About Us · What's New · Newsletter · Links · Contact Us · Home

What's New With ALERT Partnership

Teen Driving

Into the Driver’s Seat:

Policies and Practices

To Develop

Safer Teen Drivers

Friday

 October 3, 2008

8:00 am - 3:00 pm

Lehigh Valley Hospital - Muhlenberg

Wednesday: June 14, 2006

Looking for New Allies to Prevent Tragic Teen Driving Deaths

Are you troubled by opening the newspaper in the morning and seeing another headline about the death of a young person due to drinking and driving and other reckless driving behavior? Despite improved automotive safety standards, seat belts, and air bags, during the decade of the 1990’s more American young lives were lost to car “accidents” than were lost during the Vietnam War.  (more…..)

Drugs & Alcohol

Wednesday, December 7, 2005

Effective Prevention Based on Community Research

Jim Copple, director of the International Institute for Alcohol Awareness, a project of the Pacific Institute for Research and Evaluation, introduced speakers at ALERT’s November 9th seminar on Effective Prevention through Community Research Partnerships. PIRE’s founding principle is the premise that science has relevance in practice. Controlled by private funds, PIRE channels resources to the work of 400 researchers in eight policy centers with headquarters in Maryland. Problem drinking has made PIRE’s work international in scope. The community trials work in the US is a partnership with science: The role that researchers can have to produce effective change and how that role is defined is an important one for new partnerships to grasp.

Copple’s years as a community organizer in Witchita, Kansas, as founding President and CEO of Community Anti-Drug Coalitions of America, and . “Prevention programs live and die by the good will of a lot of funders. More and more, those funders want to know where the effort is going and how to know when you get there.” When good strategic planning, quality implementation, good evaluation, and good communication are combined, the result is an equation for resource development. One funder wrote Copple a check on the spot after a presentation and said, “You are the first grant seeker who told me what you were going to do, how you were going to do it, and how you would measure it.”

Copple, a sailing enthusiast, likened the value or practical research information to a lesson he observed as a volunteer sailor during the Volvo around the World Race. He watched a master sailor feel the head sail with the back of his hand. He then asked Copple to pull the head sail line in 6 cm, knowing the difference between a mere 4cm tug on the line and the asked for 6cm. The tweaked line resulted in an extra two knots of speed. “There are people around who know how to get that extra two knots out of you”, he said, referring to prevention programs; “The right information can save you time, resources, and increase your impact in the community. By combining the best of science with the best of community passion and commitment we can change people’s attitude about research and evaluation from, To us -for us, to With us, for us.”

 -Community Trials

Harold Holder, Ph.D. is a researcher with a systems approach to prevention. One of the first researchers to undertake controlled studies on cost and economic benefits of alcoholism treatment, Dr. Holder directed a five year national community trial to prevent alcohol involved injuries and deaths. The findings of the community trial include some tips for forming community and research partnerships. Each brings something to the table; communities know their problems and what local priorities are; prevention researchers know what works based upon scientific studies.

More local problems are caused by heavy drinkers than by alcoholics. Dr. Holder’s community trial goal was to reduce alcohol involved trauma in three US communities. Trauma was defined to include traffic crashes, and injuries due to burns, falls, drowning, and violence. Two California communities and another in South Carolina were selected and paired with comparison communities.

In the community trials conceptual model for the intervention, the tendency to drive and drink is influenced by the individuals perceived risk of arrest; arrest is a strong deterrent. Other factors that can be impacted include access to alcohol and alcohol serving and sales practices. The Community Trials findings support magnifying the visibility of the threat of arrest through local media. Perceived risk of arrest, access, and serving and sales practices are factors common to all communities. Intervention strategies need to consider the competing priorities in law enforcement from policy to actual enforcement.

Mobilizing the community means community organizing. Local news and media are advocates for making the community aware of its problems; they are useful for sharing real information, but newspapers don’t set public health agendas—that is still the work of community organizing.

The Community Trials outcomes included an increase in licensed bars and restaurants with written beverage serving policies.

The Community Trials gave police tools to assess drunkenness with specialty flash lights with built in breathalyzers. Press coverage of the new technology was good for the police and served to increase the perception of risk for arrest. In California, persons who looked to be under 21 and who were not carded were photographed in front of a “mountain of beer” dramatically illustrating how much they could purchase in a weekend without being ID’d. The breathalyzers were used at voluntary checkpoints and refused by only two percent of drivers. Readings on the voluntary breathalyzers were not revealed to the screener but if police suspected a driver to be drunk, a taxi was called; there was no enforcement during the awareness campaigns.

Community Trials produced plotted maps showing retail alcohol outlets in relation to incident maps for pedestrian injury, collisions, arrests for drunken driving, and assaults. Concerned citizens protested granting a business license for yet another outlet under land use planning laws and won the day.

Daytime crashes, DUI’s, and other crash data were graphed per month. Hospitalized assault cases were graphed. Total consumption was charted for all three communities; consumption actually went up by two percent affirming that reducing underage drinking and problems associated with alcohol use does not necessarily translate into reduced profits. The program is a prohibition; it is not to stop drinking—rather, it is to reduce high risk drinking. Heavy drinking reduced by six percent. Driving after having too much to drink down was down by 49%. Drivers found to be BAC positive drivers were down 44%. Nighttime injury crashes were down 10% and hospital cases involving assaults were down 2%. For every one dollar invested in the effort, a savings of $2.03 was realized.

 -Putting Families Back in the Community Prevention Wheel

Brenda Miller, PhD is a PIRE research scientist in Berkeley, CA studying family environmental strategies for preventing underage drinking. Preventing underage drinking is going to require strategies for putting families back into action in delaying first use. Media, retail outlets, school, treatment, and families all contribute to the environment and culture of alcohol. Miller presented four goals for putting families into the prevention loop.

The first strategy is to emphasize to the community at large the importance of parents and families in preventing first use. For prevention workers, it is important to recognize the variety of family compositions that raise children and to respect the diversity of family values about alcohol use among youth.
The second goal is to increase knowledge of the underage drinking problem. Parents need to be award of the wide array of products that contain alcohol such as cough syrups and to know the warning signs of alcohol abuse.

A third goal is for parents to recognize their own beliefs, values and expectancies about their adolescent’s use of alcohol. Parents need to be coached in verbalizing those beliefs to themselves but also to their youth and to make sure that they do. Rules, rewards and consequences need to be set in advance. Parents need to make sure that when they develop consequences that they also use verbal affirmations of when their kids are doing well. The media does not acknowledge those doing well. Controls on alcohol availability in the home all impact on underage alcohol use.

A fourth goal is to increase family action. What can an individual parent do? Would a parent be comfortable talking parent to parent? Things that parents can talk to each other about include the availability of alcohol in your own home. What are the extended family’s attitudes about alcohol? Kids may get alcohol from older cousins or other relations that a parent may not think of when they think of ways they might protect their own teens. Parents can become involved in media awareness. Parents who have lost a child directly through alcohol related events may eventually be strong enough to share in a local news story about the circumstances of their loss. An example in Berkeley was a couple that lost of their daughter because of her participation in a heavy drinking game after which she aspirated vomit. Keep parents in the loop and mine the community for its stories as yet another strategy to connect families with prevention.

Finally, Miller reminded workshop participants not to reinvent the wheel. Communicate to parents about state and federal resources--those that speak directly to parents. Have parents share their different approaches for keeping their kids safe. Ask parents to consciously make decisions about what they are going to do to keep their kids safe. Remind parents that the strategies they use for their 11 or 12 year old will need to change when they look at strategies for keeping a 16 year old safe. When kids get their first license parents loose their ability to control their child’s environment and their access to places. Young women who put themselves in danger are an example of a bad decision. Help them prepare for danger. Share ideas among parents as people concerned about prevention. Facilitate sharing—get the kids ideas out there too. Don’t exclude youth. Focus on healthy life choices so that kids look at what they can do in a healthy way.

 -Enforcing Underage Drinking Laws: You Cannot Teach What a Community Will Not Support

Johnnetta Davis-Joyce, director of PIRE’s Center for Policy Application and Training, says that to practice prevention is to engage in radical behavior. The work of prevention is first to identify societal problems and accept responsibility for them. These problems are portrayed in television news, series, movies; these problems impact our finances, our government, our friends, our schools, our work, our family, our churches and our community. Engaging the community to promote environmental change is the most effective strategy in reducing alcohol related harm. Limitations on access, changing expressions of community norms, preventing impaired driving, strategies in schools: pair local initiatives unique to the local community with research based strategies. Johnnetta gave a snapshot of various communities and their unique strategies to impact and enforce existing underage drinking laws.

 -Florence, S.C.

Florence discovered a way to break down racial barriers during talks to prevent underage drinking. To save kids, community members had to learn about each other’s communities. Data collection involved the use of roadside surveys, surveys in emergency rooms, random phone surveys to the community, and focus groups. The research provided a clear perspective of what the community wanted. Florence is located near an auto race track that brings 100,000 people to the area on weekends. There are eleven law enforcement agencies that had to be consulted and involved as well as religious leaders, and school principals. Florence received lots of support and media attention for the kick off of its “Zero Tolerance Media Campaign.” Police chiefs were on television communicating data from PIRE. A multi jurisdictional task force conducted sobriety checkpoints as a county- wide activity around prom and graduation. Law enforcement officers received letters thanking them for their involvement. The coalition gave away flashlights with passive alcohol sensors in the flashlight to enhance their work on the road. The police did not have to find funding for party patrol training—the coalition paid for it. The coalition provided the officers with fun items to give away at checkpoints when the officer thanks the driver for not drinking (like turkeys for every 5th driver.) Grocery stores had “zero tolerance” messages on their grocery bags to increase the perception that if they were drinking and driving they would be caught. The coalition wanted the public perception to be that law enforcement is out there all the time.

 -Salinas, CA

The Big Hat Chili Festival is a community event in Salinas that was started by the sheriffs’association 45 years ago. The event draws 5000 people every year. In 1992, there were eleven arrests near the barbecue pits for fighting. Coalition members met with the Big Hat Sheriffs’Association with this message, “You can make more money with a family event.” That idea went no where. Then the coalition conducted surveys about the numbers of driving accidents and arrest during the event, observations about whether youth and young looking festival patrons were ID’d when buying alcohol. Then the coalition members went back to the festival planners and threatened to use their media advocacy skills to make the data public. Suddenly they were willing to talk with coalition members about how to make changes in the way they served and promoted alcohol. The festival planners asked the coalition for help to provide alcohol responsibility at this event. City-wide special-events trainings were instituted. The bottom line—consensus is not always needed: Find their soft spot: Liability.

 -Nevada

Nevada instituted a three strike policy for high school athletes and received Statewide support. Their philosophy is “No one rises to low expectations.” After the first use, there is a warning and penalty; after the second strike there is a treatment assessment; and after the third there the player is no longer on the team. Nevada combined environmental strategies, with clear communication, consistent enforcement, and the availability of treatment.

 -Louisiana

The relationship between parent and child changes in high school. Coalition members that were parents of ninth and tenth graders, concerned about preparing for high school found a need for a prevention program that would focus on that transition period. Topics included covering what group teens would choose to be a part of, social hosting, and for parents, an opportunity to discuss the social environment and what adult behavior communicates to student. Louisiana involved parents who were part of the recovery community; they don’t want their children to be affected the way they were. The recovery community is following through with prevention efforts for their own children; they are a powerful untapped voice.

 -What Next?

Participants were asked to write two things that rise to the top of the list concerning issues raised or not raised during the workshop. What is needed in the area of additional research from PIRE and what should we, as a community, be working on?

Participants want more information on best practices and strategies for implementation. Some participants want to know ways to motivate and involve parents who are part of the problem, particularly those who drive children while under the influence. A presenter advocated for partnerships with Adult Children of Alcoholics.

The Lehigh Valley has a large influx of people from out of state especially in Palmer and Forks townships, Northampton County. One participant asked ALERT to examine the use of alcohol in more affluent populations in new developments so that prevention intervention strategies could be developed to address the issues of availability, accessibility and acceptability.

Participants want to continue the discussion on curtailing quantity beer sales - kegs, pallets to young people, how to gain access for more prevention efforts in schools and building working relationship with law enforcement.

“I truly believe that we need to get more of the younger generation involved into these meetings. They are sure to have an opinion on everything that has been said today. They would be able to also provide a new perspective to the people who attend this meeting that don’t have children of their own.”

School representatives want more information to be shared with schools about laws especially the penalties for underage drinking. One participant wants research on current driving suspension penalties in PA and how effective they are in reducing underage drinking. Is underage drinking increasing or decreasing as a result of zero tolerance laws? (It may increase statistically with greater attention to enforcement.)

The workshop attendees want specifics on family strategies. How should they talk withchildren as they approach teenage years on importance of not using alcohol?

Comments? E-mail me.

2006 ALERT Partnership