Avoiding a Campus Hangover: A Comprehensive Approach to Reduce College Underage Drinking

1. Avoiding a Campus Hangover: A Comprehensive Approach to Reduce College Underage Drinking Nancy McGee Mike McBride

2. MOPIP Overview • PIP was established in 2000 with a grant from the US Dept. of Higher Education and since then funding has been continued through a number of sources, including: • Missouri Department of Mental Health • MODOT • Missouri Department of Public Safety-OJJDP/EUDL • Mission is to create a campus, city, and state environment that supports responsible decision making in regards to alcohol by Missouri college students.

3. MOPIP Overview • It initially started with 12 publically funded universities and three state agencies: Highway Safety; Division of Alcohol & Drug Abuse; and The Division of Alcohol & Tobacco Control. • The Partners in Prevention (PIP) consortium recently expanded to include 7 additional campus coalitions raising the total to 19 Missouri university and college campuses.

4. Collaboration among Missouri Institutions of Higher Education: Partners in Prevention • Central Bible College • Drury University • Evangel University • Harris-Stowe State University • University of Central Missouri • Lincoln University • Missouri Southern State University • Missouri State University • Missouri Western State University • Northwest Missouri State University • Rockhurst University • Saint Louis University • Southeast Missouri State University • Truman State University • University of Missouri • University of Missouri-Kansas City • Missouri University of Science and Technology • University of Missouri-St. Louis • Westminster College • Funding Sources and Partners: • Missouri Division of Alcohol and Drug Abuse • Missouri Division of Alcohol and Tobacco Control • MODOT’s Division of Highway Safety • Missouri Department of Public Safety OJJDP-Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws • Department of Higher Education

5. Target Environment • Target population: 130,000 undergraduate college students in Missouri, and the 1.2 million residents of the surrounding communities • Target Communities: the drinking environment of each campus and surrounding community

6. PIP: Focused on Statewide Prevention

7. Problem: • Alcohol abuse and underage drinking is widespread in the United States • Approximately 13,334,000 underage youth in The United States drink  each year. (http://www.udetc.org/UnderageDrinkingCosts.asp)

8. Problem: • In 2007 underage drinking cost the United States $7.4 billion in medical costs alone • (http://www.udetc.org/UnderageDrinkingCosts.asp) • This could have paid for four years of college education for over 260,000 students. • (http://www.collegeboard.com/student/pay/add-it-up/4494.html) • Missouri is not immune underage drinking costs in Missouriare estimated to be $1.4 Billion annually • (http://www.udetc.org/UnderageDrinkingCosts.asp)

9. Where we started • CORE, 2002 survey, given to 11 PIP schools (n=2623) • 80% of Underage students had consumed alcohol in the past year • 73% of underage students reported alcohol as readily available • 60% had experienced a hangover in the past year • 33% had been in an argument or fight while drinking

10. Community Trials Intervention (CTI) • CTI is a five component evidence-based program • 5 Components of CTI: • Community Awareness • RBST • Risk of Drunk Driving • Underage Access • Community Mobilization

11. What we did

12. Awareness Component • In the beginning the primary focus was on health promotion and encouraging students to make good decisions • Most of the coalition members were originally from the health and wellness centers on the various campuses • Early on much of the work focused on social norms campaigns in an effort to change student behavior

13. Awareness Component • Campuses were enticed to attend monthly meetings with small stipends of grant money to be used for conducting surveys and purchasing promotional items with social norm messages to be distributed to students at various events.

14. Awareness: Posters/Brochures

15. Awareness: Posters/Brochures

16. Community Mobilization Component • This component focuses on getting stakeholders and leaders involved • Attendance at monthly meetings was mandated to receive the grant funding • Each campus was required to survey their student population on ATOD issues and analyze that data

17. Community Mobilization Component • Monthly professional development trainings were held on ATOD issues & topics of interest • An annual conference was begun which brings in nationally renowned speakers/presenters on ATOD issues. The conference is attended by over 350 participants each year from over 5 states and involves a large student component • Several years into its existence the group realized to make any long term sustainable change they needed to bring Judicial Affairs and Law Enforcement into the mix and PIEC (Partners in Environmental Change) was formed as a subset of MOPIP

18. PIEC • The focus of PIEC is to promote environmental change both on the campus and within the surrounding community through the implementation of new policies and increased enforcement of existing policies and laws • Each campus is required to appoint a campus judicial representative and a campus and/or community law enforcement officer to the coalition

19. Using Assessment as a Mobilization Tool • THE DATA MATTERS!!! • It identifies your problem(s) • It identifies your barriers/challenges • It should guide your interventions/programs • Determines appropriate allocation of limited resources • What works on one campus may not work on another

20. Using Assessment as a Mobilization Tool • Data Tools we have used: • CORE/Missouri College Health Behavior Survey • Campus Community Environment Policy Survey (CCEPS) • PIP Coalition Survey • PIP Campus Coalition Survey • Community Readiness Assessment • Other possible resources: SAMHSA website, UDETC website, Higher Ed Center

21. Community Mobilization= Collaboration! • Once the main problems related to alcohol use in your area have been identified • Now it’s time to identify the stakeholders: Who can you tell this information to, and who will provide helpful insight? • Prevention professionals • Law enforcement (Campus, Community & State) • Student health/counseling center staff • Student conduct staff • Business owners (bar owners/Package liquor stores) • Prosecutors/Judges

22. Community Mobilization= Collaboration! • Schedule monthly meetings • Develop a Strategic Plan • Identify areas of concern • Prioritize your areas of concern • Set specific timelines • Delegate responsibilities • Continually reassess

23. Responsible Beverage Service Training (RBST) Component • Partnered with Alcohol and Tobacco Control to provide free training for servers of alcohol • State of Missouri Alcohol Responsibility Training (SMART) Online • http://wellness.missouri.edu/SMART/ • Student Alcohol Responsibility Training (START) Online • http://www.startcollegeservertraining.com/

24. Impaired Driving Component • CHEERS • SMART • STRIPES • DWI enforcement • “Get out of Jail Free” cards • “What’s your degree worth?” brochures

25. Underage Access to Alcohol Component • Each campus is provided with funding to conduct law enforcement operations that have been identified as “best practices” • Money can also be used to purchase equipment to assist in underage drinking enforcement efforts (ID scanners, PBT’s, UV flashlights…) • Partnered with the UDETC to provide free training opportunities for law enforcement on the proper implementation of “best practice” strategies

26. What has been achieved • 1/3 reduction in binge drinking among PIP students between the 2002 CORE (47.3%) and the 2010 MCHBS (31.7%) • Funded enforcement operations and equipment responsible for over 1000 alcohol-related summonses • Implementation of a 21 bar entry age in one campus community.

27. What has been achieved • The implementation of specialized enforcement units for alcohol enforcement on several of the campuses • Trained hundreds of law enforcement personnel on techniques ranging from compliance check operations to controlled party dispersal • Dispersed approximately $240,000 for law enforcement equipment, overtime enforcement details and other miscellaneous uses to PIP schools to lower underage and binge drinking

28. What has been achieved • MOPIP provided expert testimony to the state legislature on underage drinking issues and appropriate strategies and laws to address the issue, which resulted in the passage of several new laws ranging from Minor in possession by consumption to “open house parties”

29. What has been achieved: Underage Drinking among Missouri College Students

30. What changed among underage students? Access!

31. What changed the ability of underage students to access alcohol? • Increased alcohol law enforcement as a piece of a comprehensive strategic plan • Compliance checks, DWI checkpoints and Controlled Party Dispersals • Consistent Student conduct procedures • In 2010, 11 PIP campuses surveyed reported 2097 students had gone through student conduct due to alcohol violations • Only 86 of these were repeat offenders (4%) • 4 of the 11 reporting using BASICS or a form of it

32. PIP Recognition • 2008 National Exemplary Award for Innovative Substance Abuse Prevention Programs, from the National Prevention Network • 2009 CADCA Got Outcomes! Coalition in Focus Award • The Meeting of the Minds annual conference, brings national experts in prevention, law enforcement and judicial affairs to Missouri since 2000: http://mom.missouri.edu/

33. Questions?

34. Contact Info • Nancy McGee • 314-877-0325 • Nancy.McGee@dps.mo.gov • Mike McBride • 573-884-7534 • mcbridema@missouri.edu