Criteria for assessing alternative methods for identifying abusers include cost, drugs capable of being detected, ability to differentiate casual from chronic use, time span of use that can be detected, and accuracy. Screening methods may include self-reports, official records, or urinalysis. Urinalysis appears, at present, to be the most cost-effective and accurate screening method available. Pretrial testing of all arrestees, of probationers and parolees, and of juvenile detainees would facilitate assessment, monitoring, and treatment; but continued testing and/or diagnostic interview data are needed to differentiate abusers from recent users. A pretrial drug detection program for adult defendants, implemented in Washington, D.C., indicated that about two-thirds of tested arrestees were active drug users and that users who complied with continuing pretrial urine testing had lower pretrial misconduct rates than those who did not. Other programs have used routine probation and parole urinalysis and/or referral to treatment. Overall, these programs suggest that monitoring, particularly when combined with treatment, may provide an effective means of intervening in drug abuse and related criminality. 28 note and 36 references.