Drug laboratory efficiency: shifting paradigms - Baltimore City Police Department's Drug Analysis Unit

FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin,The, August, 1994 by Shiv K. Soni

Like many other large urban areas, Baltimore, Maryland, witnessed a record number of homicides (353) and drug arrests (17,687) in 1993, as the fatal combination of drugs and guns challenged already-strained law enforcement resources. With the increase in drug-related offenses, aggressive drug law enforcement remained a top priority within the city's police department. As a result, the department's Drug Analysis Unit (also referred to as the laboratory) confronted an enormous caseload, one that has doubled since 1982.

In 1993, the laboratory analyzed a record number of controlled dangerous substances (CDS) cases--18,010, containing 235,485 total drug units. CDS submissions increased nearly 40 percent over 1990 figures, while total drug units increased over 65 percent.

Numbers, however, do not tell the complete story. Drug analyses have become increasingly complex as drug abuse and distribution patterns evolve. For example,laboratory analysis revealed that two distinct qualities of heroin were being distributed on the streets of Baltimore: A low quality taken by injection and a high quality ingested primarily by inhaling.

New designer drugs also continue to enter the illicit market. In spring 1992, the laboratory played a major role in the analysis of Fentanyl, a street drug distributed under the name "China White." Use of this drug resulted in 30 deaths throughout Maryland, including 25 deaths in the City of Baltimore alone. In addition, analysis and identification of anabolic steroids--designated as controlled substances under separate Federal and State laws--involve a complex process, requiring the use of state-of-the-art analytical instruments.

To meet the challenge of increased caseloads and more complex drug analyses, while working within an environment of fiscal restraints, the Drug Analysis Unit made a series of management decisions that ultimately led to greatly enhanced productivity and efficiency. This article describes the factors that led to the "paradigm shift" undertaken by the laboratory and the specific changes that produced positive results.

THE CHALLENGE

To support investigations adequately, drug analysis must be rapid, precise, and cost-effective. However, during the last decade, budgetary constraints often precluded staffing levels commensurate with the ever-expanding influx of drug cases. Nationwide, increased caseloads and demands for prompt analytical information by the courts placed tremendous pressure on laboratory services. In Baltimore, this situation was exacerbated by a reliance on manually operated, labor-intensive analytical instruments, as well as a resistance to standardization and to newly acquired automated procedures on the part of laboratory personnel.

The challenge to administrators, therefore, was to design a system that would eliminate the constant backlog, decrease turnaround time, increase individual productivity, and maintain high analytical standards for accuracy and precision. Any practical system must also effect a paradigm shift in the mindset of the personnel within the Drug Analysis Unit to make them more receptive to change and new ideas.

SHIFTING PARADIGMS

To meet the challenge and to escape the limitations of the former paradigm (the "old way of doing things"), managers carefully developed a new set of paradigms. These standards include:

* Expanded training and education of personnel

* Review and revision of the laboratory's standard operating analytical procedures

* Continuous quality improvement measures

* Acquisition and application of emerging technologies for analytical purposes

* Design of innovative laboratory forms

* Continued sensitivity to public interests.

Adapting to changes in the scientific and technological environment requires a constant acquisition of knowledge and skills. Eventually, the successful implementation of these concepts culminated in a more productive and efficient environment within the Drug Analysis Unit.

Training and Education

When setting out to improve efficiency, administrators understood that training and education constitute a basic, but easily overlooked, component of productivity. Therefore, the training and education program was expanded and redesigned to promote independent thought and sound scientific judgment in the use of automated procedures.

The multifaceted program covers drug analysis techniques, as well as the principles, applications, and limitations of the methods and techniques currently in use. To reinforce the training, managers encouraged chemists to use automated equipment and procedures in daily routines. The integration of automated procedures into the working routine, though slow and cumbersome at first, gradually won widespread support among laboratory personnel.

Standard Operating Procedures

Managers thoroughly reviewed and streamlined standard operating procedures (SOP) to maximize productivity and consistency in the use of laboratory methodology among chemists. In order to enhance productivity, a basic tenet of the paradigm shift required that all chemists use identical techniques. Initially, laboratory personnel viewed such standardization as unconventional at best. Traditional practice in the field held that as professionals, forensic examiners could choose among any accepted analytical techniques available.