Drones, Dogs & Donuts 🍩
WFAM - Waste of the Week (...but sent bi-weekly, I think)
Quick WFAM Project Updates (9.10.25)
- Our database just reached 200 WFAM examples
- Current WFAM Total: ~$20mil
Our database is always growing as the community continues to flag issues. We appreciate your contributions!
Drones, Dogs & Donuts
Across the country, states and localities are stealing opioid settlement funds meant for evidence-based opioid addiction prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery and funneling them in wasteful, even harmful, spending instead.
To date, we’ve uncovered $7.5 million of opioid settlement funds wasted on law enforcement. That's ~1/3 our current WFAM total (not a total of all spending). Today, we'll call out some specific examples:
Drones ($97k)
2025 EOY UPDATE: +$152,971
- Vendors: Skydio, BRINC, DJI*
- Where: Virginia, West Virgina
- Spending: Device, accessories/attachments
- Duration: Up-front + ongoing costs (potentially: video/cloud storage, maintenance, replacements, training)
- Other Considerations:
- As always, the purchasing process may have issues: Was there an open bidding process for these devices? How was the specific model evaluated for the stated purpose? These questions could generate other concerns and are worth investigating.
- Was the public notified about this purchase? Who was consulted before the purchase? Who approved the purchase?
- What are the metrics that law enforcement provided to decision makers to evaluate whether this spending is a "success?" Is there data or research showing that drones reduce overdose deaths or improve access to treatment? If not, why would opioid settlement money go towards this?
- How are the drones going to be used? Will they respect privacy and civil liberties, or disproportionately target marginalized communities? What safeguards are in place?
- How were ongoing costs factored into the decision-making process?
- Were alternative uses of the funds considered? Were alternative funds to purchase drones pursued?
- *The federal government has been working towards banning DJI drones for a few years...)
- Good Spending Alternatives: Naloxone distribution in high-risk communities, peer navigators, transportation vouchers for treatment
K9 Dog Related Expenses ($283k)
2025 EOY UPDATE: +$813,738
- Vendors: Regional (not sure if there's a national K9 cabal, probably)
- Where: Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, New York, Missouri
- Spending: Dogs, training equipment, vehicles
- Duration: Up-front + ongoing costs
- Other notes:
- K9's are primarily used for low-level drug possession, which is not the systemic issue driving the crisis. What are the metrics that law enforcement provided to decision makers to evaluate whether this spending is a "success?" Is there data or research showing that drones reduce overdose deaths or improve access to treatment?
- Was the public notified about this purchase? Who was consulted before the purchase? Who approved the purchase?
- How were ongoing costs factored into the decision-making process?
- Were alternative uses of the funds considered? Were alternative funds to purchase K9's pursued?
- How are the dogs going to be used? Will they respect privacy and civil liberties, or disproportionately target marginalized communities? What safeguards are in place?
- Good Spending Alternatives: Mobile treatment and harm reduction services, drug checking, jail diversion programs
From our standpoint, no drone or police dog can address a community's need for addiction prevention, harm reduction, treatment, and recovery supports. Therefore, anytime we see spending like this, it's going to end up on our database as WASTE.
