Program Profile: Mandatory-Random Student Drug Testing

This program is designed to deter students from substance use and to identify and refer those with substance use problems to counseling or treatment services. Students and their parents sign consent forms, agreeing to the students’ random drug testing as a condition of participation in athletics and other school-sponsored extracurricular activities. The program is rated Ineffective. There were no statistically significant effects on overall substance use or intentions to use substances.

An Ineffective rating implies that implementing the program is unlikely to result in the intended outcome(s).

This program's rating is based on evidence that includes at least one high-quality randomized controlled trial.

Program Goals

Mandatory–Random Student Drug Testing (MRSDT) programs are designed to supplement existing school-based prevention interventions and have two primary goals: 1) deter students from substance use and 2) identify students with substance use problems and refer them to appropriate counseling or treatment services. Under MRSDT, students and their parents sign consent forms, thereby agreeing to the students’ random drug testing as a condition of participation in athletics and other school-sponsored extracurricular activities. During the 2004–05 school year, 14 percent of U.S. public school districts conducted random drug testing (James–Burdumy et al. 2012).

Program Theory

Despite a steady decline over the last decade, the prevalence of adolescent substance use remains a cause for concern. National estimates suggest that 50 percent of students report having ever used illicit drugs, and substance use is found to be a leading cause of health problems in adolescence and adulthood (Anderson and Smith 2005; Johnston et al. 2008). Therefore, it remains important for schools to explore approaches to reducing adolescent substance use.

One approach is MRSDT programs. The theoretical framework of MRSDT predicts that the programs could reduce substance use in three ways: by deterring substance use, by detecting substance use, and by having spillover effects on students who aren’t directly subjected to drug testing. MRSDT is expected to have deterrent effects if students are aware of the possibility of drug testing and the possible outcomes that could result from a positive test. Deterrent effects are more likely to occur when students are directly subjected to testing and for the specific substances covered by the drug testing policy. However, changes in substance use behavior could carry over during times when students are not required to submit to drug testing and to substances that do not directly fall under the testing policy.

In addition, students who do test positive for substance use can be referred by school faculty to appropriate treatment or counseling services. Finally, MRSDT could also have an effect on the substance use of students who are not subject to drug testing, as they observe and are influenced by the behavior of their peers who are randomly tested.

Target Population

Generally, only students who participate in school-sponsored athletics or extracurricular activities are subject to mandatory–random drug testing. The Supreme Court has upheld the constitutionality of random drug testing without suspicion for students who choose to participate in school-sponsored activities. However, the Supreme Court has not ruled on a case involving random drug testing of all students in a single school (James–Burdumy et al. 2010).

Program Components

The U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools (OSDFS) has operated a grant program to support MRSDT programs in schools since 2003. To receive grant funding, school districts must document other school-based prevention strategies that are already in place to prevent substance use because MRSDT is meant to supplement and not replace those efforts. The OSDFS grant program provides funding but leaves numerous implementation decisions to the discretion of the individual grantees. However, all districts are required to follow a basic set of testing procedures, including the following:

• School districts must administer tests to a minimum of 50 percent of eligible students.
• Schools must test for a minimum of five substances (marijuana, amphetamines, cocaine, methamphetamines, and opiates).
• Students who test positive should be referred to counseling or treatment services.
• Positive test results are subject to review and verification by a certified Medical Review Officer.
• School districts must establish procedures to maintain the confidentiality of test results.

Within those requirements, school districts can establish which extracurricular activities are covered by the drug testing policy, the frequency of testing of and the proportion of students who will be eligible for testing during each testing event, any additional substances that may be tested for, and the period of the school year when students may be subjected to testing.

For example, school districts may choose to randomly drug-test only those students who participate in sports such as football, soccer, wrestling, baseball, and basketball. But students in school-sponsored clubs and other activities such as drama, band, and choir may also be eligible for testing. School districts may also decide to drug-test students only during the period of the school year when they are participating in school sports or clubs, or students may be subject to drug testing for the entire school year. In addition, schools may decide to test for additional substances beyond the five required by the grant program.

It is also important for schools to make students aware of the MRSDT policies. Increasing student awareness could be done through various methods, such as announcements at athletic practices, messages delivered through the school public address system, letters or emails to parents and students, or media releases (including newspaper, television, or radio).

Study

James–Burdumy and colleagues (2010) examined the effectiveness of Mandatory–Random Student Drug Testing (MRSDT) by conducting a clustered randomized trial among seven grantee school districts that applied for and received funding from the Office of Safe and Drug-Free Schools grant program in 2006. Schools within grantee districts were randomly assigned to the treatment group (those permitted to begin their MRSDT program immediately upon learning of their treatment assignment in spring 2007) or to the control group (those required to delay their implementation of MRSDT until after the follow-up student survey for this study was administered in spring 2008).

The treatment group included 20 high schools and 2,699 students. The control group included 16 high schools and 2,024 students. Students in the treatment group were 50.9 percent female and 70.3 percent white, 21.4 percent African American, 3.9 percent more than one race, and 4.5 percent American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander. Half of the group (50.7 percent) were in 9th grade, 26.7 percent were in 10th grade, and 22.7 percent were in 11th grade. The control group was 49.6 percent female and 67.7 percent white, 22.7 percent African American, 4.9 percent more than one race, and 4.8 percent American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, or Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander. More than half of the group (51.7 percent) were in 9th grade, 27.4 percent were in 10th grade, and 21.0 percent were in 11th grade. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups on demographic characteristics or any baseline version of the outcome measures, except on age; students in the treatment group were less likely than control group students to be 16 years old.

Key outcomes of the study included students’ self-reports of substance use, perceptions of the consequences of substance use, connectedness with school, intentions to use substances in the future, and participation in activities covered by MRSDT. Student-level data was collected from student surveys administered at the baseline (spring 2007) and at the 1-year follow-up (spring 2008). The survey included separate questions on students’ use of 10 different substances and asked them how frequently they had used the substance over three reference periods: the past 30 days, the past 6 months, and ever in their lifetimes. Questions also asked students about their intentions to use any substance in the next 12 months. In addition, the number of disciplinary incidents was also assessed by examining data from official school reports. Disciplinary incidents included expulsions, illegal-drug incidents, alcohol-related incidents, and physical attacks or fights.

The study used a regression model to estimate the impacts of MRSDT on student- and school-level outcomes. A generalized estimating equations approach was used for clustering adjustment. For the adjustment for multiple hypotheses testing, statistical significance tests were calculated based on critical values from the multivariate t–distribution, taking into account correlations among tests. For the analytic weights, the study adjusted for differences across schools in random assignment, sampling, consent, and nonresponse probabilities. Impacts were estimated separately for three analysis samples: participants in covered activities, nonparticipants, and all students. The CrimeSolutions review of this study focused on the analysis of participants in covered activities (e.g., football, soccer, wrestling, baseball, and basketball), but not on the analysis of students in school-sponsored clubs and other activities (e.g., drama, band, and choir). Findings related to students in school-sponsored clubs and other activities can be found under Other Information.

Diffusion and Displacement

James-Burdumy and colleagues (2010) found that Mandatory–Random Student Drug Testing had no statistically significant spillover effects on the substance use reported by students who did not participate in covered activities. For nonparticipants, there were no statistically significant differences between the treatment and control students on any measures of substance use in the past 30 days or in the past 6 months.

These sources were used in the development of the program profile:

These sources were used in the development of the program profile: