You know how drug policy reformers feel about the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of the war on drugs; but how about what the government itself has to say about it? The Justice Department's Office of Inspector General released a report saying that the DEA had, among other problems, failed to establish "reasonable realistic performance goals" (you mean a "drug-free America " isn't a reasonable goal?). Of course that just makes it one of an endless list of inneffective, badly-run, wasteful government programs that taxpayers continue to pay for in spite of reports like these. This report comes on top of a report from The White House Office of Management and Budget earlier this year that said the DEA had been "unable to demonstrate progress in reducing the availability of illegal drugs in the United States."
DEA faulted on its reports
By Jerry Seper


     Efforts by the Drug Enforcement Administration to target, disrupt and
dismantle global drug-trafficking organizations cannot be measured and, as
a result, it remains unclear whether the agency is adequately achieving its
drug enforcement goals and objectives, a report said yesterday.
     The Justice Department's Office of Inspector General said the DEA had
failed to meet key aspects of the government's new performance-reporting
guidelines, which focus on results instead of procedure, and that the
agency's strategic objectives were "not quantitative, directly measurable
or assessment-based."
     The report said that while the DEA established performance indicators,
the agency had not created specific criteria for its field divisions to
designate organizations as "priority targets," a key element of its
strategic goal, and had no specific criteria for reporting on priority
targets that had been disrupted or dismantled.
     It also said the DEA did not have an effective system to collect,
analyze and report data for all of its performance indicators; lacked
accurate performance data for one of the five field divisions included in
the review; and had failed to create "reasonable realistic performance goals."
     In response to the investigation, the DEA said it is updating its
strategic plan and that the new strategy will address the shortcomings
listed in the report. According to the DEA, the new plan will include a
general long-term goal and four strategic goals with quantitative,
time-specific objectives.
     DEA Administrator Karen Tandy noted in a memo to Mr. Fine that the
audit contained seven recommendations for action by the agency and that DEA
supervisors had addressed six of them prior to the release of the IG report.
     "The DEA's actions to revise its goal and objectives in the new
strategic plan are positive steps toward improving the DEA's ability to
measure achievement of its critically important goals and objectives," said
Inspector General Glenn A. Fine.
     The DEA enforces federal laws that relate to controlled substances,
including identifying and targeting organizations and people involved in
growing, manufacturing or distributing illicit drugs. It also is
responsible for taking action to reduce the availability of and demand for
illicit narcotics on the domestic and international markets and for
controlling the diversion of legitimately manufactured narcotics into the
illicit drug traffic.
     The White House Office of Management and Budget said earlier this year
in a performance evaluation for the 2004 fiscal budget that DEA had been
"unable to demonstrate progress in reducing the availability of illegal
drugs in the United States." The new budget called for the smallest
increase for the agency since 1988.
 

Hope you are enjoying your Tidbits. If you're not a member of and would like to join, please fill out our membership application.  And be sure to visit our website.

Click here to unsubscribe to this mailing list.
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.