PS452 Unit 1 Seminar

James.T.Joyner

community_profile_unit1_washington_dc.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >PS452 Unit 1 Seminar

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGICAL PROFILE:

CONSEQUENCES OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, AND ILLICIT DRUG USE IN THE

DISTRICT’S COMMUNITIES, 2001–2007

PREPARED FOR

THE ADDICTION PREVENTION AND RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION, DC DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

THE CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE RESEARCH (CESAR), UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK

District of Columbia: Community Profile 1

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank the members of the DC Epidemiological Outcomes Workgroup for their efforts over the past year. Their dedication to understanding and addressing drug use and the consequences of drug use in the District of Columbia makes this report possible. Their patience and willingness to assist in this project and plan for the future are commendable.

In addition, special thanks are offered to the following agencies and individuals for

providing data and assistance to the DCEOW which made this report possible:

• The DC Office of Planning o Robert Beasley

• The Metropolitan Police Department o Anne Grant o Sarah Hoyos o Brenda Eich

• The DC Department of Health o Tracy Garner o Garret Lum

• The DC Department of Health, HIV/AIDS Administration o Makhabele Woolfork

• The Substance and Mental Health Services Administration, Office of Applied Studies

o Joe Gfroerer and his staff • The DC Department of Health, Center for Policy, Planning, and Epidemiology

o Dr. Fern Johnson-Clarke o Dr. Manzur Ejaz

• The DC Pretrial Services Agency o Jerome Robinson

• Faces and Voices of Recovery o Rob Flemming

• The DC Office of the Chief Medical Examiner o Dr. Fiona Couper

• The District of Columbia Public Schools Health Operations HIV/AIDS Education Program

o Marc Clark

District of Columbia: Community Profile 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION I. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………..…………...……8 SECTION II. SNAPSHOTS..…………………………………….……………………….…10 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA………………………………………………………………….…...11 WARD 1.………………………………………………..………………..…………….…...12 WARD 2.………………………………………………………….……………….……..…13 WARD 3.…………………………………………………….……..……….……..………..14 WARD 4.…………………………………………………..…..….…………….…………..15 WARD 5.……………………………………………………...…………..……..….………16 WARD 6.………………………………………………………..…..………..…..…………17 WARD 7.…………………………………………………………..………………..………18 WARD 8..……………………………………………………………..…………………….19 SECTION III. CONSEQUENCE: VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME……………………….20 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALL VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME…………………………………………….21 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL- AND DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME …………………...23 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL- AND DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME BY WARD………….24 WARD 1: ALL VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME………………………………………………..… 25 WARD 1: ALCOHOL- AND DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME…………………….…… 26 DISTRICT-WIDE: HOMICIDE BY WARD…………………..……………………………...……….27 DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG-RELATED HOMICIDE BY WARD………………………………………...… 28 WARD 1: HOMICIDE…………………………………………………………………………..29 SECTION IV. CONSEQUENCE: ARREST…………………………………………………..30 DISTRICT-WIDE: SUBSTANCE-RELATED DRIVING AND ALCOHOL-RELATED ARRESTS………………… 31 DISTRICT-WIDE: SUBSTANCE-RELATED DRIVING AND ALCOHOL-RELATED ARRESTS BY WARD………...32 WARD 1: SUBSTANCE-RELATED DRIVING AND ALCOHOL-RELATED ARRESTS………………………...33 DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS……………………………………………………...34 DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS BY WARD…………………………………………….35 WARD 1: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS…………………………………………………………….36 SECTION V. CONSEQUENCE: HIV/AIDS……………………………………….………..39 DISTRICT-WIDE: HIV (NOT AIDS) BY WARD……………..……………………………………...40 DISTRICT-WIDE: HIV (NOT AIDS)………………………..…………………………………… 42 DISTRICT-WIDE: AIDS BY WARD……………..………………………………………………. 43 DISTRICT-WIDE: AIDS…………………...…..……………………………………………… 46 SECTION VI. CONSEQUENCE: DEPENDENCE AND ABUSE……………………………….48 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE OR ABUSE BY WARD…………………………………… 49 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE BY WARD……………………………………………... 50 DISTRICT-WIDE: ILLICIT DRUG DEPENDENCE OR ABUSE BY WARD………………………………… 51 DISTRICT-WIDE: ILLICIT DRUG DEPENDENCE BY WARD…………………………………….…..…52

District of Columbia: Community Profile 3

SECTION VII. CONSEQUENCE: MORTALITY…………………………………………… 53 DISTRICT-WIDE: CHRONIC LIVER DISEASE DEATHS BY WARD……………………………………..54 WARD 1: CHRONIC LIVER DISEASE DEATHS……………………………………………………..55 DISTRICT-WIDE: LUNG CANCER DEATHS BY WARD………………………………………………56 WARD 1: LUNG CANCER DEATHS……………………………………………………………... 57 DISTRICT-WIDE: COPD AND EMPHYSEMA DEATHS BY WARD…………………………….………..58 WARD 1: COPD AND EMPHYSEMA DEATHS…………………………………………….………..59 SECTION VIII. ALCOHOL, ILLICIT DRUG, AND TOBACCO CONSUMPTION…….……….60 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION BY WARD…………………………………….……….61 DISTRICT-WIDE: UNDERAGE ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION BY WARD………………………….……….62 DISTRICT-WIDE: MARIJUANA CONSUMPTION BY WARD………………………………….…….….63 DISTRICT-WIDE: ANY ILLICIT DRUG CONSUMPTION OTHER THAN MARIJUANA BY WARD……………. 64 DISTRICT-WIDE: COCAINE CONSUMPTION BY WARD…………………………………….………..65 DISTRICT-WIDE: NONMEDICAL CONSUMPTION OF PAIN RELIEVERS BY WARD………………………. 66 DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG TEST RESULTS FOR ADULT ARRESTEES BY WARD…………………………...67 WARD 1: DRUG TEST RESULTS FOR ADULT ARRESTEES………………………………………….. 69 DISTRICT-WIDE: TOBACCO CONSUMPTION BY WARD……………………………………………. 72 SECTION IX. TREATMENT CONSUMPTION………………………………………...…….73 DISTRICT-WIDE: WEEKLY RECOVERY MEETINGS, RECOVERY CLUBS AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS BY REGION……………………………………………………………………………….…….74 DISTRICT-WIDE: NEEDING BUT NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT FOR ALCOHOL USE BY WARD…….…...…75 DISTRICT-WIDE: NEEDING BUT NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT FOR ILLICIT DRUG USE BY WARD…...……76 SECTION X. CONCLUSION………….…………………………………………………….77

District of Columbia: Community Profile 4

LIST OF TABLES, FIGURES, AND MAPS

TABLES TABLE 1. Estimated Number of District of Columbia Alcohol-Related Violent Crime Offenses and Drug- Related Property Crime Offenses: 2002–2006……………………………………………………………...23 TABLE 2. Estimated Number of District of Columbia Alcohol-Related Violent Crime Offenses and Drug- Related Property Crime Offenses by Ward in 2006…………………………………………………...........24 TABLE 3. Total Number and Percent of All Ward 1 Violent and Property Crime Offenses in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006…………………………………………………………………………….……...…25 TABLE 4. Estimated Number of Alcohol- and Drug-Related Crimes in Ward 1: 2002–2006………………26 TABLE 5. Ward-Level Drug-Related Homicides in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006…………………28 TABLE 6. Descriptives for Ward 1 Homicides in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006………………........29 TABLE 7. Number of Adult and Juvenile Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006…………………………………………………………..…….…………31 TABLE 8. Total Number of Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia by Ward in 2006………………………………………………………………………….………32 TABLE 9. Number of Ward 1 Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006………………………………………………………………………………………33 TABLE 10. Number of Adult and Juvenile Drug-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006...34 TABLE 11. Total Number of Drug-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia by Ward in 2006…………35 TABLE 12. Number of Ward 1 Adult and Juvenile Drug-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006…………………………………………………………………………………………………..36 TABLE 13. Number of Ward 1 Drug-Related Arrests by Gender in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006...37 TABLE 14. Number of Ward 1 Drug-Related Arrests by Race in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006…...38 TABLE 15. Number of Newly Reported HIV (not AIDS) Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006………………………………………………………………………………………..41 TABLE 16. Number and Percentage of Newly Reported HIV (not AIDS) Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006………………………………….……………..…42 TABLE 17. Number of Newly Reported AIDS Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006……………………………………………………………………………..………….………...44 TABLE 18. Number of Living AIDS Cases and AIDS Mortality Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006…………………………………………………………….…..…………45 TABLE 19. Number and Percentage of Newly Reported AIDS Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006………………………………………………….……………46

District of Columbia: Community Profile 5

TABLE 20. Number and Percentage of Living AIDS Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: 2001–2006………………………………………………………………………………………………..…47 TABLE 21. Number and Percentage of AIDS Mortality Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: 2001–2006…………………………………………………………...…………………….……47 TABLE 22. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Alcohol: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages…………………….49 TABLE 23. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Alcohol Dependence: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages…………………………………………...50 TABLE 24. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Any Illicit Drug: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages…………….51 TABLE 25. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Illicit Drug Dependence: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………………..………52 TABLE 26. Number of Chronic Liver Disease Deaths in Ward 1 in the District of Columbia: 2001–2005...55 TABLE 27. Number of Lung Cancer Deaths in Ward 1 in the District of Columbia: 2001–2005……..……57 TABLE 28. Number of COPD and Emphysema Deaths in Ward 1 in the District of Columbia: 2001–2005…………………………………………………………………………………………………..59 TABLE 29. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Alcohol Use: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages………………………………………..….61 TABLE 30. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Marijuana Use: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………….……………..…63 TABLE 31. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Use of Any Illicit Drug Other than Marijuana: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages………..………64 TABLE 32. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Cocaine Use: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages………………………………………….…………65 TABLE 33. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Nonmedical Use of Pain Relievers: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………66 TABLE 34. Percentage of Positive Drug Test Results for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia by Drug and Ward: Fiscal Year 2007…………………………………………………………………………..68 TABLE 35. Ward 1 Drug Test Results for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007…………………………………………………………………………………………………..69 TABLE 36. Ward 1 Drug Test Results by Gender for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007……………………………….……………………………….……………………..……69 TABLE 37. Ward 1 Drug Test Results by Race for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007………………………………………………………………………….……………………….70 TABLE 38. Ward 1 Drug Test Results by Age for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007……………………………………………………..……………………….…………………...71

District of Columbia: Community Profile 6

TABLE 39. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Cigarette Use: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………………………...…..72 TABLE 40. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Alcohol Use: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages………………………..75 TABLE 41. Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Illicit Drug Use: Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………….……76 FIGURES FIGURE 1. Rank-Ordered Violent and Property Crime Offenses in the District: Average Numbers between 2002 and 2006………………………………………………………………………………………….……21 FIGURE 2. Rank-Ordered Total Violent and Property Crime Offenses in the District in 2006……….…….22 FIGURE 3. Rank-Ordered Ward 1 Total Violent and Property Crime Offenses in 2006 ………..………….25 FIGURE 4. Number of Homicides in the District of Columbia by Ward: 2002–2006……………………….27 FIGURE 5. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Alcohol: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages…………………………………………………...49 FIGURE 6. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Alcohol Dependence: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………..…………………………………………...50 FIGURE 7. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Any Illicit Drug: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……..……………………………………...51 FIGURE 8. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Illicit Drug Dependence: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……….…………………………………………………52 FIGURE 9. Number of Chronic Liver Disease Deaths in the District of Columbia by Ward: 2001–2005…..54 FIGURE 10. Number of Lung Cancer Deaths in the District of Columbia by Ward: 2001–2005…………...56 FIGURE 11. Number of COPD and Emphysema Deaths in the District of Columbia by Ward: 2001–2005..58 FIGURE 12. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Alcohol Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages…….……………………………………………………………….61 FIGURE 13. Percent of Residents Aged 12 to 20 Reporting Past Month Underage Alcohol Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………………………………………..…...62 FIGURE 14. Percent of Residents Aged 12 to 20 Reporting Past Month Underage Binge Alcohol Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages………..………………………………………………...62 FIGURE 15. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Marijuana Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………………………………………………………..63 FIGURE 16. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Use of Any Illicit Drug Other than Marijuana: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……….…………………………64

District of Columbia: Community Profile 7

FIGURE 17. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Cocaine Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………………………………………………………..65 FIGURE 18. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Nonmedical Use of Pain Relievers: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages …………………………………………………..66 FIGURE 19. Percentage of Positive Drug Tests for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: 2004–2007…………………………………………………………………………………………………..67 FIGURE 20. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Cigarette Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages……………………………………………………………………..72 FIGURE 21. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Alcohol Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages………………………………..…...75 FIGURE 22. Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Illicit Drug Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages………………………………………..76 MAPS MAP 1. Average Rate of Newly Reported HIV (not AIDS) Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: 2001– 2006 ………………………………………………………………………………………………………...40 MAP 2. Average Rate of Newly Reported AIDS Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: 2001– 2006……........................................................................................................................................................43

District of Columbia: Community Profile 8

Overview

This is the latest in a series of reports produced by the DC Epidemiological Outcomes Workgroup (DCEOW). These reports compile available data on the consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and the consequences of use of these substances in the District of Columbia (District, DC). Previous reports have assessed substance abuse problems citywide and amongst District youth. This report, for the first time, assesses community level problems related to the use of alcohol, tobacco, and illegal drug substances. For the purposes of this report, community is defined as group(s) of people whose relationship is based on common geographical space or common interests, culture, shared values and institutions, and who are arranged in a social structure according to relationships developed in the community over a period of time1. In the District, the ward is the most common geographical definition of a community. Therefore, this report assesses drug- and alcohol-related crime, HIV/AIDS, mortality, and drug abuse/dependence citywide and across the District’s eight wards.

Indicators related to substance use consequences and consumption patterns presented in this report were the result of a large list of possible indicators suggested by DCEOW membership and ranked as high priority by these same members. Initial indicators were examined using a standard set of criteria including availability and validity of data, consistently collected data, sensitivity (in detecting change over time), and availability of attributable fractions (to explain incidents or cases related to alcohol and illicit drug use). Indicators that met these five criteria were then reviewed by the DCEOW members and rated as high, medium or low priority for the District using the data presented in the first report of this series. The first annual District of Columbia Epidemiological Profile details how these indicators were selected. This report is available online at www.cesar.umd.edu. DCEOW

The DCEOW was originally convened in March 2005 by the Department of Health Addiction, Prevention, and Recovery Administration (APRA) at the request of the Mayor’s Interagency Task Force on Substance Abuse Prevention, Treatment and Control. The members meet quarterly to collaborate on ways to strengthen the District’s data sources and to gain a more complete and accurate understanding of drug trends in the District. The current DCEOW mission is as follows:

Monitor the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs and the consequences of their use in DC to identify and prioritize the District’s prevention needs. To achieve this end, the DCEOW will oversee the

1 The definition of community was adapted by the DCEOW from a definition supplied by the New Mexico SEOW in October 2007.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: INTRODUCTION SSEECCTTIIOONN II

http://www.cesar.umd.edu/

District of Columbia: Community Profile 9

collection, interpretation, and dissemination of data that quantifies substance use and its consequences.

Organization of this Report

This report begins with demographic profiles of the District as a whole and each ward individually, with a description of each population including various demographic breakdowns based on 2000 Census Bureau data, the number of alcohol retailers and tobacco licenses, medical services, educational facilities, and law enforcement stations and specialty units. The profiles are followed by four consequences assessed citywide and by ward. Additional demographic information for all consequences (except HIV/AIDS) is provided for Ward 1, which was selected for special emphasis because APRA staff requested a focus on an individual ward representing the diverse demographics of all District residents. The consequences provided in this report include: crime (violent and property), arrests, HIV/AIDS, substance abuse dependence, and mortality due to alcohol, tobacco and illegal drugs. The final section of the report provides an overview of the consumption patterns for alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drugs in the District at the ward level. Also available on a regional level are the number of recovery meetings, recovery clubs, and available treatment programs in the District of Columbia.

This report was produced with funding from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration’s Center for Substance Abuse Prevention. It will be updated and expanded in future years as additional data and funding become available.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 10

SSEECCTTIIOONN IIII S

SNNAAPPSSHHOOTTSS

The purpose of this section is to provide the reader with an overview of each ward. Demographic profiles of the District as a whole and of each ward individually are provided on the next few pages. These snapshots include various demographic breakdowns based on 2000 Census Bureau data, the number of alcohol retailers and tobacco licenses in the District, medical services, educational facilities, and law enforcement stations and specialty units. Before reviewing the consequences of alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use, this section outlines the many differences and similarities in the District’s eight wards, and provides an essential background for understanding the information provided in this report.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 11

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA: SNAPSHOT

Total Population (2000)……………..…………………572,059 Sex

o Male……………………….…..269,366 o Female…..….…….……………302,693

Race o Black…………..……….……....343,312 o White………….……….…….....176,101 o Asian……………………….........15,189 o American Indian/Alaska Native.…1,713 o Other race…….………….…..….22,298 o Two or more races…….……..….13,446

Hispanic (of any race)…….…......…..44,953 D Tobacco Licenses………..….…1,127

Alcohol Retailers...………....….1,437

M Hospital Centers …….….….……. .8 Specialty Hospitals ….…….……....9 E Elementary………….…….……..235 Middle……………….…………..107

Senior High…………….…………85

Colleges/Universities….………....... L

Age o 0-24……..………..................187,629 o 25-34…..……………………101,762 o 35-44…………………………87,677 o 45-54…………………………75,310 o 55-64...…….…………………49,783 o 65 and over…..…….................69,898 o Youth (under 18)……............114,992

Median Age …….……………...…...34.6

iissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess

Meeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess

Edduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess

Junior High……………………….16

Laaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt

Police Stations/Substations….…....11

NOTE: 2000 Population Data. SOURCES: Population data were prepared by the DC Office of Planning/State Data Center from data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Alcohol Licenses data were taken from the DC Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration’s (ABRA) website at www.abra.dc.gov.

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from the Metropolitan Police Department website at www.mpdc.dc.gov. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 12

WARD 1: SNAPSHOT

Total population: ………………………….73,364 Sex

o Male……………………………........36,861 o Female………………………….........36,503

Race o Black………………………………...33,554 o White………………………………...23,276 o Asian………………………………….2,588 o American Indian/Alaska Native………..378 o Other race……………………………10,260 o Two or more races……………………3,308

Hispanic (of any race)…………………….18,109 Age

o 0-24…………………...…………......24,488 o 25-34…...……………………………17,959 o 35-44...………………………………12,007 o 45-54...………………………………..8,326 o 55-64...………………………………..4,900 o 65 and over...………………………....5,684 o Youth (under 18)…………………….13,102

Median Age ……………………………........31.8 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married……………………….57.4% o Now married, except separated……...25.6% o Separated……………………………..3.7% o Widowed………………….…………..5.0% o Divorced……………….……………...8.2%

Population Statistics (2000)

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or higher….68.4% o Bachelor’s degree or higher……..38.5% o Graduate or professional degree…19.9%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed………………..……….92.5% o Unemployed………………..……...7.5%

Poverty o Families…………………….…….19.7% o Individuals……………….……….22.0%

Housing Units o Total……………………………..34,632 o Occupied……………….………....90.7% o Vacant………………….………......9.3%

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers ……………………. .1 Specialty Hospitals …………………...0

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses………..……..….. .179 Alcohol Retailers...……………..……239

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt

Police Stations/Substations………………...2

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss Latino Liaison Unit Deaf and Hard Hearing Liaison Unit

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary…………………………...15 Middle…………………………………6 Junior High…………………………….3 Senior High……………………………6 Colleges/Universities……………….....1

o Howard University NOTE: 2000 Population Data. SOURCES: Population data were prepared by the DC Office of Planning/State Data Center from data provided by the U.S. Census Bureau. Alcohol Licenses data were taken from the DC Alcoholic Beverage Regulation Administration’s (ABRA) website at www.abra.dc.gov.

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 13

WARD 2: SNAPSHOT

Total population: …………………………….68,869

Sex o Male………………………………........35,167 o Female…………………………….........33,702

Race o Black…………………………………...13,723 o White…………………………………...45,036 o Asian…………………………………….5,269 o American Indian/Alaska Native…………..234 o Other race………...………….…………..2,706 o Two or more races………………………1,901

Hispanic (of any race)…………………………6,997 Age

o 0-24……………………...…………......23,299 o 25-34…...………………………………16,720 o 35-44...………………..…………………9,788 o 45-54...……………….………………….7,599 o 55-64...………………….……………….5,191 o 65 and over...…………………………....6,272 o Youth (under 18)………………………..5,513

Median Age …………………..……………......31.7 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married………………………….61.2% o Now married, except separated………...23.9% o Separated………………..……………….2.6% o Widowed………………..……………….4.8% o Divorced………………..………………..7.4%

Population Statistics (2000)

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or higher….86.8% o Bachelor’s degree or higher……..64.1% o Graduate or professional degree....35.7%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed………………………..91.8% o Unemployed……………………....8.2%

Poverty o Families………………………….11.6% o Individuals……………………….18.7%

Housing Units o Total……………………………..39,362 o Occupied………………………....91.9% o Vacant………………….……….....8.1%

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers………………………..2 Specialty Hospitals ………………….....0

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses…………...….…….. .281 Alcohol Retailers...…….………………591

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt

Police Stations/Substations……………..….....1

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss Asian Liaison Unit

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary…………………………….18 Middle……………………..…..………..5 Junior High……………………………...0 Senior High……………………………..6 Colleges/Universities…………………...3

o George Washington University o Georgetown University o Strayer University

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 14 WARD 3: SNAPSHOT

Total population: …………………………….73,718 Sex

o Male………………………………........32,248 o Female……………………………........41,470

Race o Black…………………………………….4,259 o White…………………………………..61,647 o Asian…………………………………….4,231 o American Indian/Alaska Native…………..140 o Other race……………………….………1,549 o Two or more races ……………………...1,892

Hispanic (of any race)........................................5,027 Age

o 0-24……………………...…………......18,681 o 25-34…...………………………………15,519 o 35-44...…………………………………10,863 o 45-54......……………………………….10,864 o 55-64...………………………………….7,653 o 65 and over.…………………………....10,138 o Youth (under 18)………………………..8,817

Median Age ………………………..………......37.4 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married………………………….41.6% o Now married, except separated………..43.2% o Separated…………..……………………1.5% o Widowed……………..…………………5.9% o Divorced…………..…………………….7.8%

Population Statistics (2000)

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or higher….95.7% o Bachelor’s degree or higher……..79.1% o Graduate or professional degree…48.7%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed………………………..90.4% o Unemployed……………………....9.6%

Poverty o Families…………………………...2.7% o Individuals………………………...7.4%

Housing Units o Total………………………….....38,734 o Occupied………………………...96.0% o Vacant………………………….....4.0%

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers………………………..1 Specialty Hospitals ………………….....2

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary……………….…………...30 Middle………………….……………..16 Senior High…………….……………..11 Junior High…………………………….1 Colleges/Universities…….…………….3

o American University o George Washington University o University of the District of Columbia

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses………..……………….. .69

Alcohol Retailers...……………………..…147

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt Police Stations/Substations……………………...1

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss None

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 15 WARD 4: SNAPSHOT

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or higher…77.9% o Bachelor’s degree or higher…….32.9% o Graduate or professional degree...16.7%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed………………………..93.4% o Unemployed……………………....6.6%

Poverty o Families…………………………...7.9% o Individuals……………………….12.0%

Housing Units o Total……………………………..31,044 o Occupied………………………....93.6% o Vacant……………………….….....6.4%

Total population: …………………………….74,092 Sex

o Male………………………………........34,454 o Female……………………………........39,638

Race o Black…………………………………...52,407 o White…………………………………..13,112 o Asian…………….……..………………….721 o American Indian/Alaska Native…………..222 o Other race…..…………………………...5,369 o Two or more races……………………....2,261

Hispanic (of any race)………………………...9,237 Age

o 0-24……………………...…………......21,414 o 25-34…...………..………………………9,438 o 35-44...…………………………………11,629 o 45-54......……………………………….11,478 o 55-64...………….……………………….7,441 o 65 and over…………………………….12,692 o Youth (under 18)……………………….15,691

Median Age…………………………………….40.3 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married………………………….37.8% o Now married, except separated…….…..37.3% o Separated…………………………...……4.2% o Widowed………………………….……10.0% o Divorced………………………..………10.7%

Population Statistics (2000)

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers………………………..0 Specialty Hospitals …………………….1

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses………..……………….. .117 Alcohol Retailers...………………….....……84

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss vestigations Branch

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary…………………….….…...36 Middle……………………….…….…..16 Junior High……………………………..1 Senior High………………….….……..11 Colleges/Universities……….…….…….0

Police Stations/Substations………………….….....1

Civil Rights and Force In Force Investigation Team

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 16

WARD 5: SNAPSHOT

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or higher…..72.4% o Bachelor’s degree or higher……...20.7% o Graduate or professional degree…..9.0%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed…………………….…..84.8% o Unemployed……………………...15.2%

Poverty o Families………………………….14.3% o Individuals……………………….20.0%

Housing Units o Total……………………………..32,258 o Occupied………………………....87.2% o Vacant…………………………....12.8%

Total population: …………………………….72,527 Sex

o Male………………………………........33,840 o Female……………………………........38,687

Race o Black…………………………………...62,846 o White……………………………………6,796 o Asian………………………………………607 o American Indian/Alaska Native…………..230 o Other race……………..…………………..897 o Two or more races………………………1,151

Hispanic (of any race)………………………...1,856 Age

o 0-24……………………...…………......23,358 o 25-34…...……………..…………………8,764 o 35-44...…………………………………10,734 o 45-54......……………………………….10,077 o 55-64...………….……………………….6,670 o 65 and over…………………………….12,924 o Youth (under 18)………………………15,328

Median Age ……………………..…………......38.9 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married…………………….…….42.6% o Now married, except separated….……..29.2% o Separated………………………..……….5.1% o Widowed……………………………….11.5% o Divorced………………………………..11.5%

Population Statistics (2000)

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers………………………..2 Specialty Hospitals ………………….....4

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses………..………….. .152 Alcohol Retailers...………………....….90

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt

Police Stations/Substations…………….….....1

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss mily Violence and Child Protection Unit

Forensic Biology Section Forensic Science Services Division Missing Persons Section

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary…………………..………...25 Middle…………………….….………..20 Junior High……………………………..3 Senior High………………..…………..23 Colleges/Universities…….……….….....3

o Catholic University o Gallaudet University o Trinity College

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 17 WARD 6: SNAPSHOT

Total population: …………………………….68,035 Sex

o Male………………………………........34,037 o Female……………………………........33,998

Race o Black…………………………………...42,678 o White…………………………………..21,513 o Asian…………………………………….1,339 o American Indian/Alaska Native…………..202 o Other race…………………………………872 o Two or more races………………………1,431

Hispanic (of any race)…………………………2,053 Age

o 0-24……………………...…………......18,074 o 25-34…...………………………………14,016 o 35-44...…………………………………11,934 o 45-54...…………………….…………….9,939 o 55-64...…………………….…………….6,287 o 65 and over……………………………...7,785 o Youth (under 18)……………………….11,657

Median Age ………………………………........36.6 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married………………….……….50.7% o Now married, except separated….……..25.1% o Separated…………………….….……….4.5% o Widowed………………………..……….8.7% o Divorced………………………..………11.0%

Population Statistics (2000)

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or higher…..78.8% o Bachelor’s degree or higher….......43.6% o Graduate or professional degree…22.5%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed………………………..90.4% o Unemployed……………………....9.6%

Poverty o Families………………………….19.1% o Individuals……………………….21.1%

Housing Units o Total……………………………..35,510 o Occupied………………………....90.0% o Vacant…………………………....10.0%

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers…………………..0 Specialty Hospitals …………….....1

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary………….…………...24 Middle………………….………..11 Junior High……………………….4 Senior High…………….…………4 Colleges/Universities……….….....2

o National Defense University o Southeastern University

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses………..…......147 Alcohol Retailers...………….….202

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt Police Stations/Substations………………………….….....1

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss

es and Fraud Unit Auto Theft Unit Gang Crimes/Narcotics

Computer Crime and Forensic Unit Harbor Patrol Domestic Violence Unit Major Crash Investigations Executive Protection Unit Major Narcotics Branch Explosive Ordnance Disposal Unit Pawn Unit Prostitution Unit

Air Support Unit Field Operations Support Unit Arson Task Force Financial Crim

Bank/Hotel Robbery Squad Gay and Lesbian Liaison Unit

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 18 WARD 7: SNAPSHOT

Total population: …………………………….70,540 Sex

o Male………………………………........30,988 o Female…………………….………........39,552

Race o Black…………………………………...68,312 o White………………………………………976 o Asian………………………………………133 o American Indian/Alaska Native…………..155 o Other race…………….……………………246 o Two or more races………………………...718

Hispanic (of any race)…………………………..658 Age

o 0-24……………………...…………......25,141 o 25-34…...…………..……………………8,808 o 35-44...…………………………………10,634 o 45-54...…………….…………………….9,382 o 55-64...…………….…………………….6,726 o 65 and over.…………………….…….....9,849 o Youth (under 18)……………………….19,420

Median Age ………………….…………….......36.2 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married………………………….45.5% o Now married, except separated………..26.6% o Separated………………………..………6.3% o Widowed………………………..………9.8% o Divorced…………………….…………11.8%

Population Statistics (2000)

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or higher…71.1% o Bachelor’s degree or higher…….12.6% o Graduate or professional degree....4.4%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed………………………..86.3% o Unemployed……………………...13.7%

Poverty o Families………………………….21.6% o Individuals……………………….24.9%

Housing Units o Total……………………………..33,651 o Occupied………………………....87.3% o Vacant…………………………....12.7%

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers…………………….…..0 Specialty Hospitals……………….……..0

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses………..……………..…...92 Alcohol Retailers...……………………...…..48

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss Environmental Crimes Unit Family Liaison Specialist Unit Horse Mounted Unit

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary………….……..…….……...29 Middle………………..….……….……..12 Junior High………………………………0 Senior High……………..….…………….5 Colleges/Universities…..…….…………..0

Police Stations/Substations………………..….....3

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 19 WARD 8: SNAPSHOT

Total population: …………………………….70,914 Sex

o Male………………………………........31,771 o Female……………………………........39,143

Race o Black…………………………………..65,533 o White……………………………………3,745 o Asian……………………………………...301 o American Indian/Alaska Native………….152 o Other race………….……………………..399 o Two or more races………………………..784

Hispanic (of any race)………………………..1,016 Age

o 0-24……………………....…..……......33,174 o 25-34…...…………….………..………10,538 o 35-44...………………………..…….…10,088 o 45-54……………………………………7,645 o 55-64...………………………………….4,915 o 65 and over...…………………………....4,554 o Youth (under 18)………………………25,464

Median Age …………….…………………......27.2 Marital Status (age 15 years and over)

o Never married………………………….50.6% o Now married, except separated………..26.0% o Separated……………….……………….6.4% o Widowed……………….……………….7.0% o Divorced……………….………………..9.9%

Population Statistics (2000)

Education (age 25 years and over) o High school graduate or

higher…...66.3% o Bachelor’s degree or higher……......8.0% o Graduate or professional degree…...2.8%

Civilian Labor Force Status (age 16 and over) o Employed…………….……….…..78.0% o Unemployed……………….……..22.0%

Poverty o Families………………….……….33.1% o Individuals…………….………….36.0%

Housing Units o Total……………………………..29,654 o Occupied……………….………....84.4% o Vacant………………….………....15.6%

MMeeddiiccaall SSeerrvviicceess Hospital Centers………………………..2 Specialty Hospitals……………………..1

EEdduuccaattiioonnaall FFaacciilliittiieess Elementary…………….……………...29 Middle………………………….……..10 Junior High…………………………….1 Senior High………………….…………6 Colleges/Universities……….………….0

DDiissttrriibbuuttiioonn LLiicceennsseess Tobacco Licenses………..…………….. .90 Alcohol Retailers...…………………...….36

LLaaww EEnnffoorrcceemmeenntt

Police Stations/Substations…………….….....1

SSppeecciiaallttyy PPoolliiccee UUnniittss//DDiivviissiioonnss None

Tobacco Licenses data were provided by the Addiction Prevention and Recovery Administration (APRA), a division of the DC Department of Health. Medical Services data were taken from the DC Citizen Atlas website. Law Enforcement data were taken from DC Citizen Atlas website. Educational Facilities data were taken from www.dcschoolsearch.dc.gov.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 20

SSEECCTTIIOONN IIIIII

For the consequence category, we have included eight indicators that are a part of the

crime and criminal justice Center for Substance Abuse Prevention National Outcome Measures (CSAP NOMs) domain. The data presented within each of the eight indicators listed below allow us to assess the prevalence of both drug- and alcohol-related violent and property crime in the District of Columbia.

• Violent Crime o Robberies o Sex Abuse o Assault with a Deadly Weapon o Homicide

• Property Crime o Burglary o Theft o Theft from Auto o Stolen Autos

These eight indicators were selected in accordance with CSAP requirements. The

purpose of these selected indicators is to describe major community-wide consequences of alcohol and illicit drug use. The following diagrams and tables provide an in-depth look at alcohol-related violent crime, drug-related property crime, and drug-related homicides in the District of Columbia.

The MPD records homicide occurrences in a database separate from all other violent crime. Because of this, it was possible to include detailed information about homicide occurrences in the District.

All statistics presented here are based on preliminary DC index crime data. The data

do not represent official statistics submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under the Uniform Crime Reporting program (UCR). All preliminary offenses are coded based on DC criminal code and not the FBI offense classifications. All statistics are subject to change due to a variety of reasons, such as a change in classification, the determination that certain offense reports were unfounded, or late reporting. Please understand that any comparisons between MPD preliminary data as published here and the official crime statistics published by the FBI under the UCR Program are inaccurate and misleading. Excludes crimes for which no address could be identified (between 1% and 3% of all crimes). All homicide data are verified through the Violent Crimes Branch (VCB).

Source: Geocoded Analytical Services Application (ASAP) data as of May 7, 2007.

CCOONNSSEEQQUUEENNCCEE:: VVIIOOLLEENNTT AANNDD PPRROOPPEERRTTYY CCRRIIMMEE

District of Columbia: Community Profile 21 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALL VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME

55––YYEEAARR TTRREENNDD:: 22000022––22000066 Figure 1: Rank-Ordered Violent

and Property Crime Offenses in the District: Average Numbers between

2002 and 2006

Theft from Auto: The number of thefts from autos in the District decreased 33.5% between 2002 and 2006.

Burglary: The number of burglaries decreased 25.9% between 2002 and 2006.

Stolen Auto: The number of stolen auto offenses in the District decreased 25.1% between 2002 and 2006.

Theft from Auto (avg. = 8,313)

Stolen Auto (avg. = 7,571)

Assault with a Deadly Weapon (ADW): The number of ADW offenses decreased 14.5% between 2002 and 2006.

Sex Abuse: The number of sex abuse offenses in the District decreased 12.4% between 2002 and 2006.

Robbery: The number of robberies decreased 7.2% between 2002 and 2006.

Theft: The number of theft offenses increased 5.7% between 2002 and 2006.

Theft (avg. = 7,557)

Burglary (avg. = 4,487)

Robbery (avg. = 4,074)

Assault with a Deadly Weapon (avg. = 3,595)

Sex Abuse (avg. = 343)

HIGHLIGHTS

• Overall, violent and property crime offenses in the District decreased between 2002 and 2006, except for theft which increased nearly six percent.

• Theft from auto, stolen autos, theft, and burglary were the four most frequently reported property crimes in the District.

• Although theft from auto (n=8,313) was the most frequently reported property crime, it also had the greatest overall decline (-33.5%) from 2002 to 2006.

• Burglary and stolen auto offenses declined approximately 25 percent; ADW, sex abuse, and robbery decreased 14.5 percent, 12.4 percent, and 7.2 percent respectively.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 22 DISTRICT-WIDE: ALL VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME

11––YYEEAARR TTRREENNDD,, 22000055––22000066 Stolen Auto: The number of stolen auto

offenses in the District decreased 7.7% between 2005 and 2006.

Robbery: The number of District robberies decreased 4.4% between 2005 and 2006.

Theft: The number of theft offenses decreased 1.0% between 2005 and 2006.

Sex Abuse: The number of sex abuse offenses increased 10.7% between 2005 and 2006.

Theft from Auto: The number of thefts from autos increased 3.2% between 2005 and 2006.

Burglary: The number of burglaries increased 0.6% between 2005 and 2006.

Assault with a Deadly Weapon: The number of ADW offenses in the District increased 0.4% between 2005 and 2006.

Figure 2: Rank-Ordered Total Violent and Property Crime Offenses

in the District in 2006 (n = 32,296)

Theft (n = 7,425)

Theft from Auto (n = 7,294)

Stolen Auto (n = 6,145)

Robbery (n = 3,885)

Burglary (n = 3,882)

Assault with a Deadly Weapon (n = 3,348)

Sex Abuse (n = 317)

• Theft, stolen autos, and robbery were three of the four most frequently reported violent and property crimes in the District in 2005 and 2006; however, each of the three decreased during this time while theft from autos increased. However, trends varied within the wards.

o Ward 8 had the greatest percent increase (44.6%) in theft offenses, while Ward 6 had the greatest decrease (-18%) between 2005 and 2006.

o Ward 8 had the greatest percent increase (12.5%) of stolen autos, while Ward 3 had the greatest decrease (-34.6%) between 2005 and 2006.

o Ward 4 had the greatest percent increase (12.3%) of robbery offenses, while Ward 7 had the greatest decrease (-14.3%) between 2005 and 2006.

• Sex abuse, theft from auto, burglary, and assault with a deadly weapon (ADW) offenses increased in the District between 2005 and 2006. Within the wards the following trends were noted:

o Sex abuse offenses increased from 288 in 2005 to 317 in 2006, with the greatest percent increase (63.0%) during this time occurring in Ward 1.

o Theft from auto offenses had the greatest percent increase (36.3%) in Ward 2, while Ward 8 had the greatest decrease (-31.6%) between 2005 and 2006.

o Burglary offenses had the greatest percent increase (27.8%) in Ward 1, while Ward 6 decreased 18.0 percent between 2005 and 2006.

o Of all violent and property crimes, ADW offenses changed the least (0.4%) between 2005 and 2006; the largest decrease (-20.0%) was recorded in Ward 3, and the largest increase (18.8%) was recorded in Ward 2 during this period.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 23

DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL- AND DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME

Table 1: Estimated Number of District of Columbia Alcohol-Related Violent Crime Offenses and

Drug-Related Property Crime Offenses: 2002–2006

Attributable Fraction*

US Estimate Total # Estimated #

Alcohol/Drug Related

Total # Estimated #

Alcohol/Drug Related

Total # Estimated #

Alcohol/Drug Related

Total # Estimated #

Alcohol/Drug Related

Total # Estimated #

Alcohol/Drug Related

Robbery 3% 4,188 126 4,418 133 3,816 114 4,063 122 3,885 117 Sex Abuse 23% 362 83 440 101 306 70 288 66 317 73 Assault with a Deadly Weapon (ADW) 30% 3,916 1,175 3,947 1,184 3,431 1,029 3,335 1,001 3,348 1,004 Total --- 8,466 1,384 8,805 1,418 7,553 1,213 7,686 1,189 7,550 1,194

Burglary 30% 5,237 1,571 5,011 1,503 4,447 1,334 3,857 1,157 3,882 1,165 Theft 30% 7,025 2,108 8,053 2,416 7,781 2,334 7,500 2,250 7,425 2,228 Theft from Auto 30% 10,970 3,291 9,008 2,702 7,225 2,168 7,068 2,120 7,294 2,188 Stolen Auto 7% 8,203 574 8,955 627 7,897 553 6,655 466 6,145 430 Total --- 31,435 7,544 31,027 7,248 27,350 6,389 25,080 5,993 24,746 6,011

2004 2005 2006

District of Columbia

Property Crime Offenses: Drug-Related

Violent Crime Offenses: Alcohol-Related

2002 2003

NOTES: * Attributable fraction percent estimates for alcohol-related violent crimes and drug-related property crimes were provided by the State Epidemiological System (SEDS). Estimates of the percentage of crimes attributable to illicit drugs are derived primarily from self-reports of incarcerated offenders. The actual percentages attributable to alcohol or drugs may vary across geographic units or subpopulations.

HIGHLIGHTS

• Among violent crimes in the United States, approximately three percent of robberies, 23 percent of sexual assaults, and 30 percent of assaults with a deadly weapon (ADW) are estimated by using attributable fractions (to explain incidents or cases related to alcohol use).

• Among property crimes in the United States, approximately 30 percent of burglaries, theft offenses, and thefts from auto, and seven percent of stolen autos are estimated to be drug related.

• When the attributable fractions were applied to District crime, theft and theft from auto offenses were the top two drug-related offenses in 2005 and 2006.

• Assault with a deadly weapon was the most frequently reported alcohol-related violent crime in the District each year between 2002 through 2006, although the estimated number has declined slightly during this time.

NOTES: All statistics presented here are based on preliminary DC index crime data. SOURCE: Geocoded Analytical Services Application (ASAP) Preliminary Crime Data provided by the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau. Attributable fraction percent estimates for alcohol-related violent crimes and drug-related property crimes were provided by the State Epidemiological System (SEDS) from The Economic Costs of Alcohol and Drug Abuse in The United States – 1992 (http://www.nida.nih.gov/economiccosts/index.html). Estimates of the percentage of crimes attributable to illicit drugs are derived primarily from self-reports of incarcerated offenders. The actual percentages attributable to alcohol or drugs may vary across geographic units or subpopulations.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 24

DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL- AND DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME BY WARD

Table 2: Estimated Number of District of Columbia Alcohol-Related Violent Crime Offenses and

Drug-Related Property Crime Offenses by Ward in 2006 Attributable

Fraction* US Estimate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Unknown

Robbery 3% 117 23 15 3 12 18 16 14 16 0 Sex Abuse 23% 73 10 5 2 8 12 7 11 18 0 Assault with a Deadly Weapon (ADW) 30% 1,004 136 101 10 86 163 138 161 208 2 Total Alcohol Related --- 1,194 169 121 15 106 193 161 186 242 2

Burglary 30% 1,165 182 204 70 93 169 153 135 157 2 Theft 30% 2,228 270 712 224 178 234 325 122 161 3 Theft from Auto 30% 2,188 436 493 115 138 270 405 205 119 8 Stolen Auto 7% 430 64 33 6 47 72 65 73 69 1 Total Drug Related --- 6,011 952 1,442 415 456 745 948 535 506 14

Violent Crime Offenses: Estimated Number Related to Alcohol Use

WARD

Property Crime Offenses: Estimated Number Related to Drug Use

DC2006

NOTES: Estimated numbers are rounded to the nearest whole number. *Attributable fraction percent estimates for alcohol-related violent crimes and drug-related property crimes were provided by the State Epidemiological System (SEDS). Estimates of percentage of crimes attributable to illicit drugs are derived primarily from self-reports of incarcerated offenders. Actual percentages attributable to alcohol or drugs may vary across geographic units or subpopulations.

HIGHLIGHTS

• Based on the attributable fractions, alcohol-related violent crimes occurred most frequently in Ward 8 in 2006.

• In 2006, Ward 8 had the greatest number of alcohol-related sex abuse and ADW offenses.

• Ward 1 had a greater number of estimated alcohol-related robberies than all other wards in 2006.

• In 2006, Ward 2 had the greatest number of estimated drug-related burglary, theft, and theft from auto offenses.

• In 2006, Ward 3 had an estimated total of 15 alcohol-related violent crimes, the lowest of all eight wards; Ward 3 also had the lowest number of all estimated drug-related property crimes, except theft (which was lowest in Ward 7).

NOTE: All statistics presented here are based on preliminary DC index crime data. SOURCE: Geocoded Analytical Services Application (ASAP) Preliminary Crime Data provided by the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau. Attributable fraction percent estimates for alcohol-related violent crimes and drug-related property crimes were provided by the State Epidemiological System (SEDS) from The Economic Costs of Alcohol and Drug Abuse in The United States – 1992 (http://www.nida.nih.gov/economiccosts/index.html). Estimates of the percentage of crimes attributable to illicit drugs are derived primarily from self-reports of incarcerated offenders. The actual percentages attributable to alcohol or drugs may vary across geographic units or subpopulations.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 25

WARD 1: ALL VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME

Table 3: Total Number and Percent of All Ward 1 Violent and Property Crime Offenses in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

Total # % Total # % Total # % Total # % Total # %

Robbery 727 17.4 819 18.5 741 19.4 800 19.7 765 19.7 Sex Abuse 54 14.9 62 14.1 41 13.4 27 9.4 44 13.9 Assault with a Deadly Weapon (ADW) 513 13.1 508 12.9 399 11.6 405 12.1 453 13.5 Total 1,294 1,389 1,181 1,232 1,262

Burglary 833 15.9 655 13.1 490 11.0 474 12.3 606 15.6 Theft 848 12.1 985 12.2 904 11.6 853 11.4 899 12.1 Theft from Auto 1,581 14.4 1,607 17.8 1,240 17.2 1,140 16.1 1,454 19.9 Stolen Auto 1,002 12.2 1,006 11.2 928 11.8 828 12.4 914 14.9 Total 4,264 4,253 3,562 3,295 3,873

Property Crime Offenses

CRIME OFFENSES

NO TE: Column t ot als will not equal 100%. P ercent ages depict t he percent of Ward 1 offenses among all incident s occurring in t he eight wards of t he Dist rict .

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006WARD 1

Violent Crime Offenses

Figure 3: Rank-Ordered Ward 1 Total

Violent and Property Crime Offenses in 2006 (n=5,135)

Theft from Auto (n = 1,454)

Stolen Auto (n = 914)

Theft (n = 899)

Robbery (n = 765)

Burglary (n = 606)

Assault with a Deadly Weapon (n = 453)

Sex Abuse (n = 44)

HHIIGGHHLLIIGGHHTTSS

• Property crimes decreased steadily in Ward 1 from 2003 to 2005 and then increased slightly in 2006.

• Between 2002 and 2006, violent crimes fluctuated slightly, but always ranged between 1,200 and 1,400 offenses.

• Theft from auto was the most frequently reported violent or property crime each year from 2002 through 2006.

• Nearly 20 percent of all robbery and theft from auto offenses in the District in 2006 occurred in Ward 1. All other violent and property crimes ranged from 12-16 percent.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 26

WARD 1: ALCOHOL- AND DRUG-RELATED VIOLENT AND PROPERTY CRIME

Table 4: Estimated Number of Alcohol- and Drug-Related Crimes in Ward 1:

2002–2006

Attributable Fraction*

U.S. Estimates 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Violent Crime Offenses: Alcohol-Related Robbery 3% 22 25 22 24 23 Sex Abuse 23% 12 14 9 6 10 Assault with a Deadly Weapon (ADW) 30% 154 152 120 122 136 Total -- 188 191 151 152 169 Property Crime Offenses: Drug-Related Burglary 30% 250 197 147 142 182 Theft 30% 254 296 271 256 270 Theft from Auto 30% 474 482 372 342 436 Stolen Auto 7% 70 70 65 58 64 Total -- 1,048 1,045 855 798 952

WARD 1 YEAR

HIGHLIGHTS

• Based on the attributable fractions, ADW was the most frequently reported alcohol- related violent crime in Ward 1 each year, and theft from auto was the most frequently reported drug-related property crime between 2002 and 2006.

• All alcohol- and drug-related crimes decreased in Ward 1 between 2003 and 2005, then increased in 2006, except robbery which fluctuated between 22 and 25 alcohol-related offenses during this time.

NOTE: *Attributable fraction percent estimates for alcohol-related violent crimes and drug-related property crimes were provided by the State Epidemiological System (SEDS) from The Economic Costs of Alcohol and Drug Abuse in The United States – 1992 (http://www.nida.nih.gov/economiccosts/index.html). Estimates of the percentage of crimes attributable to illicit drugs are derived primarily from self- reports of incarcerated offenders. The actual percentages attributable to alcohol or drugs may vary across geographic units or subpopulations. All statistics presented here are based on preliminary DC index crime data. SOURCE: Geocoded Analytical Services Application (ASAP) Preliminary Crime Data provided by the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 27 DISTRICT-WIDE: HOMICIDE BY WARD

Figure 4: Number of Homicides in the District of Columbia by Ward: 2002–2006

N um

be r

of H

om ic

id es

Ward 1 25 18 9 19 20

Ward 2 6 8 6 14 7

Ward 3 3 1 1 0 2

Ward 4 23 15 16 9 7

Ward 5 55 50 37 40 26

Ward 6 28 27 20 31 21

Ward 7 60 58 51 28 40

Ward 8 62 71 57 55 46

T ot al 262 248 197 196 169

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

HIGHLIGHTS • Overall, the number of homicides in the District decreased 36 percent from 262 in 2002, to 169 in

2006. • Compared to 2002, in 2006 the number of reported homicides decreased for all wards except Ward

2, which stayed about the same. • In each year since 2002, Ward 8 consistently had more homicides than all other wards, while Ward

3 consistently had fewer homicides than all other wards. • Wards 4, 5, 6, and 8 reported fewer homicides in 2006 than in any of the prior four years.

Source: Violent Crimes Branch (VCB) Homicide Data provided by the VCB through the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 28

DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG-RELATED HOMICIDE BY WARD

Table 5: Ward-Level Drug-Related* Homicides in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

Drug- Related (#)

% of Ward Total

Drug- Related (#)

% of Ward Total

Drug- Related (#)

% of Ward Total

Drug- Related (#)

% of Ward Total

Drug- Related (#)

% of Ward Total

Total 89 34.0 63 25.8 33 16.8 19 9.7 19 11.2 Ward 1 6 24.0 5 27.8 2 22.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 Ward 2 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 14.3 Ward 3 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Ward 4 5 21.7 4 26.7 2 12.5 3 33.3 3 42.9 Ward 5 27 49.1 10 20.0 7 18.9 5 12.5 6 23.1 Ward 6 6 21.4 7 25.9 6 30.0 4 12.9 3 14.3 Ward 7 26 43.3 18 31.0 11 21.6 1 3.6 2 5.0 Ward 8 19 30.6 19 26.8 5 8.8 6 10.9 4 8.7

WARD

20062002 2003 2004 2005

Note: *A drug-related homicide means that the primary motive for the homicide was recorded as “drugs” by the DC Metropolitan Police Department. HIGHLIGHTS • Approximately one in ten homicides committed in the District in 2006 was drug related. • Consistent with the five-year trend in total District homicides which decreased, drug-related

homicides also decreased, from 89 in 2002 to 19 in both 2005 and 2006. • More drug-related homicides occurred in Ward 5 than any other ward each year between

2002 and 2006, except 2003. • Wards 5 and 7 experienced the greatest decreases (78 percent and 92.3 percent respectively)

in drug-related homicides between 2002 and 2006. • Ward 3 reported no drug-related homicides between 2002 and 2006; Ward 2 reported no

drug-related homicides between 2002 and 2005 and only one in 2006. • Wards 1, 4, and 6 reported fewer than 10 drug-related homicides each year between 2002 and

2006.

Source: Violent Crimes Branch (VCB) Homicide Data provided by the VCB through the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 29

WARD 1: HOMICIDE

Table 6: Descriptives for Ward 1 Homicides in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

Total # % Total # % Total # % Total # % Total # % Total # of Homicides 25 9.5 18 7.3 9 4.6 19 9.7 20 11.8

Male 19 8.3 18 7.9 9 5.2 16 9.1 20 12.8 Female 6 18.2 0 0.0 0 0.0 3 14.3 0 0.0

Black 22 9.1 14 6.1 9 4.7 15 8.2 18 11.5 White 1 11.1 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 16.7 0 0.0

Hispanic 2 22.2 4 40.0 0 0.0 3 40.0 2 20.0 Other 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0

Altercation 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 25.0 Argument 9 15.5 6 9.2 0 0.0 7 12.5 5 17.2

Child Abuse 1 25.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 2 66.7 Domestic 2 11.8 1 10.0 1 11.1 1 7.1 0 0.0

Drug 6 6.7 5 7.9 2 6.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Gang Related 1 12.5 1 33.3 0 0.0 2 66.7 0 0.0

Mistaken Identity 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Negligence 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 1 50.0 0 0.0 Retaliation 4 15.4 1 3.4 2 5.3 3 8.3 5 20.8 Robbery 0 0.0 1 3.3 3 16.7 5 29.4 0 0.0

Other 1 7.1 1 16.7 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 Unknown 1 4.2 2 4.9 1 2.6 0 0.0 7 10.4

WARD 1

Motive

Decedent's Race

Decedent's Gender

20062002 2003 2004 2005

NOTES: Percentages equal the percent occuring in Ward 1 out of the total for all Wards; therefore, columns will not add up to 100%. A drug-related homicide means that the primary motive for the homicide was recorded as “drugs” by the DC Metropolitan Police Department.

HIGHLIGHTS

• The number of homicides in Ward 1 decreased 64 percent between 2002 and 2004, then doubled in 2005, and remained about the same in 2006.

• In 2006, nearly 12 percent of all District homicides took place in Ward 1, which was the highest percentage in the past five-year period.

• In 2006, all homicide decedents in Ward 1 were male and 90 percent were Black.

• Drug-related homicides decreased each year between 2002 and 2004 in Ward 1. In both 2005 and 2006 there were no drug-related homicides reported in Ward 1.

• In 2006, arguments and retaliation accounted for 50 percent of all motives for homicide in Ward 1.

SOURCE: Violent Crimes Branch (VCB) Homicide Data provided by the VCB through the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 30

For this consequence category, we include eleven indicators that are part of the crime

and criminal justice Center for Substance Abuse Prevention National Outcome Measures (CSAP NOMs) domain. The data presented within each of the eleven indicators (listed below) allow us to assess the prevalence of both alcohol- and drug-related arrests in the District of Columbia.

• Alcohol-Related Arrests o Drinking in Public o Possession of Open Alcohol

• Alcohol- and/or Drug-Related Arrests o Driving Under the Influence o Driving Under the Influence and Refusing a Test o Driving While Intoxicated

• Drug-Related Arrests o Conspiracy to Distribute o Distribution o Possession o Possession with Intent to Distribute o Possession of Drug Paraphernalia o Any Other Narcotic Violation

These eleven indicators were selected in accordance with CSAP requirements. The

purpose of these selected indicators is to describe a major community-wide consequence of alcohol and illicit drug use. The following tables provide an in-depth look at alcohol- and/or drug-related arrests for DC, both as a whole and at the ward level.

Alcohol- and drug-related arrest data were provided by the Metropolitan Police

Department (MPD). Totals are based solely on the top arrest charge. One person may have been booked on more than one arrest charge. Excludes arrests for which no address could be identified (between 1% and 3% of all arrests).

Source: Geocoded Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) data as of May 7, 2007.

CCOONNSSEEQQUUE SSE

ENNC ECCT

CE TI

E:: AAR IOONN I

RR IVV

REESSTT

District of Columbia: Community Profile 31

HIGHLIGHTS

DISTRICT-WIDE: SUBSTANCE-RELATED DRIVING AND ALCOHOL-RELATED ARRESTS

Table 7: Number of Adult and Juvenile Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Total Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arrests

3,633 3,996 5,376 5,839 5,724 3,631 3,993 5,376 5,839 5,721 2 3 0 0 3

Driving Under the Influence - Alcohol/Drugs

322 359 285 315 701 322 358 285 315 701 0 1 0 0 0

Driving Under the Influence - Refusing 193 189 207 227 258 193 189 207 227 258 0 0 0 0 0 Driving While Intoxicated - 953 1,020 1,141 1,059 899 953 1,020 1,141 1,059 899 0 0 0 0 0 Drinking in Public 300 230 320 282 273 300 230 320 282 272 0 0 0 0 1 Possession of Open Alcohol 1,865 2,198 3,423 3,956 3,593 1,863 2,196 3,423 3,956 3,591 2 2 0 0 2

Type of Violation

District of Columbia Number of Juvenile and Adult Arrests

Total Arrests Juveniles (Under 18)Adults (18+)

• Between 2002 and 2006, adult arrests accounted for 99 to 100 percent of all substance- related driving and alcohol-related arrests.

• The total number of substance-related driving and alcohol-related arrests increased between 2002 and 2005, and then slightly decreased in 2006.

• For each year, the greatest number of substance-related driving and alcohol-related arrests occurred for possession of open alcohol.

• For each year, the fewest number of substance-related driving and alcohol-related arrests occurred for refusing a test while allegedly driving under the influence.

• Between 2002 and 2006, six of the eight juvenile substance-related driving and alcohol- related arrests occurred for possession of open alcohol.

NOTES: Totals are based solely on the most serious arrest charge, since one individual may be booked on more than one arrest charge. The above data reflect arrests made by all agencies in the District of Columbia. SOURCE: Geocoded Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) Arrest Data provided by the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 32

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 8: Total Number* of Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia by Ward in 2006

DISTRICT-WIDE: SUBSTANCE-RELATED DRIVING AND ALCOHOL-RELATED ARRESTS BY WARD

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8 Total**

Total Arrests (All Causes) 6,118 6,628 1,071 5,154 7,570 10,098 6,890 7,339 52,547 Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol- Related Arrests***

853 1,110 100 706 624 1,245 381 466 5,724

Driving Under the Influence - Alcohol/Drugs 192 273 13 15 38 79 36 23 701

Driving Under the Influence - Refusing Test 42 77 8 12 17 74 7 4 258

Driving While Intoxicated - Alcohol/Drugs 56 235 47 66 48 355 24 26 899

Drinking in Public 44 55 1 559 16 683 287 399 273

Possession of Open Alcohol 519 470 31 54 505 54 27 14 3,593

District of Columbia WARD

Type of Arrest

Type of Violation

NOTES: * Total population includes the total number of juvenile and adult arrestees. ** Rows may not sum to total because Ward was defined as zero, or unspecified for 1,679 all-cause arrests and 239 drug-related arrests. *** Excludes arrests for liquor law and other ABC violations.

• Substance-related driving and alcohol-related arrests accounted for 11 percent of total arrests (all causes) in the District of Columbia in 2006.

• In 2006, Ward 6 (n=1,245) and Ward 2 (n=1,110) had the greatest number of substance-related driving and alcohol-related arrests among all eight wards. o Combined, Wards 2 and 6 accounted for 41 percent of the substance-related

driving and alcohol-related arrests in 2006. • Forty-two percent of those arrested for substance-related driving and alcohol-related

arrests in Ward 2 were arrested for possession of open alcohol. • Fifty-five percent of those arrested for substance-related driving and alcohol-related

arrests in Ward 6 were arrested for drinking in public. • Ward 3 (n=100) had the fewest number of substance-related driving and alcohol-

related arrests in 2006; Ward 7 had the second fewest at 381 substance-related driving and alcohol-related arrests.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 33

HIGHLIGHTS

WARD 1: SUBSTANCE-RELATED DRIVING AND ALCOHOL- RELATED ARRESTS

Table 9: Number of Ward 1 Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Total Arrests (All Causes) 6,706 5,775 7,179 5,869 6,118 Total Substance-Related Driving and Alcohol-Related Arres ts

492 598 1,009 1,048 853

Driving Under the Influence - Alcohol/Drugs

24 32 8 19 192

Driving Under the Influence - Refusing Tes t 12 16 9 13 42 Driving While Intoxicated - Alcohol/Drugs 103 113 67 70 56 Drinking in Public 61 57 86 91 44 Pos ses sion of Open Alcohol 292 380 839 855 519 Age Juvenile (under 18) 0 1 0 0 2 Adult (18 or older) 492 597 1,009 1,048 851 Sex Male 449 544 939 946 747 Female 43 54 70 102 106 Race Black 279 320 655 681 500 White 211 271 349 367 352 Asian 1 3 1 0 Other 0 0 0 0 Unknown 1 4 4 0 0

Type of Arrest

Type of Violation

Ward 1 Year

1 0

• In every year between 2002 and 2006, adult males and adult Blacks accounted for the greatest percentage of arrests in Ward 1.

• From 2005 to 2006, there was a tenfold increase in the number of arrests for driving under the influence of alcohol and/or drugs in Ward 1 and a 39 percent decrease in possession of open alcohol.

• The total number of substance-related driving and alcohol-related arrests in Ward 1 nearly doubled between 2003 and 2004, reached a high in 2005, and then decreased in 2006.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 34

DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS

HIGHLIGHTS • Between 2002 and 2006, drug-related arrests ranged from 15 percent to 18 percent of all arrests in the Distric • Adults (18+) represented the majority of drug-related arrests in the District for all years between 2002 and

2006. • In every year between 2002 and 2006, possession and possession with intent to distribute accounted for the

majority of all drug-related arrests in the District. • In 2006, simple possession accounted for 50 percent of all drug-related arrests in the District. • Between 2002 and 2006, marijuana-related arrests represented the majority of all District arrests. • Among juveniles, possession with intent to distribute and distribution represented a larger percentage of drug

related arrests than any other type of drug-related arrest in the District.

Table 10: Number of Adult and Juvenile Drug-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Total Arrests (All Caus es) 45,635 45,365 51,059 51,591 52,547 43,213 42,808 48,109 48,658 49,353 2,422 2,557 2,950 2,933 3,194

Drug-Related Arrests 6,706 7,259 8,712 8,760 9,308 6,344 6,929 8,345 8,440 8,972 362 330 367 320 336

Conspiracy to Distribute 18 34 40 31 5 18 34 40 31 5 0 0 0 0 0

Distribution 1,587 1,373 1,739 1,809 1,573 1,481 1,288 1,634 1,720 1,500 106 85 105 89 73

Pos sess ion 2,617 3,126 3,930 4,059 4,669 2,530 3,050 3,844 3,971 4,559 87 76 86 88 110

Pos sess ion with Intent to Distribute

2,203 2,174 2,358 2,127 2,172 2,036 2,010 2,189 1,996 2,025 167 164 169 131 147

Pos sess ion of Drug Paraphernalia 217 314 448 619 771 217 310 446 614 767 0 4 2 5 4

Any Other Narcotic Violation* 64 238 197 115 118 62 237 192 108 116 2 1 5 7 2

Amphetamines 7 5 10 17 27 7 5 10 15 26 0 0 0 2 1

Cocaine 1,599 1,427 1,761 1,890 1,897 1,540 1,375 1,700 1,830 1,845 59 52 61 60 52

Cocaine (Crack) 895 1,017 1,442 1,536 2,075 801 949 1,368 1,472 1,985 94 68 74 64 90

Marijuana 2,626 2,855 3,391 3,248 3,049 2,446 2,681 3,180 3,078 2,877 180 174 211 170 172

Heroin 1,016 1,047 1,178 1,042 853 1,002 1,032 1,171 1,033 847 14 15 7 9 6

PCP 159 270 161 175 347 149 257 155 172 343 10 13 6 3 4

Other** 184 319 319 232 288 179 315 313 225 281 5 4 6 7 7

Adults (18+)

Type of Arrest

Type of Violation

Drug Type of Arrest**

District of Columbia

Number of Juvenile and Adult Arrests

Total Arres ts Juveniles (Under 18)

NOTE: There were no manufacturing arrests between 2002 and 2006. Columns may not sum to total drug-related arrests because arrests for possession of drug paraphernalia, forge narcotic prescription, and violation of pharmacy laws are not accounted for among drug type of arrest. * Includes the following offenses: "forged narcotic prescription," "violation of pharmacy laws," and "any other narcotic violation." Some possession arrests share an offense code (1826) with "any other narcotic violation" including LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession. ** Includes arrests for barbiturates, Dilaudid, and "any other narcotic violation." Some drugs share an offense code (1826) with "any other narcotic violation" including LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 35

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8 Total**

Total Arrests (All Caus es ) 6,118 6,628 1,071 5,154 7,570 10,098 6,890 7,339 52,547

Drug-Related Arrests 1,001 595 39 990 1,318 2,224 1,414 1,464 9,308

Conspiracy to Dis tribute 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 5

Distribution 140 80 1 37 290 406 361 220 1,573

Possess ion 475 338 27 554 636 1,277 530 685 4,669

Possess ion with Intent to Distribute 194 102 5 229 323 336 451 475 2,172

Possess ion of Drug Paraphernalia 183 70 5 160 56 169 61 52 771

Violation of Pharmacy Laws 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

Any Other Narcotic Violation*** 8 4 1 10 13 34 11 31 117

Drug Type of Arres t****

Marijuana 255 214 25 424 474 572 423 546 3,049

Cocaine 230 127 3 296 171 345 381 306 1,897

Cocaine (Crack) 195 137 2 40 381 779 259 234 2,075

Heroin 93 21 1 45 138 245 202 86 853

PCP 13 5 0 5 36 24 63 185 347

Amphetamines (includes Preludin) 4 1 1 4 3 2 4 8 27

Other**** 27 20 2 16 59 88 21 47 288

District of Columbia WARD

Type of Arres t

Type of Violation

Table 11: Total Number* of Drug-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia by Ward in 2006

DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS BY WARD

HIGHLIGHTS • In 2006, a total of 17.7 percent of the 52,547 arrests in the District of Columbia were drug related. • Nearly 17 percent of all drug-related arrests were for conspiracy to distribute or distribution; fifty-eight

percent were for simple possession of drugs or drug paraphernalia and 23.3 percent of the drug-related arrests were for possession with intent to distribute.

• More than 42 percent of all drug-related arrests were for cocaine or cocaine (crack) and nearly one third of all drug-related arrests were for marijuana.

NOTE: There were no manufacturing, forged narcotic prescription, barbiturates, or Dilaudid arrests in 2006. Columns may not sum to total drug-related arrests because arrests for possession of drug paraphernalia, forge narcotic prescription, and violation of pharmacy laws are not been accounted for among drug type of arrest. * Total number includes the total number of juvenile and adult arrestees. ** Rows may not sum to total because Ward was defined as zero or unspecified for 1,679 "all causes" arrests and 263 "drug-related arrests". *** Includes violation of pharmacy laws and may include some possession arrests that share an offense code (1826) with "Any other narcotic violation" including LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession. **** Includes arrests for "Any other narcotic violation" which shares an offense code (1826) with LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession.

NOTES: Totals are based solely on the most serious arrest charge, since one individual may be booked on more than one arrest charge. The above arrests reflect arrests made by all agencies in the District of Columbia. SOURCE: Geocoded Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) Arrest Data provided by the Research and Analysis Division, Office of Professional Development, Professional Development Bureau.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 36

WARD 1: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS

HIGHLIGHTS • Adult offenders (18+) represented a greater percentage of drug-related arrests than

juvenile offenders (under 18) for all years in Ward 1. • Among adult offenders in Ward 1, possession arrests accounted for a greater percentage of

violations than for any other type of violation in each year between 2002 and 2006. • Among juvenile offenders in Ward 1, arrests for possession with intent to distribute

accounted for a greater percentage of arrests than any other type of drug-related arrest. • Among adult and juvenile offenders in Ward 1, marijuana-related arrests accounted for a

greater percentage of all drug arrests.

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Total Arres ts (All Causes) 6,157 5,543 6,876 5,657 5,773 273 232 303 212 345

Drug-Related Arrests 970 933 1,376 965 970 48 37 39 10 31

Conspiracy to Distribute 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Dis tribution 269 131 218 125 136 19 5 12 3 4 Pos sess ion 332 414 713 543 467 6 10 9 3 8 Pos sess ion with Intent to Dis tribute 324 278 302 182 176 23 20 18 4 18 Pos sess ion of Drug Paraphernalia 44 104 125 113 183 0 2 0 0 0 Any Other Narcotic Violation* 1 4 16 2 8 0 0 0 0 1

Amphetamines 0 1 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 1 Cocaine 285 203 425 254 224 12 3 9 1 6 Cocaine (Crack) 111 87 138 114 187 11 12 10 4 8 Marijuana 258 262 450 382 243 23 16 18 5 12 Heroin 254 254 197 80 92 2 4 1 0 1 PCP 2 11 8 9 12 0 0 0 0 1 Other** 16 11 32 8 25 0 0 1 0 2

Drug Type of Arres t**

Juvenile (Under 18)

Type of Arrest

Type of Violation

Adult (18+)WARD 1

AGE

Table 12: Number of Ward 1 Adult and Juvenile Drug-Related Arrests in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

NOTE: There were no manufacturing, forged narcotic prescription, barbiturates, or Dilaudid arrests from 2002–2006. Columns may not sum to total drug-related arrests because arrests for possession of drug paraphernalia, forge narcotic prescription, and violation of pharmacy laws are not accounted for among drug type of arrest. * Includes the following offenses: "violation of pharmacy laws," and "any other narcotic violation." Some possession arrests share an offense code (1826) with "any other narcotic violation" including LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession. ** Includes arrests for "any other narcotic violation." Some drugs share an offense code (1826) with "any other narcotic violation" including LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 37

WARD 1: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Type of Arrest Total Arrests (All Causes) 5,273 4,811 5,917 4,854 4,882 1,156 964 1,262 1,015 1,235 Drug-Related Arrests 891 840 1,202 840 805 127 130 213 135 196 Type of Violation

Conspiracy to Distribute 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 Distribution 254 118 197 109 111 34 18 33 19 29 Possession 298 367 601 484 389 40 57 121 62 86 Possession with Intent to Distribute 307 273 304 166 170 40 25 16 20 24 Possession of Drug Paraphernalia 31 77 86 79 126 13 29 39 34 57 Any Other Narcotic Violation* 1 3 13 2 9 0 1 3 0 0

Amphetamines 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 3 0 Cocaine 258 179 353 205 189 39 27 81 50 41 Cocaine (Crack) 110 86 127 105 153 12 13 21 13 42 Marijuana 268 257 431 363 220 13 21 37 24 35 Heroin 208 224 171 70 76 48 34 27 10 1 PCP 2 8 5 8 10 0 3 3 1 3 Other** 14 8 28 8 26 2 3 5 0 1

WARD 1

GENDER

Male Female

Drug Type of Arrest**

Table 13: Number of Ward 1 Drug-Related Arrests by Gender in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

HIGHLIGHTS • Males represented a greater percentage of all drug-related arrests than females for all years

in Ward 1. • Males in Ward 1 were more likely to be arrested for possession than females.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 38

HIGHLIGHTS • Blacks represented a greater percentage of all drug-related arrests than Whites and Others for

all years in Ward 1. • Between 2002 and 2006, in Ward 1, Blacks were more likely to be arrested for marijuana-

related incidences, followed by cocaine-related incidences, and heroin-related incidences third.

• Between 2002 and 2006, in Ward 1, Whites were more likely to be arrested for marijuana- related incidences, followed by cocaine-related incidences, and heroin-related incidences third.

WARD 1: DRUG-RELATED ARRESTS

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

Total Arrests (All Causes) 5,054 4,322 4,947 4,179 3,988 1,330 1,427 1,434 1,416 1,562 22 9 614 235 568 Drug-Related Arrests 863 824 1,257 860 893 149 145 157 115 104 6 0 0 0

Conspiracy to Distribute 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Distribution 260 122 207 123 138 27 14 22 5 1 1 0 1 0 0 Possession 262 335 632 461 405 75 89 90 85 68 1 0 0 0 0 Possession with Intent to Distribute 299 265 294 171 174 44 32 26 15 19 2 0 0 0 0 Possession of Drug Paraphernalia 41 97 111 103 168 3 9 14 10 15 0 0 0 0 0 Forged Narcotic Prescription 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Violation of Pharmacy Laws 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Any Other Narcotic Violation* 1 3 11 2 7 0 1 5 0 1 0 0 0 0

Amphetamines 0 1 0 3 2 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 Cocaine 243 169 379 226 199 51 37 54 29 29 3 0 0 0 0 Cocaine (Crack) 100 84 133 107 178 19 15 15 11 17 1 0 0 0 0 Marijuana 242 240 425 337 223 39 38 43 50 32 0 0 0 0 0 Heroin 224 217 175 67 88 32 40 23 13 5 0 0 0 0 PCP 2 8 8 9 12 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Other** 11 8 26 8 22 5 3 7 0 5 0 0 0 0

Drug Type of Arrest***

RACE

WARD 1 OtherBlack White

Type of Arrest

Type of Violation 0

0 0 0

Table 14: Number of Ward 1 Drug-Related Arrests by Race in the District of Columbia: 2002–2006

NOTE: There were no manufacturing, forged narcotic prescription, barbiturates, or Dilaudid arrests from 2002–2006. Columns may not sum to total drug-related arrests because arrests for possession of drug paraphernalia, forge narcotic prescription, and violation of pharmacy laws are not accounted for among drug type of arrest. Rows may not sum to total number of arrests due to missing data cells. * Includes the following offenses: "violation of pharmacy laws," and "any other narcotic violation." Some possession arrests share an offense code (1826) with "any other narcotic violation" including LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession. ** Includes arrests for "any other narcotic violation." Some drugs share an offense code (1826) with "any other narcotic violation" including LSD possession, felony and misdemeanor Preludin possession, and misdemeanor heroin possession.

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COMMUNITY EPIDEMIOLOGICAL PROFILE:

CONSEQUENCES OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, AND ILLICIT DRUG USE IN THE

DISTRICT’S COMMUNITIES, 2001–2007

PART II

PREPARED BY

THE ADDICTION PREVENTION AND RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION, DC DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH

AND THE CENTER FOR SUBSTANCE ABUSE RESEARCH,

UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND, COLLEGE PARK

District of Columbia: Community Profile 40

For this consequence category, we assessed eight indicators in the reduced morbidity

CSAP NOMs domain. The data presented within each of the eight indicators allows us to assess new incidents and the prevalence of HIV and AIDS in the District of Columbia.

• HIV(not AIDS) o Rate of Newly Reported o Number of Newly Reported o Mode of Transmission

• AIDS o Rate of Newly Reported o Number of Newly Reported o Living Cases o Mortality o Mode of Transmission

These eight indicators were selected in accordance with CSAP requirements. The

purpose of these selected indicators is to describe a major health consequence of illicit drug use at the ward level for the District of Columbia. The maps and tables provided in this report take a closer look at ward-level HIV and AIDS cases for combined years between 2001–2006. You can access more detailed HIV/AIDS information at the District level at <http://doh.dc.gov/doh/cwp/view,A,1371,Q,603431.asp>.

CCOONNSSEEQQUUEEN SSE

NCCE ECCT

E: TI

: HHIIVV/ IOONN VV

/AAIIDDSS

District of Columbia: Community Profile 41

DISTRICT-WIDE: HIV (NOT AIDS) BY WARD

Map 1: Average Rate of Newly Reported HIV (not AIDS) Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: 2001–2006 (N=3,052)

Ward 4 60.1

Ward 3 8.6

Ward 8 105.1

Ward 6 115.1

Ward 2 91.5

Ward 1 96.8

Ward 7 79.4

Ward 5 88.0

HIGHLIGHTS

• The average rate of newly diagnosed HIV (not AIDS) cases by ward ranged between

8.6 and 115.1 cases per 100,000 population. • The highest rates were found in Wards 6 and 8, where the rates were 115.1 and 105.1

cases per 100,000, respectively. The next highest rate was in Ward 1: 96.8 cases per 100,000.

• The lowest rates were found in Ward 3: 8.6 cases per 100,000.

SOURCE: District of Columbia, Department of Health HIV/AIDS Administration Bureau of Surveillance and Epidemiology 2007 Report entitled “District of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemiology Annual Report 2007,” page 85.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 42

DISTRICT-WIDE: HIV (NOT AIDS) BY WARD

Table 15: Number of Newly Reported HIV (not AIDS) Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006

Ward Newly Reported HIV (not AIDS)

Cases Ward 1 426 Ward 2 378 Ward 3 38 Ward 4 267 Ward 5 383 Ward 6 470 Ward 7 336 Ward 8 447 Jail Population 216 Homeless Population 91 Total 3,052

HIGHLIGHTS

• The number of reported HIV (not AIDS) cases ranged from 38 cases in Ward 3 to 470 cases in Ward 6 between 2001 and 2006.

• The largest number of newly reported HIV (not AIDS) cases between 2001 and 2006 were living in Wards 1 6 (n=470), 8 (n=447), and 1 (n=426) at the time of diagnosis.

• More than 300 HIV (not AIDS) cases were reported among persons who were in the DC jail or homeless during this time period.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 43

DISTRICT-WIDE: HIV (NOT AIDS)

HIGHLIGHTS

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

MSM 146 27.0 189 27.5 172 28.0 116 21.4 106 21.9 113 28.0 842 25.8 IDU 70 13.0 96 14.0 84 13.7 84 15.5 62 12.8 36 8.9 432 13.2 MSM/IDU 10 1.9 12 1.7 15 2.4 9 1.7 9 1.9 6 1.5 61 1.9 Heterosexual 208 38.5 263 38.3 209 34.0 189 34.9 178 36.9 175 43.4 1,222 37.4 RNI/Unknown 106 19.6 127 18.5 135 22.0 143 26.4 128 26.5 73 18.1 712 21.8 Total 540 100.0 687 100.0 615 100.0 541 100.0 483 100.0 403 100.0 3,269 100.0

Table 16: Number and Percentage of Newly Reported HIV (not AIDS) Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006

• Between 2001 and 2006, there were 3,269 newly reported cases of HIV (not AIDS). • The most frequently-reported mode of transmission among new HIV (not AIDS) cases

was heterosexual contact (37.4 percent between 2001 and 2006). • The largest decrease in cases by mode of transmission was among HIV (not AIDS) cases

attributed to IDU. The number of cases decreased from 108 cases in 2002 to 42 cases in 2006, a 61 percent reduction.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 44

DISTRICT-WIDE: AIDS BY WARD

Map 2: Average Rate of Newly Reported AIDS Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: 2001–2006 (N=4,062)

Ward 8 134.0

Ward 7 127.8

Ward 2 105.3

Ward 6 131.3

Ward 5 129.4

Ward 1 118.1

Ward 3 9.5

Ward 4 75.6

HIGHLIGHTS

• The average rate of newly diagnosed AIDS cases by ward ranged between 9.5 and

134 cases per 100,000 population. • The highest rates were found among cases living in Wards 5, 6, 7, and 8, where the

rates were 129.4, 131.3, 127.8, and 134.0 cases per 100,000, respectively. • The lowest rates were found among cases living in Ward 3, with 9.5 cases per

100,000 population.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 45

DISTRICT-WIDE: AIDS BY WARD

Table 17: Number of Newly Reported AIDS Cases by Ward,

Ward Newly Reported AIDS Cases

Ward 1 520 Ward 2 435 Ward 3 42 Ward 4 336 Ward 5 563 Ward 6 536 Ward 7 541 Ward 8 570 Jail Population 381 Homeless Population 138 Total 4,062

HIGHLIGHTS

District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006

• The number of reported AIDS cases ranged from 42 to 570 cases per ward between 2001 and 2006.

• The largest numbers of reported AIDS cases were living in Wards 8 (n=570), 7 (n=541), 5 (n=563), 6 (n=536), and 1 (n=520) at the time of AIDS diagnosis.

• The smallest number of reported AIDS cases were living in Ward 3 (n=42) at the time of diagnosis.

• More than 375 AIDS cases were diagnosed among persons incarcerated at the DC jail during this time period.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 46

DISTRICT-WIDE: AIDS BY WARD

Table 18: Number of Living AIDS Cases and AIDS Mortality Cases by Ward, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006

Ward Living AIDS Cases AIDS Mortality Cases

Ward 1 1,102 206 Ward 2 940 149 Ward 3 139 14 Ward 4 599 153 Ward 5 983 264 Ward 6 1,014 244 Ward 7 808 198 Ward 8 851 247 Jail Population 636 22 Homeless Population 342 28 Total 7,414 1,525

HIGHLIGHTS

• The number of persons living with AIDS ranged from 139 persons in Ward 3 to 1,102 persons

in Ward 1. • The greatest numbers of people living with AIDS in the District were living in Wards 1

(n=1,102) and 6 (n=1,014). • Nearly 1,000 persons living with AIDS in the District were either homeless or in the DC jail. • The number of people who died with an AIDS diagnosis between 2001 and 2006 ranged from

14 people in Ward 3 to 264 in Ward 5. • Wards 5 (n=264), 8 (n=247), and 6 (n=244) recorded the highest AIDS mortality levels during

the years 2001-2006.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 47

DISTRICT-WIDE: AIDS

Table 19: Number and Percentage of Newly Reported AIDS Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: Cumulative for Years 2001–2006

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

MSM 197 29.3 309 31.7 250 29.7 206 25.4 142 20.9 190 27.1 1,294 27.7 IDU 137 20.4 191 19.6 167 19.9 188 23.2 206 30.3 134 19.1 1,023 21.9 MSM/IDU 28 4.2 33 3.4 24 2.9 27 3.3 22 3.2 24 3.4 158 3.4 Heterosexual 148 22.0 244 25.0 209 24.9 206 25.4 188 27.7 246 35.1 1,241 26.5 RNI 161 23.9 192 19.7 185 22.0 181 22.3 119 17.5 102 14.6 940 20.1 Other < 3 -- 6 0.6 6 0.7 < 3 -- < 3 -- 4 0.6 22 0.5 Total 673 100.0 975 100.0 841 100.0 810 100.0 679 100.0 700 100.0 4,678 100.0

HIGHLIGHTS

• Between 2001 and 2006, 4,678 AIDS cases were newly recorded. • Overall, the most frequently reported mode of transmission among AIDS cases was MSM;

however, in 2005, the highest proportion of AIDS cases was attributed to IDU; and in 2006, the highest proportion of AIDS cases was attributed to heterosexual contact.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 48

DISTRICT-WIDE: AIDS

Table 20: Number and Percentage of Living AIDS Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: 2001–2006

Table 21: Number and Percentage of AIDS Mortality Cases by Mode of Transmission, District of Columbia: 2001–2006

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 N % N % N % N % N % N %

MSM 2,736 46.7 2,893 44.3 2,988 42.2 3,050 40.2 3,041 38.1 3,068 36.7 IDU 1,530 26.1 1,648 25.2 1,739 24.6 1,845 24.3 1,980 24.8 2,039 24.4 MSM/IDU 295 5.0 308 4.7 309 4.4 316 4.2 322 4.0 327 3.9 Heterosexual 1,044 17.8 1,328 20.3 1,587 22.4 1,798 23.7 1,962 24.6 2,195 26.2 RNI 202 3.5 304 4.7 400 5.6 525 6.9 612 7.7 684 8.2 Other 48 0.8 53 0.8 57 0.8 57 0.8 55 0.7 55 0.7 Total 5,855 100.0 6,534 100.0 7,080 100.0 7,591 100.0 7,972 100.0 8,368 100.0

HIGHLIGHTS • Between 2001 and 2006, the number of those living with AIDS increased by 42.9

percent; this was most likely due to increased use of Highly Active Antiretroviral Therapy (HAART) and prophylactic therapies resulting in delayed progression from AIDS to death.

• The most frequently reported mode of AIDS transmission was attributed to MSM

contact. In 2006, MSM accounted for 36.7 percent of all living AIDS cases, a reduction from 46.7 percent in 2001.

• IDU and MSM/IDU accounted for 28.3 percent of all living AIDS cases in 2006.

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Total N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

MSM 85 25.3 85 25.9 84 23.9 86 25.2 70 24.7 45 20.1 455 24.4 IDU 117 34.8 111 33.8 125 35.6 102 29.9 90 31.8 67 29.9 612 32.9 MSM/IDU 14 4.2 19 5.8 17 4.8 15 4.4 12 4.2 8 3.6 85 4.6 Heterosexual 71 21.0 76 23.2 88 25.1 90 26.4 73 25.8 73 32.6 471 25.3 RNI 47 14.0 37 11.3 37 10.5 47 13.8 37 13.1 31 13.8 236 12.7 Other < 3 -- 0 0.0 0 0.0 < 3 -- < 3 -- 0 0.0 4 0.2 Total 336 100.0 328 100.0 351 100.0 341 100.0 283 100.0 224 100.0 1,863 100.0

HIGHLIGHTS • The largest proportion of deaths was among those with mode of transmission

attributed to IDU (32.9%), heterosexual contact (25.3%), and MSM (24.4%).

NOTES: Mode of transmission is the means by which HIV is transmitted from one individual to another. MSM means men who had sex with other men. IDU means intravenous drug use. MSM/IDU means men who have sex with other men and are intravenous drug users. Heterosexual means heterosexual contact. RNI means risk not identified. Other includes hemophilia, blood transfusions, and occupational exposure (healthcare workers). SOURCE: District of Columbia, Department of Health HIV/AIDS Administration Bureau of Surveillance and Epidemiology 2007 Report entitled “District of Columbia HIV/AIDS Epidemiology Annual Report 2007,” pages 58-59 and 72.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 49

For this consequence category, we included the four indicators listed below that were

a part of the reduced morbidity NOMs domain. The data presented for this indicator allowed us to assess the estimated number of persons in the District of Columbia who met the criteria for alcohol or illicit drug dependence or abuse based on the definition found in the 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV).

• Alcohol-Related o Persons aged 12 or older meeting DSM-IV criteria for dependence or

abuse o Persons aged 12 or older meeting DSM-IV criteria for dependence only

• Illicit Drug-Related o Persons aged 12 or older meeting DSM-IV criteria for dependence or

abuse o Persons aged 12 or older meeting DSM-IV criteria for dependence only

These indicators were selected in accordance with CSAP requirements. The purpose

of these indicators is to describe a major public health consequence of continued alcohol and illicit drug use. The figures and tables provided in this report provide estimates based on averages for data collected between 2002 and 2004. These estimates provided a means to examine alcohol and illicit drug-related dependence and abuse for individuals aged 12 or older at the ward level.

CCOONNSSEEQQUUEENNCCEE:: DDE SSE

EPPE ECCT

ENNDDEENNCCEE AANNDD AABBUUSSEE

TIIOONN VVII

District of Columbia: Community Profile 50

DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE OR ABUSE BY WARD

Figure 5: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Alcohol:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 22: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Alcohol:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• The percentage of residents aged 12 or

older reporting past year alcohol dependence or abuse was similar across all eight wards.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

Ward 1

Age 95% Prediction

Interval 2.20 - 5.74

13.36 - 23.06 7.82 - 14.45

• Based on annual averages for 2002–2004, residents aged 12 to 17 were less likely to report past year alcohol dependence or abuse than all other residents in Ward 1.

NOTES: Dependence or abuse based on definitions found in 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 51

DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL DEPENDENCE BY WARD

Figure 6: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Alcohol Dependence:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 23: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Alcohol Dependence:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• The percentage of residents aged 12 or

older reporting past year alcohol dependence was similar across all eight wards.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Wa rd 1 Wa rd 2 Wa rd 3 Wa rd 4 Wa rd 5 Wa rd 6 Wa rd 7 Wa rd 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

95% Prediction Interval

Ward 1

3.96 - 8.45

.89 - 3.11 5.13 - 11.28

A ge

• Based on the annual averages for 2002–2004, residents aged 12 to 17 reported lower estimates of past year alcohol dependence than all other residents in Ward 1.

• The estimate for residents aged 18 to 25 was similar to that of residents aged 26 or older for past year alcohol dependence.

NOTES: Dependence based on definitions found in 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 52

DISTRICT-WIDE: ILLICIT DRUG DEPENDENCE OR ABUSE

BY WARD

Figure 7: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Any Illicit Drug:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 24: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Dependence or Abuse of Any Illicit Drug:

Estimates Based on 2002─2004 Annual Averages

• The percentage of residents aged 12 or older reporting past year illicit drug dependence or abuse was about the same across all eight wards.

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

Age 2.65 - 6.71

95% Prediction Interval

Ward 1

5.78 - 11.43 2.02 - 5.35

• Based on annual averages for 2002–2004, Ward 1 residents aged 18 to 25 were more

likely to report past year illicit drug dependence or abuse than residents aged 26 or older.

NOTES: Dependence or abuse based on definitions found in 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Illicit drugs include marijuana/hashish, cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutic used nonmedically. The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse

District of Columbia: Community Profile 53 DISTRICT-WIDE: ILLICIT DRUG DEPENDENCE BY WARD

Figure 8: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Illicit Drug Dependence:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 25: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Illicit Drug Dependence:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• The percentage of residents aged 12 or older reporting past year illicit drug dependence or abuse was similar across all eight wards.

• Based on annual averages for 2002–2004, Ward 1 residents aged 18 to 25 were more likely to report past year illicit drug dependence than residents aged 12 to 17 and 26 or older.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

A e 95% Prediction

Interval

Ward 1

1.24 - 3.67 3.77 - 8.94 1.31 - 3.70

NOTES: Dependence based on definitions found in 4th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Illicit drugs include marijuana/hashish, cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutic used nonmedically. The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 54

For this consequence, we included two indicators that were a part of the reduced mortality CSAP NOMs domain. The data presented within each of the indicators allowed us to assess the prevalence of chronic liver disease as a consequence of alcohol use and both lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and emphysema as consequences of tobacco use in the District of Columbia.

• Alcohol-Related o Chronic Liver Disease

• Tobacco/Smoking-Related o Lung Cancer o COPD and Emphysema

These indicators were selected in accordance with CSAP recommendations. The purpose of these selected indicators was to describe major public health consequences of alcohol use and tobacco use/smoking. The charts and tables provided in this report take an in-depth look at DC deaths related to liver disease, lung cancer and COPD and emphysema by examining gender, race, and age at the ward-level.

CONSEQUENCE: MORTALITY SSEECCTTIIOONN VVIIII

District of Columbia: Community Profile 55 DISTRICT-WIDE: CHRONIC LIVER DISEASE DEATHS BY WARD

Figure 9: Number of Chronic Liver Disease Deaths in the

22 N

um be

r of

D ea

th s

Total*** 67 97 49 85 93

Ward 1 17 10 7 13 9

Ward 2 6 13 7 7 17

Ward 3 3 5 2 3 3

Ward 4 7 12 4 13 14

Ward 5 8 12 8 13 14

Ward 6 9 14 6 10 11

Ward 7 10 21 4 18 15

Ward 8 7 9 7 8 9

2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005**

District of Columbia by Ward: 2001–2005

**The total number of deaths for 2005 has not been confirmed with the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics

Administration.

***Totals for all wards for each year may not add up to the total number of chronic liver disease deaths due to some deaths in which the ward variable was missing.

HIGHLIGHTS

• The number of deaths due to chronic liver disease fluctuated from 2001 to 2005, peaking in 2002 and 2005 with 97 deaths.

• Ward 2 experienced an increase in chronic liver disease deaths between 2004 and 2005, while all

other wards experienced a decrease or remained about the same.

• Among chronic liver disease deaths in the United States, approximately 40 percent of them were estimated to be alcohol related.

• Ward 1 experienced a decrease in reported deaths due to chronic liver disease between 2001 and 2005, while Ward 3 held between two and five deaths throughout this time; all other wards reported an increase in chronic liver disease deaths over the past five.

NOTE: Long term, heavy alcohol consumption is the leading cause of chronic liver disease, in particular cirrhosis. The data provided in this table are based on recorded deaths; cases of cirrhosis morbidity are not reflected in the data. SOURCE: Statistics prepared by the Center for Substance Abuse Research with data provided by the DC Department of Health, Vital Records Division. Attributable fraction percent estimate for alcohol-related chronic liver disease deaths was provided by Alcohol-Related Disease Impact (ARDI).

District of Columbia: Community Profile 56

WARD 1: CHRONIC LIVER DISEASE DEATHS

Table 26: Number of Chronic Liver Disease Deaths in Ward 1 in the District of Columbia: 2001–2005

2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005** Total 56 17 10 7 13

Male 43 12 9 5 9 8 Female 13 5 1 2 4 1

Black 40 12 10 7 7 4 White 14 4 0 0 5 5 Othe

r 2 1 0 0 1 0

34 or Younger 1 0 0 0 0 1 35-44 12 3 3 2 2 2 45-54 16 3 2 3 7 1 55-64 16 6 3 2 2 3 65-74 7 3 2 0 1 1

75 and Older 4 2 0 0 1 1

Single 24 4 7 1 6 6 Married 13 3 3 1 3 3

Widowed 4 2 0 1 1 0 Divorced 10 6 0 3 1 0 Unknown 5 2 0 1 2 0

Marital Status

YEAR WARD 1

Sex

Race

Age

Total (2001–2005)

NOTES: * 2003 numbers may be underreported due to 53 deaths in the District that were not accounted for in our analysis. In 2003, there was a discrepancy of 53 deaths between the total number of resident deaths included in the District-wide data set used to conduct the analysis reported above, and the 5,478 total resident deaths reported by the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration. ** The total number of deaths for 2005 has not been confirmed with the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration.

HIGHLIGHTS • There were a total of 56 chronic liver disease deaths in Ward 1 between 2001 and 2005; based on

2000 Census Bureau data, this was a rate of 7.6 chronic liver disease deaths in Ward 1 per 10,000 residents.

• Individuals dying of chronic liver disease in Ward 1 were most likely to be male, Black, 45-64, and single.

• In Ward 1 between 2001 and 2005, males (11 deaths per 10,000) were more than three times as likely as females (3 deaths per 10,000) to die of chronic liver disease.

• Since 2001, the racial differences in chronic liver disease deaths for Blacks and Whites appear to be diminishing; in 2005, about the same number of Blacks and Whites died of chronic liver disease.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 57

DISTRICT-WIDE: LUNG CANCER DEATHS BY WARD

Figure 10: Number of Lung Cancer Deaths in the District of Columbia

N um

be r

of D

ea th

Total*** 325 324 289 278 294

Ward 1 31 28 21 31 19

Ward 2 37 33 24 34 21

Ward 3 28 30 22 26 23

Ward 4 71 64 44 51 64

Ward 5 39 48 42 44 57

Ward 6 41 41 31 31 40

Ward 7 49 41 23 41 35

Ward 8 26 37 29 18 29

2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005**

by Ward: 2001–2005

HIGHLIGHTS • From 2001 to 2005, the total number of lung cancer deaths in the District ranged from a high of 325

in 2001 to a low of 278 in 2004. • Among lung cancer deaths in the United States, approximately 80-90 percent are attributable to

cigarette smoking, indicating that between 235 and 264 total deaths in the District could be attributed to cigarette smoking in 2005, a rate of 32-36 deaths per 10,000 residents.

• More residents in Ward 4 died from lung cancer each year than in all other wards.

NOTE: * 2003 numbers may be underreported due to 53 deaths that were not accounted for in our analysis. In 2003, there was a discrepancy of 53 deaths between the total number of resident deaths included in the data set used to conduct the analysis reported above, and the 5,478 total resident deaths reported by the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration. **The total number of deaths for 2005 has not been confirmed with the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration. ***Totals for all wards for each year may not add up to the total number of lung cancer deaths due to some deaths in which the ward variable was missing.

NOTE: Lung cancer results from long-term tobacco use, and is the most common form of cancer mortality in the U.S. Lung cancer has a long latency period therefore, it may be many years before changes in smoking affect population mortality. SOURCE: Statistics prepared by the Center for Substance Abuse Research with data provided by the DC Department of Health, Vital Records Division. Attributable fraction percent estimate for tobacco-related lung cancer was provided by the State Epidemiological System (SEDS). Actual percentage attributable to tobacco may vary across geographic units or subpopulations.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 58

WARD 1: LUNG CANCER DEATHS

Table 27: Number of Lung Cancer Deaths in Ward 1 in the District of Columbia: 2001–2005

2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005** Total 130 31 28 21 31 19

Male 82 20 13 15 23 11 Female 48 11 15 6 8 8

Black 99 21 22 17 23 16 White 30 9 6 4 8 3 Other 1 1 0 0 0 0

34 or Younger 0 0 0 0 0 0 35-44 4 1 1 0 1 1 45-54 14 2 4 2 4 2 55-64 39 7 7 7 11 65-74 36 10 10 5 6 5 75-84 27 8 5 7 5 2

85 and Olde

r 9 3 1 0 3 2 Unknown 1 0 0 0 1 0

Single 40 9 8 7 10 Married 32 8 3 6 12

Widowed 28 7 9 4 3 5 Divorced 24 7 7 4 4 2

Marital Status

Sex

Race

Age

WARD 1 Total

(2001–2005) YEAR

6 3

HIGHLIGHTS • Overall, there were a total of 130 lung cancer deaths in Ward 1 between 2001 and 2005; based on the

attributable fraction (80-90%), between 104 and 117 lung cancer deaths in Ward 1 were related to tobacco use during this time.

• Individuals dying of chronic liver disease in Ward 1 were most likely to be male, Black, and 55-74. • Blacks (29 deaths per 10,000) were more than twice as likely as Whites (12 deaths per 10,000) to die

of lung cancer during this five-year period. • Single residents were slightly more likely than married, widowed, or divorced residents to die from

lung cancer in 2005.

NOTES: * 2003 numbers may be underreported due to 53 total deaths in the District that were not accounted for in our analysis. In 2003, there was a discrepancy of 53 deaths between the total number of resident deaths included in the District-wide data set used to conduct the analysis reported above, and the 5,478 total resident deaths reported by the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration. ** The total number of deaths for 2005 has not been confirmed with the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration.

NOTE: Lung cancer results from long-term tobacco use, and is the most common form of cancer mortality in the U.S. Lung cancer has a long latency period therefore; it may be many years before changes in smoking affect population mortality. SOURCE: Statistics prepared by the Center for Substance Abuse Research with data provided by the DC Department of Health, Vital Records Division.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 59 DISTRICT-WIDE: COPD AND EMPHYSEMA DEATHS BY WARD

Figure 11: Number of COPD and Emphysema Deaths in the

N um

be r

of D

ea th

Total*** 128 127 116 131 128

Ward 1 15 13 3 10 11

Ward 2 11 19 11 20 14

Ward 3 26 16 14 19 17

Ward 4 23 24 23 29 22

Ward 5 17 13 18 16 15

Ward 6 9 11 8 14 10

Ward 7 17 18 7 17 18

Ward 8 10 13 7 6 18

2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005**

District of Columbia by Ward: 2001–2005

HIGHLIGHTS • Approximately 80 percent of COPD and emphysema deaths in the United States are attributable to

smoking, indicating that an estimated 102 deaths in the District could be attributed to smoking in 2005, a rate of nearly 14 deaths per 10,000 residents.

• Ward 8 experienced an increase in COPD and emphysema deaths in 2005, while all other wards experienced a decrease or remained about the same.

• In 2001, more COPD and emphysema deaths occurred in Ward 3 compared to all other wards; however, since 2002, more COPD and emphysema deaths occurred in Ward 4 than all other wards.

NOTE: * 2003 numbers may be underreported due to 53 deaths that were not accounted for in our analysis. In 2003, there was a discrepancy of 53 deaths between the total number of resident deaths included in the data set used to conduct the analysis reported above, and the 5,478 total resident deaths reported by the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration. **The total number of deaths for 2005 has not been confirmed with the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration. ***Totals for all wards for each year may not add up to the total number of COPD and emphysema deaths due to some deaths in which the ward variable was missing.

NOTE: Statistics provided in the chart are based on recorded deaths; cases of morbidity from respiratory disease are not reflected in this indicator. Death from respiratory disease reflects long-term, chronic cigarette smoking; it may be many years before changes in smoking affect population mortality. SOURCE: Statistics prepared by the Center for Substance Abuse Research with data provided by the DC Department of Health, Vital Records Division. Attributable fraction percent estimates for tobacco-related COPD and emphysema deaths were provided by the State Epidemiological System (SEDS). Actual percentage attributable to tobacco may vary across geographic units or subpopulations.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 60

WARD 1: COPD AND EMPHYSEMA DEATHS

Table 28: Number of COPD and Emphysema Deaths in Ward 1 in the District of Columbia: 2001–2005

2001 2002 2003* 2004 2005** Total 52 15 13 3 10 11

Male 25 5 7 2 6 5 Female 27 10 6 1 4 6

Black 42 10 12 2 9 9 White 10 5 1 1 1 2

34 or Younger 0 0 0 0 0 0 35-44 0 0 0 0 0 0 45-54 1 0 0 0 0 1 55-64 7 1 2 0 3 1 65-74 14 4 4 0 3 3 75-84 18 6 6 2 0 4 85 and Older 12 4 1 1 4 2

Single 17 5 4 2 2 4 Married 10 2 2 0 3 3 Widowed 20 5 6 1 5 3 Divorced 5 3 1 0 0 1

WARD 1 Total

(2001–2005) YEAR

Sex

Race

Age

Marital Status

NOTES: *2003 numbers may be underreported due to 53 total deaths in the District that were not accounted for in our analysis. In 2003, there was a discrepancy of 53 deaths between the total number of resident deaths included in the District-wide data set used to conduct the analysis reported above, and the 5,478 total resident deaths reported by the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration. ** The total number of deaths for 2005 has not been confirmed with the District of Columbia Department of Health, State Center for Health Statistics Administration.

HIGHLIGHTS

• Overall, there were a total of 52 COPD and emphysema deaths in Ward 1 between 2001 and 2005; based on the attributable fraction of 80 percent, an estimated 41 COPD and emphysema deaths in Ward 1 were related to smoking.

• Between 2001 and 2005, more Ward 1 females (7 per 10,000 female residents) than males (6 per 10,000 male residents) died of COPD or emphysema.

• Unlike other alcohol- and tobacco-related deaths, slightly more Whites (12 per 10,000) died from COPD or emphysema than Blacks (11 per 10,000).

• More individuals aged 55-74 died from COPD or emphysema than all other age groups. • A greater number of widowed individuals died of COPD or emphysema between 2001 and 2005 than

individuals who were single, married, or divorced.

NOTE: Statistics provided in the table are based on recorded deaths; cases of morbidity from respiratory disease are not reflected in this indicator. Death from respiratory disease reflects long-term, chronic cigarette smoking; it may be many years before changes in smoking affect population mortality. SOURCE: Statistics prepared by the Center for Substance Abuse Research with data provided by the DC tment of Health, Vital Records Division. Depar

District of Columbia: Community Profile 61

For this section, we included the following seven indicators to monitor the

consequences of illicit drug use. The data presented for these seven indicators allowed us to assess the estimated number of persons in the District of Columbia who reported alcohol, illicit drug, and/or tobacco use in the past 30 days.

• Alcohol-Related

o Persons aged 12 or older reporting past month use o Underage alcohol consumption past month and binge drinking

• Illicit Drug-Related (marijuana, cocaine, nonmedical use of prescription pain relievers, illicit drugs other than marijuana)

o Persons aged 12 or older reporting past month use o Persons aged 12 to 20 reporting past month use o Drug-testing results on the DC adult arrestee population

• Tobacco-Related o Persons aged 12 or older reporting past month use

• Arrestee Urinalysis Tests o Arrestees testing positive for cocaine, opiates, PCP, and amphetamines

These indicators were selected in accordance with CSAP requirements. The consumption tables included in this report do not provide a complete understanding of the alcohol, illicit drug, and tobacco use patterns in the District of Columbia; however, they do allow for some ward-level estimates based on averages provided with confidence intervals (95%) for data collected between 2002 and 2004.

AALLCCOOHHOOLL,, IILLLLIICCIITT DDRRUUGG,, AANNDD TTOOBBAACCCCOO CCOONNSSUUMMPPTTIIOONN

SSEECCTTIIOONN VVIIIIII

District of Columbia: Community Profile 62

DISTRICT-WIDE: ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION BY WARD

Figure 12: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Alcohol Use: Ward Estimates Based on

2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 29: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Alcohol Use:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• Based on annual averages for 2002–

2004, residents aged 12 or older in Wards 2, 3, and 6 reported higher percentages of past month alcohol use than residents of the same age in Wards 5, 7, and 8.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

Ward 1

9.01 - 17.01 *

95% Prediction IntervalA

ge * Low precision estimate. • An estimated range of 9.01 to 17.01 percent of Ward 1 residents aged 12 to 17

reported past month alcohol use based on 2002–2004 annual averages.

NOTE: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 63 DISTRICT-WIDE: UNDERAGE ALCOHOL CONSUMPTION BY

WARD Figure 13: Percent of Residents Aged 12 to 20 Reporting

Past Month Underage Alcohol Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

• Based on annual averages for 2002– 2004, residents aged 12 to 20 in Wards 2 and 3 reported the highest percentages of underage past month alcohol use compared to all other wards.

Wa rd 1 Wa rd 2 Wa rd 3 Wa rd 4 Wa rd 5 Wa rd 6 Wa rd 7 Wa rd 8

Figure 14: Percent of Residents Aged 12 to 20 Reporting

Past Month Underage Binge Alcohol Use:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS • Based on annual averages for 2002–

2004, residents aged 12 to 20 in Wards 2 and 3 reported the highest percentages of underage past month binge alcohol use compared to all other wards.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

NOTE: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004.

Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. Binge alcohol use is drinking five or more drinks on the same occasion (i.e., at the same time or within a couple of hours of each other) on at least 1 day in the past 30 days. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 64

DISTRICT-WIDE: MARIJUANA CONSUMPTION BY WARD

Figure 15: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Marijuana Use:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 30: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Marijuana Use:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• Based on annual averages for 2002–

2004, residents aged 12 or older exhibited similar consumption patterns of past month marijuana use across all eight wards.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

95% Prediction Interval

3.80 - 9.69

Ward 1

* 4.31 - 10.00

ge * Low precision estimate. • Based on 2002–2004 annual averages, an estimated range of 3.8 to 9.69 percent of

Ward 1 residents aged 12 to 17, and an estimated range of 4.31 to 10.0 percent of Ward 1 residents aged 26 or older reported past month marijuana use.

NOTE The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 65

DISTRICT-WIDE: ANY ILLICIT DRUG CONSUMPTION OTHER THAN MARIJUANA BY WARD

Figure 16: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Use of Any Illicit Drug Other than Marijuana:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 31: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Use of Any Illicit Drug Other than Marijuana:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• Based on annual 2002–2004 averages,

residents aged 12 or older exhibited similar consumption patterns of past month use of any illicit drug other than marijuana across all eight wards.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

Ward 1

2.38 - 5.97

2.98 - 6.84 4.51 - 9.60

95% Prediction IntervalA

ge • Based on 2002–2004 annual averages, Ward 1 residents in all three age groups

exhibited similar consumption patterns of past month use of any illicit drug other than marijuana.

NOTES: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. Any Illicit drug other than marijuana includes cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutic used nonmedically. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 66

DISTRICT-WIDE: COCAINE CONSUMPTION BY WARD

Figure 17: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older

Reporting Past Year Cocaine Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 32: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Cocaine Use:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• Based on 2002─2004 annual averages, residents aged 12 or older all eight wards exhibited similar consumption patterns of past year cocaine use.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older 1.77 - 5.31

* 3.43 - 7.96

95% Prediction Interval

Ward 1

A ge * Low precision estimate. • Based on 2002–2004 annual averages, an estimated range of 3.43 to 7.96 percent of

Ward 1 residents aged 18 to 25, and an estimated range of 1.77 to 5.31 percent of the Ward’s residents aged 26 or older reported past year cocaine use.

NOTE: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 67

DISTRICT-WIDE: NONMEDICAL CONSUMPTION OF PAIN RELIEVERS BY WARD

Figure 18: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting

Past Year Nonmedical Use of Pain Relievers:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 33: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Nonmedical Use of Pain Relievers:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• Based on 2002–2004 annual averages, residents aged 12 or older across all eight wards exhibited similar consumption patterns of past year nonmedical use of pain relievers.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

3.61 - 8.53 1.65 - 4.68

A e 95% Prediction

Interval 2.80 - 6.92

Ward 1

g • Based on the annual averages for 2002–2004, past year nonmedical use of pain

relievers had similar consumption patterns by residents in Ward 1 for all three age groups.

NOTE: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 68

DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG TEST RESULTS FOR ADULT ARRESTEES BY WARD

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%

80.0%

90.0%

100.0%

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 48.7% 45.8% 51.0% 53.9%

Ward 2 47.5% 51.7% 58.4% 57.4%

Ward 3 36.0% 29.0% 36.5% 44.3%

Ward 4 45.2% 45.6% 48.0% 51.5%

Ward 5 50.1% 50.5% 54.1% 52.5%

Ward 6 50.2% 49.2% 54.1% 54.5%

Ward 7 46.7% 44.4% 47.9% 53.1%

HIGHLIGHTS

Ward 8 43.3% 43.8% 47.1% 48.9%

2004 2005 2006 2007

Figure 19: Percentage of Positive Drug Tests for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: 2004–2007

for drug substances. Each year represents the fiscal year beginning October 1 and ending September 30PthP. SOURCE: DC Office of Forensic, Pretrial Services Agency, December 2007.

• The DC Pretrial Services conducts urinalyses on adult arrestees (age 18 and older) for amphetamines, cocaine, opiates, and phencyclidine (PCP).

• In fiscal year (FY) 2007, the percentage of adult arrestees testing positive ranged from 44.3 to 57.4 percent across all wards, with the highest percentage in Ward 2 and the lowest in Ward 3.

• The percentage of adult arrestees testing positive for any drug increased in FY2006 for all wards, and continued to increase in FY2007 for Wards 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 8.

• The percentage of positive drug test results decreased in only two of the eight wards: Ward 2 (1.0%) and Ward 5 (1.6%).

NOTES: The District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency does not test all arrestees for drug substances. Percentages shown are for adult arrestees actually tested

District of Columbia: Community Profile 69

DISTRICT-WIDE: DRUG TEST RESULTS FOR ADULT ARRESTEES BY WARD

Table 34: Percentage of Positive Drug Test Results for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia by Drug and Ward: Fiscal Year 2007

Ward 1 (n=983)

Ward 2 (n=907)

Ward 3 (n=61)

Ward 4 (n=1,109)

Ward 5 (n=1,699)

Ward 6 (n=1,443)

Ward 7 (n=1,861)

Ward 8 (n=1,763)

Amphetamines 2.1 4.8 3.3 2.0 3.5 4.2 6.4 6.7 Cocaine 44.6 46.1 37.7 44.7 40.6 42.9 38.7 33.0 Opiates 9.7 11.7 9.8 10.9 11.4 12.3 11.0 8.6 Phencyclidine 9.4 9.2 3.3 7.8 11.0 11.5 12.8 14.3

WARD

Drug

HIGHLIGHTS

• In FY2007, a greater percentage of adult arrestees (aged 18 and older) tested positive for cocaine than for any other drug in all eight wards.

• The highest percentages of adult arrestees testing positive for cocaine were in Wards 1, 2, and 4, with nearly half of arrestees testing positive.

• One in ten adult arrestees in all eight wards tested positive for opiates.

• Fewer than seven percent of adult arrestees in any ward tested positive for amphetamines.

• Ward 8 had the lowest percentage of adult arrestees testing positive for cocaine and opiates, but the highest percentage testing positive for PCP and amphetamines.

NOTES: The District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency does not test all arrestees for drug substances. Percentages shown are for adult arrestees actually tested for drug substances. Each year represents the fiscal year beginning October 1 and ending September 30th. SOURCE: DC Office of Forensic, Pretrial Services Agency, December 2007.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 70

WARD 1: DRUG TEST RESULTS FOR ADULT ARRESTEES

Table 35: Ward 1 Drug Test Results for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007

Table 36: Ward 1 Drug Test Results by Gender for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007

2004 2005 2006 2007 Total Te s te d (#) 988 874 977 983 Total Pos itive (%) 48.7 45.8 51.0 53.9

WARD 1 Ye ar

NOTE: Column totals for each year do not add up to totals provided due to missing gender data for some cases in years 2005-2007

HIGHLIGHTS

• The percentage of positive drug test results for adult arrestees in Ward 1 has increased steadily since FY2004.

HIGHLIGHTS

2004 2005 2006 2007

Tested (#) 807 717 784 783 Positive (%) 46.5 42.4 49.2 50.7

Tested (#) 181 155 189 197 Positive (%) 58.6 60.7 58.7 67.5

Fe male

Male

Ye ar WARD 1

GENDER

• In Ward 1, a higher percentage of female adult arrestees tested positive each year than males; in FY2007, two-thirds of females and half of males tested positive.

NOTES: The District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency does not test all arrestees for drug substances. Percentages shown are for adult arrestees actually tested for drug substances. Each year represents the fiscal year beginning October 1 and ending September 30PthP. SOURCE: DC Office of Forensic, Pretrial Services Agency, December 2007.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 71

WARD 1: DRUG TEST RESULTS FOR ADULT ARRESTEES

Table 37: Ward 1 Drug Test Results by Race for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007

2004 2005 2006 2007

Tested (#) 782 707 773 790 Positive (%) 51.8 48.9 54.0 57.1

Tested (#) 201 160 193 182 Positive (%) 36.3 30.6 38.9 41.8

Tested (#) 3 4 4 5 Positive (%) - - - -

WARD 1 Ye ar

Black RACE

White

Othe r

NOTES: Column totals for each year do not add up to totals provided due to missing race data for some cases in each year. Percentages not reported due to low cell count.

HIGHLIGHTS • At least four times more Black adult arrestees (aged 18 and older) were tested each year than

White adult arrestees.

• More than half of Black adult arrestees tested positive each year, compared to approximately 30- 40 percent of White adult arrestees.

NOTES: The District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency does not test all arrestees for drug substances. Percentages shown are for adult arrestees actually tested for drug substances. Each year represents the fiscal year beginning October 1 and ending September 30PthP. SOURCE: DC Office of Forensic, Pretrial Services Agency, December 2007

District of Columbia: Community Profile 72

WARD 1: DRUG TEST RESULTS FOR ADULT ARRESTEES

Table 38: Ward 1 Drug Test Results by Age for Adult Arrestees in the District of Columbia: Fiscal Years 2004–2007

NOTES: Column totals for each year do not add up to totals provided due to missing age data for some cases in each year. Percentages not reported due to low cell count.

2004 2005 2006 2007

Tested (#) 563 507 572 572 Positive (%) 47.4 41.6 48.6 52.4

Tested (#) 236 198 232 226 Positive (%) 50.8 53.5 54.3 56.2

Tested (#) 105 97 99 103 Positive (%) 53.3 57.7 63.6 55.3

Tested (#) 38 34 25 3 Positive (%) 52.6 47.1 44.0 61.3

Tested (#) 4 3 6 Positive (%) - - - -

AGE 18-24

55 and olde r

25-34

35-44

45-54

WARD 1 Ye ar

HIGHLIGHTS • Since FY2004, arrestees 18-24 years old have made up the largest population of arrestees tested

for illegal substances; however, arrestees aged 25 and older consistently have a higher percentage of positive drug tests.

NOTES: The District of Columbia Pretrial Services Agency does not test all arrestees for drug substances. Percentages shown are for adult arrestees actually tested for drug substances. Each year represents the fiscal year beginning October 1 and ending September 30PthP. SOURCE: DC Office of Forensic, Pretrial Services Agency, December 2007.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 73

DISTRICT-WIDE: TOBACCO CONSUMPTION BY WARD

Figure 20: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Cigarette Use:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS • Based on 2002–2004 annual

averages, Ward 4 residents aged 12 or older reported lower percentages of past month cigarette use than residents in Wards 1, 2, and 8.

Table 39: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Month Cigarette Use:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

27.02 - 38.96 24.50 - 35.26

95% Prediction Interval

4.30 - 9.10

Ward 1

• Based on 2002–2004 annual averages, Ward 1 residents aged 12 to 17 reported lower estimates of past month cigarette use than all other residents in the Ward.

• Residents aged 18 to 25 and 26 or older reported similar estimates of past month cigarette use.

NOTE: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 74

For this section, we have included the following eight indicators that are useful in

monitoring the availability of support groups and treatment for individuals abusing or dependent on alcohol or illicit drugs. The data presented for these eight indicators allowed us to assess the availability of support groups and treatment, as well as the need for treatment in the District of Columbia.

• Support Groups/Treatment

o Alcoholics Anonymous Meetings o Narcotics Anonymous Meetings o Cocaine Anonymous Meetings o Crystal Meth Anonymous Meetings o Recovery Clubs o Treatment Programs

• Need for Treatment

o Needing alcohol treatment o Needing illicit drug treatment

These indicators were selected in accordance with CSAP requirements. The tables providing data on the need for alcohol and/or illicit drug treatment do not provide a complete understanding of the need for treatment, nor do available support groups and treatment options provide an exhaustive list for the District of Columbia. The information provided does, however, provide some ward-level information on the need for treatment and options for individuals who currently abuse and/or are dependent on alcohol and/or illicit drugs.

TTRRE SSE

EAATTM ECCTTI

MEENNT IOONN I

T IXX

District of Columbia: Community Profile 75

DISTRICT-WIDE: WEEKLY RECOVERY MEETINGS, RECOVERY CLUBS AND TREATMENT PROGRAMS

BY REGION

Alcoholics Anonymous Meetings………53 Narcotics Anonymous Meetings………..33 Cocaine Anonymous Meetings…………..0 Crystal Meth Anonymous Meetings……..0 Recovery Clubs…………………………..5 Treatment Programs…………………….15

NORTHEAST REGION

Alcoholics Anonymous Meetings……..411 Narcotics Anonymous Meetings………..92 Cocaine Anonymous Meetings…………..0 Crystal Meth Anonymous Meetings……..5 Recovery Clubs…………………………..5 Treatment Programs…………………….27

NORTHWEST REGION

Alcoholics Anonymous Meetings………90 Narcotics Anonymous Meetings………..27 Cocaine Anonymous Meetings…………..1 Crystal Meth Anonymous Meetings……..0 Recovery Clubs…………………………..1 Treatment Programs…………………..….7

SOUTHEAST REGION

Alcoholics Anonymous Meetings………14 Narcotics Anonymous Meetings…………1 Cocaine Anonymous Meetings…………..0 Crystal Meth Anonymous Meetings……..0 Recovery Clubs…………………………..0 Treatment Programs…………………..….0

SOUTHWEST REGION

SOURCES: Provided to CESAR by Faces and Voices of Recovery using data from the following sources: the Washington Area Intergroup Association; the Chesapeake and Potomac Region of Narcotics Anonymous; the Cocaine Anonymous Washington, DC, Maryland and Northern Virginia Area Website; Crystal Meth Anonymous; and the Bounce Back Guide to Recovery in Washington, DC, 2007, published by Recovery Works, Washington, DC.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 76

DISTRICT-WIDE: NEEDING BUT NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT FOR ALCOHOL USE BY WARD

Figure 21: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older

Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Alcohol Use: Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

HIGHLIGHTS

Table 40: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Alcohol Use:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• Based on 2002–2004 annual averages,

residents aged 12 or older in Wards 7 and 8 reported lower percentages of needing but not receiving treatment for alcohol use than in Ward 2.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

95% Prediction IntervalAge

Ward 1

7.50 - 14.06

1.96 - 5.30 12.53 - 21.99

• Based on 2002–2004 annual averages, Ward 1 residents aged 12 to 17 reported lower

estimates of needing but not receiving treatment for alcohol use in the past year than all other (older) Ward 1 residents.

• Residents aged 18 to 25 and residents aged 26 or older reported similar estimates.

NOTE: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health, Office of Applied Studies, Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration.

District of Columbia: Community Profile 77

DISTRICT-WIDE: NEEDING BUT NOT RECEIVING TREATMENT FOR ILLICIT DRUG USE BY WARD

Figure 22: Percent of Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Illicit Drug Use:

Ward Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages HIGHLIGHTS

Table 41: Percent Prediction Interval of Ward 1 Residents Aged 12 or Older Reporting Past Year Need but No Treatment for Illicit Drug Use:

Estimates Based on 2002–2004 Annual Averages

• Based on the 2002–2004 annual averages, residents aged 12 or older needing but not receiving treatment for illicit drug use in the past year had similar consumption patterns across all eight wards.

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

P er

ce nt

ag e

Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8

12 to 17 18 to 25 26 or older

Ward 1 95% Prediction

Interval 2.60 - 6.46

5.49 - 11.11

A ge

1.51 - 4.06

• Based on 2002–2004 annual averages, Ward 1 residents aged 18 to 25 reported higher

estimates of needing but receiving no treatment for past year illicit drug use than residents aged 26 or older.

NOTE: The statistics presented here are based on an average calculated from annual averages for years 2002, 2003, and 2004. Data should be interpreted with caution due to estimates calculated using a 95% confidence interval. Illicit drugs include marijuana/hashish, cocaine (including crack), heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants, or prescription-type psychotherapeutic used nonmedically. SOURCE: Adapted by CESAR from data from the 2002, 2003, and 2004 National Survey on Drug Use and Health (NSDUH), Office of Applied Studies (OAS), Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).

District of Columbia: Community Profile 78

The five consequences highlighted in this report (violent and property crime, arrest, HIV/AIDS, dependence and abuse, and mortality) represent a deeper analysis of data initially presented in the “District of Columbia Epidemiological Profile” released in March 2007. This new report was prepared during the initial phase of a ward-level data analysis plan initiated by the DCEOW. It is the latest in a series of reports that are designed to assess the consequences and consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs in the District of Columbia. The purpose of this report is to analyze existing data regarding the use of alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs at the community level and to fill data gaps that were detected in the first citywide report completed last year.

In order to assess District needs on the ward-level, additional data were requested and

obtained by the DCEOW from various District agencies. Analyses of these data allowed the DCEOW to assess the consequences and consumption patterns related to alcohol, tobacco, and other drugs at the ward-level. Moreover, many of the data gaps were minimized with the addition of ward-level data. These additional data allowed for various demographic breakdowns that were previously not available or reported. Analyses included in this report will be used by city and local coalitions to conduct needs assessments and identify District funding priorities associated with the consequences and consumption of alcohol, tobacco, and other drug substances.

Future reports of the DCEOW will expand on the information provided in this report

and the earlier citywide report. As additional citywide and ward-level data become available, they will be added to future DCEOW reports.

CCOONNC SSE

CLLU ECCT

US TI

SIIOONN IOONN XX

District of Columbia: Community Profile 79

As part of Chief Cathy Lanier's dedication to improving crime data tracking and analysis, in 2008, the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) upgraded key data systems. The data provided for the "District of Columbia: Community Profile" was disseminated prior to these upgrades and should not be compared with datasets released thereafter. Violent and Property Crime

Source: Geocoded Analytical Services Application (ASAP) data as of May 7, 2007.

All statistics presented here are based on preliminary DC index crime data. The data do not represent official statistics submitted to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) under the Uniform Crime Reporting program (UCR). All preliminary offenses are coded based on DC criminal code and not the FBI offense classifications. All statistics are subject to change due to a variety of reasons, such as a change in classification, the determination that certain offense reports were unfounded, or late reporting. Please understand that any comparisons between MPD preliminary data as published here and the official crime statistics published by the FBI under the UCR Program are inaccurate and misleading. Excludes crimes for which no address could be identified (between 1% and 3% of all crimes). All homicide data are verified through the Violent Crimes Branch (VCB). Arrests

Source: Geocoded Criminal Justice Information System (CJIS) data as of May 7, 2007.

Totals are based solely on the top arrest charge. One person may have been booked

on more than one arrest charge. Excludes arrests for which no address could be identified (between 1% and 3% of all arrests).

AADDDDIITTIIOONNAALL NNOOTTEESS AABBOOUUTT LLAAWW EENNFFOORRCCEEMMEENNTT DDAATTAA

Community Profile Final Part 1.pdf
Community Profile Final Part 2.pdf