1 / 58

What Communities Can Do to Prevent Alcohol Service Problems: New and Ongoing Research

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. Strategies Coordinating Community Policy and Enforcement.

hedva
Download Presentation

What Communities Can Do to Prevent Alcohol Service Problems: New and Ongoing Research

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 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

  2. 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

  3. The Border Project Preventing alcohol-related problems at the US/Mexico Border Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  4. Current sites • San Diego -Tijuana • El Paso – Juarez • Laredo –Nuevo Laredo • Brownsville - Matamoros Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  5. The Problem • Mexico’s drinking age is 18 • Some border towns provided plentiful, cheap sources of alcohol Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  6. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  7. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  8. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  9. 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

  10. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  11. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  12. 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

  13. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  14. 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

  15. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  16. 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

  17. 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

  18. 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

  19. 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

  20. Alcohol Outlet Density and Alcohol Problems Making Enforcement More Effective through Alcohol Policy Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  21. 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

  22. Problems include • Impaired driving • Property crime • Violent crime • Child abuse and neglect • Underage drinking Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  23. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  24. 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

  25. The ResultsCommunities 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

  26. 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

  27. Safer California UniversitiesProject 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

  28. 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

  29. What are we trying to prevent? • Intoxication • Harm related to intoxication Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  30. 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 Random Assignment Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  31. 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

  32. 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

  33. 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

  34. 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

  35. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  36. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  37. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  38. In addition…No Displacement Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  39. 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

  40. 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

  41. 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

  42. 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

  43. Community Interventions • Mobilization • Reward & Reminder • Media Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  44. Reward & Reminder Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  45. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  46. 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

  47. 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

  48. Alcohol Sources Among Oregon 8th and 11th Graders, 2006 Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  49. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

  50. Stewart: Lifesavers 2008

More Related