What we don’t know about illegal drugs in the U.S. is costing lives.
The gap between what we understand about illegal drugs and what we urgently need to know has widened to a dangerous degree. Overdose deaths have surged over the past decade, while intelligence programs that once informed law enforcement about illegal drug markets have been systematically dismantled. Without reliable information, the only statistic we can truly measure is the death toll. The federal and state governments must act quickly to revive our drug intelligence collection systems.
The changing landscape of drug enforcement
Drug enforcement is at a crossroads. Traditional drugs like cannabis, cocaine, and heroin are agricultural products that rely on large-scale transportation to remain profitable. These supply chains have inherent vulnerabilities which, when targeted by enforcement efforts that restrict supply, have historically driven up prices and curbed demand. However, as drug markets evolve, the effectiveness of these strategies fades.
In contrast, synthetic drugs are produced from widely available, loosely regulated chemicals. They are harder to detect, and even small quantities can be trafficked profitably. More troubling still, synthetic drugs are frequently mixed into other illegal substances to boost potency, allowing traffickers to cut costs and reinvest profits into evading law enforcement.
Synthetic drugs with ever-evolving chemical compositions will likely dominate future drug markets. Drug use appears relatively inelastic to risk: even as awareness of fentanyl’s dangers has grown, opioid use has persisted. People will keep using dangerous substances, and traffickers will keep adapting to meet demand. To counter this ever-adaptive trade, our response requires not just a magnifying glass but a microscope.
Data challenges
Effective responses require anticipating threats before they become unmanageable. However, today’s policymakers and law enforcement agencies face a persistent obstacle: the lack of systematic, high-quality data on critical drug attributes such as formulations, prices, purity, and adulteration at both local and national levels. Even subtle shifts in purity or adulteration patterns can foreshadow broader market changes or impending overdose outbreaks. Predicting overdose spikes and identifying prolific dealers requires a clear understanding of how drug markets function.
Despite this need, federal agencies have dismantled key intelligence programs, including the Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring (ADAM) program (terminated in 2014) and the Heroin Domestic Monitor Program (HDMP, ended in 2016). ADAM collected data directly from arrestees, offering insights into the prevalence and trends of illegal drug use and supply, and linking drug use to criminal activity. Similarly, HDMP used controlled drug buys to provide detailed data on heroin’s price, purity, and origin, creating a clear picture of market trends and overdose risks.
The loss of ADAM is particularly alarming. Recent research by RAND highlights that household surveys substantially undercount opioid use disorder, making it exceedingly difficult to allocate resources appropriately. As a consequence, the vacuum in actionable intelligence has left practitioners, policymakers, and researchers largely in the dark regarding emerging trends, hindering everything from local enforcement adjustments to early-warning systems.
Moreover, while databases that track drug seizures and the chemical composition of recovered drugs, such as STARLIMS and the National Forensic Laboratory Information System (NFLIS), remain in existence, access has grown increasingly restricted. Today, researchers often find it difficult, if not impossible, to tap into these critical resources, further compounding the intelligence gap.
This deficiency is not accidental. It reflects long-standing policy choices. Agencies have clung to outdated data collection systems—delegating drug testing to local labs that often lack the necessary resources or training—and have abandoned human-intelligence programs that once enriched our understanding of the market.
A modern law-enforcement drug surveillance program
The Office of National Drug Control Policy highlighted the importance of data improvement in its 2024 National Drug Control Strategy and in its recent six-point plan. These efforts suggest growing bipartisan support for a smarter, more transparent drug intelligence infrastructure that serves both law enforcement and public health needs.
The case for reviving ADAM
ADAM played a critical role in illuminating drug use patterns among arrestees and informing both enforcement and treatment strategies. Its discontinuation has left a significant gap in our ability to respond to emerging market trends. Some states have already begun pushing for their own versions of ADAM-like programs, and a modern, revitalized iteration of ADAM—one that leverages advanced analytics and more transparent data-sharing protocols—could quickly bridge this gap. At a minimum, a successful program would include the following core elements:
- Broad Substance Coverage:
The program would collect data on various illegal drugs, with particular attention to synthetic substances whose properties demand alternative detection and analysis methods. - Integration with Routine Law Enforcement:
Most law enforcement agencies already confiscate drugs, seize paraphernalia, and collect relevant information during arrests and inspections. A successful program would systematically capture and analyze these data, making it both timely and minimally disruptive to existing operations. - Multiple Data Sources:
The system would aggregate data from forensic analyses, arrest records, field reports, and even drug testing results. Some of the best insights have come from questions about enforcement expenditures and drug test data. - Standardized Collection Protocols:
Consistent methodologies would be developed to ensure reliable, unbiased data collection across different regions and agencies. - Legal and Ethical Oversight:
The process would comply with strict legal guidelines and privacy standards. Any use of criminal informants for information gathering—while not a new practice—is subject to rigorous ethical review; indeed, one reason for discontinuing some DMP programs was DEA hesitancy about paying incentives to criminals to reveal market details. - Cost Efficiency:
Because the data are already being collected in the course of normal policing, establishing a structured system to analyze and share them is relatively inexpensive. ADAM, for example, cost about $10 million per year at its peak. - Rationale for This Approach:
By integrating data collection into everyday law enforcement activities, the proposed program can provide real-time insights into drug trends, enabling proactive policing and early-warning measures that can ultimately save lives.
Conclusion
To make meaningful progress, policymakers should prioritize:
- Revive and Modernize Defunct Programs:
Update programs like ADAM and HDMP with modern analytical tools to produce actionable insights. - Enhance Transparency and Accessibility:
Improve access to DEA databases for researchers and policymakers. - Adopt Innovative Surveillance Methods:
Leverage techniques such as wastewater analysis—which has been successfully implemented during the COVID pandemic—to provide near-real-time monitoring of drug consumption. There is growing evidence that such networks, if adequately supported, could be a key component of future surveillance strategies.
A data-driven, evidence-based approach to drug enforcement offers the potential for more precise and proactive interventions that protect public safety while reducing the unintended harms of traditional enforcement. By investing in comprehensive surveillance, embracing modern analytics, and promoting transparent data-sharing, we can modernize our response. This transformation could lower overdose deaths, strengthen harm reduction, and improve resource allocation—all at a modest cost.