2. Quality of Life Coalition Dickinson County, KS Strategic Prevention Framework

3. Underage Drinking Prevalence Outcomes Past 30 Day Use 2008 Baseline 32.9% 200931.4% 201031.2% 201126.1% GOAL22.9% Rate of Past 30-day use has declined each year since project inception – and had largest decrease from 2010-11. With continued coalition efforts it is likely that the goal will be met.

4. Underage Drinking Prevalence Outcomes Binge Drinking 2008 Baseline 19.9% 200915.3% 201017.2% 201111.8% Rate Binge Drinking use declined the first year, showed slight increase in year two and declined dramatically in year 3. Although Binge Drinking was not a targeted outcome, the coalition is pleased that strategies are positively affecting this issue.

5. Targeted Influencing Factors Enforcement – Increase rate of citations for MIP 2007 Baseline 31 200927 20107 201112 2012* data provided by local law enforcement as of Aug 201143 Target29 Rate of MIP fell (wrong direction) in the first 3 years of project. However, under new leadership, law enforcement officers on the street are supported and empowered to issue these citations. Strategies – Saturation Patrols & CMCA

6. Targeted Influencing Factors Reduce % parents reporting it is not wrong at all for child to drink 2008 Baseline 5.4% 20094.6% 20103.3% 20113.9% Target3.5% % of parents reporting that it is not wrong for their children to drink has decreased each year, exceeding the targeted goal in 2011. Strategies – Parent Letters, CMCA

7. Targeted Influencing Factors Increase % of students who report they would be caught by police if drinking 2008 Baseline 28.8% 200927.1% 201037.9% 201133.1% Target33.1% % of parents reporting that it is not wrong for their children to drink has decreased each year, exceeding the targeted goal in 2011. Strategies – Saturation Patrols, CMCA

8. Targeted Influencing Factors Proportion of you who report there is no risk in harming themselves 2008 Baseline 13.3% 200914.5% 201014.1% 201111.9% Target8.3% % of students reporting that there is risk in drinking increased the first two years but decreased this past year. Strategies – Too Good for Drugs, Class Action

9. Targeted Influencing Factors Students at risk for academic Failure 2008 Baseline 44.3% 200942.7% 201043.3% 201139.2% Target40.3% Students at risk for academic failure have decreased exceeding the goal. Strategy– Big Brothers Big Sisters

10. Targeted Influencing Factors % Students reporting poor family management 6 th grade 8 th grade 2008 Baseline 51%44% 200962%46% 201041%52% 201142%42.7% Target42%35% 6 th grade students reporting poor family management have declined to reach goal. 8 th grade students have increased two years, but decreased in 2011 heading in the right direction. Strategy– Keep A Clear Mind

11. Extent of Saturation Program# Participating Enforcement – Saturation Patrols19,344 Parent Letters3,469 CMCA89 / 19,344 Too Good for Drugs787 Class Action354 Big Brothers Big Sisters36 Keep A Clear Mind47 Environmental19,344 Information Dissemination3,469 Alternative Drug Free36 Prevention Education1,188 Strategy Effectiveness

12. Saturation or Scope of Impact Continuum of Impact Low (awareness) High (knowledge or behavior change) High Reach Saturation Patrols CMCA strategies Parent Letters Media Campaign Too Good for Drugs Low Reach Class Action Big Brothers Big Sisters Keep A Clear Mind Strategy Effectiveness

13. # DeliveredPractice ChangePolicy Change 200944 - Work with community to plan Staff trained Data collected Post-event planning 1 – Sheriff department makes policy to implement Saturation Patrols 20104 2011 ( as of 9/30/11) 51- APD makes policy to implement Saturation Patrols

14. Strategies 2009-2011 25 Middle School Age Matches Made 1 - New Practice to serve Middle School Age Students

15. Strategies 2009-2011 -3 sessions of training provided by the Youth Leadership Institute -- 25 community members trained -- Strategies: Law Enforcement Training (1x); Sticker Shock (2x); Parents Who Host Lose the Most (1x); Safe Spots Book (1x); Improved System of reporting UAD through Crime Stoppers

16. Strategies # DeliveredPractice Change Policy Change 2008005 2009400 201041 – coalition staff conduct pre & post test 0 2011 ( as of 9/30/11) 2 (in progress) 00

17. Strategies # DeliveredPractice ChangePolicy Change 2008005 – school boards adopt policy to implement curricula 2009300 2010100 2011 ( as of 9/30/11) 1 (in progress)00

18. Strategies # DeliveredPractice Change Policy Change 2008000 2009100 2010100 2011 ( as of 9/30/11) 100

19. Strategies # DeliveredPractice ChangePolicy Change 2008005 – school board adopted policy of sending letters 2009400 2010600 2011Ended strategy

20. Media is primary prevention vehicle; youth, parents and schools are primary audience for prevention efforts; youth serving agencies, law enforcement and business are partners in prevention efforts. Community Mobilization – Sector Involvement

22. Community Mobilization AWARENESS “I was attending an adult party and a young child about 3 years old picked up his father’s unopened beer. The father, who was about 30, took it away and said “I better get that before I get in trouble for social hosting.” Although he was joking, this example shows that people are now more aware of laws, are seeking to be good role models, and are conscious about making sure children are kept away from alcohol.” – Dickinson County Coalition Member READINESS Local government was asked in 2010 to allow alcohol at a public building. The Coalition spent much time contacting elected officials and educating members about the reasons it was not a good idea to change this policy. The elected body went ahead with a public meeting to hear from community members about different perspectives. Ultimately the policy was not changed but the vote was also not unanimous. In 2011, local government was again asked to consider changing policy to allow alcohol at a public venue. This time the elected body determined that they would not make any consideration to change the policy.

23. Community Mobilization Key Leaders Support in Dickinson County Having the right connections. Having people who can champion the cause to other key leaders quietly but very effectively. Having partners who help with strategies for which there is no funding. Having leaders who help acquire future funding for coalition. Having people who are consistent in attending coalition meetings even though they have many other commitments.

24. Next Steps Factors Contributing to Outcome Data Moving Key sector leader support and broad, diverse support Media -> community awareness Good results = increased enthusiasm for making difference Youth are ready to learn and Parents are ready to listen Factors Impeding Progress Some implementers not committed to success School budget reductions = change in focus Next Steps Renewed commitment from school boards and administrators Develop report of other factors possibly attributed to underage drinking reduction Continue to promote efforts, positive results throughout communities and sectors