1. BUS Baseline Study of Drug Use in the Waterloo Region

2. Descriptors Funder: Waterloo Region Public Health Initiated by: the Harm Reduction Network of Waterloo Region Timeline: July 2007 – April 2008 Approach: Rapid Assessment and Response Team: Andrew Taylor, Suzanne Field, Gabriela Novotna, Brian Barlett, Leesa Stephenson, Don Johnson (with statistical assistance from Shannon Cushing)

3. Purpose  Overall: to gain a stronger understanding about drug use and response in the Waterloo Region  Current trends and patterns of local drug use.  safety risks and harm reduction practices while using and buying  Perceptions and experiences with current services and healthcare  Ideas and suggestions for strengthening the community response.

4. Scope of BUS All illicit substances and all misuse of prescription drugs Does not include alcohol All demographics and regions

5. Community Impact The Final Report will: guide future regional planning on drug-related initiatives. be used as a baseline for measuring the impact of future initiatives. become a publicly accessible resource.

6. Methodology Steering Committee: –Harm Reduction Services –Public Health –Police Services –Substance Use/Addiction Services –Outreach Services –Sheltering Services –Youth Services –Correctional Services

7. Methodology Continued Interviews and Questionnaires –Target number was 30 interviews (increased from 15) –Recruited demographically diverse participants Focus Groups –Healthcare workers, Service providers, Police Officers Surveys –Distributed to Healthcare and Service Providers through the Region, regardless of service focus. –77 were completed

8. Current Status Completed all but two interviews. Focus Groups and Surveys are completed Analysis is underway Draft final report to be created by mid-March.

9. Arising Inspirations and Successes Strong desire from those who regularly use drugs to tell their stories and share their wisdoms of what they need in this community. Strong desire from professionals to become involved. A common picture began to emerge. The process brought together a medley of differing political views about best approaches. Resources were shared.

10. Challenges Contrasting views were passionately expressed. Difficult to recruit representation from: –Surrounding townships. – seniors and university students –Those using drugs less commonly associated with addiction (party drugs, fitness drugs) Logistical challenges with recruitment Scheduling challenges with interviews Cautious not to develop or support stereotypes

11. Future Implications for CCBR Strengthened our relationship with Public Health Allowed for the creation of new relationships with several drug-related services and healthcare agencies. Provided a strong example of how change can occur through the process of research.