H. R. 2291
One Hundred Seventh Congress
of the
United States of America
AT THE FIRST SESSION
Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
the third day of January, two thousand and one
An Act
To extend the authorization of the Drug-Free Communities Support Program for
an additional 5 years, to authorize a National Community Antidrug Coalition
Institute, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUP-
PORT PROGRAM.
(a) FINDINGS.—Congress makes the following findings:
(1) In the next 15 years, the youth population in the United
States will grow by 21 percent, adding 6,500,000 youth to
the population of the United States. Even if drug use rates
remain constant, there will be a huge surge in drug-related
problems, such as academic failure, drug-related violence, and
HIV incidence, simply due to this population increase.
(2) According to the 1994–1996 National Household Survey,
60 percent of students age 12 to 17 who frequently cut classes
and who reported delinquent behavior in the past 6 months
used marijuana 52 days or more in the previous year.
(3) The 2000 Washington Kids Count survey conducted
by the University of Washington reported that students whose
peers have little or no involvement with drinking and drugs
have higher math and reading scores than students whose
peers had low level drinking or drug use.
(4) Substance abuse prevention works. In 1999, only 10
percent of teens saw marijuana users as popular, compared
to 17 percent in 1998 and 19 percent in 1997. The rate of
past-month use of any drug among 12- to 17-year-olds declined
26 percent between 1997 and 1999. Marijuana use for sixth
through eighth graders is at the lowest point in 5 years, as
is use of cocaine, inhalants, and hallucinogens.
(5) Community Anti-Drug Coalitions throughout the United
States are successfully developing and implementing com-
prehensive, long-term strategies to reduce substance abuse
among youth on a sustained basis. For example:
(A) The Boston Coalition brought college and university
presidents together to create the Cooperative Agreement
on Underage Drinking. This agreement represents the first
coordinated effort of Boston’s many institutions of higher
education to address issues such as binge drinking, under-
age drinking, and changing the norms surrounding alcohol
abuse that exist on college and university campuses.
(B) In 2000, the Coalition for a Drug-Free Greater
Cincinnati surveyed more than 47,000 local students in
H. R. 2291—2
grades 7 through 12. The results provided evidence that
the Coalition’s initiatives are working. For the first time
in a decade, teen drug use in Greater Cincinnati appears
to be leveling off. The data collected from the survey has
served as a tool to strengthen relationships between schools
and communities, as well as facilitate the growth of anti-
drug coalitions in communities where such coalitions had
not existed.
(C) The Miami Coalition used a three-part strategy
to decrease the percentage of high school seniors who
reported using marijuana at least once during the most
recent 30-day period. The development of a media strategy,
the creation of a network of prevention agencies, and
discussions with high school students about the dangers
of marijuana all contributed to a decrease in the percentage
of seniors who reported using marijuana from over 22
percent in 1995 to 9 percent in 1997. The Miami Coalition
was able to achieve these results while national rates of
marijuana use were increasing.
(D) The Nashville Prevention Partnership worked with
elementary and middle school children in an attempt to
influence them toward positive life goals and discourage
them from using substances. The Partnership targeted an
area in East Nashville and created after school programs,
mentoring opportunities, attendance initiatives, and safe
passages to and from school. Attendance and test scores
increased as a result of the program.
(E) At a youth-led town meeting sponsored by the
Bering Strait Community Partnership in Nome, Alaska,
youth identified a need for a safe, substance-free space.
With help from a variety of community partners, the Part-
nership staff and youth members created the Java Hut,
a substance-free coffeehouse designed for youth. The Java
Hut is helping to change norms in the community by pro-
viding a fun, youth-friendly atmosphere and activities that
are not centered around alcohol or marijuana.
(F) Portland’s Regional Drug Initiative (RDI) has pro-
moted the establishment of drug-free workplaces among
the city’s large and small employers. Over 3,000 employers
have attended an RDI training session, and of those, 92
percent have instituted drug-free workplace policies. As
a result, there has been a 5.5 percent decrease in positive
workplace drug tests.
(G) San Antonio Fighting Back worked to increase
the age at which youth first used illegal substances.
Research suggests that the later the age of first use, the
lower the risk that a young person will become a regular
substance abuser. As a result, the age of first illegal drug
use increased from 9.4 years in 1992 to 13.5 years in
1997.
(H) In 1990, multiple data sources confirmed a trend
of increased alcohol use by teenagers in the Troy commu-
nity. Using its ‘‘multiple strategies over multiple sectors’’
approach, the Troy Coalition worked with parents, physi-
cians, students, coaches, and others to address this problem
from several angles. As a result, the rate of twelfth grade
students who had consumed alcohol in the past month
H. R. 2291—3
decreased from 62.1 percent to 53.3 percent between 1991
and 1998, and the rate of eighth grade students decreased
from 26.3 percent to 17.4 percent. The Troy Coalition
believes that this decline represents not only a change
in behavior on the part of students, but also a change
in the norms of the community.
(6) Despite these successes, drug use continues to be a
serious problem facing communities across the United States.
For example:
(A) According to the Pulse Check: Trends in Drug
Abuse Mid-Year 2000 report—
(i) crack and powder cocaine remains the most
serious drug problem;
(ii) marijuana remains the most widely available
illicit drug, and its potency is on the rise;
(iii) treatment sources report an increase in admis-
sions with marijuana as the primary drug of abuse—
and adolescents outnumber other age groups entering
treatment for marijuana;
(iv) 80 percent of Pulse Check sources reported
increased availability of club drugs, with ecstasy
(MDMA) and ketamine the most widely cited club
drugs and seven sources reporting that powder cocaine
is being used as a club drug by young adults;
(v) ecstasy abuse and trafficking is expanding, no
longer confined to the ‘‘rave’’ scene;
(vi) the sale and use of club drugs has grown
from nightclubs and raves to high schools, the streets,
neighborhoods, open venues, and younger ages;
(vii) ecstasy users often are unknowingly pur-
chasing adulterated tablets or some other substance
sold as MDMA; and
(viii) along with reports of increased heroin
snorting as a route of administration for initiates, there
is also an increase in injecting initiates and the nega-
tive health consequences associated with injection (for
example, increases in HIV/AIDS and Hepatitis C) sug-
gesting that there is a generational forgetting of the
dangers of injection of the drug.
(B) The 2000 Parent’s Resource Institute for Drug Edu-
cation study reported that 23.6 percent of children in the
sixth through twelfth grades used illicit drugs in the past
year. The same study found that monthly usage among
this group was 15.3 percent.
(C) According to the 2000 Monitoring the Future study,
the use of ecstasy among eighth graders increased from
1.7 percent in 1999 to 3.1 percent in 2000, among tenth
graders from 4.4 percent to 5.4 percent, and from 5.6 per-
cent to 8.2 percent among twelfth graders.
(D) A 1999 Mellman Group study found that—
(i) 56 percent of the population in the United
States believed that drug use was increasing in 1999;
(ii) 92 percent of the population viewed illegal
drug use as a serious problem in the United States;
and
(iii) 73 percent of the population viewed illegal
drug use as a serious problem in their communities.
H. R. 2291—4
(7) According to the 2001 report of the National Center
on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University
entitled ‘‘Shoveling Up: The Impact of Substance Abuse on
State Budgets’’, using the most conservative assumption, in
1998 States spent $77,900,000,000 to shovel up the wreckage
of substance abuse, only $3,000,000,000 to prevent and treat
the problem and $433,000,000 for alcohol and tobacco regulation
and compliance. This $77,900,000,000 burden was distributed
as follows:
(A) $30,700,000,000 in the justice system (77 percent
of justice spending).
(B) $16,500,000,000 in education costs (10 percent of
education spending).
(C) $15,200,000,000 in health costs (25 percent of
health spending).
(D) $7,700,000,000 in child and family assistance (32
percent of child and family assistance spending).
(E) $5,900,000,000 in mental health and developmental
disabilities (31 percent of mental health spending).
(F) $1,500,000,000 in public safety (26 percent of public
safety spending) and $400,000,000 for the state workforce.
(8) 
Intergovernmental 
cooperation 
and 
coordination
through national, State, and local or tribal leadership and
partnerships are critical to facilitate the reduction of substance
abuse among youth in communities across the United States.
(9) Substance abuse is perceived as a much greater problem
nationally than at the community level. According to a 2001
study sponsored by The Pew Charitable Trusts, between 1994
and 2000—
(A) there was a 43 percent increase in the percentage
of Americans who felt progress was being made in the
war on drugs at the community level;
(B) only 9 percent of Americans say drug abuse is
a ‘‘crisis’’ in their neighborhood, compared to 27 percent
who say this about the nation; and
(C) the percentage of those who felt we lost ground
in the war on drugs on a community level fell by more
than a quarter, from 51 percent in 1994 to 37 percent
in 2000.
(b) EXTENSION AND INCREASE OF PROGRAM.—Section 1024(a)
of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1524(a))
is amended—
(1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of paragraph (4); and
(2) by striking paragraph (5) and inserting the following
new paragraphs:
‘‘(5) $50,600,000 for fiscal year 2002;
‘‘(6) $60,000,000 for fiscal year 2003;
‘‘(7) $70,000,000 for fiscal year 2004;
‘‘(8) $80,000,000 for fiscal year 2005;
‘‘(9) $90,000,000 for fiscal year 2006; and
‘‘(10) $99,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.’’.
(c) EXTENSION OF LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS.—Sec-
tion 1024(b) of that Act (21 U.S.C. 1524(b)) is amended by striking
paragraph (5) and inserting the following new paragraph (5):
‘‘(5) 6 percent for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2007.’’.
H. R. 2291—5
(d) ADDITIONAL GRANTS.—Section 1032(b) of that Act (21 U.S.C.
1533(b)) is amended by adding at the end the following new para-
graph (3):
‘‘(3) ADDITIONAL GRANTS.—
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—Subject to subparagraph (F), the
Administrator may award an additional grant under this
paragraph to an eligible coalition awarded a grant under
paragraph (1) or (2) for any first fiscal year after the
end of the 4-year period following the period of the initial
grant under paragraph (1) or (2), as the case may be.
‘‘(B) SCOPE OF GRANTS.—A coalition awarded a grant
under paragraph (1) or (2), including a renewal grant under
such paragraph, may not be awarded another grant under
such paragraph, and is eligible for an additional grant
under this section only under this paragraph.
‘‘(C) NO
PRIORITY
FOR
APPLICATIONS.—The Adminis-
trator may not afford a higher priority in the award of
an additional grant under this paragraph than the
Administrator would afford the applicant for the grant
if the applicant were submitting an application for an
initial grant under paragraph (1) or (2) rather than an
application for a grant under this paragraph.
‘‘(D) RENEWAL GRANTS.—Subject to subparagraph (F),
the Administrator may award a renewal grant to a grant
recipient under this paragraph for each of the fiscal years
of the 4-fiscal-year period following the fiscal year for which
the initial additional grant under subparagraph (A) is
awarded in an amount not to exceed amounts as follows:
‘‘(i) For the first and second fiscal years of that
4-fiscal-year period, the amount equal to 80 percent
of the non-Federal funds, including in-kind contribu-
tions, raised by the coalition for the applicable fiscal
year.
‘‘(ii) For the third and fourth fiscal years of that
4-fiscal-year period, the amount equal to 67 percent
of the non-Federal funds, including in-kind contribu-
tions, raised by the coalition for the applicable fiscal
year.
‘‘(E) SUSPENSION.—If a grant recipient under this para-
graph fails to continue to meet the criteria specified in
subsection (a), the Administrator may suspend the grant,
after providing written notice to the grant recipient and
an opportunity to appeal.
‘‘(F) LIMITATION.—The amount of a grant award under
this paragraph may not exceed $100,000 for a fiscal year.’’.
(e) DATA COLLECTION AND DISSEMINATION.—Section 1033(b) of
that Act (21 U.S.C. 1533(b)) is amended by adding at the end
the following new paragraph:
‘‘(3) CONSULTATION.—The Administrator shall carry out
activities under this subsection in consultation with the
Advisory Commission and the National Community Antidrug
Coalition Institute.’’.
(f) LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR EVALUATION
OF PROGRAM.—Section 1033(b) of that Act, as amended by sub-
section (e) of this section, is further amended by adding at the
end the following new paragraph:
H. R. 2291—6
‘‘(4) LIMITATION ON USE OF CERTAIN FUNDS FOR EVALUATION
OF PROGRAM.—Amounts for activities under paragraph (2)(B)
may not be derived from amounts under section 1024(a) except
for amounts that are available under section 1024(b) for
administrative costs.’’.
(g) TREATMENT OF FUNDS FOR COALITIONS REPRESENTING CER-
TAIN ORGANIZATIONS.—Section 1032 of that Act (21 U.S.C. 1532)
is further amended by adding at the end the following new sub-
section:
‘‘(c) TREATMENT OF FUNDS FOR COALITIONS REPRESENTING CER-
TAIN ORGANIZATIONS.—Funds appropriated for the substance abuse
activities of a coalition that includes a representative of the Bureau
of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, or a tribal government
agency with expertise in the field of substance abuse may be counted
as non-Federal funds raised by the coalition for purposes of this
section.’’.
(h) PRIORITY IN AWARDING GRANTS.—Section 1032 of that Act
(21 U.S.C. 1532) is further amended by adding at the end the
following new subsection:
‘‘(d) PRIORITY IN AWARDING GRANTS.—In awarding grants under
subsection (b)(1)(A)(i), priority shall be given to a coalition serving
economically disadvantaged areas.’’.
SEC. 2. SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS FOR COALITION MENTORING ACTIVI-
TIES UNDER DRUG-FREE COMMUNITIES SUPPORT PRO-
GRAM.
Subchapter I of chapter 2 of the National Narcotics Leadership
Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) is amended by adding at
the end the following new section:
‘‘SEC. 1035. SUPPLEMENTAL GRANTS FOR COALITION MENTORING
ACTIVITIES.
‘‘(a) AUTHORITY TO MAKE GRANTS.—As part of the program
established under section 1031, the Director may award an initial
grant under this subsection, and renewal grants under subsection
(f), to any coalition awarded a grant under section 1032 that meets
the criteria specified in subsection (d) in order to fund coalition
mentoring activities by such coalition in support of the program.
‘‘(b) TREATMENT WITH OTHER GRANTS.—
‘‘(1) SUPPLEMENT.—A grant awarded to a coalition under
this section is in addition to any grant awarded to the coalition
under section 1032.
‘‘(2) REQUIREMENT FOR BASIC GRANT.—A coalition may not
be awarded a grant under this section for a fiscal year unless
the coalition was awarded a grant or renewal grant under
section 1032(b) for that fiscal year.
‘‘(c) APPLICATION.—A coalition seeking a grant under this sec-
tion shall submit to the Administrator an application for the grant
in such form and manner as the Administrator may require.
‘‘(d) CRITERIA.—A coalition meets the criteria specified in this
subsection if the coalition—
‘‘(1) has been in existence for at least 5 years;
‘‘(2) has achieved, by or through its own efforts, measurable
results in the prevention and treatment of substance abuse
among youth;
‘‘(3) has staff or members willing to serve as mentors for
persons seeking to start or expand the activities of other coali-
tions in the prevention and treatment of substance abuse;
H. R. 2291—7
‘‘(4) has demonstrable support from some members of the
community in which the coalition mentoring activities to be
supported by the grant under this section are to be carried
out; and
‘‘(5) submits to the Administrator a detailed plan for the
coalition mentoring activities to be supported by the grant
under this section.
‘‘(e) USE OF GRANT FUNDS.—A coalition awarded a grant under
this section shall use the grant amount for mentoring activities
to support and encourage the development of new, self-supporting
community coalitions that are focused on the prevention and treat-
ment of substance abuse in such new coalitions’ communities. The
mentoring coalition shall encourage such development in accordance
with the plan submitted by the mentoring coalition under subsection
(d)(5).
‘‘(f) RENEWAL
GRANTS.—The Administrator may make a
renewal grant to any coalition awarded a grant under subsection
(a), or a previous renewal grant under this subsection, if the coali-
tion, at the time of application for such renewal grant—
‘‘(1) continues to meet the criteria specified in subsection
(d); and
‘‘(2) has made demonstrable progress in the development
of one or more new, self-supporting community coalitions that
are focused on the prevention and treatment of substance abuse.
‘‘(g) GRANT AMOUNTS.—
‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), the
total amount of grants awarded to a coalition under this section
for a fiscal year may not exceed the amount of non-Federal
funds raised by the coalition, including in-kind contributions,
for that fiscal year. Funds appropriated for the substance abuse
activities of a coalition that includes a representative of the
Bureau of Indian Affairs, the Indian Health Service, or a tribal
government agency with expertise in the field of substance
abuse may be counted as non-Federal funds raised by the
coalition.
‘‘(2) INITIAL
GRANTS.—The amount of the initial grant
awarded to a coalition under subsection (a) may not exceed
$75,000.
‘‘(3) RENEWAL GRANTS.—The total amount of renewal grants
awarded to a coalition under subsection (f) for any fiscal year
may not exceed $75,000.
‘‘(h) FISCAL YEAR LIMITATION
ON AMOUNT AVAILABLE
FOR
GRANTS.—The total amount available for grants under this section,
including renewal grants under subsection (f), in any fiscal year
may not exceed the amount equal to five percent of the amount
authorized to be appropriated by section 1024(a) for that fiscal
year.
‘‘(i) PRIORITY IN AWARDING INITIAL GRANTS.—In awarding ini-
tial grants under this section, priority shall be given to a coalition
that expressly proposes to provide mentorship to a coalition or
aspiring coalition serving economically disadvantaged areas.’’.
SEC. 3. FIVE-YEAR EXTENSION OF ADVISORY COMMISSION ON DRUG-
FREE COMMUNITIES.
Section 1048 of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of 1988
(21 U.S.C. 1548) is amended by striking ‘‘2002’’ and inserting ‘‘2007’’.
H. R. 2291—8
SEC. 4. AUTHORIZATION FOR NATIONAL COMMUNITY ANTIDRUG
COALITION INSTITUTE.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The Director of the Office of National Drug
Control Policy may, using amounts authorized to be appropriated
by subsection (d), make a grant to an eligible organization to
provide for the establishment of a National Community Antidrug
Coalition Institute.
(b) ELIGIBLE ORGANIZATIONS.—An organization eligible for the
grant under subsection (a) is any national nonprofit organization
that represents, provides technical assistance and training to, and
has special expertise and broad, national-level experience in commu-
nity antidrug coalitions under section 1032 of the National Narcotics
Leadership Act of 1988 (21 U.S.C. 1532).
(c) USE OF GRANT AMOUNT.—The organization receiving the
grant under subsection (a) shall establish a National Community
Antidrug Coalition Institute to—
(1) provide education, training, and technical assistance
for coalition leaders and community teams, with emphasis on
the development of coalitions serving economically disadvan-
taged areas;
(2) develop and disseminate evaluation tools, mechanisms,
and measures to better assess and document coalition perform-
ance measures and outcomes; and
(3) bridge the gap between research and practice by trans-
lating knowledge from research into practical information.
(d) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—There is authorized
to be appropriated for purposes of activities under this section,
including the grant under subsection (a), amounts as follows:
(1) For each of fiscal years 2002 and 2003, $2,000,000.
(2) For each of fiscal years 2004 and 2005, $1,000,000.
(3) For each of fiscal years 2006 and 2007, $750,000.
SEC. 5. PROHIBITION AGAINST DUPLICATION OF EFFORT.
The Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy
shall ensure that the same or similar activities are not carried
out, through the use of funds for administrative costs provided
under subchapter II of the National Narcotics Leadership Act of
1988 (21 U.S.C. 1521 et seq.) or funds provided under section
4 of this Act, by more than one recipient of such funds.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Vice President of the United States and
President of the Senate.