ANNUAL REPORT

2005


PAUL J. MCNULTY, EXECUTIVE BOARD CHAIRPERSON


JUDITH SACHWALD, EXECUTIVE BOARD VICE CHAIRPERSON


THOMAS H. CARR, DIRECTOR


WASHINGTON/BALTIMORE 

HIGH INTENSITY DRUG TRAFFICKING AREA 

Published: May 15, 2006 
Washington/Baltimore HIDTA 

2005 Annual Report 
Maryland federal jury convicts three major drug dealers. These 

convictions were the result of a lengthy investigation, Operation 

Encore that was initiated in October of 2002. It was conducted by the 

Drug Money Laundering Initiative, led by Group Supervisor Kevin 

Butts from Immigration & Customs Enforcement (ICE). In addition to 

ICE Agents, the initiative includes Task Force Officers from the U.S. 

Postal Service, Prince George’s County Police, Montgomery County 

Police, Maryland State Police, Baltimore City Police, Howard County 

Police and Baltimore County Police departments. The Drug 

Enforcement Administration assisted with the arrests and search 

warrants. 

In 2005, thirty federal search warrants executed throughout Maryland, 

Washington, D.C., and New York resulted in the arrest of 32 

individuals on federal drug conspiracy and mail-wire fraud charges. 

Three kilograms of heroin, $250,000 in cash, eight handguns, a 

ballistic vest, a large quantity of cocaine, and over $1,000,000 in 

criminal proceeds were seized. 

Evidence acquired through sanctioned wire interceptions and 

presented at trial indicated that the defendants conspired to distribute 

multi-kilograms of cocaine, cocaine base, and heroin throughout the 

Baltimore – Washington area. The defendants denied any connection 

with the drug conspiracy and denied that the use of the word “Tshirts” was code for drugs, as investigating agents alleged. One 

defendant also denied any knowledge of a New York “furniture 

supplier’s” involvement with drug sales and that she was unaware 

that a co-conspirator had placed 2.3 kilograms of heroin in her 

vehicle. That heroin was recovered by a Maryland State Trooper 

during a traffic stop in connection with this investigation. 
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 1 

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 3 

SUMMARY OF THREAT ASSESSMENT FOR BUDGET YEAR 2005.................................... 5 

HIDTA STRATEGY SUMMARY................................................................................................. 7 

HIDTA PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT................................................................................ 8 

PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR GOAL 1......................................................................... 8 

PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR GOAL 2....................................................................... 16 

CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................................... 24 

APPENDICES .............................................................................................................................. 27 

TABLES AND FIGURES ............................................................................................................ 39 

ENDNOTES ................................................................................................................................. 41 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

Figure 1: Drugs & Drug Assets Seized Increased 66% 

from 2002 to 2005 

$100,000,000 

$80,000,000 

$60,000,000 

$40,000,000 

$20,000,000 

$0 

$48,459,652 

$59,949,268 

$73,747,591 $80,663,534 

2002 2003 2004 2005 

Assets Seized Drugs Seized 

This report highlights the Washington/ 

Baltimore (W/B) HIDTA’s continued success 

in disrupting and dismantling drug trafficking 

and money laundering organizations (DTOs 

and MLOs) in the W/B region and the 

ongoing efforts to improve the effectiveness 

and efficiency of HIDTA initiatives. Drug and 

drug asset seizures in this region have 

increased 66 percent since 2002 (Figure 1) 

and HIDTA initiatives consistently disrupted 

or dismantled more than 100 DTOs each 

year. Seizures of both drugs and drug 

assets totaled substantially more than it 

costs to run the program. Additional 

performance highlights for return on 

investment, disrupting or dismantling DTOs, 

and cooperation and coordination are listed 

below. 

Return on Investment 

The W/B HIDTA funded 49 initiatives in 

Maryland, Washington, D.C., Northern 

Virginia, and Richmond with a total budget 

of $13,400,500. 

• $6,699,693 was devoted to law 

enforcement initiatives. 

• For every $1 invested in W/B law 

enforcement initiatives by ONDCP, 

the HIDTA yielded a return on 

investment of $9 in drug seizures 

and $5 in asset seizures. 

• More than $52 million worth of illegal 

drugs and nearly $29 million in 

illegally gained drug assets were 

Total Seizures 

permanently removed from the local 

drug market. 

Disrupting or Dismantling DTOs 

• 134 DTOs and MLOs were either 

completely dismantled or disrupted 

to the point that their ability to 

conduct business was severely 

diminished. 

• Nearly all of the MLOs (94%) and 

more than three quarters of the 

DTOs disrupted or dismantled were 

international or multi-state in scope. 

Training 

• Nearly 18,000 training hours were 

provided to 1,182 federal, state, and 

local participants. 

• This training was provided at a cost 

of $14.76 per classroom hour per 

student. 

Intelligence and Information Sharing 

• The Investigative Support Center 

(ISC) processed more than 12,200 

event and case/subject 

deconflictions. 

• Nearly 250 cases were provided 

analytical support and 262 were 

referred to other HIDTAs and other 

agencies. 

1
2
INTRODUCTION 

The W/B HIDTA was originally designated in 1994 and 

included 13 jurisdictions in Maryland, Washington, D.C., 

and Northern Virginia. The Virginia counties of Henrico, 

Chesterfield, Hanover, Prince George, and the City of 

Richmond joined the W/B HIDTA in 2005. The W/B 

HIDTA currently maintains 49 initiatives in 18 

jurisdictions. The initiatives fall into four categories: 

enforcement; intelligence and information sharing; 

support; and management and coordination. 

This region now includes three major cities and both 

suburban and rural counties. The primary drug threats 

addressed in this region continue to be marijuana, crack, 

powder cocaine, and heroin. Methamphetamine 

production is a growing threat, but to date no large scale 

clandestine laboratories have been seized. 

W/B HIDTA Vision Statement: 

We envision that within the next five years the W/B HIDTA’s Investigative Support Center (ISC) 

will coordinate its intelligence collection efforts with those of the W/B HIDTA participating 

agencies to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of HIDTA initiatives. The ISC will integrate 

investigative and strategic intelligence in order to set performance targets for W/B HIDTA 

initiatives and guide them through the strategic planning process. This will enable the W/B 

HIDTA to address identified drug threats in the region by disrupting and dismantling drug 

trafficking and money laundering organizations. 

W/B HIDTA Mission Statement: 

The mission of the W/BHIDTA is to improve interagency collaboration, promote the sharing of 

accurate and timely information and intelligence, and provide specialized training and other 

resources to W/B HIDTA participating law enforcement and treatment/criminal justice agencies. 

This will enhance their ability to provide superior services and meet their performance targets. 

Through its state-of-the-art Investigative Support Center, its highly trained and skilled 

professional staff will utilize the HIDTA Performance Management Process to improve the 

efficiency and effectiveness of HIDTA initiatives throughout the W/B HIDTA region and, when 

practical, in other areas of the country. The aim of the initiatives is to disrupt and dismantle drug 

trafficking organizations and money laundering operations, prosecute traffickers, and seize their 

drugs and profits. 

3
The strategic planning and Performance 

Management Process (PMP) for 2005 

involved six key steps: assess threats and 

needs, develop and implement a strategic 

plan, identify a measurement protocol, 

budget for results, monitor and manage 

results, and report on outcomes. This 

process is illustrated in the W/B HIDTA 

Matrix (see insert). The Matrix includes all 

identified threats and needs addressed 

during the year, performance targets, and 

the initiatives responsible for achieving 

them. 

Over the course of the year, initiative 

personnel entered case and performance 

data into Case Explorer and the PMP 

Database. HIDTA staff verified and 

validated this information on a quarterly 

basis. This process provides reliable, 

meaningful information throughout the year 

that can be used to improve law 

enforcement actions, demonstrate 

accountability of the initiatives, highlight 

initiative achievements, and reveal strategic 

and operational issues that may be 

hindering progress. 

The purpose of this report is to highlight the 

outputs and outcomes of this process. They 

are recorded in the 16 core PMP tables with 

descriptions and trend analyses. Also 

included are initiative highlights about 

successful programs and other 

accomplishments not captured in the core 

tables. 

HIDTA Goals 

The HIDTA Program plays a pivotal role in 

disrupting the flow of illegal drugs in 

America. The regional HIDTAs have been 

assigned two very specific goals as they 

work towards implementing a balanced and 

effective strategy encompassing the 

production, distribution, interdiction, and 

consumption of drugs. Each HIDTA is 

required to complete an annual strategic 

planning and Performance Management 

Process to address the following two goals. 

By engaging in both planning and 

performance management, the W/B HIDTA 

can ensure that their initiatives are targeting 

identified drug threats and responding to 

regional needs in an efficient and effective 

manner and progressing towards these 

goals. 

Goal 1: Disrupt the market for illegal 

drugs by dismantling or 

disrupting drug trafficking 

and/or money laundering 

organizations 

Goal 2: Improve the efficiency and 

effectiveness of HIDTA initiatives 

All W/B HIDTA initiatives and activities are 

planned and implemented to address these 

two goals. To receive continued funding, 

each initiative must present programmatic 

and fiscal justifications to the HIDTA 

Director and Executive Board explaining 

how it supports the goals and showing that 

it has progressed towards its performance 

targets. Initiatives support the goals by 

implementing activities that address 

identified threats and needs, setting 

measurable performance targets, and 

assessing outcomes through the PMP, as 

indicated on the HIDTA Matrix. 

1

 Treatment/Criminal Justice outcomes will be reported in an addendum to this report. Treatment initiatives are 

subjected to an independent evaluation. 

4

1 
SUMMARY OF THREAT ASSESSMENT FOR 

BUDGET YEAR 2005 

Retail and midlevel distributors cater to an 

active consumer market in the W/B region. 

As depicted in Table A, the primary drug 

threats in this region continue to be 

marijuana, crack, powdered cocaine, and 

heroin. The availability and use of 

methamphetamine continues to be 

considerably lower than the other primary 

threats, but it is increasing. Wholesale 

quantities of these drugs are imported, 

broken down, repackaged, and distributed. 

Drugs are transported into the area mainly 

from New York City, but shipments have 

also been identified from Miami, 

Philadelphia, Atlanta, California, the 

Southwest Border, South America, Canada, 

and the Netherlands. The extensive 

highway infrastructure in the region provides 

drug traffickers with the means to transport 

drugs and revenue in and out of the area. 

Commercial passenger and cargo airline 

services at three major airports and 

container ships entering the Port of 

Baltimore have also been used for the 

transportation of drugs. Other forms of 

transportation used to move drugs and drug 

proceeds to and from the area include 

passenger and freight trains, buses, 

private/commercial vehicles, and package 

delivery couriers. 

Illicit funds are laundered through traditional 

financial institutions and wire transfer 

businesses. Traffickers make deposits 

under $3,000 or use money remitters and 

money orders to transfer proceeds. 

Proceeds are also used to purchase 

expensive or cash-redeemable items. Some 

are laundered through cash-intensive 

businesses, fraudulent real estate 

transactions (“house-flipping”), or insurance 

fraud. 

Table A: Washington/Baltimore 

HIDTA 2005 Drug Threats 

Drug Threats Status 

2005 

Marijuana ↔

Crack Cocaine ↔

Cocaine ↔

Heroin ↔

Methamphetamine ↑

Drug manufacturing is not a significant issue 

in this region. It is known that distributors 

routinely cut, mill, and package heroin and 

cocaine and also convert cocaine into crack. 

Marijuana cultivation typically yields 

relatively small amounts, mostly for 

personal use. Clandestine labs used for the 

production of PCP and MDMA are only 

occasionally found. The number of 

methamphetamine labs seized, while still 

low compared to other regions of the 

country, is increasing. 

Washington, D.C. Most of the DTOs in 

Washington, D.C. are operated by African 

Americans. Colombian and Dominican 

DTOs transport most of the cocaine 

throughout the District. Marijuana is the 

most widely available and frequently abused 

illicit drug in the city. PCP, MDMA and GHB 

are also popular. The heroin trade is well 

entrenched; the 14th Street corridor in 

Northwest Washington, D.C. is a magnet for 

suburban users purchasing high-purity 

heroin. Low cost, high purity South 

American heroin is nearly as serious a 

threat as cocaine. Cocaine, particularly 

crack, is the drug most often associated 

with violent crime in D.C. 

5
Baltimore. Heroin poses the most 

significant drug threat in Baltimore. South 

American heroin is the most common. Fiftyone DTOs are active in the Baltimore Metro 

region; 31 are classified as violent. The 

majority of DTOs are operated by African 

Americans. Suburbanites often travel into 

Baltimore to purchase heroin in open-air 

markets. Raw heroin is commonplace and 

ranges in purity from 70-90 percent. 

Maryland-based local independent dealers 

and Dominican and Colombian criminal 

groups based in New York City and 

Philadelphia are the dominant transporters 

of heroin into Maryland. Local independent 

dealers and loosely organized gangs 

dominate retail heroin distribution 

throughout Maryland. Crack cocaine is the 

drug most often associated with violent 

crime in Maryland overall. It may challenge 

heroin as the drug of choice in Baltimore. 

Southern Maryland. The major drug threat 

confronting Southern Maryland is marijuana 

and has been for the past decade. PCP is 

more popular here than in other W/B HITDA 

areas. Predominantly, African American 

DTOs traffic cocaine, crack, marijuana and 

PCP throughout the area. 

Northern Virginia. Marijuana is the most 

widely available and abused illicit drug. 

Heroin is not as prominent. Cocaine is one 

of the most significant drug threats to 

Virginia because it is readily available, often 

abused and violent crime is more frequently 

associated with the distribution and abuse 

of crack cocaine than with any other illicit 

drug. The methamphetamine threat is low 

yet increasing. Pharmaceuticals and 

MDMA continue to increase throughout the 

region. Cocaine is generally the drug of 

choice among Northern Virginia DTOs. 

Richmond Metropolitan Area. Richmond 

Metropolitan Area was added to the W/B 

HIDTA region in late 2005. Initiatives were 

getting organized and funded as the year 

ended. Crack, marijuana, and heroin are 

identified as the primary drug threats 

throughout the greater Richmond area. In 

the City of Richmond, similar to Baltimore, 

the primary drug threats are crack and 

heroin. Richmond is an active east coast 

transshipment location and staging area for 

DTOs trafficking in these drugs. 

6
HIDTA STRATEGY SUMMARY 

The HIDTA approach was initiated in the 

W/B region as a grassroots effort to 

promote interagency cooperation and 

coordination. It has enabled federal, state, 

and local law enforcement operating in this 

region to develop and implement systematic 

tactics for disrupting and dismantling DTOs, 

arresting violent drug dealers, and seizing 

their drugs and illegally obtained assets. To 

ensure the effectiveness and efficiency of 

these efforts, the W/B HIDTA Executive 

Board stressed a comprehensive approach 

that involved equal partnerships between 

law enforcement and treatment agencies. 

This was accomplished through the colocation of staff, strategic planning, and the 

sharing of information and intelligence on an 

unparalleled level. 

The mandate for implementing systematic 

responses to DTOs and improving the 

effectiveness and efficiency of HIDTA 

initiatives is embraced at every level of W/B 

operations. From the highest policymaking 

and funding levels in the Executive Board to 

the collocated/commingled initiatives 

operating throughout the region, there is an 

excitement about the HIDTA approach and 

a commitment to the W/B HIDTA mission. 

More than 700 personnel from 97 federal, 

state, and local agencies participate in the 

49 initiatives currently operating in the W/B 

region. Each of these initiatives is designed 

to address the leading drug threats in this 

region by setting performance targets and 

completing specific tasks. They are 

evaluated annually to ensure that only 

effective and efficient initiatives receive 

continued funding. 

The law enforcement initiatives operating in 

this region encompass investigative, 

interdiction, intelligence, and prosecution 

efforts. These efforts address the leading 

drug threats in this region by detecting the 

sources of illegal drugs and deploying 

resources to dismantle DTOs and disrupt 

the flow of illegal drugs and trafficking 

profits. 

The 13 treatment initiatives focus on 

reducing drug-related crime by 

implementing a coerced treatment model for 

repeat offenders with drug addictions. This 

model demands accountability from 

offenders through seamless treatment and 

supervision services involving regular 

therapy sessions, drug testing, and court 

appearances. The ongoing evaluation of 

these initiatives reveals dramatic reductions 

in recidivism among participating offenders. 

The prevention initiatives funded by the W/B 

HIDTA focus on preventing illegal drug use 

by at-risk youth by promoting positive 

interactions with their families, schools, and 

communities. A coalition of law enforcement 

officers, school staff, and community 

members operates these initiatives. 

HIDTA’s training and support initiatives 

enhanced the efforts of all of these 

operational initiatives. HIDTA provided 

training on a number of topics including 

investigative/interdiction techniques, 

computer software, analytical support, and 

management. Other services include 

providing timely and informative intelligence 

reports, strategic planning, performance 

management, financial guidance, 

information technology, logistical support, 

and administrative oversight. HIDTA 

administrative staff also conducted regular 

audits of initiative PMP data and evaluations 

of initiative programs. 

7
HIDTA PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT 

Performance management is the systematic 

collection, analysis and reporting of data at 

regular intervals that monitors resources 

used, work produced, and outcomes 

achieved. It highlights what the initiatives 

did during the year and how well they did it. 

The HIDTA PMP involves six key steps that 

are completed each year: identifying threats 

and needs, setting performance targets and 

implementing a strategy for achieving them, 

identifying a measurement protocol, 

budgeting for results, monitoring and 

managing results, and reporting on 

outcomes. This is the second annual report 

on the W/B HIDTA’s performance targets, 

outputs, and outcomes using the PMP. The 

HIDTA Executive Board uses the 16 core 

measures displayed and interpreted on the 

following pages to determine whether the 

initiatives are achieving the targets and 

outcomes identified in the Matrix and 

strategy. The measures clearly demonstrate 

the successful impact of initiative efforts on 

the local drug market. This information is 

used to enhance strategic planning and law 

enforcement actions, improve the efficiency 

and accountability of HIDTA initiatives, 

Table 1 

demonstrate accountability, gain visibility for 

accomplishments, and make funding 

decisions. 

PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR 

GOAL 1 

Tables 1 through 11 assess each HIDTA’s 

effectiveness and efficiency in disrupting the 

market for illegal drugs by disrupting or 

dismantling DTOs and MLOs, prosecuting 

traffickers, and seizing their drugs and 

profits. W/B HIDTA initiatives focus on all of 

these activities simultaneously. Tables 1 

through 4 illustrate the number of DTOs 

identified, targeted, disrupted, and 

dismantled by law enforcement initiatives 

during 2005; Tables 5 through 8 focus on 

assessing the return on investment of the 

HIDTA approach in W/B region, and Tables 

9 through 11 focus on the prosecution of 

traffickers and clandestine lab activities. The 

outcomes clearly indicate the value of 

investing in the W/B HIDTA and the cost 

effectiveness of its initiatives. 

Table 1. The collaboration of federal, state, 

and local law enforcement agencies in W/B 

HIDTA enforcement initiatives provides a 

unique opportunity to identify, target, and 

disrupt or dismantle large scale international 

and multi-state DTOs. In the beginning of 

2005, W/B HIDTA initiatives were 

investigating 136 DTOs and MLOs. By the 

end of the year, an additional 76 had been 

identified. The initiatives targeted 197 of 

these DTOs and MLOs and 68 percent were 

successfully disrupted or dismantled. The 

remaining 15 DTOs were either referred to 

other agencies or are subject to additional 

intelligence gathering. 

8
Table 2 

Table 3 

Tables 2 and 3. These tables illustrate the 

scope of the DTOs and MLOs disrupted and 

dismantled. Law enforcement initiatives are 

continuing to focus on high level DTOs and 

were successful at disrupting and 

dismantling them. More than three-quarters 

of the DTOs and nearly all of the MLOs 

disrupted or dismantled in 2005 were 

international or multi-state in scope (Figure 

2). 

Washington Area Gang Initiative seizes over $2M in drugs, firearms and cash. This 

effort involved over 100 officers and intelligence analysts and resulted in the seizure of 

over 97 kilograms of cocaine, three kilograms of cocaine base, firearms and over 

$900,000 cash in October 2005. This joint Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and 

Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) task force targets violent gang activity in the 

District of Columbia that are linked to narcotics trade. 

9
Figure 2: More than 75% of DTOs and MLOs Disrupted or Dismantled were International or MultiState in Scope 

Most DTO business ventures involve the Virtually all of the MLOs disrupted or 

exchange of cash for drugs. They are dismantled were international in scope. The 

dependent on money laundering to keep number of MLOs disrupted or dismantled 

their trafficking operations running smoothly. increased from 1 in 2003 to 16 in 2005. 

Table 4 

Table 4. This table illustrates the 

operational scope of DTO and MLO cases 

initiated in 2005. Eight cases involving 

targeted DTOs were designated as 

OCDETF cases – half were international 

and half were multi-state or local in scope. 

Three of these cases involved Maryland 

initiatives, three involved D.C. initiatives, 

and two involved Virginia initiatives. Three 

cases were designated as CPOT and three 

as RPOT. Two-thirds of each were 

international in scope. 

10
Table 5 

Table 5. Conservative calculations show 

that W/B HIDTA initiatives seized more than 

$52 million worth of illegal drugs in 2005. 

This is an increase of 15 percent from 2004. 

Marijuana continues to account for the 

largest percentage (48%) of the wholesale 

value of the seizures. Figure 3 depicts drug 

seizures from 2002 through 2005. It shows 

that while heroin, crack, and 

methamphetamine seizures have been 

increasing, seizures of cocaine HCL have 

been decreasing. The biggest increase in 

seizures was in crack cocaine which more 

than tripled from 33 kilograms in 2004 to 

103 kilograms in 2005. Seizures of 

methamphetamine, described in the threat 

assessment as an emerging problem in this 

region, increased sharply, but are still 

relatively low in comparison to the other 

drug threats. Methamphetamine seizures 

increased from approximately eight 

kilograms in 2004 to nearly 19 kilograms in 

2005. Seizures of cocaine HCL decreased 

sharply and seizures of ecstasy dropped off 

completely. Approximately two kilograms of 

PCP were also seized in 2005. PCP is most 

common in the D.C. metropolitan area, and 

its use has fluctuated up and down 

throughout time. 

11
Figure 3: Drugs Removed From the Market, by Drug 2002-2005 

Amount (kg) 

10000 

1000 

100 

10 

1 

Tables 6-8. Return on investment (ROI) 

refers to the yield realized from investing 

time and funds expressed as a ratio of 

ONDCP dollars invested versus dollars 

returned. Tables 6 and 7 assess ROI by 

focusing on funds spent in support of law 

enforcement initiatives and the value of 

drugs and assets removed from the 

marketplace. Seizing drugs and illegally 

gained assets from a DTO is comparable to 

eliminating the inventory and stock holdings 

Table 6 

6933 

Marijuana 

Heroin 

Cocaine HLC 

Crack Cocaine 

Methamphetamine 

of a legitimate business, leaving it nothing to 

market and no method for hiding the 

revenue accrued. These seizures are a 

clear indication that DTOs in the W/B region 

are being disrupted and dismantled. 

Comparing the total value of the seizures to 

the budget for the law enforcement 

initiatives provides clear evidence of the 

cost effectiveness of the W/B HIDTA 

initiatives. 

4313 

1966 

4714 

33 

99 

67 

104 

266 

823 804 

506 

39 

22 

33 

103 

1 

10 8 

19 

2002 2003 2004 2005 

Year 

12
Table 7:

Table 6. This table shows the ROI for drugs removed from the drug market. The W/B 

seized by W/B initiatives is 9:1. For every HIDTA exceeded their targeted drug ROI for 

dollar invested in the W/B HIDTA by 2005. In fact, the drug ROI has increased 

ONDCP, $9 in drugs was permanently $2 since 2004. 

Table 7 

Table 7. This table assesses the ROI for 

assets seized and shows that in 2005, as in 

2004, W/B law enforcement initiatives 

seized more than $28 million worth of cash 

and other assets. Cash accounted for 61 

percent of the assets seized in 2005. The 

W/B HIDTA met its targeted drug ROI for 

2005. The ROI for assets seized by W/B 

Table 8 

initiatives is 5:1. For every dollar invested in 

the W/B HIDTA by ONDCP, $5 in drug 

assets were seized. A large portion of these 

assets were forfeited and re-directed to drug 

control programs. It is important to note that 

W/B initiatives generate more money in 

asset seizures than it costs to run the 

program. 

Table 8. This table depicts the total ROI for 

the W/B HIDTA in 2004 and 2005 by 

focusing on the HIDTA funds spent in 

support of law enforcement initiatives and 

the value of drugs and assets removed from 

the market. It allows the Executive Board to 

monitor the overall efficiency of their 

initiatives. The total ROI for the W/B HIDTA 

for 2005 is 13:1. The W/B HIDTA initiatives 

once again exceeded their target and show 

an increase in the ROI. In fact, the total ROI 

of the W/B HIDTA law enforcement 

initiatives has increased 62% from 2002 to 

2005 and the drugs and drug assets seized 

increased 66% during this time (see Figure 

4). 

13
Figure 4: ROI 

Return on Investment Increased 62% 

from 2002 to 2005 

15 

10 

5 

0 

$8 

$11 $12 $13 

2002 2003 2004 2005 

Assets Seized Drugs Seized Total Seizures 

Table 9 

Drugs & Drug Assets Seized Increased 66% 

from 2002 to 2005 

$90,000,000 

$80,000,000 

$70,000,000 

$60,000,000 

$50,000,000 

$40,000,000 

$30,000,000 

$20,000,000 

$10,000,000 

$0 

$48,459,652 

$59,949,268 

$73,747,591 $80,663,534 

2002 2003 2004 2005 

Assets Seized Drugs Seized Total Seizures 

Table 9. The W/B HIDTA facilitates the 

coordination of law enforcement by linking 

cases originating in state venues to federal 

prosecutors. HIDTA initiatives work closely 

with federal and state prosecutors to ensure 

the successful prosecution of arrested 

traffickers. The W/B HIDTA funded five 

prosecutors. As shown in Table 9, these 

prosecutors handled more than 700 cases, 

substantially more than projected. The 

number of cases handled increased 23 

percent from 2004. 

In addition to preparing cases for court, 

prosecutors offered legal assistance on 

operational matters such as preparing 

search warrants and wiretap orders. These 

activities will be monitored more closely as 

a part of the PMP starting in 2006. 

14
Table 10 

Tables 10-11. In comparison to other 

regions of the country, the 

methamphetamine threat in the W/B region 

is very low. But, the number of labs 

identified and dismantled is increasing. W/B 

HIDTA initiatives participated in the 

identification and dismantlement of seven 

clandestine labs that together were capable 

of producing a minimum of $14,400 worth of 

methamphetamine per year. In 2004, 

HIDTA initiatives seized only three labs. All 

of these labs were relatively small and were 

probably set up by cooks manufacturing 

methamphetamine for their own use and 

that of their local connections. The Maryland 

labs were small operations set up in two 

homes, a trailer, and a garage. Several of 

the people involved in setting up these labs 

were transplants from the Midwest and 

other regions of the country and had 

criminal records involving 

methamphetamine. Table 11 was not 

included in this report because no children 

were found in connection with these labs 

and no other lab-related activities were 

reported. The only dump site in Maryland in 

2005 was located outside of the HIDTA 

region. There were no dump sites 

discovered in D.C. or Virginia in the HIDTA 

region. 

15
PERFORMANCE MEASURES FOR GOAL 2 

Tables 12 through 16 assess each HIDTA’s 

effectiveness and efficiency in providing 

access to advanced technology and training 

opportunities, establishing a system for 

exchange of intelligence and information, 

and the coordination of law enforcement 

efforts. This involves monitoring the 

HIDTA’s ability to provide analytical support 

for initiative cases; training for law 

enforcement officers; deconfliction services 

for cases, events, and subjects; and 

referring cases to other HIDTAs and other 

agencies. The W/B HIDTA provides all of 

these resources through its ISC and other 

intelligence and information sharing 

initiatives. The outcomes clearly illustrate 

the high level of information sharing and the 

resulting coordination of law enforcement 

efforts in the W/B region. 

NOC expands web-based DTO database in 2005. The DTO database captured 

information relating to the first four core tables of the PMP and was able to 

generate them automatically. This proved to be such an extremely efficient 

system for collecting the data that ONDCP chose to expand this system in 2005 to 

collect data for all 16 core tables. To accomplish this, the NOC developed a new 

web-based program called the HIDTA PMP Database. It provides screens to 

collect all required initiative and administrative level data. As the data is entered, 

the core performance tables are automatically tabulated on a real-time basis. It 

also automatically generates the Budget Proposals required by ONDCP. The 

HIDTA PMP Database was used to complete the core performance tables for the 

2005 Annual Report. 

ISC initiates joint investigations. In 2005, the W/B HIDTA’s ISC continued 

to develop successful collaborative relationships with initiatives, 

participating agencies and other HIDTAs. The ISC was able to provide 

these groups with information that assisted their case development. Some 

of the information provided included: 

o Maryland Criminal History records 

o Prison record information 

o Parole and probation information 

o Driver’s license, vehicle registration information, and driver’s photo 

o Address and resident verification 

16
Table 11 

In the spring of 2005, the Training Unit implemented the practice of administering pre and post 

tests for the law enforcement classes provided by the Multijurisdictional Counterdrug Task Force 

Training. The pre and post test is designed to discern whether students gained knowledge from the 

class. The students perform a self assessment of their level of knowledge for each of the course 

learning objectives at the beginning and the end of the class. The students also evaluate the overall 

value of the class, the instructors, and the course content. 

Total Number of 

Students Surveyed 

Number of Students Reporting 

Increased Knowledge in 60% or 

more of Course Learning 

Objectives 

Percent of Students Reporting 

Increased Knowledge in 60% or more 

of Course Learning Objectives 

290 256 88% 

In 2005, 88% of the students reported an increase in their knowledge after taking a course. This 

measurement was based upon students having a reported increase in 60% or more of the course 

learning objectives. 

Total Number of 

Students Surveyed 

Number of Students Rating 

Classes as Superior or Above 

Average 

Percent of Students Rating Classes as 

Superior or Above Average 

290 290 100% 

In addition, 100% of the students gave an overall rating of either superior or above average to the 

courses offered. 

Total Number of 

Students Surveyed 

Number of Students Rating 

Instructors as Superior or Above 

Average 

Percent of Students Rating Instructors 

as Superior or Above Average 

290 273 94% 

Total Number of 

Students Surveyed 

Number of Students Rating Course 

Content as Superior or Above 

Average 

Percent of Students Rating Course 

Content as Superior or Above 

Average 

290 270 93% 

Ninety-four percent rated the instructors as superior or above average and 93% rated the content as 

superior or above average. 

This year, the Training Unit implemented follow up surveys of students. Six months after taking a 

class, students were contacted to find out whether they have been able to apply what they learned in 

performing their duties. Of the students who completed the survey, 82% stated that they had been 

able to use what they had learned in the course. 

17
Table 12 

Table 12. Training is essential in improving 

both the efficiency and effectiveness of W/B 

HIDTA initiatives. The W/B HIDTA funded a 

fulltime training coordinator who worked 

with staff to provide training to 1,182 

students. In 2005, courses were provided in 

three key areas – analytical/computer, 

investigative/interdiction, and management/ 

administrative. The 2005 training budget 

was $263,912. The HIDTA provided 17,877 

Table 13 

hours of training at a cost of $14.76 per 

student hour. This slight increase from 2004 

occurred because more students attended 

trainings in 2005 offered by outside 

contractors and because of the mandated 

management training. The majority of 

students (55%) who attended training 

sessions participated in investigative/ 

interdiction courses. 

18
W/B HIDTA’s Case Explorer and Subject/Case Deconfliction came to the rescue. 

Through the use of these programs, several investigations were connected, 

allowing for initiatives to combine resources and work together on joint 

investigations. As an example, the following subject deconfliction provided 

useful background information for a new investigation. 

A W/B HIDTA analyst ran two names in Case Explorer for a HIDTA assigned DEA 

Task Force Officer (TFO). The analyst received a hit on an open ATF case 

assigned to a TFO in another W/B HIDTA initiative. A meeting was scheduled for 

the analyst, TFOs, and supervisors who had involvement with the investigation to 

encourage an exchange of intelligence information. 

As a result of this intelligence sharing, it was determined that one of the primary 

targets was the head of a Drug Trafficking Organization involved in transporting 

drugs between Atlanta and Baltimore using commercial vehicles from the 

company of one of the targets. The drugs were being delivered to two local street 

gangs in West Baltimore that are associated with violent crime and selling heroin 

and cocaine. 

19
Table 14: 

Table 14 

Figure 5: Deconfliction Submissions Increased More than

Three Fold from 2001 to 2005 

14000

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0

Tables 13-14. These two tables focus on 

deconfliction services. These services are 

essential to protecting the safety of the 

officers investigating DTOs and avoiding 

duplication of efforts. Often multiple 

initiatives or agencies are aggressively 

pursuing the same suspect or DTO. Sharing 

information through deconfliction ensures 

that a stronger, more complete case is 

made and that the officers participating in 

the investigation are protected. More than 

12,000 deconflictions were submitted to the 

W/B ISC in 2005, exceeding all 

expectations. More than half (52%) involved 

cases or subjects. The percentage of 

deconflictions submitted increased by 28 

percent from 2004 to 2005 and more than 

three fold from 2001 to 2005 (Figure 5). 

2749

3217

6398

9612

12270

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005

Duplicate investigations reduced thanks to case/subject case deconfliction. The Watch 

Center processed 5,864 drug operations through the W/B HIDTA Event Deconflictions 

database. Of these, 663 had conflicts with either their own agency or other law 

enforcement agencies. Many of the drug operations/conflicts were at the same location. 

Most importantly, officer safety was enhanced. 

20
Trends Analysis Unit (TAU) provides valuable Methamphetamine in 

Maryland data. In 2005, the TAU developed and disseminated the 

Methamphetamine in Maryland 2005 Overview, a follow-up to the 2004 

Methamphetamine Situation Report released by the W/B HIDTA. The 

Methamphetamine in Maryland 2005 Overview identifies labs and 

dumpsites in Maryland and provides a snapshot of methamphetamine 

parcels intercepted and residential searches conducted by W/B 

HIDTA initiatives. Because this information was so well received and 

utilized by area law enforcement, similar reports for audiences in 

Northern Virginia, Richmond, and the District of Columbia are in the 

works. 

The TAU provides data for the University of Maryland’s Center for 

Substance Abuse Research (CESAR), Anne Arundel and Baltimore 

County Police departments. TAU provided data to CESAR for a 

Community Epidemiology Work Group (CEWG) Conference and 

produced pricing information for Anne Arundel County on British 

Columbia marijuana. TAU also conducted extensive research to 

produce a mini threat assessment for the Baltimore County Police 

Department that they use to enlighten policy makers in their county. 

21
Table 15: Table 15 

Table 15. Table 15 demonstrates efficiency 

through the percent of cases provided 

analytical support. Analytical support is the 

assignment of an analyst to assist with a 

case during which time the analyst performs 

one or more major analytical activity, such 

as toll or document analysis, to further a 

Table 16 

case. A case can be supported multiple 

times. So, this table reports the number of 

individual cases supported, not the number 

of times support was provided. In 2005, 242 

cases received analytical support, 

exceeding the target of 195. This is an 

increase of 30 percent from 2004. 

Table 16. The referral of cases is a unique 

and productive effort of the HIDTA Program. 

Although more cases were opened by the 

W/B HIDTA initiatives in 2005 than 2004, 

fewer were referred. Of the 262 cases 

referred, 98 were referred to other HIDTAs 

and 164 were referred to other agencies. A 

case referral can be counted each time a 

HIDTA initiative provides sufficient case 

information to another HIDTA or another 

agency for the purpose of enabling that 

HIDTA or agency to conduct an 

independent investigation. 

22
DTOs and MLOs using mail services busted. Evaluation of telephone 

tolls, subscriber information, airline flight data, and open source law 

enforcement databases provided by W/B HIDTA analysts targeted 

numerous violators; seven arrests were made, including five on arrest 

warrants. One of the violators was prosecuted federally for 

possession with intent to distribute and possession of a handgun in 

the commission of a drug trafficking crime. He was sentenced to over 

five years in federal prison. These were the results of a targeted 

parcel investigation of a drug organization transporting marijuana and 

cocaine from California to the Baltimore area. 

Interactive Mapping System allows users to access all types of 

geospatial data. The ISC’s Evaluation and Crime Mapping Unit 

developed different methods of intelligence and data dissemination. 

This data focuses on street gang activity, prison gang member 

releases, parole and probation, and general crime locations. System 

users can visualize the data on a map and extract data for further 

analysis. 

23
CONCLUSIONS 

2005 marks the second year of 

implementation of the HIDTA Performance 

Management Process (PMP). This process 

was designed to measure the effectiveness 

of HIDTA initiatives in addressing two 

program goals: disrupting and dismantling 

DTOs, and improving the efficiency and 

effectiveness of the initiatives. W/B HIDTA 

staff and administrators worked closely with 

the PMP Committee to develop the 16 core 

measures used today. They also created an 

automated system for capturing the required 

data and trained the staff at other HIDTAs 

and ONDCP how to use it. HIDTA initiatives 

across the country are now able to provide 

concrete evidence of their effectiveness in 

addressing all levels of a drug trafficking or 

money laundering networks simultaneously. 

The results reported here for the W/B 

HIDTA answer the series of questions 

posed by the PMP and are overwhelmingly 

positive. 

Does the W/B HIDTA target high-level 

DTOs? Yes. For the past two years, the 

majority of the DTOs targeted by law 

enforcement initiatives were multi-state or 

international in scope. Nearly all of the 

MLOs targeted (49 of 51) were multi-state 

or international in scope. These initiatives 

also target the local DTOs that can have a 

more visible and dramatic impact on local 

communities. In 2005, for example, 22 

percent of the DTOs targeted by the 

initiatives were local DTOs. 

Are the DTOs being disrupted and 

dismantled? Yes. Nearly three quarters of 

the targeted DTOs were disrupted or 

dismantled. More than half (57%) of the 

targeted MLOs were disrupted or 

dismantled. 

. 

Are the W/B HIDTA initiatives focusing 

on the identified threats? Yes. The W/B 

HIDTA uses PMP tools such as the Matrix 

to maintain a continuous process of 

assessing threats and implementing 

strategies to address them. If a threat is 

identified in the Matrix it must be described 

in the threat assessment and initiatives 

must set performance targets for addressing 

it. 

Are law enforcement agencies using the 

W/B HIDTA Investigative Support Center 

and training resources? Yes. The W/B 

ISC is often the focal point of criminal and 

drug trafficking intelligence for the 

participating federal, state, and local law 

enforcement agencies. The ISC provides 

these agencies with a multitude of services 

such as analytical support, deconfliction, 

threat assessments, and access to 

information sharing networks and 

databases. ISC analysts have provided 

analytical support to more than 400 cases 

over the past two years. More than 20 

initiatives submitted 21,882 deconflictions 

during this time. 

Is the HIDTA approach cost effective in 

the Washington Baltimore region? Yes. 

Law enforcement officers participating in 

HIDTA initiatives are often aware of shifts in 

drug trends before anyone else. The HIDTA 

approach strengthens and increases the 

opportunities for identifying, monitoring, and 

addressing drug threats. PMP data show 

that the return on investment in the 

Washington/Baltimore region is exceptional. 

W/B initiatives seized $9 in drugs and $5 in 

drug assets for every ONDCP dollar 

invested in the program. 

24
Baltimore Prevention featured on Brazilian TV. A three night 

television series entitled “Advances in the War on Drugs” included 

the W/B HIDTA Prevention Initiative, “Safe Streets,” to expose viewers 

to strategies used by public, private and non-profit institutions in the 

United States to combat illegal drug use. This was all arranged in 

December 2005 when representatives from the Public Affairs Office of 

the U.S. Consulate in Sao Paulo, Brazil visited Baltimore. Public 

feedback indicates the series educated Brazilian citizens and gave 

them a better understanding of challenges faced by law enforcement 

in the U.S. in fighting illegal drug usage. 

Needs of chronically under served female population and high-risk 

mental health population recognized. Court Services and Offender 

Supervision Agency (CSOSA) developed a program to expand the 

HIDTA funded Assessment and Orientation Center (AOC). Authorizing 

legislation by the National Capitol Revitalization and Self-Government 

Improvement Act of 1997 empowered CSOSA’s Director to “develop 

and operate intermediate sanctions programs for sentenced 

offenders” thereby allowing CSOSA to bring this project to fruition. 

This expansion includes the renovation of Karrick Hall, an eight story 

facility located on the grounds of the District of Columbia General 

Hospital Campus, which will be used as the new Re-Entry and 

Sanction Center for CSOSA. It consists of four male units, one female 

unit, and one mental health unit serving approximately 1200 

offender/defendants annually. 

25
HIDTA treatment/criminal justice cross-training to be implemented in 

Maryland jurisdictions. “Working Together for a Change: Training for 

Criminal Justice and Treatment Professionals on Strategies to 

Improve Outcomes with Hard-Core Drug Offenders” was a great 

success among the HIDTA treatment staff. The Prince William County 

Community Services Board (CSB) hosted this two-day training for the 

Washington, D.C. and Maryland treatment/criminal justice initiatives. 

“Life Beyond Drugs and Booze: The Real Deal IV” drew over 300 

teens, parents and professionals to learn more about the risks of drug 

and alcohol use and opportunities for recovery. This event was 

hosted by Virginia’s Prince William County initiative and cosponsored by the Community Services Board, the 31st District 

Juvenile Court Service Unit, and U-Turn of SAARA, (the Substance 

Abuse and Addiction Recovery Alliance) on April 19th at the Ferlazzo 

Government Center. 

Former Redskins player Gary Clark challenged the teens to put in the 

day-to-day practice and preparation to make their dreams a reality 

during “The Road Less Traveled, Following Your Dream Instead of the 

Crowd” presentation. 

Panel discussions for teens and parents included the “real deal” on 

living drug free and sober, led by recovering young adults. CSB 

therapists, Jim Money and Mari Brooks, mediated discussions on 

recognizing drug usage in teens and where to turn to for help. Twelve 

step programs, such as Al-Anon and Families Anonymous, were 

outlined for parents coping with teen drug and alcohol problems. 

Help for parents of “out-of-control” teens was co-led by Pat Wilson, 

PWC Schools, Danielle McCauley, Juvenile Court Service Unit, and 

Angie Mendez, CSB. 

Service providers from local agencies, non-profit organizations, and 

drug treatment programs were available to provide information about 

their services. 

26
APPENDICES

A. Table of Organization for the Washington/Baltimore HIDTA 

B. Washington/Baltimore HIDTA Executive Board Membership 

C. List of Participating Law Enforcement Agencies 

D. List of Participating Treatment Agencies 

E. List of Counties Participating in the Washington/Baltimore HIDTA 

27
28
APPENDIX A: TABLE OF ORGANIZATION FOR THE WASHINGTON/BALTIMO

Finance Unit 

Deputy Director 

Director 

Investigative Support 

Center 

Initiatives 

Law Enforce ment 

Initiatives 

See attached 

Prevention Initiatives 

See attached 

Treatm

Justi

S

Train

Executive Board 

Budget Review 

and Analysis 

Subcommittee 

(Ad Hoc) 

Law Enf orcement 

Subcommittee 

(Standing) 

Treatment/ Criminal Justice 

 Subcommittee 

(Standing) 

Pre vention 

Subcommittee 

(Standing) 

Investigative 

Intelligence Unit 

Watch Center Strategic Analysis 

Section 

Technical 

Un

Human Resources 

Unit 

Mapping & 

Evaluation Unit 

Intelligence 

Subcommittee 

(Ad Hoc) 

Trends Analysis 

Unit 

29

APPENDIX B: WASHINGTON/BALTIMORE HIDTA EXECUTIVE BOARD 

MEMBERSHIP 

Local: 7 members State: 5 members Federal: 7 members 

 LOCAL MEMBERS 

Joe Bullock, Ph.D. 

Director 

Arlington County Substance Abuse Center 

Leonard Hamm 

Police Commissioner 

Baltimore Police Department 

Melvin High 

Chief 

Prince George’s County Police Department 

Patricia Jessamy 

State's Attorney for Baltimore City 

Andrea Poteat 

Deputy Director 

Court Services & Offender Supervision Agency 

M. Douglas Scott 

Chief 

Arlington County Police Department 

Richard Trodden 

Commonwealth’s Attorney for Arlington County 

STATE MEMBERS 

Peter Luongo, Ph.D. 

Director 

Maryland Alcohol & Drug Abuse Administration 

Colonel W. Steven Flaherty 

Superintendent 

Virginia State Police 

Colonel Thomas E. Hutchins 

Superintendent 

Maryland State Police 

Judith Sachwald 

Director 

Maryland Division of Parole & Probation 

Alan Woods, Director 

Maryland Governor's Office of Crime Control 

& Prevention 

FEDERAL MEMBERS 

Mark Bastan 

Assistant Special Agent in Charge 

Bureau of Immigration and Customs 

Enforcement 

Rod Rosenstein 

U.S. Attorney for the District of Maryland 

Kenneth L. Wainstein 

U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia 

Shawn Johnson 

Special Agent in Charge 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Washington Field Office 

Paul J. McNulty 

U.S. Attorney for the 

Eastern District of Virginia 

William Hoover 

Special Agent in Charge 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives 

Washington Field Office 

Kevin L. Perkins 

Special Agent in Charge 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 

Baltimore Field Division 

31
32
APPENDIX C: LIST OF PARTICIPATING LAW ENFORCEMENT 

AGENCIES 

 FEDERAL AGENCIES 

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, 

& Explosives 

Drug Enforcement Administration 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 

Internal Revenue Service 

United State Attorney’s Office (MD, DC, 

VA) 

United States Coast Guard 

United States Immigration & Customs 

Enforcement 

United States Park Police 

United States Postal Inspectors 

United States Secret Service 

STATE AGENCIES

Maryland State Police 

MD National Capitol Park PD 

MD Natural Resources PD 

MD Transit Administration PD 

MD Transportation Authority PD 

University of MD 

University of MD Police 

Virginia Attorney General’s Office 

Virginia State Police 

 LOCAL AGENCIES

Alexandria PD 

Annapolis PD 

Anne Arundel PD 

Arlington County 

Arlington County PD 

Baltimore City PD 

Baltimore County PD 

Calvert County PD 

Charles County Sheriff’s Office 

Chesterfield PD 

Commonwealth Attorney’s Office for 

Alexandria, Virginia 

Fairfax County PD 

Greenbelt PD 

Hanover Sheriff’s Office 

Henrico PD 

Harford County Sheriff’s Office 

Howard County PD 

Loudoun County Sheriff’s Office 

Metro Washington Airport Authority PD 

Metropolitan PD 

Montgomery County PD 

National Guard (MD, DC, VA) 

Ocean City PD 

Petersburg PD 

Prince George’s County PD 

Prince William County PD 

Richmond PD 

St. Mary’s Sheriff’s Office 

State’s Attorney - Baltimore 

Vienna PD 

33
34
APPENDIX D: LIST OF PARTICIPATING TREATMENT/CRIMINAL 

JUSTICE AGENCIES 

Alexandria 

Alexandria Community Services Board 

Alexandria Parole and Probation Office 

Arlington 

Arlington County Detention Facility 

Arlington County Bureau of Substance 

Abuse 

District 10 Parole and Probation 

Baltimore City 

Alcohol and Drug Abuse Administration 

Parole and Probation Agency 

Department of Correction and Rehabilitation 

Baltimore County 

Baltimore County Bureau of Substance 

Abuse 

Baltimore County Bureau of Corrections 

Baltimore County Department of Parole and 

Probation 

Charles County 

Charles County Detention Center 

Charles County Health Department 

Charles County Mental Health 

Jude House 

Charles County Department of Parole and 

Probation 

Fairfax 

Fairfax Community Services Board 

Fairfax Department of Parole and Probation 

Howard County 

Howard County Health Department 

Howard County Bureau of Addictions 

Department of Parole and Probation 

Loudoun 

Loudoun County Mental Health Agency 

Loudoun County Community Services 

Board 

Loudoun County District 25 Parole and 

Probation 

Montgomery County 

Montgomery County Department of Health 

and Human Services 

Alcohol and Drug Abuse Administration 

Adult Addiction Services 

Department of Correction and Rehabilitation 

Montgomery County State Attorney's Office 

Division of Parole and Probation 

Vanguard Services 

Maryland Treatment Center 

Outpatient Addictions Contract Network 

Prince George’s County 

Prince George’s County Department of 

Corrections 

Prince George’s County State Attorney's 

Office 

Prince George’s County Division of Parole 

and Probation 

Prince George’s County Health Department 

Prince George’s County Public Defender's 

Office 

Prince William County 

Prince William County Community Services 

Board 

Prince William County District 35 Parole and 

Probation 

Prince William County-Manassas Regional 

Adult Detention Center 

Prince William County Office of Criminal 

Justice Services 

Prince William County District Court 

Prince William County Circuit Court 

Washington, D.C. 

Court Services and Offender Supervision 

Agency (CSOSA) 

Addiction Prevention and Recovery 

Administration (APRA) 

D.C. Department of Corrections 

US Probation Agency 

35
36
APPENDIX E: LIST OF COUNTIES PARTICIPATING IN THE 

WASHINGTON/BALTIMORE HIDTA 

Maryland 

Anne Arundel County 

Baltimore City 

Baltimore County 

Charles County 

Howard County 

Montgomery County 

Prince George’s County 

Virginia 

City of Alexandria 

Arlington County 

Chesterfield County 

Fairfax County 

Hanover County 

Henrico County 

Loudoun County 

City of Petersburg 

Prince William County 

City of Richmond 

Washington, D.C. 

37
38
TABLES AND FIGURES 

Figures 

Figure 1: Drugs & Drug Assets Seized Increased 66% from 2002 to 2005 

Figure 2: More than 75% of DTOs and MLOs Disrupted or Dismantled were 

International or Multi-State in Scope 

Figure 3: Drugs Removed From the Market, by Drug 2002-2005 

Figure 4: ROI 

Figure 5: Deconfliction Submissions Increased More than Three Fold from 2001 to 

2005 

Tables 

Table A: Washington/Baltimore HIDTA 2005 Drug Threats 

Table 1: Percentage of DTOs and MLOs Disrupted or Dismantled, 

Washington/Baltimore 2005 

Table 2: Percentage of DTOs and MLOs Disrupted or Dismantled by Scope, 

Washington/Baltimore 2005 [ALL DTOs; MLOs included] 

Table 3: Percentage of Money Laundering Organizations Disrupted or Dismantled 

by Scope, Washington/Baltimore 2005 

Table 4: Operational Scope of All DTO and MLO Cases Initiated, 

Washington/Baltimore 2005 

Table 5: Drugs Removed from the Marketplace for Year 2005, at 

Washington/Baltimore 

Table 6: Washington/Baltimore Return on Investment (ROI) for Drugs Removed 

from the Marketplace by Law Enforcement Initiatives for Year 

Table 7: Washington/Baltimore Return on Investment (ROI) for Assets Removed 

from the Marketplace by Law Enforcement Initiatives for Year 

Table 8: Washington/Baltimore Total Return on Investment (ROI) for Drugs and 

Assets Removed from the Marketplace by Law Enforcement Initiatives for 

Year 

Table 9: Prosecution Outputs and Outcomes by Year at Washington/Baltimore 

HIDTA 

Table 10: Value of Clandestine Methamphetamine Laboratories Dismantled by Size 

for Year 2005, at Washington/Baltimore 

Table 12: HIDTA Training Efficiency by Type of Training for Year 2005, at 

Washington/Baltimore 

Table 13: Percentage of HIDTA Initiatives Using Event and Case Deconfliction 

Services for Year at Washington/Baltimore 

Table 14: Percentage of Event and Case Deconflictions Submitted for Year at 

Washington/Baltimore 

Table 15: Percentage of Individual Cases Provided Analytical Support for Year at 

Washington/Baltimore 

Table 16: Percentage of HIDTA Initiative Cases Referred to Other HIDTAs and 

Other Agencies for Year at Washington/Baltimore 

39
40
ENDNOTES 

Washington/Baltimore HIDTA (2005). Threat Assessment for Budget Year 2006. College Park, 

MD:Author. 

Washington/Baltimore HIDTA (2005). Strategy for Budget Year 2006. College Park, 

MD:Author. 

Washington/Baltimore HIDTA (2005). Annual Report 2004. College Park, MD:Author. 

HIDTA Directors’ Association (2005). High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area Program: 2004 

Annual Report. Washington, D.C.: Author. 

41
42