What Communities Can Do to Prevent Alcohol Service ......Brownsville - Matamoros. Stewart:...
Transcript of What Communities Can Do to Prevent Alcohol Service ......Brownsville - Matamoros. Stewart:...
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
What Communities Can Do
to Prevent Alcohol Service
Problems:New and Ongoing Research
Kathryn Stewart
Prevention Research Center of the
Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation
Safety and Policy Analysis International
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Strategies Coordinating Community
Policy and Enforcement
◼ Preventing alcohol related problems at the
US/Mexico Border
◼ Controlling alcohol outlet density to prevent
alcohol problems
◼ Using policy and enforcement to prevent
alcohol problems in college communities
◼ Using community awareness and enforcement to
reduce sales to minors
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Border Project
Preventing alcohol-related problems at
the US/Mexico Border
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Current sites
◼ San Diego -Tijuana
◼ El Paso – Juarez
◼ Laredo –Nuevo Laredo
◼ Brownsville - Matamoros
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Problem
◼ Mexico’s drinking age is 18
◼ Some border towns provided plentiful, cheap
sources of alcohol
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Problem
◼ Mexico’s drinking age is 18
◼ Some border towns provided plentiful, cheap
sources of alcohol
◼ Young people traveled to Mexico to drink
◼ Beverage service not always “responsible”
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Problem
◼ Mexico’s drinking age is 18
◼ Some border towns provided plentiful, cheap
sources of alcohol
◼ Young people traveled to Mexico to drink
◼ Beverage service not always “responsible”
◼ Heavy drinking occurred
◼ Sometimes resulted in problems in Mexico
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Problem
◼ Mexico’s drinking age is 18
◼ Some border towns provided plentiful, cheap sources of alcohol
◼ Young people traveled to Mexico to drink
◼ Beverage service not always “responsible”
◼ Heavy drinking occurred
◼ Sometimes resulted in problems in Mexico
◼ Impaired young people drove home
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Research Strategy
◼ PIRE studied drinking behavior of young US
residents crossing into Mexico
◼ Documented the extent of heavy drinking
◼ Shed light on motivations and behavior of
border crossers
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Implementation Strategy
◼ The nature and scope of the problem were
explained to groups and agencies on both sides
of the border
◼ Media advocacy brought the problem to the
attention of the public through compelling news
coverage
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Change Strategies
◼ Earlier bar closings
◼ Stepped up DUI enforcement efforts on the US
side of the border
◼ Highly publicized enforcement of laws against
crossing by youth under 18
◼ New restrictions on Marines from Camp
Pendleton
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Results
◼ Dramatic decline in number of nighttime
crossings by young people
◼ Reduction in nighttime crashes involving drivers
under 18
◼ 90% reduction in number of Marines driving
back from the border
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Alcohol Outlet
Density and Alcohol
ProblemsMaking Enforcement More Effective through
Alcohol Policy
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Problem
◼ Neighborhoods where bars, restaurants and
liquor and other stores that sell alcohol are close
together suffer more frequent incidences of
violence and other alcohol-related problems.
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Problems include
◼ Impaired driving
◼ Property crime
◼ Violent crime
◼ Child abuse and neglect
◼ Underage drinking
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Implementation Strategy
◼ Make communities aware of the problems
created by alcohol outlets
◼ Make communities aware of the policy strategies
that can control outlet location and density
◼ Licensing policies
◼ Land use policies
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Results
Communities can:
◼ Set minimum distances between alcohol outlets
◼ Limit new licenses for areas that already have
outlets too close together;
◼ Not issue a new license when an outlet goes out
of business
◼ Permanently close outlets that repeatedly violate
liquor laws
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
The Follow-up
◼ Policy changes can permanently change the
environment
◼ Reductions in alcohol problems can be sustained
◼ Communities are empowered to take control of
the alcohol environment
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Safer California Universities
Project Goal
To evaluate the efficacy of a“Risk Management” approach to
alcohol problem prevention
NIAAA grant #R01 AA12516with support from CSAP/SAMHSA.
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Why Care About College Student Drinking?
◼ Over 1,700 deaths among 18-24 year old college students
◼ 590,000 unintentionally injured under the influence of alcohol
◼ More than 690,000 assaulted by another student who has been drinking
◼ More than 97,000 are victims of alcohol-related sexual assault or date rape
◼ About 25 percent of college students report academic consequences of their drinking including missing class, falling behind, doing poorly on exams or papers, and receiving lower grades overall
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
What are we trying to prevent?
◼ Intoxication
◼ Harm related to intoxication
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Random Assignment
Intervention Sites
▪ CSU Chico
▪ Sacramento State
▪ CSU Long Beach
▪ UC Berkeley
▪ UC Davis
▪ UC Riverside
▪ UC Santa Cruz
Comparison Sites
▪ Cal Poly SLO
▪ San Jose State
▪ CSU Fullerton
▪ UC Irvine
▪ UC Los Angeles
▪ UC San Diego
▪ UC Santa Barbara
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
How is risk management a
unique approach?
◼ Targets times and places instead of individuals
◼ Focus on intoxication
◼ Data driven and directive
◼ Tied to continuous monitoring and improvement - emphasis on “control” rather than “one shot” interventions
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Strategies for Implementation
◼ Focused on one (at most two) settings
◼ Focused on beginning of academic year
◼ Highly-specified planning and implementation
process
◼ Minimal attention to motivation
◼ Maximum attention to tasks and implementation per
se
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Integrated Intervention Strategies for
Off-Campus Parties
◼ A Social Host Safe Party Campaign
◼ Compliance Checks
◼ DUI Check Points
◼ Party Patrols
◼ Pass Social Host “Response Cost” Ordinance
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Outcomes
◼ Likelihood of getting drunk at bars or
restaurants much less.
◼ Likelihood of getting drunk at off campus
parties much less.
◼ Overall likelihood of getting drunk at any
location much less.
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
In addition…
No Displacement
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
In Sum…
◼ We have the ability to create environments that
help teens and young adults make healthy
decisions about alcohol consumption
◼ We have ample evidence that these strategies are
effective
◼ Our greatest impact will come from adopting
mutually-reinforcing policies and practices
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Reducing Youth Access to Alcohol:
A Randomized Trial
Purpose of Study: Evaluate five combined
environmental strategies to reduce youth access to
alcohol and underage drinking
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Reducing Youth Access to Alcohol:
A Randomized Trial
Study Design
◼ 36 Oregon communities
◼ 18 randomly assigned to intervention
◼ Interventions staggered, ~6 communities every two years
◼ Now in second intervention year with 1st and 2nd intervention community cohorts
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Reducing Youth Access to
Alcohol: A Randomized Trial
Environmental Strategies
◼ Reward and Reminder Program
◼ Minor Decoy Operations
◼ Shoulder Tap Operations
◼ Party Patrols
◼ Traffic Surveillance
◼ Media Advocacy
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Community Interventions
◼ Mobilization
◼ Reward & Reminder
◼ Media
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Reward & Reminder
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Reward & Reminder
◼ Total number of communities: 13
◼ Total number of stores visited: 104
◼ Total number of visits: 184
◼ Total number of rewards given: 104
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Media
◼ Topics:
◼ The problem of underage drinking
◼ The details of the project
◼ Endorsed proclamation
◼ Reward & Reminder results
◼ Alcohol and the teenage brain
◼ Prom and Graduation
◼ Parents who host parties
◼ Law enforcement activities in the community
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Alcohol Sources Among Oregon 8th and 11th Graders, 2006
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Gro
cery sto
re
Con
venien
ce store
Gas
statio
n
Liqu
or sto
re
Bar/club/restau
rant
Intern
et
Any
com
mercial
Hom
e w/out permission Pa
rent
Sibling
Other fa
mily
mem
ber
Friend
< 21
Friend
> 21
Strang
er pur
chas
e Party
Any
soc
ial
Pe
rc
en
t
8th Grade
11th Grade
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Reducing Youth Access to
Alcohol: A Randomized Trial
Summary
◼ Preliminary evidence of intervention
effects in 1st community cohort
◼ Stronger evidence if similar effects are
observed in subsequent cohorts with support
for intervening processes
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
Conclusions
◼ Communities can create environments that
reduce alcohol related problems through
◼ Development of appropriate policies
◼ Strategic use of law enforcement resources
◼ Strategic use of community awareness
Stewart: Lifesavers 2008
www.resources.prev.org