Drug Free Osage County 2011 progress report

Kansas SPF-SIG

Received 2008

Address underage drinking

One of fourteen grantees

Grant runs through June, 2012

Strategic plan

Two targeted outcomes: Past 30-day use Binge drinking

Most data obtained from Kansas Communities That Care Survey

Formed data workgroup Look at data indicators

10 risk and protective factors Magnitude of the problem Trend line Relative ration (compared to peers across

Kansas) How youth obtain alcohol Where youth drank alcohol Demographics Barriers and Assets

Chose 11 influencing and contributing factors

Key areas Family involvement and functioning Academic achievement Pro-social involvement and functioning Social access Social norms Enforcement

Family involvement and functioning Lack of clear expectations and use of

inconsistent or inappropriate consequences Lack of opportunities for meaningful

participation in family activities Promotion of alcohol at community events

Academic achievement Youth believe that they are failing or getting

bad grades

Pro-social involvement and functioning Youth report lack of opportunities for positive

community participation

Social access Ease of availability of alcohol Availability by way of social sources (adult

providing)

Social norms Parents don’t think that it’s wrong if their kids

drink regularly Youth don’t perceive that they risk harming

themselves if they drink regularly

Enforcement Youth don’t believe that they will get caught

by police if they drink Low number of MIP’s are given by police, in

proportion to the reported number of youth drinkers

Surveyed individuals Scored surveys Scoring indicated readiness rating of

“denial and resistance” Weighted factors

Community willingness to acknowledge and work on solutions

“Buy-in” of key leaders

Address influencing and contributing factors

Social access Adults providing Access to alcohol at home

Decrease, by 8 percentage points, the proportion of youth in grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 who reported drinking alcohol and said they obtained it from an adult, from a baseline of 21.6% of those reporting in 2008 to 13.6% by December 31, 2011.

Social norms Social hosting Rite of passage mentality No perception of risk of harm Parents did not think it was wrong

Decrease the proportion of youth in grades 6, 8, 10, and 12 who responded that their parents would not think it would not be wrong at all if the youth drank beer, wine or hard liquor regularly (at least once or twice a month) by 2 percentage points from a baseline of 4.6% of those reporting in 2008 to 2.6% by December 31, 2011.

Decrease by 5% the number of youth in grades 6, 8, 10, and 12 who responded “no risk” when asked if they think that people risk harming themselves (physically or in other ways) if they take one or two drinks of an alcoholic beverage nearly everyday, from a baseline of 13.1% to 8.1% by December 31, 2011.

Enforcement Kids didn’t think they’d get caught Lack of consequences—in multiple domains—

home, school, community Lax judicial system Few MIP’s given compared to reported

drinking

Increase the proportion of youth in grades 6, 8, 10, and 12 who responded “yes” when asked that if a kid drank some beer, wine or liquor in their neighborhood, or in the area around which they live, that he or she would be caught by the police, by 7% from a baseline of 29.5% in 2008, to 36.5% by December 31, 2011.

By December 30, 2011 Osage County will increase the number of citations given for Minor in Possession of alcohol (MIP) measured by the KBI data from a baseline of 1 citation in 2007 to 11 citations.

Project ALERT Prevention curriculum for middle school

students

Communities Mobilizing for Change on Alcohol (CMCA) Reduce youth alcohol use by changing

community policies and practices

Baseline 2008

2009 2010 2011 No Change

Target 2012

2011 %

Reduction from

baseline

27.3% 24.8% 24.8% 27.1% 17.3%0.2

percentage points

On how many occasions (if any) have you had beer, wine or hard liquor during the past 30 days?

Baseline 2008

2009 2010 2011 Right

Direction

Target 2012

Binge is Targete

d Objecti

ve

2011%

Reduction from

Baseline

15.4% 13.5% 11.9% 14.0% 7.4% YES1.4

percentage points

Think back over the last two weeks. How many times have you had five or more alcoholic drinks in a row?

Environmental 16,712

Prevention Education(Project ALERT)

193Middle School

Students

More thorough reporting, especially higher grades CTC Participation

YEAR 6th 8th 10th 12th TOTAL

2008 89% 67% 75% 57% 73%

2009 82% 74% 54% 40% 64%

2010 96% 100% 88% 76% 91%

2011 79% 89% 87% 82% 85%


Need more saturation


Need more saturation Need more impact

Developed supplemental plan

Evaluation on Continuum of Impact Grid Examined existing strategies Examined new strategies

Low (awareness) High (knowledge or behavior change)

HIGH

REACH

Sticker shock Media Safe Homes 4H Meetings Web page Must B-21 CrimeStoppers

LOW

REACH


HIGH

REACH


Principals meeting School policiesPolice Chiefs meetingSafe Prom Drugs in The Academic Env. Increased Sur.Newsletters/updatesParents church groups Parents Univ.Faith communities participationSchool newsletters

LOW

REACH


HIGH

REACH



LOW

REACH

County Attorney data


HIGH

REACH



LOW

REACH

County Attorney data

Positive Action/Project ALERTYouth coalitionsChurch presentationsFestival planningPolicy video/youth coalition (Club 180)Community presentations

Sectors Most Involved Schools Law enforcement Faith communities

Sectors Most Underutilized & Needing to be Engaged in Next 10 Months

Parents

Law Enforcement

Business

Youth

Parents Parents University Safe Homes Faith communities School newsletters Safe Prom Community festivals Educate on Social Hosting laws Educate on brain research

Law Enforcement Safe Prom Crimestoppers Meetings Community festivals One-on-one visits Speaking engagements Educate on brain research

Business Safe Prom CrimeStoppers Community festivals One-on-one relationships Sticker shock

Youth Positive Action in all schools Project ALERT in all schools Continued involvement in Youth Coalitions Already established groups (faith, service)

Community readiness and/or awareness changes to note: Greater receptivity among schools Greater receptivity among faith communities Greater receptivity among law enforcement

What key leader support looks like currently: School leaders Pastors Police Chiefs Sheriff County Attorney is prevention-friendly

Exploring ways to involve municipal courts

What will make data move: An act of God/Divine intervention More saturation and impact Move communities toward readiness—from

denial and resistance Sustaining programs (Project ALERT/Positive

Action) Promoting, enhancing & enforcing of policies Teaching and promotion of prevention science

What things help impede movement of data? Out-commuting of residents Community disorganization No central hub of Osage County Lack of police officers on duty Social norm of “rite of passage” Lack of resources to fund SRO’s Difficulty to secure instructors for Project ALERT Economic: loss of teachers, budget cuts in schools Parents’ reluctance to take charge in parenting Parents’ lack of training in prevention skills Municipal court system

Implement Positive Action Continually look for new partnerships Develop parent training opportunities

Churches School newsletters Other community publications Safe Prom Safe Homes

Target municipal judges to build alliances Build alliance with media outlets

Increased collaboration with schools Establishment of faith partnership Expanded Safe Prom initiative Principals meeting Police Chiefs meeting Youth coalition development and

achievements Learning more about prevention science

Prevention work is incredibly systemic. This work takes a lot of patience.

Drug Free Osage County 2011 progress report

Documents

Transcript of Drug Free Osage County 2011 progress report