply that they are still 

extraordinarily high per unit weight, even though prices have declined over the past 20 years. 

Gold sells for about $400 per ounce. Marijuana is quite literally worth almost its weight in gold, 

selling for approximately $325 per ounce in 2003, according to information from STRIDE. 

Cocaine, d-methamphetamine, and heroin are even more expensive, selling at the gram level for 

the equivalent of about $3,020, $4,410, and $10,260 per ounce, respectively. Hence, these more 

expensive illicit drugs are quite literally an order of magnitude (or more) more expensive per 

unit weight than gold. High prices can be beneficial in that they discourage consumption. 

Another striking characteristic of drug prices is their extreme variability over quantity levels, 

between locations, over time, and from transaction to transaction. The variation across quantity 

levels is due to the substantial quantity discounts given for all four drugs examined here. For 

example, the price per expected pure gram of powder cocaine is nearly three times higher for 

small transactions (< 2 grams) than for larger transactions (> 50 g). The price per expected pure 

gram of crack cocaine at the lowest quantity level is 3.5 times higher than the price at the higher 

quantity levels. 

There is also substantial spatial variation in prices. In 2001, for example, street level prices for 

powder cocaine varied considerably across the five cities for which there are sufficient data to 

generate city-specific estimates, ranging from a low of $59 per expected pure gram in San Diego 

to a high of $121 in Atlanta. Comparable variation was observed in heroin prices. 

Prices also vary substantially over time. The overall trend for powder cocaine, crack, and heroin 

showed a steep decline during the 1980s, a spike in prices in 1989–1990, then relative stability, 

with a modest decline during the 1990s and early 2000s. Variation in marijuana prices was also 

substantial but followed a very different pattern. Marijuana prices rose from 1981 to 1991, fell 

through 2000, and have since rebounded somewhat. Variation in d-methamphetamine prices 
19

over time has been the most volatile, with multiple sharp spikes that may be related to the advent 

of various precursor control regulations. 

The final form of variability—variability in transactions that occur at the same time, in the same 

geographic location, and of the same size—is no less important. The time series generated in 

this report focus on average prices in particular places and times, but at any given time, location, 

and quantity level, a broad range of prices is likely to be observed. 

Trends and variation in purity are drug-specific but are also quite common. Cocaine purities are 

now typically fairly high at all quantity levels. Substantial cutting, or dilution, of powder 

cocaine occurs but is no longer the norm. Heroin today is much more pure than it was in the 

early 1980s, and the gap between purity of larger and smaller observations has shrunk 

considerably. However, substantial evidence of routine dilution of heroin remains. Dmethamphetamine purity has varied dramatically and irregularly over time, although it has 

usually moved in the opposite direction of prices. 

This report merely documents and describes the trends in price and purity. Some patterns are 

easy to explain and interpret, while others deserve further exploration. Subsequent work should 

focus not only on further refining and updating of the descriptive trends, but also on correlating 

these trends with other data indicators both to externally validate the trends identified here as 

well as explain what drives them. 
20

Figure 1: Annual Predicted Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Powder 

0

100200300400500600

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=2g, evaluated at 0.7

2g<AMT<10g, evaluated at 10<=AMT<50g, evaluated aAMT>50g, evaluated at 108

0 100 200 300 400 500 600

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=2g, evaluated at 0.7

2g<AMT<10g, evaluated at 10<=AMT<50g, evaluated aAMT>50g, evaluated at 108
21

Figure 2: Interquartile Range of Predicted Prices for One Expected Pure Gra

Cocaine 

0

100200300400500600700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=2g, evaluated at 

2g<AMT<10g, evaluated 10<=AMT<50g, evaluatAMT>50g, evaluated at 

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=2g, evaluated at 

2g<AMT<10g, evaluated 10<=AMT<50g, evaluatAMT>50g, evaluated at 
22

Figure 3: Interquartile Range of Predicted Prices for Powder Cocaine Si

0

100200300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 DollarsAMT<=2g, evaluated at 

2g<AMT<10g, evaluate10<=AMT<50g, evaluatAMT>50g, evaluated at 

0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 DollarsAMT<=2g, evaluated at 

2g<AMT<10g, evaluate10<=AMT<50g, evaluatAMT>50g, evaluated at 
23

Figure 4: Expected Purity of Powder Cocaine 

0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.90

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) AMT<=2g, evaluated at 0.75g 2g<AMT<10g, evaluated at 5g 10<=AMT<50g, evaluated at 2

AMT>50g, evaluated at 108g 
24

Figure 5: Interquartile Range of Expected Purity for Powder Coca

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) AMT<=2g, evaluated at 0.75g 2g<AMT<10g, evaluated at 5g 10<=AMT<50g, evaluated at 2

AMT>50g, evaluated at 108g 
25

Figure 6: Interquartile Range of Expected Purity for Powder Cocaine--Lowest 

(Q1) 

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) AMT<=2g, evaluated at 0.75
26

Figure 7: Interquartile Range of Expected Purity for Powder Cocaine--High

Level (Q4) 

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) AMT>50g, evaluated at 108g
27

Figure 8: City Trends in the Retail Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Pow

0

100200300400500600700

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 

AMT<=2g, evaluated at 0.75g
28

Figure 9: City Trends in Retail Expected Purity of Powder Cocai

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) 

AMT<=2g, evaluated at 0.75g
29

Figure 10. Annual Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Crack Coca

0

50

100150200250300350400

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated at 

1g<AMT<15g, evaluated AMT>15g, evaluated at 3

050 100 150 200 250 300 350 400

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated at 

1g<AMT<15g, evaluated AMT>15g, evaluated at 3
30

Figure 11. Interquartile Range of the Price of One Expected Pure Gram of C

0

100200300400500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated at 

1g<AMT<15g, evaluateAMT>15g, evaluated at 

0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated at 

1g<AMT<15g, evaluateAMT>15g, evaluated at 
31

Figure 12. Expected Purity of Crack Cocaine 

0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.800.901.00

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.3g 1g<AMT<15g, evaluated at 5gAMT>15g, evaluated at 38g 
32

Figure 13. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity of Crack Cocai

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.3g 1g<AMT<15g, evaluated at 5g AMT>15g, evaluated at 38g 
33

Figure 14. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity of Crack Cocain

Highest Quantity Level (Q3) 

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) AMT>15g, evaluated at 38g
34

Figure 15. City Retail Prices for One Expected Pure Gram of Crack C

0

50

100150200250300350400450

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 

AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.3g
35

0.00.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) A

CNSW

Figure 16. City Retail Predicted Expected Purity of Crack Cocain

AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.3g
36

Figure 17. Annual Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Heroin 

0

500

1000150020002500

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.4

1g<AMT<10g, evaluated at AMT>10g, evaluated at 27.
37

Figure 18. Price of One Expected Pure Gram of Heroin Since 199

0

200400600800

1000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated a

1g<AMT<10g, evaluatAMT>10g, evaluated a

0 200 400 600 800 1000

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated a

1g<AMT<10g, evaluatAMT>10g, evaluated a
38

Figure 19. Interquartile Range of Prices for Heroin 

0

100020003000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0

1g<AMT<10g, evaluated AMT>10g, evaluated at 2

0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 1000 2000 3000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0

1g<AMT<10g, evaluated AMT>10g, evaluated at 2
39

Figure 20. Expected Purity of Heroin 

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.4g 1g<AMT<10g, evaluated at 2.5gAMT>10g, evaluated at 27.5g 
40

Figure 21. Interquartile Range of Expected Purity of Heroin 

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.4g 1g<AMT<10g, evaluated at 2.5g AMT>10g, evaluated at 27.5g 
41

Figure 22. City Retail Prices of One Expected Pure Gram of Hero

0

500

1000150020002500

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 

AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.4g
42

Figure 23. City Retail Expected Purity of Heroin 

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) Atla

ChiNew San Wa

AMT<=1g, evaluated at 0.4g
43

Figure 24. Annual Price of One Expected Pure Gram of d-Methamphe

0

100200300400500

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 DollarsAMT<=10g, evaluated at 

10g<AMT<100g, evaluateAMT>100g, evaluated at 2
44

Figure 25. Interquartile Range of Prices for One Expected Pure Gram 

Methamphetamine 

0

100200300400500600

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0 100 200 300 400 500 600

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars AMT<=10g, evaluat

10g<AMT<100g, evAMT>100g, evaluate
45

Figure 26. Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine 

0.000.100.200.300.400.500.600.700.80

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) AMT<=10g, evaluated at 2.5g 10g<AMT<100g, evaluated at 27.5g AMT>100g, evaluated at 225g 
46

Figure 27. Interquartile Range of Average Expected Purity of d-Methamp

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

AMT<=10g, evaluated at 2.5g 10g<AMT<100g, evaluated at 27.5g AMT>100g, evaluated at 225g 
47

Figure 28. Interquartile Range of Average Expected Purity of d-Methampheta

Quantity Level (Q1) 

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

AMT<=10g, evaluated at 2.5g 
48

Figure 29. Interquartile Range of Average Expected Purity of d-Methampheta

Quantity Level (Q2) 

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) 10g<AMT<100g, evaluated at 27.5g 
49

Figure 30. Interquartile Range of Average Expected Purity of d-Methampheta

Quantity Level (Q3) 

0.000.200.400.600.801.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)AMT>100g, evaluated at 225g 
50

Figure 31. Inverse Relationship of d-Methamphetamine Price and Expecte

Lowest Quantity Level (Q1) 

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.8

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%) 

Price Measured in Thousands of 

2002 Dollars

Price Expected Purity
51

0

200400600800

10001200140016001800

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars L

PSS

Figure 32. City-Specific Average Prices for d-Methamphetamine 

Second Quantity Level (Q2) 

10g<AMT<100g, evaluated at 27.
52

Figure 33. City-Specific Average Expected Purity of d-Methamphetam

Second Quantity Level (Q2) 

0.00.20.40.60.81.0

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

Calendar Year

Expected Purity (1.0 = 100%)

LPSS

10g<AMT<100g, evaluated at 27
53

Figure 34. Price of One Bulk Gram of Marijuana 

05

10152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 DollarsAMT<=10g, evaluated 

10g<AMT<100g, evaluAMT>100g, evaluated 
54

Figure 35. Interquartile Range of Average Price of One Bulk Gram of M

05

10152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 DollarsAMT<=10g, evaluated at 

10g<AMT<100g, evaluatAMT>100g, evaluated at 

0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 Dollars 0510152025

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Price Per Pure Gram in 2002 DollarsAMT<=10g, evaluated at 

10g<AMT<100g, evaluatAMT>100g, evaluated at 
55

Figure 36. Mean Purity of Heroin When Seizures Are Included 

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

<=1 g 1-10 g 10-200 g 200 +
56

Figure 37. Mean Purity of Powder Cocaine When Seizures Are Inclu

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

Calendar Year

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

<=10g 10g - 50g 50g - 750 g > 750 g
57

Figure 38. Purity of d-Methamphetamine When Seizures Are Inclu

0

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

Calendar Years

Purity (1.0 = 100%)

<=10g 10g - 100g 100g - 500g > 
58

Table 1

Price of One Pure Gram of Powder Cocaine

< 2 Grams 2 to 10 Grams 10 to 50 Grams 

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percent

1981 459.93 544.59 630.39 305.18 345.64 391.16 254.40 280.55 307.06 1701982 475.52 590.86 637.48 317.57 337.46 375.70 238.20 267.12 295.16 1551983 367.71 471.87 545.15 287.87 311.02 353.25 190.17 215.06 235.50 1401984 304.44 400.69 469.22 221.88 252.74 286.74 136.27 170.08 187.79 1151985 288.67 389.60 450.85 195.41 239.24 256.79 134.53 170.56 187.34 1171986 241.79 296.94 353.27 154.82 186.06 209.31 104.33 130.50 146.73 781987 199.89 250.55 291.33 119.32 145.78 159.57 80.52 98.63 110.69 601988 173.68 223.55 256.91 105.67 126.83 149.13 63.82 73.79 86.19 461989 142.81 189.92 226.70 89.48 109.54 129.41 56.30 67.02 76.50 441990 193.84 234.94 283.29 109.43 133.17 159.39 71.68 84.74 97.68 611991 159.11 198.34 243.19 84.06 99.18 113.85 52.08 67.19 77.75 461992 118.07 153.96 183.17 78.68 97.27 111.90 46.97 62.19 72.56 451993 124.20 156.18 185.51 89.60 95.57 105.06 51.53 63.58 73.49 411994 115.40 147.43 174.42 69.63 86.42 99.75 44.39 55.45 64.34 351995 136.32 181.58 213.58 73.47 87.64 97.66 47.04 57.68 64.82 411996 118.30 150.13 174.36 75.04 84.13 93.31 43.21 50.67 56.71 361997 115.89 145.72 168.50 65.48 80.21 89.10 41.84 52.07 58.28 391998 100.62 132.09 153.94 67.06 78.71 91.47 38.75 47.02 56.11 321999 105.15 135.51 154.27 76.19 82.39 90.33 40.08 50.16 58.54 372000 142.86 161.28 182.21 91.34 99.40 113.58 43.89 55.26 64.39 392001 135.73 168.29 204.03 70.75 81.38 92.59 41.63 53.98 59.10 372002 100.71 124.54 147.94 59.84 74.36 86.11 39.06 47.27 53.44 34

2003* 89.05 106.54 121.71 60.06 70.52 78.88 36.00 44.17 51.45 31

* 2003 Prices are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to be updated in future reAll prices are adjusted for inflation and reported in 2002 dollars. Estimates to the penny are provided to facilitate replication/connot intended to be meaningfully interpreted given how broad the uncertainty bands are. Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
59

Table 2

Annual Expected Purity of Powder Cocaine

< 2 Grams 2 to 10 Grams 10 to 50 Grams 

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

2

Perc

1981 0.27 0.40 0.53 0.30 0.44 0.58 0.37 0.50 0.63 1982 0.30 0.43 0.56 0.31 0.45 0.59 0.36 0.49 0.62 1983 0.35 0.49 0.62 0.35 0.49 0.64 0.48 0.61 0.74 1984 0.40 0.53 0.66 0.41 0.55 0.70 0.55 0.67 0.80 1985 0.38 0.51 0.64 0.42 0.56 0.71 0.50 0.63 0.76 1986 0.42 0.56 0.69 0.55 0.69 0.84 0.63 0.75 0.89 1987 0.57 0.70 0.83 0.64 0.78 0.93 0.68 0.81 0.94 1988 0.60 0.73 0.86 0.63 0.78 0.92 0.68 0.80 0.94 1989 0.55 0.69 0.82 0.59 0.73 0.88 0.62 0.74 0.87 1990 0.45 0.58 0.71 0.44 0.58 0.72 0.51 0.63 0.76 1991 0.50 0.63 0.77 0.55 0.69 0.84 0.62 0.74 0.87 1992 0.54 0.67 0.80 0.53 0.67 0.82 0.60 0.73 0.86 1993 0.55 0.68 0.81 0.53 0.67 0.81 0.55 0.68 0.81 1994 0.53 0.66 0.79 0.53 0.67 0.82 0.60 0.72 0.86 1995 0.48 0.61 0.74 0.53 0.67 0.81 0.55 0.68 0.81 1996 0.59 0.73 0.86 0.55 0.69 0.84 0.58 0.71 0.84 1997 0.52 0.65 0.79 0.56 0.70 0.84 0.56 0.69 0.82 1998 0.55 0.69 0.82 0.56 0.70 0.85 0.57 0.70 0.83 1999 0.52 0.65 0.78 0.50 0.64 0.78 0.51 0.64 0.77 2000 0.48 0.61 0.74 0.43 0.57 0.72 0.45 0.58 0.71 2001 0.44 0.58 0.71 0.46 0.60 0.74 0.41 0.54 0.67 2002 0.56 0.69 0.83 0.52 0.66 0.80 0.47 0.60 0.73 

2003* 0.56 0.70 0.83 0.53 0.67 0.81 0.50 0.62 0.75 

* 2003 expected purities are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to be updaSource: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
60

Table 3

Price of One Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine

< 1 Gram 1-15 Grams > 15 Gram

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

1986 230.91 341.61 428.19 158.01 174.22 204.11 98.50 113.21987 237.71 325.12 401.35 133.63 147.32 170.20 76.37 84.91988 162.94 228.01 294.84 95.36 108.52 130.91 61.03 71.21989 148.72 197.84 252.96 84.32 96.20 115.39 58.24 66.71990 194.14 254.68 309.80 121.42 137.98 162.35 87.92 97.51991 152.70 201.60 256.60 96.70 107.75 125.85 66.17 72.41992 143.03 206.69 265.23 86.75 101.92 115.10 57.53 66.71993 131.92 178.66 225.52 82.20 98.03 113.34 55.19 65.71994 135.57 174.46 219.44 63.33 83.62 102.19 49.27 57.81995 144.52 181.87 219.03 77.22 87.27 100.19 50.88 59.31996 126.25 162.37 187.77 72.13 79.22 90.02 46.70 54.21997 153.85 195.38 233.75 85.51 88.55 97.87 50.83 58.71998 122.06 161.06 195.95 71.59 77.34 91.58 45.33 52.41999 161.03 205.33 244.65 77.08 87.38 103.74 53.40 59.42000 172.92 218.55 245.15 88.62 97.76 112.85 55.72 63.52001 154.78 198.36 252.39 74.97 89.02 103.35 53.80 61.22002 134.85 172.90 212.11 71.85 80.68 88.80 48.61 54.8

2003* 138.22 189.87 221.66 57.01 74.07 91.55 40.15 47.4

* 2003 Prices are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to be updated in futuAll prices are adjusted for inflation and reported in 2002 dollars. Estimates to the penny are provided to facilitate replicatio

and not intended to be meaningfully interpreted given how broad the uncertainty bands are. 

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
61

Table 4

Annual Expected Purity of Crack Cocaine

< 1 Gram 1-15 Grams > 15 G

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Ave

1986 0.77 0.84 0.94 0.68 0.77 0.86 0.65 1987 0.76 0.83 0.93 0.71 0.80 0.90 0.58 1988 0.78 0.86 0.96 0.75 0.84 0.94 0.68 1989 0.79 0.87 0.96 0.74 0.83 0.93 0.65 1990 0.73 0.81 0.90 0.70 0.79 0.88 0.52 1991 0.78 0.86 0.95 0.74 0.83 0.93 0.67 1992 0.74 0.82 0.92 0.72 0.81 0.91 0.66 1993 0.74 0.81 0.91 0.70 0.79 0.89 0.60 1994 0.74 0.81 0.91 0.70 0.79 0.89 0.62 1995 0.68 0.76 0.85 0.65 0.74 0.83 0.56 1996 0.68 0.76 0.86 0.65 0.74 0.84 0.56 1997 0.65 0.73 0.83 0.61 0.70 0.80 0.50 1998 0.67 0.75 0.85 0.63 0.72 0.82 0.52 1999 0.64 0.72 0.81 0.58 0.67 0.76 0.47 2000 0.60 0.68 0.77 0.53 0.62 0.71 0.42 2001 0.60 0.68 0.77 0.53 0.62 0.71 0.40 2002 0.62 0.70 0.80 0.55 0.64 0.74 0.46 

2003* 0.66 0.74 0.84 0.61 0.69 0.79 0.49 

* 2003 expected purities are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and th

updated in future reports.Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
62

Table 5

Price of One Pure Gram of Heroin

< 1 Gram 1-10 Grams > 10 Grams

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

P

1981 1260.12 1974.49 2680.48 1064.28 1670.02 2093.36 765.27 1007.60 1982 1275.48 1587.69 2013.20 775.31 1226.42 1492.52 638.10 744.49 1983 1026.46 1626.58 2026.90 1140.79 1528.63 1879.94 596.73 726.13 1984 1093.56 1468.39 1653.55 1003.20 1440.79 1780.91 569.95 715.18 1985 943.26 1351.65 1573.75 706.52 1128.50 1468.20 526.04 655.43 1986 977.37 1352.37 1691.38 773.82 1021.65 1350.08 540.95 656.25 1987 930.12 1230.13 1398.18 731.56 1093.10 1343.06 658.11 754.27 1988 671.47 1043.78 1317.75 621.89 880.91 1025.54 416.85 511.38 1989 576.37 933.97 1198.33 468.48 693.87 801.15 398.84 485.84 1990 601.34 947.70 1100.75 600.20 911.57 1115.62 551.94 647.46 1991 556.47 895.79 1089.93 611.45 819.38 1109.41 414.47 492.31 1992 462.94 743.91 931.33 451.10 633.38 730.70 352.99 402.08 1993 469.23 619.73 695.58 294.45 448.69 626.13 286.13 325.48 1994 397.00 615.16 734.73 294.16 418.35 521.08 251.49 299.03 1995 332.58 544.69 614.58 270.04 402.90 507.41 191.14 237.73 1996 364.25 515.69 633.98 245.83 378.49 518.90 202.55 248.48 1997 309.40 491.04 580.53 227.76 327.60 430.20 183.26 208.32 1998 316.42 432.76 518.10 163.51 294.42 368.88 155.57 185.77 1999 319.30 426.49 467.68 148.56 266.16 376.10 144.05 176.05 2000 301.96 413.90 466.58 178.86 269.54 332.44 129.30 153.60 2001 284.30 398.27 475.40 167.30 246.02 283.72 115.96 134.62 2002 280.39 372.00 428.03 162.03 240.84 306.75 128.18 138.32 

2003* 246.97 361.95 393.88 162.26 246.05 339.87 120.26 139.22 

* 2003 Prices are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to be updated in future reportAll prices are adjusted for inflation and reported in 2002 dollars. Estimates to the penny are provided to facilitate replication/confirmand not intended to be meaningfully interpreted given how broad the uncertainty bands are. Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
63

Table 6

Annual Expected Purity of Heroin

< 1 Gram 1-10 Grams > 10 Grams

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

Pe

1981 0.00 0.11 0.18 0.00 0.09 0.15 0.00 0.12 1982 0.08 0.17 0.26 0.08 0.18 0.26 0.13 0.27 1983 0.05 0.14 0.23 0.01 0.11 0.19 0.14 0.28 1984 0.12 0.21 0.30 0.05 0.15 0.23 0.17 0.32 1985 0.13 0.23 0.31 0.15 0.25 0.33 0.24 0.38 1986 0.14 0.24 0.32 0.15 0.24 0.33 0.23 0.37 1987 0.14 0.23 0.32 0.14 0.24 0.32 0.19 0.34 1988 0.20 0.29 0.38 0.20 0.29 0.38 0.30 0.44 1989 0.24 0.33 0.42 0.21 0.30 0.39 0.38 0.52 1990 0.14 0.24 0.32 0.15 0.24 0.33 0.22 0.36 1991 0.21 0.31 0.39 0.17 0.26 0.35 0.26 0.40 1992 0.28 0.37 0.46 0.28 0.38 0.46 0.39 0.53 1993 0.32 0.41 0.50 0.31 0.41 0.49 0.44 0.58 1994 0.32 0.41 0.50 0.31 0.41 0.49 0.41 0.55 1995 0.36 0.45 0.54 0.32 0.41 0.50 0.40 0.55 1996 0.29 0.38 0.47 0.27 0.37 0.45 0.35 0.49 1997 0.36 0.45 0.54 0.30 0.40 0.48 0.37 0.51 1998 0.35 0.44 0.53 0.31 0.41 0.50 0.40 0.54 1999 0.33 0.42 0.51 0.30 0.39 0.48 0.41 0.55 2000 0.34 0.43 0.52 0.30 0.39 0.48 0.43 0.57 2001 0.29 0.39 0.47 0.28 0.37 0.46 0.40 0.55 2002 0.32 0.41 0.50 0.30 0.40 0.48 0.34 0.48 

2003* 0.22 0.32 0.40 0.25 0.34 0.43 0.32 0.46 

*2003 expected purities are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likeupdated in future reports.Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
64

Table 7

Price of One Pure Gram of d-Methamphetamine

< 10 Grams 10-100 Grams > 100 Grams

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

Pe

1981 304.26 401.23 496.60 123.61 153.72 191.251982 326.81 393.62 485.68 152.43 200.02 251.62 68.99 91.83 1983 280.06 396.56 494.33 150.62 202.75 255.58 80.51 106.51 1984 285.11 350.94 434.55 162.96 242.86 305.95 54.07 72.00 1985 285.84 377.34 437.68 140.41 190.63 240.88 69.16 91.44 1986 236.10 292.96 364.65 171.22 234.67 296.37 46.71 61.70 1987 197.43 269.99 337.15 141.41 188.26 238.27 1988 246.77 275.85 342.95 115.97 155.62 196.07 51.35 70.12 1989 290.57 349.45 434.54 121.87 162.63 206.10 60.39 79.77 1990 324.38 402.48 504.17 205.28 281.30 356.53 112.78 159.52 1991 359.98 449.78 559.50 209.33 273.82 346.17 84.00 118.20 1992 190.25 237.00 297.53 123.14 166.31 210.75 72.56 95.66 1993 175.70 215.37 272.44 102.07 132.99 168.87 41.61 58.22 1994 137.46 160.35 200.88 68.18 93.58 118.42 34.26 47.83 1995 203.68 254.27 316.57 105.62 146.02 183.45 61.55 86.32 1996 186.64 230.79 290.08 105.13 145.01 181.63 57.39 79.98 1997 143.29 178.26 229.73 80.41 110.69 139.67 41.35 55.05 1998 205.98 256.02 343.57 145.51 200.19 252.42 86.86 119.60 1999 168.75 210.60 260.62 130.75 177.22 222.45 60.92 86.91 2000 133.66 179.87 231.46 102.92 141.21 177.25 54.33 73.20 2001 144.69 181.72 240.61 94.89 113.50 147.91 48.13 64.51 2002 120.99 153.77 197.31 76.07 104.02 131.06 39.79 58.39 

2003* 120.81 155.61 200.20 67.00 90.77 114.04 32.76 48.28 

* 2003 Prices are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to be updated in fuAll prices are adjusted for inflation and reported in 2002 dollars. Estimates to the penny are provided to facilitate replicatiand not intended to be meaningfully interpreted given how broad the uncertainty bands are. Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
65

Table 8

Annual Expected Purity of d-Methamphetamine

< 10 Grams 10-100 Grams > 100 G

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Avera

1981 0.30 0.44 0.59 0.37 0.51 0.631982 0.27 0.42 0.57 0.35 0.49 0.61 0.21 01983 0.25 0.40 0.54 0.33 0.47 0.59 0.41 01984 0.29 0.44 0.59 0.27 0.41 0.52 0.36 01985 0.27 0.42 0.57 0.36 0.50 0.62 0.33 01986 0.37 0.52 0.67 0.27 0.41 0.53 0.39 01987 0.36 0.51 0.65 0.32 0.46 0.58 0.24 01988 0.42 0.57 0.71 0.36 0.50 0.62 0.42 01989 0.33 0.48 0.63 0.36 0.50 0.62 0.34 01990 0.24 0.39 0.53 0.15 0.29 0.41 0.11 01991 0.21 0.36 0.51 0.17 0.31 0.43 0.32 01992 0.38 0.53 0.67 0.31 0.45 0.57 0.36 01993 0.43 0.58 0.72 0.39 0.53 0.65 0.54 01994 0.60 0.74 0.89 0.54 0.69 0.80 0.58 01995 0.41 0.56 0.71 0.41 0.56 0.67 0.37 01996 0.39 0.54 0.68 0.30 0.44 0.56 0.22 01997 0.46 0.60 0.75 0.35 0.49 0.61 0.32 01998 0.26 0.40 0.55 0.11 0.26 0.37 0.02 01999 0.28 0.43 0.58 0.17 0.32 0.43 0.05 02000 0.37 0.52 0.67 0.19 0.33 0.45 0.09 02001 0.42 0.57 0.71 0.28 0.42 0.54 0.13 02002 0.49 0.64 0.79 0.33 0.47 0.59 0.18 0

2003* 0.47 0.62 0.77 0.42 0.56 0.67 0.29 0

*2003 expected purities are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus updated in future reports.Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
66

Table 9

Price of One Bulk Gram of Marijuana

< 10 Grams 10-100 Grams > 100 Gram

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

75th 

Percentile

25th 

Percentile Average

1981 5.02 6.34 7.30 3.37 3.42 3.57 1.29 1982 5.51 6.97 8.02 4.76 4.82 5.11 1.34 1.71983 9.77 12.36 14.21 6.72 7.58 7.61 2.37 3.36 1984 9.20 11.64 13.39 3.99 4.32 4.67 2.42 3.33 1985 10.07 12.74 14.65 5.41 5.92 6.28 2.24 2.95 1986 11.86 15.01 17.25 9.31 9.43 9.85 2.70 3.42 1987 10.96 13.87 15.94 6.72 6.86 7.11 4.15 5.05 1988 11.51 14.57 16.74 7.49 7.74 7.90 2.56 3.42 1989 10.90 13.80 15.85 7.76 7.92 8.33 2.92 3.71990 11.82 14.96 17.20 9.62 9.90 10.31 3.20 4.26 1991 13.92 17.63 20.24 9.84 10.62 10.56 3.69 4.85 1992 11.95 15.15 17.39 6.92 7.20 7.51 3.12 4.30 1993 11.50 14.58 16.73 10.12 10.82 11.14 3.25 4.63 1994 10.29 13.05 14.96 10.14 10.96 10.81 2.64 3.58 1995 9.23 11.72 13.43 6.63 7.31 7.06 2.64 3.37 1996 7.86 9.99 11.44 4.75 6.30 6.65 2.06 2.51997 7.28 9.25 10.58 4.27 4.57 4.58 2.18 2.75 1998 6.82 8.67 9.92 5.80 5.93 6.15 2.34 3.07 1999 7.62 9.70 11.09 7.47 8.47 8.03 2.13 2.86 2000 6.89 8.77 10.02 4.78 5.22 5.21 1.84 2.53 2001 7.52 9.58 10.94 4.59 5.20 5.38 1.78 2.47 2002 8.69 11.09 12.65 7.65 8.72 8.70 2.10 3.40 

2003* 8.85 11.37 12.88 6.00 7.12 6.44 1.94 2.47 

* 2003 Prices are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to be updated future reports. All prices are adjusted for inflation and reported in 2002 dollars. Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)Prepared by: RAND Corporation 2/04
67

Table 10 

Definitions of Quantity Level Ranges & Number of Observation

When Seizure Data Are Included 

Cocaine

Heroin Powder Meth

Ranges Level #1 <= 1g < =10g < =10g

Level #2 1-10g 10g - 50g 10g - 100gLevel #3 10- 200g 50g - 750g 100g-500gLevel #4 > 200g > 750 g > 500g

Number Level #1 20881 40627 18887of Obs. Level #2 13655 30838 13011

Level #3 14290 34228 9155Level #4 13320 35667 4544Total 62146 141360 45597
68

Table 11 

The Mean and Median Purity for Powder Cocaine 

When Seizures Are Included

 ≤ 10 Grams 10-50 Grams 50 - 750 Grams > 750 Grams 

Year Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median 

1981 0.49 0.46 0.52 0.50 0.70 0.76 0.85 0.88 

1982 0.50 0.45 0.52 0.50 0.75 0.83 0.88 0.90 

1983 0.57 0.54 0.62 0.63 0.80 0.87 0.91 0.92 

1984 0.58 0.56 0.65 0.67 0.78 0.85 0.89 0.91 

1985 0.53 0.49 0.61 0.61 0.72 0.80 0.85 0.89 

1986 0.62 0.63 0.71 0.78 0.80 0.87 0.88 0.90 

1987 0.70 0.80 0.77 0.84 0.83 0.88 0.88 0.89 

1988 0.74 0.83 0.79 0.85 0.81 0.86 0.86 0.89 

1989 0.71 0.79 0.73 0.81 0.77 0.84 0.83 0.87 

1990 0.58 0.58 0.60 0.60 0.67 0.73 0.79 0.86 

1991 0.68 0.76 0.70 0.76 0.74 0.82 0.84 0.88 

1992 0.69 0.78 0.72 0.79 0.76 0.83 0.83 0.88 

1993 0.68 0.75 0.67 0.72 0.75 0.82 0.83 0.87 

1994 0.69 0.78 0.70 0.77 0.76 0.82 0.84 0.86 

1995 0.66 0.73 0.68 0.73 0.71 0.78 0.82 0.86 

1996 0.68 0.75 0.69 0.74 0.73 0.80 0.83 0.86 

1997 0.65 0.72 0.67 0.72 0.70 0.78 0.82 0.85 

1998 0.68 0.76 0.68 0.75 0.71 0.79 0.80 0.83 

1999 0.63 0.68 0.62 0.66 0.66 0.72 0.77 0.81 

2000 0.58 0.59 0.56 0.59 0.59 0.65 0.73 0.78 

2001 0.56 0.59 0.53 0.55 0.58 0.65 0.71 0.74 

2002 0.62 0.68 0.60 0.65 0.62 0.68 0.74 0.78 

2003 0.65 0.74 0.60 0.65 0.67 0.74 0.79 0.84 

* 2003 purities are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to 

be updated in future reports. 

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004. 
69

Table 12 

The Mean and Median Purity for Heroin When Seizures Are Included

 ≤ 1 Gram 1-10 Grams 10 - 200 Grams > 200 Grams 

Year Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median 

1981 0.08 0.04 0.09 0.04 0.21 0.04 0.32 0.22 

1982 0.11 0.05 0.13 0.04 0.27 0.07 0.52 0.67 

1983 0.22 0.10 0.18 0.07 0.33 0.21 0.53 0.60 

1984 0.26 0.13 0.26 0.14 0.41 0.41 0.60 0.62 

1985 0.25 0.14 0.29 0.18 0.44 0.45 0.57 0.57 

1986 0.26 0.16 0.28 0.18 0.37 0.34 0.51 0.50 

1987 0.27 0.17 0.29 0.18 0.35 0.30 0.53 0.48 

1988 0.32 0.25 0.33 0.27 0.47 0.48 0.64 0.70 

1989 0.38 0.35 0.38 0.38 0.56 0.59 0.71 0.81 

1990 0.29 0.22 0.31 0.24 0.42 0.39 0.62 0.68 

1991 0.31 0.23 0.30 0.22 0.49 0.51 0.65 0.69 

1992 0.37 0.31 0.38 0.35 0.55 0.55 0.73 0.82 

1993 0.42 0.35 0.42 0.35 0.62 0.66 0.77 0.84 

1994 0.44 0.38 0.45 0.40 0.59 0.64 0.74 0.82 

1995 0.46 0.38 0.46 0.42 0.63 0.66 0.77 0.86 

1996 0.37 0.30 0.43 0.40 0.55 0.57 0.71 0.80 

1997 0.42 0.33 0.43 0.37 0.62 0.68 0.78 0.84 

1998 0.41 0.33 0.45 0.42 0.60 0.62 0.76 0.83 

1999 0.41 0.34 0.43 0.41 0.60 0.63 0.76 0.82 

2000 0.42 0.35 0.46 0.47 0.63 0.67 0.78 0.84 

2001 0.38 0.31 0.42 0.40 0.62 0.67 0.71 0.81 

2002 0.39 0.35 0.41 0.38 0.58 0.60 0.70 0.80 

2003 0.37 0.32 0.40 0.37 0.53 0.55 0.70 0.75 

* 2003 purities are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to 

be updated in future reports. 

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004. 
70

Table 13 

The Mean and Median Purity for d-Methamphetamine 

When Seizures Are Included

 ≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams 100 - 500 Grams > 500 Grams 

Year Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median Mean Median 

1981 0.45 0.36 0.39 0.31 0.56 0.63 0.72 0.75 

1982 0.56 0.54 0.44 0.39 0.50 0.50 0.48 0.43 

1983 0.50 0.47 0.45 0.38 0.51 0.54 0.22 0.14 

1984 0.49 0.44 0.46 0.43 0.43 0.34 0.60 0.43 

1985 0.50 0.46 0.51 0.48 0.56 0.56 0.63 0.83 

1986 0.59 0.58 0.57 0.60 0.58 0.61 0.68 0.73 

1987 0.65 0.70 0.57 0.56 0.61 0.65 0.65 0.78 

1988 0.67 0.75 0.61 0.64 0.65 0.68 0.70 0.71 

1989 0.65 0.70 0.58 0.57 0.61 0.65 0.68 0.79 

1990 0.49 0.41 0.43 0.32 0.41 0.31 0.47 0.40 

1991 0.51 0.41 0.48 0.35 0.49 0.39 0.44 0.32 

1992 0.67 0.80 0.57 0.57 0.71 0.85 0.74 0.91 

1993 0.70 0.87 0.64 0.73 0.74 0.89 0.80 0.92 

1994 0.73 0.88 0.69 0.85 0.77 0.89 0.83 0.93 

1995 0.66 0.83 0.60 0.66 0.66 0.82 0.74 0.88 

1996 0.60 0.69 0.47 0.36 0.49 0.38 0.52 0.41 

1997 0.59 0.54 0.50 0.40 0.52 0.43 0.53 0.45 

1998 0.42 0.29 0.27 0.17 0.23 0.18 0.26 0.19 

1999 0.46 0.33 0.31 0.21 0.26 0.20 0.29 0.22 

2000 0.47 0.35 0.34 0.24 0.29 0.21 0.35 0.23 

2001 0.51 0.44 0.40 0.25 0.33 0.22 0.45 0.28 

2002 0.52 0.48 0.42 0.29 0.37 0.23 0.49 0.32 

2003 0.59 0.62 0.53 0.53 0.45 0.31 0.64 0.76 

* 2003 purities are based on information from only the first two quarters of the year, and thus are likely to 

be updated in future reports. 

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004. 
71
A-1

APPENDIX: Estimated Quarterly Prices and Purity 
A-2

Table A.1: Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Powder 

Cocaine, Constant 2002 Dollars 

 ≤ 2 Grams 2-10 Grams 10-50 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num.

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Qu

1981Q1 55 554.08 641.33 736.24 84 267.40 322.06 367.48 126 281.13 307.86 325.12 25 18

1981Q2 53 487.20 558.67 631.95 67 321.61 387.44 420.36 111 253.17 280.52 302.95 13 14

1981Q3 46 368.33 437.35 515.15 52 265.30 335.53 383.01 113 245.68 272.24 304.67 

1981Q4 53 462.40 541.01 638.31 49 306.55 337.54 386.30 53 232.77 261.56 294.99 6 18

1982Q1 87 465.64 607.77 673.79 86 345.71 380.61 426.92 134 241.70 276.66 309.01 15 17

1982Q2 65 509.70 669.05 774.21 94 292.46 324.78 365.89 91 242.07 274.79 311.51 17 14

1982Q3 97 459.73 512.09 593.73 116 304.72 335.15 370.77 146 235.97 255.87 286.35 12 16

1982Q4 86 502.85 574.53 643.63 72 280.44 309.31 346.08 105 220.56 261.15 293.53 8 14

1983Q1 103 435.23 573.04 678.38 109 286.49 320.84 364.66 150 206.98 230.12 254.17 30 15

1983Q2 54 395.30 470.46 540.26 131 280.96 325.71 379.09 183 207.64 237.20 275.65 37 14

1983Q3 62 337.77 424.19 511.52 100 285.22 319.50 362.88 165 170.59 205.52 235.78 45 14

1983Q4 110 327.22 419.81 480.03 145 264.19 278.04 304.65 214 158.56 187.40 203.41 44 13

1984Q1 124 283.21 371.15 441.60 128 244.43 259.62 283.50 225 142.37 169.88 191.25 57 10

1984Q2 99 334.38 436.72 523.74 128 210.99 244.54 287.55 225 136.68 167.24 184.98 64 10

1984Q3 78 319.46 400.27 467.42 122 240.49 259.66 285.19 247 134.40 173.74 186.82 59 12

1984Q4 104 314.41 394.60 461.09 142 215.80 247.14 279.67 281 126.31 169.47 198.55 60 12

1985Q1 129 350.07 451.90 531.38 181 211.22 236.06 257.26 296 131.88 173.54 196.05 70 1

1985Q2 167 288.37 379.12 442.79 160 216.52 245.92 266.77 326 147.85 188.35 207.56 92 12

1985Q3 159 278.83 370.61 455.32 165 192.51 231.57 263.92 382 131.53 165.86 179.15 85 1

1985Q4 143 257.44 356.78 421.85 142 210.51 243.43 268.46 390 128.75 154.50 173.79 122 10

1986Q1 165 226.96 303.97 362.12 165 170.41 200.86 223.95 396 117.31 138.69 150.59 112 8

1986Q2 172 265.19 331.01 387.77 183 162.38 192.40 214.36 368 108.75 137.45 152.96 113 8

1986Q3 165 237.24 291.87 343.45 147 149.03 180.81 203.23 334 103.99 127.84 146.88 100 7

1986Q4 160 219.82 260.92 287.04 126 144.31 170.16 192.56 330 89.82 118.02 139.27 128 6

1987Q1 139 239.95 295.71 322.79 86 127.92 149.27 171.94 282 89.81 113.55 129.48 134 6

1987Q2 96 222.38 280.86 335.13 117 123.46 152.25 168.94 407 79.12 102.84 122.23 193 6

1987Q3 89 176.29 216.14 244.51 115 125.70 148.65 160.32 429 77.82 94.58 110.52 207 6

1987Q4 94 157.89 209.50 253.19 111 106.77 132.96 152.20 357 63.26 83.53 94.86 178 5

1988Q1 87 157.97 199.98 229.78 134 105.29 135.53 167.32 380 59.79 76.11 92.93 161 4

1988Q2 117 174.82 207.95 244.17 109 107.81 137.23 166.85 354 69.63 79.32 89.57 178 5
A-3

Table A.1: Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Powder Cocaine, Constant 2002 

Dollars (Continued) 

 ≤ 2 Grams 2-10 Grams 10-50 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num.

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Qu

1988Q3 110 205.61 282.42 299.86 124 99.75 122.89 139.22 341 57.09 72.99 84.66 241 4

1988Q4 87 158.83 203.84 245.03 106 91.04 111.68 130.84 329 55.00 66.73 76.66 223 4

1989Q1 79 146.09 187.51 224.33 138 84.69 110.64 130.43 377 52.75 66.04 75.23 237 4

1989Q2 86 141.78 182.51 224.54 85 77.76 95.15 112.79 365 50.10 62.26 70.77 203 4

1989Q3 82 162.13 210.18 242.99 87 88.75 108.98 128.51 291 51.30 65.27 74.32 253 4

1989Q4 90 121.25 179.46 212.92 98 110.64 123.39 134.81 236 63.11 74.51 87.24 184 4

1990Q1 95 169.35 210.89 253.67 109 100.75 124.60 139.55 226 61.80 75.35 87.69 175 6

1990Q2 47 173.07 230.35 280.36 63 130.98 161.45 182.99 190 73.24 86.74 99.63 135 6

1990Q3 75 206.17 278.02 328.19 77 100.09 121.53 152.23 231 77.55 93.28 112.87 170 6

1990Q4 69 171.53 220.49 265.47 67 100.35 125.10 155.34 250 64.87 83.61 93.13 157 5

1991Q1 143 148.14 193.55 236.74 118 88.39 106.68 127.03 334 57.34 74.27 91.71 235 5

1991Q2 70 148.02 196.25 233.63 85 90.26 98.62 113.65 305 52.97 70.13 81.70 304 4

1991Q3 47 170.05 215.53 263.17 96 81.64 97.96 113.58 318 49.98 65.08 74.66 287 4

1991Q4 46 147.19 188.04 222.79 76 75.97 93.47 109.68 266 48.22 59.29 69.69 231 4

1992Q1 69 109.13 147.31 173.65 88 69.38 85.56 102.29 278 41.69 57.56 64.87 236 3

1992Q2 48 124.74 157.47 183.71 62 84.37 105.71 121.81 190 59.23 71.59 80.78 152 5

1992Q3 66 111.22 147.15 176.26 59 80.82 100.07 116.00 223 44.95 61.65 76.42 221 4

1992Q4 45 130.81 163.91 190.65 44 79.85 97.76 114.75 160 44.35 57.96 65.87 98 4

1993Q1 44 127.33 155.08 192.83 47 87.40 97.84 109.34 99 50.63 61.71 75.65 74 4

1993Q2 51 135.70 182.07 220.97 53 72.92 88.24 102.67 141 51.49 64.59 76.09 66 4

1993Q3 65 106.90 134.62 157.03 54 83.66 104.24 119.84 143 53.21 64.91 74.25 96 4

1993Q4 58 119.59 152.93 175.67 50 73.56 91.95 112.18 110 50.62 63.13 72.83 78 4

1994Q1 50 104.91 137.83 166.94 55 73.45 89.71 100.72 139 45.22 56.87 66.57 92 3

1994Q2 30 133.61 162.28 193.56 51 74.21 91.12 108.54 148 46.01 56.88 69.55 99 3

1994Q3 55 113.54 139.05 162.30 45 67.10 79.70 89.60 166 42.82 57.05 64.70 147 3

1994Q4 28 115.41 150.56 178.61 46 68.69 85.13 103.95 139 41.36 51.03 56.47 106 3

1995Q1 30 121.22 158.67 187.60 63 57.89 70.35 81.92 136 38.49 48.39 52.42 96 3

1995Q2 24 144.66 192.89 230.80 44 60.77 75.56 87.33 103 41.35 52.53 59.55 108 3

1995Q3 34 145.78 191.76 232.59 55 90.46 103.53 119.05 105 57.56 69.59 72.64 104 4

1995Q4 47 146.95 183.00 207.67 36 86.52 101.11 109.75 113 49.24 60.22 67.22 99 4
A-4

Table A.1: Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Powder Cocaine, Constant 2002 

Dollars (Continued) 

 ≤ 2 Grams 2-10 Grams 10-50 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num.

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Qu

1996Q1 28 133.95 179.83 206.42 50 65.74 81.59 98.75 120 46.99 55.06 63.49 111 3

1996Q2 46 124.59 141.69 162.38 55 81.45 92.71 100.87 140 42.31 52.12 60.41 167 3

1996Q3 31 146.79 171.75 200.61 55 63.83 80.53 91.31 158 41.34 50.97 58.49 189 3

1996Q4 24 96.63 107.26 123.26 46 71.14 81.69 91.74 150 38.11 44.51 49.52 148 3

1997Q1 29 129.37 154.28 176.81 77 61.10 76.57 90.54 145 37.46 47.40 54.44 114 3

1997Q2 55 126.21 149.00 178.33 71 68.56 84.81 98.53 98 47.42 59.50 69.84 88 4

1997Q3 52 114.98 142.41 169.26 79 64.49 77.64 90.17 154 43.76 55.14 62.98 169 4

1997Q4 41 112.14 137.21 151.95 57 68.95 81.83 93.24 155 36.54 46.23 55.85 156 3

1998Q1 35 92.43 114.57 131.18 56 57.20 69.39 77.92 171 37.65 47.56 56.38 145 3

1998Q2 34 116.13 154.91 183.91 68 67.26 78.98 93.82 163 38.25 46.55 53.62 192 3

1998Q3 52 95.34 120.69 136.69 70 63.22 71.41 81.94 188 37.19 46.39 55.69 174 3

1998Q4 44 119.57 138.18 160.58 55 82.08 95.08 107.28 147 37.62 47.58 58.11 159 3

1999Q1 89 114.72 145.02 168.52 87 77.34 92.74 109.58 134 40.60 48.19 55.90 108 4

1999Q2 36 91.62 118.14 141.79 70 63.00 77.05 88.43 133 41.05 52.91 64.15 161 3

1999Q3 67 106.45 135.69 160.26 55 66.45 77.67 85.01 185 41.33 50.26 59.74 239 3

1999Q4 39 111.15 143.18 167.09 65 68.55 82.10 90.85 146 37.50 49.29 55.16 124 3

2000Q1 53 131.68 160.42 171.63 71 75.57 89.44 105.20 130 42.97 54.30 64.19 115 4

2000Q2 37 109.92 146.85 174.09 60 85.63 95.44 105.92 151 51.82 61.67 72.63 174 4

2000Q3 30 176.68 203.21 241.12 62 73.67 93.73 109.35 179 42.97 54.68 63.18 170 3

2000Q4 41 106.76 134.63 156.82 66 105.44 119.01 132.26 167 37.96 50.39 59.86 114 3

2001Q1 41 128.20 166.44 198.40 81 71.95 90.56 102.39 190 47.34 53.70 59.83 184 3

2001Q2 21 122.01 151.70 181.00 63 81.70 90.13 103.92 167 42.93 54.55 63.46 185 3

2001Q3 17 143.64 179.85 211.01 41 57.45 72.08 82.30 130 40.00 53.04 61.28 180 3

2001Q4 20 138.63 175.15 205.47 38 59.42 72.77 82.01 100 42.06 54.65 62.19 133 3

2002Q1 23 110.97 134.08 163.00 60 59.67 74.29 85.75 120 40.45 51.69 59.39 155 3

2002Q2 21 79.96 105.61 127.57 60 72.60 80.02 88.88 102 40.63 48.51 52.38 197 3

2002Q3 22 121.02 152.81 175.04 43 60.98 75.50 85.27 145 37.70 44.54 49.92 208 3

2002Q4 26 80.18 105.64 128.23 44 54.94 67.63 78.28 115 36.90 44.32 52.15 135 3

2003Q1 27 92.79 118.96 136.30 72 53.84 68.08 75.63 163 35.61 42.62 51.09 134 3

2003Q2 13 82.18 94.12 107.33 19 59.84 72.97 83.40 101 37.09 45.71 53.71 89 3

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). Prepared by: RAND 

Corporation, February 2004.
A-5

Table A.2 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine 

Constant 2002 Dollars

≤ 1 Gram 1-15 Grams > 15 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1986Q1 25 297.74 405.85 520.22 8 156.99 172.65 193.86 8 108.73 123.00 140.18

1986Q2 53 252.99 340.46 436.29 24 143.93 164.64 193.73 7 108.16 126.34 141.63

1986Q3 59 229.01 319.82 407.12 22 137.75 158.03 183.12 8 96.06 113.49 129.21

1986Q4 32 222.57 300.30 378.58 15 181.14 201.55 233.52 7 79.37 90.25 102.91

1987Q1 40 353.41 484.72 596.71 16 167.95 186.74 218.34 14 82.44 94.18 107.09

1987Q2 67 236.17 316.92 395.19 33 120.36 153.09 185.02 38 92.32 105.48 119.02

1987Q3 100 213.84 295.54 371.62 99 116.38 129.35 146.82 15 60.25 68.25 78.11

1987Q4 127 151.43 203.28 255.68 27 106.21 120.09 142.66 24 66.39 71.83 80.26

1988Q1 115 165.13 214.58 280.87 39 87.07 95.03 113.02 21 71.83 81.36 92.60

1988Q2 179 174.73 220.89 283.61 49 93.21 103.94 126.10 34 62.48 70.61 81.81

1988Q3 232 156.84 222.21 290.83 81 102.69 122.24 141.80 66 54.93 66.33 78.92

1988Q4 274 185.75 254.34 319.78 69 92.25 112.85 131.45 46 59.06 66.67 77.33

1989Q1 282 151.24 199.58 258.22 76 88.75 97.32 112.44 72 54.46 64.09 74.62

1989Q2 407 162.43 218.93 256.07 103 84.35 90.59 106.41 79 52.07 62.92 73.29

1989Q3 315 134.28 193.85 246.95 116 80.30 95.23 112.95 102 51.96 60.65 68.56

1989Q4 214 129.92 179.02 212.74 56 89.20 101.65 117.59 55 71.22 79.44 88.66

1990Q1 290 161.63 211.61 255.67 88 106.12 117.34 133.24 82 80.76 90.97 98.75

1990Q2 205 208.16 270.04 314.46 87 122.17 156.68 190.98 64 93.80 109.71 123.54

1990Q3 338 208.20 278.71 351.53 117 123.37 146.58 174.10 95 97.85 106.73 118.30

1990Q4 244 177.99 258.36 334.24 125 118.32 131.33 159.58 75 73.97 82.95 93.04

1991Q1 329 179.85 234.30 299.41 167 113.40 127.92 145.29 142 68.01 77.74 84.31

1991Q2 342 156.09 217.09 275.94 167 104.08 115.96 133.47 199 64.77 75.11 83.74

1991Q3 327 151.27 202.38 253.11 115 77.09 96.19 117.54 181 60.55 72.52 79.25

1991Q4 271 113.82 152.64 192.17 148 78.36 90.94 106.68 149 58.75 64.29 71.03

1992Q1 236 135.92 187.98 219.57 219 66.23 87.80 103.65 186 51.64 61.63 70.56

1992Q2 209 187.80 244.84 308.71 152 103.57 114.35 133.30 133 65.70 75.66 85.03

1992Q3 216 151.25 216.65 282.56 243 90.36 103.57 121.24 207 59.24 68.79 77.43

1992Q4 178 123.66 177.28 215.11 178 88.32 101.95 116.12 165 48.12 61.02 71.62

1993Q1 148 138.49 179.77 224.80 161 78.81 97.43 118.56 129 54.90 63.29 72.15

1993Q2 138 139.73 186.36 235.82 195 86.42 101.52 116.07 159 65.95 74.80 83.09

1993Q3 105 124.45 162.59 204.58 177 85.87 103.05 119.37 166 55.32 64.28 73.09

1993Q4 126 127.75 185.93 232.48 192 70.45 90.12 110.52 136 48.28 60.81 69.82

1994Q1 111 139.31 184.08 228.65 217 62.13 81.01 94.65 189 52.13 59.28 66.48

1994Q2 122 123.12 176.50 210.01 250 68.95 90.27 110.24 177 48.12 59.52 68.83

1994Q3 173 114.46 169.95 199.70 327 66.68 84.47 96.50 269 51.82 58.04 66.02

1994Q4 86 111.20 167.32 202.80 304 62.73 78.72 95.06 268 45.00 54.51 62.00
A-6

Table A.2 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Crack Cocaine 

Constant 2002 Dollars (Continued)

≤ 1 Gram 1-15 Grams > 15 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1995Q1 92 112.76 163.99 211.71 369 59.19 78.16 91.12 297 45.72 54.34 60.91

1995Q2 126 123.73 166.64 201.50 238 67.07 85.05 97.07 205 49.37 56.72 64.14

1995Q3 195 135.86 179.10 210.13 216 93.65 99.43 111.08 189 52.84 63.87 70.65

1995Q4 127 181.16 217.74 258.05 207 68.38 86.43 100.31 180 55.61 62.53 70.25

1996Q1 111 113.15 153.33 185.42 294 70.58 81.27 92.35 254 48.15 55.94 64.26

1996Q2 142 110.76 148.51 180.71 303 66.13 76.20 82.95 304 46.35 54.84 61.17

1996Q3 132 130.58 169.48 191.40 302 73.27 78.99 89.99 306 44.23 52.35 60.43

1996Q4 182 134.89 178.15 223.74 348 70.38 80.43 91.90 264 47.39 53.98 60.71

1997Q1 198 120.42 165.55 209.04 350 70.73 78.73 90.58 332 41.34 53.59 62.04

1997Q2 190 179.71 234.48 298.72 322 93.30 102.67 118.61 252 56.53 67.71 75.02

1997Q3 187 144.38 189.33 233.98 325 84.02 90.20 98.95 402 52.83 60.82 71.67

1997Q4 98 147.84 192.17 237.18 271 76.09 82.60 92.38 317 45.08 52.87 60.67

1998Q1 103 125.26 169.82 215.35 338 65.67 74.85 85.00 392 44.86 53.62 62.65

1998Q2 162 125.43 165.61 197.74 312 70.08 77.12 88.98 398 45.43 51.53 58.49

1998Q3 161 114.44 146.31 170.08 339 74.15 78.62 87.64 357 44.95 50.23 55.76

1998Q4 196 116.47 162.50 196.66 333 70.81 78.78 89.82 301 44.17 54.27 62.95

1999Q1 246 187.84 256.25 299.10 350 77.14 95.92 109.73 246 62.20 67.85 78.03

1999Q2 262 134.70 193.93 235.11 385 75.93 83.54 98.16 330 53.18 58.75 66.84

1999Q3 363 125.27 181.67 232.29 441 66.20 81.08 97.44 393 48.30 55.94 62.41

1999Q4 299 139.29 189.46 224.75 443 72.11 88.98 104.15 291 47.23 55.44 60.61

2000Q1 309 158.15 214.16 242.75 517 85.26 99.46 117.01 296 56.53 67.50 76.43

2000Q2 307 185.69 232.64 286.98 478 86.22 95.86 108.35 421 57.79 66.43 75.58

2000Q3 211 157.37 215.77 266.28 476 84.76 99.24 112.00 483 54.94 62.80 71.63

2000Q4 271 159.43 211.64 254.97 412 75.65 96.49 111.77 339 49.09 57.49 66.20

2001Q1 228 165.15 227.09 277.27 526 72.31 91.98 108.25 424 52.74 61.37 70.41

2001Q2 286 139.04 182.80 231.12 488 71.29 90.48 107.25 458 56.28 62.77 71.89

2001Q3 183 136.33 182.10 218.00 390 70.06 84.56 97.19 379 48.81 57.99 67.94

2001Q4 244 154.31 201.44 244.70 253 86.22 89.07 98.43 246 54.95 62.79 73.43

2002Q1 207 131.95 191.45 245.22 394 65.81 79.69 93.34 409 53.37 57.99 65.22

2002Q2 169 128.36 165.26 204.09 353 78.68 87.43 101.27 460 51.49 57.68 66.25

2002Q3 132 121.48 165.23 191.51 354 73.32 80.74 93.32 438 47.43 53.12 60.62

2002Q4 124 131.51 169.65 209.49 255 69.58 74.87 86.46 286 44.56 50.42 56.32

2003Q1 111 156.20 220.10 282.08 327 56.91 74.41 88.15 377 42.07 48.03 54.29

2003Q2 96 118.83 159.63 201.06 222 59.79 73.72 90.99 245 39.16 46.91 53.88

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004. 
A-7

Table A.3 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Heroin 

Constant 2002 Dollars

≤ 1 Gram 1-10 Grams >10 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1981Q1 110 1138.04 2309.35 3087.25 89 1041.37 1587.34 1601.86 69 968.66 1355.43 1684.14

1981Q2 99 1236.24 1991.45 2427.00 81 972.76 1866.77 2137.70 79 637.20 815.81 1012.45

1981Q3 111 1233.85 1893.89 2721.15 103 767.15 1747.10 1957.41 70 929.73 1188.42 1520.82

1981Q4 159 1295.18 1703.25 2097.00 68 716.68 1478.85 1581.55 42 503.78 670.76 792.78

1982Q1 142 1242.93 1639.73 2018.08 147 687.79 1241.08 1264.09 68 501.94 634.83 803.40

1982Q2 125 904.91 1435.82 1771.55 90 784.00 1370.74 1344.97 75 598.30 806.01 1040.23

1982Q3 137 1470.14 1715.54 2112.35 93 440.47 1219.22 1245.01 61 476.38 700.74 920.64

1982Q4 57 1015.28 1559.67 1958.33 62 490.92 1074.65 1091.20 44 777.99 836.37 1062.11

1983Q1 88 1156.59 1615.04 1849.95 85 990.25 1812.22 2069.15 54 650.42 836.36 1090.23

1983Q2 69 1239.41 1899.66 2427.50 66 871.43 1583.98 1617.45 55 541.42 757.55 943.61

1983Q3 82 879.28 1368.15 1633.23 89 1013.32 1535.45 1406.85 84 627.29 848.48 1015.95

1983Q4 59 1026.74 1623.48 2008.58 52 591.89 1182.86 1291.74 43 367.80 462.13 589.66

1984Q1 60 1223.49 1587.44 1780.83 53 947.43 1564.86 1592.90 60 637.56 775.53 882.47

1984Q2 59 1233.93 1714.22 2030.80 48 694.09 1353.60 1550.73 53 501.17 676.39 724.44

1984Q3 58 856.14 1382.74 1656.35 69 793.07 1644.99 1866.05 64 509.04 658.22 807.35

1984Q4 44 809.14 1189.17 1467.15 37 673.94 1199.69 1185.29 60 565.76 750.60 902.02

1985Q1 61 943.73 1423.86 1783.60 75 793.80 1259.41 1440.19 61 429.41 549.83 710.29

1985Q2 46 787.52 1230.01 1517.45 67 618.66 1302.41 1496.02 76 451.91 609.24 683.71

1985Q3 53 715.45 1180.69 1372.88 71 531.13 1209.52 1345.26 84 565.52 700.64 848.36

1985Q4 55 1039.16 1572.06 1935.48 43 353.49 742.66 791.61 65 664.60 762.03 849.28

1986Q1 61 1031.74 1303.25 1535.68 54 433.39 811.62 853.17 91 473.27 652.55 796.63

1986Q2 51 1175.50 1498.32 1881.05 51 485.23 839.06 768.09 64 480.66 560.27 679.63

1986Q3 53 778.18 1228.88 1506.23 30 520.67 916.76 1032.88 55 654.53 724.78 833.93

1986Q4 32 990.83 1379.04 1566.38 18 877.81 1519.16 1550.33 60 567.99 687.40 758.26

1987Q1 38 1064.29 1417.06 1728.03 28 608.72 1217.30 1287.01 66 739.37 915.37 985.56

1987Q2 44 902.64 1207.99 1427.63 36 615.94 1167.21 1088.77 60 610.92 719.76 860.76

1987Q3 52 654.93 1070.56 1257.28 37 637.26 1196.28 1346.14 63 677.50 735.97 811.14

1987Q4 92 772.01 1224.90 1555.70 59 452.90 791.59 750.78 60 547.58 645.98 757.68

1988Q1 86 721.27 1068.53 1513.55 45 433.14 810.90 835.09 77 352.22 488.39 560.78

1988Q2 143 635.90 1076.25 1163.38 43 429.25 821.88 1009.93 71 428.14 517.80 565.34
A-8

Table A.3 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Heroin 

Constant 2002 Dollars (Continued)

≤ 1 Gram 1-10 Grams >10 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile

1988Q3 114 662.46 1041.92 1278.90 64 632.60 1036.38 1026.95 74 469.04 543.30 657.07

1988Q4 86 651.28 988.43 1204.40 49 486.20 854.49 912.71 51 398.77 496.05 539.70

1989Q1 66 581.78 866.53 1065.93 47 464.23 750.40 701.49 53 466.15 530.50 574.00

1989Q2 56 632.59 927.89 1174.75 33 374.96 792.30 950.30 59 398.80 476.13 568.31

1989Q3 85 544.18 947.09 1178.80 54 351.47 628.74 709.68 79 372.41 465.94 572.01

1989Q4 58 633.67 994.35 1332.18 39 356.80 604.02 628.71 71 446.23 470.81 533.28

1990Q1 102 688.10 1059.32 1330.18 49 515.53 978.74 1039.32 58 464.70 605.46 739.86

1990Q2 113 569.18 857.02 1079.13 28 474.35 803.35 917.99 69 559.34 603.08 677.14

1990Q3 88 745.41 1142.59 1459.30 45 584.22 1031.42 1089.56 57 487.71 609.59 705.57

1990Q4 100 527.79 731.88 886.85 25 521.71 832.76 877.48 48 588.50 771.71 907.51

1991Q1 173 503.97 914.77 1072.48 55 581.30 1042.36 1177.64 46 521.17 615.79 683.05

1991Q2 181 541.83 925.51 1202.50 67 520.73 845.31 863.39 61 389.77 514.38 591.10

1991Q3 155 582.74 951.32 1272.48 69 436.10 736.63 758.00 69 357.48 404.81 473.63

1991Q4 83 523.67 791.58 1006.93 32 371.63 653.21 754.69 40 403.23 434.24 507.81

1992Q1 125 502.93 824.50 945.20 51 377.85 639.38 623.52 53 346.57 421.39 488.13

1992Q2 116 422.66 746.09 960.10 39 378.50 659.02 698.70 77 336.32 417.39 470.00

1992Q3 92 414.86 768.59 943.23 43 402.72 732.02 772.93 72 349.93 395.29 421.19

1992Q4 131 446.56 636.45 763.88 38 284.51 503.08 506.45 53 288.19 374.23 433.31

1993Q1 172 413.86 657.32 729.95 67 254.89 497.02 516.29 55 272.51 338.42 405.37

1993Q2 156 399.73 613.27 756.70 71 159.78 379.04 480.06 58 248.14 315.82 351.35

1993Q3 173 416.44 607.90 694.68 99 252.88 444.94 490.07 118 241.43 305.08 339.59

1993Q4 134 383.10 600.43 711.60 61 280.32 473.75 515.20 48 282.75 342.58 425.54

1994Q1 196 445.89 658.99 710.40 93 221.24 395.57 386.99 67 272.27 331.75 368.74

1994Q2 173 371.89 583.16 626.25 83 267.44 443.33 451.28 79 267.85 338.38 391.76

1994Q3 192 406.26 647.89 697.85 84 217.88 419.32 478.93 86 224.13 280.58 305.44

1994Q4 173 312.27 570.61 665.80 85 237.88 415.17 437.20 68 193.37 245.39 313.44

1995Q1 197 316.01 547.59 695.70 79 242.42 408.00 426.55 104 182.07 245.76 309.62

1995Q2 223 394.71 542.00 611.80 92 212.74 359.09 367.96 76 189.35 218.70 268.40

1995Q3 202 386.54 576.32 708.58 104 204.35 418.08 492.79 102 163.30 236.50 282.45

1995Q4 187 331.57 512.86 548.73 68 241.18 426.41 457.64 54 226.70 249.97 266.15
A-9

Table A.3 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of Heroin 

Constant 2002 Dollars (Continued) 

≤ 1 Gram 1-10 Grams >10 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile

1996Q1 214 386.42 515.03 660.30 93 178.05 388.91 424.10 62 240.16 258.08 311.54

1996Q2 224 330.96 541.10 683.95 111 208.78 384.19 436.81 99 212.44 277.18 343.75

1996Q3 187 343.96 502.79 599.03 99 202.81 389.20 431.12 93 196.23 237.48 287.63

1996Q4 197 318.81 503.82 623.65 92 173.27 351.66 396.87 73 187.60 221.19 248.18

1997Q1 280 321.53 493.94 657.90 90 182.69 328.91 315.58 87 181.03 221.20 247.95

1997Q2 248 318.27 529.13 644.03 119 192.04 340.70 355.47 106 154.58 189.74 222.75

1997Q3 218 294.21 486.55 595.05 99 168.32 306.82 363.62 95 187.01 225.09 273.24

1997Q4 52 290.61 454.54 539.80 41 193.46 333.96 374.91 79 162.62 197.25 241.32

1998Q1 314 302.07 472.51 576.88 142 128.82 295.89 319.41 99 151.58 203.40 240.57

1998Q2 210 310.73 431.11 511.80 140 150.06 287.25 287.09 141 153.30 167.67 204.40

1998Q3 160 322.34 441.91 564.40 124 159.23 289.14 302.26 105 141.03 172.69 205.54

1998Q4 202 256.40 385.51 411.70 120 141.32 305.41 374.30 100 161.71 199.32 248.45

1999Q1 265 286.13 415.09 533.18 163 142.86 271.82 290.73 111 162.60 197.94 221.85

1999Q2 257 291.52 440.17 473.70 158 144.53 281.97 289.14 98 143.75 186.69 230.25

1999Q3 254 316.70 409.30 496.28 161 130.01 270.59 309.09 112 139.67 165.52 175.80

1999Q4 194 303.95 441.40 512.75 104 112.97 240.25 293.81 87 126.52 154.05 172.41

2000Q1 258 323.89 428.43 444.83 131 126.46 259.00 323.44 100 122.60 153.13 192.45

2000Q2 216 290.34 413.43 510.30 164 127.47 272.67 298.48 117 123.48 145.67 174.96

2000Q3 222 300.89 405.47 446.55 155 144.79 251.39 253.66 112 138.77 174.43 210.13

2000Q4 209 306.50 408.26 479.80 86 163.35 295.08 331.85 64 102.28 141.16 171.55

2001Q1 218 284.15 391.98 440.08 164 141.78 256.02 246.05 84 116.09 152.42 184.84

2001Q2 219 273.31 407.51 563.70 140 138.93 238.68 269.23 105 93.64 139.39 172.82

2001Q3 218 265.30 396.78 477.85 118 145.26 260.00 275.99 105 110.42 132.61 162.70

2001Q4 223 285.42 396.83 453.03 81 128.19 229.36 242.67 60 81.06 114.06 142.91

2002Q1 228 305.58 392.39 424.23 111 141.58 253.80 275.33 81 118.77 143.57 158.71

2002Q2 225 285.31 405.35 453.75 149 114.46 229.55 250.27 83 100.10 130.27 157.67

2002Q3 225 280.38 388.20 494.18 134 142.69 256.93 282.95 114 129.66 148.69 183.67

2002Q4 79 196.76 302.06 367.50 67 128.85 223.08 221.18 50 111.91 130.74 156.53

2003Q1 215 261.38 361.76 391.95 110 111.02 227.97 253.51 60 111.98 128.84 142.08

2003Q2 52 238.51 362.14 403.98 51 157.83 264.13 289.52 43 119.70 149.60 184.44

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004. 
A-10

Table A.4 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of 

d-Methamphetamine, Constant 2002 Dollars 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1981Q1 19 228.40 327.92 403.14 20 112.81 154.10 192.64

1981Q2 11 397.84 476.90 596.95 9 117.83 159.53 199.21

1981Q3 8 262.76 353.51 439.55 10 101.70 139.00 171.95

1981Q4 8 405.31 446.60 548.72 8 119.01 162.23 201.22

1982Q1 14 285.86 349.66 427.50 19 162.13 219.48 274.11 8 68.99 91.83 99.07

1982Q2 16 377.69 492.24 610.78 8 134.77 186.82 234.07

1982Q3 22 295.64 358.50 442.14 14 156.36 211.77 264.35

1982Q4 25 287.90 374.09 462.30 16 151.21 182.01 233.95

1983Q1 29 377.33 533.01 666.04 8 147.02 196.45 248.57

1983Q2 31 309.31 370.58 462.58 12 202.91 274.34 344.36

1983Q3 17 272.62 387.56 481.21 14 124.10 187.91 238.26

1983Q4 25 245.75 295.09 367.51 8 112.37 152.28 189.98 8 80.51 106.51 114.33

1984Q1 31 273.25 349.14 434.90 8 252.82 347.82 433.78 8 59.28 77.94 85.58

1984Q2 31 240.64 288.55 359.88 28 153.12 226.14 287.48 12 44.13 59.02 63.38

1984Q3 19 316.05 398.14 491.22 13 143.45 213.49 269.32 13 44.50 59.52 63.90

1984Q4 32 294.63 367.94 452.20 19 124.22 183.99 233.22 6 68.37 91.50 98.18

1985Q1 37 363.82 449.95 487.32 32 144.30 204.20 257.02 12 49.72 65.88 71.40

1985Q2 11 230.98 318.49 396.43 13 178.23 261.43 328.11

1985Q3 24 236.34 333.16 417.17 9 89.24 120.03 150.88

1985Q4 28 319.04 407.77 495.87 16 131.46 176.88 222.27 7 88.59 116.99 127.20

1986Q1 39 260.20 334.03 417.66 22 155.61 229.14 292.15

1986Q2 23 208.73 254.12 315.64 15 212.22 276.60 346.77 6 68.20 89.94 97.95

1986Q3 28 268.48 335.29 417.28 14 202.56 278.42 350.82 6 35.54 48.58 52.41

1986Q4 24 205.96 248.40 308.01 9 104.27 154.51 195.76 5 32.75 46.58 50.11

1987Q1 25 232.56 289.88 361.45 18 147.68 198.19 248.84 5 230.53 306.57 330.99

1987Q2 30 210.78 275.44 345.28 25 143.08 186.71 241.91

1987Q3 22 168.64 210.13 262.12 12 141.23 188.94 237.18

1987Q4 43 233.88 304.50 379.74 18 131.13 179.20 225.93

1988Q1 64 205.70 239.00 297.44 39 109.31 147.51 184.82 9 52.67 74.13 80.59

1988Q2 60 266.53 324.38 398.60 30 102.16 138.38 176.01 9 54.81 72.58 78.72
A-11

Table A.4 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of 

d-Methamphetamine, Constant 2002 Dollars (Continued) 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1988Q3 29 206.76 256.34 321.35 36 138.16 186.43 233.60 8 48.30 73.28 80.07

1988Q4 29 228.02 283.67 354.41 27 111.34 150.17 189.86 8 42.96 60.48 65.72

1989Q1 35 205.94 257.08 320.09 33 110.90 150.61 191.07 8 56.68 79.77 86.72

1989Q2 26 207.42 258.19 322.37 20 117.77 159.56 204.54

1989Q3 23 388.42 468.21 580.88 21 104.12 142.01 179.39

1989Q4 30 331.24 414.34 514.82 18 144.75 198.35 248.55

1990Q1 25 204.31 254.31 317.55 25 233.73 284.39 361.71

1990Q2 16 431.39 531.48 670.49 26 273.02 375.06 474.20 8 169.74 240.64 265.38

1990Q3 21 277.11 344.33 430.70 28 147.86 202.15 256.81 10 96.61 136.85 149.36

1990Q4 17 399.84 479.79 597.96 15 193.52 263.61 333.42 8 76.71 101.07 110.16

1991Q1 32 457.08 580.08 710.42 22 140.15 191.66 241.47 10 78.62 103.46 112.90

1991Q2 18 363.13 450.15 564.39 29 272.62 361.34 460.92 9 58.44 82.09 89.41

1991Q3 16 360.04 445.76 559.58 21 179.24 243.99 308.81 8 87.66 123.47 134.13

1991Q4 9 259.68 323.11 403.60 25 219.50 298.30 376.90 8 116.11 163.78 177.62

1992Q1 11 195.32 232.44 290.76 31 147.94 185.07 233.78 8 111.94 156.20 171.26

1992Q2 18 191.50 251.18 317.78 28 140.01 186.97 236.72 13 70.28 92.67 100.91

1992Q3 22 189.23 233.34 294.11 29 113.02 154.05 195.22 12 42.82 60.06 65.52

1992Q4 12 184.96 231.04 287.47 28 102.50 139.15 176.61 8 52.72 73.70 80.65

1993Q1 28 177.75 218.24 276.27 18 129.78 157.48 196.79 7 51.10 71.45 78.17

1993Q2 21 200.99 249.37 312.38 20 114.23 154.71 196.15

1993Q3 25 198.26 244.80 308.14 34 90.87 111.59 140.63 16 37.07 51.92 56.72

1993Q4 39 106.85 149.08 192.95 31 81.16 108.17 137.22 11 36.66 51.29 56.08

1994Q1 28 140.57 172.44 218.48 34 75.97 103.61 131.94 28 38.07 52.64 57.14

1994Q2 32 139.42 173.58 216.68 53 73.94 100.06 125.00 22 32.57 45.41 49.83

1994Q3 32 97.33 119.66 151.28 57 63.04 86.14 107.06 20 32.51 45.90 49.74

1994Q4 38 153.38 175.73 217.07 41 62.24 84.52 106.87 23 33.86 47.36 51.80

1995Q1 51 137.78 170.40 214.14 70 80.27 109.63 135.72 26 31.73 41.41 45.56

1995Q2 40 147.39 180.62 229.08 102 66.86 91.91 115.19 42 27.05 39.24 42.97

1995Q3 67 143.02 178.33 222.29 56 81.09 109.91 136.64 24 47.91 67.19 73.29

1995Q4 55 401.72 487.72 600.76 33 199.09 272.63 345.79 17 149.63 197.43 219.59
A-12

Table A.4 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Expected Pure Gram of 

d-Methamphetamine, Constant 2002 Dollars (Continued) 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1996Q1 27 194.01 238.95 301.54 56 139.79 193.01 240.85 16 78.53 109.45 120.15

1996Q2 42 170.68 213.23 265.28 53 102.42 138.13 172.59 32 50.01 69.62 76.50

1996Q3 24 243.49 299.97 380.08 40 99.82 139.27 172.83 46 50.07 69.80 75.75

1996Q4 35 138.37 171.02 215.06 77 80.11 109.64 139.14 50 51.08 71.04 77.12

1997Q1 47 158.36 195.42 246.12 99 74.15 101.66 128.80 43 32.21 46.08 49.87

1997Q2 48 117.12 149.59 193.26 114 80.72 110.33 140.21 57 45.39 59.37 65.19

1997Q3 60 125.70 155.80 195.38 133 79.45 109.30 137.99 51 36.91 53.32 58.26

1997Q4 72 171.99 212.24 267.32 143 88.04 121.48 151.68 66 47.10 61.42 67.63

1998Q1 77 167.38 209.90 260.15 154 94.25 129.45 166.80 79 49.71 69.64 73.63

1998Q2 72 192.89 246.63 299.80 150 170.34 232.88 287.61 66 98.50 129.12 142.62

1998Q3 61 257.86 319.52 415.64 132 179.43 250.86 311.65 85 114.69 160.34 178.69

1998Q4 41 205.23 248.05 320.09 145 141.28 187.57 242.59 94 89.82 119.32 130.08

1999Q1 61 204.85 254.13 318.13 115 167.18 228.07 288.04 92 77.92 109.37 119.62

1999Q2 59 163.31 200.63 249.79 102 125.68 173.98 216.53 91 60.72 81.38 89.70

1999Q3 75 162.52 203.54 252.59 165 105.58 142.58 181.91 119 57.50 80.15 89.90

1999Q4 63 144.33 184.08 242.45 122 118.00 164.25 203.31 99 52.33 76.74 84.94

2000Q1 69 105.06 148.31 185.45 130 96.89 133.22 168.29 130 53.25 73.22 79.13

2000Q2 79 163.85 208.98 263.52 167 113.12 156.77 196.47 106 58.56 79.63 86.88

2000Q3 51 156.14 186.41 240.18 139 98.42 142.78 182.71 122 47.61 71.95 76.68

2000Q4 44 142.27 175.77 233.66 96 98.67 132.09 180.14 100 46.76 68.00 73.57

2001Q1 74 140.83 175.86 218.89 124 84.60 120.64 146.93 110 53.69 70.95 78.46

2001Q2 63 150.39 187.95 248.15 151 88.22 119.16 141.29 139 41.10 61.96 70.34

2001Q3 77 147.86 182.60 239.62 145 71.34 99.41 134.99 157 42.41 58.10 63.21

2001Q4 68 144.89 180.46 225.20 128 86.13 114.77 139.36 86 44.15 67.02 73.68

2002Q1 74 140.27 180.01 230.09 142 74.45 100.34 127.84 111 41.47 60.54 65.91

2002Q2 88 118.79 150.53 191.04 153 76.58 105.49 133.02 104 39.41 57.54 63.11

2002Q3 58 125.02 157.57 201.06 144 79.23 105.21 134.64 111 45.69 66.17 71.72

2002Q4 55 99.87 126.96 164.80 97 78.13 105.04 137.44 79 32.78 49.30 53.23

2003Q1 82 115.71 143.43 181.81 179 66.25 90.94 114.15 89 33.67 46.31 50.26

2003Q2 39 134.34 167.79 207.88 104 67.75 90.60 114.39 54 38.21 50.26 54.26

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004. 
A-13

Table A.5 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Gram of Marijuana, Constant 2002 Dollars

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average QuartileObs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile

1981Q1 16 5.07 6.40 7.37 24 3.73 3.79 3.95 3 1.32 1.72 2.05

1981Q2 35 5.03 6.36 7.32 7 3.28 3.36 3.51 2 1.21 1.57 1.88

1981Q3 41 4.83 6.10 7.02 13 3.23 3.31 3.46 11 1.27 1.65 1.97

1981Q4 38 5.15 6.51 7.49 12 3.17 3.21 3.35 1 1.34 1.74 2.08

1982Q1 10 5.56 7.04 8.09 11 5.27 5.34 5.66 6 1.38 1.84 2.15

1982Q2 17 5.53 6.99 8.04 12 4.68 4.74 5.03 3 1.27 1.68 1.97

1982Q3 8 5.30 6.71 7.71 9 4.61 4.67 4.95 8 1.33 1.76 2.06

1982Q4 10 5.65 7.15 8.22 4 4.48 4.53 4.80 13 1.40 1.86 2.18

1983Q1 10 9.86 12.48 14.35 10 7.62 8.40 8.43 2 2.51 3.45 4.58

1983Q2 27 9.80 12.39 14.25 9 6.77 7.46 7.50 6 2.24 3.16 4.20

1983Q3 18 9.40 11.89 13.67 8 6.51 7.35 7.38 8 2.34 3.31 4.40

1983Q4 11 10.02 12.68 14.58 18 6.32 7.13 7.16 18 2.55 3.50 4.65

1984Q1 18 9.29 11.76 13.52 9 4.41 4.78 5.17 5 2.49 3.42 3.56

1984Q2 35 9.23 11.68 13.43 10 3.92 4.25 4.59 9 2.28 3.13 3.14

1984Q3 18 8.86 11.20 12.88 9 3.86 4.19 4.52 7 2.38 3.28 3.29

1984Q4 16 9.44 11.94 13.73 13 3.75 4.06 4.39 7 2.48 3.47 3.48

1985Q1 28 10.17 12.87 14.79 12 5.99 6.55 6.95 13 2.31 3.04 3.63

1985Q2 22 10.10 12.78 14.69 9 5.32 5.82 6.18 18 2.11 2.78 3.47

1985Q3 16 9.69 12.26 14.09 5 5.24 5.73 6.08 6 2.21 2.91 3.59

1985Q4 9 10.33 13.07 15.03 6 5.09 5.56 5.90 9 2.34 3.08 3.79

1986Q1 8 11.97 15.15 17.41 5 10.31 10.45 10.91 6 2.77 3.51 4.36

1986Q2 10 11.89 15.05 17.30 2 9.05 9.28 9.69 3 2.54 3.22 3.99

1986Q3 12 11.41 14.44 16.59 2 9.02 9.14 9.55 3 2.66 3.37 4.18

1986Q4 17 12.16 15.39 17.69 4 8.75 8.87 9.26 5 2.81 3.56 4.42

1987Q1 29 11.06 14.00 16.09 5 7.44 7.60 7.88 11 4.27 5.19 6.22

1987Q2 19 10.99 13.91 15.98 4 6.61 6.75 7.00 26 3.91 4.75 5.69

1987Q3 9 10.54 13.34 15.33 5 6.51 6.65 6.89 9 4.09 4.98 5.97

1987Q4 4 11.24 14.22 16.34 6 6.32 6.45 6.68 3 4.33 5.26 6.30

1988Q1 15 11.61 14.70 16.89 3 8.29 8.57 8.75 10 2.60 3.52 4.27

1988Q2 12 11.54 14.60 16.78 10 7.37 7.61 7.78 3 2.41 3.22 4.03
A-14

Table A.5 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Gram of Marijuana 

Constant 2002 Dollars (Continued) 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1988Q3 10 11.07 14.01 16.10 3 7.25 7.49 7.66 2 2.50 3.38 4.10

1988Q4 6 11.80 14.94 17.16 9 7.03 7.27 7.43 8 2.64 3.57 4.33

1989Q1 8 11.00 13.93 16.00 5 8.59 8.77 9.23 16 3.00 3.89 4.71

1989Q2 6 10.93 13.84 15.89 6 7.63 7.79 8.20 6 2.75 3.57 4.31

1989Q3 10 10.48 13.28 15.25 4 7.52 7.67 8.07 8 2.88 3.74 4.52

1989Q4 10 11.18 14.15 16.26 2 7.29 7.44 7.83 2 3.04 3.95 4.73

1990Q1 8 11.94 15.11 17.36 9 10.65 10.97 11.42 17 3.29 4.38 5.57

1990Q2 10 11.86 15.01 17.24 4 9.46 9.74 10.15 11 3.02 4.01 4.97

1990Q3 8 11.38 14.40 16.55 1 9.32 9.59 9.99 4 3.16 4.20 5.35

1990Q4 14 12.13 15.35 17.64 12 9.04 9.31 9.69 23 3.34 4.44 5.50

1991Q1 14 14.05 17.79 20.44 30 10.90 11.76 11.69 32 3.97 4.99 6.18

1991Q2 16 13.96 17.67 20.30 8 9.68 10.45 10.39 11 3.63 4.57 5.66

1991Q3 5 13.39 16.96 19.48 5 9.53 10.29 10.23 5 3.81 4.79 5.93

1991Q4 4 14.27 18.08 20.76 9.25 9.98 9.93 31 4.02 5.06 6.03

1992Q1 12 12.07 15.29 17.55 7 7.66 7.97 8.31 20 3.21 4.43 5.78

1992Q2 18 11.99 15.19 17.44 12 6.81 7.08 7.25 23 3.07 4.05 5.00

1992Q3 25 11.50 14.57 16.73 7 6.70 6.97 7.27 35 3.08 4.25 5.55

1992Q4 14 12.26 15.54 17.83 8 6.50 6.77 7.05 26 3.39 4.49 5.86

1993Q1 23 11.61 14.72 16.89 4 11.21 11.98 12.39 14 3.34 4.76 6.01

1993Q2 27 11.53 14.62 16.77 8 9.96 10.65 10.97 13 3.06 4.36 5.50

1993Q3 37 11.06 14.03 16.09 13 9.93 10.48 10.84 14 3.20 4.57 5.76

1993Q4 27 11.80 14.96 17.16 9 9.52 10.17 10.51 13 3.31 4.83 6.09

1994Q1 12 10.38 13.17 15.10 6 11.23 12.14 11.97 18 2.72 3.68 4.65

1994Q2 21 10.31 13.09 15.00 3 9.98 10.78 10.63 26 2.49 3.37 4.26

1994Q3 9 9.90 12.56 14.39 6 9.83 10.62 10.47 15 2.61 3.54 4.46

1994Q4 15 10.55 13.39 15.35 22 9.53 10.30 10.16 13 2.76 3.73 4.71

1995Q1 14 9.32 11.83 13.55 17 7.25 8.10 7.82 21 2.71 3.47 4.41

1995Q2 9 9.25 11.75 13.46 8 6.52 7.19 6.95 37 2.55 3.18 4.06

1995Q3 13 8.88 11.27 12.92 4 6.42 7.08 6.84 20 2.68 3.33 4.26

1995Q4 43 9.47 12.02 13.77 18 6.23 6.87 6.64 18 2.83 3.52 4.50
A-15

Table A.5 

Estimated Quarterly Price Per Gram of Marijuana 

Constant 2002 Dollars (Continued) 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average QuartileObs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile

1996Q1 23 7.94 10.08 11.54 16 5.26 6.98 7.37 23 2.11 2.66 3.00

1996Q2 22 7.88 10.01 11.47 11 4.67 6.20 6.55 23 1.94 2.44 2.75

1996Q3 15 7.56 9.61 11.00 13 4.60 6.10 6.45 27 2.03 2.55 2.88

1996Q4 12 8.06 10.24 11.73 6 4.46 5.92 6.25 13 2.14 2.70 3.04

1997Q1 44 7.34 9.34 10.68 16 4.79 5.06 5.07 28 2.24 2.83 3.69

1997Q2 40 7.29 9.27 10.61 28 4.25 4.49 4.51 33 2.05 2.59 3.38

1997Q3 26 7.00 8.90 10.18 16 4.19 4.42 4.44 35 2.15 2.72 3.54

1997Q4 20 7.46 9.48 10.85 7 4.06 4.29 4.30 19 2.27 2.87 3.74

1998Q1 10 6.88 8.76 10.01 13 6.43 6.57 6.81 27 2.37 3.15 3.85

1998Q2 34 6.84 8.70 9.95 12 5.71 5.83 6.05 35 2.17 2.89 3.53

1998Q3 24 6.56 8.35 9.54 6 5.62 5.75 5.95 27 2.28 3.03 3.69

1998Q4 25 6.99 8.90 10.17 10 5.46 5.57 5.78 18 2.44 3.20 3.90

1999Q1 31 7.69 9.79 11.19 7 8.28 9.39 8.89 23 2.19 2.94 3.70

1999Q2 61 7.64 9.73 11.12 11 7.35 8.34 7.90 29 2.01 2.70 3.39

1999Q3 97 7.33 9.33 10.67 11 6.73 8.21 7.78 26 2.10 2.82 3.55

1999Q4 22 7.82 9.95 11.37 11 6.53 7.97 7.54 22 2.22 2.98 3.75

2000Q1 32 6.95 8.85 10.11 11 5.30 5.78 5.78 33 1.89 2.61 3.06

2000Q2 24 6.90 8.79 10.04 3 4.70 5.13 5.13 27 1.78 2.39 2.80

2000Q3 11 6.62 8.44 9.64 6 4.57 5.05 5.05 26 1.87 2.50 2.93

2000Q4 39 7.06 8.99 10.27 10 4.49 4.90 4.90 16 1.97 2.64 3.10

2001Q1 29 7.59 9.67 11.04 14 5.09 5.76 5.96 31 1.83 2.54 3.15

2001Q2 39 7.54 9.61 10.97 4 4.52 5.11 5.29 9 1.68 2.32 2.86

2001Q3 49 7.23 9.22 10.52 9 4.45 5.04 5.21 20 1.76 2.44 3.00

2001Q4 76 7.71 9.83 11.22 11 4.32 4.89 5.06 12 1.86 2.57 3.19

2002Q1 55 8.78 11.19 12.77 12 8.47 9.66 9.64 16 2.16 3.49 3.51

2002Q2 60 8.72 11.12 12.68 8 7.62 8.58 8.56 24 1.98 3.20 3.21

2002Q3 51 8.36 10.67 12.17 3 7.41 8.45 8.43 11 2.07 3.35 3.37

2002Q4 79 8.92 11.37 12.97 3 7.19 8.20 8.18 19 2.19 3.54 3.55

2003Q1 66 8.94 11.41 13.00 13 6.64 7.55 7.14 26 1.99 2.57 3.13

2003Q2 10 8.88 11.33 12.91 8 5.90 6.70 6.34 18 1.82 2.36 2.86

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004. 
A-16

Table A.6: Estimated Purity Per Gram of Powder Cocaine, Quarterly Series 

 ≤ 2 Grams 2-10 Grams 10-50 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num.

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Qu

1981Q1 56 0.31 0.32 0.36 86 0.43 0.48 0.53 127 0.45 0.47 0.50 25

1981Q2 53 0.34 0.39 0.42 67 0.36 0.41 0.46 113 0.44 0.50 0.55 13

1981Q3 48 0.43 0.48 0.54 53 0.36 0.42 0.47 113 0.47 0.51 0.56 

1981Q4 52 0.34 0.41 0.46 52 0.37 0.43 0.48 53 0.45 0.51 0.59 6

1982Q1 87 0.34 0.38 0.42 86 0.32 0.37 0.41 138 0.45 0.49 0.53 15

1982Q2 64 0.36 0.42 0.46 96 0.41 0.46 0.50 92 0.40 0.46 0.49 21

1982Q3 95 0.42 0.47 0.55 116 0.38 0.44 0.50 150 0.45 0.50 0.54 19

1982Q4 86 0.38 0.45 0.50 72 0.44 0.51 0.56 107 0.46 0.50 0.55 8

1983Q1 111 0.40 0.45 0.48 112 0.40 0.48 0.51 151 0.54 0.59 0.65 30

1983Q2 56 0.47 0.51 0.54 133 0.45 0.48 0.52 184 0.51 0.55 0.60 38

1983Q3 61 0.43 0.47 0.53 100 0.41 0.47 0.51 169 0.58 0.62 0.67 45

1983Q4 116 0.43 0.51 0.60 147 0.49 0.54 0.59 217 0.61 0.67 0.74 46

1984Q1 129 0.45 0.52 0.58 128 0.47 0.54 0.59 227 0.64 0.69 0.72 60

1984Q2 98 0.49 0.55 0.64 131 0.52 0.59 0.64 230 0.65 0.69 0.75 64

1984Q3 81 0.48 0.53 0.58 125 0.50 0.55 0.59 246 0.60 0.66 0.72 61

1984Q4 106 0.47 0.53 0.59 146 0.48 0.54 0.60 282 0.60 0.65 0.70 60

1985Q1 129 0.42 0.50 0.55 183 0.49 0.57 0.61 295 0.56 0.62 0.67 71

1985Q2 172 0.42 0.53 0.58 163 0.48 0.53 0.57 332 0.47 0.57 0.67 94

1985Q3 162 0.43 0.49 0.54 170 0.48 0.54 0.59 384 0.59 0.63 0.70 87

1985Q4 145 0.48 0.53 0.57 145 0.52 0.60 0.66 390 0.61 0.68 0.72 110

1986Q1 161 0.47 0.57 0.65 168 0.57 0.62 0.69 400 0.68 0.73 0.77 113

1986Q2 170 0.54 0.56 0.66 184 0.63 0.68 0.72 369 0.69 0.75 0.80 112

1986Q3 142 0.57 0.54 0.67 150 0.69 0.73 0.77 335 0.69 0.76 0.81 102

1986Q4 135 0.66 0.55 0.75 128 0.70 0.72 0.76 346 0.71 0.78 0.85 124

1987Q1 150 0.67 0.66 0.78 88 0.72 0.76 0.80 291 0.75 0.80 0.85 136

1987Q2 96 0.71 0.71 0.78 121 0.74 0.79 0.84 411 0.76 0.79 0.85 200

1987Q3 95 0.71 0.73 0.77 121 0.72 0.77 0.82 440 0.77 0.81 0.85 214

1987Q4 94 0.67 0.71 0.75 113 0.77 0.80 0.84 369 0.79 0.84 0.87 182

1988Q1 88 0.72 0.76 0.80 136 0.72 0.77 0.81 397 0.81 0.84 0.88 171

1988Q2 121 0.63 0.67 0.70 115 0.68 0.74 0.80 362 0.74 0.78 0.82 181
A-17

Table A.6: Estimated Purity Per Gram of Powder Cocaine, Quarterly Series 

(Continued) 

 ≤ 2 Grams 2-10 Grams 10-50 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num.

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Qu

1988Q3 111 0.69 0.73 0.79 127 0.76 0.79 0.84 353 0.74 0.78 0.83 255

1988Q4 87 0.74 0.77 0.81 112 0.76 0.80 0.83 348 0.79 0.82 0.86 239

1989Q1 84 0.71 0.74 0.78 144 0.71 0.75 0.80 387 0.78 0.80 0.84 247

1989Q2 81 0.69 0.74 0.77 89 0.74 0.79 0.83 374 0.71 0.74 0.80 206

1989Q3 84 0.63 0.66 0.73 92 0.67 0.72 0.75 309 0.69 0.74 0.79 265

1989Q4 81 0.56 0.60 0.65 102 0.63 0.67 0.71 250 0.65 0.69 0.73 185

1990Q1 96 0.57 0.62 0.65 111 0.56 0.61 0.64 231 0.60 0.66 0.70 180

1990Q2 49 0.51 0.59 0.69 66 0.45 0.50 0.55 196 0.56 0.60 0.65 142

1990Q3 74 0.45 0.52 0.56 82 0.53 0.58 0.62 240 0.54 0.60 0.68 184

1990Q4 70 0.56 0.59 0.63 73 0.56 0.61 0.65 263 0.60 0.67 0.72 161

1991Q1 145 0.53 0.61 0.65 126 0.58 0.62 0.68 342 0.65 0.71 0.76 238

1991Q2 66 0.58 0.61 0.66 87 0.66 0.70 0.79 311 0.67 0.73 0.80 309

1991Q3 49 0.62 0.67 0.71 101 0.61 0.68 0.73 325 0.71 0.76 0.82 298

1991Q4 49 0.57 0.64 0.69 78 0.69 0.76 0.81 276 0.75 0.78 0.82 241

1992Q1 70 0.61 0.68 0.73 90 0.61 0.67 0.74 295 0.71 0.76 0.79 241

1992Q2 47 0.59 0.63 0.69 66 0.62 0.65 0.68 193 0.62 0.67 0.72 156

1992Q3 68 0.64 0.68 0.73 61 0.62 0.66 0.70 229 0.69 0.73 0.79 224

1992Q4 45 0.67 0.71 0.74 46 0.65 0.70 0.74 165 0.72 0.76 0.80 103

1993Q1 43 0.65 0.68 0.72 48 0.58 0.65 0.70 100 0.63 0.68 0.72 78

1993Q2 44 0.66 0.69 0.70 57 0.69 0.73 0.78 148 0.63 0.67 0.72 71

1993Q3 52 0.64 0.69 0.71 54 0.59 0.65 0.70 147 0.64 0.68 0.71 97

1993Q4 46 0.65 0.68 0.71 52 0.59 0.64 0.69 113 0.64 0.67 0.69 84

1994Q1 51 0.65 0.70 0.74 56 0.67 0.72 0.77 143 0.66 0.71 0.75 96

1994Q2 30 0.61 0.63 0.67 54 0.64 0.68 0.72 156 0.69 0.74 0.78 101

1994Q3 61 0.61 0.63 0.66 53 0.63 0.68 0.72 171 0.67 0.71 0.76 150

1994Q4 29 0.66 0.68 0.72 47 0.58 0.61 0.66 141 0.70 0.74 0.77 109

1995Q1 32 0.68 0.70 0.75 69 0.71 0.75 0.79 145 0.73 0.76 0.80 102

1995Q2 25 0.48 0.52 0.56 45 0.62 0.68 0.72 112 0.66 0.71 0.76 112

1995Q3 33 0.56 0.61 0.66 57 0.57 0.62 0.68 107 0.57 0.60 0.65 108

1995Q4 48 0.57 0.60 0.63 38 0.58 0.62 0.67 118 0.61 0.65 0.68 102
A-18

Table A.6: Estimated Purity Per Gram of Powder Cocaine, Quarterly Series 

(Continued) 

 ≤ 2 Grams 2-10 Grams 10-50 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Qua

1996Q1 29 0.66 0.68 0.72 53 0.66 0.70 0.75 124 0.64 0.68 0.72 114

1996Q2 45 0.67 0.69 0.73 55 0.60 0.64 0.69 143 0.61 0.67 0.73 173

1996Q3 31 0.66 0.70 0.74 59 0.63 0.69 0.75 164 0.65 0.70 0.74 193

1996Q4 24 0.81 0.84 0.86 46 0.70 0.73 0.78 155 0.72 0.77 0.81 151

1997Q1 29 0.64 0.69 0.74 79 0.64 0.69 0.73 149 0.68 0.73 0.79 117

1997Q2 55 0.55 0.59 0.64 74 0.64 0.68 0.72 99 0.58 0.63 0.67 90

1997Q3 50 0.60 0.65 0.71 80 0.65 0.71 0.76 160 0.61 0.66 0.71 172

1997Q4 40 0.65 0.69 0.72 63 0.67 0.71 0.76 158 0.71 0.74 0.77 164

1998Q1 34 0.72 0.75 0.78 57 0.67 0.71 0.76 178 0.65 0.68 0.75 149

1998Q2 34 0.64 0.67 0.73 71 0.68 0.73 0.76 169 0.68 0.72 0.77 195

1998Q3 52 0.60 0.63 0.66 75 0.62 0.67 0.72 199 0.69 0.71 0.75 181

1998Q4 38 0.67 0.69 0.71 56 0.66 0.70 0.73 157 0.64 0.67 0.70 164

1999Q1 81 0.59 0.62 0.65 92 0.59 0.63 0.68 141 0.59 0.65 0.71 107

1999Q2 34 0.58 0.61 0.64 71 0.60 0.65 0.71 134 0.60 0.63 0.69 168

1999Q3 61 0.63 0.67 0.70 57 0.58 0.63 0.67 193 0.57 0.63 0.69 239

1999Q4 36 0.67 0.70 0.72 67 0.59 0.64 0.69 148 0.61 0.64 0.70 127

2000Q1 51 0.57 0.63 0.67 74 0.51 0.56 0.60 137 0.56 0.60 0.64 117

2000Q2 32 0.58 0.62 0.65 58 0.54 0.58 0.64 156 0.48 0.53 0.57 178

2000Q3 29 0.55 0.58 0.64 65 0.54 0.59 0.64 181 0.56 0.61 0.66 172

2000Q4 40 0.57 0.62 0.65 65 0.50 0.55 0.60 171 0.52 0.58 0.62 119

2001Q1 41 0.57 0.60 0.65 85 0.55 0.60 0.65 192 0.50 0.53 0.57 186

2001Q2 21 0.53 0.55 0.58 64 0.57 0.62 0.66 169 0.51 0.54 0.58 188

2001Q3 15 0.61 0.64 0.66 37 0.53 0.57 0.62 131 0.50 0.55 0.59 178

2001Q4 17 0.49 0.52 0.55 38 0.56 0.59 0.65 98 0.48 0.52 0.55 126

2002Q1 17 0.62 0.65 0.70 59 0.62 0.66 0.71 119 0.50 0.54 0.58 157

2002Q2 21 0.68 0.71 0.75 63 0.58 0.63 0.69 109 0.55 0.59 0.65 201

2002Q3 21 0.72 0.75 0.78 45 0.60 0.65 0.71 149 0.60 0.65 0.69 215

2002Q4 27 0.65 0.67 0.69 44 0.64 0.68 0.73 120 0.56 0.61 0.65 136

2003Q1 29 0.66 0.71 0.74 75 0.64 0.69 0.74 175 0.59 0.63 0.67 138

2003Q2 13 0.66 0.69 0.72 20 0.60 0.65 0.69 108 0.57 0.61 0.66 91

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004
A-19

Table A.7 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of Crack Cocaine, Quarterly Series 

≤ 1 Gram 1-15 Grams > 15 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1986Q1 24 0.87 0.88 0.91 8 0.75 0.76 0.78 6 0.72 0.73 0.75

1986Q2 45 0.85 0.86 0.88 23 0.75 0.76 0.80 6 0.71 0.74 0.76

1986Q3 50 0.79 0.78 0.84 21 0.76 0.79 0.80 9 0.74 0.75 0.76

1986Q4 25 0.85 0.86 0.89 14 0.74 0.75 0.77 10 0.79 0.80 0.83

1987Q1 42 0.75 0.77 0.80 16 0.75 0.79 0.81 18 0.70 0.72 0.75

1987Q2 68 0.74 0.76 0.79 35 0.75 0.77 0.79 39 0.61 0.64 0.67

1987Q3 103 0.89 0.91 0.93 100 0.77 0.78 0.80 17 0.63 0.65 0.68

1987Q4 122 0.89 0.90 0.93 26 0.86 0.87 0.90 24 0.68 0.70 0.75

1988Q1 116 0.87 0.88 0.92 42 0.82 0.83 0.85 21 0.67 0.69 0.72

1988Q2 172 0.77 0.80 0.83 51 0.82 0.84 0.86 35 0.75 0.77 0.79

1988Q3 228 0.86 0.86 0.89 83 0.81 0.83 0.85 70 0.79 0.81 0.82

1988Q4 253 0.90 0.90 0.94 71 0.85 0.86 0.88 52 0.81 0.84 0.86

1989Q1 285 0.86 0.87 0.89 79 0.82 0.85 0.86 72 0.71 0.74 0.77

1989Q2 399 0.85 0.86 0.89 104 0.82 0.84 0.86 85 0.76 0.79 0.81

1989Q3 313 0.85 0.86 0.89 120 0.80 0.81 0.82 108 0.72 0.76 0.79

1989Q4 216 0.86 0.87 0.90 59 0.80 0.82 0.84 54 0.70 0.72 0.73

1990Q1 298 0.78 0.79 0.83 88 0.78 0.79 0.81 85 0.57 0.61 0.63

1990Q2 213 0.79 0.79 0.83 88 0.73 0.74 0.77 65 0.51 0.54 0.57

1990Q3 349 0.76 0.79 0.81 119 0.76 0.76 0.81 101 0.59 0.61 0.64

1990Q4 240 0.84 0.85 0.89 130 0.84 0.85 0.87 78 0.70 0.73 0.77

1991Q1 339 0.86 0.87 0.89 171 0.82 0.83 0.85 148 0.76 0.77 0.78

1991Q2 339 0.82 0.84 0.86 166 0.81 0.83 0.85 198 0.77 0.78 0.80

1991Q3 312 0.84 0.85 0.89 121 0.82 0.83 0.85 186 0.72 0.74 0.76

1991Q4 269 0.85 0.86 0.90 150 0.82 0.84 0.87 150 0.77 0.78 0.79

1992Q1 233 0.81 0.83 0.85 228 0.82 0.85 0.87 190 0.77 0.79 0.81

1992Q2 207 0.77 0.78 0.80 154 0.78 0.79 0.81 136 0.69 0.72 0.77

1992Q3 221 0.81 0.84 0.85 256 0.75 0.77 0.79 210 0.74 0.75 0.78

1992Q4 178 0.83 0.84 0.87 177 0.81 0.83 0.87 168 0.74 0.76 0.80

1993Q1 147 0.78 0.81 0.84 164 0.77 0.80 0.82 134 0.67 0.70 0.73

1993Q2 135 0.81 0.83 0.86 202 0.76 0.79 0.81 164 0.66 0.68 0.71

1993Q3 108 0.76 0.79 0.83 183 0.76 0.79 0.81 171 0.69 0.72 0.75

1993Q4 125 0.80 0.83 0.85 191 0.78 0.80 0.82 139 0.66 0.71 0.74

1994Q1 108 0.80 0.82 0.85 226 0.80 0.80 0.84 190 0.71 0.73 0.75

1994Q2 122 0.78 0.80 0.83 257 0.76 0.78 0.81 185 0.70 0.72 0.74

1994Q3 142 0.82 0.79 0.84 346 0.77 0.79 0.81 270 0.68 0.71 0.74

1994Q4 84 0.82 0.84 0.87 311 0.78 0.80 0.83 274 0.70 0.72 0.73
A-20

Table A.7 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of Crack Cocaine, Quarterly Series (Continued) 

≤ 1 Gram 1-15 Grams > 15 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1995Q1 92 0.80 0.81 0.84 385 0.77 0.78 0.80 300 0.68 0.71 0.73

1995Q2 124 0.75 0.75 0.79 241 0.75 0.74 0.77 208 0.65 0.66 0.69

1995Q3 201 0.70 0.72 0.74 217 0.65 0.69 0.71 196 0.57 0.61 0.66

1995Q4 105 0.73 0.75 0.77 208 0.72 0.74 0.77 191 0.61 0.65 0.70

1996Q1 102 0.76 0.78 0.80 301 0.74 0.76 0.78 263 0.63 0.65 0.69

1996Q2 143 0.71 0.72 0.74 313 0.70 0.72 0.76 320 0.63 0.66 0.70

1996Q3 133 0.74 0.76 0.78 307 0.70 0.73 0.77 317 0.62 0.65 0.70

1996Q4 187 0.77 0.79 0.81 362 0.74 0.75 0.77 271 0.64 0.66 0.68

1997Q1 191 0.76 0.78 0.80 354 0.71 0.74 0.78 341 0.61 0.63 0.66

1997Q2 192 0.63 0.65 0.67 326 0.62 0.63 0.67 258 0.53 0.55 0.59

1997Q3 183 0.73 0.76 0.78 318 0.67 0.70 0.73 398 0.55 0.59 0.61

1997Q4 101 0.72 0.73 0.76 275 0.73 0.74 0.77 335 0.61 0.64 0.68

1998Q1 98 0.74 0.76 0.77 350 0.72 0.74 0.77 405 0.60 0.63 0.67

1998Q2 156 0.75 0.76 0.79 328 0.70 0.74 0.77 412 0.61 0.63 0.67

1998Q3 150 0.76 0.79 0.80 345 0.68 0.71 0.75 367 0.58 0.60 0.63

1998Q4 184 0.69 0.70 0.73 342 0.70 0.71 0.73 312 0.56 0.60 0.64

1999Q1 227 0.67 0.70 0.72 352 0.64 0.66 0.70 247 0.51 0.53 0.56

1999Q2 224 0.70 0.71 0.73 368 0.64 0.66 0.69 333 0.55 0.58 0.62

1999Q3 334 0.70 0.73 0.75 424 0.65 0.67 0.71 393 0.56 0.58 0.61

1999Q4 300 0.71 0.73 0.76 451 0.63 0.67 0.70 292 0.54 0.57 0.61

2000Q1 285 0.68 0.69 0.73 501 0.60 0.63 0.66 299 0.48 0.51 0.56

2000Q2 236 0.64 0.66 0.68 475 0.55 0.59 0.62 400 0.46 0.49 0.52

2000Q3 171 0.66 0.69 0.71 455 0.58 0.60 0.64 476 0.50 0.52 0.54

2000Q4 229 0.66 0.68 0.70 388 0.62 0.64 0.68 331 0.52 0.55 0.58

2001Q1 225 0.67 0.69 0.70 532 0.61 0.64 0.65 426 0.48 0.51 0.55

2001Q2 252 0.63 0.66 0.67 420 0.59 0.61 0.63 426 0.48 0.51 0.52

2001Q3 173 0.67 0.69 0.70 358 0.60 0.63 0.66 373 0.47 0.50 0.52

2001Q4 210 0.64 0.67 0.68 244 0.56 0.58 0.60 236 0.47 0.49 0.52

2002Q1 196 0.68 0.70 0.72 373 0.63 0.63 0.66 390 0.50 0.52 0.57

2002Q2 139 0.68 0.69 0.71 333 0.61 0.63 0.66 435 0.50 0.52 0.58

2002Q3 125 0.68 0.71 0.73 358 0.60 0.64 0.67 439 0.54 0.56 0.60

2002Q4 126 0.69 0.71 0.74 256 0.66 0.68 0.70 265 0.58 0.61 0.63

2003Q1 104 0.71 0.73 0.76 319 0.63 0.69 0.72 377 0.57 0.59 0.63

2003Q2 81 0.74 0.75 0.77 217 0.67 0.70 0.74 247 0.55 0.59 0.63

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004.
A-21

Table A.8 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of Heroin, Quarterly Series 

≤ 1 Gram 1-10 Grams >10 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1981Q1 128 0.01 0.13 0.15 104 0.01 0.09 0.14 85 0.01 0.06 0.10

1981Q2 114 0.01 0.09 0.15 93 0.01 0.09 0.16 101 0.10 0.15 0.21

1981Q3 126 0.01 0.10 0.15 123 0.01 0.10 0.18 95 0.08 0.14 0.19

1981Q4 174 0.04 0.14 0.22 78 0.01 0.07 0.12 64 0.08 0.14 0.17

1982Q1 160 0.01 0.13 0.24 168 0.02 0.17 0.26 90 0.17 0.25 0.30

1982Q2 145 0.06 0.18 0.27 95 0.04 0.19 0.32 98 0.19 0.24 0.31

1982Q3 143 0.11 0.20 0.27 104 0.10 0.23 0.34 74 0.22 0.29 0.35

1982Q4 61 0.06 0.18 0.27 78 0.02 0.12 0.19 51 0.25 0.30 0.35

1983Q1 100 0.02 0.11 0.18 90 0.01 0.09 0.15 69 0.17 0.24 0.31

1983Q2 84 0.03 0.13 0.22 86 0.01 0.12 0.17 73 0.18 0.27 0.33

1983Q3 94 0.07 0.17 0.25 93 0.01 0.11 0.17 89 0.23 0.29 0.37

1983Q4 66 0.06 0.17 0.27 60 0.03 0.14 0.24 67 0.28 0.33 0.37

1984Q1 71 0.01 0.12 0.19 55 0.01 0.13 0.21 61 0.29 0.34 0.42

1984Q2 65 0.14 0.28 0.37 49 0.02 0.14 0.28 54 0.22 0.27 0.33

1984Q3 66 0.20 0.26 0.32 71 0.06 0.15 0.27 63 0.29 0.33 0.38

1984Q4 44 0.09 0.20 0.26 40 0.09 0.18 0.24 61 0.26 0.33 0.41

1985Q1 62 0.12 0.23 0.29 80 0.13 0.21 0.31 64 0.27 0.35 0.43

1985Q2 48 0.09 0.21 0.30 67 0.17 0.27 0.39 75 0.35 0.38 0.46

1985Q3 60 0.16 0.24 0.31 69 0.09 0.22 0.32 87 0.35 0.38 0.46

1985Q4 55 0.07 0.23 0.30 43 0.14 0.27 0.38 62 0.36 0.40 0.44

1986Q1 56 0.19 0.30 0.39 59 0.22 0.29 0.37 87 0.33 0.36 0.46

1986Q2 47 0.09 0.20 0.30 53 0.10 0.20 0.31 64 0.37 0.41 0.46

1986Q3 45 0.20 0.29 0.42 30 0.15 0.26 0.36 55 0.31 0.35 0.41

1986Q4 39 0.05 0.17 0.25 17 0.09 0.22 0.33 57 0.31 0.36 0.42

1987Q1 43 0.05 0.17 0.23 21 0.04 0.25 0.27 66 0.22 0.27 0.32

1987Q2 46 0.13 0.25 0.30 36 0.13 0.24 0.37 60 0.24 0.30 0.37

1987Q3 53 0.17 0.28 0.37 37 0.14 0.25 0.37 64 0.36 0.41 0.47

1987Q4 96 0.11 0.22 0.32 62 0.10 0.21 0.36 60 0.32 0.37 0.43

1988Q1 90 0.14 0.27 0.40 46 0.15 0.30 0.42 78 0.38 0.44 0.49

1988Q2 142 0.15 0.29 0.38 53 0.13 0.25 0.39 71 0.38 0.43 0.48
A-22

Table A.8 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of Heroin, Quarterly Series (Continued)

≤ 1 Gram 1-10 Grams >10 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1988Q3 117 0.22 0.35 0.45 66 0.15 0.31 0.45 75 0.40 0.45 0.52

1988Q4 87 0.15 0.27 0.39 53 0.21 0.32 0.43 52 0.39 0.43 0.50

1989Q1 67 0.20 0.33 0.45 48 0.17 0.27 0.40 53 0.45 0.50 0.56

1989Q2 60 0.18 0.31 0.40 37 0.17 0.26 0.33 62 0.43 0.49 0.59

1989Q3 83 0.25 0.39 0.44 55 0.20 0.33 0.47 79 0.44 0.54 0.64

1989Q4 58 0.17 0.28 0.39 40 0.25 0.35 0.44 71 0.44 0.54 0.64

1990Q1 108 0.09 0.22 0.27 53 0.10 0.21 0.29 58 0.32 0.37 0.41

1990Q2 119 0.12 0.24 0.30 31 0.13 0.23 0.33 69 0.29 0.35 0.43

1990Q3 89 0.12 0.18 0.27 46 0.12 0.22 0.33 61 0.32 0.36 0.42

1990Q4 99 0.13 0.31 0.32 26 0.21 0.32 0.38 48 0.27 0.38 0.41

1991Q1 167 0.15 0.35 0.30 56 0.10 0.23 0.38 46 0.20 0.31 0.38

1991Q2 188 0.18 0.31 0.38 68 0.15 0.27 0.38 61 0.34 0.40 0.48

1991Q3 156 0.18 0.29 0.38 68 0.16 0.30 0.45 71 0.38 0.44 0.49

1991Q4 83 0.15 0.29 0.33 33 0.15 0.26 0.33 40 0.42 0.46 0.52

1992Q1 131 0.19 0.32 0.42 52 0.22 0.37 0.51 53 0.49 0.53 0.60

1992Q2 117 0.28 0.43 0.47 41 0.23 0.35 0.50 81 0.39 0.45 0.57

1992Q3 93 0.22 0.35 0.42 43 0.26 0.37 0.50 72 0.48 0.53 0.59

1992Q4 131 0.27 0.40 0.45 38 0.30 0.41 0.56 54 0.55 0.60 0.65

1993Q1 174 0.26 0.37 0.41 70 0.27 0.40 0.55 56 0.50 0.56 0.61

1993Q2 157 0.28 0.41 0.49 72 0.33 0.43 0.56 60 0.54 0.59 0.64

1993Q3 170 0.30 0.41 0.46 100 0.24 0.36 0.50 118 0.52 0.57 0.65

1993Q4 120 0.30 0.44 0.50 60 0.30 0.43 0.54 48 0.56 0.61 0.70

1994Q1 199 0.22 0.36 0.48 96 0.29 0.40 0.48 68 0.51 0.56 0.64

1994Q2 175 0.21 0.41 0.58 85 0.23 0.39 0.51 81 0.46 0.53 0.58

1994Q3 203 0.31 0.44 0.55 87 0.30 0.40 0.55 87 0.50 0.56 0.62

1994Q4 176 0.28 0.43 0.65 85 0.28 0.44 0.60 70 0.50 0.56 0.66

1995Q1 198 0.26 0.41 0.52 77 0.25 0.41 0.50 106 0.45 0.56 0.66

1995Q2 223 0.33 0.49 0.54 92 0.27 0.43 0.53 77 0.53 0.58 0.67

1995Q3 196 0.28 0.46 0.52 107 0.26 0.40 0.53 102 0.47 0.55 0.62

1995Q4 181 0.32 0.43 0.55 69 0.30 0.42 0.52 55 0.42 0.48 0.55
A-23

Table A.8 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of Heroin, Quarterly Series (Continued)

≤ 1 Gram 1-10 Grams >10 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average QuartileObs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile

1996Q1 216 0.23 0.37 0.44 95 0.25 0.34 0.42 62 0.42 0.48 0.57

1996Q2 226 0.28 0.37 0.46 113 0.23 0.37 0.50 101 0.35 0.39 0.46

1996Q3 191 0.25 0.40 0.46 102 0.25 0.36 0.48 94 0.47 0.53 0.58

1996Q4 197 0.26 0.39 0.50 94 0.28 0.41 0.55 73 0.51 0.56 0.62

1997Q1 269 0.29 0.45 0.52 94 0.23 0.37 0.49 87 0.39 0.49 0.58

1997Q2 236 0.28 0.40 0.48 120 0.31 0.39 0.51 107 0.44 0.50 0.58

1997Q3 220 0.29 0.45 0.57 103 0.26 0.40 0.54 95 0.44 0.49 0.55

1997Q4 50 0.36 0.50 0.59 42 0.36 0.43 0.55 79 0.49 0.54 0.61

1998Q1 318 0.31 0.44 0.56 147 0.29 0.41 0.51 100 0.49 0.54 0.63

1998Q2 215 0.32 0.48 0.58 142 0.29 0.44 0.54 141 0.51 0.55 0.62

1998Q3 160 0.29 0.40 0.50 127 0.24 0.37 0.51 108 0.45 0.50 0.56

1998Q4 206 0.28 0.46 0.60 118 0.25 0.42 0.58 101 0.50 0.56 0.63

1999Q1 258 0.28 0.41 0.56 167 0.25 0.40 0.58 111 0.47 0.53 0.59

1999Q2 255 0.25 0.41 0.51 161 0.23 0.37 0.52 98 0.43 0.48 0.56

1999Q3 250 0.25 0.44 0.54 167 0.23 0.42 0.58 112 0.52 0.60 0.66

1999Q4 190 0.23 0.43 0.56 108 0.26 0.39 0.55 88 0.52 0.59 0.65

2000Q1 252 0.27 0.44 0.51 135 0.31 0.40 0.54 101 0.48 0.56 0.63

2000Q2 205 0.26 0.43 0.53 167 0.22 0.38 0.54 114 0.43 0.53 0.61

2000Q3 212 0.24 0.44 0.49 155 0.26 0.42 0.56 113 0.55 0.58 0.66

2000Q4 210 0.27 0.41 0.48 87 0.22 0.37 0.53 65 0.56 0.61 0.69

2001Q1 217 0.24 0.39 0.54 167 0.22 0.37 0.52 87 0.48 0.53 0.58

2001Q2 219 0.24 0.40 0.50 140 0.26 0.39 0.55 103 0.50 0.58 0.64

2001Q3 217 0.21 0.36 0.46 114 0.21 0.38 0.47 104 0.45 0.52 0.64

2001Q4 217 0.23 0.40 0.53 79 0.21 0.36 0.45 60 0.49 0.55 0.61

2002Q1 217 0.29 0.46 0.49 112 0.28 0.41 0.54 82 0.41 0.47 0.56

2002Q2 224 0.24 0.39 0.51 147 0.28 0.40 0.54 83 0.45 0.50 0.57

2002Q3 229 0.28 0.39 0.48 136 0.23 0.38 0.52 113 0.41 0.47 0.54

2002Q4 79 0.24 0.40 0.52 69 0.28 0.40 0.55 50 0.42 0.49 0.56

2003Q1 220 0.23 0.34 0.45 109 0.22 0.35 0.47 61 0.42 0.46 0.52

2003Q2 42 0.23 0.29 0.43 51 0.23 0.33 0.41 43 0.41 0.46 0.52

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004.
A-24

Table A.9 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of d-Methamphetamine, Quarterly Series 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1981Q1 20 0.19 0.35 0.51 20 0.33 0.48 0.68

1981Q2 11 0.34 0.50 0.66 7 0.41 0.55 0.76

1981Q3 8 0.19 0.36 0.52 10 0.39 0.51 0.70

1981Q4 7 0.40 0.56 0.72 8 0.33 0.48 0.67

1982Q1 14 0.28 0.44 0.61 19 0.33 0.48 0.67 8 0.29 0.33 0.37

1982Q2 16 0.23 0.40 0.56 8 0.30 0.46 0.65

1982Q3 22 0.31 0.48 0.64 13 0.38 0.54 0.72

1982Q4 27 0.20 0.38 0.53 16 0.38 0.50 0.70

1983Q1 29 0.16 0.33 0.48 8 0.36 0.47 0.63

1983Q2 32 0.25 0.42 0.58 12 0.25 0.36 0.54

1983Q3 17 0.20 0.37 0.52 15 0.36 0.48 0.66

1983Q4 25 0.30 0.47 0.62 8 0.41 0.57 0.76 7 0.48 0.52 0.56

1984Q1 31 0.19 0.36 0.49 8 0.16 0.30 0.47 8 0.43 0.46 0.49

1984Q2 29 0.39 0.55 0.71 28 0.37 0.46 0.64 12 0.48 0.51 0.55

1984Q3 18 0.26 0.43 0.59 13 0.22 0.38 0.57 12 0.50 0.53 0.57

1984Q4 32 0.28 0.43 0.60 19 0.34 0.49 0.68 6 0.33 0.36 0.40

1985Q1 37 0.16 0.32 0.49 32 0.36 0.44 0.62 13 0.44 0.47 0.51

1985Q2 11 0.28 0.45 0.61 13 0.29 0.39 0.50

1985Q3 21 0.35 0.51 0.67 9 0.60 0.68 0.86

1985Q4 28 0.23 0.40 0.56 16 0.40 0.49 0.68 8 0.37 0.40 0.44

1986Q1 39 0.33 0.49 0.66 22 0.30 0.44 0.63

1986Q2 22 0.41 0.58 0.74 14 0.28 0.40 0.58 6 0.37 0.40 0.44

1986Q3 29 0.30 0.46 0.62 14 0.33 0.44 0.63 6 0.53 0.56 0.60

1986Q4 23 0.40 0.55 0.72 9 0.23 0.37 0.56

1987Q1 25 0.39 0.56 0.72 18 0.35 0.51 0.70 5 0.28 0.32 0.36

1987Q2 29 0.37 0.52 0.69 25 0.31 0.43 0.62

1987Q3 22 0.34 0.51 0.67 13 0.31 0.46 0.64

1987Q4 41 0.27 0.44 0.59 18 0.28 0.43 0.62

1988Q1 66 0.40 0.56 0.72 40 0.33 0.49 0.68 9 0.48 0.52 0.56

1988Q2 59 0.41 0.58 0.75 30 0.38 0.54 0.72 9 0.45 0.49 0.53
A-25

Table A.9 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of d-Methamphetamine, Quarterly Series 

(Continued) 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile 

1988Q3 29 0.38 0.55 0.71 36 0.31 0.47 0.66 8 0.38 0.43 0.47

1988Q4 29 0.40 0.57 0.73 27 0.39 0.52 0.70 8 0.62 0.65 0.69

1989Q1 35 0.40 0.57 0.73 33 0.40 0.53 0.71 8 0.39 0.45 0.49

1989Q2 27 0.38 0.55 0.70 20 0.43 0.56 0.74

1989Q3 23 0.25 0.43 0.58 22 0.35 0.51 0.70

1989Q4 30 0.22 0.38 0.54 17 0.29 0.42 0.60

1990Q1 25 0.27 0.43 0.59 25 0.10 0.26 0.45

1990Q2 16 0.17 0.34 0.50 27 0.09 0.24 0.43 8 0.09 0.13 0.16

1990Q3 19 0.21 0.37 0.53 26 0.18 0.33 0.52 10 0.16 0.19 0.23

1990Q4 18 0.23 0.41 0.64 16 0.25 0.33 0.51 8 0.31 0.34 0.38

1991Q1 32 0.20 0.37 0.61 27 0.24 0.38 0.57 10 0.31 0.34 0.38

1991Q2 17 0.23 0.39 0.55 28 0.17 0.33 0.52 10 0.37 0.41 0.44

1991Q3 17 0.26 0.43 0.59 26 0.13 0.28 0.47 9 0.26 0.30 0.34

1991Q4 10 0.10 0.26 0.42 25 0.09 0.26 0.43 8 0.58 0.63 0.66

1992Q1 11 0.29 0.46 0.62 31 0.22 0.37 0.56 9 0.12 0.17 0.19

1992Q2 17 0.42 0.60 0.75 28 0.24 0.40 0.58 14 0.40 0.44 0.48

1992Q3 24 0.46 0.62 0.78 32 0.38 0.53 0.70 12 0.67 0.70 0.74

1992Q4 12 0.25 0.42 0.58 29 0.34 0.51 0.70 8 0.54 0.57 0.61

1993Q1 28 0.48 0.64 0.80 18 0.31 0.47 0.66 8 0.62 0.66 0.70

1993Q2 22 0.39 0.56 0.72 21 0.27 0.42 0.57

1993Q3 25 0.25 0.41 0.58 35 0.46 0.62 0.81 17 0.59 0.62 0.66

1993Q4 37 0.53 0.69 0.85 33 0.43 0.59 0.78 11 0.64 0.68 0.71

1994Q1 28 0.55 0.71 0.87 37 0.50 0.66 0.85 32 0.66 0.69 0.73

1994Q2 31 0.61 0.76 0.94 55 0.46 0.66 0.86 26 0.68 0.72 0.76

1994Q3 37 0.59 0.76 0.92 59 0.58 0.73 0.92 20 0.70 0.72 0.77

1994Q4 39 0.57 0.74 0.90 46 0.56 0.69 0.88 23 0.65 0.68 0.71

1995Q1 50 0.52 0.68 0.84 74 0.57 0.67 0.86 26 0.71 0.75 0.78

1995Q2 40 0.53 0.70 0.86 105 0.57 0.70 0.82 41 0.64 0.69 0.72

1995Q3 71 0.40 0.55 0.72 57 0.43 0.60 0.78 24 0.39 0.42 0.45

1995Q4 54 0.16 0.32 0.41 35 0.10 0.26 0.44 17 0.05 0.09 0.12
A-26

Table A.9 

Estimated Purity of One Gram of d-Methamphetamine, Quarterly Series 

(Continued) 

≤ 10 Grams 10-100 Grams >100 Grams 

 Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd Num. 1st 3rd 

Period Obs. Quartile Average QuartileObs. Quartile Average Quartile Obs. Quartile Average Quartile

1996Q1 29 0.34 0.52 0.72 61 0.25 0.41 0.60 16 0.15 0.19 0.23

1996Q2 44 0.32 0.48 0.57 60 0.23 0.38 0.58 32 0.33 0.37 0.41

1996Q3 25 0.37 0.54 0.70 49 0.34 0.46 0.65 47 0.37 0.41 0.45

1996Q4 38 0.45 0.62 0.78 85 0.35 0.51 0.70 52 0.33 0.37 0.41

1997Q1 46 0.50 0.67 0.82 101 0.39 0.54 0.73 44 0.40 0.45 0.48

1997Q2 45 0.53 0.71 0.87 118 0.36 0.49 0.68 57 0.41 0.45 0.49

1997Q3 56 0.40 0.55 0.72 141 0.39 0.51 0.65 52 0.40 0.44 0.48

1997Q4 74 0.34 0.49 0.66 151 0.29 0.44 0.59 66 0.37 0.41 0.44

1998Q1 76 0.37 0.54 0.77 164 0.26 0.37 0.47 79 0.22 0.25 0.29

1998Q2 71 0.21 0.37 0.54 156 0.10 0.20 0.29 65 0.07 0.11 0.14

1998Q3 63 0.16 0.34 0.49 143 0.08 0.18 0.31 86 0.04 0.08 0.11

1998Q4 47 0.20 0.37 0.43 153 0.15 0.27 0.41 95 0.05 0.10 0.13

1999Q1 64 0.18 0.36 0.51 125 0.11 0.24 0.39 93 0.06 0.10 0.13

1999Q2 58 0.26 0.42 0.59 105 0.17 0.31 0.50 89 0.12 0.15 0.19

1999Q3 73 0.30 0.47 0.63 166 0.20 0.37 0.55 120 0.16 0.19 0.23

1999Q4 67 0.31 0.48 0.64 127 0.18 0.35 0.52 97 0.17 0.20 0.23

2000Q1 72 0.29 0.46 0.62 136 0.20 0.31 0.51 132 0.18 0.22 0.24

2000Q2 82 0.36 0.54 0.71 170 0.18 0.30 0.46 108 0.16 0.19 0.22

2000Q3 49 0.32 0.49 0.65 154 0.19 0.35 0.52 124 0.15 0.19 0.22

2000Q4 39 0.41 0.58 0.74 106 0.21 0.37 0.52 102 0.15 0.19 0.23

2001Q1 69 0.36 0.52 0.69 134 0.23 0.40 0.65 112 0.15 0.18 0.22

2001Q2 57 0.42 0.58 0.74 157 0.21 0.40 0.57 142 0.19 0.22 0.25

2001Q3 74 0.47 0.62 0.78 155 0.26 0.49 0.74 158 0.24 0.28 0.31

2001Q4 66 0.38 0.55 0.71 136 0.23 0.38 0.51 85 0.22 0.25 0.29

2002Q1 74 0.48 0.64 0.85 156 0.32 0.48 0.65 118 0.22 0.25 0.29

2002Q2 95 0.49 0.61 0.82 161 0.28 0.45 0.64 104 0.24 0.28 0.31

2002Q3 60 0.48 0.65 0.84 154 0.32 0.50 0.69 115 0.26 0.30 0.33

2002Q4 55 0.49 0.66 0.87 98 0.30 0.47 0.72 79 0.30 0.34 0.37

2003Q1 79 0.40 0.59 0.75 184 0.47 0.56 0.69 89 0.29 0.34 0.37

2003Q2 39 0.48 0.64 0.81 105 0.42 0.55 0.74 55 0.38 0.42 0.46

Source: System to Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE). 

Prepared by: RAND Corporation, February 2004.

 
OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG

CONTROL POLICY

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

WASHINGTON, DC 20503