LEADERS CONCERNED ABOUT DRUG REPORT

Problems with a High Point drug-rehab program are frustrating community
leaders and prompting renewed calls for a long-term drug-treatment center in
Guilford County.

A new report said Alcohol and Drug Services has too many empty beds
and has strayed from its original mission of providing a 12-step
treatment program. Only about half of ADS' 55 beds are occupied, and
the program typically houses addicts for less than a week.

"Why in the world when we have one of the finest facilities anywhere
and it not being utilized -- I don't know," said Wally Harrelson, who
helped found ADS and is the county's public defender. He also
criticized ADS for not keeping addicts in its program for at least 28
days.

"You certainly can't get anyone's attention in three to five days," he
said. "That within itself is worthless."

The report from consultant Jim Van Hecke was commissioned by the
Guilford County Substance Abuse Coalition, a collection of citizens
and members of 43 organizations associated with alcohol and drug
treatment. It followed a News & Record series in November 2004 dealing
with the county's 20-year battle with crack cocaine.

ADS has performed substance-abuse services for the county's mental
health agency for more than a decade, chipping away at a drug problem
that costs the county tens of millions of dollars annually. But the
program is underused and employs a "revolving-door" treatment strategy
when addicts really need long-term care, said Bruce Davis, a
Democratic county commissioner from High Point.

"And if this requires more resources, then we need to put more
resources to it," said Davis, who added, "I don't want us to turn our
backs on ADS."

But Chuck Fortune, ADS's executive director, said the county's mental
health agency determines how long people stay in treatment, not ADS.
In fact, he said it's rare when the state will reimburse ADS for
letting an addict stay even seven to 10 days.

"We have zero control over that," he said. "We're getting portrayed as
the bad guy here."

"It's not that we don't want to put people in treatment," he added.
"The longer you keep someone in treatment, the better luck you will
have keeping someone clean."

Susan Mills, a coalition board member and the relative of a crack
addict, said ADS must change its mind-set to better serve people who
need long-term care.

"I think it requires more than money," she said. "I think it requires
changing your program."

As of July 1, the mental health agency, known as the Guilford Center,
had contracts with ADS worth about $1.7 million in federal, state and
county funds. Commissioners approve all Guilford Center contracts
awarded to ADS or any other agency.

Commissioner Melvin "Skip" Alston said he hadn't heard specific
complaints about ADS, which provides the lion's share of
government-funded drug treatment in the county, but said the program
- -- like most offered in Guilford County -- isn't effective because
addicts are released too soon.

"People can't get cured in a week or two," said Alston, a Democrat.
"It's not effective at all, and that's the problem with Guilford
County and the program we're offering."

Commissioner Linda Shaw agrees. She and Alston, both veteran
commissioners, have quarrelled often over the years, but both say
long-term drug treatment is needed.

"I don't think three days of detox or 12 days of detox is going to be
the answer," said Shaw, a Republican. She added: "I'm not saying that
ADS isn't needed, I'm just saying we need something beyond what they
do."

But Democrat Kirk Perkins said, "if we've got all those beds our there
we're not utilizing, until we figure out why not, why would we
consider additional drug treatment facilities?"

The commissioners can change the county's drug treatment strategy if
they want. Billie Martin Pierce, the Guilford Center's director, says
she's urging commissioners to wait until the coalition's Jan. 19
presentation, when some of Van Hecke's findings will be included with
the group's own report.

"They need to let this report come forward," she said. "They don't
have anything to react to right now."