DRUG TREATMENT REINVENTED IN D.C.

Costly System Keeps Parolees From Reoffending, Gets Them Treated, Officials Say

When he was arrested for heroin possession in 1996, Bernard Jackson-El
thought he knew the drill.

Throughout the 1980s and most of the 1990s, whenever Jackson-El was caught
using drugs, he was sent back to jail for violating parole from a 1976
burglary conviction. Eighteen months later, he would be back on the street.

But when Jackson-El was paroled after serving about a year on the
possession charge, something new happened: He was placed in a drug
treatment program for four months. After relapsing, he was back in
treatment for two months. Over a three-year period, he got about 170
counseling sessions, 100 drug tests and intense supervision.

Jackson-El, 47, has been clean for a year and is now a photo supervisor at
a CVS store in Southeast Washington. He's a success story of the Court
Services and Offender Supervision Agency, a four- year-old federal agency
that has used new ideas and millions of dollars to remake the system by
which released D.C. offenders are tested and treated for drugs.

Observers say the agency has brought a testing and treatment system that
was once abysmal into line with national standards. But its success has
also made the enormous challenges of the job more evident.

Better testing has uncovered more relapsing addicts, and there isn't enough
money to properly treat them all. By setting its goals high, aiming to
treat all drug-addicted offenders instead of sending them back to jail, the
agency has put itself in need of a massive funding increase.

The court services agency supervises parolees, probationers and released
pretrial defendants and employs supervision officers. The agency took over
those functions from several city agencies after the 1997 National Capital
Revitalization Act, which federalized much of the District's correctional
system.

Under the old D.C. system, drug testing for offenders was done
sporadically, and treatment was hard to get, officials say.

When the court services agency, then headed by John A. Carver, took over in
1997, its administrators brought in a new philosophy, some parts of which
were developed in D.C.'s Pretrial Services Agency.

In the new system, it is virtually impossible for an offender to go back to
jail for a positive urine test. Instead, everything from inpatient
treatment to increased counseling to placement in a halfway house might be
prescribed.

The new agency also requires regular drug tests for every released
offender. In most other jurisdictions, offenders are tested only when a
judge or supervision officer requires it, according to Adele V. Harrell, of
the Urban Institute, a Washington-based economic and social policy research
organization.

Money has made a big difference. Officials say the fact that the agency is
federal has helped it obtain funding for a variety of functions, including
new testing centers, where urine samples are given, and a new testing lab.

The expanded services come with a price tag: The court services agency
spent about $6 million this year to treat about 1,000 people. That's about
25 percent more spent on each drug user than by the city's public health
system.

Under the old system, addicts from the criminal justice system were treated
in the same crowded, shabby facilities as the rest of the city's addicts.
Now, the court services agency can pay to contract with private drug
treatment centers in the area, as well as build its own inpatient centers
and outpatient offices, though it still relies on the city's detoxification
clinic to treat some offenders.

Certainly, more offenders are being tested, and more often. In 1998, one
study found that fewer than 5 percent of the city's probationers, and fewer
than 2 percent of parolees, got regular testing. Since September 2000, the
agency has tested 100 percent of both groups, with each offender screened
at least once a month.

The court services agency is proud that a smaller percentage of those tests
are coming back positive every year. Among probationers, 23 percent of
samples were positive this year, compared with 30 percent in 1998.

Direct comparisons between the federal system and the city's old drug
treatment programs for offenders are not possible because there are no
reliable statistics for the old system, officials say. But those familiar
with the old system say the new agency has greatly improved services.
Margret Nedelkoff Kellems, the deputy mayor for public safety, says the
District now has "one of the most progressive and effective" programs in
the country for dealing with drug-addicted offenders on release.

Agency officials also believe that declining recidivism among parolees
shows the effectiveness of their anti-drug programs, although longer stays
in halfway houses and other federal reforms are also credited.

The anti-drug efforts are "changing the credibility of the system in the
eyes of these offenders," said John L. Clark, corrections trustee for
Washington. "There's no question the District is safer because of this."

But the percentage of supervised offenders who tested positive at least
once this year -- about 59 percent -- is basically unchanged from 1998.
Comparative figures for the old drug treatment system are not available.

That fits with a less encouraging development: Officials say their success
at testing has revealed greater need for treatment. More frequent testing
means that more relapses are caught, and that more positive-testing
offenders must be sent to counseling or treatment.

The result is a need for treatment far greater than even the court services
agency's federal money can pay for. Jasper Ormond, the agency's interim
director, said that only about 40 percent of the offenders who tested
positive for drugs last year got as much treatment as they needed.

The agency's money problems have been noted at D.C. Superior Court. Judge
Michael L. Rankin said that this summer and fall, judges were told that no
money remained for drug treatment for parolees and probationers. Judges
simply delayed sentencing, Rankin said, so offenders could stay in programs
for pretrial defendants, which still had money.

The court services agency asked for and received a 66 percent increase in
its testing and treatment budget for next year, according to spokesman
Cedric Hendricks.

Ormond said even that money probably would not be enough for all the needed
treatment. But the agency is committed to offering addicts treatment
instead of putting them back in jail, he said. "We have to keep our
standards high," Ormond said.

Jackson-El is an example of the problems -- and promise -- of treating a
hard-core addict.

Despite a total of six months of inpatient drug treatment after he left
jail, he returned to Southeast Washington and began using drugs again.
After leaving treatment, he tested positive 12 times.

Finally, it was determined that the only way to help the slight, polite
Southwest native was to assign him a parole officer, Vincent Agubokwu, who
specialized in high-risk offenders. Agubokwu had only 30 cases -- most
supervisors now have about 70, and in the old days, many had more than 100.
Agubokwu could constantly check on Jackson-El, sometimes going to his home
at a moment's notice.

Although no one can give the exact cost of Jackson-El's therapy, officials
concede that it must have been staggering. But, after more than three
years, it worked. He hasn't had a positive test since last winter and
hasn't gone back to jail.

"I pay bills today. I pay tickets today," Jackson-El said. "I like my life
today. I never knew that it was so good on the other side."