RESEARCH: DRUG REHAB SAVES MONEY

LOS ANGELES - The first results of a University of California at Los
Angeles study released last week show that California taxpayers are saving
more money than expected due to Proposition 36, which gives first- and
second-time drug offenders the option of rehabilitation with probation
instead of jail time.

According to a press release from the Drug Policy Alliance, a national
organization that supports rehabilitation over incarceration, the results
of the UCLA study mean that roughly $275 million was saved in the first
year Proposition 36 went into effect.

The study covered 58 counties and was conducted by the UCLA Integrated
Substance Abuse Program, which is part of UCLA's Neuropsychiatric Institute.

Bill Zimmerman, who managed the campaign for Proposition 36 when
Californians voted on it in 2000, said the State Office of the Legislative
Analyst originally estimated the Proposition could save $250 million after
several years.

The Legislative Analyst's Office provides non-partisan fiscal and policy
advice to the legislature.

"[They] didn't think the savings would add up to this until the third or
fourth year, but we've exceeded those expectations already," Zimmerman said.

Zimmerman said that money is being saved because providing outpatient
treatment is cheaper than incarceration.

He said the cost for treatment per drug offender is about $4,000, whereas
annual incarceration costs roughly $28,000 per inmate.

Dr. Douglas Longshore, the principal investigator for the UCLA study, said
the findings for the next four years of the study are unpredictable at this
point.

"It's very hard to see how that's going to play out," Longshore said.

Though 69 per cent of the 53,697 eligible drug offenders opted to receive
treatment, the treatment's effectiveness is uncertain. The probability of
repeat offenders could affect the money-saving quality of Proposition 36 in
the future.

In addition, if budget cuts lead the state to stop allocating $120 million
to counties for treatment, counties may have to pay the bill themselves or
cut back from other programs.

Michaelis Jacoby, former drug offender and the clinical supervisor of the
Discovery Program - a residential alcohol and drug treatment centre in
Century City - said jail time without more costly in-house treatment is
ineffective.

"I know for me, jail has no rehabilitative qualities - it just taught me to
be a better criminal," he said.

Jacoby said it was while he was in Biscaluiz prison that he discovered the
12-step program that he said "changed [his] life." He said the
spiritually-based program worked for him by forcing him to take
responsibility for his addiction.

According to the UCLA study for the year ending in July 2002, 86 per cent
of the offenders who received treatment through Proposition 36 were placed
in outpatient drug-free programs, whereas only 10 per cent were placed in a
long-term residential program.

Jacoby does not believe the money-saving outpatient treatment is effective
compared to inpatient treatment, because people can arrive late to meetings
or ignore the message they teach.

"I think that if you get arrested and they Prop. 36 you, you need a
long-term, sober living facility to really get a chance," he said.

Public policy professor Mark A.R. Kleiman - director of the Drug Policy
Analysis Program that researches the effects of drug policies on the public
- - believes cutting costs through using an outpatient program may not be the
best way to treat drug addicts.

He suggested enforcing frequent drug tests and increased monitoring of
offenders.

"I think it would be worth the money to get people to do what you want them
to do, which is stop," he said.