Detailed Information on the
Drug Enforcement Administration Assessment

Continue to seek an independent evaluation of the program's drug enforcement activities and its impact on the drug market in the U.S.

Improving the program's methodology for projecting long-term performance. This will result in more accurate targets that will challenge the program to continue improving its performance over time.

Measure: Contribute to DOJ's Goal to Reduce the Availability of Drugs in America. The FY 2008 target is to reduce drug availability by 10 percent from the FY 2002 baseline as published by the Drug Availability Steering Committee in December 2002.

Explanation:The FY 2008 target represents DOJ's goal to reduce drug availability by 10 percent from the FY 2002 baseline as published by the Drug Availability Steering Committee in December 2002. No current data on drug availability are available.

Measure: Number of drug trafficking organizations (Foreign and Domestic) linked to the AG's Consolidated Priority Target (CPOT) List that are dismantled. The CPOT list identifies the major organizations responsible for distributing drugs in the United States.

Explanation:Targets represent cumulative number of organizations reported dismantled.

Measure: Number of drug trafficking organizations (Foreign and Domestic) linked to the AG's Consolidated Priority Target (CPOT) List that are disrupted. The CPOT list identifies the major organizations responsible for distributing drugs in the United States.

Explanation:Targets represent cumulative number of organizations reported disrupted.

Measure: Number of drug trafficking organizations (Foreign and Domestic) not linked to the AG's Consolidated Priority Target (CPOT) List that are dismantled.

Explanation:Targets represent cumulative number of organizations reported dismantled.

Measure: Number of drug trafficking organizations (Foreign and Domestic) not linked to the AG's Consolidated Priority Target (CPOT) List that are disrupted.

Explanation:Targets represent cumulative number of organizations reported disrupted.

Measure: Ensure CSA compliance among all registrants.

Explanation:This measure tracks the percent of the registrant population compliant with the CSA. The targets reported represent two-year (FY 2005) and five-year (FY 2008) objectives.

Measure: Number of Administrative/Criminal Sanctions Imposed on CSA and CDTA Registrants/Applicants(Dismantle)

Explanation:Consists of administrative code 1 (surrender for cause), code 2 (revocation) and code D (denial). Registrants lose or forfeit the DEA Registration or are convicted of a drug felony. Registrants are permanently denied access to controlled substances/chemicals pending a reversal of circumstances.

Measure: Percentage of Registrations Processed Electronically.

Explanation:The goal of this efficiency measure is to increase the percentage of CSA and CDTA registrations (applications and renewals) processed electronically.

Measure: Percent of Special Agent Investigative Work Hours Devoted to Priority Target Organization (PTO) Investigations.

Explanation:The goal of this efficiency measure is to increase the percentage of investigative work hours devoted to PTO investigations. By increasing the effort placed on priority cases, DEA will have a greater impact on reducing drug availability.

Measure: Number of Registrations Processed per FTE.

Explanation:The goal of this efficiency measure is to increase the number of CSA and CDTA registrations (applications and renewals) processed per FTE.

Is the program purpose clear?

Explanation: DEA has a clear and unambiguous mission; there is consensus among interested parties (ONDCP, other Federal law enforcement agencies, and State and local law enforcement entities) on DEA's purpose.

Evidence: DEA's mission is 'to enforce the controlled substances laws and regulations of the United States and bring to the criminal and civil justice system of the United States, or any other competent jurisdiction, those organizations and principal members of organizations, involved in the growing, manufacture, or distribution of controlled substances appearing in or destined for illicit traffic in the United States; and to recommend and support non-enforcement programs aimed at reducing the availability of illicit controlled substances on the domestic and international markets.'

Does the program address a specific and existing problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Drug trafficking, drug use, and associated violent crimes are national problems. DEA is the Federal government's single-mission agency for enforcing the Federal drug laws.

Evidence: Estimated annual cost to society of drug abuse is $160B; 1/3 of all violent acts and 1/2 of all homicides are drug related; 2.8M Americans are dependent on illegal drugs.

Is the program designed so that it is not redundant or duplicative of any Federal, state, local or private effort?

Explanation: DEA is the only single mission agency responsible for drug enforcement and the only agency concerned with the full spectrum of drug activity, from the source to the user. Other Federal drug control agencies directly involved in supply reduction efforts, e.g. Customs, Coast Guard, and Border Patrol, focus exclusively on drug interdiction, not drug investigations. The FBI, which also investigates drug trafficking organizations, is scaling back its involvement in response to homeland security needs and is no longer included in the National Drug Control Budget. In terms of State and local law enforcement agencies, the enforcement focus of these organizations is regional and local in nature, with street gangs a primary target. DEA is the only law enforcement organization looking at the national impact of specific local, national, and international drug trafficking organizations. In addition, DEA is responsible for providing unique services, such as training to State and Local law enforcement agencies, clandestine laboratory certification school, and laboratory services.

Evidence: National Drug Control Strategy, FY 2004 Drug Control Budget Summary.

Is the program design free of major flaws that would limit the program's effectiveness or efficiency?

Explanation: There is no conclusive evidence that another approach to drug law enforcement is more efficient/effective. In addition, DEA extends its impact by leveraging resources of State and local law enforcement and foreign governments.

Evidence:  

Is the program effectively targeted, so program resources reach intended beneficiaries and/or otherwise address the program's purpose directly?

Explanation: DEA addresses the problem by targeting major drug trafficking organizations and by placing significant importance on interagency cooperation and information sharing and leveraging resources of State and local law enforcement and foreign governments.

Evidence: DEA's revised Strategic Plan and DEA's FY 2005 Budget Request to Congress.

Does the program have a limited number of specific long-term performance measures that focus on outcomes and meaningfully reflect the purpose of the program?

Explanation: DEA's has established a general long-term goal of contributing to DOJ's Goal to Reduce the Availability of Drugs in America and more specific long-term goals related to disrupting and dismantling Priority Target Organizations (PTOs) and ensuring that all required registrants comply with the Controlled Substances Act.

Evidence: DEA's revised FY 2003 - FY 2008 Strategic Plan.

Does the program have ambitious targets and timeframes for its long-term measures?

Explanation: Baselines have been established for each of the long-term performance measures and ambitious targets have been set for FY 2005 and FY 2008.

Evidence: DEA's revised FY 2003 - FY 2008 Strategic Plan.

Does the program have a limited number of specific annual performance measures that demonstrate progress toward achieving the program's long-term measures?

Explanation: DEA's has established annual goals related to disrupting and dismantling Priority Target Organizations (PTOs) and ensuring that all required registrants comply with the Controlled Substances Act.

Evidence: DEA's revised FY 2003 - FY 2008 Strategic Plan.

Does the program have baselines and ambitious targets and timeframes for its annual measures?

Explanation: Baselines have been established for each of the nine annual performance measures and ambitious targets set through FY 2005.

Evidence: DEA's revised FY 2003 - FY 2008 Strategic Plan.

Do all partners (including grantees, sub-grantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, etc.) commit to and work toward the annual and/or long-term goals of the program?

Explanation: DEA's major partners are State and local law enforcement agencies, other federal agency participants in High Intensity Drug Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) Task Forces and Organized Crime and Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF), and National Guard organizations. DEA has Memoranda of Understanding with each of these partners. The MOUs include specific objectives, policies, procedures, time frames, etc. For example, DEA's "Guidelines for Establishing a State and Local Task Force", as published in the DEA Agents Manual, require that the specific objectives of the State and Local task force are outlined in the MOU to include: (1) disrupt the illicit drug traffic in specified areas by immobilizing the highest levels of targeted violators and trafficking organizations; (2) increase the effectiveness of participating agencies by providing extended on-the-job training to assigned officers and exposing them to the benefits of selective targeting; etc.

Evidence: Memoranda of Understanding with DEA's State and Local Law Enforcement Partners and Federal programs such as HIDTA, OCDETF etc., Guidelines for Establishing State and Local Task Forces as published in DEA's Agents Manual, Guidelines for Establishing State and Local Task Forces, and HIDTA Program Policy and Budget Guidance.

Are independent and quality evaluations of sufficient scope and quality conducted on a regular basis or as needed to support program improvements and evaluate effectiveness and relevance to the problem, interest, or need?

Explanation: Although DEA has a large number (42) on-going General Accounting Office (GAO) and Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audits, these audits do not meet the requirements of regularly scheduled, objective, independent evaluations that examine how well the program is accomplishing its mission and meeting its long-term goals.

Evidence: Copies of audit scope letters for on-going/completed GAO and OIG audits.

Are Budget requests explicitly tied to accomplishment of the annual and long-term performance goals, and are the resource needs presented in a complete and transparent manner in the program's budget?

Explanation: The FY 2004 President's Budget included DEA's proposed restructuring of decision units (from 10 units to four) to align resources with the draft DEA Strategic Plan and make it possible to tie accomplishments to resources, the Congress did not provide funding according to that restructuring. DEA's FY 2005 Budget has been formulated in the revised decision unit structure that will align resources with DEA's four proposed long-term strategic goals. Since all of the activities and programs associated with DEA's Salaries and Expenses appropriation were assessed as one program during the FY 2004 budget process, the full annual costs of operating the program are estimated and budgeted.

Evidence: DOJ's FY 2004 Congressional Justification and Performance Plan.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to correct its strategic planning deficiencies?

Explanation: DEA has made numerous changes in the past year to improve its strategic planning. These steps include: revising budget submissions to track performance, developing a new strategic plan with appropriate long term and annual measures and a strategic focus that more accurately reflects all of DEA's programs, and implementing targeting and reporting systems to enable DEA HQs to review the allocation of investigative resources.

Evidence: Over the past two years, DEA has made progress in the area of strategic planning and aligning resource allocations with performance. DEA has developed a process for setting goals and tracking progress against priority targeted organizations.

Does the agency regularly collect timely and credible performance information, including information from key program partners, and use it to manage the program and improve performance?

Explanation: Data on the number of PTOs disrupted/dismantled will be reported quarterly as part of a quarterly status reports proposed by DEA. The data are maintained by the Priority Target Activity and Resource Reporting System (PTARRS) on a real-time basis. The targets and accomplishments for disrupting/dismantling used to adjust priorities, make resource allocations and take other management actions. For example, DEA reprogrammed 100 positions in FY 2002 based in part upon an internal threat assessment. In addition, data associated with the Diversion Control program are maintained by several information systems that provide monthly and quarterly reports on enforcement and regulatory activities which are provided to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control.

Evidence: Examples of PTARRS and Diversion Control (QRDB) reports and systems documentation.

Are Federal managers and program partners (grantees, subgrantees, contractors, cost-sharing partners, etc.) held accountable for cost, schedule and performance results?

Explanation: DEA is revising the format of the domestic Field Management Plans and foreign Country Office Plans to ensure consistency with and accountability to DEA's revised FY 2003 - FY 2008 Strategic Plan. In addition, the current Special Agent in Charge (SAC) performance appraisal requires that SACs identify, target, investigate and immobilize significant violators and organizations within their division's area of responsibility. However, there is no explicit link between the performance against DEA's goals and the performance appraisal of DEA managers. DEA has proposed adding additional standards to enhance accountability.

Evidence: DEA Annual Personnel Performance Appraisal for Special Agents in Charge.

Are all funds (Federal and partners') obligated in a timely manner and spent for the intended purpose?

Explanation: Funds are obligated consistent with DEA's operating plan. DEA rarely lapses annual funds and has a small carryover in its no-year account. All DEA funds are spent on drug enforcement or related support activities.

Evidence: Periodic and year-end spending reports; Decision Unit Reconciliation Reports; SF 132s, SF 133s.

Does the program have procedures (e.g., competitive sourcing/cost comparisons, IT improvements, approporaite incentives) to measure and achieve efficiencies and cost effectiveness in program execution?

Explanation: Efficiency measures are not appropriate for law enforcement programs. In addition, the majority of DEA FTEs are inherently governmental and therefore exempt from competitive sourcing requirements.

Evidence: Available measures, such as costs per arrest, drugs seized, or investigations initiated are not sufficiently refined to reflect the varied nature of law enforcement responsibilities.

Does the program collaborate and coordinate effectively with related programs?

Explanation: DEA representative sits on the Advisory Council of each of the nine OCDETF regions and the majority of the 28 HIDTA executive boards. This coordination results in meaningful actions in management and resource allocation. For example, in response to FBI's reduction in drug-related investigations and an internal DEA threat assessment, DEA reallocated agents and other positions to the southwest border. In addition, DEA recently established agreements with the Department of Homeland Security's Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to expand information sharing, improve coordination of drug investigations, and implement a pilot program to determine the efficacy of DEA's proposal to co-locate Title 21 cross-designated ICE agents with DEA personnel.

Evidence: Memoranda of Understanding with DEA's State and Local Law Enforcement Partners and Federal programs such as State and Local Task Forces, HIDTA Task Forces, and OCDETF Task Forces, and the joint Memorandum from DEA and ICE concerning agency coordination.

Does the program use strong financial management practices?

Explanation: DEA's financial management system is in compliance with the requirements of the FFMIA. DEA has received an unqualified opinion for FY 2002, with no internal control weaknesses reported and no reportable conditions related to financial management.

Evidence: DOJ FY 2002 Accountability Report and the Draft Audit Report of DEA's FY 2002 Annual Financial Statement.

Has the program taken meaningful steps to address its management deficiencies?

Explanation: DEA has several connected systems for addressing management deficiencies, many of which are mentioned in its annual FFMIA and accountability reporting. DEA has its own Inspections Program which reviews all offices and divisions on a cyclical basis. DEA also has the required audit liaison and follow-up function to assure that it addresses findings and recommendations from outside auditors. Lastly, DEA has a specific system for tracking its progress toward addressing any deficiencies identified in the annual financial audit.

Evidence: Over the last three years, DEA has made significant progress on a range of management issues including inventory control, reprogramming controls, and other financial management functions. DEA has eliminated its material internal control weaknesses.

Has the program demonstrated adequate progress in achieving its long-term outcome performance goals?

Explanation: Performance data demonstrates some small progress toward long-term and annual goals to disrupt and/or dismantle PTOs.

Evidence: Revised DEA FY 2003 - FY 2008 Strategic Plan and DOJ FY 2004 Performance Plan.

Does the program (including program partners) achieve its annual performance goals?

Explanation: Performance data demonstrates some small progress toward long-term and annual goals to disrupt and/or dismantle PTOs.

Evidence: DEA's FY 2005 Spring Call Submission to DOJ.

Does the program demonstrate improved efficiencies or cost effectiveness in achieving program performance goals each year?

Explanation: Efficiency measures are not appropriate for law enforcement programs. In addition, the majority of DEA FTEs are inherently governmental and therefore exempt from competitive sourcing requirements.

Evidence: Efficiency measures that are not appropriate for law enforcement include cost per arrests, seizure, or investigation. Targets are generally not accepted for these types of measures and are not helpful in determining a law enforcement program's effectiveness.

Does the performance of this program compare favorably to other programs, including government, private, etc., that have similar purpose and goals?

Explanation: Similar drug law enforcement programs such as HIDTA, FBI, and Customs do not have good performance indicators so a comparison is difficult to make.

Evidence:  

Do independent and quality evaluations of this program indicate that the program is effective and achieving results?

Explanation: The findings and recommendations associated with the relevant GAO and OIG audits indicate results.

Evidence: Competed GAO and OIG Reports.