II

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1075

To extend and modify the Drug-Free Communities Support Program, to

authorize a National Community Antidrug Coalition Institute, and for

other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 20, 2001

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Mr. BIDEN, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, and Mr.

DASCHLE) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To extend and modify the Drug-Free Communities Support

Program, to authorize a National Community Antidrug

Coalition Institute, and for other purposes.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUP4 PORT PROGRAM.

5 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following find6 ings:

7 (1) In the next 15 years, the youth population

8 in the United States will grow by 21 percent, adding

9 6,500,000 youth to the population of the United
2

•S 1075 IS

1 States. Even if drug use rates remain constant,

2 there will be a huge surge in drug-related problems,

3 such as academic failure, drug-related violence, and

4 HIV incidence, simply due to this population in5 crease.

6 (2) According to the 1994–1996 National

7 Household Survey, 60 percent of students age 12 to

8 17 who frequently cut classes and who reported de9 linquent behavior in the past 6 months used mari10 juana 52 days or more in the previous year.

11 (3) The 2000 Washington Kids Count survey

12 conducted by the University of Washington reported

13 that students whose peers have little or no involve14 ment with drinking and drugs have higher math and

15 reading scores than students whose peers had low

16 level drinking or drug use.

17 (4) Substance abuse prevention works. In 1999,

18 only 10 percent of teens saw marijuana users as

19 popular, compared to 17 percent in 1998 and 19

20 percent in 1997. The rate of past-month use of any

21 drug among 12 to 17 year olds declined 26 percent

22 between 1997 and 1999. Marijuana use for sixth

23 through eighth graders is at the lowest point in 5

24 years, as is use of cocaine, inhalants, and

25 hallucinogens.
3

•S 1075 IS

1 (5) Community Anti-Drug Coalitions through2 out the United States are successfully developing

3 and implementing comprehensive, long-term strate4 gies to reduce substance abuse among youth on a

5 sustained basis. For example:

6 (A) The Boston Coalition brought college

7 and university presidents together to create the

8 Cooperative Agreement on Underage Drinking.

9 This agreement represents the first coordinated

10 effort of Boston’s many institutions of higher

11 education to address issues such as binge drink12 ing, underage drinking, and changing the

13 norms surrounding alcohol abuse that exist on

14 college and university campuses.

15 (B) The Miami Coalition used a three-part

16 strategy to decrease the percentage of high

17 school seniors who reported using marijuana at

18 least once during the most recent 30-day pe19 riod. The development of a media strategy, the

20 creation of a network of prevention agencies,

21 and discussions with high school students about

22 the dangers of marijuana all contributed to a

23 decrease in the percentage of seniors who re24 ported using marijuana from more than 22 per25 cent in 1995 to 9 percent in 1997. The Miami
4

•S 1075 IS

1 Coalition was able to achieve these results while

2 national rates of marijuana use were increasing.

3 (C) The Nashville Prevention Partnership

4 worked with elementary and middle school chil5 dren in an attempt to influence them toward

6 positive life goals and discourage them from

7 using substances. The Partnership targeted an

8 area in East Nashville and created after school

9 programs, mentoring opportunities, attendance

10 initiatives, and safe passages to and from

11 school. Attendance and test scores increased as

12 a result of the program.

13 (D) At a youth-led town meeting sponsored

14 by the Bering Strait Community Partnership in

15 Nome, Alaska, youth identified a need for a

16 safe, substance-free space. With help from a va17 riety of community partners, the Partnership

18 staff and youth members created the Java Hut,

19 a substance-free coffeehouse designed for youth.

20 The Java Hut is helping to change norms in

21 the community by providing a fun, youth22 friendly atmosphere and activities that are not

23 centered around alcohol or marijuana.

24 (E) Portland’s Regional Drug Initiative

25 (RDI) has promoted the establishment of drug-
5

•S 1075 IS

1 free workplaces among the city’s large and

2 small employers. More than 3,000 employers

3 have attended an RDI training session, and of

4 those, 92 percent have instituted drug-free

5 workplace policies. As a result, there has been

6 a 5.5 percent decrease in positive workplace

7 drug tests.

8 (F) San Antonio Fighting Back worked to

9 increase the age at which youth first used ille10 gal substances. Research suggests that the later

11 the age of first use, the lower the risk that a

12 young person will become a regular substance

13 abuser. As a result, the age of first illegal drug

14 use increased from 9.4 years in 1992 to 13.5

15 years in 1997.

16 (G) In 1990, multiple data sources con17 firmed a trend of increased alcohol use by teen18 agers in the Troy community. Using its ‘‘mul19 tiple strategies over multiple sectors’’ approach,

20 the Troy Coalition worked with parents, physi21 cians, students, coaches, and others to address

22 this problem from several angles. As a result,

23 the rate of twelfth grade students who had con24 sumed alcohol in the past month decreased

25 from 62.1 percent to 53.3 percent between
6

•S 1075 IS

1 1991 and 1998, and the rate of eighth grade

2 students decreased from 26.3 percent to 17.4

3 percent. The Troy Coalition believes that this

4 decline represents not only a change in behavior

5 on the part of students, but also a change in

6 the norms of the community.

7 (H) In 2000, the Coalition for a Drug8 Free Greater Cincinnati surveyed more than

9 47,000 local seventh through twelfth graders.

10 The results provided evidence that the Coali11 tion’s initiatives are working. For the first time

12 in a decade, teen drug use in Greater Cin13 cinnati appears to be leveling off. The data col14 lected from the survey has served as a tool to

15 strengthen relationships between schools and

16 communities, as well as facilitate the growth of

17 anti-drug coalitions in communities where they

18 had not existed.

19 (6) Despite these successes, drug use continues

20 to be a serious problem facing communities across

21 the United States. For example:

22 (A) According to the Pulse Check: Trends

23 in Drug Abuse Mid-Year 2000 report—

24 (i) crack and powder cocaine remains

25 the most serious drug problem;
7

•S 1075 IS

1 (ii) marijuana remains the most wide2 ly available illicit drug, and its potency is

3 on the rise;

4 (iii) treatment sources report an in5 crease in admissions with marijuana as the

6 primary drug of abuse—and adolescents

7 outnumber other age groups entering

8 treatment for marijuana;

9 (iv) 80 percent of Pulse Check sources

10 reported increased availability of club

11 drugs, with ecstasy (MDMA) and ketamine

12 the most widely cited club drugs and seven

13 sources reporting that powder cocaine is

14 being used as a club drug by young adults;

15 (v) ecstasy abuse and trafficking is

16 expanding, no longer confined to the

17 ‘‘rave’’ scene;

18 (vi) the sale and use of club drugs has

19 grown from nightclubs and raves to high

20 schools, the streets, neighborhoods, open

21 venues, and younger ages;

22 (vii) ecstasy users often are unknow23 ingly purchasing adulterated tablets or

24 some other substance sold as MDMA; and
8

•S 1075 IS

1 (viii) along with reports of increased

2 heroin snorting as a route of administra3 tion for initiates, there is also an increase

4 in injecting initiates and the negative

5 health consequences associated with injec6 tion (for example, increases in HIV/AIDS

7 and Hepatitis C) suggesting that there is

8 a generational forgetting of the dangers of

9 injection of the drug.

10 (B) The 2000 Parent’s Resource Institute

11 for Drug Education study reported that 23.6

12 percent of children in the sixth through twelfth

13 grades used illicit drugs in the past year. The

14 same study found that monthly usage among

15 this group was 15.3 percent.

16 (C) According to the 2000 Monitoring the

17 Future study, the use of ecstasy among eighth

18 graders increased from 1.7 percent in 1999 to

19 3.1 percent in 2000, among tenth graders from

20 4.4 percent to 5.4 percent, and from 5.6 per21 cent to 8.2 percent among twelfth graders.

22 (D) A 1999 Mellman Group study found

23 that—
9

•S 1075 IS

1 (i) 56 percent of the population in the

2 United States believed that drug use was

3 increasing in 1999;

4 (ii) 92 percent of the population

5 viewed illegal drug use as a serious prob6 lem in the United States; and

7 (iii) 73 percent of the population

8 viewed illegal drug use as a serious prob9 lem in their communities.

10 (7) According to the 2001 report of the Na11 tional Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at

12 Columbia University entitled ‘‘Shoveling Up: The

13 Impact of Substance Abuse on State Budgets’’,

14 using the most conservative assumption, in 1998

15 States spent $77,900,000,000 to shovel up the

16 wreckage of substance abuse, only $3,000,000,000

17 to prevent and treat the problem and $433,000,000

18 for alcohol and tobacco regulation and compliance.

19 This $77,900,000,000 burden was distributed as fol20 lows:

21 (A) $30,700,000,000 in the justice system

22 (77 percent of justice spending).

23 (B) $16,500,000,000 in education costs

24 (10 percent of education spending).
10

•S 1075 IS

1 (C) $15,200,000,000 in health costs (25

2 percent of health spending).

3 (D) $7,700,000,000 in child and family as4 sistance (32 percent of child and family assist5 ance spending).

6 (E) $5,900,000,000 in mental health and

7 developmental disabilities (31 percent of mental

8 health spending).

9 (F) $1,500,000,000 in public safety (26

10 percent of public safety spending) and

11 $400,000,000 for the state workforce.

12 (8) Intergovernmental cooperation and coordi13 nation through national, State, and local or tribal

14 leadership and partnerships are critical to facilitate

15 the reduction of substance abuse among youth in

16 communities across the United States.

17 (9) Substance abuse is perceived as a much

18 greater problem nationally than at the community

19 level. According to a 2001 study sponsored by The

20 Pew Charitable Trusts, between 1994 and 2000—

21 (A) there was a 43 percent increase in the

22 percentage of Americans who felt progress was

23 being made in the war on drugs at the commu24 nity level;
11

•S 1075 IS

1 (B) only 9 percent of Americans say drug

2 abuse is a ‘‘crisis’’ in their neighborhood, com3 pared to 27 percent who say this about the na4 tion; and

5 (C) the percentage of those who felt we

6 lost ground in the war on drugs on a commu7 nity level fell by more than a quarter, from 51

8 percent in 1994 to 37 percent in 2000.

9 (b) EXTENSION AND INCREASE OF PROGRAM.—Sec10 tion 1024(a) of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of

11 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1524(a)) is amended—

12 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph

13 (4); and

14 (2) by striking paragraph (5) and inserting the

15 following new paragraphs:

16 ‘‘(5) $50,600,000 for fiscal year 2002;

17 ‘‘(6) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;

18 ‘‘(7) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;

19 ‘‘(8) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;

20 ‘‘(9) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and

21 ‘‘(10) $75,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.’’.

22 (c) EXTENSION OF LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE

23 COSTS.—Section 1024(b) of that Act (21 U.S.C. 1524(b))

24 is amended by striking paragraph (5) and inserting the

25 following new paragraph (5):
12

•S 1075 IS

1 ‘‘(5) 8 percent for each of fiscal years 2002

2 through 2007.’’.

3 (d) ADDITIONAL GRANTS.—Section 1032(b) of that

4 Act (21 U.S.C. 1533(b)) is amended by adding at the end

5 the following new paragraph (3):

6 ‘‘(3) ADDITIONAL GRANTS.—

7 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subpara8 graph (F), the Administrator may award an ad9 ditional grant under this paragraph to an eligi10 ble coalition awarded a grant under paragraph

11 (1) or (2) for any first fiscal year after the end

12 of the 4-year period following the period of the

13 initial grant under paragraph (1) or (2), as the

14 case may be.

15 ‘‘(B) SCOPE OF GRANTS.—A coalition

16 awarded a grant under paragraph (1) or (2),

17 including a renewal grant under such para18 graph, may not be awarded another grant

19 under such paragraph, and is eligible for an ad20 ditional grant under this section only under this

21 paragraph.

22 ‘‘(C) NO PRIORITY FOR APPLICATIONS.—

23 The Administrator may not afford a higher pri24 ority in the award of an additional grant under

25 this paragraph than the Administrator would
13

•S 1075 IS

1 afford the applicant for the grant if the appli2 cant were submitting an application for an ini3 tial grant under paragraph (1) or (2) rather

4 than an application for a grant under this para5 graph.

6 ‘‘(D) RENEWAL GRANTS.—Subject to sub7 paragraph (F), the Administrator may award a

8 renewal grant to a grant recipient under this

9 paragraph for each of the fiscal years of the 4-

10 fiscal year period following the fiscal year for

11 which the initial additional grant under sub12 paragraph (A) is awarded in an amount not to

13 exceed amounts as follows:

14 ‘‘(i) For the first and second fiscal

15 years of that 4-fiscal year period, the

16 amount equal to 80 percent of the non17 Federal funds, including in-kind contribu18 tions, raised by the coalition for the appli19 cable fiscal year.

20 ‘‘(ii) For the second, third, and fourth

21 fiscal years of that 4-fiscal year period, the

22 amount equal to 67 percent of the non23 Federal funds, including in-kind contribu24 tions, raised by the coalition for the appli25 cable fiscal year.
14

•S 1075 IS

1 ‘‘(E) SUSPENSION.—If a grant recipient

2 under this paragraph fails to continue to meet

3 the criteria specified in subsection (a), the Ad4 ministrator may suspend the grant, after pro5 viding written notice to the grant recipient and

6 an opportunity to appeal.

7 ‘‘(F) LIMITATION.—The amount of a grant

8 award under this paragraph may not exceed

9 $100,000 for a fiscal year.’’.

10 (e) DATA COLLECTION AND DISSEMINATION.—Sec11 tion 1033(b) of that Act (21 U.S.C. 1533(b)) is amended

12 by adding at the end the following new paragraph:

13 ‘‘(3) CONSULTATION.—The Administrator shall

14 carry out activities under this subsection in consulta15 tion with the Advisory Commission and the National

16 Community Antidrug Coalition Institute.’’.

17 (f) LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR

18 EVALUATION OF PROGRAM.—Section 1033(b) of that Act,

19 as amended by subsection (e) of this section, is further

20 amended by adding at the end the following new para21 graph:

22 ‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS

23 FOR EVALUATION OF PROGRAM.—Amounts for ac24 tivities under paragraph (2)(B) may not be derived

25 from amounts under section 1024(a), except for
15

•S 1075 IS

1 amounts that are available under section 1024(b) for

2 administrative costs.’’.

3 SEC. 2. SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS FOR COALITION MEN4 TORING ACTIVITIES UNDER DRUG-FREE COM5 MUNITIES SUPPORT PROGRAM.

6 Subchapter I of chapter 2 of the National Narcotics

7 Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is

8 amended by adding at the end the following new section:

9 ‘‘SEC. 1035. SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS FOR COALITION MEN10 TORING ACTIVITIES.

11 ‘‘(a) AUTHORITY TO MAKE GRANTS.—As part of the

12 program established under section 1031, the Director may

13 award an initial grant under this subsection, and renewal

14 grants under subsection (f), to any coalition awarded a

15 grant under section 1032 that meets the criteria specified

16 in subsection (d) in order to fund coalition mentoring ac17 tivities by such coalition in support of the program.

18 ‘‘(b) TREATMENT WITH OTHER GRANTS.—

19 ‘‘(1) SUPPLEMENT.—A grant awarded to a coa20 lition under this section is in addition to any grant

21 awarded to the coalition under section 1032.

22 ‘‘(2) REQUIREMENT FOR BASIC GRANT.—A coa23 lition may not be awarded a grant under this section

24 for a fiscal year unless the coalition was awarded a
16

•S 1075 IS

1 grant or renewal grant under section 1032(b) for

2 that fiscal year.

3 ‘‘(c) APPLICATION.—A coalition seeking a grant

4 under this section shall submit to the Administrator an

5 application for the grant in such form and manner as the

6 Administrator may require.

7 ‘‘(d) CRITERIA.—A coalition meets the criteria speci8 fied in this subsection if the coalition—

9 ‘‘(1) has been in existence for at least 5 years;

10 ‘‘(2) has achieved, by or through its own ef11 forts, measurable results in the prevention and treat12 ment of substance abuse among youth;

13 ‘‘(3) has staff or members willing to serve as

14 mentors for persons seeking to start or expand the

15 activities of other coalitions in the prevention and

16 treatment of substance abuse;

17 ‘‘(4) has demonstrable support from some mem18 bers of the community in which the coalition men19 toring activities to be supported by the grant under

20 this section are to be carried out; and

21 ‘‘(5) submits to the Administrator a detailed

22 plan for the coalition mentoring activities to be sup23 ported by the grant under this section.

24 ‘‘(e) USE OF GRANT FUNDS.—A coalition awarded

25 a grant under this section shall use the grant amount for
17

•S 1075 IS

1 mentoring activities to support and encourage the develop2 ment of new, self-supporting community coalitions that

3 are focused on the prevention and treatment of substance

4 abuse in such new coalitions’ communities. The mentoring

5 coalition shall encourage such development in accordance

6 with the plan submitted by the mentoring coalition under

7 subsection (d)(5).

8 ‘‘(f) RENEWAL GRANTS.—The Administrator may

9 make a renewal grant to any coalition awarded a grant

10 under subsection (a), or a previous renewal grant under

11 this subsection, if the coalition, at the time of application

12 for such renewal grant—

13 ‘‘(1) continues to meet the criteria specified in

14 subsection (d); and

15 ‘‘(2) has made demonstrable progress in the de16 velopment of one or more new, self-supporting com17 munity coalitions that are focused on the prevention

18 and treatment of substance abuse.

19 ‘‘(g) GRANT AMOUNTS.—

20 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraphs (2)

21 and (3), the total amount of grants awarded to a co22 alition under this section for a fiscal year may not

23 exceed the amount of non-Federal funds raised by

24 the coalition, including in-kind contributions, for

25 that fiscal year.
18

•S 1075 IS

1 ‘‘(2) INITIAL GRANTS.—The amount of the ini2 tial grant awarded to a coalition under subsection

3 (a) may not exceed $75,000.

4 ‘‘(3) RENEWAL GRANTS.—The total amount of

5 renewal grants awarded to a coalition under sub6 section (f) for any fiscal year may not exceed

7 $75,000.

8 ‘‘(h) FISCAL YEAR LIMITATION ON AMOUNT AVAIL9 ABLE FOR GRANTS.—The total amount available for

10 grants under this section, including renewal grants under

11 subsection (f), in any fiscal year may not exceed the

12 amount equal to five percent of the amount authorized to

13 be appropriated by section 1024(a) for that fiscal year.’’.

14 SEC. 3. FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF ADVISORY COMMISSION

15 ON DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES.

16 Section 1048 of the National Narcotics Leadership

17 Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1548) is amended by striking

18 ‘‘2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2007’’.

19 SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION FOR NATIONAL COMMUNITY ANTI20 DRUG COALITION INSTITUTE.

21 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the Office of Na22 tional Drug Control Policy may, using amounts authorized

23 to be appropriated by subsection (d), make a grant to an

24 eligible organization to provide for the establishment of

25 a National Community Antidrug Coalition Institute.
19

•S 1075 IS

1 (b) ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.—An organization eli2 gible for the grant under subsection (a) is any national

3 nonprofit organization that represents, provides technical

4 assistance and training to, and has special expertise and

5 broad, national-level experience in community antidrug

6 coalitions under section 1032 of the National Narcotics

7 Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1532).

8 (c) USE OF GRANT AMOUNT.—The organization re9 ceiving the grant under subsection (a) shall establish a

10 National Community Antidrug Coalition Institute to—

11 (1) provide education, training, and technical

12 assistance for coalition leaders and community

13 teams;

14 (2) develop and disseminate evaluation tools,

15 mechanisms, and measures to better assess and doc16 ument coalition performance measures and out17 comes; and

18 (3) bridge the gap between research and prac19 tice by translating knowledge from research into

20 practical information.

21 (d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is

22 authorized to be appropriated for purposes of activities

23 under this section, including the grant under subsection

24 (a), amounts as follows:
20

•S 1075 IS

1 (1) For each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003,

2 $2,000,000.

3 (2) For each of fiscal years 2004, 2005, 2006,

4 and 2007, such sums as may be necessary for such

5 activities.

Æ