Docstoc

F5 - Saltz HEC Leadership Anaheim 710

Document Sample
F5 - Saltz HEC Leadership Anaheim 710 Powered By Docstoc
					    Community Environmental
     Prevention Interventions


                                    Bob Saltz
                           Prevention Research Center
                               Berkeley, California



Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation
                                                PRC Prevention Research Center
    Task Force Recommendations
   Tier 1: Evidence of Effectiveness Among
            College Students

   Tier 2: Evidence of Success With General
            Populations That Could Be Applied
            to College Environments

   Tier 3: Evidence of Logical and Theoretical
            Promise, But Require More
            Comprehensive Evaluation

   Tier 4: Evidence of Ineffectiveness
    Recommendations – Tier 2
   Increased enforcement of minimum drinking
    age laws
   Implementation, increased publicity, and
    enforcement of other laws to reduce alcohol-
    impaired driving
   Restrictions on alcohol retail outlet density
   Increased price and excise taxes on alcoholic
    beverages
   Responsible beverage service policies in
    social and commercial settings
                  …finally

   The formation of a campus and
    community coalition may be critical to
    implement these strategies effectively
Evidence for Community-Level
   Prevention Interventions
Environmental Policies to Reduce
 College Drinking: An Update of
       Research Findings

   Toomey, Lenk, & Wagenaar (2007)
         Journal of Studies on
          Alcohol and Drugs
            SPARC
Study to Prevent Alcohol Related
         Consequences:
Using a Community Organizing Approach to
Implement Environmental Strategies in and
       around the College Campus

          Mark Wolfson, et al
         Wake Forrest University
                 SPARC Conceptual Model
                                            Larger Environment



                                             SPARC Intervention
                  Community Organizing                               Environmental Strategies
                  •   Hold one-on-one meetings                     •Reduce Availability
                  •   Understand self-interest                     •Address Price/Marketing
                  •   Analyze power
 Interventions    •   Build coalition
                                                                   •Improve Social Norms
                                                                   •Minimize Harm
                  •   Identify actionable issues
                  •   Develop strategies                           Elements: Policy, Enforcement,
                  •   Plan & implement actions                     Awareness




                                                Culture / Context
                              Community cultures      Campus cultures
Intermediate
                                                                             Larger political,
  Outcomes                    •Government             •Student
                                                                             socio-economic
                              •Neighborhoods          •Administration
                              Law enforcement        Alumni                and historical
                              Retail/business        Faculty               context

                              Community Policies      Campus Policies




                                            High-risk Drinking
                                       Indicators
                                       - Quantity         - Social Setting
     Long-term                         - Frequency        - Timing
                                       - Physical setting - Underage use
     Outcomes
                                       Consequences
                                       - Health          - Legal
                                       - Social          - Academic
                                       - Violence        - Victimization
    Environmental Strategies

Reduce Alcohol Availability
Address Price/Marketing
Improve Social Norms
Minimize Harm
Expectations of each Intervention School:
 Include 3 of the 4 areas in strategic plan
 Most strategies should be comprehensive – i.e.,
  include Policy, Awareness, and Enforcement
  elements
  Evidence of Impact: Summary
CDS
      Severe Consequences, due to own drinking (p=.02)
      Alcohol-related Injuries, caused to others (p=.03)
RA Survey
      Consequences: p=.04
      Environment: p=.01
      Aggregate: p=.03
I & I Reports
      Police reports of alcohol-related incidents (p=0.04)
      Police reports of # of citations for underage alcohol
       use (p=.008)
Safer California Universities
       Project Goal:

  To evaluate the efficacy of a
“Risk Management” approach to
  alcohol problem prevention



        NIAAA grant #R01 AA12516
     with support from CSAP/SAMHSA.
         Random Assignment
Intervention Sites     Comparison Sites

   CSU Chico             Cal Poly SLO
   Sacramento State      San Jose State
   CSU Long Beach        CSU Fullerton
   UC Berkeley           UC Irvine
   UC Davis              UC Los Angeles
   UC Riverside          UC San Diego
   UC Santa Cruz         UC Santa Barbara
     How is risk management a
        unique approach?

   Targets times and places instead of
    individuals

   Focus on intoxication

   Tied to continuous monitoring and
    improvement - emphasis on “control”
    rather than “one shot” interventions
Integrated Intervention Strategies
      for Off-Campus Parties

    Compliance Checks

    DUI Check Points

    Party Patrols

    Pass Social Host “Response Cost”
     Ordinance

    A Social Host Safe Party Campaign
                    Outcomes
   Likelihood of getting drunk at a given generic
    setting (e.g., Greek parties; residence halls) plus
    additional aggregate measure across all settings
   Two baseline years combined vs. two years
    post-intervention combined
   Controlling for individual-level variables and
    campus/community variables
         DUI or RWDD Related to Off-Campus Party

0.20




0.15




0.10




                                              Intervention
0.05
                                              Control




0.00
       2003-04                          2004-05
                      Survey years
           Practical Significance
   At each campus, 900 fewer students drinking to
    intoxication at off-campus parties and 600 fewer
    getting drunk at bars/restaurants during the fall
    semester at intervention schools relative to
    controls.
   Equivalent to 6,000 fewer incidents of
    intoxication at off-campus parties and 4,000
    fewer incidents at bars & restaurants during the
    fall semester at Safer intervention schools
    relative to controls
 In addition…

No Displacement
                 In Sum…
   We have the ability to create environments
    that help teens and young adults make
    healthy decisions about alcohol
    consumption
   We have growing evidence that these
    strategies are effective
   Our greatest impact will likely come from
    adopting mutually-reinforcing policies and
    practices
…but there are challenges
    Typical Hurdles for Comprehensive
            Prevention Strategy
   Implicit assumption that the only “target” is
    high-risk drinkers
   Ambivalence about student drinking
   Low perceived efficacy of preventive
    interventions
   Challenges of coordination and resource
    allocation
   Possible fears of “backlash”
    Unique Hurdles for College Prevention
   Too much weight on “process” vs. “outcome”
   Preference for persuasion over control
   Universities are complex, diffuse
    organizations
   Prevention staff trained in education,
    awareness strategies
   Prevention staff usually lacks authority to
    launch initiatives
Thank you!

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:3
posted:8/24/2011
language:English
pages:30