The Price of

Illicit Drugs:

1981 through the

Second Quarter of 2000

Office of

National Drug Control Policy

October 2001
ii
iii

The Price of Illicit Drugs:

1981 through the Second Quarter of 2000

Prepared for:

Office of National Drug Control Policy

Office of Programs, Budget, Research and Evaluations

under HHS contract no. 282-98-0006

task order number 23

Prepared by:

Abt Associates, Inc.

1110 Vermont Avenue, NW

Suite 610

Washington, DC 20005-3522

October 2001

 NCJ 190639

 PO 2965
iv
v

Table of Contents

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

General Comments about the Presentation ...................................................................................... 4

Cocaine Prices.................................................................................................................................. 6

Heroin Prices.................................................................................................................................... 9

Methamphetamine Prices............................................................................................................... 11

Marijuana Prices ............................................................................................................................ 12

Conclusions.................................................................................................................................... 13

List of Figures

Figure 1: Estimated Cocaine Price Per Pure Gram at Four Purchase Levels................................. 17

Figure 2: Comparison of Cocaine Retail Price Per Pure Gram Calculated as a Function

 of Amount or Based on Amount Purchased as a Function of Expenditure

 (Alternate Method) ........................................................................................................ 18

Figure 3: Estimated Cocaine Purity at Four Purchase Levels........................................................ 19

Figure 4: Estimated Heroin Price Per Pure Gram at Four Purchase Levels................................... 20

Figure 5: Comparison of Heroin Retail Price Per Pure Gram Calculated as a Function of

Amount or Based on Amount Purchased as a Function of Expenditure

(Alternate Method) ........................................................................................................ 21

Figure 6: Estimated Heroin Purity at Four Purchase Levels.......................................................... 22

Figure 7: Estimated Methamphetamine Price Per Pure Gram at Three Purchase Levels .............. 23

Figure 8: Estimated Methamphetamine Purity at Three Purchase Level....................................... 24

Figure 9: Estimated Marijuana Price Per Pure Gram at Four Purchase Levels ............................. 25

List of Tables

Table 1: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine at Four Purchase

 Levels, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 28

Table 2: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Heroin at Four Purchase

 Levels, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000................................................................. 31

Table 3: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Methamphetamine at Three

 Purchase Levels, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 ................................................. 34

Table 4: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram of Marijuana at Four Purchase Levels,

 Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 ............................................................................. 37

Table 5: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine and Heroin at the

 Retail Level, Calculated via an Alternate Method, Calendar year quarters for

 1981-2000 ........................................................................................................................ 40

Table 6: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine at Four Purchase

 Levels, Calendar years for 1981-2000 ............................................................................. 43

Table 7: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Heroin at Four Purchase

 Levels, Calendar years for 1981-2000 ............................................................................. 44

Table 8: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Methamphetamine at

 Three Purchase Levels, Calendar years for 1981-2000 ................................................... 45

Table 9: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram of Marijuana at Four Purchase Levels,

 Calendar years for 1981-2000........................................................................................... 46
vi

Appendix A: Statistical Methods

1. The STRIDE Data....................................................................................................................A-1

2. Variables ..................................................................................................................................A-2

3. A Model for Price ....................................................................................................................A-6

4. An Alternative Model for Retail Prices ...................................................................................A-9

5. A Model for Purity.................................................................................................................A-13

6. A Model for Weights .............................................................................................................A-16

7. The Relationship Between Retail and Wholesale Prices .......................................................A-19

8. Regional Prices ......................................................................................................................A-21

Appendix A: Statistical Methods: List of Figures

Figure A1. Flowchart for STRIDE and DAWN ..........................................................................A-2

Figure A2. Relative Frequency of Retail Cocaine Purchases ....................................................A-11

Figure A3. Relative Frequency of Retail Heroin Purchases ......................................................A-11

Figure A4. Predicted Weights for Cocaine: Chicago, 1981-Q1 to 2000-Q2 .............................A-18

Figure A5. Monthly Retail and Wholesale Cocaine Prices: National........................................A-20

Figure A6. Monthly Retail and Wholesale Cocaine Prices: South West Border.......................A-22

Appendix A: Statistical Methods: List of Tables

Table A1. Criteria for Deleting Data Point by Drug....................................................................A-1

Table A2. The Effect of Outlier Deletion on STRIDE Sample Size ...........................................A-4

Table A3. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Cocaine ......................................................A-8

Table A4. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Heroin ........................................................A-8

Table A5. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Methamphetamine .....................................A-9

Table A6. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Marijuana.................................................A-12

Table A7. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates: Retail Cocaine and Heroin ...........................A-12

Table A8. Predicted mean amounts for given nominal prices: Cocaine, Rest of U.S., Q2 2000A-12

Table A9. Predicted mean amounts for given nominal prices: Heroin, Rest of U.S., Q2 2000.A-12

Table A10. Percentage of Cell Means with no Data..................................................................A-15

Appendix B: Data Adjustments: List of Tables

Table B1. Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine ..................................................................... B-2

Table B2. Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin ....................................................................... B-9

Table B3. Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine................................................... B-10

Table B4. Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana ................................................................ B-23

Table B5. Consumer Price Index, First Half of 2000 as Reference Point ................................. B-30

Appendix C: Regional Estimates: List of Tables

Table C1. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases < 1 pure gram ........ C-2

Table C2. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases

 between 1 and 10 pure grams .................................................................................. C-3

Table C3. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between

10 and 100 pure grams ............................................................................................. C-4

Table C4. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases > 100 pure grams... C-5

Table C5. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases < 0.1 pure gram ....... C-6

Table C6. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between 0.1

and 1 pure grams ...................................................................................................... C-7

Table C7. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between 1

and 10 pure grams .................................................................................................... C-8
vii

Table C8. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases > 10 pure grams....... C-9

Table C9. Annual Methamphetamine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases

 < 10 pure gram........................................................................................................... C-10

Table C10. Annual Methamphetamine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases

between 10 and 100 pure grams ............................................................................ C-11

Table C11. Annual Methamphetamine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases >

 100 pure grams......................................................................................................... C-12

Table C12. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases < 10 pure gram ................ C-13

Table C13. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases between 10 and

 100 pure grams......................................................................................................... C-14

Table C14. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases between 100 and

1000 pure grams ..................................................................................................... C-15

Table C15. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases > 1000 pure grams........... C-16
viii
ix

Acknowledgements

The authors and staff of Abt Associates, Inc., conducted and reported this joint research for ONDCP under

contract 282-98-0006, Task order Number 23. The Abt Associates authors included William Rhodes,

Project Director, Patrick Johnston, and Ryan Kling.

ONDCP Office of Programs, Budget, Research and Evaluation (OPBRE) sponsored this study to provide a

better understanding of national-level drug prices and as a reference for additional drug research. Dr. Terry

Zobeck, Chief of the OPBRE Research Branch, and Dr. Michael Cala, OPBRE Project director, provided

guidance and direction for the study's progress. Feedback on the study and the report would be appreciated

to improve further efforts in this area. Please send comments or questions to ONDCP@NCJRS.org, and

reference this report.

Thanks to Ms.Bonnie Robinson, OPBRE program support specialist, for providing extensive editing and

publishing corrections to facilitate the final printing of this report and posting of the electronic version.

Disclaimer

Information presented in this publication reflects the views of the authors and does not necessarily reflect

the official policy or position of the Federal Government.

Public Domain Notice

All information 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. This report is available online at

<www.WhiteHouseDrugPolicy.gov>, by selecting “Publications”.
x
1

Introduction

As policy makers assess the effectiveness of the Nation’s anti-drug efforts, they should be concerned with

trends in the price and purity of illicit drugs on the Nation’s streets. Drug price and purity cannot tell the

entire story, or even most of the story, about the success of anti-drug programs. Still, in an area of high

national concern, where there are few clear indicators of program effectiveness, trends in drug prices are an

essential part in understanding the Nation’s drug trends.

Changes in drug price and purity may reflect the effect of supply and demand reduction programs. That

reflection is imperfect, of course, because many additional factors affect drug markets. Nevertheless, as

source country and interdiction programs reduce the flow of drugs to the United States, they cause supply

shortages in domestic markets, with the consequence that sellers dilute their products’ quality and charge

higher prices for the limited supply. Even if source country and interdiction programs fail to reduce the

level of drug imports, those programs increase drug prices by imposing higher business costs on producers

and shippers. Like any businessman, a drug dealer will expect customers to cover at least some of those

higher costs.

Some researchers claim that source country and interdiction programs have small effects on domestic

prices.1 Their reasoning is that drug producers can quickly expand production efforts, so shortages are

ephemeral. Also, they argue, domestic dealers account for most distribution costs, so increasing production

and foreign shipping costs could not substantially increase domestic prices. Other researchers have

challenged this reasoning and claim a strong empirical relationship between domestic prices and both

source zone and interdiction efforts.2 In the judgement of the National Research Council, this issue remains

unsettled.3

A kilogram of pure cocaine costs about $25,000 at the wholesale level. For purposes of this report,

wholesale level is defined as a large street purchase. The size levels depend on the drug and are defined

later in this report. This is a high price for a product that is basically agricultural, requires inexpensive

chemical processing, and has minimal shipping costs absent interdiction. Consequently, source zone and

 

1

 Rydell, C. and Everingham, S. Controlling Cocaine: Supply versus Demand Programs, Drug Policy Research

Center, Santa Monica, California: Rand, 1994.

2

 Crane, B., Rivolo, A. and Comfort, G. “An Empirical Examination of Counterdrug Interdiction Programs

Effectiveness,” paper prepared for the Institute of Defense Analysis, Washington, D.C., 1997.

3

 Manski, C., Pepper, J. and Thomas, Y. Assessment of Two Cost Effectiveness Studies on Cocaine Control Policy,

National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1999.
2

transit zone programs almost certainly explain high wholesale prices. Although the wholesale price is only

a fraction of the retail price (closer to $225,000 per pure kilogram), $25,000 is not insignificant. Moreover,

this report shows that domestic dealers markup the wholesale price as they resell to their customers,

accounting for some of the $200,000 difference between retail and wholesale prices. The size of that

markup – and hence the relative effectiveness of interdiction and domestic law enforcement – is the

principal issue of contention between those who say that interdiction is ineffective (because the markup is

small) and those who say that interdiction is effective (because the markup is large). Estimates of the size

of the price markup seem essential for assessing public policy.

Continuing with the cocaine illustration, the drug might pass through several distribution levels, where the

principal value added is to repackage the cocaine into smaller lots. (Cocaine typically gets transformed into

crack at the lowest distribution levels, but that process is also inexpensive.) Absent law enforcement, then,

the cost of moving a kilogram of cocaine from the wholesale level to the retail level would seem to be

much less than $200,000 – probably closer to the cost of marketing aspirin. Thus, much of the $200,000

that does not result from a markup of wholesale price is presumably a consequence of domestic law

enforcement.4 This is a second way that illicit drug prices are a reflection of anti-drug programs.

As noted, supply-based programs can only carry the Nation so far toward achieving its targets for reducing

illicit drug use. The larger part has to be played by programs that inhibit youth from experimenting with

drugs, encourage moderate users to stop recreational use, and provide treatment and perhaps coercion for

those habituated to illicit substances. Nevertheless, supply-side programs can cause higher drug prices, and

those higher drug prices can be an important complement to demand-based programs. As prices increase,

some drug users would choose to reduce their consumption. They may even choose to quit using drugs, at

least so long as prices remain high. Several researchers report evidence that drug users – even hardcore

users – respond to higher prices by quitting or using a lower level of drugs.5

 Additional evidence is

 

4

 Domestic law enforcement operates on drug prices in three ways. First, domestic law enforcement seizes some of

the substance, thereby reducing its supply, or at least increasing the cost of selling the product. Second, law

enforcement imposes substantial risks that dealers will be captured and incarcerated. Third, because drug dealing

is outlawed, contracts between buyers and sellers are unenforceable at law, and violence often substitutes as a

means of enforcing deals. Dealers would seem to charge higher prices to compensate for these substantial risks.

5

 Caulkins, J. “Estimating Elasticities of Demand for Cocaine and Heroin with DUF Data,” working paper, Carnegie

Mellon University, August 1995. Chaloupka, F, Grossman, M. and Tauras, J. “The Demand for Cocaine and

Marijuana by Youth,” NBER working paper, No. 6411, 1998. Grossman, M., Chaloupka, F. and Brown, C.

“The Demand for Cocaine by Young Adults: A Rational Addiction Approach,” NBER working paper, No. 5713,

1996. Saffer, H. and Chaloupka, F. “The Demand for Illicit Drugs,” NBER working paper, No. 5238, 1995.90
3

emerging that higher prices can result in lower experimentation by school-aged children, with long-term

consequences for future drug use.6

 Apparently a successful supply-based program can complement a

comprehensive demand-based program.

The findings described above probably seem sensible to most people. If public officials impede the

production and delivery of drugs, and increase the risk of transacting illicit substances, then prices should

increase as dealers attempt to recoup their costs and compensate for risk. Users should respond to those

higher prices the same way they do to the price of tobacco and alcohol – they will use less. But the

pressing question is the magnitude of the effect that public interventions have on prices and that those

prices have on consumption. Estimating that effect is difficult for a number of reasons, including the

problem of getting reliable estimates of drug prices.

By comparison, estimating the retail price of hamburger is simple. Go to several grocery stores and

observe prices for a standard amount (say one pound) and quality (say 95 percent lean). There will be

some variation from store to store, of course, but competition will keep the prices within a narrow range.

Illicit substances are different. Nominal prices seem to stay about the same over time and from place to

place. For example, $10 and $20 bags of heroin have been typical retail transaction for years. The quality

of those purchases, however, varies greatly from place to place, from time to time, and even from customer

to customer. Decreases in the purity of their product, and hence increases in its price per pure gram, are the

way that drug dealers charge higher prices. As a practical matter, then, useful price series must be

expressed in such metrics as “price per pure gram” and “purity of a standard transaction amount” rather

than nominal transaction amounts.7

Unfortunately, for those concerned with public policy, that quality variation is not directly observable. A

bag of 5 percent pure heroin looks no different than a bag of 50 percent pure heroin. Some buyers may be

sufficiently experienced to judge small changes in quality, but as a practical matter the quality of heroin

and other drugs must be judged by laboratory analysis.

 

6

 Rhodes, W., Johnston, P., Han, S., McMullen, Q. and Hozik, L. “Illicit Drugs: Price Elasticity of Demand and

Supply,” report submitted to the National Institute of Justice by Abt Associates, February 17, 2000.

7

 The value of the dollar has generally decreased over time due to inflation. It seems reasonable to adjust estimated

drug prices to account for inflation, but the size of that adjustment is arguable. We have used the consumer price

index, but many hardcore drug users have an atypical market basket that is dominated by drug consumption.

Some alternative price index may be more appropriate for them.
4

The System To Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence (STRIDE) of the Drug Enforcement

Administration (DEA) provides the most comprehensive data source for laboratory analyses of drug

purchases. Researchers have used STRIDE and similar data to develop price series for illicit drugs.8

 Given

the large variation in prices over time, across places, between distribution levels and from sale to sale, it is

no wonder that those researchers have often used sophisticated statistical procedures to identify trends in

drug prices.

This report presents an analysis of drug prices commissioned by the Office of National Drug Control

Policy. Based on STRIDE data from 1981 through the middle of 2000, it presents trends in the price per

pure gram and the purity of cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines. It also presents trends in the price of

marijuana that are unadjusted for THC content, because STRIDE does not report marijuana quality. In

each case, the trends are reported for several distribution levels, which is a useful way to estimate the

markup of drug prices from the wholesale to the retail level.

General Comments about the Presentation

This report presents findings with a series of graphs and tables. Those graphs and tables are based on

statistical modeling that will not interest most readers. A technical presentation of that modeling appears in

an appendix. This report provides both a price and purity figure, with corresponding tables, for cocaine,

heroin and methamphetamine. But marijuana just has the price figures, with corresponding tables. As

mentioned, marijuana’s THC content – that is, its counterpart to purity – is unknown in the data. Thus,

marijuana price estimates are for bulk grams, not pure grams as with the other three drugs.

For each drug, the figures show estimated prices at several hypothetical distribution levels. These

hypothetical levels were set by the analysis team to enhance the reader’s ability to compare prices as drugs

move from wholesale to retail levels. These levels are hypothetical because, in fact, drug markets are fluid

and lack fixed distribution levels. The hypothetical distribution levels vary across drugs because each drug

is transacted in different amounts; for example, a single dose of cocaine is not necessarily the same as a

single dose of heroin. For all four drugs, prices for the highest (“wholesale”) distribution level certainly

 

8

 Rhodes, W., Hyatt, R. and Scheiman, P. “The Price of Cocaine, Heroin and Marijuana, 1981-1993,” Journal of

Drug Issues, 24 no. 3 (1994): 383-401. Caulkins, J. and Padman, R. “Quantity Discounts and Quality Premia for

Illicit Drugs,” Journal of American Statistical Association, 88 no. 423 (1994): 748-57. Rhodes, W., Truitt, L.,

Kling, R and Nelson, A. “The Domestic Monitor Program and the Heroin Signature Program: Recommendations

for Changes,” Cambridge, MA, Abt Associates Inc., June 30, 1998.
5

overstate drug prices at the U.S. border. Because imports are usually seized, not purchased, price

information is seldom available for them. That is, prices at the border are almost certainly lower than the

lowest prices shown in these figures.

As mentioned, illicit drugs often are transacted at fixed prices that remain constant over time. For example,

crack cocaine is often sold as a $10 rock and heroin is often sold in a $20 bag, regardless of purity or

volume. The size of the rock and the purity of the bag change over time, however, which means that the

standardized price, or the price per pure gram, changes significantly over time. The figures reported here

are intended to capture trends in standardized prices and are expressed in terms of price per pure gram.

In addition to the above, the report introduces an alternative way to estimate retail prices for cocaine and

heroin (Statistical Appendix, section 4). At retail, cocaine and heroin are typically transacted at fixed

prices of $10, $20, $40 and so on up to about $100. Using the STRIDE data, we estimated the amount of

pure cocaine/heroin for each purchase conditional on the amount paid for that purchase. Then we used

results from a special addendum to the Drug Use Forecasting survey to weight each dollar category by the

distribution of prices that users actually pay on the street. This weighted average is a measure of pure

cocaine/heroin actually purchased per dollar spent. We use the inverse of that estimate – the price per pure

gram – as the estimate of retail prices.

This alternative approach to estimating retail prices provides a transitional methodology that will take

advantage of data emerging from NIJ’s Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program and

SAMHSA’s National Household Survey on Drug Abuse (NHSDA). One problem with the current

application is its reliance on purchase data from just six cities for only one year (Q3 1995 – Q2 1996).

Another problem is that the addendum data are limited to cocaine and heroin purchases. ADAM data will

come from at least thirty-five cities, and they will include all drugs of interest. New versions of the

National Household Survey on Drug Abuse will include questions about the purchase of marijuana. Thus,

this alternative approach to estimating retail price-series will improve with the expansion of ADAM and the

NHSDA.

Beyond the alternative model for retail cocaine and heroin prices, there are several differences between the

methods used in the current 1981-2000 report and those used in the previous 1981-1998 report. Firstly, the

raw quarterly database (STRIDE 1 in Figure A1) for 2000 contained slightly different numbers of

transactions than the raw quarterly database for 1998. For example, the number of transactions in the first

two quarters of 1998 was 162 and 202 in the 2000 database but only 153 and 170 in the 1998 database.
6

Secondly, even if the raw data over the period Q1 1981  Q2 1998 had been identical in both databases, the

final data after removing outliers, would almost certainly be different. This is because the definition of an

outlier depends on the estimated model, and a model fit to the period Q1 1981  Q2 1998 would give

slightly different parameter estimates than the same model fit to the period Q1 1981  Q2 2000.

Thirdly, the current weighting system based on the Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) was improved

in the current report because Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) were more tightly defined. In this

report, any town or city in an MSA (e.g. Cambridge in the Boston MSA) is now literally in that MSA,

whereas in the previous report this was only approximately so.

Fourthly, the baseline for the deflator (based on the Consumer Price Index) is the first half of 2000 in the

current report, and was the first half of 1998 in the previous report.

Cocaine Prices

Figure 1 reports estimated cocaine prices for purchases at each of four distribution levels:

0-1 pure grams

1-10 pure grams

10-100 pure grams

more than 100 pure grams

The lowest distribution level in this figure is almost certainly a retail-level purchase, the second lowest

level is probably a mixture of retail-level and middle dealer-level purchases, and the rest of the purchases

are almost certainly transactions between dealers. Our new estimates for retail-level prices will be reported

in a separate figure.9

 

9

 Figures 1 through 3 correspond to their counterparts in the previous price-series report, except we have combined the

two highest distribution levels, which are difficult to distinguish empirically. Although we might have introduced

the new retail-price series into these extent figures, continuity between this and the last price-series report seems

desirable.
7

Prices at each distribution level fell markedly from 1981 to about 1988, after which price decreases have

been gradual and irregular.10 For example, at the lowest distribution level reported here, the typical

purchase of 350 milligrams of pure cocaine (that is, about 0.5 bulk grams at 67 percent purity) cost $400 to

$460 per pure gram in 1981 and 1982. It cost $170 to $230 per pure gram in 1999 and 2000. Similarly, at

the next higher distribution level, the typical purchase of 4.4 grams of pure cocaine (that is, almost 7 bulk

grams at 63 percent purity) costs roughly $260 to $300 in 1981 and 1982. A purchase cost around $90 to

$100 per pure gram in 1997 and 1998.

Figure 1 shows that some price increases at the wholesale level seem to cascade throughout all the lower

distribution levels, perhaps suggesting that events either outside the country or at the wholesale level affect

retail prices. The largest and longest lasting effect is associated with the end of 1989 and the beginning of

1990, with another sharp effect happening in the second quarter of 1992 and again in the first quarter of

1997. Prices may have spiked in the middle of 1995, but if they did, that spike only appears after a lag at

the lowest distribution level.

Associating these price spikes with specific drug interdiction events is problematic. It seems likely that

some interdiction events had measurable effects on cocaine prices, while others did not, and distinguishing

which events had an effect and which did not is complicated by the absence of knowledge about the delay

between when an event occurred and when prices changed. Notwithstanding these difficulties, Abt

Associates has made substantial progress modeling the interdiction-price relationship for cocaine.11

The relationship between wholesale and retail prices is of considerable interest. The correlation between

wholesale and retail prices is 0.46, and even though this estimate is technically inappropriate, it does

correctly portray the fact that both price series tend to move together. In fact transfer function methods

(which are technically more appropriate because they model various time series aspects of the data)

indicate that increases in wholesale prices are associated with lagged as well as contemporaneous

increases in retail prices (see section 7 of Appendix A). Specifically, we estimate that an increase in retail

prices of $1 in a given month is associated with an increase in wholesale prices of $0.034 (p = 0.001) the

 

10 Most of the decline since 1988 can be attributed to an increase in the consumer price index. Whether the CPI

should be applied to illicit drug transactions, or whether an alternative price index would be better, is debatable.

These price estimates use the CPI in lieu of a clear alternative.

11 Layne M., Bruen, A., Johnston P., Rhodes W., Decker S., Townsend M., Chester C., Schaffer G., Lavin J.

“Measuring the Deterrent Effect of Enforcement Operations on Drug Smuggling, 1991-1999,” Abt Associates

2001.
8

same month, and an increase of $0.039 (p = 0.0003) the following month. Thus, to some extent at least,

wholesale prices appear to have followed, rather than lead, retail prices.

This association is unlikely to be causal, and is more likely related to the fact that purchase agreements at

the wholesale level are made in advance while those at the retail level do not involve prior contractual

arrangements. Further, this association is merely a summary of the wholesale-retail relationship over a

particular historical period, and need not hold over other time periods when price changes are less the result

of, for example, changes in supply, and more the result of increased law enforcement.

Retail Cocaine Prices

As noted earlier, we developed a new methodology for estimating retail prices, and we applied that new

methodology to graph a retail-level price trend. These are presented in figure 2, which shows a trend that is

not much different from that shown by figure 1. Furthermore, from 1988 onward, the two trend lines seem

to show similar quarterly price perturbations. Since 1995, the retail price for cocaine has ranged between

$100 and $150 per pure gram. There are sharp perturbations, which appear to be correlated with

interdiction events.

Figure 3 shows trends in cocaine purity when cocaine is transacted at different distribution levels. Because

the lines blend together during recent years, patterns get muddled, but some conclusions are clear. At the

highest distribution level, cocaine is routinely bought and sold at roughly 85 percent purity. The purity

decreases at lower distribution levels, but even at those levels, cocaine is usually 70 to 80 percent pure.

(This is only true after 1988, about the time when crack cocaine began to dominate the market.) Note that

cocaine purity is sometimes higher at retail than at wholesale. This may result from crack cocaine being

“cooked” from powder cocaine, resulting in a product of increased purity at the retail level.

While the purity of cocaine sold at the highest distribution levels remains relatively constant, cocaine

shortages seem to have caused lower-level dealers to cut their product’s purity. Note that those transient

decreases in purity correspond to temporary increases in prices, as shown in figures 1 and 2.

Heroin Prices

Figures 4 through 6 are the heroin counterparts to figures 1 through 3. They report prices for heroin

distributed at four levels:
9

0 to 0.1 pure grams

0.1 to 1 pure grams

1 to 10 pure grams

more than 10 pure grams

Figure 4 shows that heroin prices have fallen at all distribution levels for nearly two decades. The

percentage price decrease is the smallest for retail level heroin sales and is greatest for high-level heroin

sales.

As reported here, prices for the lowest-level sales are estimated for a typical purchase of 40 pure milligrams

(that is, about 0.3 grams of bulk heroin at 13 percent purity). Such a quantity and purity seems most

suitable for injection drug use, implying that injection drug users have experienced a relatively modest

decrease in heroin prices. For them, heroin cost roughly $3.00 to $3.60 per pure milligram in the early

1980s and $1.80 to $2.10 per pure milligram in the late 1990s. Put another way, these numbers suggest that

a $20 bag of heroin contained about 6 pure milligrams in the early 1980s and about 10 pure milligrams in

the later 1990s.

Prices at the next lowest level are estimated for a typical purchase of roughly one-third of a pure gram at

almost 40 percent purity. Such a purchase would be acceptable for insuffulation, although injection drug

users could also buy at this level. When purchased at this quantity and quality, heroin cost $1.90 to $2.40

per pure gram in 1981 and 1982; it cost forty to fifty cents per pure gram in the early 2000s.

Retail Heroin Prices

After applying our new methodology for estimating retail heroin prices, we graphed results in figure 5. The

curve shows a startling and almost constant decrease in the price of heroin. During the early 1980s, heroin

users were spending $4 to $5 per milligram; by the 2000s, they were spending closer to $0.40 per

milligram.

Figure 5 shows a steep and sustained decrease in the price of heroin, in contrast to figure 4, which showed a

more moderate decline and virtual leveling in prices at the lower levels. Why do these apparently different

pictures occur? A change in methodology is part of the explanation, but the major reason is that the new

retail price combined purchases of low-level purity (suitable for injection) with purchases of higher-level

purity (suitable for insuffulation). Over time, the latter have become a larger proportion of users’
10

purchases, at least as reflected by STRIDE data. In the early 1980s, the STRIDE data was dominated by

purchases at the injection drug use level (roughly 150 to 225 buys per quarter) and there were fewer

purchases at the insuffulation level (roughly 75 to 160 purchases per quarter). By the early 1990s, the mix

was nearly even (roughly 60 to 150 per quarter at the injection level and 70 to 150 per quarter at the

insuffulation level). But by the end of the millennium, purchases at the level suitable for insuffulation

dominated (40 to 50 per quarter for high-purity heroin and close to 25 purchases per quarter for low purity

heroin). Thus, the new retail price series resembles the lowest level for the old series during the early

1980s and the next lowest level for the old series during the late 1990s. This new method gives a much

clearer picture of what heroin users paid for drugs during the last twenty years.

As with cocaine, there is indication that the long term relationship between wholesale and retail prices is

roughly one of a constant ratio. Unlike cocaine, the heroin price curves show no apparent high-level

disruptions that can be seen throughout lower level sales. Before concluding that the heroin distribution

system is inherently different from the cocaine distribution system, however, note that the heroin price

series seems to suffer from greater quarter-to-quarter random variation than its cocaine counterpart. This

partly results from a smaller number of heroin purchases than cocaine purchases in the STRIDE data. This

random variation may mask a more systematic relationship between wholesale prices and retail prices.

As shown by figure 6, the purity of heroin has remained relatively constant when transacted in lots of 10

pure grams and more. For amounts less than 10 pure grams, dealers cut the drug before resale; however,

over the last two decades heroin has been sold at increasing purity among lower level dealers, and between

them and final customers. Most of the increase in the purity of heroin sold at retail seems to have happened

before 1995, as the purity of heroin has remained fairly constant since then.12 This higher level of purity is

coincident with the emerging dominance of South American heroin in the United States market.13

 

12 Heroin may be increasingly transacted at higher purity at retail despite these figures. This could happen if

customers increasingly buy heroin at the 0.1 to 1 pure gram level instead of at the 0 to 0.1 pure gram level.

13 Rhodes, W., Truitt, L., Kling, R and Nelson, A. “The Domestic Monitor Program and the Heroin Signature

Program: Recommendations for Changes,” Cambridge, MA, Abt Associates Inc., June 30, 1998.
11

Methamphetamine Prices

Figures 7 and 8 are the methamphetamine counterparts to figures 1 and 3 (cocaine) and figures 4 and 6

(heroin). They report prices for methamphetamine distributed at three levels:

0 to 10 pure grams

10 to 100 pure grams

100 pure grams and more

The STRIDE data provide fewer examples of methamphetamine purchases than they do of cocaine and

heroin purchases. As a result, methamphetamine price series exhibit a greater sampling variation, and

distinguishing trends is more difficult. However, some trends are apparent.

Figure 7 shows that methamphetamine prices have declined over the past two decades, and by roughly the

same percentage for all distribution levels. In other words, price markups appear to be multiplicative for

this drug.

Prices for the lowest-level sales (estimated at the typical purchase of 3 pure grams – about 7 bulk gram at

41 percent purity) were roughly $300 in the early 1980s and $160 in the late 1990s. At the next highest

level of distribution (estimated at the typical purchase of 31 pure grams – about 56 bulk grams at 55 percent

purity) prices were roughly $110 in the early 1980s and $70 in the late 1990s.

Figure 8 shows the average purity of methamphetamine transacted at three distribution levels. The

relatively small number of data points results in considerable sampling variation from quarter to quarter,

but patterns still emerge. As expected, the purity of methamphetamine was higher for higher levels of

distribution. Notable is the parallel trend at different distribution levels. Generally, at all distribution

levels, purity increased after 1985, fell after 1988, increased again after 1990, and then decreased again

after 1995. Something of significance was surely happening in the methamphetamine market to explain

these reversals in trends, but no explanations are at hand.

Marijuana Prices

As in the case of methamphetamine, there are relatively few marijuana purchases in STRIDE, so

distinguishing trends is relatively difficult. Another problem is that the DEA does not test marijuana for

THC content, so there is no marijuana counterpart to the pure grams reported for cocaine and heroin. The
12

difficulty this causes is that STRIDE data provide no basis for adjusting price changes for marijuana’s

quality.

Figure 9 is the counterpart to figures 1 (cocaine), 4 (heroin) and 7 (methamphetamine). This figure reports

price estimates for marijuana distributed at four levels:

0 to 10 bulk grams

10 to 100 bulk grams

100 to 1000 bulk grams

1000 bulk grams and more

At the lowest distribution level, price is estimated for the typical purchase of 3.1 grams of marijuana, which

might represent about six typical joints. Dividing the typical prices observed during the past few years by

six suggests that a joint cost about $2.50 during the later 1990s. The same joint (ignoring quality

differences) probably cost about $1.25 to $1.50 in the early 1980s.

Price at the second lowest price level is evaluated for a purchase of 35 grams, which is slightly more than

an ounce. Many marijuana users buy the drug in ounce bundles, so prices estimated for this level probably

represent retail level purchases, albeit relatively large ones, and certainly many sales among dealers. A

purchase at the ounce level probably cost about $150 in the late 1990s. It probably cost more like $80 in

the early 1980s.

Conclusions

Trends in illicit drug prices provide important information about the success of the Nation’s supply-based

anti-drug programs. Illicit drug prices are many magnitudes higher than would otherwise be the case were

there no effective source zone, interdiction, and domestic law enforcement programs. That is good news.

So, too, are the occasional spikes in drug prices that appear to result from successful source zone and

interdiction programs. More disconcerting is the Nation’s apparent inability to affect long-term increases

in illicit drug prices, which have fallen or remained fairly constant since the early 1990s.

As the Nation moves to reduce illicit drug use, even a constant or declining trend in drug prices could be

consistent with a successful supply-based program. If demand-based programs can reduce the market for

illicit substances, especially by hardcore users who appear to provide most of the demand, then future drug

prices could fall as suppliers seek to sell to fewer buyers. But the prevalence of hardcore drug use has not
13

declined much since the early 1990s, so decreased demand is an unlikely explanation of past trends.

Supply-based programs have been remarkably successful at keeping illicit drug prices at very high levels,

but not so successful at pushing them higher during the 1990s. Only the future will reveal whether or not

new supply-based programs can build on the experience and success of old programs.
14

References

Box G.E., Jenkins G.M., and Reinsel G.C. (1994). Time Series Analysis, Third Edition. Prentice Hall,

Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.

Fahrmeir L. and Tutz G. (1994). Multivariate Statistical Modeling Based on Generalized Linear

Models, Springer, New York.

Lawless J.F. (1982). Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data. Wiley, New York.

McCullagh P. and Nelder J.A. (1989). Generalized Linear Models, Second Edition. Chapman and

Hall, London.
15

LIST OF FIGURES
16
Figure 1: Estimated Cocaine Price Per Pure Gram at Four Purchase Levels

$0

$50

$100$150$200$250$300$350$400$450$500

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Price Per Pure Gram in 2000 Dollars

Graphic Gr

line

Street Purchasers STRIDE data set

(pure grams) Purity A

Small User < 1 65% Large User 1 to 10 62% Mid-level distributor 10 to 100 70% Wholesale distributor > 100 82% 
Figure 2: Comparison of Cocaine Retail Price Per Pure Gram Calculated as a Function of Amount or Based on AFunction of Expenditure (Alternate Method)

$0

$100$200$300$400$500$600$700$800$900

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Price Per Pure Gram in 2000 Dollars Based on Price as a Function of Amou

Based on Amount Purchased as a Function of 

(Alternate Method)
Figure 3: Estimated Cocaine Purity at Four Purchase Levels

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Purity (%) Graphic

line

Street Purchasers STRIDE data set

(pure grams)

Small User < 1Large User 1 to 10Mid-level distributor 10 to 100Wholesale distributor > 100
Figure 4: Estimated Heroin Price Per Pure Gram at Four Purchase Levels

$0

$500

$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500$3,000$3,500$4,000$4,500

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Price Per Pure Gram in 2000 Dollars

Graphic Mean of STRIDE data 

line

Street Purchasers STRIDE data set

(pure grams) Purity Amount (pure g

Small User < 0.1 13% 0.04Large User 0.1 to 1 39% 0.34Mid-level distributor 1 to 10 41% 4Wholesale distributor > 10 60% 49
Figure 5: Comparison of Heroin Retail Price Per Pure Gram Calculated as a Function of Amount or Based on AmFunction of Expenditure (Alternate Method)

$0

$500

$1,000$1,500$2,000$2,500$3,000$3,500$4,000$4,500$5,000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Price Per Pure Gram in 2000 Dollars Based on Price as a Function of Amo

Based on Amount Purchased as a Function of Expenditure

(Alternate Method)
Figure 6: Estimated Heroin Purity at Four Purchase Levels

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Purity (%)

Street Purchasers STRIDE d

(pure gr

Small User < 0.Large User 0.1 to Mid-level distributor 1 to 1Wholesale distributor > 10
Figure 7: Estimated Methamphetamine Price Per Pure Gram at Three Purchase Levels

$0

$50

$100$150$200$250$300$350$400

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Price Per Pure Gram in 2000 Dollars

Street Purchasers STRIDE data set Mean of STRID

(pure grams) Purity Amount (

User < 10 33% 2Mid-level distributor 10 to 100 46% 3Wholesale distributor > 100 66% 
Figure 8: Estimated Methamphetamine Purity at Three Purchase Levels

0%

10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Purity (%)

Street Purchasers STRIDE data set

(pure grams)

User < 10Mid-level distributor 10 to 100Wholesale distributor > 100
Figure 9: Estimated Marijuana Price Per Pure Gram at Four Purchase Levels

$0.00$5.00

$10.00$15.00$20.00$25.00$30.00$35.00$40.00

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

CALENDAR YEAR QUARTER

Price Per Pure Gram in 2000 Dollars

Street Purchasers STRIDE data set Mean 

(pure grams) Amo

Small User < 10 Large User 10 to 100 Mid-level distributor 100 to 1,000 Wholesale distributor > 1,000 
26
27

LIST OF TABLES
28

Table 1: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q81 445.44 304.52 213.76 32 44 59 74 167 82 2

2q81 421.90 284.11 198.56 33 43 61 86 111 75 1

3q81 397.02 264.02 200.70 44 44 61 58 119 64 0

4q81 427.98 255.48 191.20 35 46 60 63 76 39 0

1q82 464.15 270.79 191.88 32 43 59 123 165 88 2

2q82 444.98 267.11 182.56 176.38 34 47 61 69 80 157 55 4

3q82 408.78 256.91 182.27 137.28 37 45 63 75 125 208 75 3

4q82 415.24 264.11 181.08 40 49 61 116 134 75 0

1q83 417.02 256.45 185.70 132.26 35 49 68 81 146 185 113 5

2q83 418.64 258.32 184.38 121.15 44 49 67 81 91 216 122 13

3q83 377.99 244.76 176.52 113.62 37 49 70 83 93 154 147 19

4q83 381.59 231.03 165.92 114.21 42 55 71 90 150 222 198 22

1q84 368.92 226.31 160.05 75.79 45 55 75 87 180 209 212 17

2q84 386.19 226.96 152.38 99.93 43 58 72 84 137 202 236 19

3q84 374.32 217.78 152.59 106.10 44 53 68 86 135 198 232 15

4q84 381.86 217.95 148.17 111.15 42 52 69 88 151 239 249 16

1q85 373.80 214.13 150.85 101.49 40 54 68 83 201 306 246 20

2q85 334.61 223.67 147.14 96.36 37 50 64 78 251 301 295 21

3q85 300.67 211.96 143.17 85.78 40 51 67 83 258 314 364 29

4q85 303.04 215.13 137.61 89.13 41 55 71 85 219 248 379 34

1q86 312.47 191.95 132.29 78.62 49 59 75 89 200 262 426 36

2q86 318.63 194.51 131.19 76.05 54 64 76 85 234 309 392 32

3q86 312.43 197.60 124.00 69.72 50 64 78 88 231 253 359 28

4q86 314.55 185.50 121.09 66.94 53 68 79 90 178 200 390 35

1q87 323.10 183.22 113.87 63.18 55 68 81 88 182 153 364 44

2q87 297.67 170.08 107.92 57.60 55 70 79 81 189 225 533 73

3q87 290.15 172.89 101.14 52.77 72 73 81 87 217 286 567 75

4q87 258.57 161.90 93.51 44.52 76 73 83 87 235 207 497 72

1q88 248.69 145.23 85.39 40.02 74 74 83 86 243 231 502 68

2q88 222.26 148.20 82.15 45.46 68 69 81 86 328 222 476 82

3q88 248.79 137.22 77.38 46.44 77 73 80 89 348 260 538 136

4q88 230.59 137.38 74.71 45.43 82 76 82 89 338 228 488 116

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 1 pure gram)

2: Large User (1 to 10 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)

4: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
29

Table 1: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q89 216.82 125.68 70.00 37.23 78 73 81 84 367 251 576 105

2q89 232.63 121.40 65.31 36.65 81 73 77 85 480 243 534 94

3q89 233.57 121.28 64.86 36.46 78 72 74 86 393 273 507 99

4q89 220.19 118.64 70.78 41.64 73 64 71 81 300 206 356 69

1q90 243.32 124.27 71.38 44.34 68 59 68 77 421 271 375 48

2q90 291.75 148.69 78.83 52.42 69 53 64 76 281 225 276 40

3q90 280.57 141.55 82.17 51.58 67 61 63 80 441 248 370 52

4q90 254.11 146.40 77.59 47.20 73 63 69 81 315 250 366 54

1q91 244.54 130.41 73.43 42.56 76 65 74 81 496 354 568 68

2q91 228.09 120.35 70.42 40.45 79 70 74 82 408 284 629 122

3q91 225.34 110.08 68.61 41.13 80 68 75 84 360 256 615 119

4q91 211.92 108.33 64.49 37.94 79 77 78 86 311 255 506 106

1q92 204.64 109.47 61.36 33.73 79 76 78 86 290 328 581 91

2q92 234.11 125.42 70.35 42.58 72 69 73 83 254 249 391 39

3q92 231.52 112.13 65.51 38.85 77 71 75 83 280 339 509 86

4q92 227.13 111.31 62.94 35.08 77 78 78 81 224 236 356 47

1q93 207.63 109.03 63.07 33.72 73 72 72 83 196 204 255 31

2q93 212.29 115.59 66.69 35.31 74 72 70 78 176 293 298 25

3q93 186.17 109.46 61.93 35.32 72 70 72 78 167 254 328 43

4q93 190.67 105.21 60.19 35.18 75 71 72 81 170 254 258 35

1q94 188.15 98.98 58.38 31.03 75 73 73 82 168 262 367 49

2q94 186.63 102.90 58.64 32.21 74 73 75 81 166 307 375 40

3q94 175.27 99.35 56.53 32.88 73 74 72 78 203 395 491 63

4q94 197.79 93.45 54.54 30.13 72 74 74 83 129 354 444 48

1q95 198.17 91.23 53.38 31.95 73 76 73 80 141 436 465 46

2q95 197.96 93.74 54.76 32.62 70 71 70 78 161 291 350 44

3q95 190.43 102.72 57.04 35.48 60 63 65 68 256 279 316 30

4q95 197.40 99.66 57.26 34.78 67 67 67 73 159 265 317 39

1q96 188.72 96.90 53.40 31.04 73 71 69 81 149 341 425 43

2q96 160.56 90.90 50.93 31.58 68 68 67 79 213 359 509 74

3q96 173.36 92.51 49.77 29.25 70 68 69 77 182 375 528 71

4q96 177.21 91.30 50.41 27.81 75 71 70 80 229 396 456 63

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 1 pure gram)

2: Large User (1 to 10 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)

4: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
30

Table 1: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q97 166.44 85.45 48.99 27.79 71 69 67 79 225 451 506 47

2q97 209.66 97.07 55.46 32.55 55 62 60 81 304 397 347 31

3q97 211.16 89.39 53.28 31.69 67 66 63 77 245 449 562 61

4q97 193.33 88.81 48.83 27.98 68 69 67 74 157 341 515 56

1q98 180.51 89.02 47.75 28.89 69 69 66 75 162 426 595 46

2q98 184.57 86.21 47.91 27.26 71 69 67 78 202 405 626 74

3q98 184.60 85.74 45.58 26.53 68 67 66 77 231 422 591 71

4q98 182.68 90.69 46.60 28.08 66 68 63 75 230 414 500 60

1q99 190.05 100.69 50.24 24.15 61 63 59 70 327 498 359 23

2q99 184.67 87.46 49.61 27.30 64 62 61 71 292 446 514 34

3q99 171.22 87.34 47.27 26.92 66 63 62 74 409 507 631 90

4q99 189.78 93.07 46.97 28.00 66 63 62 70 395 491 451 31

1q00 197.36 104.37 51.71 27.22 64 60 55 68 381 578 391 34

2q00 226.03 96.97 51.18 24.85 58 55 51 66 319 531 544 33

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 1 pure gram)

2: Large User (1 to 10 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)

4: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
31

Table 2: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Heroin at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q81 3,339.52 2,100.92 1,167.53 915.95 3 6 14 56 187 155 63 11

2q81 3,578.83 2,208.52 1,117.11 860.56 4 10 12 64 182 116 80 24

3q81 3,281.21 2,384.04 1,359.75 954.06 4 11 25 57 192 143 75 22

4q81 2,980.50 1,904.56 1,182.86 730.25 4 15 24 59 207 72 43 22

1q82 3,110.24 1,962.32 1,078.43 932.82 4 14 33 67 206 156 78 17

2q82 3,332.55 1,936.29 1,177.32 860.31 4 19 31 54 181 99 92 31

3q82 3,196.01 1,810.62 1,204.88 819.48 5 22 33 54 225 101 84 23

4q82 3,499.75 1,843.10 1,175.92 760.46 6 17 31 64 156 85 44 18

1q83 3,878.81 1,701.34 1,319.53 943.73 5 18 23 53 178 112 59 12

2q83 3,788.61 2,214.88 1,325.46 810.13 6 15 27 61 146 113 68 24

3q83 3,471.38 2,124.11 1,180.61 666.69 7 17 31 58 163 134 69 34

4q83 3,470.98 1,969.76 1,415.98 818.79 6 18 35 60 147 81 50 30

1q84 3,526.48 1,933.86 1,287.59 663.77 7 17 37 57 152 75 49 28

2q84 3,461.66 1,843.86 1,261.30 766.68 7 28 34 57 144 62 54 24

3q84 3,478.96 2,206.62 1,395.56 674.33 9 25 38 56 145 91 62 33

4q84 3,473.42 1,736.99 1,227.30 764.70 8 28 36 59 144 63 43 32

1q85 3,123.52 1,731.03 1,065.90 573.77 9 25 39 51 189 101 58 30

2q85 3,143.39 1,817.79 1,162.84 754.29 8 28 46 65 156 88 78 41

3q85 3,243.34 1,714.23 1,205.72 696.01 7 26 42 55 125 74 82 55

4q85 3,074.58 1,438.41 1,296.89 646.35 9 29 45 53 125 71 48 40

1q86 3,784.85 1,549.53 1,087.74 581.08 9 31 40 52 110 79 78 32

2q86 3,502.44 1,414.13 967.69 522.38 10 26 45 49 129 80 54 33

3q86 3,290.06 1,609.61 1,134.38 562.57 9 28 31 47 123 66 60 21

4q86 3,430.38 1,986.93 1,423.21 522.19 9 23 32 47 88 53 46 20

1q87 3,444.79 1,412.00 1,416.96 566.65 10 20 31 44 81 57 49 24

2q87 4,067.29 2,045.38 1,107.59 528.20 10 25 34 55 82 78 55 30

3q87 2,574.30 1,326.59 1,138.63 589.06 11 32 38 58 65 85 52 44

4q87 3,139.34 1,487.24 992.03 525.53 13 31 40 52 122 93 67 31

1q88 3,105.40 1,417.87 984.51 464.90 15 33 41 61 99 81 59 48

2q88 3,104.79 1,287.07 1,068.46 491.89 18 35 38 60 107 98 63 42

3q88 3,125.23 1,198.94 903.53 500.65 17 40 42 57 71 111 56 48

4q88 3,156.38 1,079.71 884.96 496.75 20 37 40 53 78 71 52 36

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 0.1 pure gram)

2: Large User (0.1 to 1 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (1 to 10 pure grams)

4: Wholesale Distributor (10 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
32

Table 2: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Heroin at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q89 2,999.54 1,133.04 848.80 481.30 21 37 44 60 53 71 44 42

2q89 2,535.45 1,018.84 817.00 406.05 18 38 40 61 72 54 56 48

3q89 2,528.20 926.15 830.66 396.46 20 43 46 64 75 84 65 76

4q89 2,324.53 918.19 664.77 404.92 16 38 47 64 68 52 42 64

1q90 2,881.14 1,133.99 956.31 380.69 13 29 35 55 107 83 57 45

2q90 3,121.93 1,177.31 740.33 435.00 17 32 33 48 116 83 102 41

3q90 3,360.83 1,370.26 903.34 405.45 12 25 29 53 93 72 68 29

4q90 2,330.16 1,063.61 912.43 437.50 22 32 33 53 74 86 65 26

1q91 2,998.94 1,285.22 1,026.02 465.93 17 27 29 58 150 122 62 26

2q91 3,280.84 1,018.47 839.95 394.21 16 35 32 53 142 146 74 41

3q91 3,012.46 1,128.17 866.95 416.68 19 34 30 60 121 109 85 36

4q91 2,795.15 951.88 756.37 388.19 17 36 39 56 60 70 31 27

1q92 2,801.91 962.23 725.38 380.70 20 40 38 59 81 106 73 43

2q92 2,878.66 991.69 732.05 342.29 21 44 34 59 78 92 60 50

3q92 2,989.42 912.96 664.27 336.08 23 43 38 58 61 101 70 55

4q92 2,780.54 816.48 625.56 333.76 19 49 47 67 85 85 27 43

1q93 2,718.13 765.47 607.45 288.20 23 44 54 66 96 138 42 51

2q93 2,811.68 624.34 550.48 288.55 24 46 55 69 107 125 56 46

3q93 2,478.64 671.36 472.16 299.38 26 45 44 67 86 166 71 87

4q93 2,530.02 669.96 513.69 269.08 28 42 46 67 56 119 62 37

1q94 2,546.99 665.61 438.85 276.21 22 40 47 65 86 163 85 51

2q94 2,798.22 649.08 472.03 260.31 23 46 46 61 70 175 88 62

3q94 2,978.76 601.91 454.71 232.16 27 50 46 63 68 183 85 74

4q94 2,559.55 682.15 365.55 220.46 27 50 48 67 58 167 75 50

1q95 2,504.57 546.16 390.36 205.83 25 48 52 69 74 173 81 82

2q95 2,355.19 533.02 373.60 208.26 26 50 54 61 72 200 79 69

3q95 2,950.64 573.27 374.24 204.19 25 46 50 60 66 212 91 104

4q95 2,797.12 568.80 396.95 207.48 20 46 46 57 57 168 74 49

1q96 2,849.29 549.96 374.02 168.11 22 40 38 56 79 214 102 50

2q96 2,364.66 568.30 389.67 177.17 23 41 42 51 97 198 126 66

3q96 2,011.30 544.71 392.36 182.78 24 42 50 58 62 188 84 71

4q96 2,472.67 521.48 357.18 181.58 21 47 49 61 81 170 82 63

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 0.1 pure gram)

2: Large User (0.1 to 1 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (1 to 10 pure grams)

4: Wholesale Distributor (10 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
33

Table 2: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Heroin at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q97 2,258.45 547.79 325.56 173.98 23 47 43 59 102 233 79 69

2q97 2,580.95 520.54 327.86 169.15 25 44 47 60 87 215 95 82

3q97 2,533.12 519.12 363.98 173.88 23 50 45 58 67 220 90 88

4q97 2,117.80 771.16 327.39 168.52 43 54 44 59 14 44 80 66

1q98 2,239.23 459.53 338.91 158.40 23 45 50 61 81 321 112 92

2q98 2,011.01 432.03 326.42 140.28 27 47 49 58 55 223 151 129

3q98 2,320.66 430.70 329.78 142.54 24 43 45 55 54 172 116 88

4q98 1,777.00 434.78 330.73 151.28 27 46 51 60 65 211 80 81

1q99 1,963.31 474.10 331.74 159.31 28 45 48 61 102 239 131 99

2q99 2,035.82 489.09 305.55 135.85 27 43 39 56 86 252 166 72

3q99 1,813.67 427.92 308.04 136.68 25 43 47 60 98 242 136 103

4q99 1,904.30 412.77 272.56 131.51 26 43 46 64 64 185 83 71

1q00 2,061.23 435.14 254.84 105.14 28 45 51 58 69 242 117 74

2q00 2,114.49 411.02 282.83 119.16 22 45 43 60 45 224 121 107

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 0.1 pure gram)

2: Large User (0.1 to 1 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (1 to 10 pure grams)

4: Wholesale Distributor (10 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
34

Table 3: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Methamphetamine at Three

Purchase Levels, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

1q81 211.39 103.41 34 73 48 5 0

2q81 363.72 85.85 46 56 23 7 1

3q81 235.47 91.94 34 79 24 4 1

4q81 338.73 91.10 50 55 15 4 0

1q82 298.75 126.98 38 54 60 17 1

2q82 299.01 143.94 40 55 35 13 0

3q82 281.59 129.75 47 71 40 12 1

4q82 291.31 106.65 45 60 43 11 0

1q83 294.68 99.19 33 46 47 11 2

2q83 315.25 129.02 46 53 56 9 1

3q83 317.08 107.91 42 74 37 12 1

4q83 315.85 121.02 48 65 35 13 2

1q84 288.40 144.75 43 61 69 15 2

2q84 320.59 125.20 38 69 64 37 2

3q84 290.40 118.00 61.37 28 56 61 43 17 4

4q84 282.34 127.97 41 59 76 23 2

1q85 303.40 132.72 64.66 33 52 75 83 32 4

2q85 332.66 126.23 72.15 39 60 49 35 20 4

3q85 324.56 149.42 40 68 48 17 1

4q85 285.50 120.12 81.72 32 62 40 60 22 3

1q86 294.76 127.72 41 59 90 15 1

2q86 321.98 147.85 37 46 70 17 1

3q86 302.65 107.55 37.36 39 62 74 61 14 4

4q86 283.98 90.41 41 60 41 11 1

1q87 289.87 136.78 49 50 41 17 1

2q87 274.88 90.60 48.42 39 65 78 48 15 4

3q87 259.92 106.82 53.58 42 53 85 30 14 5

4q87 292.10 90.31 47.21 42 64 80 67 9 3

1q88 238.68 97.80 48 63 89 31 2

2q88 243.71 89.71 39.55 52 67 65 75 24 6

3q88 249.52 91.81 48.12 40 58 84 55 25 3

4q88 259.09 91.06 36.87 43 59 86 37 29 5

*Street Purchasers: 1: User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)

3: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
35

Table 3: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Methamphetamine at Three

Purchase Levels, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

1q89 234.45 88.83 38 62 62 28 2

2q89 212.23 101.72 42.56 44 71 63 38 18 3

3q89 243.53 97.93 38 68 38 15 0

4q89 229.94 104.86 30.60 31 52 93 48 10 3

1q90 235.18 119.79 26 50 58 8 2

2q90 250.79 122.58 18 28 57 12 1

3q90 254.35 114.77 27 39 46 12 1

4q90 264.23 104.51 50.61 22 40 56 32 10 4

1q91 241.97 93.92 39.84 20 47 41 51 11 6

2q91 234.79 232.92 34.53 16 50 59 37 20 4

3q91 213.18 212.83 20 51 33 12 1

4q91 201.41 107.82 125.49 20 48 81 37 12 4

1q92 224.45 98.99 29.51 27 46 67 40 16 3

2q92 273.10 95.11 53.79 35 49 65 45 20 10

3q92 253.35 129.17 38.72 37 62 87 46 27 10

4q92 226.96 90.19 39.66 28 71 69 45 19 6

1q93 221.07 84.99 41.77 40 48 84 47 14 5

2q93 227.36 105.09 44.00 35 55 55 39 17 3

3q93 241.40 84.59 38.50 32 73 77 46 29 6

4q93 190.34 65.04 39.06 53 76 78 43 25 9

1q94 220.91 65.42 39.45 47 77 87 44 27 21

2q94 217.03 73.37 30.40 54 76 89 48 48 20

3q94 185.70 78.05 30.41 55 78 89 50 48 15

4q94 189.08 71.42 33.02 61 75 82 52 43 20

1q95 197.30 88.00 25.70 55 76 89 82 58 21

2q95 209.13 69.07 22.18 51 72 86 63 100 28

3q95 200.09 87.21 30.67 45 56 75 93 48 12

4q95 197.06 99.30 12 31 88 24 1

1q96 204.63 101.27 24 49 71 32 1

2q96 192.42 90.24 39.33 30 48 66 87 57 11

3q96 196.36 92.20 38.79 32 56 58 49 47 25

4q96 198.33 82.83 38.55 40 51 56 76 79 29

*Street Purchasers: 1: User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)

3: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
36

Table 3: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Methamphetamine at Three

Purchase Levels, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

1q97 188.52 70.92 27.95 46 51 77 84 105 21

2q97 180.74 65.57 28.77 46 55 67 96 103 27

3q97 178.00 70.94 24.51 39 60 63 108 112 27

4q97 193.19 75.05 29.74 33 49 57 149 118 27

1q98 178.75 69.41 28.40 31 42 44 172 116 31

2q98 159.57 72.89 27.73 17 26 33 215 67 4

3q98 161.20 83.77 29.50 16 21 22 189 85 12

4q98 165.63 74.90 34.00 19 22 19 173 110 5

1q99 158.94 74.70 25.17 16 23 21 173 99 12

2q99 163.38 63.11 30.15 24 22 44 146 107 9

3q99 153.58 75.31 27.10 26 32 42 168 165 18

4q99 150.76 64.92 26.35 26 29 40 152 110 19

1q00 138.99 64.61 29.54 24 27 42 164 151 20

2q00 155.72 61.78 29.03 23 28 44 184 144 15

*Street Purchasers: 1: User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)

3: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
37

Table 4: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram of Marijuana at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q81 9.41 4.84 1.79 22 24 3 1

2q81 7.80 5.10 41 7 2 0

3q81 7.25 3.42 1.79 0.56 49 13 9 4

4q81 5.04 3.42 38 11 1 1

1q82 12.98 2.67 2.59 15 14 5 2

2q82 6.42 5.92 1.58 18 12 3 0

3q82 9.13 4.98 2.12 2.91 13 8 7 4

4q82 10.65 7.76 2.38 0.09 17 4 9 11

1q83 10.81 7.82 12 10 2 1

2q83 9.87 9.91 4.38 28 13 5 0

3q83 9.73 6.47 3.45 17 8 8 0

4q83 14.00 8.70 2.49 2.15 11 18 15 3

1q84 12.64 9.77 1.94 19 9 4 1

2q84 13.06 5.35 2.60 4.25 41 10 6 3

3q84 10.01 5.65 3.36 22 9 5 1

4q84 12.60 5.83 3.81 19 13 5 2

1q85 12.66 7.73 2.93 2.37 27 13 10 3

2q85 12.90 8.43 2.72 26 9 17 1

3q85 14.06 6.71 2.99 1.84 17 4 3 3

4q85 11.59 7.28 2.56 11 6 8 1

1q86 11.62 7.86 2.50 9 4 6 0

2q86 16.22 11 2 2 1

3q86 17.08 3.04 13 2 3 0

4q86 14.33 11.03 6.18 14 4 4 1

1q87 16.76 8.67 5.65 30 3 10 1

2q87 12.17 11.44 3.54 21 3 25 1

3q87 11.49 21.41 4.00 9 7 7 2

4q87 11.77 7.91 3.93 4 5 3 0

1q88 15.28 13.04 4.41 17 3 8 2

2q88 13.37 8.38 12 14 2 1

3q88 12.00 10.12 10 12 2 0

4q88 16.28 9.84 2.69 6 16 7 1

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Large User (10 to 100 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (100 to 1000 pure grams or more)

4. Wholesale Distributor (more than 1000 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
38

Table 4: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram of Marijuana at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q89 12.09 8.35 3.13 2.13 14 6 15 3

2q89 17.88 9.24 3.57 9 6 5 1

3q89 13.15 7.18 3.09 1.90 10 4 4 4

4q89 15.21 12 2 1 1

1q90 14.02 9.83 4.99 3.34 8 9 13 3

2q90 13.35 9.73 4.67 10 4 10 1

3q90 17.87 4.87 9 1 3 0

4q90 11.05 11.96 5.70 2.41 14 12 19 4

1q91 17.00 11.40 5.31 14 29 26 2

2q91 15.32 8.85 5.21 16 9 9 1

3q91 33.61 11.85 6.28 5 5 5 0

4q91 27.48 4.74 2.76 5 1 20 10

1q92 18.73 10.86 5.22 12 7 21 0

2q92 13.36 12.48 5.98 18 12 21 1

3q92 12.92 11.26 4.41 4.31 25 6 25 8

4q92 14.27 6.69 3.83 2.14 14 7 20 5

1q93 14.36 20.37 4.02 25 4 13 1

2q93 13.95 14.21 3.74 27 8 13 2

3q93 15.98 13.70 5.30 1.88 42 11 10 3

4q93 15.89 14.70 3.27 2.69 29 9 10 3

1q94 17.20 14.26 3.57 14 6 17 1

2q94 10.85 7.71 3.47 1.11 21 4 22 4

3q94 11.34 7.35 2.52 1.51 9 6 10 3

4q94 15.52 5.84 4.35 2.46 15 20 8 5

1q95 15.69 6.40 3.48 2.27 15 15 8 11

2q95 11.34 8.70 3.14 1.80 9 8 22 12

3q95 9.43 8.01 3.28 1.66 13 3 13 8

4q95 10.63 6.45 3.45 1.58 43 17 14 4

1q96 13.12 7.76 2.76 24 16 23 0

2q96 11.04 5.86 2.25 1.18 22 10 19 4

3q96 7.91 7.07 2.74 1.75 16 13 19 5

4q96 9.81 6.78 2.42 1.81 13 6 11 3

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Large User (10 to 100 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (100 to 1000 pure grams or more)

4. Wholesale Distributor (more than 1000 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
39

Table 4: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram of Marijuana at Four Purchase Levels,

Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1q97 8.95 7.62 2.53 1.17 46 17 23 5

2q97 8.42 5.68 2.90 1.15 39 26 28 5

3q97 10.58 6.57 2.71 1.59 26 15 30 5

4q97 12.24 7.32 2.65 1.31 19 6 14 5

1q98 10.89 6.14 2.90 1.36 13 13 22 5

2q98 9.27 6.36 2.58 1.10 36 12 33 5

3q98 8.32 8.66 2.46 1.08 24 6 23 3

4q98 8.40 5.53 3.81 25 9 17 1

1q99 8.76 10.78 2.78 32 7 19 2

2q99 9.08 9.66 2.46 61 10 23 1

3q99 9.19 8.01 2.62 1.29 97 11 20 5

4q99 10.05 7.74 2.99 1.31 24 10 18 3

1q00 8.50 5.64 2.36 1.05 28 11 26 4

2q00 9.11 4.88 2.47 23 3 24 2

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Large User (10 to 100 pure grams)

3: Mid-level Distributor (100 to 1000 pure grams or more)

4. Wholesale Distributor (more than 1000 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
40

Table 5: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine and Heroin at the Retail

Level, Calculated via an Alternate Method, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000

Cocaine Heroin

Period

Price

 (2000$/pure gram) Number

of Cases

Price

(2000$/pure gram) Number

of Cases

1q81 $629.01 44 $4,393.59 119

2q81 $768.09 46 $4,161.85 113

3q81 $757.64 43 $3,139.11 129

4q81 $824.71 37 $3,413.77 179

1q82 $649.06 62 $3,608.91 151

2q82 $588.81 41 $3,791.17 134

3q82 $612.61 63 $3,627.96 162

4q82 $564.51 78 $3,735.34 110

1q83 $590.13 84 $4,099.33 135

2q83 $422.04 56 $4,246.44 126

3q83 $613.30 65 $3,241.02 127

4q83 $471.59 103 $4,195.04 129

1q84 $415.97 114 $3,183.67 123

2q84 $457.35 96 $3,115.09 123

3q84 $450.09 104 $2,121.08 115

4q84 $351.32 112 $2,875.79 120

1q85 $468.11 141 $2,355.26 161

2q85 $444.31 176 $2,624.18 132

3q85 $368.51 228 $2,808.98 91

4q85 $347.48 184 $1,981.28 118

1q86 $384.09 195 $2,614.36 92

2q86 $307.17 212 $2,128.05 131

3q86 $434.73 279 $2,849.18 145

4q86 $413.61 222 $2,223.29 90

1q87 $321.91 189 $2,112.26 76

2q87 $291.53 203 $1,958.08 66

3q87 $206.21 241 $1,824.25 95

4q87 $174.50 251 $1,729.75 128

1q88 $152.33 259 $1,301.38 97

2q88 $173.08 368 $1,537.55 120

3q88 $162.41 386 $1,142.14 89

4q88 $130.44 387 $1,411.66 79

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
41

Table 5: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine and Heroin at the Retail

Level, Calculated via an Alternate Method, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Cocaine Heroin

Period

Price

 (2000$/pure gram) Number

of Cases

Price

(2000$/pure gram) Number

of Cases

1q89 $134.28 380 $1,423.70 74

2q89 $139.46 539 $1,287.47 96

3q89 $137.32 421 $1,107.34 114

4q89 $171.93 336 $988.37 101

1q90 $194.62 466 $1,303.08 141

2q90 $230.43 285 $1,365.12 136

3q90 $227.42 486 $1,381.45 82

4q90 $203.32 351 $1,383.05 131

1q91 $174.18 544 $1,398.07 158

2q91 $164.20 482 $1,256.15 141

3q91 $159.20 443 $1,250.61 123

4q91 $153.86 371 $1,105.77 76

1q92 $132.54 355 $1,030.63 85

2q92 $191.21 305 $907.76 81

3q92 $155.91 317 $821.80 86

4q92 $157.04 225 $808.04 103

1q93 $163.35 232 $883.15 127

2q93 $175.99 230 $803.21 156

3q93 $145.47 216 $697.54 140

4q93 $149.37 226 $719.99 93

1q94 $139.10 199 $784.64 161

2q94 $129.18 195 $630.35 150

3q94 $147.43 272 $605.74 157

4q94 $121.60 155 $544.55 136

1q95 $120.96 167 $530.15 173

2q95 $136.73 194 $475.27 176

3q95 $141.07 266 $454.10 160

4q95 $185.18 205 $434.00 147

1q96 $135.58 174 $578.16 182

2q96 $137.26 238 $535.74 185

3q96 $142.23 209 $463.54 168

4q96 $119.14 259 $445.37 145

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
42

Table 5: Estimated Quarterly Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine and Heroin at the Retail

Level, Calculated via an Alternate Method, Calendar year quarters for 1981-2000 (continued)

Cocaine Heroin

Period

Price

 (2000$/pure gram) Number

of Cases

Price

(2000$/pure gram) Number

of Cases

1q97 $125.47 252 $461.70 211

2q97 $192.69 274 $452.24 168

3q97 $154.44 259 $364.96 193

4q97 $131.80 167 $472.55 25

1q98 $119.63 196 $376.65 284

2q98 $120.56 245 $359.96 203

3q98 $139.74 261 $379.62 155

4q98 $147.97 260 $340.06 200

1q99 $183.12 360 $409.51 228

2q99 $154.39 334 $424.73 226

3q99 $128.76 489 $350.56 229

4q99 $135.81 371 $337.02 171

1q00 $165.64 362 $345.20 210

2q00 $205.82 304 $316.24 167

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE)

Prepared by: Abt Associates, Inc. 3/2/01
Table 6: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Cocaine at Four Purchase Levels, Calendar years for 1981-20

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1981 $423.09 $277.03 $201.06 $125.43 36% 44% 60% 73% 281 473 260 31982 $433.29 $264.73 $184.45 $153.95 36% 46% 61% 79% 444 664 293 91983 $398.81 $247.64 $178.13 $120.31 39% 50% 69% 84% 480 777 580 591984 $377.82 $222.25 $153.30 $98.24 44% 55% 71% 86% 603 848 929 671985 $328.03 $216.23 $144.69 $93.19 40% 52% 67% 82% 929 1169 1284 1041986 $314.52 $192.39 $127.14 $72.83 51% 64% 77% 88% 843 1024 1567 1311987 $292.37 $172.02 $104.11 $54.52 64% 71% 81% 86% 823 871 1961 2641988 $237.58 $142.01 $79.91 $44.34 75% 73% 81% 88% 1257 941 2004 4021989 $225.80 $121.75 $67.74 $38.00 78% 71% 76% 84% 1540 973 1973 3671990 $267.44 $140.23 $77.49 $48.88 69% 59% 66% 78% 1458 994 1387 1941991 $227.47 $117.29 $69.24 $40.52 78% 70% 75% 83% 1575 1149 2318 4151992 $224.35 $114.58 $65.04 $37.56 76% 74% 76% 83% 1048 1152 1837 2631993 $199.19 $109.82 $62.97 $34.88 74% 71% 72% 80% 709 1005 1139 1341994 $186.96 $98.67 $57.02 $31.56 73% 74% 73% 81% 666 1318 1677 2001995 $195.99 $96.83 $55.61 $33.71 67% 69% 69% 75% 717 1271 1448 1591996 $174.96 $92.90 $51.12 $29.92 72% 70% 69% 79% 773 1471 1918 2511997 $195.15 $90.18 $51.64 $30.00 65% 66% 64% 78% 931 1638 1930 1951998 $183.09 $87.91 $46.96 $27.69 68% 68% 66% 76% 825 1667 2312 2511999 $183.93 $92.14 $48.52 $26.59 64% 63% 61% 71% 1423 1942 1955 1782000 $211.70 $100.67 $51.45 $26.03 61% 58% 53% 67% 700 1109 935 67

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 1 pure gram)

2: Large User (1 to 10 pure grams)3: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)4: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table 7: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Heroin at Four Purchase Levels, Calendar years for 1981-200

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1981 $3,295.01 $2,149.51 $1,206.81 $865.21 4% 10% 19% 59% 768 486 261 791982 $3,284.64 $1,888.08 $1,159.14 $843.27 5% 18% 32% 60% 768 441 298 891983 $3,652.45 $2,002.52 $1,310.40 $809.83 6% 17% 29% 58% 634 440 246 1001984 $3,485.13 $1,930.33 $1,292.94 $717.37 8% 25% 36% 57% 585 291 208 1171985 $3,146.21 $1,675.37 $1,182.83 $667.60 8% 27% 43% 56% 595 334 266 1661986 $3,501.93 $1,640.05 $1,153.26 $547.05 9% 27% 37% 49% 450 278 238 1061987 $3,306.43 $1,567.80 $1,163.80 $552.36 11% 27% 36% 52% 350 313 223 1291988 $3,122.95 $1,245.90 $960.37 $488.55 17% 36% 40% 58% 355 361 230 1741989 $2,596.93 $999.05 $790.31 $422.18 19% 39% 44% 62% 268 261 207 2301990 $2,923.51 $1,186.29 $878.10 $414.66 16% 30% 32% 52% 390 324 292 1411991 $3,021.84 $1,095.94 $872.32 $416.25 17% 33% 32% 57% 473 447 252 1301992 $2,862.63 $920.84 $686.81 $348.21 21% 44% 39% 61% 305 384 230 1911993 $2,634.62 $682.78 $535.94 $286.30 25% 44% 50% 67% 345 548 231 2211994 $2,720.88 $649.69 $432.78 $247.29 25% 46% 47% 64% 282 688 333 2371995 $2,651.88 $555.31 $383.79 $206.44 24% 48% 51% 62% 269 753 325 3041996 $2,424.48 $546.11 $378.31 $177.41 23% 43% 45% 56% 319 770 394 2501997 $2,372.58 $589.65 $336.20 $171.38 28% 49% 45% 59% 270 712 344 3051998 $2,086.98 $439.26 $331.46 $148.12 25% 45% 49% 58% 255 927 459 3901999 $1,929.28 $450.97 $304.47 $140.83 27% 43% 45% 60% 350 918 516 3452000 $2,087.86 $423.08 $268.84 $112.15 25% 45% 47% 59% 114 466 238 181

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 0.1 pure gram)

2: Large User (0.1 to 1 pure grams)3: Mid-level Distributor (1 to 10 pure grams)4: Wholesale Distributor (10 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table 8: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram and Purity of Methamphetamine at Three Purchase Levels, Calendar years 

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3

1981 $287.33 $93.07 $37.03 41% 66% 64% 110 20 21982 $292.66 $126.83 $70.06 43% 60% 43% 178 53 21983 $310.72 $114.28 $65.57 43% 60% 73% 175 45 61984 $295.43 $128.98 $78.62 38% 61% 60% 252 92 101985 $311.53 $132.12 $63.34 36% 60% 65% 226 91 121986 $300.84 $118.38 $58.29 40% 57% 65% 262 57 71987 $279.19 $106.13 $52.81 43% 58% 84% 186 55 131988 $247.75 $92.59 $37.22 46% 62% 80% 256 109 161989 $230.04 $98.34 $32.91 38% 63% 84% 186 71 81990 $251.14 $115.41 $43.92 23% 39% 42% 193 42 81991 $222.84 $161.87 $157.39 19% 49% 68% 158 55 151992 $244.46 $103.36 $40.42 32% 57% 72% 176 82 291993 $220.04 $84.93 $40.83 40% 63% 73% 175 85 231994 $203.18 $72.06 $33.32 54% 76% 87% 194 166 761995 $200.90 $85.89 $34.37 41% 59% 73% 326 230 621996 $197.94 $91.64 $41.84 32% 51% 62% 283 215 661997 $185.11 $70.62 $27.74 41% 54% 66% 437 438 1021998 $166.29 $75.24 $29.91 21% 28% 29% 749 378 521999 $156.66 $69.51 $27.19 23% 26% 36% 639 481 582000 $147.36 $63.20 $29.28 24% 27% 43% 348 295 35

*Street Purchasers: 1: User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Mid-level Distributor (10 to 100 pure grams)4: Wholesale Distributor (100 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table 9: Estimated Annual Price per Pure Gram of Marijuana at Four Purchase Levels, Calendar years for 1981-2000

Period Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

Level* => 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

1981 $7.37 $4.19 $6.78 $0.91 150 55 15 61982 $9.80 $5.33 $2.17 $1.29 63 38 24 171983 $11.10 $8.23 $3.66 $1.08 68 49 30 41984 $12.08 $6.65 $2.93 $2.86 101 41 20 71985 $12.80 $7.54 $2.80 $1.83 81 32 38 81986 $14.81 $8.40 $3.32 $1.08 47 12 15 21987 $13.05 $12.36 $4.28 $2.56 64 18 45 41988 $14.23 $10.34 $3.79 $2.08 45 45 19 41989 $14.58 $15.59 $3.67 $2.05 45 18 25 91990 $14.07 $8.85 $5.06 $1.92 41 26 45 81991 $23.35 $16.88 $5.39 $4.06 40 44 60 131992 $14.82 $10.32 $4.86 $3.25 69 32 87 141993 $15.05 $15.75 $4.08 $2.01 123 32 46 91994 $13.73 $8.79 $3.48 $1.79 59 36 57 131995 $11.77 $7.39 $3.34 $1.83 80 43 57 351996 $10.47 $6.87 $2.54 $1.58 75 45 72 121997 $10.05 $6.80 $2.70 $1.30 130 64 95 201998 $9.22 $6.67 $2.94 $1.23 98 40 95 141999 $9.27 $9.05 $2.71 $1.14 214 38 80 112000 $8.80 $5.26 $2.41 $0.97 51 14 50 6

*Street Purchasers: 1: Small User (less than 10 pure gram)

2: Large User (10 to 100 pure grams)3: Mid-level Distributor (100 to 1000 pure grams)4: Wholesale Distributor (1000 pure grams or more)

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
A-1

Appendix A: Statistical Methods

1. The STRIDE Data

The analysis reported here is based on the System To Retrieve Information from Drug Evidence

(STRIDE) database, which contains data on illicit drug purchases from the first quarter 1981

through the second quarter 2000. Over this period, the DEA recorded the price, weight, purity,

location and date of 122,288 transactions consisting of cocaine (78,407), heroin (30,350),

methamphetamine (9,694), and marijuana (3,837). This appendix describes how the original

STRIDE data set was cleaned, modeled, and weighted. An overview of the entire process for the

price data is shown in the flow chart on the following page. The flow chart for the purity data (not

shown) is identical except that the third left-side square box reads “Purity Model (section 5)”

rather than “Price Model (section 3)”.

The STRIDE database contained many purchases that a researcher familiar with the illicit drug

market would deem incorrect. These were removed under the guidance of Dr. Dana Hunt, a

substance abuse expert at Abt Associates. Table A1 lists the criteria for deletion. Purchases with

extremely low purities were deleted because it seemed likely that the buyer was deceived (e.g. a

user would not knowingly purchase cocaine with purity less than 10%). In cases with inordinately

high prices per bulk gram (e.g. greater than $3,000 for cocaine), inordinately low prices (e.g. less

than $3 for cocaine), or inordinately low bulk amounts (e.g. less than one tenth of a gram for

cocaine), the data itself is highly suspect. Again, the idea is that a user would not knowingly

purchase one bulk gram of cocaine for more than $3,000, and so on.

Table A1. Criteria for Deleting Data Point by Drug

_________________________________________________________________________

Dollars per Nominal Bulk

Drug bulk gram Purity price ($) grams

_________________________________________________________________________

Cocaine > 3,000 < 0.1 < 3 < 0.1

Heroin >10,000 < 0.02 < 3 < 0.1

Methamphetamine > 3,000 < 0.1 < 3 < 0.1

Marijuana > 100 - < 0.1 < 0.2

_________________________________________________________________________
A-2

STRIDE2

Remove

Model-Based

Outliers

(Section 1)

STRIDE1

Remove

Gross Outliers

(Section 1)

STRIDE3

Price

Model

(Section 3)

Means for

78 quarters by

30 cities

DAWN2

Weight

Model

(Section 6)

Weights for

78 quarters by

30 cities

78 National

Weighted

Means

Figure A1. Flow Chart for STRIDE and DAWN Data

DAWN1

Add 8 NonDAWN Cities

(Section 6)
A-3

In addition to the above gross discrepancies, many prices were found to be reasonable at some

transaction size and purity, yet were unreasonable given the actual amount and purity of the

purchase at hand. For example, $100 per pure gram of heroin is not an unreasonable price for a

purchase of one pure kilo, but it is extremely low for a purchase of one tenth of a pure gram.

Purchases with excessively large residual prices were deleted, the residual price being the

difference between the observed price and predicted price (given the amount, purity, city and

quarter) obtained from the price model described below.

In order to gauge the size of a residual it is necessary to know the distribution of residuals. For

normal linear models, standardized residuals (residuals divided by their standard errors) follow a

standard normal distribution and the probability of a large residual is easily calculated. For

generalized linear models, the deviance residuals can be used in a similar way (McCullagh and

Nelder, 1989, pp. 37-40).

We set the probability of deleting good data to 0.002 and deleted purchases with prices outside

this threshold. Experiments with simulated data indicate that further iteration improves our ability

to detect outliers. This occurs because the distribution of deviance residuals in the first iteration is

artificially dispersed because of the presence of inordinately extreme residuals which will be

absent from the second iteration. We iterated until no further outliers could be detected, typically

performing five to ten iterations.

Table A2 summarizes the effect of our successive approaches to outlier deletion. The first row

gives the initial size of the STRIDE sample, STRIDE1. The second row shows the effect of

removing gross outliers by the criteria listed in Table A1, thus creating STRIDE2. The third row

shows the effect of further outlier removal by model-based methods, thus creating STRIDE3. The

second row has 0 to 3 percent less data than the first row, and the third row has 4 to 5 percent less

data than the second row.

The effect of removing gross outliers and extreme residuals depended on the drug and distribution

level, but some general patterns emerged. The removal of gross outliers dramatically reduced the

mean price per pure gram and mean price per gram. Excluding Level 4 marijuana, the effect of
A-4

the subsequent removal of extreme residuals was to decrease mean prices by a further 3% on

average, although the effect was occasionally in the opposite direction (mean prices for Level 4

cocaine, Level 4 heroin, Level 3 methamphetamine, and Level 1 marijuana increased by 15%,

21%, 5%, and 6% respectively).

Table A2. The Effect of Outlier Deletion on STRIDE Sample Size

_______________________________________________________________________________

Cocaine Heroin Meth. Marijuana

_______________________________________________________________________________

Initial STRIDE sample 78,407 30,350 9,694 3,837

(STRIDE1)

Sample after removing 77,071 29,406 9,662 3,749

gross outliers (STRIDE2)

Sample after removing 73,901 27,963 9,171 3,557

extreme residuals (STRIDE3)

_______________________________________________________________________________

The effect of outlier removal on parameter estimates associated with log(amount), log(purity), and

the ratio of Q2 2000 prices to Q1 1981 prices was varied. For some drugs and distribution levels,

the magnitude of the parameter estimates increased and for others they decreased. In no case was

a statistically significant change in sign observed, and except for the ratio of Q2 2000 to Q1 1981

marijuana prices, all parameters were negative with or without the inclusion of extreme residuals.

Also, there was a tendency for the parameter associated with log(amount), denoted by  in section

3, and the parameter associated with log(purity), denoted by in section 3, to offset each other in

the sense that  increased when decreased, and conversely.

The effect of the removal of extreme residuals on parameter estimates associated with

log(amount), log(purity), and the ratio of Q2 2000 prices to Q1 1981 prices (these are denoted here

by , and ) was varied. For some drugs and distribution levels, the magnitude of the parameter

estimates increased and for others they decreased. In no case was a statistically significant change

in sign observed; except for  in the case of marijuana, all parameters were negative with or
A-5

without the inclusion of extreme residuals. Also, there was a tendency for  and to offset each

other in the sense that  increased when decreased, and conversely.

The alternative method of estimating cocaine and heroin retail prices (described in section 4)

yields far fewer outliers partly because outcomes (pure grams) are not divided by purities that are

sometimes implausibly small. In addition, the outliers that are flagged are more easily assessed by

experts because the market is better understood in terms of the amount obtained for a nominal

dollar amount. These are important advantages of the alternative method, the results for which are

as follows. Firstly, gross outliers (cocaine: nominal prices  $1, bulk grams  0.05 grams or bulk

grams  5 grams; heroin: nominal prices  $1, bulk grams  0.04 grams or more than 5 grams for

heroin) excluded 2.7% of the cocaine data and 2.4% of the heroin data. Secondly, model-based

outliers exclude an additional 0.2% of the remaining cocaine data and 0.4% of the remaining

heroin data. Consultation with Dr. Dana Hunt opinion confirms that these additional purchases

were unreasonable given the market for these drugs.

2. Variables

To model the purchase price as a function of amount purchased, we standardized both price and

amount. Except for marijuana, amount was expressed in pure grams and price was expressed in

2000 dollars per pure gram (Table 14 gives the Consumer Price Index using the first half of 2000

as a reference point). In the case of marijuana, the purity (THC content) was absent from the

STRIDE database, so we expressed amount and price in terms of bulk grams and current dollars

per bulk gram.

Other variables thought to affect purchase price were purity (0 to 1), time (78 quarters from Q1

1981 to Q2 2000), city (29 large U.S. cities and the Rest of U.S.), and distribution level (several

levels defined in terms of standardized amount). The 29 cities were: Atlanta, Baltimore, Boston,

Buffalo, Chicago, Cleveland, Dallas, Denver, Detroit, Houston, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Miami,

Milwaukee, Minneapolis, New Orleans, New York, Newark, Philadelphia, Phoenix, Pittsburgh,

Portland, San Antonio, San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, St. Louis, Tampa and Washington DC.
A-6

From the viewpoint of the model, the Rest of U.S. is just another “city”, and at times we use the

shorthand “30 cities” for “the 29 large U.S. cities and the Rest of U.S.”.

The distribution level has no precise definition, but the intention was to distinguish purchases that

were predominantly retail (Level 1) from those involving dealers (Level 2 and above). The levels,

inclusive of the upper limit, were as follows: cocaine (0-1, 1-10, 10-100, >100 pure grams); heroin

(0-0.1, 0.1-1, 1-10, >10 pure grams); methamphetamine (0-10, 10-100, >100 pure grams);

marijuana (0-10, 10-100, 100-1,000, >1,000 bulk grams).

3. A Model for Price

For each drug and each level of distribution, we regressed standardized price against standardized

amount, purity, time and city. For the reason just outlined, purity was not included in the model

for marijuana. Because price changes over short periods of time are of interest, both time and city

were treated as factors (with 78 and 30 levels respectively). Had time been treated continuously,

means estimated by the model would not have exhibited short-term fluctuations in price.

The regression model took the form of a generalized linear model with log link function,

logarithmic predictors, and constant coefficient of variation (McCullagh and Nelder, 1989, ch. 8).

This model implies the following mean and variance specifications:

E(priceitj) = exp( + cityi + timet + log(amountitj) + log(purityitj)) (1)

 V(priceitj) = E2(priceitj) (2)

In these expressions, priceitj represents the jth observation from the ith city at the tth time period,

with covariate values amountitj and purityitj. E(priceitj) is the mean value of priceitj, and V(priceitj)

is its variance.  is a dispersion parameter analogous to 

2

 in a linear model based on least

squares.

Estimation and inference for the above model was carried out via the method of quasi-maximum

likelihood. Under distributional assumptions involving only the first two moments (those

embodied in (1) and (2)), quasi-maximum likelihood estimates are consistent and asymptotically
A-7

normal, and they are also optimal among a large class of estimators (McCullagh and Nelder, 1989,

ch. 9). Residual analysis supported the adequacy of the specifications given by (1) and (2),

although consistency and asymptotic normality hold even when the variance function is

incorrectly specified (Fahrmeir and Tutz, 1994, pp.52-55).

Tables A3 through A6 list the average purchase price and parameter estimates associated with

log(amount), , and log(purity), , for each level of distribution. The figures in parentheses are

standard errors. As expected, the price per pure gram (or price per gram for marijuana) falls as

distribution level rises. Also, the magnitude of  tends to decrease, and the magnitude of tends

to increase, with an increase in distribution level.

Table A3. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Cocaine

_______________________________________________________________________

Level of Average Price

Distribution N per Pure Gram  

_______________________________________________________________________

Less than 1 pg 18025 265.420 -0.269(0.004) -0.645(0.006)

1 to 10 pg 22456 151.126 -0.303(0.003) -0.638(0.005)

10 to 100 pg 29707 94.967 -0.152(0.002) -0.787(0.005)

More than 100 pg 3713 56.210 -0.138(0.005) -0.868(0.019)

_______________________________________________________________________

Table A4. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Heroin

_______________________________________________________________________

Level of Average Price

Distribution N per Pure Gram  

_______________________________________________________________________

Less than 0.1 pg 8145 2875.092 -0.429(0.008) -0.436(0.007)

0.1 to 1 pg 10142 1150.103 -0.286(0.007) -0.291(0.006)

1 to 10 pg 5791 794.588 -0.260(0.010) -0.298(0.009)

More than 10 pg 3885 437.251 -0.146(0.006) -0.555(0.013)

_______________________________________________________________________
A-8

Table A5. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Methamphetamine

_______________________________________________________________________

Level of Average Price

Distribution N per Pure Gram  

_______________________________________________________________________

Less than 10 pg 5509 239.884 -0.314(0.004) -0.687(0.006)

10 to 100 pg 3060 101.172 -0.299(0.012) -0.541(0.012)

More than 100 pg 602 50.721 -0.114(0.023) -0.712(0.036)

_______________________________________________________________________

Table A6. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates for Marijuana

_______________________________________________________

Level of Average Price

Distribution N per Gram 

_______________________________________________________

Less than 10 g 1644 12.617 -0.636(0.017)

10 to 100 g 722 9.160 -0.116(0.028)

100 to 1000 g 975 3.677 -0.279(0.022)

More than 1000 g 216 1.869 -0.122(0.030)

_______________________________________________________

The price model just described contained 109 parameter (29 for the 30 cities, 77 for the 78

quarters, and one each for amount, purity and intercept terms). Based on estimates of these

parameters, we derived estimates for mean prices for each city in each quarter. For a given

quarter, the 30 city means were multiplied by their respective DAWN weights (described below)

and the sum of these contributions provided a weighted estimate for the mean price and mean

purity in the U.S. for that quarter. The national results are shown in Tables 1-4, and Figures 1, 4,

7, and 9. Annualized versions of these are shown in Tables 6-9.
A-9

4. An Alternative Model for Retail Price

Additional information obtained from a DUF addendum data enabled us to estimate retail prices

for cocaine and heroin by an alternative method. The DUF data provided arrestees’ answers to

various questions about drug expenditures over the last 7 days, and in particular, the amount paid

by cocaine and heroin users for their last drug transaction. The data came from six cities (New

York, Washington DC, Portland, San Diego, Chicago, and San Antonio) over one year (Q3 1995 –

Q2 1996) and were used to obtain frequencies for the amount paid in nominal dollars by retaillevel cocaine and heroin users. A retail purchase was defined as a purchase up to 100 nominal

dollars, and prices were rounded to the nearest $10. The resulting cocaine and heroin price

distributions are shown below in Figures A2 and A3.

In the previous section we used the STRIDE data to estimate a model that assumes price depends

on amount. In this section, we estimate the “reverse” model which supposes the amount purchased

(in pure grams) depends on the price paid (in nominal dollars). We considered several

formulations of this model and settled on:

E(amountitj) = exp( + cityi + timet + log(priceitj)) (1)

V(amountitj) = E2

(amountitj) (2)

Table A7 provides estimates for the parameters associated with log(price). Both estimates are

close to unity which suggests that there are no quantity discounts at the retail level.
A-10

Number of Observat ions

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Price Category

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Figure A2. Relative Frequency of Retail Cocaine Purchases Number of Observat ions

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

Price Category

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Figure A3. Relative Frequency of Retail Heroin Purchases
A-11

Table A7. Mean Price and Parameter Estimates: Retail Cocaine and Heroin

Type of Drug N

Average Price per

Pure Gram 

Cocaine 18946 270.12 1.1549 (0.010)

Heroin 10659 1581.36 0.9378 (0.016)

Based on this model, we predicted the mean purchase amount for the set of nominal expenditures

from $10 to $100 for each city and quarter. For example, Tables A8 and A9 give these estimates

for Rest of U.S. in Q2 2000.

Table A8. Predicted mean amounts (pure milligrams) for given nominal prices: Cocaine,

Rest of U.S., Q2 2000

Nominal Mean 95% Confidence Limits

Price ($) Amount Lower Upper

10 36.28 30.71 41.35

20 80.78 67.41 93.37

30 129.02 106.79 150.37

40 179.86 148.00 210.86

50 232.73 190.64 274.08

60 287.28 234.45 339.57

70 343.26 279.25 407.01

80 400.50 324.93 476.16

90 458.85 371.38 546.85

100 518.23 418.54 618.93

Table A9. Predicted mean amounts (pure milligrams) for given nominal prices: Heroin,

Rest of U.S., Q2 2000

Nominal Mean 95% Confidence Limits

Price ($) Amount Lower Upper

10 29.68 23.19 37.99

20 56.86 43.46 74.40

30 83.17 62.75 110.23

40 108.92 81.43 145.70

50 134.28 99.67 180.89

60 159.31 117.58 215.87

70 184.09 135.20 250.67

80 208.65 152.58 285.32

90 233.02 169.77 319.84

100 257.22 186.77 354.24
A-12

Corresponding predicted real prices per pure gram for this set of nominal expenditures were

obtained by deflating and then inverting these predicted mean amounts. The average retail price

(in 2000 dollars) for a given city and quarter was then obtained as the weighted average of the set

of 10 prices, with weights coming from the DUF-based cocaine and heroin price distributions

described above. For a given quarter, the 30 city means were then multiplied by their respective

DAWN weights and the sum of these contributions provided a weighted estimate for the mean

price and mean purity in the U.S. for that quarter. The national results are show in Table 5 and

Figures 2 and 5.

5. A Model for Purity

Given sufficient data, we could have estimated the mean purity for each city in each quarter by its

sample mean. For a given quarter, a weighted average of these 30 city (29 large U.S. cities and the

Rest of U.S.) sample means would have provided a sensible quarterly estimate for the mean purity

in the U.S. for that quarter. However, given 30 cities and 78 quarters, this would require 2,340

sample means for each level of distribution for each drug, and this requirement goes well beyond

the resources of the STRIDE database. For each level of distribution for cocaine, Table A10

contains the percentages of these cell means that do not have data. This section describes a

feasible alternative to simple tabulations.

In order to estimate 2,340 cell means from a database containing less than 2,340 cells of data,

some form of modeling is necessary. The linear model provides a straightforward possibility:

E(purityitj) =  + cityi + timet (3)

V(purityitj) = 

2

 (4)

However, both of these specifications are implausible for the purity data. First, the mean purity

must lie in the unit interval, but (3) does not impose this restriction. Second, the variance of purity

depends on its mean (it is higher around 0.5 than 0.9), but this is not embodied in (4). The first

problem was particularly important for our data, as the linear model gave impossible estimates for

purity for several cities in several quarters. We avoided both problems by working with a quasi-
A-13

binomial model and regarding a purity measurement as a realization from a quasi-binomial

experiment.

Table A10. Percentage of Cell Means with no Data

Cocaine Number of Cells

Missing

Percent Cells

Missing

0 to 1 Pure Grams 1174 50.17%

1 to 10 Pure Grams 573 24.49%

10 to 100 Pure Grams 310 13.25%

Greater than 100 pure

grams

1347 57.56%

Heroin Number of Cells

Missing

Percent Cells

Missing

0 to 0.1 Pure Grams 1138 48.63%

0.1 to 1 Pure Grams 923 39.44%

1 to 10 Pure Grams 1206 51.54%

Greater than 10 pure grams 1460 62.39%

Methamphetamine Number of Cells

Missing

Percent Cells

Missing

0 to 10 Pure Grams 1673 71.50%

10 to 100 Pure Grams 1800 76.92%

Greater than 100 pure

grams

2126 90.85%

Marijuana Number of Cells

Missing

Percent Cells

Missing

0 to 10 Pure Grams 2079 88.85%

10 to 100 Pure Grams 2092 89.40%

100 to 1000 Pure Grams 2012 85.98%

Greater than 1000 pure

grams

2209 94.40%

A DEA laboratory obtained a purity measurement for a given purchase by analyzing a

small sample of the purchase. To construe this measurement as an outcome of a binomial

experiment (even though the actual measurement process may have proceeded along different

lines), let the small sample constitute a three dimensional grid of m cells, and let y be the number

of pure cells. Then y follows a binomial(m, p) distribution, and p = y/m is the observed proportion

of pure cells, that is, the purity. The analysis of purity can now be carried out via a binomial
A-14

model because each purity observation corresponds to a binomial observation. For example, if a

purchase had an observed purity of 0.8 then, if m was 1,000, we have effectively observed 800

events in 1,000 trials.

The problem is that the value of m is unknown. While a purity measurement of 0.8 is consistent

with obtaining 800 events in 1,000 trials, it is also consistent with obtaining 8 events in 10 trials,

but these two binomial observations convey different information. However, if we assume the

value of m is the same for all purchases (i.e. that the size of the small sample used in the laboratory

analysis was the same size for all purchases), any choice of m will suffice provided the variance

function incorporates a dispersion parameter. That is, estimation and inference based on an

overdispersed binomial model is invariant to the choice of m. Thus, our mean and variance

functions for purity were:

E(purityitj) = exp( + cityi + timet)/{1 + exp( + cityi + timet)} (5)

 V(purityitj) = {E(purityitj)(1 - E(purityitj))}/m (6)

Here, purityitj represents the jth observation from the ith city at the tth time period, and  is the

dispersion parameter. Equation (5) specifies a logistic model, because the inverse of the mean

function is the logit function. In contrast to the linear model (3), the logistic model restricts the

mean purity to the unit interval.

This purity model contained 107 parameters (29 for the 30 cities, 77 for the 78 quarters, and one

for the intercept). Based on estimate of these parameters, we derived estimates for mean purities

for each city in each quarter. For a given quarter, the 30 city means were multiplied by their

respective DAWN weights and the sum of these contributions provided a weighted estimate for

the mean price and mean purity in the U.S. for that quarter. The national results are show in Tables

1-4, and Figures 3, 6, and 8.

6. A Model for Weights

As previously noted, the price and purity models described above provided estimates for mean

price and mean purity for each city in each quarter. For a given quarter, the 30 city means were
A-15

multiplied by their respective weights, and the sum of these terms provided weighted estimates for

the mean price and mean purity in the U.S. for that quarter. The weights for each drug and quarter

are given in appendix B. The remainder of this section describes the method used to calculate the

weights.

Weighting was necessary because the STRIDE database is not representative of drug purchases

across the U.S. For example, STRIDE over-represents cocaine purchases in Washington D.C. and

under-represents those in Los Angeles. Weighting seeks to remedy this situation. The required

weight for a given city in a given quarter is the proportion of U.S. purchases made in that city in

that quarter.

Unfortunately, these weights are unavailable, and it was necessary to estimate weights via a

surrogate variable. We used Drug Abuse Warning Network (DAWN) emergency-event counts as

a surrogate variable. These counts were compiled by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health

Services Administration (SAMHSA) on a semi-annual basis over the period 1988-1999 for 21 of

our 29 cities and for a Rest of U.S. category.

The original DAWN database is referred to as DAWN1 in the flow chart in Figure A1. This

database was augmented by pairing eight large U.S. cities that were excluded from DAWN with

eight similar DAWN cities, and the augmented database is referred to as DAWN2 in the flow

chart. The imputed emergency-event counts for additional eight cities were calculated in

proportion to their population. To illustrate the method, consider the (Houston, Dallas) pair.

Dallas, a DAWN city, had a population of 2,566,124 and a cocaine emergency-event count of 823.

Houston, a non-DAWN city, had a population of 3,274,963, and therefore its imputed cocaine

emergency-event count was 1.276 x 823 = 1,050. The motivation for the pairing was to include

large cities that for some reason are not in DAWN. The criteria for a particular pairing was that the

two be broadly similar cities in similar locations. The list of all (matched city, DAWN city) pairs

were: (Houston, Dallas), (Pittsburgh, Buffalo), (Tampa, Miami), (Milwaukee, Minneapolis),

(Kansas City, St. Louis), (Cleveland, Detroit), (Portland, Seattle), and (San Antonio, Dallas).
A-16

Figure A4. Predicted Weights for Cocaine: Cocaine, 1981-Q1 to 2000-Q2

We fit a Poisson regression model (E(yt) = exp( + timet) and V(yt) = E(yt), where yt =

emergency-events at time t) to the resulting “extended” DAWN database (18 semi-annual

emergency-event counts from 1988 through 1999 for 29 cities plus the Rest of U.S.) to obtain

modeled counts for the 78 quarters from Q1 1981 through Q2 2000 for each city. The modeled

weights were then calculated from the modeled counts in such a way that the weights in a given

quarter summed to one. For example, Figure A4 shows the modeled and observed weights for

Chicago.

Modeling the weights achieved two objectives. Firstly, it smoothed over the random fluctuations

in quarters where data existed, and secondly, it provided estimates (extrapolations and

interpolations) in quarters where data was unavailable. Overall the modeled weights appeared
A-17

very reasonable, particularly given that the length of the required extrapolation was nearly as long

as the range of observable data.

7. The Relationship Between Retail and Wholesale Prices

It is of interest to know the relationship between retail and wholesale prices. This is not a simple

matter of regressing one price on the other. Rather, one must account for the fact that both

variables are time series with particular correlation structures which affect each other in a possibly

delayed or dynamic fashion (Box et. al, 1994). We illustrate an approach to this bivariate time

series problem for cocaine prices over the last decade 1991-2000. Retail prices were based on a

monthly version of the method described in section 4, and wholesale prices were based on a

monthly version of the method described in section 3. The two price series are shown in Figure

A5.

The correlation between the two price series is 0.46, and even though this estimate is technically

inappropriate, it does correctly portray the fact that both price series tend to move together. The

technical problem arises because a simple correlation coefficient ignores the time series nature of

the two series: its validity assumes firstly that observations in each price series are independent

rather than autocorrelated, and secondly that the correlation between the two series is

contemporaneous rather than delayed, dynamic (involving lags of some sort), or both.
A-18

Figure A5. Monthly Retail and Wholesale Cocaine Prices : National

Transfer function methods, which do accommodate for time series aspects, indicate that both price

series have high first order autocorrelation (0.550 (p	0.0001) for retail and 0.83904 (p	 0.0001)

for wholesale), and that increases in wholesale prices are associated with lagged as well as

contemporaneous increases in retail prices. Specifically, we estimate that an increase in retail

prices of $1 in a given month is associated with an increase in wholesale prices of $0.034 (p =

0.001) the same month, and an increase of $0.039 (p = 0.0003) the following month. Thus, to

some extent at least, wholesale prices appear to have followed, rather than lead, retail prices.

This surprising result requires some explanation. Consider the possibility of an external event

(such as a successful interdiction) causing a temporary shortage in the cocaine market. Prices do

not adjust at the wholesale/importation level because delivery prices are set by contract. Prices

increase over time as contractual terms adjust to market realities. No such lag occurs at the retail

level, however, where dealers charge the maximum price that the market will bear. Therefore,
A-19

wholesale prices lag behind increases in retail prices, but this does not imply that an increase in

retail prices causes an increase in wholesale/importation prices. Note also that the estimated

association summarizes the wholesale-retail relationship over a particular historical period, and it

need not hold over other time periods when price changes are less the result of, for example,

changes in supply, and more the result of increased law enforcement.

8. Regional Prices

Regional prices and purities are useful for a variety of reasons. Appendix C shows the results of

aggregating the cleaned data (STRIDE3 in Figure A1) into six consumption regions (Northeast,

Southeast, East Central, West Central, Mountain, and Pacific) and calculating annual sample

means for prices and purities.

Although this simple approach may be suitable to ascertain rough trends, it suffers from several

defects. Firstly, the sample weights are inappropriate. “No sample weights” actually implies

“equal sample weights”, and these are appropriate only for random samples. Secondly, prices have

not been adjusted for transaction size and purity. Thirdly, the method for removing outliers is

inappropriate, since outliers relative to the national model are not necessarily outliers relative to

the regional model.

The last issue is particularly egregious in cases when it is desirable to keep the time series

structure in the regional prices series. For example, the presence of a non-smoothed monthly time

series structure would be critical to the success of a study attempting to measure the effect of

monthly anti-cocaine smuggling operations on monthly cocaine prices. In fact, Abt Associates has

recently conducted such a study, and for this purpose a regional price series that did maintain the

time series structure was estimated for the South West Border from 1991-20001

. The resulting

wholesale and retail price series are shown in Figure A6.

 

1 Layne M., Bruen, A., Johnston P., Rhodes W., Decker S., Townsend M., Chester C., Schaffer G., Lavin J.

“Measuring the Deterrent Effect of Enforcement Operations on Drug Smuggling, 1991-1999,” Abt Associates 2001.
A-20

The approach used to obtain the South West Border price series was a variant of the method used

to obtain the national price series (section 1-3). A direct application of the method failed to

identify important outliers because of the sparseness of the data. For example, if a particular

month had only a single transaction, then the model would necessarily fit perfectly, and the

corresponding residual would be therefore be zero (the single observation being completely

accommodated by its own parameter). Alternatively, if there were only two transactions in a

month, then the model would be equidistant from both observations, and the magnitude (absolute

value) of the two residuals would be identical, regardless of the position of the two observations.

Clearly some degree of smoothing is required here. Our approach was to use a high degree

polynomial model for outlier detection, and then fit the resulting “clean” data by (a monthly

version of) the dummy variable model of section 3. This approach could be applied to other

regional price series, and hopefully future editions of the report will contain these series.

Figure A6. Monthly Retail and Wholesale Cocaine Prices: South West Border
B-1

Appendix B

Data Adjustments: List of Tables
Table B1: Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine

Metropolitan Area 1981 1982 1983

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.023 0.023 0.

Baltimore 0.028 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.Boston 0.024 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.Buffalo 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Chicago 0.033 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.036 0.036 0.037 0.038 0.039 0.Cleveland 0.028 0.028 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.Dallas 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.Denver 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.Detroit 0.053 0.054 0.054 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.056 0.056 0.057 0.Houston 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.Los Angeles 0.069 0.069 0.069 0.069 0.068 0.068 0.068 0.067 0.067 0.Miami 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Milwaukee 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.New Orleans 0.063 0.062 0.061 0.060 0.059 0.058 0.057 0.056 0.055 0.New York 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.178 0.178 0.178 0.178 0.178 0.178 0.Newark 0.058 0.058 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.056 0.056 0.055 0.055 0.Philadelphia 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.107 0.Phoenix 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Pittsburgh 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Portland 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.San Antonio 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.San Diego 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.San Francisco 0.043 0.042 0.042 0.041 0.041 0.041 0.040 0.040 0.039 0.Seattle 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.St Louis 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Tampa 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.Washington, DC 0.162 0.159 0.155 0.151 0.148 0.144 0.140 0.137 0.134 0.Rest of US 0.043 0.044 0.046 0.048 0.049 0.051 0.053 0.054 0.056 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B1: Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1984 1985 1986

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.027 0.027 0.

Baltimore 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.035 0.036 0.036 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.Boston 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.Buffalo 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Chicago 0.042 0.043 0.043 0.044 0.045 0.046 0.047 0.047 0.048 0.Cleveland 0.030 0.030 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.Dallas 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.Denver 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Detroit 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.060 0.060 0.Houston 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.Kansas City 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.Los Angeles 0.066 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.064 0.064 0.063 0.063 0.062 0.Miami 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.Milwaukee 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.New Orleans 0.051 0.050 0.049 0.048 0.047 0.046 0.045 0.045 0.044 0.New York 0.178 0.178 0.178 0.178 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.176 0.176 0.Newark 0.053 0.053 0.052 0.052 0.051 0.051 0.050 0.050 0.049 0.Philadelphia 0.107 0.107 0.106 0.106 0.106 0.106 0.105 0.105 0.105 0.Phoenix 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Pittsburgh 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Portland 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.San Antonio 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.San Diego 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.San Francisco 0.038 0.037 0.037 0.036 0.036 0.035 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.Seattle 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.St Louis 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Tampa 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Washington, DC 0.120 0.117 0.114 0.111 0.108 0.105 0.102 0.100 0.097 0.Rest of US 0.064 0.066 0.068 0.070 0.072 0.074 0.076 0.079 0.081 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B1: Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1987 1988 1989

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.028 0.028 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.

Baltimore 0.039 0.040 0.040 0.041 0.041 0.041 0.042 0.042 0.043 0.Boston 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.Buffalo 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Chicago 0.051 0.052 0.053 0.054 0.055 0.056 0.056 0.057 0.058 0.Cleveland 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.Dallas 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.Denver 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Detroit 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.Houston 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.Kansas City 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.Los Angeles 0.060 0.060 0.059 0.059 0.058 0.058 0.057 0.057 0.056 0.Miami 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.Milwaukee 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.New Orleans 0.040 0.039 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.New York 0.174 0.173 0.172 0.172 0.171 0.170 0.169 0.168 0.168 0.Newark 0.047 0.047 0.046 0.046 0.045 0.045 0.044 0.043 0.043 0.Philadelphia 0.103 0.103 0.102 0.102 0.101 0.101 0.100 0.099 0.099 0.Phoenix 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Pittsburgh 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.Portland 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.San Antonio 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.San Diego 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.San Francisco 0.032 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.029 0.028 0.Seattle 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.St Louis 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Tampa 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.Washington, DC 0.086 0.084 0.081 0.079 0.077 0.074 0.072 0.070 0.068 0.Rest of US 0.091 0.094 0.096 0.099 0.102 0.105 0.108 0.111 0.114 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B1: Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1990 1991 1992

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.

Baltimore 0.044 0.044 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.047 0.Boston 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.Buffalo 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Chicago 0.061 0.062 0.063 0.064 0.064 0.065 0.066 0.067 0.068 0.Cleveland 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.Dallas 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.Denver 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Detroit 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.Houston 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.Kansas City 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Los Angeles 0.054 0.053 0.053 0.052 0.051 0.051 0.050 0.049 0.049 0.Miami 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.Milwaukee 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.New Orleans 0.031 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.028 0.027 0.026 0.026 0.025 0.New York 0.164 0.163 0.162 0.160 0.159 0.158 0.157 0.156 0.154 0.Newark 0.041 0.040 0.039 0.039 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.037 0.036 0.Philadelphia 0.096 0.096 0.095 0.094 0.093 0.093 0.092 0.091 0.090 0.Phoenix 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Pittsburgh 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.Portland 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.San Antonio 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.San Diego 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.San Francisco 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.025 0.025 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.023 0.Seattle 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.St Louis 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.Tampa 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.Washington, DC 0.060 0.058 0.056 0.054 0.053 0.051 0.049 0.048 0.046 0.Rest of US 0.126 0.129 0.133 0.136 0.139 0.143 0.146 0.150 0.154 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B1: Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1993 1994 1995

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.

Baltimore 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.048 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.Boston 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.Buffalo 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.Chicago 0.071 0.071 0.072 0.073 0.073 0.074 0.075 0.075 0.076 0.Cleveland 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.029 0.Dallas 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.Denver 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Detroit 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.058 0.058 0.Houston 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.Kansas City 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Los Angeles 0.046 0.045 0.045 0.044 0.044 0.043 0.042 0.042 0.041 0.Miami 0.016 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.Milwaukee 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.New Orleans 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.019 0.018 0.018 0.New York 0.149 0.148 0.146 0.145 0.143 0.142 0.140 0.139 0.137 0.Newark 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.Philadelphia 0.087 0.086 0.085 0.084 0.083 0.082 0.081 0.080 0.079 0.Phoenix 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Pittsburgh 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.Portland 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.San Antonio 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.San Diego 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.San Francisco 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.018 0.Seattle 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.St Louis 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.Tampa 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.020 0.Washington, DC 0.040 0.039 0.037 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.032 0.031 0.030 0.Rest of US 0.169 0.172 0.176 0.180 0.184 0.188 0.192 0.197 0.201 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B1: Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1996 1997 1998

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.

Baltimore 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.051 0.051 0.Boston 0.028 0.028 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.026 0.Buffalo 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Chicago 0.078 0.079 0.080 0.080 0.081 0.081 0.082 0.082 0.083 0.Cleveland 0.029 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.Dallas 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.Denver 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Detroit 0.057 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.055 0.055 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.Houston 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.Kansas City 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Los Angeles 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.Miami 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.023 0.Milwaukee 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.New Orleans 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.New York 0.131 0.130 0.128 0.126 0.125 0.123 0.122 0.120 0.118 0.Newark 0.027 0.026 0.026 0.025 0.025 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.023 0.Philadelphia 0.076 0.075 0.074 0.073 0.072 0.071 0.070 0.069 0.068 0.Phoenix 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Pittsburgh 0.016 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.019 0.Portland 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.San Antonio 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.San Diego 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.San Francisco 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.Seattle 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.St Louis 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.Tampa 0.021 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.024 0.024 0.Washington, DC 0.026 0.025 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.019 0.Rest of US 0.218 0.222 0.227 0.231 0.236 0.240 0.245 0.249 0.254 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B1: Estimated DAWN Weights for Cocaine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1999 2000 2001

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036

Baltimore 0.051 0.051 0.051 0.051 0.050 0.050Boston 0.026 0.026 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025Buffalo 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011Chicago 0.084 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.086 0.086Cleveland 0.026 0.026 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025Dallas 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011Denver 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007Detroit 0.052 0.051 0.051 0.050 0.050 0.049Houston 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.013Kansas City 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009Los Angeles 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.028Miami 0.024 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.026Milwaukee 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002Minneapolis-St Paul 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004New Orleans 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.009New York 0.112 0.110 0.108 0.107 0.105 0.103Newark 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.019 0.019Philadelphia 0.064 0.063 0.062 0.061 0.060 0.059Phoenix 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008Pittsburgh 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.022Portland 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012San Antonio 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005San Diego 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005San Francisco 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011Seattle 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015St Louis 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014Tampa 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.027 0.027Washington, DC 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.013Rest of US 0.272 0.277 0.282 0.286 0.291 0.296Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B2: Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin

Metropolitan Area 1981 1982 1983

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.

Baltimore 0.039 0.040 0.040 0.041 0.042 0.043 0.044 0.044 0.045 0.Boston 0.025 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.Buffalo 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Chicago 0.018 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.023 0.023 0.Cleveland 0.032 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.Dallas 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Denver 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Detroit 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.Houston 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Kansas City 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Los Angeles 0.134 0.132 0.130 0.128 0.126 0.124 0.123 0.121 0.119 0.Miami 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Milwaukee 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New Orleans 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.New York 0.152 0.153 0.153 0.154 0.154 0.155 0.155 0.155 0.156 0.Newark 0.043 0.043 0.044 0.044 0.045 0.045 0.046 0.046 0.047 0.Philadelphia 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.Phoenix 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.Pittsburgh 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Portland 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.San Antonio 0.010 0.010 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.San Diego 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.San Francisco 0.145 0.143 0.141 0.139 0.137 0.135 0.133 0.131 0.129 0.Seattle 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.St Louis 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Tampa 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.Washington, DC 0.070 0.069 0.068 0.067 0.067 0.066 0.065 0.064 0.063 0.Rest of US 0.139 0.140 0.142 0.143 0.144 0.146 0.147 0.149 0.150 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B2: Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1984 1985 1986

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.

Baltimore 0.049 0.049 0.050 0.051 0.052 0.053 0.054 0.055 0.056 0.Boston 0.028 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.Buffalo 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.Chicago 0.026 0.027 0.028 0.029 0.030 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.033 0.Cleveland 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.Dallas 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Denver 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Detroit 0.058 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.055 0.Houston 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Kansas City 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Los Angeles 0.112 0.110 0.108 0.107 0.105 0.103 0.101 0.100 0.098 0.Miami 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Milwaukee 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New Orleans 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.New York 0.157 0.158 0.158 0.158 0.158 0.158 0.159 0.159 0.159 0.Newark 0.049 0.049 0.050 0.050 0.051 0.051 0.052 0.052 0.053 0.Philadelphia 0.058 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.Phoenix 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Pittsburgh 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Portland 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.San Antonio 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.San Diego 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.San Francisco 0.121 0.119 0.117 0.115 0.113 0.111 0.109 0.108 0.106 0.Seattle 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.St Louis 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Tampa 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Washington, DC 0.059 0.059 0.058 0.057 0.056 0.055 0.054 0.053 0.053 0.Rest of US 0.156 0.157 0.158 0.160 0.161 0.162 0.164 0.165 0.166 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B2: Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1987 1988 1989

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.

Baltimore 0.059 0.060 0.061 0.062 0.063 0.064 0.065 0.066 0.067 0.Boston 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.Buffalo 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Chicago 0.037 0.038 0.039 0.040 0.042 0.043 0.044 0.045 0.046 0.Cleveland 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.026 0.Dallas 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Denver 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Detroit 0.054 0.054 0.053 0.053 0.053 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.051 0.Houston 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Kansas City 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Los Angeles 0.091 0.090 0.088 0.087 0.085 0.084 0.082 0.080 0.079 0.Miami 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Milwaukee 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New Orleans 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.New York 0.159 0.159 0.159 0.159 0.159 0.159 0.158 0.158 0.158 0.Newark 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.056 0.056 0.057 0.057 0.058 0.058 0.Philadelphia 0.059 0.059 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.Phoenix 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Pittsburgh 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.Portland 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.San Antonio 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.San Diego 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.San Francisco 0.098 0.097 0.095 0.093 0.091 0.090 0.088 0.086 0.085 0.Seattle 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.St Louis 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Tampa 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Washington, DC 0.049 0.048 0.048 0.047 0.046 0.045 0.044 0.044 0.043 0.Rest of US 0.171 0.172 0.173 0.174 0.175 0.176 0.177 0.178 0.179 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B2: Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1990 1991 1992

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.

Baltimore 0.071 0.072 0.073 0.074 0.075 0.076 0.077 0.077 0.078 0.Boston 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.Buffalo 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Chicago 0.051 0.053 0.054 0.055 0.057 0.058 0.060 0.061 0.063 0.Cleveland 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.Dallas 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Denver 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.Detroit 0.050 0.049 0.049 0.048 0.048 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.046 0.Houston 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Kansas City 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.Los Angeles 0.073 0.072 0.070 0.069 0.067 0.066 0.065 0.063 0.062 0.Miami 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Milwaukee 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New Orleans 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.New York 0.157 0.157 0.156 0.156 0.155 0.155 0.155 0.154 0.154 0.Newark 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.Philadelphia 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.Phoenix 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Pittsburgh 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Portland 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.San Antonio 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.San Diego 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.San Francisco 0.078 0.077 0.075 0.074 0.072 0.071 0.069 0.068 0.066 0.Seattle 0.022 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.St Louis 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Tampa 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Washington, DC 0.040 0.039 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.Rest of US 0.183 0.184 0.185 0.186 0.186 0.187 0.188 0.189 0.189 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B2: Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1993 1994 1995

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.

Baltimore 0.082 0.083 0.084 0.085 0.086 0.087 0.088 0.089 0.090 0.Boston 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.036 0.037 0.Buffalo 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Chicago 0.069 0.070 0.072 0.074 0.075 0.077 0.079 0.081 0.083 0.Cleveland 0.023 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.Dallas 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Denver 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.Detroit 0.044 0.044 0.043 0.043 0.042 0.042 0.041 0.041 0.040 0.Houston 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Los Angeles 0.057 0.056 0.054 0.053 0.052 0.051 0.050 0.049 0.048 0.Miami 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Milwaukee 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New Orleans 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.New York 0.151 0.151 0.150 0.149 0.149 0.148 0.147 0.146 0.146 0.Newark 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.Philadelphia 0.055 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.053 0.053 0.053 0.052 0.Phoenix 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Pittsburgh 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.Portland 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.023 0.San Antonio 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.San Diego 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.San Francisco 0.061 0.059 0.058 0.057 0.056 0.054 0.053 0.052 0.051 0.Seattle 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.St Louis 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Tampa 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Washington, DC 0.031 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.028 0.027 0.027 0.Rest of US 0.191 0.192 0.192 0.193 0.193 0.194 0.194 0.194 0.195 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B2: Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1996 1997 1998

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.

Baltimore 0.093 0.094 0.095 0.096 0.097 0.097 0.098 0.099 0.100 0.Boston 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.Buffalo 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Chicago 0.090 0.092 0.094 0.096 0.098 0.100 0.102 0.104 0.106 0.Cleveland 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.017 0.Dallas 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Denver 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.Detroit 0.039 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.037 0.036 0.036 0.035 0.035 0.Houston 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.Kansas City 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Los Angeles 0.043 0.042 0.041 0.040 0.039 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.036 0.Miami 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.Milwaukee 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New Orleans 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.New York 0.142 0.141 0.140 0.139 0.138 0.137 0.136 0.135 0.134 0.Newark 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.Philadelphia 0.051 0.051 0.050 0.050 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.048 0.048 0.Phoenix 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.Pittsburgh 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.Portland 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.San Antonio 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.San Diego 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.San Francisco 0.046 0.045 0.044 0.043 0.042 0.041 0.040 0.039 0.038 0.Seattle 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.St Louis 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Tampa 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.Washington, DC 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.023 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.Rest of US 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.195 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B2: Estimated DAWN Weights for Heroin

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1999 2000 2001

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007

Baltimore 0.103 0.104 0.104 0.105 0.106 0.106Boston 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037Buffalo 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007Chicago 0.115 0.117 0.119 0.122 0.124 0.126Cleveland 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.015Dallas 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Denver 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008Detroit 0.033 0.032 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.030Houston 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006Kansas City 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007Los Angeles 0.032 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.028Miami 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.013Milwaukee 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001Minneapolis-St Paul 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002New Orleans 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005New York 0.130 0.129 0.128 0.127 0.125 0.124Newark 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067Philadelphia 0.046 0.046 0.045 0.045 0.044 0.044Phoenix 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010Pittsburgh 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015Portland 0.027 0.027 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.029San Antonio 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002San Diego 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.011San Francisco 0.034 0.033 0.032 0.031 0.030 0.030Seattle 0.034 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.036 0.036St Louis 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010Tampa 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013Washington, DC 0.018 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.016 0.016Rest of US 0.194 0.193 0.193 0.193 0.192 0.192Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B3: Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine

Metropolitan Area 1981 1982 1983

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.

Baltimore 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Boston 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Buffalo 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.Chicago 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Cleveland 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.010 0.Dallas 0.078 0.076 0.075 0.073 0.071 0.070 0.068 0.067 0.065 0.Denver 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.Detroit 0.030 0.028 0.027 0.026 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.020 0.Houston 0.098 0.096 0.094 0.092 0.090 0.088 0.086 0.084 0.082 0.Kansas City 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Los Angeles 0.053 0.054 0.056 0.057 0.058 0.059 0.060 0.061 0.062 0.Miami 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Milwaukee 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.New Orleans 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.New York 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Newark 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Philadelphia 0.053 0.052 0.051 0.050 0.049 0.047 0.046 0.045 0.044 0.Phoenix 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.033 0.Pittsburgh 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Portland 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.San Antonio 0.039 0.039 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.San Diego 0.196 0.194 0.193 0.192 0.190 0.188 0.187 0.185 0.183 0.San Francisco 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.132 0.133 0.133 0.133 0.132 0.132 0.Seattle 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.St Louis 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Tampa 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Washington, DC 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Rest of US 0.221 0.228 0.234 0.241 0.247 0.254 0.261 0.268 0.275 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B3: Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1984 1985 1986

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.

Baltimore 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Boston 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Buffalo 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Chicago 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.Cleveland 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.Dallas 0.059 0.058 0.056 0.055 0.053 0.052 0.050 0.049 0.048 0.Denver 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Detroit 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.Houston 0.074 0.072 0.070 0.069 0.067 0.065 0.063 0.061 0.060 0.Kansas City 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Los Angeles 0.066 0.067 0.068 0.069 0.070 0.071 0.071 0.072 0.073 0.Miami 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Milwaukee 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.New Orleans 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.New York 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Newark 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Philadelphia 0.039 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.033 0.032 0.031 0.Phoenix 0.035 0.036 0.036 0.037 0.037 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.039 0.Pittsburgh 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Portland 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.San Antonio 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.027 0.027 0.026 0.025 0.025 0.024 0.San Diego 0.175 0.173 0.171 0.169 0.166 0.164 0.162 0.159 0.157 0.San Francisco 0.131 0.131 0.130 0.130 0.129 0.128 0.128 0.127 0.126 0.Seattle 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.St Louis 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Tampa 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Washington, DC 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Rest of US 0.302 0.309 0.317 0.324 0.331 0.338 0.345 0.352 0.359 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B3: Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1987 1988 1989

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.

Baltimore 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Boston 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Buffalo 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Chicago 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Cleveland 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.Dallas 0.042 0.041 0.040 0.039 0.037 0.036 0.035 0.034 0.033 0.Denver 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.Detroit 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Houston 0.053 0.051 0.050 0.048 0.047 0.045 0.044 0.042 0.041 0.Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Los Angeles 0.076 0.077 0.078 0.078 0.079 0.080 0.080 0.081 0.081 0.Miami 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Milwaukee 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.New Orleans 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.New York 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Newark 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Philadelphia 0.027 0.026 0.025 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.020 0.Phoenix 0.040 0.041 0.041 0.042 0.042 0.042 0.043 0.043 0.043 0.Pittsburgh 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Portland 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.San Antonio 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.016 0.San Diego 0.147 0.144 0.142 0.139 0.137 0.134 0.132 0.129 0.127 0.San Francisco 0.122 0.121 0.120 0.119 0.118 0.117 0.115 0.114 0.113 0.Seattle 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.St Louis 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Tampa 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Washington, DC 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Rest of US 0.387 0.394 0.401 0.408 0.415 0.422 0.429 0.435 0.442 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B3: Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1990 1991 1992

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.

Baltimore 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Boston 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Buffalo 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Chicago 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Cleveland 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Dallas 0.029 0.028 0.027 0.026 0.025 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.Denver 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.Detroit 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Houston 0.036 0.034 0.033 0.032 0.031 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.027 0.Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Los Angeles 0.083 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.086 0.086 0.Miami 0.000 0.000 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Milwaukee 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.New Orleans 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.New York 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Newark 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Philadelphia 0.018 0.017 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.Phoenix 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.Pittsburgh 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Portland 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.San Antonio 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.San Diego 0.116 0.114 0.111 0.109 0.106 0.104 0.102 0.099 0.097 0.San Francisco 0.107 0.106 0.105 0.103 0.102 0.100 0.099 0.098 0.096 0.Seattle 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.St Louis 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Tampa 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Washington, DC 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Rest of US 0.468 0.474 0.481 0.487 0.493 0.499 0.505 0.511 0.517 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B3: Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1993 1994 1995

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.

Baltimore 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Boston 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Buffalo 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Chicago 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Cleveland 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.Dallas 0.018 0.018 0.017 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.Denver 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.Detroit 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Houston 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.020 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Los Angeles 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.Miami 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Milwaukee 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.New Orleans 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New York 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Newark 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Philadelphia 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.009 0.009 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.Phoenix 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.Pittsburgh 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Portland 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.San Antonio 0.009 0.009 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.San Diego 0.088 0.086 0.084 0.081 0.079 0.077 0.075 0.073 0.071 0.San Francisco 0.090 0.089 0.087 0.086 0.084 0.083 0.081 0.080 0.078 0.Seattle 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.St Louis 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Tampa 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Washington, DC 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Rest of US 0.539 0.545 0.550 0.555 0.560 0.565 0.570 0.575 0.580 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B3: Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1996 1997 1998

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.

Baltimore 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Boston 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Buffalo 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Chicago 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Cleveland 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Dallas 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.009 0.009 0.008 0.008 0.Denver 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.Detroit 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Houston 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.Los Angeles 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.087 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.086 0.Miami 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Milwaukee 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Minneapolis-St Paul 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.New Orleans 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.New York 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Newark 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.Philadelphia 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Phoenix 0.046 0.046 0.046 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.045 0.Pittsburgh 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Portland 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.San Antonio 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.San Diego 0.064 0.062 0.060 0.059 0.057 0.055 0.054 0.052 0.051 0.San Francisco 0.073 0.071 0.070 0.069 0.067 0.066 0.065 0.063 0.062 0.Seattle 0.022 0.022 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.023 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.St Louis 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.Tampa 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.Washington, DC 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.Rest of US 0.599 0.603 0.607 0.611 0.616 0.620 0.624 0.628 0.631 0.Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B3: Estimated DAWN Weights for Methamphetamine

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1999 2000 2001

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012

Baltimore 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Boston 0.001 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Buffalo 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001Chicago 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001Cleveland 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Dallas 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.005Denver 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011Detroit 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Houston 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003Los Angeles 0.085 0.085 0.084 0.084 0.084 0.083Miami 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001Milwaukee 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Minneapolis-St Paul 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010New Orleans 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001New York 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002Newark 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000Philadelphia 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003Phoenix 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.044 0.044Pittsburgh 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001Portland 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.021San Antonio 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003San Diego 0.045 0.044 0.043 0.041 0.040 0.039San Francisco 0.057 0.056 0.055 0.054 0.053 0.051Seattle 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.026St Louis 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005Tampa 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001Washington, DC 0.002 0.002 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001Rest of US 0.646 0.649 0.653 0.656 0.659 0.662Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B4: Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana

Metropolitan Area 1981 1982 1983

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.025 0.025 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.027 0.027 0.027 

Baltimore 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 Boston 0.025 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.028 Buffalo 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 Chicago 0.042 0.043 0.043 0.044 0.044 0.045 0.045 0.046 0.047 Cleveland 0.030 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.032 0.032 0.032 Dallas 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 Denver 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Detroit 0.057 0.058 0.058 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.060 0.060 0.061 Houston 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 Kansas City 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 Los Angeles 0.053 0.053 0.054 0.054 0.054 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 Miami 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 Milwaukee 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 Minneapolis-St Paul 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 New Orleans 0.038 0.038 0.038 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.037 0.036 New York 0.126 0.126 0.125 0.124 0.123 0.122 0.122 0.121 0.120 Newark 0.062 0.061 0.059 0.058 0.057 0.055 0.054 0.053 0.052 Philadelphia 0.037 0.037 0.038 0.039 0.039 0.040 0.040 0.041 0.042 Phoenix 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 Pittsburgh 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Portland 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 San Antonio 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 San Diego 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.017 0.017 San Francisco 0.063 0.061 0.059 0.058 0.056 0.055 0.053 0.052 0.050 Seattle 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 St Louis 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 Tampa 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 Washington, DC 0.169 0.167 0.164 0.161 0.159 0.156 0.153 0.151 0.148 Rest of US 0.100 0.103 0.105 0.108 0.111 0.113 0.116 0.119 0.122 Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B4: Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1984 1985 1986

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.030 

Baltimore 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 Boston 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.031 0.031 Buffalo 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.002 Chicago 0.049 0.049 0.050 0.050 0.050 0.051 0.051 0.052 0.052 Cleveland 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.034 0.034 0.034 Dallas 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 Denver 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 Detroit 0.062 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.064 0.065 Houston 0.029 0.029 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.028 0.028 Kansas City 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Los Angeles 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 Miami 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 Milwaukee 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 Minneapolis-St Paul 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 New Orleans 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.033 New York 0.116 0.115 0.114 0.113 0.112 0.111 0.110 0.108 0.107 Newark 0.047 0.046 0.045 0.043 0.042 0.041 0.040 0.039 0.038 Philadelphia 0.044 0.045 0.045 0.046 0.046 0.047 0.047 0.048 0.049 Phoenix 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 Pittsburgh 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Portland 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 San Antonio 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 San Diego 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 San Francisco 0.045 0.044 0.042 0.041 0.040 0.039 0.037 0.036 0.035 Seattle 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 St Louis 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 Tampa 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 Washington, DC 0.137 0.135 0.132 0.130 0.127 0.125 0.122 0.120 0.117 Rest of US 0.134 0.137 0.140 0.143 0.146 0.150 0.153 0.156 0.159 Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B4: Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1987 1988 1989

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.030 0.030 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 

Baltimore 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 Boston 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 Buffalo 0.002 0.002 0.002 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 Chicago 0.054 0.054 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.057 Cleveland 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 Dallas 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.020 Denver 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 Detroit 0.065 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.067 Houston 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.026 Kansas City 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 Los Angeles 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.057 0.056 0.056 Miami 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 Milwaukee 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006 Minneapolis-St Paul 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 New Orleans 0.032 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.029 New York 0.103 0.102 0.100 0.099 0.098 0.097 0.095 0.094 0.093 Newark 0.034 0.033 0.032 0.031 0.030 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.027 Philadelphia 0.051 0.051 0.052 0.052 0.053 0.053 0.054 0.054 0.055 Phoenix 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 Pittsburgh 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.006 0.006 Portland 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 San Antonio 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 San Diego 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 San Francisco 0.031 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.027 0.026 0.025 0.025 0.024 Seattle 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 St Louis 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 Tampa 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 Washington, DC 0.108 0.105 0.103 0.101 0.098 0.096 0.094 0.092 0.090 Rest of US 0.173 0.177 0.180 0.184 0.187 0.191 0.194 0.198 0.202 Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B4: Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1990 1991 1992

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 

Baltimore 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 Boston 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 Buffalo 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 Chicago 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.059 0.060 0.060 Cleveland 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 Dallas 0.020 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.018 Denver 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.010 Detroit 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.066 0.066 0.066 Houston 0.025 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.024 0.023 0.023 0.023 Kansas City 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 Los Angeles 0.056 0.056 0.056 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.055 0.054 0.054 Miami 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Milwaukee 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 Minneapolis-St Paul 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.010 New Orleans 0.028 0.027 0.027 0.027 0.026 0.026 0.026 0.025 0.025 New York 0.088 0.087 0.086 0.084 0.083 0.082 0.081 0.079 0.078 Newark 0.024 0.023 0.023 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.019 0.019 Philadelphia 0.057 0.057 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.059 0.059 0.060 0.060 Phoenix 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 Pittsburgh 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 Portland 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 San Antonio 0.005 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 San Diego 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.015 San Francisco 0.021 0.020 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.016 0.016 Seattle 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 St Louis 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 Tampa 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Washington, DC 0.081 0.079 0.078 0.076 0.074 0.072 0.070 0.068 0.066 Rest of US 0.216 0.220 0.224 0.228 0.232 0.235 0.239 0.243 0.247 Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B4: Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1993 1994 1995

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.032 

Baltimore 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.019 Boston 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.035 Buffalo 0.004 0.004 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Chicago 0.060 0.060 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 Cleveland 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 0.033 Dallas 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.016 0.016 0.016 Denver 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 Detroit 0.066 0.066 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.064 0.064 Houston 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.020 0.020 0.020 Kansas City 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 Los Angeles 0.053 0.053 0.053 0.052 0.052 0.052 0.051 0.051 0.051 Miami 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.016 Milwaukee 0.006 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 Minneapolis-St Paul 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.009 New Orleans 0.024 0.023 0.023 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.021 0.021 0.021 New York 0.073 0.072 0.071 0.070 0.068 0.067 0.066 0.065 0.064 Newark 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.012 Philadelphia 0.061 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.064 0.064 Phoenix 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 0.011 Pittsburgh 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.011 Portland 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 San Antonio 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 San Diego 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 San Francisco 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.011 0.011 0.010 0.010 Seattle 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.016 St Louis 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 Tampa 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.017 Washington, DC 0.060 0.058 0.057 0.055 0.054 0.052 0.051 0.049 0.048 Rest of US 0.262 0.266 0.270 0.274 0.278 0.282 0.286 0.290 0.294 Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B4: Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1996 1997 1998

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.032 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 

Baltimore 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 0.021 Boston 0.035 0.035 0.035 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.034 Buffalo 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.006 0.007 0.007 0.007 Chicago 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 0.061 Cleveland 0.032 0.032 0.032 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.031 0.030 Dallas 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.014 Denver 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 Detroit 0.063 0.063 0.063 0.062 0.062 0.062 0.061 0.061 0.061 Houston 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.017 Kansas City 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 Los Angeles 0.049 0.049 0.049 0.048 0.048 0.047 0.047 0.047 0.046 Miami 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.017 0.017 0.017 Milwaukee 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.004 Minneapolis-St Paul 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.008 0.008 New Orleans 0.019 0.019 0.019 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.017 0.017 0.017 New York 0.059 0.058 0.057 0.056 0.055 0.054 0.053 0.052 0.051 Newark 0.011 0.010 0.010 0.010 0.009 0.009 0.009 0.008 0.008 Philadelphia 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.065 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 0.066 Phoenix 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 Pittsburgh 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 Portland 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 San Antonio 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 San Diego 0.014 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.013 San Francisco 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 Seattle 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016 St Louis 0.016 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 Tampa 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 Washington, DC 0.043 0.041 0.040 0.039 0.038 0.037 0.036 0.035 0.034 Rest of US 0.309 0.313 0.317 0.321 0.325 0.329 0.333 0.337 0.340 Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B4: Estimated DAWN Weights for Marijuana

(Continued)

Metropolitan Area 1999 2000 2001

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 

Atlanta 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030 0.030

Baltimore 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022 0.022Boston 0.034 0.034 0.034 0.033 0.033 0.033Buffalo 0.007 0.007 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008Chicago 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.060 0.060Cleveland 0.030 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.029 0.028Dallas 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.012 0.012 0.012Denver 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006Detroit 0.059 0.059 0.058 0.058 0.058 0.057Houston 0.016 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015Kansas City 0.013 0.013 0.013 0.014 0.014 0.014Los Angeles 0.045 0.044 0.044 0.043 0.043 0.042Miami 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017 0.017Milwaukee 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004 0.004Minneapolis-St Paul 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.008 0.007New Orleans 0.016 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.014 0.014New York 0.047 0.046 0.045 0.044 0.043 0.042Newark 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.006 0.006 0.006Philadelphia 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067 0.067Phoenix 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011 0.011Pittsburgh 0.015 0.015 0.016 0.016 0.016 0.016Portland 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012San Antonio 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007 0.007San Diego 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.012 0.011San Francisco 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.004 0.004Seattle 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015 0.015St Louis 0.019 0.019 0.020 0.020 0.020 0.020Tampa 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018 0.018Washington, DC 0.030 0.029 0.028 0.027 0.026 0.025Rest of US 0.356 0.360 0.363 0.367 0.371 0.375Source: Drug Abuse Warning Network Emergency Room Mentions, 1988 – 1999.
Table B5: Comsumer Price Index, First Half of 2000 as Reference Point

Year January February March April May June July August September October 

1981 0.522 0.528 0.531 0.535 0.539 0.544 0.55 0.554 0.559 0.56 1982 0.565 0.567 0.566 0.568 0.574 0.581 0.585 0.586 0.587 0.588 1983 0.585 0.585 0.587 0.591 0.594 0.596 0.597 0.6 0.603 0.604 1984 0.606 0.608 0.608 0.609 0.612 0.613 0.616 0.622 0.625 0.625 1985 0.626 0.629 0.632 0.634 0.637 0.639 0.639 0.64 0.642 0.644 1986 0.650 0.648 0.644 0.642 0.644 0.647 0.647 0.648 0.651 0.651 1987 0.656 0.659 0.662 0.666 0.668 0.671 0.673 0.676 0.679 0.681 1988 0.683 0.685 0.687 0.690 0.693 0.696 0.699 0.702 0.707 0.710 1989 0.714 0.717 0.721 0.727 0.731 0.733 0.735 0.735 0.738 0.741 1990 0.751 0.754 0.759 0.760 0.761 0.766 0.768 0.775 0.782 0.787 1991 0.793 0.793 0.794 0.796 0.798 0.800 0.801 0.803 0.807 0.808 1992 0.812 0.814 0.818 0.819 0.821 0.824 0.826 0.828 0.830 0.833 1993 0.837 0.840 0.842 0.845 0.847 0.847 0.848 0.850 0.851 0.855 1994 0.857 0.859 0.862 0.864 0.865 0.868 0.870 0.874 0.877 0.877 1995 0.882 0.885 0.887 0.891 0.893 0.895 0.895 0.896 0.899 0.901 1996 0.905 0.908 0.912 0.917 0.919 0.920 0.921 0.922 0.926 0.928 1997 0.933 0.936 0.937 0.938 0.938 0.939 0.940 0.942 0.945 0.946 1998 0.945 0.946 0.947 0.949 0.952 0.953 0.954 0.955 0.956 0.958 1999 0.961 0.961 0.963 0.971 0.972 0.972 0.975 0.978 0.983 0.985 2000 0.988 0.994 1.002 1.003 1.004 1.010Source: Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers,Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1981 – 2000.
C-1

Appendix C

Regional Estimates: List of Tables
Table C1. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases < 1 pure gram

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Num

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN 

1981 1,087.77 1,334.84 1,387.53 698.35 1,774.59 1,228.02 41 30 25 53 28 36 8 1982 1,218.16 1,195.10 1,258.28 583.46 1,664.38 1,289.04 33 45 29 53 25 30 12 1983 1,096.67 689.39 890.75 411.37 1,171.27 1,236.90 42 48 35 61 29 37 17 1984 761.33 571.62 850.17 481.30 897.42 733.70 43 49 43 62 33 59 28 1985 771.09 816.68 822.67 492.55 912.61 803.51 44 37 39 61 33 42 34 1986 520.14 623.05 438.43 346.23 709.45 505.45 51 48 64 78 43 56 24 1987 531.99 383.41 415.90 287.85 543.07 347.41 54 62 76 68 65 78 11 1988 368.34 273.07 342.10 194.33 289.32 435.29 66 75 67 87 76 64 29 1989 313.34 300.35 236.49 169.09 260.95 393.11 72 63 67 86 80 68 21 1990 376.55 349.36 364.72 244.33 577.61 385.78 66 64 58 78 72 64 32 1991 221.45 252.34 247.09 135.50 310.16 311.41 67 83 61 80 81 69 20 1992 287.61 283.97 184.17 212.23 256.19 342.78 73 65 64 83 79 76 23 1993 294.89 181.08 162.25 152.85 225.88 207.61 68 59 69 82 75 80 21 1994 247.77 175.01 178.34 124.66 206.24 204.94 72 66 71 81 74 74 11 1995 285.56 223.99 204.69 153.92 228.64 210.39 70 70 65 73 68 67 12 1996 209.86 191.93 180.79 138.25 223.31 177.23 64 75 67 83 71 75 28 1997 236.13 230.79 253.04 230.68 280.75 223.61 67 66 57 66 61 75 43 11998 156.96 183.21 381.09 186.63 231.69 272.50 76 67 60 69 69 69 15 11999 213.67 395.55 211.18 162.69 200.77 272.18 64 63 60 73 63 65 52 12000 215.69 165.44 307.09 74.47 234.61 291.02 57 67 61 77 59 55 77 2

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C2. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between 1 and 10 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number 

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE 

1981 521.26 473.71 553.07 324.50 444.25 646.08 38 43 39 60 40 35 24 23 11982 485.77 403.82 468.31 392.59 499.20 483.45 41 49 42 57 37 43 27 26 41983 391.24 393.20 403.41 295.68 452.05 454.49 47 50 47 62 40 46 41 15 51984 341.92 317.64 313.31 208.90 380.73 365.48 51 56 56 72 45 51 44 17 31985 335.71 335.04 313.71 233.29 375.35 346.73 49 49 53 67 42 49 68 25 41986 268.72 280.73 228.51 176.14 323.07 278.04 60 57 65 74 56 57 61 19 41987 214.45 178.65 166.28 171.03 220.07 236.69 69 73 75 65 70 67 44 13 31988 195.95 184.12 156.38 113.34 201.97 171.92 69 70 68 82 72 67 53 15 31989 158.82 155.36 150.61 106.31 164.54 149.47 68 56 58 76 75 70 53 12 51990 209.34 199.56 244.41 147.67 209.56 208.34 59 49 43 63 66 58 51 12 61991 145.86 125.52 163.11 123.23 141.52 141.62 65 67 57 78 75 70 53 17 71992 154.09 113.29 127.62 100.30 143.11 130.77 68 72 69 80 74 75 48 23 41993 128.58 106.38 134.24 97.84 132.65 126.59 66 70 63 77 74 70 39 15 41994 125.60 95.92 102.96 78.60 120.11 111.63 64 70 75 80 72 71 27 16 81995 139.90 106.02 109.96 97.57 118.29 112.77 62 65 67 62 68 68 39 20 81996 115.29 101.09 121.01 83.16 112.43 110.53 67 69 62 73 68 71 38 24 81997 125.52 113.42 120.50 85.32 112.41 112.08 64 63 59 62 65 68 42 30 91998 117.09 100.48 101.13 69.33 105.99 114.39 61 67 63 70 66 70 53 30 91999 123.79 83.11 120.78 100.69 135.20 122.07 63 67 60 68 56 60 74 43 122000 158.68 101.64 156.26 77.96 157.76 142.44 51 58 59 60 51 53 77 47 19

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C3. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between 10 and 100 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number 

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE 

1981 293.36 261.06 269.74 249.41 260.15 312.76 56 68 59 69 61 56 14 7 1982 276.41 232.25 254.92 218.69 225.88 265.76 55 65 59 70 62 59 13 11 11983 239.18 245.14 197.71 170.11 232.31 219.92 62 64 73 80 59 70 23 12 41984 198.16 188.82 169.04 162.01 183.83 202.81 68 71 74 78 66 67 47 15 51985 197.18 175.58 171.14 141.27 186.06 190.44 66 71 68 77 63 64 59 24 71986 144.93 143.71 121.05 114.01 146.59 148.02 76 75 80 82 73 76 93 28 71987 108.93 104.23 101.49 84.95 114.54 112.04 81 82 80 86 79 79 126 34 101988 85.09 79.91 77.64 60.77 87.74 80.88 81 82 79 83 82 82 129 44 81989 77.11 74.44 77.82 55.78 78.51 72.78 76 74 69 75 78 78 112 42 101990 98.05 88.37 116.41 85.87 99.75 94.01 69 63 56 64 68 69 69 26 81991 78.52 70.69 84.44 61.07 78.24 75.24 76 72 68 76 75 77 111 35 91992 78.39 58.76 78.67 48.59 75.72 77.33 75 77 66 80 74 79 82 24 61993 77.07 68.04 76.70 51.84 73.77 69.54 71 65 66 76 70 73 48 11 41994 65.32 53.62 63.76 43.57 65.40 64.16 73 76 69 76 72 74 59 18 81995 71.49 60.95 64.45 48.55 68.03 65.83 68 65 65 68 67 70 80 16 71996 61.85 58.78 66.05 43.68 63.50 57.67 70 68 63 72 65 69 79 33 111997 67.30 53.34 71.68 46.67 70.39 59.47 66 66 58 68 60 68 88 30 101998 62.43 51.29 58.75 40.25 60.66 57.28 68 66 62 68 63 65 91 40 121999 67.58 47.75 67.92 43.96 71.36 60.13 61 65 57 66 57 62 93 46 102000 81.20 47.64 81.99 59.45 90.07 69.99 52 58 54 54 48 53 79 46 11

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C4. Annual Cocaine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases > 100 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number 

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE 

1981 - - 131.93 139.41 - - - - 86 52 - - 0 0 1982 - 231.47 - 152.44 157.56 - - 54 - 73 78 - 0 0 1983 118.73 - 112.41 126.22 100.44 168.98 81 - 87 86 86 67 2 0 1984 112.04 89.21 99.58 91.97 88.82 87.37 84 92 88 84 84 95 2 0 1985 115.48 88.68 94.85 93.09 89.12 93.74 83 92 81 86 78 84 3 0 11986 88.68 55.14 68.29 71.25 61.05 81.47 86 94 90 85 88 88 4 1 11987 79.09 54.46 52.25 51.27 53.59 61.32 79 80 88 85 88 85 4 3 21988 46.95 35.31 39.09 73.10 44.33 42.16 90 86 94 85 86 89 13 9 31989 45.51 39.30 39.12 33.67 44.35 40.57 83 87 84 83 83 84 15 5 31990 59.66 64.65 53.89 55.45 66.09 54.92 78 76 88 78 70 74 5 4 21991 49.18 42.84 40.61 39.93 57.56 35.93 90 79 91 84 78 87 16 10 21992 53.51 34.46 42.99 34.92 44.66 37.82 79 87 83 85 80 86 14 3 11993 41.47 42.84 44.59 37.70 41.43 33.29 83 72 81 78 79 85 5 2 1994 42.33 27.24 40.66 30.95 38.59 34.74 78 90 80 80 80 82 6 3 11995 47.15 35.26 48.03 31.67 44.18 38.04 78 77 70 75 76 76 4 3 11996 40.14 33.59 36.69 30.43 39.58 30.40 78 75 82 78 75 82 9 6 11997 39.10 40.72 39.76 32.96 38.77 33.77 78 74 78 76 76 75 5 3 11998 34.61 32.94 39.46 28.45 40.41 35.21 77 68 74 79 74 74 10 5 11999 33.91 29.54 45.18 39.78 44.45 28.72 80 74 67 59 65 75 9 9 2000 44.24 27.31 53.84 37.88 46.68 36.99 71 72 48 66 63 65 4 5 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C5. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases < 0.1 pure gram

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Num

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN 

1981 8,918.18 13,881.90 8,416.65 7,788.37 5,926.19 8,980.48 5 3 4 8 4 4 4 10 1982 8,881.90 8,617.17 6,591.53 5,859.51 6,364.57 7,606.31 4 5 6 10 4 5 10 7 1983 9,370.86 6,416.76 6,632.26 4,336.29 7,436.13 9,865.81 4 10 8 14 5 8 9 4 1984 9,514.77 6,346.38 6,504.75 3,908.34 5,583.58 7,329.69 3 24 7 14 6 11 15 2 1985 8,623.19 2,633.75 6,734.52 2,648.94 4,418.20 6,587.70 5 39 7 18 8 10 16 1 1986 9,647.97 5,925.50 6,997.00 3,846.43 4,772.09 7,310.28 3 14 12 14 9 10 7 1 1987 9,058.38 5,281.81 4,748.66 2,814.64 2,926.52 8,587.37 6 21 18 16 12 6 6 4 1988 5,867.32 4,144.25 3,633.93 2,081.95 3,474.02 8,293.21 11 35 22 17 12 15 17 9 1989 4,074.96 2,093.05 1,877.13 4,135.97 2,494.62 3,131.75 9 38 25 13 14 10 10 5 1990 3,707.40 3,603.29 2,662.46 3,413.44 4,410.84 2,371.14 13 19 27 11 10 12 14 6 1991 3,452.08 2,871.95 2,583.44 3,678.21 2,704.57 6,061.79 9 19 33 11 16 8 14 13 1992 3,270.51 2,531.18 2,969.59 2,808.59 2,228.56 5,197.66 15 33 39 22 18 9 13 5 1993 2,384.54 3,373.80 1,447.53 1,927.35 2,338.59 2,940.65 19 32 42 22 19 16 10 13 1994 2,806.22 1,674.71 1,793.44 1,688.42 2,610.12 3,678.37 15 30 38 20 21 8 12 12 1995 4,185.10 1,999.88 1,632.13 1,736.19 2,221.67 3,337.01 18 22 38 25 25 13 7 11 1996 1,729.67 3,716.14 3,028.75 1,794.46 2,537.50 2,791.73 20 13 37 20 20 20 16 5 1997 1,572.27 1,929.84 1,942.88 1,948.10 2,135.49 4,171.27 35 13 39 25 26 10 12 3 1998 2,258.03 1,912.10 1,203.56 824.69 2,339.73 3,349.55 23 19 45 24 20 17 5 5 1999 1,932.05 1,760.37 1,183.47 1,123.94 1,813.55 2,827.09 23 22 50 21 18 12 6 6 2000 1,055.22 1,645.53 1,358.40 1,531.49 2,239.37 2,654.69 38 20 46 12 22 13 7 3 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C6. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between 0.1 and 1 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Numb

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN N

1981 6,372.99 4,987.81 3,388.13 4,628.02 3,158.88 5,258.42 13 15 12 18 24 6 13 8 1982 5,286.81 3,352.28 2,848.00 2,520.74 4,339.30 4,335.07 17 22 16 37 15 9 13 9 1983 4,794.29 3,129.75 3,861.56 2,174.74 3,522.63 3,475.33 16 35 13 40 18 14 13 7 1984 5,216.20 2,103.51 2,997.47 1,781.14 4,330.26 3,829.28 5 54 21 44 17 24 14 3 1985 4,027.07 1,585.98 2,504.11 1,425.91 3,039.21 2,214.54 15 58 21 49 20 31 16 2 1986 3,448.10 2,124.67 1,979.63 1,475.33 3,211.21 2,366.76 14 36 30 43 16 24 10 6 1987 3,177.91 1,872.27 1,482.65 1,337.18 3,287.09 3,003.73 15 40 37 37 14 19 8 6 1988 2,873.30 1,623.98 1,031.94 1,089.07 2,103.46 2,649.67 21 42 53 37 22 30 12 15 1989 1,605.21 958.03 890.27 886.06 1,252.75 1,337.39 34 47 49 37 28 36 10 7 1990 2,333.19 2,281.72 1,255.05 1,462.79 2,394.42 2,184.43 20 22 45 22 23 28 11 6 1991 1,670.66 2,291.27 1,025.01 1,418.66 1,492.06 2,073.25 27 23 54 23 26 17 10 4 1992 1,289.25 1,608.00 770.18 809.23 1,133.20 2,384.22 27 34 66 39 35 22 9 4 1993 1,007.34 1,012.15 690.15 582.70 994.30 1,247.20 33 45 67 42 25 15 18 4 1994 999.45 509.96 586.51 605.76 903.20 1,179.25 26 53 66 37 47 18 14 5 1995 875.73 535.00 530.08 466.62 916.56 1,043.59 39 42 69 42 35 21 19 8 1996 851.68 454.83 537.31 413.26 750.69 1,114.02 41 42 59 39 31 37 13 13 1997 731.62 583.80 467.79 523.18 940.92 1,213.05 46 38 67 36 48 25 18 18 1998 565.62 394.51 444.79 292.96 564.79 960.49 40 40 64 38 41 35 24 20 1999 591.50 477.97 502.96 340.45 582.89 782.06 42 39 63 37 35 26 21 25 2000 568.08 412.24 450.52 270.84 544.69 729.44 49 43 65 42 39 31 27 32 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C7. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between 1 and 10 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Numb

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN N

1981 2,418.17 3,634.55 1,835.07 2,082.26 2,275.19 2,940.50 14 9 17 26 30 6 6 3 1982 1,994.86 1,970.54 1,567.15 1,436.54 1,544.31 1,708.83 19 18 22 53 55 25 15 4 1983 2,008.85 2,091.05 2,456.29 1,535.94 1,335.48 1,619.24 23 36 19 51 38 21 12 5 1984 1,984.18 784.51 2,129.08 1,250.39 2,673.89 1,523.43 15 60 28 45 39 35 10 3 1985 1,657.02 818.91 1,799.95 944.75 2,157.37 1,471.10 18 61 38 55 34 46 13 3 1986 1,693.13 887.78 1,621.36 1,114.36 2,056.90 1,369.76 23 53 33 38 25 38 15 5 1987 1,687.38 924.50 1,363.84 1,023.98 2,527.80 1,454.53 21 60 41 34 17 28 8 3 1988 1,746.59 1,000.25 1,065.64 803.71 1,259.47 1,292.12 28 38 54 35 26 32 8 9 1989 966.85 871.40 843.81 646.73 997.13 1,065.43 42 47 56 36 37 24 7 4 1990 1,417.93 923.51 1,339.66 765.96 1,320.16 1,045.76 30 28 37 28 30 28 7 4 1991 984.83 1,502.90 928.26 973.86 1,259.28 1,244.31 38 25 48 22 27 29 7 5 1992 1,001.25 709.42 851.03 597.52 854.57 870.35 41 39 46 27 54 29 6 4 1993 885.71 579.27 461.37 458.42 805.36 857.65 43 52 70 31 38 31 7 3 1994 720.71 597.27 477.30 363.60 520.60 728.19 53 37 64 30 53 27 7 8 1995 736.61 313.88 418.95 275.94 559.89 491.54 48 40 69 33 54 44 11 3 1996 698.00 514.08 419.66 217.76 563.88 399.73 43 32 58 41 46 39 10 8 1997 551.55 338.29 373.88 210.95 487.08 628.13 48 39 61 30 55 32 11 7 1998 464.50 336.80 349.46 185.83 510.04 409.58 62 40 61 33 58 36 6 5 1999 452.85 213.28 357.97 210.96 437.54 480.86 54 57 60 33 44 38 8 6 2000 413.33 158.15 291.95 191.34 367.60 438.25 51 53 64 24 49 37 10 11 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C8. Annual Heroin Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases > 10 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Numbe

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN N

1981 - - 977.13 629.66 1,223.80 - - - 66 79 50 - 0 0 1982 1,088.23 - 926.38 895.04 798.47 1,007.11 51 - 65 63 65 45 3 0 1983 1,363.68 748.84 909.82 704.00 739.73 1,221.86 46 66 62 65 72 43 3 1 1984 843.53 655.86 851.14 697.65 902.02 857.72 67 68 59 60 52 67 2 2 1985 994.10 530.19 834.15 533.32 1,149.51 841.81 52 69 60 62 37 62 5 1 1986 860.31 473.59 822.53 572.17 847.00 583.71 43 60 48 61 54 61 4 1 1987 784.50 562.36 678.46 534.26 607.95 730.68 37 49 59 50 58 44 1 2 1988 611.11 509.94 593.23 477.51 502.36 539.48 61 56 76 43 55 53 3 3 1989 539.06 384.55 463.76 369.94 485.07 527.81 68 58 72 48 61 54 5 7 1990 560.82 464.25 557.36 494.20 580.42 484.58 51 43 58 47 56 52 3 6 1991 538.96 524.19 507.00 442.56 597.80 771.42 65 41 60 55 63 36 3 2 1992 421.12 439.10 381.15 427.04 398.89 508.37 67 52 73 49 67 42 7 2 1993 355.86 305.52 290.94 281.67 339.07 323.65 66 56 81 52 73 54 8 2 1994 415.22 281.88 254.53 180.70 342.24 321.64 61 61 73 58 69 53 6 2 1995 366.62 257.53 231.69 196.57 248.07 274.76 53 51 72 50 82 53 7 6 1996 379.68 169.81 244.58 152.12 271.78 188.55 53 54 62 47 81 57 4 6 1997 252.40 151.29 215.95 138.55 262.88 249.31 70 58 68 41 71 48 9 7 1998 240.06 154.08 189.56 115.61 215.44 168.13 61 56 64 42 72 57 8 9 1999 273.16 112.10 158.49 114.27 198.92 120.27 65 58 70 44 69 58 3 4 2000 192.53 93.49 132.33 95.98 145.88 158.47 70 59 71 40 71 65 4 13 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C9. Annual Methamphetamine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases < 10 pure gram

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Numb

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN 

1981 - 604.10 337.53 932.79 723.95 440.47 - 39 34 32 51 41 0 2 1982 564.43 424.49 578.61 484.44 606.78 631.59 34 39 26 51 41 36 2 4 1983 317.97 615.41 597.02 588.00 638.23 575.11 42 53 33 47 30 34 1 2 1984 - 479.74 486.05 724.80 471.09 431.29 - 42 28 41 26 39 0 7 1985 669.51 179.65 572.12 479.05 793.17 1,101.63 18 70 18 42 28 33 2 3 1986 723.85 331.25 838.07 363.83 517.17 900.61 27 46 22 48 18 33 2 6 1987 419.90 475.02 279.02 324.58 630.04 909.72 36 42 30 57 45 30 3 3 1988 851.43 345.15 652.45 170.62 821.19 478.98 11 41 15 67 18 30 1 4 1989 744.85 315.93 860.44 189.09 624.30 313.13 16 32 12 54 46 38 1 6 1990 603.54 871.93 669.63 340.43 1,104.11 841.27 30 15 13 32 22 21 1 7 1991 359.73 1,095.96 751.51 417.20 1,148.02 1,149.24 25 11 7 28 8 17 1 8 1992 404.95 709.34 785.98 379.17 525.99 498.23 26 26 25 42 15 28 2 6 1993 280.32 665.92 500.40 358.11 352.34 643.92 42 50 17 51 36 30 5 7 1994 748.92 225.22 271.05 90.95 365.60 321.96 14 54 17 82 42 38 2 7 1995 430.16 533.12 1,067.42 226.19 895.48 964.97 29 46 14 60 26 29 3 9 1996 951.24 467.06 938.86 271.23 901.03 548.11 18 36 13 44 14 24 2 14 1997 907.12 187.74 304.04 106.40 629.67 519.95 20 45 30 57 22 28 5 36 1998 1,092.47 457.57 807.58 307.62 822.68 799.26 17 21 26 24 19 15 13 53 1999 1,567.63 402.96 879.16 172.20 965.17 730.68 11 28 10 31 16 18 9 33 2000 320.95 207.54 415.45 227.16 810.79 373.92 28 30 29 27 18 28 11 23 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C10. Annual Methamphetamine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases between 10 and 100 pure 

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number 

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE 

1981 30.96 - 105.34 151.93 - 157.81 15 - 55 61 - 58 1 0 1982 320.71 135.48 178.97 139.37 169.67 222.54 45 64 41 70 46 46 1 1 1983 106.97 141.88 172.37 116.45 267.14 175.88 18 75 41 68 36 63 1 1 1984 - 133.01 157.39 128.83 322.30 146.63 - 62 39 73 20 66 0 2 11985 195.72 134.47 126.91 162.93 201.27 237.97 55 68 50 57 44 54 1 1 1986 403.78 - 152.78 83.94 299.17 176.34 39 - 43 71 26 56 1 0 1987 210.72 175.21 202.16 84.53 - 156.11 37 47 36 66 - 52 0 1 1988 110.26 114.62 152.88 75.23 264.02 149.30 62 68 29 67 23 55 1 2 1989 - 100.21 269.01 94.72 - 88.30 - 57 18 70 - 64 0 5 1990 218.61 176.60 234.12 92.88 - 259.54 33 37 25 43 - 31 1 3 1991 257.93 206.27 168.16 181.32 - 327.81 21 53 22 58 - 19 0 2 1992 134.91 180.49 263.45 86.06 - 201.66 54 50 19 68 - 37 1 2 1993 129.20 74.49 183.92 63.94 96.33 171.58 75 58 27 79 45 47 1 4 1994 114.73 56.04 127.95 39.63 179.74 103.05 60 79 51 87 55 70 0 7 1995 115.12 88.20 218.58 101.60 309.56 138.71 62 59 30 64 28 45 1 11 11996 227.53 77.87 219.91 101.32 184.02 122.94 25 56 22 54 48 55 0 11 1997 176.86 70.68 154.14 61.92 128.70 124.11 49 51 35 61 50 44 3 30 1998 238.56 145.95 211.34 107.80 222.78 187.11 22 32 25 28 25 25 2 21 1999 - 118.89 246.75 87.95 196.24 152.71 - 24 16 31 28 20 0 21 2000 179.53 98.29 199.76 87.20 178.40 103.72 37 37 16 28 17 29 5 12 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C11. Annual Methamphetamine Price and Purity for Six Regions for Purchases > 100 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Purity (%) Number 

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE 

1981 33.33 - 62.21 - - - 14 - 79 - - - 0 0 1982 - - - 82.01 - - - - - 51 - - 0 0 1983 - - 50.47 98.47 - - - - 72 61 - - 0 0 1984 - 59.61 101.36 138.20 - - - 79 48 60 - - 0 1 1985 - - 81.39 88.40 288.64 - - - 42 68 20 - 0 0 1986 27.51 129.61 - 40.92 38.73 73.62 66 51 - 95 81 42 1 0 1987 - - - 44.58 - 38.86 - - - 83 - 90 0 0 1988 - 45.06 126.04 27.74 - 64.52 - 91 18 146 - 72 0 1 1989 59.27 18.79 117.90 28.15 - 26.64 76 77 27 88 - 98 1 0 1990 - 78.03 - 59.94 - - - 66 - 50 - - 0 0 1991 - 49.79 - 125.56 - - - 82 - 73 - - 0 1 1992 - 23.48 107.48 37.17 - 87.61 - 90 25 79 - 54 0 1 1993 - 53.40 - 28.74 - 100.78 - 77 - 85 - 57 0 1 1994 - 34.51 75.95 23.50 - 32.67 - 85 27 91 - 89 0 3 1995 - 36.57 - 21.77 43.18 49.06 - 78 - 81 93 73 0 4 1996 - 81.47 86.37 42.03 51.49 57.81 - 33 28 70 95 59 0 3 1997 - 30.64 61.24 28.28 55.83 30.47 - 64 34 72 45 63 0 2 1998 - 51.08 71.94 56.10 108.42 73.74 - 36 36 30 46 36 0 2 1999 - 68.16 - 42.15 - 62.66 - 26 - 44 - 21 0 1 2000 - 19.61 - 47.03 88.36 37.97 - 86 - 47 31 54 0 1 

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C12. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases < 10 pure gram

Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC

1981 - - - 12.31 7.94 9.47 0 0 0 3 35 01982 1.81 - 4.70 18.71 12.61 7.91 0 0 0 2 13 11983 11.78 - 12.95 8.52 23.37 5.90 1 0 0 6 6 31984 6.94 - 3.82 10.45 19.27 6.49 2 0 0 7 16 11985 8.20 - - 7.68 24.85 11.78 2 0 0 4 14 01986 - 9.60 - 26.50 26.35 18.15 0 1 0 2 10 01987 - 11.26 9.66 6.41 22.00 14.57 0 0 1 1 7 71988 11.45 - - 11.04 15.92 7.90 1 0 0 1 7 21989 7.16 - 13.01 31.81 14.26 8.26 1 0 1 2 6 31990 15.78 9.58 13.48 15.12 17.87 6.06 0 0 0 0 9 11991 17.78 30.28 12.06 7.18 18.17 26.06 1 1 1 0 6 11992 12.48 13.07 21.88 12.76 18.49 11.60 2 0 1 1 11 21993 19.58 21.74 11.34 17.82 17.07 30.34 1 2 1 1 25 11994 4.45 26.61 - 3.55 10.60 13.33 0 2 0 1 9 21995 9.16 12.84 9.46 6.33 9.20 7.52 0 2 1 5 11 21996 5.04 8.80 7.24 11.08 8.40 9.80 2 1 1 2 12 21997 6.52 10.12 17.15 11.45 4.89 10.17 1 1 1 11 19 11998 5.03 12.68 13.30 - 6.59 4.75 1 1 1 0 22 11999 7.76 6.83 9.40 11.21 6.51 8.25 2 1 2 2 47 12000 6.19 19.59 10.52 - 6.83 - 1 2 1 0 22 0

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C13. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases between 10 and 100 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC

1981 2.69 4.46 2.64 3.05 3.25 2.92 0 1 0 2 11 11982 7.39 - 5.48 8.06 2.76 4.41 2 0 1 1 3 31983 8.52 - 13.57 7.03 4.98 5.82 2 0 0 2 3 51984 5.50 - 3.19 5.49 3.78 3.82 4 0 1 2 2 21985 5.04 - - 4.75 5.26 4.67 1 0 0 3 3 11986 7.57 9.83 - 3.15 7.61 8.66 1 0 0 1 1 11987 5.08 - 8.95 10.29 10.66 6.83 1 0 0 2 1 21988 9.13 - - 8.33 8.54 5.27 0 0 0 3 5 31989 7.53 - 4.63 11.30 9.31 4.49 1 0 0 2 1 11990 9.94 6.36 7.84 11.57 7.04 - 2 0 2 1 2 01991 8.90 5.29 14.40 39.81 4.48 8.57 2 0 7 1 0 21992 7.73 6.28 12.07 7.49 9.10 8.46 1 2 2 0 1 21993 10.93 - 12.62 23.57 12.77 12.74 2 0 1 0 5 11994 - 8.27 13.01 7.95 7.57 5.64 0 1 0 6 2 11995 8.75 6.47 - 2.74 6.49 5.44 0 1 0 3 6 11996 7.00 6.08 7.19 1.96 8.45 4.99 1 2 2 1 5 21997 4.86 6.58 - 5.86 4.21 4.36 0 7 0 2 5 31998 7.98 6.89 6.29 5.44 4.85 4.03 1 3 2 1 3 11999 10.41 3.88 11.10 - 5.75 8.13 2 2 1 0 3 22000 5.44 3.53 2.04 4.37 3.67 - 2 2 1 2 2 0

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C14. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases between 100 and 1000 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC

1981 1.68 - - 4.79 1.94 1.57 1 0 0 1 1 11982 1.85 3.76 1.58 2.82 2.03 2.22 0 0 1 0 3 11983 4.07 2.47 3.84 4.28 3.44 2.74 1 0 1 0 2 21984 2.99 1.92 2.56 3.19 3.71 2.78 3 0 1 0 1 11985 2.61 - - 2.64 3.17 1.55 3 0 0 1 2 31986 2.86 - - 4.22 3.94 2.93 2 0 0 0 1 11987 4.29 2.10 5.96 3.79 - 3.90 7 0 1 1 0 31988 3.03 6.53 4.58 3.14 5.04 2.60 1 1 1 1 1 21989 3.03 2.35 4.33 2.36 3.31 2.90 1 1 1 1 1 41990 5.69 1.85 6.42 3.24 4.83 4.24 5 0 3 1 1 11991 5.17 2.93 5.70 3.38 5.25 4.19 4 1 5 1 2 21992 4.36 5.72 5.53 7.62 4.09 5.33 3 3 6 2 2 51993 5.58 3.97 5.70 2.04 4.43 3.30 4 2 1 1 2 31994 4.67 3.48 3.05 2.06 3.77 2.90 2 1 7 2 2 11995 2.82 3.01 3.27 0.93 5.24 2.64 1 2 4 1 5 31996 3.36 2.61 3.58 0.83 2.92 1.97 2 2 5 1 6 31997 3.05 2.03 2.87 0.77 2.64 2.63 6 2 3 0 7 51998 2.96 4.84 2.72 3.40 3.53 2.83 6 1 7 1 7 21999 2.64 1.72 2.71 1.64 2.74 2.30 2 3 5 2 6 22000 2.27 1.58 3.32 1.32 2.44 1.42 7 4 3 1 8 3

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab
Table C15. Annual Marijuana Price for Six Regions for Purchases > 1000 pure grams

Price (2000$/pure gram) Number of Cases

EC MTN NE PAC SE WC EC MTN NE PAC SE WC

1981 - - - - 0.94 0.96 0 0 0 0 1 11982 1.50 - - - 2.65 - 4 0 0 0 0 01983 - - - - - 2.37 0 0 0 0 0 01984 - - 7.57 - 1.27 1.64 0 0 0 0 0 11985 - - 2.25 - 3.50 2.15 0 0 1 0 0 11986 - 1.31 - - 2.43 - 0 0 0 0 0 01987 2.08 - - 1.92 - - 0 0 0 1 0 01988 - - - - 3.21 2.00 0 0 0 0 0 11989 2.59 1.20 3.86 - 3.11 1.72 0 1 1 0 0 11990 3.35 - 4.95 - 2.82 1.30 0 0 1 0 0 11991 6.30 2.36 4.09 5.36 1.27 2.18 1 1 1 0 0 01992 1.13 10.38 4.83 - 4.03 1.25 0 1 1 0 1 11993 4.47 3.02 - 0.96 - 1.13 0 0 0 1 0 11994 1.60 1.48 - 1.19 2.73 1.49 0 1 0 0 1 11995 2.75 1.78 2.60 2.27 2.34 1.50 1 4 2 1 0 11996 1.72 1.56 3.39 - 2.50 1.25 0 1 1 0 1 11997 1.88 1.93 2.03 1.39 1.12 1.35 0 1 1 2 1 11998 - 1.53 1.84 1.06 1.64 0.88 0 1 1 1 0 11999 1.24 1.74 2.04 0.96 2.14 - 1 0 0 1 1 02000 1.57 0.95 - 0.89 - - 1 2 0 1 0 0

Regions: EC = East Central SE = Southeast NE = Northeast

WC = West Central MTN = Mountain PAC = Pacific

Source: System To Retrieve Information on Drug Evidence (STRIDE) Prepared by: Ab