evaluation of fta drug abuse testing program april 2008
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Evaluation of FTA Drug Abuse Testing Program April 2008

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 34

Evaluation of FTA Drug Abuse Testing Program April 2008 - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 72 Views
  • Uploaded on

Evaluation of FTA Drug Abuse Testing Program April 2008. Jerry Powers, FTA Office of Program Management – Safety & Security. Evaluation Analysis Opportunities. Use DAMIS data and external cost measures to develop a cost benefit model

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about ' Evaluation of FTA Drug Abuse Testing Program April 2008' - chimalsi-mamadou


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
evaluation of fta drug abuse testing program april 2008
Evaluation of FTA Drug Abuse Testing ProgramApril 2008

Jerry Powers, FTA Office of Program Management – Safety & Security

evaluation analysis opportunities
Evaluation Analysis Opportunities
  • Use DAMIS data and external cost measures to develop a cost benefit model
  • Compare DAMIS data to SAMIS data to determine safety benefit from the D&A Program
  • Raise the bar – provide customer service. Opportunities to use DAMIS to help agencies justify D&A expenditure apart from it just being a regulatory requirement
  • Show where to focus efforts/funding - areas for improvement
charter prove the effectiveness of the d a program in achieving fta strategic goal
CHARTERProve the Effectiveness of the D&A Program in Achieving FTA Strategic Goal
  • Promoting public safety by eliminating transit-related deaths, injuries, and property damage

USE:

  • Maturing DAMIS data together with:
    • Safety Data (SAMIS/NTD)
    • Audits/Technical assistance experience and data
    • Other Industry and Government D&A measures
    • Creative analysis
new measures of cost and safety benefits money lives mayhem
New Measures of Cost and Safety BenefitsMoney, Lives & Mayhem

Cost Benefit

  • Show cost saving to Transit Industry due to elimination or mitigation of D&A using employees
  • Second chance programs have significant cost benefit to industry
  • Audits are having a positive effect in terms of safety benefits and cost savings
  • Use baseline rate (1995 or 1996) and subsequent improvement to prove reduction in accidents, fatalities and injuries

Safety Benefit

outline
Outline
  • Concept and Measures
  • FTA and Testing Costs
  • Benefits
    • Mitigation of Drug & Alcohol positives
      • Pre-employment
      • Random
      • Reasonable Suspicion
      • Refusals
      • Post-Accident
      • Deterrent Effect
    • Safety
    • Audits
    • Second Chance Programs
d a evaluation concept
D&A Evaluation Concept

I. COST BENEFIT

II. SAFETY BENEFIT

Baseline

Baseline

NTD S&S Data

DAMIS

Data

NTD S&S Data

Other Industry

and Government

D&A Cost

Measures

DAMIS

Data

Analysis

Analysis

Merge these

baselines into cost benefit spreadsheet

Of D&A Program

NTD S&S Data

NTD S&S Data

Merge these

baselines to show D&A contributing to accident avoidance

DAMIS

Data

DAMIS

Data

Other Industry

and Government

D&A Cost

Measures

damis baseline
DAMIS Baseline
  • Random Positives are on the decline
  • CDL positive rate is higher than other employee categories
ntd s s baseline
NTD S&S Baseline
  • Transit Industry is getting safer. Incidents, injuries and fatalities are trending down
cost methodology unit of measurement
Cost Methodology – Unit of Measurement
  • Each D&A using employee costs the Transit Industry and the overall society $15-20K per year:
    • Health Care Expenditures
      • D&A abuse services
      • Medical consequences
    • Productivity Effects
      • Premature Death
      • Impaired productivity
      • Institutionalization, Incarceration, Crime careers and victims
    • Other Effects
      • Crime effects
      • Vehicle crashes and fire
  • D&A Program eliminates or mitigates users at $15-20K per user per year
costs

2005

$2,200,000

FTA Total Cost per Year - FY2001

309,190

Total Tests

140,179

Total Random and Reasonable Suspicion Drug Tests

$66.56

Cost per Test - from 1999 Rural

$20,579,686

Actual Cost of Tests

$6.08

Safety Sensitive Employee Productivity Cost (per test)

$853,410

Total National Productivity Cost to Agencies

Cost of Drug & Alcohol Program Personnel at Transit Agencies (per

40.97

Test)

$12,667,514

Total National Administrative Cost to Agencies

$36,300,611

Total Cost

Costs
  • Costs have ranged from $22M-$36M per year since 1995
savings methodology
Savings Methodology
  • Transit is 0.14% of the US Gross National Product (approximately $17.4 Billion/year in 2005)
  • Cost of Drug use and Alcohol misuse to the US economy is $483 Billion per year – NIDA measure indexed
  • Transit portion of that cost is $677 Million per year. Safety-sensitive are 80% of transit employees. Thus incur $542 Million of that cost.
  • 10.6% of Transportation Workers with drug use and/or alcohol misuse - Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) Survey
  • Approximately 260,000 safety-sensitive transit employees
  • Thus, ~27,500 incur the $542 Million in annual cost
  • $542,000,000/27,500 employees = $19,700 per year per employee in 2005
  • Deterring or mitigating those 27,500 employees is the basic savings opportunity
cost methodology pre employment savings
Cost MethodologyPre-employment Savings
  • Pre-employment testing - eliminated 18,125 users over the course of the Program. These users would have cost the Transit Industry $358 Million in 2005 (18,125*$19,753 = ~$358,000,000).
cost methodology random savings
Cost MethodologyRandom Savings
  • Random testing - eliminated or mitigated 5701 users over the previous 5 years of the program in 2005. These users would have cost the Transit Industry $112 Million in 2005 (5701*$19,753 = ~$112,000,000).
cost methodology post accident reasonable suspicion and refusals
Cost MethodologyPost-Accident, Reasonable Suspicion, and Refusals
  • Post Accident positives - eliminated or mitigated 1041 users over previous 5 years in 2005. These users would have cost the Transit Industry $21 Million in 2005.
  • Reasonable Suspicion - eliminated or mitigated 601 over previous 5 years in 2005. These users would have cost the Transit Industry $12 Million in 2005.
  • Refusals - eliminated 1506 users over previous 5 years in 2005. These users would have cost the Transit Industry $30 Million in 2005.
deterrent effect of random testing
Deterrent Effect of Random Testing

Year to Year calculation – no cumulative effect

If the positive rate remained

the same as at the beginning

of the program, each year there

would be ~2000 more positives

per year

Random Positive Rate

deterrence random program
Deterrence – Random Program
  • Has saved a total of $347 Million 1995-2005
  • From $9M to up to $56M per year
cost methodology
Cost Methodology
  • Drug and Alcohol Rules Cost Benefit (Regulatory Impact Analysis) called for a $1.39 Billion benefit over 10 years. An average of $139 million/year.
  • Real data from the first 11 years blows this figure away
    • $3.683 Billion (or $335 million per year average)

Redskins 27

Cowboys 14

It’s Up and…. It’s Good!

safety methodology d a accidents are comparable with regular accidents in lethality
Safety Methodology - D&A Accidents are Comparable with Regular Accidents in Lethality
  • SAMIS shows and .0071 fatalities per Accident (Collision) 1995 – 1998.
  • DAMIS shows .0077 fatalities per D&A Accident.
  • Thus, D&A has comparable lethality to Overall Safety figures in fatal accidents (8% higher than non-D&A accidents).
  • Fatalities are a function of accidents – bad luck when they occur
safety methodology show that d a program saves lives and reduces injuries
Safety Methodology - Show that D&A Program Saves Lives and Reduces Injuries
  • D&A Program Reduces Accidents and thus, exposure to Injuries and Fatalities
  • No way of measuring the D&A related accident rate before the program, so…
  • Use 1995 as a baseline
saving lives it s what s above the curve
Saving Lives: It’s What’s above the Curve

Post-Accident Positive Rate (Drug and Alcohol)

Per Incident

  • Using 1995 as a baseline,
  • the dark wedge represents:
  • 1690 Accidents
  • 13 Fatalities
  • 1486 Injuries

Post Accident Positive Rate

safety methodology less accidents less mayhem
Safety Methodology -Less Accidents = Less Mayhem
  • DAMIS showed that 3.1% accidents were D&A related in 1995 (Baseline)
  • DAMIS showed that 1.5% accidents were D&A related in 2005 (Improvement)
  • If the rate had remained at 3.1%, 1690 more accidents would have resulted from 1996-2005.
  • National Transit Database (NTD) Safety & Security module reveals that .0071 fatalities result per accident (collisions, vehicle going off road, and derailments)
  • At an overall DAMIS rate of .0077 fatalities per accident, these 817 accidents would be expected to cause 13.02 fatalities.
the fta drug alcohol testing program
The FTA Drug & Alcohol Testing Program

The decrease in illicit drug use in the transit industry has resulted in the positive rate dropping from 1.76% to 0.81% resulting in:

  • An avoidance of 1,690 accidents that would have produced approximately 13 fatalities and 1486 injuries.
  • The elimination or mitigation through rehabilitation of 29,841 illicit drug users in the transit industry through both testing and deterrence

3.       Productivity benefits and total societal economic cost avoidance of $3.68 billion dollars

training cost for new employees
Training Cost for New Employees
  • Transit employee salary – weighted average from 2000 Bureau of Labor Statistics
cost measures is return to duty and follow up a benefit or a burden
Cost Measures - Is Return-to-duty and Follow-up a Benefit or a Burden?
  • It is estimated that to train new employee, it costs 1/3rd of an employee’s annual salary
  • $1650 per month – D&A Using employee

D&A Abusing

Employee

Costs

Training

Costs for

New Employees

is second chance policy beneficial to industry yes

Second Chance Programs

Return to Duty and Follow-up

totals

25,624

Return-to-Duty Tests (Both Drugs & Alcohol)

175,247

Follow-up Tests (Both Drugs & Alcohol)

475

Positives - Failed Return-to-Duty Tests (Both Drugs & Alcohol)

2300

Positives - Failed Follow-up Tests (Both Drugs & Alcohol)

10.06%

Percent Positives per Return-to-Duty Employee 1995-2005

6.53

Follow-up tests per RTD employee 1995-2005

Average Transit Salary - 2000

$223,254,981

Savings through the Avoidance of Training Costs

Societal Economic Cost of Employing a Drug User or Alcohol Misuser

(2 months or 1/6 of Average Annual Economic Impact of Each Drug &

Alcohol Using Transit Employee)

$7,571,542

Cost of Additional Testing - Return-to-Duty and Follow-up (assume

$70/test because of Urban focus)

$14,060,970

$24,599,040

Substance Abuse Professional (SAP) Cost (assume $960/ RTD Emp.)

$177,023,429

Net (Savings minus Costs) - Second Chance Programs

Is Second Chance Policy Beneficial to Industry? YES

$28,970.32

  • Benefit is almost 5 times more than the cost ($223M saved in training vs. $46M in costs), or for every dollar spent on Second Chance, industry got almost $5 dollars back.
cost measures audits
Cost Measures - Audits
  • Expect a hump in Random positive rate after audit as testing gets better – random becomes more random.
  • And systems are generally brought into compliance
  • Good examples: Los Angeles, San Jose, Santa Fe

OR

  • Random rate decreases as agency relaxes after audit

OR

  • They go up the year of as agency readies for the audit
audits
Audits
  • Expected result of Audits - Timeline

Goes up

as result of

better testing

(catch more users)

Audit

Lower

as result of

eliminating abusers

and causing abstinence

actual audit effect
Actual Audit Effect
  • Drop in the right of the chart shows that audits are effective in discouraging and eliminating substance abusers
  • Audit cost is ~$25K. One user mitigated over one year saves ~$20K
trends drug metabolization time and positive rates shows actual drug choices
Trends: Drug Metabolization Time and Positive Rates shows Actual Drug Choices
  • Program would seem to be pushing users away from THC (45 days to leave the system) and towards Cocaine (3 days to leave the system)
  • Expect that tests catch actual THC users at a rate 15 times higher than that of actual Cocaine users
    • Multiplying Cocaine rate by 15 gives equivalent actual comparable usage rate
  • Data shows that Cocaine use is 10 to 12 times higher than THC use
actual usage comparison
Actual Usage Comparison

If Cocaine was testable out to

45 days – the chart would look like

This.

questions answers
Questions & Answers

Jerry Powers

will be available for

questions

immediately following this presentation

Room 209-210

ad